Overunity.com Archives

He now says it is fake with batteries:
http://youtu.be/n93iIduG01I (http://youtu.be/n93iIduG01I)

The battery looks kind of taller than the coil, why didn't he pull off that fake bolt head instead and show the battery inside? But either way he's just an idiot now in my book.

Yea, this guy, I dunno.

First, like said already above, those bolt heads would have to have been lathed hollow and probably the nut with the bolt screwed to it to fit that battery in there.

And why not show the actual battery if the battery is short enough to fit between the cutoffs of the head and nut of the fake bolt?

Also, when he shows the rotor spinning in one direction, the led's are dim, but in the other direction they are bright. With a battery, the led's should light where ever the magnet is, as long as the coil gets juice from the reed closing, the led's should light during the coil collapse when the reed opens. If there is a battery

If he would have pulled the hollowed out bolt cap off of one of those coils, I wouldnt be writing this.

The schematic is correct as in the led's will only light when there is coil collapse.

But I wanna see the coil taken apart to see that battery, the battery he shows in the vid. I realize that the wire is supposedly wound around the battery, but just leme see the top or bottom of the battery in one of those coils.

Dang, its hard to believe and admitted faker.  lol   Cant even get that right.

Mags

I just reread my post and looked at the schematic again. I can be tricky with the battery being where it is.

Im not really sure if the schematic is correct. Will try after dinner just to see if the led lights on a coil in the circuit config in the schematic.

The reason being is, the collapse would produce a continued forward current when the reed opened. If so, then the battery should be powering the leds all the time. It is an odd setup. Current would have to reverse through the battery to light the led.
Unless the reed stays closed most of the time and the led(diodes) are reversed in the schematic, by accident? Thus not allowing current to the led's because the reed is closed(short across the coil, batt, resistor in series)?

Odd indeedy.

Mags

This bit I know: Sometimes we believe what we want to believe.

The bit I don't understand is grown up people behaving like juveniles even if they admit to their deeds.

Quote from: Magluvin on April 11, 2012, 07:56:10 PM
I just reread my post and looked at the schematic again. I can be tricky with the battery being where it is.

Im not really sure if the schematic is correct. Will try after dinner just to see if the led lights on a coil in the circuit config in the schematic.

The reason being is, the collapse would produce a continued forward current when the reed opened. If so, then the battery should be powering the leds all the time. It is an odd setup. Current would have to reverse through the battery to light the led.
Unless the reed stays closed most of the time and the led(diodes) are reversed in the schematic, by accident? Thus not allowing current to the led's because the reed is closed(short across the coil, batt, resistor in series)?

Odd indeedy.

Mags

He must show the coil with the battery and the resistor inside to clear things up, in his schema the battery is shorted with the coil, but maybe if the reed is closed and opened, the coil in series with the battery will produce a kick that turns the magnet rotor, but how did the led survive the hv inductive spike? or the battery is regulating the voltage?

I have come up with a method to make a standard "toy"
DC motor like one might build oneself that has a special
2 part commutator. Basically it uses an optical disk and
H-Bridge to control the field current direction based on
the rotor phase and then logically "nands in" a N.C. normally
closed reed switch position detector mounted on an
adjustable spatula like he has.

The concept is that you build this DC motor first and get
it to run. Then once it runs remove the applied DC field current
and rewire the field circuit it to what he said he had. The
operational parameters should be pretty much the same
between the two putative motor operating modes.

---

The thing is that a pure magnetic motor versus a dc motor
with no commutative field current reversal should operate
using iddedic methods. That is if you can build a commutatorless
DC motor you will also be able to build a pure magnetic motor.

The way it would work is that a shorted field coil with a low resistance
shunt would allow rotor magnets to intrude with only true LENZ braking
losses then when the coil is unshorted the rotor poles suddenly see each
other through the now in-series field coils.

:S:MarkSCoffman

---

If I had this to do fake It might require a Bedini mirror circuit inside each or one
field coils along with the battery - the reed switch could then be fake inoperative.
Also the faces "N" and "S" marked in ink on the magnets might lie. The reed switch
would work if the postion of the rotor magnets was always "N" incomming.

I have a good picture about overunity machines. In that picture there are forces provided by properties of matter such as magnetism (permanent magnets) and electrostatic charges, any of them likely to no need of burning anything.
I hardly put an effort trying to understand videos like posted above that, in the first place, aren't well explained and then, aren't simple. My effort is focused with machines like permanent magnet motors with only magnets. I recommend to you do the same.

Quote from: crazycut06 on April 12, 2012, 09:28:57 AM

He must show the coil with the battery and the resistor inside to clear things up, in his schema the battery is shorted with the coil, but maybe if the reed is closed and opened, the coil in series with the battery will produce a kick that turns the magnet rotor, but how did the led survive the hv inductive spike? or the battery is regulating the voltage?

Well according to the diagram, it looks like he soldered one of the leads of the coil to the batteries casing(-) near the positive terminal. Like he removed some of the wrapping that covers the battery. So it is in series with the coil and resistor.

Also hiding the resistor with the battery means even more space needed in the cavity of the coil. The coil doesnt look lumped like it is beside the battery, so it must be top or bottom.

Im getting on the bench now to try to see if the led lights. Just a simple circuit, no motor.  Was going to do it last night but got distracted with other things.

I need to see the led light. If it does, then there is a reversal of magnetic field before a reversal of current flows.

Check any literature on switching power supplies. During the field collapse when input is disconnected from the inductor, current always flows in the same direction as the input produced through the inductor. Not reverse emf. Not back emf. But a continued forward current.

Mile High and I had discussed this at OUR when he put us "pulse motor builders" to a test of figuring out what was going on in a particular motor circuit.

Well I did describe what I thought. I also did not know which polarity of the output capture diode was in the circuit, yet I claimed also that the diode could be set as either polarity and the capture capacitor would still see a higher than source voltage, because of field reversal that can happen if there is no load during the first collapse.

If the capture diode is in a position that current from the source IS directed to the output cap, there is still additional currents from the collapse and reversal happening anyways.

So I need to try it in this case to see if the reversal happens, as I have seen before, just not the way this guy does it with the battery in series with the current from field collapse. But If it does, then my my description to mile high is correct, but he did not agree. Nor did he explain why. ;]

When I first discovered it, I didnt know what was happening at first.  It was when I was running a second pulse motor stage with stored collapse energy from the first stage. The diode could be in either direction and the second stage cap was getting higher than source, but a different polarity than normal collapse capture. But I did find that the source would send additional power to the second stage if the diode was set to do so. But I remember specifically to use the diodes polarity so that the source did not make it to the second stage storage cap directly. Or else others might say that the source was powering the second stage also, not just the first.  Even if the timing were set differently between the first and second stage. ;] 

All coils have some capacitance. So a coil in itself can oscillate. In a regular coil,not bifi, etc, the freq of oscillation would be very high due to very low capacitance distributed throughout the coil windings. A bifi will have much greater capacitance thus lower oscillation freq. So even with a regular coil, the field can reverse if there is no load to stop it from happening via damping due to the load.  Like loading an LC while ringing. It will kill the ringing.

Even in Falstads circuit sim, you can apply a scope shot of a coil, and if disconnected from a source, with no direction for current to flow in either direction, the coil will self oscillate at very high freq. ;]

One thing that intrigues me is, can we use this field reversal to our advantage. ;]  Always thinkin. Even with ideas from possible fakes. ;]

Mags

Good for you, Mags! The device does appear rather intriguing either way, after having read a good part of the description and seen Bodkins' first attempt at replication. It ain't over 'til the fat toroid sings (or something like that).
Bob

Thanks Bob

There is always something to learn. The circuit is unusual.  If you read my last post in the This Might Blow Your Mind   thread, this circuit in the reveal of the fake simplifies the Ossie circuit to get the collapse back to the battery with only 1 reed, not 2. I describe it there. ;]

Mags

The guy that did the clip made a mistake in his circuit because it makes no sense.

However, if you move the two batteries around then it's just the same old circuit that makes the LEDs blink when reed switch opens.

reed switch bottom ->  batt negative -> batt positive -> 5-ohm resistor -> coil -> reed switch top.

If you can look at the diagram in the YT clip and follow the above then you will see how each battery would be placed in the bottom horizontal connection line in the schematic.

Relative to the corrected schematic, when the reed closes the current flows up through each coil (remember the batteries have moved) and the current flows down through the reed switch in the center.

When the reed switch opens the current continues flowing up through the coils but now it flows down through the LEDs to complete the circuit.

There is no high-voltage spike at all.

You notice that even though the batteries have been moved, the 5-ohm resistor is still soldered to the positive terminal of each battery.  So it's conceivable that he got mixed up when he made his schematic.

MileHigh

Quote from: MileHigh on April 13, 2012, 12:55:12 AM
The guy that did the clip made a mistake in his circuit because it makes no sense.

However, if you move the two batteries around then it's just the same old circuit that makes the LEDs blink when reed switch opens.

reed switch bottom ->  batt negative -> batt positive -> 5-ohm resistor -> coil -> reed switch top.

If you can look at the diagram in the YT clip and follow the above then you will see how each battery would be placed in the bottom horizontal connection line in the schematic.

Relative to the corrected schematic, when the reed closes the current flows up through each coil (remember the batteries have moved) and the current flows down through the reed switch in the center.

When the reed switch opens the current continues flowing up through the coils but now it flows down through the LEDs to complete the circuit.

There is no high-voltage spike at all.

You notice that even though the batteries have been moved, the 5-ohm resistor is still soldered to the positive terminal of each battery.  So it's conceivable that he got mixed up when he made his schematic.

MileHigh

MH

I just put a sim circuit up that shows the reversal of current(actual bemf). And it works in the real world.

I suspected that the circuit was not correct also at one point, but I remembered that reversal can happen. In that circuit, the leds wont conduct if the current continues to flow in the same direction from the coil. The cathode would have to be on the top side of the led(diode) for current to flow as you say. And if you flip the led that way, the led would just drain the battery at all times, except when the reed is closed.

Look at the sim with codes above. Actually, make the circuit for real. Either way I am right. ;]  I just proved it.

I explained this to you at our. But you didnt agree then either. ;[

The larsko circuit works as shown. Its just not a common situation. It had me going for a bit also, till I did something about it and tried and proved. ;]

Its simple. If I have to make a vid.....  ???

Mags

MH

Sorry, this is not the thread with the sims and explanation  2 posts starting with this one...

http://www.overunity.com/12147/this-might-blow-your-mind/msg318769/#msg318769

Mags

He just posted a third video with a wrong circuit diagramm...

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fM6-4D74bi4

This way the circuit is drawn, the LEDs DO NOT light up due to the BackEMF pulse !
He just shorted out the LEDs with the Reed switch !!
If he wanted to pull a prank he should be able to draw a correct circuit diagramm...
Also it would be nice if he would have  dismantled the motor to show the hidden batteries inside the coils...
Otherwise people might not believe him as the batteries looked too long to fit inside the coils...


Also User Mopozco has made a video about it:


http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nG3zeNvDEZU


Here is the wrong circuit diagramm from Larsko quickly drawn just one coil leg...

Quote from: hartiberlin on April 13, 2012, 12:44:11 PM
Also User Mopozco has made a video about it:


http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nG3zeNvDEZU (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nG3zeNvDEZU)

The video of Mopozco answered a lot of my questions. It is very important to note, that the shape of the magnets is not relevant. The coils can be parallel or in series as Mopozco states in his video. Nothing is better than a few experiments.

Greetings, Conrad

Hi folks, I think we have two possibilities here, the control freaks are still running around bullying people who display devices that are running in a unique way and would explain larsko's change of story from detailed report to prank.
Or we have the same old mind psyops campaign to simply create doubt in any of this being possible, to many people on these forums and elsewhere are making pranks and hoaxes for this not to be obvious to everyone.
There is no motive I can see for making hoaxes and pranks, unless one is either being bullied to do so, or is somehow deriving benefit from such actions.
Everything in this world in regard to human affairs is meticulously designed to be exactly the way it is, only a relatively few bad apples are spoiling the barrel in this world.
Human nature is one of truth, peace, joy, love and abundance.
These few manipulators and the unseen ones as well, will never convince me otherwise, no matter how many tricks and illusions they pull.
Robert Adams made a self runner with something right along the lines of this design, so don't let them jade you folks.
peace love light once and forever

Quote from: SkyWatcher123 on April 13, 2012, 09:38:53 PM
Hi folks, I think we have two possibilities here, the control freaks are still running around bullying people who display devices that are running in a unique way and would explain larsko's change of story from detailed report to prank.
Or we have the same old mind psyops campaign to simply create doubt in any of this being possible, to many people on these forums and elsewhere are making pranks and hoaxes for this not to be obvious to everyone.
There is no motive I can see for making hoaxes and pranks, unless one is either being bullied to do so, or is somehow deriving benefit from such actions.
Everything in this world in regard to human affairs is meticulously designed to be exactly the way it is, only a relatively few bad apples are spoiling the barrel in this world.
Human nature is one of truth, peace, joy, love and abundance.
These few manipulators and the unseen ones as well, will never convince me otherwise, no matter how many tricks and illusions they pull.
Robert Adams made a self runner with something right along the lines of this design, so don't let them jade you folks.
peace love light once and forever

Hi All,

Won't say it won't, won't say it will.  Mine is crude to the point of tears but has given me a heck of a lot of information.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=of_eAEhCwwY&feature=g-upl&context=G20c16d6AUAAAAAAAAAA

Ben K4ZPE
The worlds smallest lab.

Conrad:

The shape of the magnets would have some importance.  What would be more important is the polarization of the magnets.  In theory you would want an up-down polarization.  Sometimes the polarization of a magnet is not self-evident.  In an ideal world when people made clips they would state what the polarization of their magnets is.

Skywatcher:

You are forgetting the third option, the guy is just telling the truth.  Also, people have been committing hoaxes since time immemorial for all sorts of reasons.  Do you remember balloon boy?

MileHigh

Quote from: k4zep on April 13, 2012, 10:00:24 PM
Hi All,

Won't say it won't, won't say it will.  Mine is crude to the point of tears but has given me a heck of a lot of information.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=of_eAEhCwwY&feature=g-upl&context=G20c16d6AUAAAAAAAAAA (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=of_eAEhCwwY&feature=g-upl&context=G20c16d6AUAAAAAAAAAA)

Ben K4ZPE
The worlds smallest lab.

Just wondering what sort of behaviour you'd get if you used air core coils. ?

Cheers

Quote from: hoptoad on April 13, 2012, 10:48:52 PM
Just wondering what sort of behaviour you'd get if you used air core coils. ?

Cheers

A lot weaker coupling and output.  To really understand what is going on.  I'm going to have to monitor current and not just voltage.  Current lags in the motor coils.....
I'm just getting started here.....hard to overcome that emf and utilize it!

Ben K4ZEP

Quote from: k4zep on April 13, 2012, 10:53:02 PM
A lot weaker coupling and output.  To really understand what is going on.  I'm going to have to monitor current and not just voltage.  Current lags in the motor coils.....
I'm just getting started here.....hard to overcome that emf and utilize it!

Ben K4ZEP

Yes, I would expect a much weaker coupling, but with no core drag or core attraction to offset the weaker coupling, results may be significantly different.
Just a thought.

Cheers

@ hoptoad and k4zep:

I kind of like air core coils. A core (iron, ferrite) introduces a lot of difficult to control material parameters and the wave forms produced by the coil become strange (spiky and deviate from the ideal sinus).

It is not very related to this motor, but playing with Joule Thieves I learned to appreciate air core coils. Just by adding or removing windings one can easily fine tune.

It is impossible to change the material characteristics of toroids or any other type of core. Specially when experimenting at home the options are very limited when using ferrite or iron cores. Chances are very high one is using the wrong type of core which dampens sutler effects. The famous people building pulse motors in the past were endlessly searching for suitable cores and went to extreams mixing their own materials, which can only be done in a very good chemistry lab and by help of computer calculations and simulations.

Air cores need more wire windings but one has complete control over the shape and size of the coil which can be wound around a cardboard or plastic tube which are very easy to build or can be found easily.

The high inductance ferrites allow for very small coils, but size is not such a big problem when experimenting. Once a new principle has been found with air core coils (and their pure sinus wave forms), material scientists can determine just the right mixture for a suitable ferrite in order to make everything smaller.

Just some thoughts, greetings, Conrad

Quote from: conradelektro on April 14, 2012, 04:54:34 AM
@ hoptoad and k4zep:

I kind of like air core coils. A core (iron, ferrite) introduces a lot of difficult to control material parameters and the wave forms produced by the coil become strange (spiky and deviate from the ideal sinus).

It is not very related to this motor, but playing with Joule Thieves I learned to appreciate air core coils. Just by adding or removing windings one can easily fine tune.

It is impossible to change the material characteristics of toroids or any other type of core. Specially when experimenting at home the options are very limited when using ferrite or iron cores. Chances are very high one is using the wrong type of core which dampens sutler effects. The famous people building pulse motors in the past were endlessly searching for suitable cores and went to extreams mixing their own materials, which can only be done in a very good chemistry lab and by help of computer calculations and simulations.

Air cores need more wire windings but one has complete control over the shape and size of the coil which can be wound around a cardboard or plastic tube which are very easy to build or can be found easily.

The high inductance ferrites allow for very small coils, but size is not such a big problem when experimenting. Once a new principle has been found with air core coils (and their pure sinus wave forms), material scientists can determine just the right mixture for a suitable ferrite in order to make everything smaller.

Just some thoughts, greetings, Conrad

Hi Conrad and Hoptoad,

Everything you guys say is right on.  As simple as it looks there is a beast here to tame!  The contra EMF is a problem,
got to think on phasing here.  Right now I don't see how the unipolar concept can work.  The generator action is X amount of braking and unless I can get the magneto or open contact burst more while cancelling out the core, it is a problem!  So will be messing today, hope my mumetal comes in......

Without building one of these no matter how simple, it will never be figured out.......Did either of these devices come
out on April 1st?

Ben K4ZEP

In larskos vid where he shows a correction to the schematic, I find it hard to believe that such a mistake could have been made in the first schematic. After all the conniving care he took to build and put on a controlled demonstration, he didnt remember which way the battery was connected? I dont get it.

The first schematic will work as a motor and flash the led. And give back to the battery, not explained by him in the vids.

But now he shows the update circuit that only takes from the battery. 

What is going on here? 

First a self powered motor. Then its a battery powered that gives back to the battery(not specified by him though). Then just a battery sucker. Whats next? He really had a D cell in the coils?  Was all just a good 3D animation?

Something is very weird about all this.

The first circuit is the interesting one. Whether he knew it or not. Its almost Tesla weird in style. 

Mags

Here is code for the Falstad sim. 

If you right click the background of the circuit screen, select/drag option will allow you to exchange the batteries to see what Im saying. The circuit works in both situations.

The first battery in the circuit when you import the code is Larskos first circuit.
The battery to the right not in the circuit is his second version. I made the batteries 1.2v for rechargeable.

Why would he change it if it works either way? Of course the polarity of the fields would change also. So is it N or S now?

The only other differences would be that the first circuit does produce true BEMF(Reverse Electro Motive Force) and charges back to the battery, but the second version only produces normal collapse current, just more continued forward emf, like in switching power supplies, and only drains the battery.


If the scope shots for both batteries do not show in the import, just right click the batteries and select scope.  Then right click the scope shot and select Show Power Consumed  and Show Negative Peak Value.

Sometimes the scope shots dont always arrive in the code. 

http://falstad.com/circuit/

$ 1 4.9999999999999996E-6 10.20027730826997 50 5.0 50
l 304 128 304 176 0 1.0 -1.291725244562808E-20
r 304 256 304 304 0 5.0
v 304 176 304 256 0 0 40.0 1.2 0.0 0.0 0.5
w 304 128 208 128 0
w 304 304 208 304 0
s 208 128 208 304 0 1 true
w 304 128 384 144 0
v 544 272 544 192 0 0 40.0 1.2 0.0 0.0 0.5
w 384 288 304 304 0
162 384 144 384 288 1 2.1024259 1.0 0.0 0.0
o 2 64 1 291 7.62939453125E-5 9.765625E-5 0 -1
o 7 64 1 291 7.62939453125E-5 9.765625E-5 1 -1


Now, which circuit would you rather build? The power sucker(Larskos last circuit presentation) or the first one?  ;]

I just dont get what is going on with that guy.   The first one works.  Some out there may be looking at the circuit and assuming actual BEMF isnt occurring so the led couldnt possibly be lighting. But it does either way. So maybe Larsko looked at it that way also. But he built the thing. He knows the polarity of the battery. He could have just as well on the second circuit just reversed the led's and gotten a good result.

I think the sim circuit shows it quite clearly.

Like I said, something is weird  8) :'( 8) here as to what is really going on. Larsko has produced a lot of vids, he knows what he is doing.

Mags

One more thing. All this show and tell, yet he hasnt ripped the top off of one of those coils yet to show the battery inside.  Maybe it is taking him this long to actually build the hollowed out coil/bolt and nut. lol After the fact, if you know what I mean.

Mags dont buy any of it. :o

At 1:54, he holds up the AA battery. The coil assembly does not look tall enough to contain an AA battery.

http://youtu.be/n93iIduG01I (http://youtu.be/n93iIduG01I)

I just posted on his YT ch and asked a few questions. He really needs to clear this up.

Mags

Hi Ben,
nice to see you back experimenting.

What would happen, if you used IRON wire for the coils ?
Then the magnets would be attracted to the coils on its own
attraction and generate already induction which you could store via a diode in
a cap and when the magnets will be Top Dead Center you could
use the stored cap energy to pulse some additional copper coils around the iron coils
to get the magnets to escape from the iron wire attraction.

I guess it will only work something like this, if at all...


Regards, Stefan.

Quote from: hartiberlin on April 14, 2012, 05:42:13 PM
Hi Ben,
nice to see you back experimenting.

What would happen, if you used IRON wire for the coils ?
Then the magnets would be attracted to the coils on its own
attraction and generate already induction which you could store via a diode in
a cap and when the magnets will be Top Dead Center you could
use the stored cap energy to pulse some additional copper coils around the iron coils
to get the magnets to escape from the iron wire attraction.

I guess it will only work something like this, if at all...


Regards, Stefan.

Hi Stefan,

Yes, if you used insulated iron wire for the coil, you could do away with the iron core but
if you charged up a Cap. via a diode, you would loose .4 to .7V as a drop across the diode
depending on the type of diode used. (you could use a reed relay here for no loss but it wouldn't make any difference as you would
slow the rotor down more!) You would also have increased losses in the higher resistance in the wire/coil.
You would have the drag or repulsion on the rotor charging the Cap. when in this generator mode.  You simply can't get away from the
generated EMF that causes repulsion in the approaching rotor if you use it or short it!  With the loss in the steel wire, the voltage drop
across the diode and then the resistance losses in the repulsion iron and copper coils, it would probably not fly. Over the last week
or so when I was directed to both videos, I threw basic theory to the wind and jumped in with both feet!  Immediately the
scope showed me the error of my enthusiasm and after a hundred different variations on the theme, I had to get back to reality. 

As to the size of the AA battery, they also make AAA nicads/metal hydride, etc.  Also N size if you really want to play around
with the illusion.  My hats off to two really nice pulse motors.  On the first original, just unscrew the two small screws holding
the coils on after removing the MuMetal base screws and show that the wood base is solid and the bolts are indeed solid. 
Pop off the heads on the "replication" and show the batteries inside immediately after showing it run.  That would clear up a lot of questions. 
I also don't understand the "tap" on the coils in the second replication.  The quest goes on!

Stefan, I never was away, just didn't have anything constructive to input.  As I get older, I watch more, read more and post less.

Ben K4ZEP

Nice to see you guys picking up on Adams motor :)

Just all of this thread screams to be pointed into Bedini SSG, with reed switch isntead of coil/hall sensor.
There is alot to be exploited in BEMF/radiant area from collapsing electromagnetic field, as those pulses act differently than conventional electricity. For example, if you have 2 generator coils winded on top 2 driving coils and try attach single diode to each when other side of those coils are common ground, when you try to catch BEMF spikes ant rectify them the diodes do not work as intended and act as short wire for BEMF... So you get current between 2 diodes cathodes. I tried this setup once more in my rewinded stepper mottor what got now generator coils on top of driving coils and clearly can see this effect.

P.S> The BEMF pulses are much higher voltage than initially (up to 10-20 times) with very low current usually.

Cheers!

The YouTube user http://www.youtube.com/user/skycollection (http://www.youtube.com/user/skycollection) has produced a video with the name
TETRAHEDRON (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=aEjA8jlOOa0&context=C4b27b6bADvjVQa1PpcFNWQDdTWlKNH1jhAzlWjrAzOME5LNnKAYo=) (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=aEjA8jlOOa0 (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=aEjA8jlOOa0) )which seems to depict a motor (2 coils, reed switch, LEDs feed back generated electricity) similar to Larskro`s. The rotor turns for minutes and the claim is "no batteries". He promises in the video to add a third coil in a future experiment.

I could never get any information from skycollection, may be others (e.g. Spanish speakers) have more luck.

The contraptions built by skycollection are just beautiful, I wish I could build like that.

Greetings, Conrad

T-1000:

QuoteThere is alot to be exploited in BEMF/radiant area from collapsing electromagnetic field, as those pulses act differently than conventional electricity.

I know that is your understanding and a lot of people believe that, but in fact it's not true.

QuoteThe BEMF pulses are much higher voltage than initially (up to 10-20 times) with very low current usually.

That's also another misunderstanding.

There are some people around here that may be able to help you and explain this to you.

Also, please note that it can be very difficult to describe schematic diagrams in text.  A simple diagram is worth 1000 words!

MileHigh

Quote from: conradelektro on April 15, 2012, 09:58:46 AM
...
TETRAHEDRON (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=aEjA8jlOOa0&context=C4b27b6bADvjVQa1PpcFNWQDdTWlKNH1jhAzlWjrAzOME5LNnKAYo=) (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=aEjA8jlOOa0 (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=aEjA8jlOOa0) )which seems to depict a motor (2 coils, reed switch, LEDs feed back generated electricity) similar to Larskro`s. The rotor turns for minutes and the claim is "no batteries"...

And it appears to be accelerating, with no batteries (or any other external input)?

Nice built as always.
Thanks for posting the link.
Mike

Quote from: MileHigh on April 15, 2012, 10:01:27 AM
T-1000:

I know that is your understanding and a lot of people believe that, but in fact it's not true.

That's also another misunderstanding.

There are some people around here that may be able to help you and explain this to you.

Also, please note that it can be very difficult to describe schematic diagrams in text.  A simple diagram is worth 1000 words!

MileHigh

Lol  Typical MH. Everyone is wrong, yet no real explanation of why. Just , as above, " not true" and "misunderstanding" and "Others here can show you" (passing the buck) and discounting T-1000's words for lack of a picture. This isnt Playboy magazine.  I understand what T-1000 is saying, yet you require more from him.
I know your game MH.

Mags

Mags:

It's no game.  You know the thread, we went though it on our.com and I thought that you "got it."

Quoteif you have 2 generator coils winded on top 2 driving coils and try attach single diode to each when other side of those coils are common ground, when you try to catch BEMF spikes ant rectify them the diodes do not work as intended and act as short wire for BEMF... So you get current between 2 diodes cathodes. I tried this setup once more in my rewinded stepper mottor what got now generator coils on top of driving coils and clearly can see this effect.

Perhaps you can explain what he means.

MileHigh

Quote from: MileHigh on April 15, 2012, 11:40:51 AM
Mags:

It's no game.  You know the thread, we went though it on our.com and I thought that you "got it."

Perhaps you can explain what he means.

MileHigh

I know what you are getting at MH
People refer to the spikes as a voltage source and should be calling it a current source.

But it is none the less EMF( bemf, cemf, reverse emf, or just emf) which describes Voltage, pressure, potential difference..Just because the field collapse is the motive for current to flow, doesnt mean that voltage does not exist at the leads of the coil when the collapse is happening. The measured amount of voltage will depend on the load it is provided to. Even a DVM is a load across an open coil with a very high ohm "load", thus a high result of voltage read. A voltage meter with a higher internal ohms will read a higher voltage that another meter with a lower internal ohms.

If we have a coil collapse, there is a force of potential created across the ends of that coil. Voltage is a potential difference of electric pressures between 2 points.

To say that claiming of a specific high voltage caused by field collapse is incorrect is not totally true.

And to specify a peak voltage from the collapse can have a specific peak value if the input is consistent, is not necessarily incorrect. In some cases a coils field collapse could cause thousands of volts that can jump across open air distances. And some wont jump across a 10th of a millimeter. Just because it is a current source, doesnt mean that a number in terms of Voltage peaks cannot be applied.

So I dont have much of a problem with describing the output of a coil field collapse as a high or very high voltage number. Even if it is very temporary, there is a number in voltage that can be applied to the description of the output. Voltage does not have to be constant to be described in numbers.

In the case of what T-1000 is speaking of, It sounds like he is seeing the diodes break down reversed biased. The voltage pressure peaks due to the collapse current can breach the diodes peak inverse voltage level, as the coil doesnt see a load till its voltage potential reaches that level.

Mags

Mags:

You got it for sure.  My issue was with this, "those pulses act differently than conventional electricity."  I would hope that more people get to understand that the voltage pulses or spikes are 100% conventional electricity in action as per your explanation.  I think that it's important to get people to understand that.  People in leadership positions that claim that is is "unconventional electricity"  could be promoting those ideas to take advantage of people.  I tried teaching this material and for the most part failed.  Perhaps others will be much more successful at teaching than me.

In the same vein I would assume that you would agree that the statement, "The BEMF pulses are much higher voltage than initially (up to 10-20 times) with very low current usually" is something that is misunderstood.  I can't tell you how many times I have read variations on that when you know that there is a tangible current behind the high voltage spikes and in fact the root cause for the high voltage itself is the current.

I can only hope that some sort of critical mass would take place among the experimenters so that the correct understanding is promoted and the "old wives' tales" are dismissed outright.  I just know that I am not the person to do it and I just made the comment once in this thread.

In sense I don't know why you gave me a hard time when you knew exactly what I was referring to.  I was just leaving the door open for somebody to correct him because I have 'retired' from that.

MileHigh

Well MH, sometimes I get frustrated with your posts. Like the one to t-1000, only comments as to what is right and wrong, but without explanation to accommodate your accusation. When in the post above, you clearly say that my explanation is correct, yet you would not put it out there in complete as I did.

I would appreciate your posts a great deal more if you were to clear up your convictions as you divvy them out. Not everyone is like me to come and clean up the mess, so that your simple comments are not taken lightly and just assumed correct.

All meant in the nicest way possible. ;]

You say you want people to learn from what you say. Well, teach then. Bust out the goods. You clearly know this stuff. And you post enough that I think more of it can have some substance.

Ok, I gota git to my shop to put some things together then back to the bench.

Mags

Mags:

I tried doing it for several years and I never got anywhere so I'm done.  If T-1000 came back with a follow-up posting asking for more information I would have pointed him to the Min2oly thread on our.com.

It's up to the experimenters themselves to learn or not learn.  I don't think you realize how hard I tried in the past.  My teaching days are over.

MileHigh

Quote from: mikestocks2006 on April 15, 2012, 11:18:18 AM

And it appears to be accelerating, with no batteries (or any other external input)?

Nice built as always.
Thanks for posting the link.
Mike

Well..... this is what I see.
The first, slow start by Mr. Hand certainly decelerates normally -- I hope that much is agreed.
The second, much faster start by Mr. Hand also looks to me like it decelerates steadily and normally for a heavy flywheel on good bearings, right up into the zoom at 3:42... and then it looks like it jumps up in speed during the zoom.
It's hard to tell because of the frame-rate flickering, but I've watched it several times, and it sure looks like it decelerates until just around 3:42 in the zoom and then gets a boost there.

ETA: That hub arrangement looks a lot like a disk drive motor assembly to me.

Skycollection says he will show a schematic in the next vid. So till then....

I posted at Larskros 3rd vid to at least show a voltage measurement at the reed, led, as they will show 1.2v if the battery is really in the coils, not running. If he doesnt show that then what can we think? Its easy enough and he wont have to break open the coils.

It would cure my ills. ;]

Mags

This guy ReasonForeMost is a major poster at Larskros 3rd vid. He agues with me about my questioning. I asked him 2 times now if showing a measurement of the voltage on the motor, not running , is unreasonable. Still just bush beating me. Who is running that show anyways?  ;]

Wouldt it be funny if we cant even get a simple measurement on video of the 1.2v on an leds leads? There have been many requests to open the coils, even Stefan would like to see.

This Reason guy has me wondering even more. He says just take their word for it.  lol are you kidding me. In this day and age and all we have seen.

We will see what Larskro comes up with. I gave a test criteria to avoid any trickery. Simple 2 min vid is all I can be satisfied with giving Lars the benefit of the doubt that it would ruin the coil to open it.
It was suppose to be a lesson about scammers. Good greif. Finish the lesson and open a coil.   Maybe the not opening the coils is a sign that the lesson is not over yet?

Hey everybody, come see the magnet motor working!! Look! Looky, it works!!!
But dont build this motor, dont waste your time. Oh, no I cant open the coil. Oh, I dont know how the circuit is connected for sure.  Gime a break. lesson?

Mags

Wow, Larskro refused to do the voltage measurement on the motor to show that batteries are inside.
This is just too funny now.

Mags

My guess is that some folks might be taking his "battery reveal" clue literally. Perhaps he is just indicating that "a battery source" is used, but not necessarily "that" particular battery type?

A few button cells would fit nicely inside his coils.

Ok, just responded to mr Reason(The Protector) posting at Lars 3rd vid. Mr Reason, he said Irrational, and um oh yea, Irrational, and yup irrational. Great dialog this guy. pretty much what he has been saying.

Here was my post's

   
•      Im BAAACk! Mr Irrational Myself. ;] Say what you will Dr. Im not phased by it. ;] Some others might fall for your limited dialog, but not I Sir. ;]
  Ok heres my plan. Using just a coil with a core, led, reed sw and a magnet, I will make the self runner. As assumed in the first video, and Rovella's showing.
  What really made me realize that we can have a field reversal in the coil after the first field collapse was the circuit in vid 2. Well I can get it also without the battery. Continued......
      Magluvin (http://www.youtube.com/user/Magluvin)   in reply to     ReasonForemost (http://www.youtube.com/user/ReasonForemost) 1 second ago 
     
•      Timing for the reed will be somewhere just past TDC. As most should know, when the mag approaches the coil/core, the output will be of a particular polarity. After TDC the output polarity reverses. We are only going to make use of the mag pass just after TDC. The reed will short the coil briefly causing high current to flow and a field builds. Release the reed and the coils field collapses with no load, as the led is not biased in that direction during the initial collapse. ;] Continued.....
      Magluvin (http://www.youtube.com/user/Magluvin)   in reply to     Magluvin (http://www.youtube.com/user/Magluvin) 1 second ago 
     
•      Since the field collapse has no load, the collapse goes all the way into field reversal and current reversal, lighting the led(load) and pushing the magnet on its way. And repeat. The mag and coil shouldnt be too close as the mag field will impede the coils collapse and reversal. So for this particular setup, energy in rotor motion will not be great, but its a beginning. ;]
  How do ya like dem apples?
  Mags
      Magluvin (http://www.youtube.com/user/Magluvin)   in reply to     Magluvin (http://www.youtube.com/user/Magluvin) 1 second ago

Been thinking on this all day, and that is what I have come up with.
Whether it works will find out. Coil,led and reed all parallel. Only led polarities need to be determined once all is put together.

Just throwing it all out there beforehand.


Only timing, mag and coil proximity, correct led polarity.
if the led is in first collapse capture polarity, there will be a continued Lenz when the reed opens. But in reversal, we have reverse lenz, if you can call it that. ;]
Maybe the circuit in vid 2 was too close to being what I have described, thus vid 3, "The Battery Sucker"

I love dem apples  ;]



Mags

Mags,
After wrestling with the first 3 pages of Rovella's description to get it into a decent English translation, I too began to sense that what he was saying made sense.  Here's a snippet:

QuoteThe simplicity of construction borders on impossible, as you see. It seems like a spoof, but to the rigor of logic, it appears to be self-sustaining due to the reaction of the two electromagnets which take energy from the toroids and at the right moment, throw it back in synchronized fashion; the foul deed occurs when the magnetic toroid (for example, the right-hand toroid) energizes the right bobbin, which feeds the left bobbin, which at the proper moment enters into a reaction with the right magnetic toroid, and it is only this action which becomes effective because it enters into play with the force of the magnets â€" one permanent, one electric.

He's attracted a lot of drama,
This son of Italian Mama.
First, it's working, then it's not;
Perhaps a little, perhaps a lot.

And as the drama dances on
The one time curious growd is gone
Searching for the newest thrill
- The latest, greatest OU pill.

Trust your gut, Sir Mags, I say;
And forge ahead as feel, you may.
Let not the world obscure your dreams
But challenge you to best its screams.

This mama's boy's device doth beckon,
Some who dream or build and reckon.
So heed ye well these words once sung,
Lest ye be unaware and stung:

"When you swim in the sea
And an eel bites your knee,
That's a Moray!"
(That's Mr. Moray in his sea of energy, of course :o)

Bob

Hey Bob
Thanks for the encouragement. ;]

Its funny. lenz makes more sense to me now.  When the magnet induces the coil, the field in the coil is in attraction with the magnet thus slowing down the magnets motion or at least applying a pulling force on it. So if the reed closes and opens for a short time, there is lenz at that time. But if we coordinate a coil field reversal with the led allowing the real BEMF to happen, and continue through the led for as along as it can, with field reversal, then it very well could work.

Tito said once that for a very simple method, all you need is a coil, diode, reed switch, and a magnet. Sounds very good to me. ;] 

Im just arranging my rotor at the moment for all N facing out with larger mags. Alternating poles would probably cause issues as the led would not be in correct polarity.

So if Zeropoints motor worked, the reed most likely only activated during a particular pole pass and not the other. The reed distance is very critical for this to happen, and I have done it before. That is before i learned to use bias mags on my reeds to only fire on the N or S pole passes. Z always said the reed position was critical.

Mags

Quote from: Magluvin on April 16, 2012, 10:56:51 PM
Its funny. lenz makes more sense to me now.  When the magnet induces the coil, the field in the coil is in attraction with the magnet thus slowing down the magnets motion or at least applying a pulling force on it. So if the reed closes and opens for a short time, there is lenz at that time. But if we coordinate a coil field reversal with the led allowing the real BEMF to happen, and continue through the led for as along as it can, with field reversal, then it very well could work.

Tito said once that for a very simple method, all you need is a coil, diode, reed switch, and a magnet. Sounds very good to me. ;] 

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=UV2gvsmeM_U

Thanks T.  It would be interesting to see what level of discharge there would be without the gen coil? Might ask him. When he had the battery in for a while, the voltage was going up as compared to just the cap. But being that the battery would be dumping quite a bit of current into the cap when it is below batt voltage, the battery is probably settling back upward after the dump. or the cap wasnt done drinking yet. ;]   Ive had pulse motors that once the thing ran for hours, the batt voltage would climb for a while. Slowly but it would climb. But then it would start to go down again.

I only had one that seemed to almost never go down in voltage. Starting a run test should not be done with freshly charged batteries. It will look as if they drain a lot faster than if they were to settle down after charge first. All due to the batteries wanting to settle down during the run.  ;] it can be very dicouraging if one doesnt know better.  ;]   It can make a very good motor seem not near close yet.  Because the motor, if sending regen has to work harder against the drop that is inherent to the battery rather than just trying to maintain a voltage it prefers to sit at unloaded.

mags

HI

Hey Lars

Thanks for the scope shot. I know your doing your best.
But sorry if that is not evident enough for me, but that could be a scope shot of anything really. Anything other than the motor that is. Dont take this baddly. Its just that it can be questionable just as I just described. ;]

Im not saying that you are lying Lars. Ive seen how certain requirements are necessary when showing and or describing these machines via the net in order to convey confidence to the viewers that there is no doubt that it really really seems to be as you show and describe. Some of what you have shown and described leave me to question.

Im sorry that I feel that way, but you have to understand.....

If you were to do video 1 just as you did, that would be fine. Great build and vid actually.
I would have left out the "not a fake, but" in the title, but it is what it is.

So then you show vid 2. Also a great vid showing the circuit and a battery implying that it is what you installed in those coils. But I have 2 questions..
1   The battery doesnt look like it would fit. Too long. And Im not the only one that questions it. I even thought that if you hollowed out the bolt head and the nut/bolt end, that you could possibly get it in there. Its hard to say without it in front of me. But I still lean toward not fitting. Sorry, but Ive looked and looked at it. Even the fact that your one finger next to the led lit/flashing, shows that the battery is within close enough proximity to the coil to assume as I do. Sorry again.

2   When you tilt the motor to show the top view, when you spin the rotor one way the leds are weak, but the other direction they are strong. Just messing around, I could not get that effect with the battery. But I could get it without the battery using just a coil, led reed and rotor. All with keeping the reed in one position for each test and spinning the rotor one way then the other. Sorry again, but I fail to see how you get those effects with the battery.  The battery powers the coil and then the coil powers the led. With a battery, either direction produces the same output to the led. Its not only real for me, but also logical.

But if you were able to show me the battery in the coil or even do the 2 min measurement vid I described, I would be all yours.  ;]  But you cant and I have to accept that. So what am I to do?

I can be generally friendly. But I dont know you till just recently. Let me ask you. Should I just trust anyone? Here on the net? I would love it if people could just trust everyone. But we dont live in that world. It sucks. But I believe we will be in a place like that one day.  ;]

Basically Im just trying to get down to the point of, Ok, he "definitely" has batteries in them coils, cool. Hey Lars, Nice setup! and that would be it. Nice show then on with life.

So then you get some complaints that the first circuit doesnt work. Not from me. So you post vid 3 of the revised circuit. And you already know my complaints on that. I wont repeat them. But it is questionable. And then you posted back to me that your not sure now since I pointed out that the first circuit works.

Well ok then, you forget. It happens.

But even keeping that in mind, my mind was in overdrive, thinking hmm, maybe these circuits are just afterthoughts after showing a real self runner. Maybe you cant understand why I might think that way. But after seeing so many of these things over the years, you learn to look at the details, and recognize if something is a miss. Like a judge listens to people everyday and learns what he can believe and not. that doesnt make me a bad person. Im just looking for something close to undeniable truth. Thats all. ;]  Only because it is important to me, because Im into this stuff.

Your friend Dr Reason that is posting on the 3rd vid, I really dont like the way he thinks that others should just accept it all as presented or else we are irrational, or any of the other clever words he uses to label us for questioning questionable things. And of the ones that do just accept the whole deal for what was supposedly intended by posting these vids, then they are  not seeing the details and say Good Show and move on. Well not everyone is like that.

Not everyone drinks orange juice realizing that most(brands) of it sits in big tanks for up to a year before bottling and they add chemicals to it to bring back the flavor because it is lost over that period of time. So what else might be wrong with the juice other than just taste loss over that period of time?  Well most people dont know anything at all, because they dont question or look very closely to figure it out. Just a wonderful life as usual.  But some of us do know these things and research to figure them out. Because not much of the nitty gritty makes it to the common news sources.
Some did make news on the juice in the tanks for a year, and the fungiside issue that the fda says is ok for us. Yea right. Well its not OK, over time.

Well that hurt them a bit. Ive noticed a LOT of orange juice commercials come out in the last couple months, showing orange groves and a hand picking off of the tree, but they sure as heck aint gunna show us the tanks and the chemicals, and what ever it is that they are doing.

But we are just suppose to accept that the orange picked from that tree in the commercial will be squeezed and bottled and refrigerated and sent right to the store shelves just in time for breakfast for the kids.   UUUGGG!  lol  Do ya get my drift?

Can you see the relationship between the orange juice commercials and what you have shown?  Im not saying you are intentionally deceiving anyone for sure. It could all be just how you went along with it and how it is received by some and then others. Just maybe a bit of not so good planning and or execution.  But it is hard to tell for sure. I still dont know.

I would like to. But some things just need to be cleared up thats all. Im not asking for a fight. Dr Reason gets me fired up a bit with his beat around the bush posting. I really dont trust him fer nuthin at this point. I think he is all about the idea that free energy doesnt exist and preaches it. Thats fine, but his way of teaching his religion doesnt pull me to the dark side one bit. His words are hollow, hopefully like your bolt heads.  ;]

Anyways, dont fret Lars. I posted my last post to your 3rd vid that is directed to you that you have already seen.. The Dr and I may kick it around a bit but I will leave you to your work.

Good luck  ;]

mags

Mags:

Quote
2   When you tilt the motor to show the top view, when you spin the rotor one way the leds are weak, but the other direction they are strong. Just messing around, I could not get that effect with the battery. But I could get it without the battery using just a coil, led reed and rotor. All with keeping the reed in one position for each test and spinning the rotor one way then the other. Sorry again, but I fail to see how you get those effects with the battery.  The battery powers the coil and then the coil powers the led. With a battery, either direction produces the same output to the led. Its not only real for me, but also logical.

When the reed switch shorts and the battery is connected then it's in series with whatever EMF is being induced in the coil from the passing magnets.  So if the EMF induced by the passing magnets is larger than the battery voltage then you should still be able to get the difference in LED intensities.  So you are jumping the gun in your analysis.

All:

I have read this thread from time to time and looks at most of the Mopozco clips that have been linked to.  He seems like a really nice guy.  I have seen two major mistakes made by him but no comments from anybody as to what those mistakes are.  I am being a pain the butt again but I challenge all of you to figure out what those mistakes are and somebody should communicate them back to Mopozco.  The challenge is to try to collectively "up your game."

MileHigh

Quote from: MileHigh on April 18, 2012, 12:27:19 AM
Mags:

When the reed switch shorts and the battery is connected then it's in series with whatever EMF is being induced in the coil from the passing magnets.  So if the EMF induced by the passing magnets is larger than the battery voltage then you should still be able to get the difference in LED intensities.  So you are jumping the gun in your analysis.

All:

I have read this thread from time to time and looks at most of the Mopozco clips that have been linked to.  He seems like a really nice guy.  I have seen two major mistakes made by him but no comments from anybody as to what those mistakes are.  I am being a pain the butt again but I challenge all of you to figure out what those mistakes are and somebody should communicate them back to Mopozco.  The challenge is to try to collectively "up your game."

MileHigh

Jumping the gun?  I challenge you to prove that I jumped and that it was a gun I jumped over.  lol  MH just do the test. In fact, did you do the test? Or are you just speculating? Guessing? Asserting a hypothesis as fact? This must be why you said you gave up teaching people years ago.  Tisk Tisk  That was just the other day you told me that , right?  What was it, umm, well, they can read it for themselves. Where was it hmm. Was it this thread?  ;)

I thought that possibly the magnet generation would affect the brightness also in one direction vs the other. So I had to try it. But the generation isnt much compared to what happens with the coil shorting and then discharge to the led. Just do the test.  Then do the test of just the coil led and reed, no battery.  Then come back and show me my guns a jumpin. Or, you can continue on like you always do and we should assume you are always correct. Yea right. Its all in your mind. Your loosin it bud.
  ;]

And as for your challenge. Why is it on us to look for things that you already claim to have found? What, is this a diversion?  8) Thats a possible bunch of people that might do it. Maybe a lot of posts too. Big Diversion.  8)          .... like a book.

How about you just tell us what you found, and let us determine whether you are as good as you think you are?.  :o ;) That is my challenge to you. Are ya man enough?  8)
We will see. We did this before. I predict that, well, you wont turn out to be a man. :P If history is a reliable clue to follow. ;)
Or is it that only your rules apply in these discussions? :o ;)   I really dont care for those rules.

Magnets

Quote from: MileHigh on April 18, 2012, 12:27:19 AM


When the reed switch shorts and the battery is connected then it's in series with whatever EMF is being induced in the coil from the passing magnets.  So if the EMF induced by the passing magnets is larger than the battery voltage then you should still be able to get the difference in LED intensities.  So you are jumping the gun in your analysis.

M, are you saying that the magnet passing the coil in lars vid, even at the most rpm we have seen in the vids, is generating more voltage than the batteries 1.2v? man, you havnt ever done this stuff have you. Even as you say Im jumping guns with my questioning of Lasr setup, you pull out that bag of crap?

M, lets say that Lars scop shot is real, of the battery powered motor. Can you describe each level of the trace for us please, and specifically show us the portion of the trace that shows ordinary magnet/coil generation vs when the reed closes and opens?  Then show us where you see that the generation( your quote above "So if the EMF induced by the passing magnets is larger than the battery voltage") is higher than the battery voltage????????  HA!  Who is jumping guns now?  Wow dude. You should retire. 8)

Mags

Where did ya go MH?  Im dying to read your response before I go to sleep.
You were just here.

Oh well, maybe you need until tomorrow to think your way out of this one. Ill give you that. Try a vitamin B complex  It helps to keep the footy taste out of the mouth.   ;)

Mags

Hi Mags,

I can confirm from my own setup that the scope shot provided by L is authentic.

Identical setup and absolutely identical waveform - running from 2 x 1.3v Li-on rechargeables.

Thanks, Garry

p.s. if you need pics, let me know.

Hey Gary

Even though I say that I doubt things, I also have thoughts that everything might be as told. I just cant say for sure. If I did it wouldnt be the truth for sure, one way or the other, if ya know what I mean.

I fully can say that the scope shot is very possibly of the motor that is presented with a battery. Yes.
But if investigating this with so many issues, should I just accept the pic of a lone scope shot as if it IS the actual battery motor in vid 1 and 2 that produced that shot? I cant say for sure because I was not there. 

So far it is hear say, to the Nth degree.

Nobody has seen the battery in the coil except for Lars. Fact
He wont open to show us  Fact
He refuses to measure an led or the reed(open) to show the 1.2v within the non running motor Fact
Produces a drawing of the circuit in vid 2, and then makes a correction of it in vid 3. And then, in post on vid 3, claims I have him doubting either schematic because I told him that the first circuit works, and I asked why he changed it.  Fact

He cant remember after building 2 identical coils if the resistor was soldered to the tip+ or the side- or if the coil was here or there either  Fact. 

Gary. Do you remember these connections on your build?   ;)   Will you remember a month from now? Year? ;)

Oh well. But Im doing test runs tomorrow on the non battery setup. Just coil, reed, led and rotor. Im setting up 2 reed assy's one just a single and the other a dual reed in series. one next to the other.
This will shorten the close timing compared to a single reed. You can get super short pulses this way. One closes then the other closes ON then the first opens OFF.

Please put up some pics. Ill put some up also.  ;] Show and tell   

Mags

Hi Mags,

OK

http://youtu.be/b9Ka4BbUx08 (http://youtu.be/b9Ka4BbUx08)

Hi
The scop shut is over the diode.

HI
Picture of the AAA / COIL.

HI ALL
Drawing of the coil.

If you believe that self-running devices works (Video 1) is my headline wrong.
If you believe that self-running, overunity devices DO NOT works, my headline is correct.
The meaning of this video is just to open peoples eyes.
I did not expect that someone wanted to replicate this motor.
Thanks to all interested.
Larskro

So much effort in hollowing out the head of the bolt, you could have just went with some 12V A23 batteries which is just a stack of button cells and smaller than AAA. Please show the opened coils as well while you're at it. You can't expect people to be critical only to one side of the argument that's called having double standards.

Quote from: Magluvin on April 18, 2012, 01:11:34 AM
I thought that possibly the magnet generation would affect the brightness also in one direction vs the other. So I had to try it. But the generation isnt much compared to what happens with the coil shorting and then discharge to the led.

That instantly did "ding" in my head about what N. Tesla was doing to charge capacitors and what Ismael Aviso was doing also.. ;)
http://www.tfcbooks.com/images/articles/1919-05-00/19190500_fig_10.gif (http://www.tfcbooks.com/images/articles/1919-05-00/19190500_fig_10.gif) from http://www.tfcbooks.com/tesla/1919-05-00.htm (http://www.tfcbooks.com/tesla/1919-05-00.htm)
http://home.dmv.com/~tbastian/images/CorumDesign.gif from http://home.dmv.com/~tbastian/ball.htm

And Ismael was doing that also :) - www.youtube.com/watch?v=rv7C7YOetDY#t=0h30m00s (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rv7C7YOetDY#t=0h30m00s)

Hopefully that will explain some things.

UUUUGGGHH!  Trying time and time again, every time I want to post this site just keeps recycling back to the home page. I dont even know what I wanted to say now, except this.
I know its not a pay site that I should expect anything, but im so frustrated.  ugh

Off and on since 530 till now 953. At times I could read, but when I finally went to post, home page.

lol im probably too whacked right now to say anything without it sounding off kilter. But Ill see what I can do.

Lars
Thanks for the pics and drawing. Your camera takes nice pics.  ;]

But here is something to think about next time you make a lesson or a production that makes people think.

Planning is important. Like making a movie for the theaters, there is a beginning middle and end. And throughout there are many many details to cover before coming to theaters near you to make the production believable to the paying audiences. the more believable the more money they make.  ;]  Good planning is important.

Lets say this all was a movie. In the end most would probably see the pic of the voltage measure of the led and say AHH, yep there is a battery in there. But some of us will see that the top of the picture cuts off the view of the the other end of the motor where the other led is.
Some of us would look at it like the first Rocky movie where his fist is like 12 inches away from  his opponents head, but the opponents head flys back like it was really hit. If you watch in slow motion it gets really ridiculous.
Or like in I think it was Commando, where he dropped Sali over the cliff. The girl says What happened to Sali? And Arnold says, I let him go. Classic. But at this point Arnold and the girls car is trashed and Sali's Porsche is up on its side with the driver door down. But Arnold being the Commando, simply rolls the car to its wheels and they get in and put the pedal to the metal and are on their way. But some of us will notice that the driver side of the car is a bit smashed up. But when they drive away, it is in perfect condition. I seen it. ;] You can too.  Details details

So some of us will say, bahh, they just hooked up power to the other led that we cant see to try and fool us that there is a battery in there. Movie tricks. Bahh, The drawing of the battery embedded into the hollowed out bolt head is, well, just that, a drawing and proves nothing. Seeing is believing if the view covers all bases. And this IS what some are thinking. Thinking it is a B rated movie that just isnt totally believable.

Dont take this badly. Im just trying to get you to understand that an undertaking like the one you took could have been better planned to a point that nearly everyone liked the movie and story line. People can walk away and say That was really good wasnt it? Yes it was. Cant wait for a sequel. ;]  I dont expect anyone to be a Steven Speilburg. It is what it is. But some can be when they learn the ropes. ;]

Now after seeing the pics today, I was kinda in disbelief at the pic of the voltage measurement. But then I thought that maybe you didnt really get what I was telling you about how you should go about doing a short vid of the  voltage measurement that could convince the best critic. Including me. ;] Maybe you didnt remember, but from my explanation here you might get the point.

There might be another reason for the pic the way it is taken. Just thinkin. Maybe your lesson is not finished yet. Who can say for sure?  Maybe it is all still part of the project to see what people will do, the more you reveal questionable clues. Again, dont take this badly. The reasons why I might think that, are all here in this post, just as a possibilty. I am not in a box. ;] I dont like it in the box. ;]  Im outside, and looking at everything, not just what they want me to believe and accept it as truth.

Again, if you had shown the short vid, I wouldnt even be writing all this. I would have been writing, Very cool Lars and thank you for doing that. ;] All questions would be over.

Also, next time it would be good to have pics of the build. People always love that kind of show. It gives a feeling of being full, instead of still hungry left wanting or needing more when the show is over. They just smile and enjoy instead of question.  ;]

Thanks again Lars. You can hang out here anytime. Your welcome here. ;]

Mags

Hey T-1000

Thanks for those. Good stuff.  Hopefully you have more "dings" for us. ;]

I liked the Avisio vid. The reasoning for the resistor on the gate of the mosfets was interesting. Never thought of that before.  Makes sense.  ;]
Im going to go over the other stuff and get back on the bench again for a bit here.

Mags

Hey MileHigh. Where ya at?  Still thinkin? Well, theres always tomorrow. And the next day.
And the......   Take your time. I know you will come up with something.  ;) History

Mags

Mags:

I am not sure what you want from me. "History"  ?

MileHigh

HI
Good look to all of you.
LarsKro

Has this video been commented on by "Skycollection"?

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=aEjA8jlOOa0 (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=aEjA8jlOOa0)

Thanks,

Quote from: MileHigh on April 19, 2012, 10:59:00 AM
Mags:

I am not sure what you want from me. "History"  ?

MileHigh

Nothing I suppose. Its history.  ;]

I used the word history to show that you 8) wont respond accordingly if someone calls you 8) on your 8) facts.  As shown clearly by your 8) above post and the one before that. ;] 

You 8) are the one that claimed that I was jumping the gun. Do you 8) think I just pretend to work on this stuff? Are you 8) saying I am bluffing, by throwing your 8) unsubstantiated facts as your 8) evidence to somehow make me look bad? 8) What a joke. I rip apart every word of your posts to see what you 8) are up to.  ;) You betcha.

If you 8) ever have said oops I was wrong(I have), I wouldnt think that you 8) are 'only here' to bash any possibilities of free energy and OU. It is your goal in my point of view. You 8) never retort. You 8) only go on as if nothing happened, or talk in diversions to take attn off of your downfalls. I see Wilby busted you 8) up good the other day. ;]  He and I agree 100% on how you 8) handle your affairs here. Its simply "history", meaning we can just go back in time and read it to find the truth.

If you 8) are this bad at simple pulse motors, what the heck business of yours 8) to talk cold fusion let alone seemingly simple stuff in comparison?

Have you 8) read my posts? Is "history" the only word that appeared on your 8) screen within my posts?  Your 8) "not sure" of what I wrote in response to me replying to your 8) "jumping the gun" comment?  Here is what I think. Almost 2 days and you 8) cant figure a way out of the hole you 8) dug, and finally decided to post what we see above. I knew it would be tough. You 8) didnt even try. :'( Not even an oops. :-X

Well, I suppose the readers can figure it out for themselves. Our posts define who we are to the readers M. Someone said that to me the other day. So true.

If you 8) ever try that sly crap again, I will bust you 8) up again. ;]   If this is the game you  8) want to play. ;D I know how to play. ;) We can call it Risk.  :o ;)
How do ya like dem apples? ;)

Mags

Guys, maybe is it enough of wrestling and time waste?

It would be much better if you put your time into ressurection of Muller dynamo - http://peswiki.com/index.php/Directory:William_%28Bill%29_Muller_Dynamo  (http://www.overunity.com/3842/muller-dynamo/). With your skills it should be possible ;)

Larskro: It is up to you, but you can still learn from what N. Tesla was doing more than 100 years ago: http://ia600302.us.archive.org/16/items/inventionsresear00martiala/inventionsresear00martiala.pdf
Then do experiments and see yourself.

Magluvin: There are always closed minded sceptics around and you can spend your lifetime arguing with them...

Cheers!

Mags:

As far as I am concerned you are wigging out.  What I said is that if the reed switch is closed when the magnet is near that the coil itself will generate EMF and that will be in series with the battery voltage.  Do you disagree with this?

I also said if the EMF is greater than the battery voltage then you could see the same difference in brightness effect in the LEDs depending on the direction of the rotor.  And apparently you are having a freak-out over this.

So you have battery in series with a coil in series with an LED when the reed switch is closed.  The timing of the closing of the reed switch is different depending on the direction of the rotor.

So with a scope and a piece of graph paper you could construct a timing diagram for how the setup operates for both rotor directions where you show the voltages and the current.  That will explain the difference in brightness of the LED flash.  Is that worth freaking out about?  Jesus.

Screw you with your double-standard where someone might mention something technical and you engage them but if I say something technical you freak out and attack me.  Pull yourself together.

MileHigh

Hi OU dot Com sharp members,

Sorry, have I missed the beginning, or what?

So, one individual named "LarsKro";
Spent a lot of time and money just to fool people?
IMHO, this ain't good for your Karma, Larskro.

Fortunately, this very forum is a den of witty people and a lair of
very astute experimenters.

My take is that:
Larskro has a very subtile agenda.
This agenda is not do design another faked device (please consult the huge records). :'(
This agenda is to 'prove' that some genuine 'OU' devices are, actually, faked.
Did he not give a wrong circuit?

Of coarse, I can be wrong! :P
Anyway, Very Best,
Jean

 Magluvin, I suggest to redirect your quest; I mean see the newly opened thread: "TPU Revolution":

http://www.overunity.com/12109/tpu-revolution/msg314407/#msg314407 (http://www.overunity.com/12109/tpu-revolution/msg314407/#msg314407)

I see there a potential. This thread earned almost no attention, and I'm almost quite sure why: poor languague, foreign languague as the source; the tries of translations also yield very poor. All of that despite that the source subject is a one which originated at this forum: Otto Sabljaric and his work for TPU replication. My search fruited with astonishing source of knowledge for this subject, which occurs right in this forum's archives. Astonishing not because of quantity, rather because of available results of this work. I found there answers for your quest at Energy Amplification thread where you and some others, including me were losing time in hope to convince Tito to share his secrets. And all this knowledge sits there since the year of 2007 (!!).So, I suggest you to get and see these documents:

1. "Tao's TPU specs (http://www.overunity.com/../../../../../../downloads/sa/view/down/251/)"
which presently is on page 7 of the General documents and files (http://www.overunity.com/../../../../../../downloads/cat/25/) of the "Downloads" section of this forum. This is the essence for the understanding how the TPU works. Easy languague of this document makes an impression that it is written for kids who just yesterday learned how to read; despite of this, read at least the first part which I find very essential to understand the TPU; here you find the (easy) solution how to change high voltage into current, without losing the voltage quality.

2. http://purco.qc.ca/ftp/Overunity.com%20-%20Forum%20members/otto/ottos-open-tpu/ (http://purco.qc.ca/ftp/Overunity.com%20-%20Forum%20members/otto/ottos-open-tpu/)  and
http://purco.qc.ca/ftp/Overunity.com%20-%20Forum%20members/otto/a-pdfs/ (http://purco.qc.ca/ftp/Overunity.com%20-%20Forum%20members/otto/a-pdfs/)

This is the whole archive regarding Otto's work. Essential seems to be this work which is one of the items of one of the above given link:

http://purco.qc.ca/ftp/Overunity.com%20-%20Forum%20members/otto/a-pdfs/TPU_ECD-V1_0.pdf (http://purco.qc.ca/ftp/Overunity.com%20-%20Forum%20members/otto/a-pdfs/TPU_ECD-V1_0.pdf)

but the languague here is not easy: Otto and Ronette as authors, their native languagues are not English and thus lot of some languague errors occur. So, I suggest something else instead: to track Otto's posts from his very first presence on this forum; here his languague seems much easier to understand:

http://www.overunity.com/profile/otto.2747/area/showposts/start/1230/ (http://www.overunity.com/profile/otto.2747/area/showposts/start/1230/)

Using available translators as well as my rather poor knowledge of Russian languague, I was searching the Russian thread suggested at TPU Revolution and I found out that it seems they are not farther in their results now than Otto was five years ago, after I compared the results.

Quote from: MileHigh on April 19, 2012, 07:08:31 PM
Mags:

As far as I am concerned you are wigging out.  What I said is that if the reed switch is closed when the magnet is near that the coil itself will generate EMF and that will be in series with the battery voltage.  Do you disagree with this?

I also said if the EMF is greater than the battery voltage then you could see the same difference in brightness effect in the LEDs depending on the direction of the rotor.  And apparently you are having a freak-out over this.

So you have battery in series with a coil in series with an LED when the reed switch is closed.  The timing of the closing of the reed switch is different depending on the direction of the rotor.

So with a scope and a piece of graph paper you could construct a timing diagram for how the setup operates for both rotor directions where you show the voltages and the current.  That will explain the difference in brightness of the LED flash.  Is that worth freaking out about?  Jesus.

Screw you with your double-standard where someone might mention something technical and you engage them but if I say something technical you freak out and attack me.  Pull yourself together.

MileHigh

"I also said if the EMF is greater than the battery voltage "  This is what you actually said... "So if the EMF induced by the passing magnets is larger than the battery voltage " Would that be saying that the mag/gen is producing greater emf than the battery while the battery is connected through the reed?  Would that be an OU condition? I find that one hard to be produced here, or in most cases with the best of motor design let alone this, if the battery was the prime mover. the scope shot does not show it either.

Even if the voltage generated "adding" vs subtracting, in order to produce the flash collapse, I cant get the led that dim compared to bright. No frikin way dude.

How close in current drive do you believe the gen is compared to the battery? I know you are talking voltage, why I dunno, but that all changes very rapidly when the switch closes. In fact, the scope shot does not show any added level to the "on" section of the shot. No hump or dip. Just flat. And the reed is closed during the null of generation not peak.   This isnt a well designed, very efficient generator or motor M. You know the difference and the scope shot shows it very clearly. The hump of the gen voltage unloaded is maybe a 3rd of the battery voltage. Never more, or larger as you say it in the quotes above. you did write those quotes didnt you? Or am I being irrational or mistaken?

Now how else am I suppose to interpret this M?  Tell me please.  Or am I still full of it?

Ill do some stuff with the battery after my non battery. I spent too much time on this discussion even though it isnt that much time.

An apple a day

Mags

Mags:

I think a picture is really helpful so I edited a screen cap from the clip.   Below is what I think the proper circuit really is.  Or at least the circuit below will work.

I'll discuss it in the next posting.

So I assume everyone can see the basic function going on in this clip:

If the reed switch closes then the current flows clockwise.  The LED is reverse biased and is off.   When the reed switch opens then the coil will keep the current flowing until all of the magnetic field energy stored in the coil is discharged through the LED.

In other words the current flowing out the top of the coil instantly stops going to the right (direction of the reed switch) and instead is goes to the left (direction of the LED.)  The LED becomes forward biased and lights up.

So the brightness of the flashing LED is proportional to he amount of energy stored in the coil.  And the amount of energy stored in the coil is proportional to the current-squared flowing through the coil.

We know that there are three resistances in the main loop.  There is the 5-ohm resistor, the resistance of the coil, and the internal resistance of the battery.

We know that there are two sources of EMF that want to push current through the main loop, the 1.5-volt battery and the coil.

So in very simple terms the current through the mail loop is equal to: (Battery EMF + Coil EMF)/(5-ohm + R_coil + R_batt)

What determines the EMF produced by the coil?   There are three main contributors:  1) The number of turns in the coil, 2) The strength of the passing magnet, and 3) The angular speed of the passing magnet.

Realistically, the EMF produced by the coil is an unknown.  You know that it produces some kind of AC voltage, but the three parameters above are pretty much unknown.  You can simply scope it and experiment and find out.

One thing you know for sure is that the EMF produced by the coil can either help the battery make the current flow in the "normal" direction, which is clockwise.  But it can also hinder the flow of current and reduce the current flow, or stop it, or even reverse it.

Continued in part two...

Simplified examples:

At a certain point in time the battery voltage is 1.5 volts and the EMF from the coil is 1.0 volts for a total of 2.5 volts pushing current clockwise through the main loop.

At a certain point in time the battery voltage is 1.5 volts and the EMF from the coil is -1.5 volts for a total of 0 volts - hence the current stops flowing.

At a certain point in time the battery voltage is 1.5 volts and the EMF from the coil is -3.5 volts for a total of -2.0 volts pushing current couterclockwise through the main loop - hence the current reverses direction as compared to the "normal" direction.

So you can see that it's possible for the EMF from the coil to overwhelm or "drown out" the EMF from the battery.

From what I understand with no battery in the circuit you see the LEDs flash with different intensities depending on the direction the rotor is turning.  The unbalanced flashing in this case is due to the EMF since there is no battery in the circuit.

Therefore, it's conceivable that with a battery in the circuit where the EMF from the coil is larger than and dominates the battery voltage, that you will still get the unbalanced flashing effect.

Another thing that is interesting is that if the coil is producing EMF that adds to the battery EMF, at a certain point it will switch on the LED.  So the "good" EMF from the coil is actually clamped to the LED (diode) voltage.

If any builders out there find this interesting, the real deal is to use your scope and put a 0.25-ohm current sensing resistor in the loop, and then construct a timing diagram that shows the voltages and the current in the setup.  You can experiment and see how the circuit behaves when the EMF from the battery dominates vs. how the circuit behaves when the EMF from the coil dominates, for both directions of rotation.  So that implies that you can derive four timing diagrams from this one simple circuit.

MileHigh

Just a final comment.  The EMF from the coil doesn't even have to dominate the EMF from the battery to get a difference in the intensity of the LED flashing.

Another simplified example:

Let's just say that the EMF from the coil is either +0.2 volts or it's -0.2 volts.  Let's suppose for the sake of argument this is related to the direction that the rotor is spinning.

Therefore when you add the battery voltage to the coil EMF voltage you either have +1.7 volts or +1.3 volts.

Therefore it's conceivable that you can have differing amounts of current flowing through the main loop when the reed switch opens, and hence different brightness when the LED flashes.

MileHigh

T-1000:

QuoteThere are always closed minded sceptics around and you can spend your lifetime arguing with them...

I would like to know if you found my discussion in the previous few postings open minded or closed minded.

MileHigh

Im using a pulse motor setup to drive my rotor to see if by doing anything on the other side of the motor, , has any effect in added acceleration. We have our reed, diode and coil, using 5 rotor mags 1/2inx3/8 n52 being held in position with my 1/2x 1/8 n42 diametrics installed in 1/2 in holes on the rotor. The rotor has 10 holes, but I wanna spread out, isolate any activity with break time. Then there is no dispute as to when things start and begin if I show a scope shot.

Using the leds as strobes on the rotor makes for visuals on timing. Nice. :]

With 5 in the rotor, the pulse motor and the other device are directly across from each other to maintain the largest distance possible between the PM and the device. And they are not doing their own thing at the same time so no interference, at least the best I can do for now. the biggest interference I would imagine is having the pulse motor kick  the rotor in the middle of the devices processes. A scope shot might be distorted with something like that. I think I covered the bases there fairly well.

Im running at low rpms at first.  the pulse motor at these speeds take a while to settle, so I wait.    ;)

Right now I can produce very similar brightness levels, just like in the 3rd vid, by changing the direction of rotation. No Battery.  Just reporting. Did it in earlier tests also but just tried it to see it again. Feels good ya know. ;]
I want to neaten this up a bit and clear my bench a bit to do a vid on this. I think it is an important part of a new lesson. We will see. And it will show what I have been saying is true. It kinda brings out the bugs in others assumptions against claims before the goods are shown.  The difference between MH and I here is he doesnt have it sitting in front of him and I do.  Credibility will win every time. ;]

Also being that I have it in front of me and getting some good play time in, I understand some things that one that only sees pics and vids and stuff, without actual experience with the device right in front of them, things can get a bit hazy or distorted in view and thoughts. There are assumptions made and things missed.

Especially when talking about more detailed basics and direct descriptions, hands on right now. Any test CAN be done and REAL answers can be at your finger tips.
If you had 30 kungfu, harate, wing chun, jeet kun do  books and learned and practiced from them in a room by your self every day for 5 years, you most likely would get your but kicked when you went out to test your new self taught skills. Because you dont know what to do exactly, like the guy who has been in the ring many times in a 5 year span. Butt kicked. Fo sho. ;]

Anyways, Im trying different timings, pulse widths, rotor distances, led reversals for each test. Starting with the single reed at first. The dual reed in series really needs some fine adjustment capabilities. Working on that issue also. But man those pulses can be real short. ;]
Magnet adjustment is also necessary to get the same reed closure characteristics as all the others. I got it pretty good. Just slight shimming between the rotor mags. Details most dont think about. Even rotating the 1/2x3/8 axially makes a difference. Really. Mags aint perfect. Me either. ;]

Like I said, Ill get back into the battery stuff after. I think there is some interesting stuff to work with there also.

Magzz

Whao, pages from MH.  Ill get to it tomorrow. Im beat. work in the morn. 11:24 pm

Read a bit of the first one. Do ya really thing that the gen portion has that much effort here? Your making me want to do the battery setup right now and do a vid.  ;]  Ill se ya tomorrow evening. Let me post to what you got so far before it gets to be too much to address as it takes too much time right now.  An apple a day. ;]

Night

Mags

@T1000
don't feed the troll...

@mags
don't do it man, don't feed the troll...

Wilby:

You are such a rude-ass little schmuck.  I just tried to do something that was hopefully interesting for some people, just for the fun of it.  And you post your typical "Look at what a rude-ass thoughtless illogical negative little schmuck I can be" postings.  It's a logical fallacy for you to make that posting Wilby because the posting was a sincere effort to make a positive contribution around here and it certainly wasn't a 'troll' posting.  You are the evil incarnate little troll like some nerd exorcist nightmare fantasy come true.  You know that movie Weird Science where Kelly LeBrock turns the annoying asshole older brother into a disgusting farting puss-oozing squat little round grotesque monster?  Well I bet you that image will resonate with most people that read this and they will associate it with you from now on.

And I know just by saying that I turn you into Fapby.  So go sniff around your latest hotspot and find some napkins.

MileHigh

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=IfggccwQrcY (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=IfggccwQrcY)

Quote from: MileHigh on April 19, 2012, 10:22:30 PM
Mags:

I think a picture is really helpful so I edited a screen cap from the clip.   Below is what I think the proper circuit really is.  Or at least the circuit below will work.

I'll discuss it in the next posting.

Remove battery and make it work just from initial rotor spin. That will be accomplishment.
Here is E. Leedskalnin's book for help: http://freeenergynews.com/Directory/Magnets/Leedskalnin/Magnetic-Current_Edward-Leedskalnin_51pp.pdf

Leedskalnin's book "Sweet Sixteen" is a lot more revealing.

http://www.leedskalnin.com/Leedskalnins-Writings-A-Book-In-Every-Home.html (http://www.leedskalnin.com/Leedskalnins-Writings-A-Book-In-Every-Home.html)

QuoteNow, I will tell you what the first de-gree love making is. The first degree love making is when the fresh boy begins to soil the girl by patting, rubbing and squeezing her. They start it in that way but soon it begins to get dull and there is no kick in it, so they have to start in on the second de-gree and keep on and then by and by, when the right man comes along and when he touches the girl, then he touches her like dead flesh. There is no more response in it because all the response has been worked out with those fresh boys.  Why should it be that way?
Everything we do should be for some good purpose but as everybody knows there is nothing good that can come to a girl from a fresh boy. When a girl is sixteen or sev-enteen years old, she is as good as she ever will be, but when a boy is sixteen years old, he is then fresher than in all his stages of development. He is then not big enough to work but he is too big to be kept in a nursery and then to allow such a fresh thing to soil a girl --- it could not work on my girl. Now I will tell you about soiling. Anything that is done, if it is with the right party it is all right, but when it is with the wrong party, it is soiling, and concerning those fresh boys with the girls, it is wrong every time.

And so on and so forth.

MH, did you modify that schematic? The battery,coil and resistor are all in series, then that all is in parallel with the reed and also the led in the original schematic. You have taken the battery out of the loop when the reed is open, where it is not in Lars circuits, neither one of them. And it is the way he had it in circuit 1 is what I like. Not just a one way street  for the battery.

In my books on switching supplies, there is never anything possibly going back through to the source. It is always a one way street, like Lars second circuit. But the circuit from vid 2 does give back to the battery. And at this point, I am not concerned YET with OU from circuit 1, but with the efficiency increase from the standard by not having a 1 way street for the source. If this method can be arranged to be a switching supply that is near 90% the one way street method, then what might the efficiency be giving the source a way to accept back some energy from the circuit as I have found in Lars first circuit.

If this modified circuit is what your 3 posts of explanation are all about, then we are not talking about Lars circuits at all, as I and others thought that we were.
So I didnt bother with the 3 posts as they are of a different circuit. A circuit that fits your needs for explanation, not the real subject at hand. It is a diversion. Or just a fumble. You can see the differences I claim here dont you? Well I think the differences are clear. 
And if we were discussing why the leds are brighter in Cw and CCW of the rotor, then how can this apply to your explanation of the battery and coil emf adding up or subtracting with your new modified version? The battery is out of the loop when the reed opens.  You are changing the subject M. Why is that?

Lets stick to Lars circuit here. It is where all this particular discussion began. ;] This is the quote from your modified circuit post...
"I think a picture is really helpful so I edited a screen cap from the clip.   Below is what I think the proper circuit really is.  Or at least the circuit below will work.
I'll discuss it in the next posting."   

By saying this, you dont think either of Lars circuits are what he is using. Even though he shows the same circuit 2 times but just a change in polarity of the battery from one to the other. How do you come to the conclusion that your circuit mod is what you "think" lars really used?  Thats libelous.  Misrepresentation.  And you will have to show us the reasons with proofs as to why you are stating these claims.

His circuits work. Why is yours the better guess? Both of his circuits work, just one is more efficient than the other.
Your mod is not the same circuit as either of Lars circuits. 

You wonder why I get irked. ;] It is all in these last 4 pages. ;]  yup

Mags

Thanks for the Magnetic Currents pdf T-1000. Im going to study it this weekend.  ;D

Ill skip the fresh young boys Tinselkoala prefers to Magnetic Currents.   ???

Mags

Mags:

I moved the battery out of the loop with the resistor and the coil because the circuit doesn't work with the battery in that loop.  I am assuming the author simply made a mistake.

I assume that "two way street" means partial recharging of the battery.  When I looked at both of his circuits I don't recall seeing that.  The first circuit should be discounted don't you think?  He said that he made a mistake.  You seem to be indicating that you are hunting for OU.  I don't get that because he said it was a battery-powered hoax.

QuoteAnd if we were discussing why the leds are brighter in Cw and CCW of the rotor, then how can this apply to your explanation of the battery and coil emf adding up or subtracting with your new modified version? The battery is out of the loop when the reed opens.  You are changing the subject M. Why is that?

It's because the real action is in the loop where the battery is in my circuit.  You are not getting what happens when the reed opens.  It's all explained in my postings.  Again, I suspect that the actual circuit in the running demo is the circuit I posted.  So there is no changing of the subject.

QuoteHow do you come to the conclusion that your circuit mod is what you "think" lars really used?  Thats libelous.

Get real please.  You wonder why I get irked.

By the way, I looked at the Leedskalnin doc on magnets where he talks about invisible north-only and south-only (i.e.; magnetic monopoles) circulating around a bar magnet in opposite directions.  He also mentions the very popular "neutral zone" at the half-way point along the major axis.  It's wackadoo wonderland material!

MileHigh

Quote from: MileHigh on April 20, 2012, 10:05:12 PM
Mags:

I moved the battery out of the loop with the resistor and the coil because the circuit doesn't work with the battery in that loop.  I am assuming the author simply made a mistake.

It doesnt work with the battery in the loop?   Well that sucks, My rotor must have been running on cat farts then.  And the leds were lighting because it is that time of the month? 
Why doesnt it work M? Garry didnt complain that the circuit didnt work. You wont answer that, nor anything I ask. Im not even laughing anymore. Im actually concerned.

When you say stuff like that, when I know that it does work, I have to assume you are not as knowledgeable as you try to show, or you are saying it to discourage from that circuit. Which is it M?  Ill stick with Lars first circuit.  ;)

My new thing is, if MH 8) is against it, then it must be worth looking at further.  :o ;D

"Again, I suspect that the actual circuit in the running demo is the circuit I posted.  So there is no changing of the subject."

So its your rules again. Well no M. I dont agree with your new circuit to be what Lars claims. You were not showing this new circuit when we were talking about this earlier.

Show me where. Show me that you have ever said that Lars circuits dont work.
Were you talking about this new circuit before you posted it? Show me where.
Good weed?

This is a huge waste of time as Wilby said.  Look how you work. Bordering certified.
4 pages and you just keep on not addressing your trip ups, and now your saying we were talking about this imaginary(in your mind) circuit?

Thanks Wilby, I will get back to my work now. M, ya need to get a better brand of weed. Because these last four pages show that you are the one that is all over the place. You either do it on purpose or you need real help.

Anyone reading this, if you happen to look over these 4 pages, could you tell me if MH,s weed is way too strong.   :o ;)   Maybe some tainted rice paper? ???   

Im done M.  Maybe it is A.D.D. and you cant focus on the subject. But you are seriously wasting my time. Probably on purpose as I have stated numerous times.


Mags

Mags:

This clip has the first schematic:  http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=n93iIduG01I&list=UUjoIJFCH3ebq24jeqf11mfg&index=1&feature=plcp

That's the one he has stated is wrong.  In that schematic the current is flowing counter-clockwise in the main loop.  The critical problem is that when the reed switch opens the coil does a quick high-voltage discharge through a reverse-biased LED.  Obviously he didn't want to do that and said there was a mistake.

This is the short clip with the "corrected" schematic:  http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fM6-4D74bi4&feature=plcp&context=C448e387VDvjVQa1PpcFMETNpBjsuK4CABwEMz_W19I60cqVIN000%3D

In that schematic the current flows clockwise and therefore the LED will get forward-biased and discharge when the reed switch opens.  However, the critical problem in this schematic is that the battery will constantly keep the LED forward biased and on all the time.  Obviously he didn't want to do that and that's another mistake.  I am making the reasonable assumption that the battery is 1.5 volts and the LED switches on at 1 volt.

So there are your two critical problems with the two schematics.

The solution is to move the battery as I showed in my marked up schematic.

To quote Larskro:

QuoteIf you believe that self-running devices works (Video 1) is my headline wrong. If you believe that self-running, overunity devices DO NOT works, my headline is correct.
The meaning of this video is just to open peoples eyes.
I did not expect that someone wanted to replicate this motor.
Thanks to all interested. Larskro

I had an exchange with Larsko on YouTube six days ago, here it is:

Quote

   
•      All that I can tell you is that it will work properly if you take the batteries out of the loop formed by the resistor/battery/coil/LED. The battery has to be in the "outer loop" which in the schematic above consists of the reed switch and the LED. I am assuming that the "corrected" circuit that I am suggesting is how it actually is wired.
      User2718218 (http://www.youtube.com/user/User2718218)   in reply to     ReasonForemost (http://www.youtube.com/user/ReasonForemost) (Show the comment) (http://www.youtube.com/all_comments?v=fM6-4D74bi4#) 1 week ago 
     
•      Here is the proper circuit for each loop: reed switch bottom -> batt negative -> batt positive -> 5-ohm resistor -> coil -> reed switch top.
  In your diagram, you just have to move the batteries so that they are between the reed switch bottom connection and the 5 ohm resistors.
      User2718218 (http://www.youtube.com/user/User2718218)   1 week ago 
     
•      This will also work.
  Thanks.
      Larskro (http://www.youtube.com/user/Larskro)   in reply to     User2718218 (http://www.youtube.com/user/User2718218) (Show the comment) (http://www.youtube.com/all_comments?v=fM6-4D74bi4#) 6 days ago

[/li]
[/list]MileHigh

Mags:

As far as all of your bullshit goes, that's just you being a fool in a misguided attempt to impress your free energy friends.  I understand electronics reasonably well and you are just a beginner and and that seems to be a real bugaboo for you.  So you doing all of this ridiculous "styling" is just laughable nonsense.

It's your choice, you can try to "beat me up" or you can act like a reasonable and normal human being.

I just told you exactly what is wrong with both of the schematics posted by Larskro.  I also posted a corrected schematic that will work properly.  Do you have any comments about that?

MileHigh

Quote from: MileHigh on April 21, 2012, 12:03:02 AM
Mags:

This clip has the first schematic:  http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=n93iIduG01I&list=UUjoIJFCH3ebq24jeqf11mfg&index=1&feature=plcp (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=n93iIduG01I&list=UUjoIJFCH3ebq24jeqf11mfg&index=1&feature=plcp)

That's the one he has stated is wrong.  In that schematic the current is flowing counter-clockwise in the main loop.  The critical problem is that when the reed switch opens the coil does a quick high-voltage discharge through a reverse-biased LED.  Obviously he didn't want to do that and said there was a mistake.

This is the short clip with the "corrected" schematic:  http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fM6-4D74bi4&feature=plcp&context=C448e387VDvjVQa1PpcFMETNpBjsuK4CABwEMz_W19I60cqVIN000%3D (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fM6-4D74bi4&feature=plcp&context=C448e387VDvjVQa1PpcFMETNpBjsuK4CABwEMz_W19I60cqVIN000%3D)

In that schematic the current flows clockwise and therefore the LED will get forward-biased and discharge when the reed switch opens.  However, the critical problem in this schematic is that the battery will constantly keep the LED forward biased and on all the time.  Obviously he didn't want to do that and that's another mistake.  I am making the reasonable assumption that the battery is 1.5 volts and the LED switches on at 1 volt.

So there are your two critical problems with the two schematics.

The solution is to move the battery as I showed in my marked up schematic.

To quote Larskro:
I had an exchange with Larsko on YouTube six days ago, here it is:

[/li]
[/list]MileHigh

I his 3rd video comments he states why he changed the circuit, because someone told him it didnt work. But it does. He even claims that he is not even sure now because He cant remember. With a meter he could find out, if he can see which of the coil wires is the opposite end of the coil from the battery. So just because he said the first circuit was wrong, he later doest know at all.
So you are wrong.

"The critical problem is that when the reed switch opens the coil does a quick high-voltage discharge through a reverse-biased LED." Wrong again.

Not true. You are asserting that the coil during collapse is continuing to flow current forward in circuit 1, but it doesnt. Sim even shows that there is actual bemf, reverse emf, the current reverses and lights the led. I went over this.

And in the second circuit the currents from collapse IS continued forward current while also lighting the led from collapse.

The only difference in the 2 circuits is the batt polarity and the magnetic output polarity of the coil. So the led can stay as it is in each circuit.

But like I said, you are just guessing, and I have it right in front of me.
You are wrong

Show me common 1v red leds M. the best I have found is 1.4 up to 2v. Green and yel can go higher than 2v. Blue and ultraviolet can be in the 4v range.

And Lars batts are 1.2v(stated) and his pic shows 1.4v It must be at an after charging high. 1.35 is typical So he must have to recharge after a few short runs to just get close to the led turn on. ;]

Ive been playing with leds since the early 70's  8 years old. Just red green and yellow then. Ir also but we are not talking of those. You should also know this. you just happen to use 1v to fit your crap.  Bonehead

You just cant stop lying and conjuring up falsehoods to fit your side of your ever tripping story. Did you take the red or the blue pill? I talked with the guy. I know more than your terrible guessing and clear twisting of his words above.
READ IT AGAIN M. ITS YOUR POST!   right up there, a few inches away.

And as for your conversation with Lars as you posted above, he only says that it "will also work "  he didnt say it WAS the circuit he was using. Twist twist
Your a twister of your own words. READ IT  YOU WROTE IT JUST ABOVE   READ IT...

"As far as all of your bullshit goes, that's just you being a fool in a misguided attempt to impress your free energy friends.  I understand electronics reasonably well and you are just a beginner and and that seems to be a real bugaboo for you.  So you doing all of this ridiculous "styling" is just laughable nonsense.

It's your choice, you can try to "beat me up" or you can act like a reasonable and normal human being.

I just told you exactly what is wrong with both of the schematics posted by Larskro.  I also posted a connected schematic that will work properly.  Do you have any comments about that?
"

Beginner?  I dont dispute that your circuit will drive the motor. It is basic. But you still pulled a switch on what we were talking about. You did not pull up this circuit till now and we have been talking about his circuits, not this new one that lars only says that it will work also compared to his.

Lars 1st circuit...
This circuit will send some back to the battery while lighting the led   Most eff

Lars 2nd circuit...
This circuit drains the batt during switch closure and drains the bat while lighting the led  Least eff

Your circuit...

Drains the battery during switch closure but the battery is out of the circuit when the switch is open. Your circuit is less eff than Lars first circuit and better than lars second circuit.

People, remember these few posts when I do the battery motor vids to show that what I have written is correct an MH is on crack. ;]

Its gota be crack.

No matter what I do , the skull is way to thick. maybe Cro-MHagnon.

All of my OU friends?  Hey, I do have friends dont I. Thats the difference between you and I. Thats a beautiful thing. ;] Those guys are the greatest. 
Umm you were saying M?

Mags

 Here is the post where I have posted the sim of Lars circuit code.

It has an interchagable battery of opposit polarty you can select and drag into position to see the difference. Led will light in both circuits and they only flash when the coil colapses, not because the battery is biasing them.

http://www.overunity.com/12238/larskros-magnet-motor-video-was-a-fake-he-admits-on-second-video/msg318951/#msg318951

You will see the difference in how the coil reacts from circuit 1 to circuit 2 

1 the coil reverses current flow when the reed opens, back into the battery    BEMF

2 current flow is alway in the same direction when the reed opens, always drain   Continued EMF

But M says they wont work. So get busy all my OU Friends. If M is lying about it, it must be good.  ;)
He will never admit that the current in the coil will reverse. We have been over this and he aint budging.  But I bet he knows it can happen. Just doesnt want everyone to know. 8)

Mags

milehigh is a has-been. nothing more. no imagination and thus, he couldn't innovate his way out of a wet paper bag... he has spent his life alienating people, so now he's just a lonely old has-been with no friends, sitting in front of his pc with his 'obsessions'... which are; stalking 'ou' experimenters, posting logical fallacies and outright falsehoods on their videos, in their threads etc. and posting hateful comments on youtube 'riot' videos. pathetic.

http://www.youtube.com/user/User2718218

Jesus, forum board software is broken or it has a virus or something.  Well, I hope it's still working when I hit the "Post" button....

Mags:

Jesus, I made a mistake and forgot that an LED drops two volts and not one volt.  I must be a friggin' psycho.  It's only been 31 years since I last soldered a current programming resistor to a LED so shoot me.

So indeed the second schematic does not have a critical mistake but it's a poor design and I would still call it a mistake.  With the battery were it is, it makes it that much easier to turn on the LED from induction though the coils and you don't want to do that.  You want a clean flash from the LEDs when the coils discharge only.

So my schematic is still the right schematic.  But horror of horrors, I forgot what the normal LED forward biasing voltage is.

Back to the first schematic... That's bloody amazing seeing "BEMF" make the current reverse in the coil!  I guess everything I told you about the coil maintaining current flow in the same direction was wrong....  MY GOD, I ran the simulation and saw the current reverse and the LED light up.  It was farking fantastic.  Incredible!  You know that's DSOs never lie, eh?  You and Rosie are peas in a pod!  I am looking forward to seeing your clip on that one with the current reversing direction.  I must have got lost somewhere down the line.

Beyond that you are still playing the bad-assed little nut-case and making yourself look like a jerk.

MileHigh

How many wigs Wilby?  lol

Quote from: MileHigh on April 21, 2012, 02:46:34 AM
Jesus, forum board software is broken or it has a virus or something.  Well, I hope it's still working when I hit the "Post" button....

Mags:

Jesus, I made a mistake and forgot that an LED drops two volts and not one volt.  I must be a friggin' psycho.  It's only been 31 years since I last soldered a current programming resistor to a LED so shoot me.

So indeed the second schematic does not have a critical mistake but it's a poor design and I would still call it a mistake.  With the battery were it is, it makes it that much easier to turn on the LED from induction though the coils and you don't want to do that.  You want a clean flash from the LEDs when the coils discharge only.

So my schematic is still the right schematic.  But horror of horrors, I forgot what the normal LED forward biasing voltage is.

Back to the first schematic... That's bloody amazing seeing "BEMF" make the current reverse in the coil!  I guess everything I told you about the coil maintaining current flow in the same direction was wrong....  MY GOD, I ran the simulation and saw the current reverse and the LED light up.  It was farking fantastic.  Incredible!  You know that's DSOs never lie, eh?  You and Rosie are peas in a pod!  I am looking forward to seeing your clip on that one with the current reversing direction.  I must have got lost somewhere down the line.

Beyond that you are still playing the bad-assed little nut-case and making yourself look like a jerk.

MileHigh

If you dont know these things after 30 some years? Ya better , well, I dunno....  But you sure put it all together as if it is fact.  Bang!  Dead yet? No? Bang! BangBangBangBang! Might have to reload, aint dead yet.  ;]

Oh, so now you say that "So indeed the second schematic does not have a critical mistake but"  Yes indeedy. But just in your recent posts you had some other ideas. ???
There is nothing critical about the second circuit. It works for doing what it is intended to do. Just uses batteries faster. Still it makes the fake turn and light. Nothing critical.
Nothing much to say on the first circuit here? It works too and you said it didnt work. Oh, you do mention later..... will get to that in order. ;)

I want a clean flash from the led when the coil discharges only?  No M. You want people to believe what you are making up. Who says the led needs to be bright in order to indicate that it is lit?  Anyways your wrong. it is bright.

Oh the Horror. ya got that right. maybe you should hit the books for a bit before you play your game son.  So your circuit is the one? The one that you created that Lars said "this will work also", and you take that as if your circuit is the right one?  In your mind only.


"Back to the first schematic... That's bloody amazing seeing "BEMF" make the current reverse in the coil!  I guess everything I told you about the coil maintaining current flow in the same direction was wrong....  MY GOD, I ran the simulation and saw the current reverse and the LED light up.  It was farking fantastic.  Incredible!  You know that's DSOs never lie, eh?  You and Rosie are peas in a pod!  I am looking forward to seeing your clip on that one with the current reversing direction.  I must have got lost somewhere down the line."

There you go. How does that foot taste. Well you may as well keep it there.  I know what you are driving at M.  Here, how about this...

Hey Garry. If you reverse your led polarity, do they still light? What about if you reverse the battery instead( need to reverse the coil wires also to correct the field for the motor to run)  Ill show you mine if you show me yours.  ;]   Ya forgot about Garry huh M. Ace in the hole.  ;]    Mags got game.  ;D


And finally  "Beyond that you are still playing the bad-assed little nut-case and making yourself look like a jerk."   

Feeling some heat are we? its ok to blow off a little steam. You deserve it.  ;)

Thats all I have to say about that.  Forest. Forest Gump

Mags

And yes Wilby I was very upset to see Vancouver's downtown destroyed for absolutely no reason, just the mindless menace of violence in action.  And that's very similar in a way to your own MO.  You have a lot in common with the Vancouver rioters and you do it because you get off on it.  Why else would you do it?  Even though you are just an "Internet persona" there is a kernel of a real dark side about you, make no mistake.  You are the creep smashing virtual store windows, but those store windows happen to be real people.  That's why the Weird Science Chet-monster analogy is so fitting.

Quote from: MileHigh on April 21, 2012, 02:49:41 AM
How many wigs Wilby?  lol

Wilby read you like a dirty magazine. ya got nuthin. What? You trying to sell Wilby some of your wigs?  They probably dont fit you no more since the 30 years of brain shrinkage.

Mags

Quote from: MileHigh on April 21, 2012, 03:41:27 AM
Even though you are just an "Internet persona" there is a kernel of a real dark side about you, make no mistake.  You are the creep smashing virtual store windows, but those store windows are real people.  That's why the Weird Science Chet-monster analogy is so fitting.

I can say that this describes you well M.  You are chet. Spittin and oozing post after post

Mags

You are being bad Mags.  I'm not going to do it but if I corrected your technical points every time you made a posting you might be surprised.  You are a kid in an electronics sandbox playing with plastic pails and shovels and having some fun.  Just keepin' it real dude!  I am looking forward to seeing the coil current reversal trick in real life.

Quote from: MileHigh on April 21, 2012, 03:58:44 AM
You are being bad Mags.  I'm not going to do it but if I corrected your technical points every time you made a posting you might be surprised.  You are a kid in an electronics sandbox playing with plastic pails and shovels and having some fun.  Just keepin' it real dude!  I am looking forward to seeing the coil current reversal trick in real life.

You can try and make me look bad with your little whims. Ive been watching you at TKs thread. You dont seem to make the constant gross mistakes as you have here. Every post, crap  after crap. How can you be soo good, but be so bad from one thread to another?
Its because your doing it on purpose here. You are trying to deceive, distort and distract, post after post.

But your not very good at it. Post after post, you step on a rake that hasnt hit you in the face till I reply. I imagine it is hard to keep track of all those lies and made up facts once you get soo deep into it all. You must be assuming we are all just chumps and you shouldnt have to defend your downfalls. Well you put in the hours here i can say. thank you for the reveal of your madness. 8) I get it now.

Being you are so bad at producing believable balony, maybe you really dont know that the current is reversing in circuit 1. Even looking the rake in the face, you take it like a girl, and fill your diaper again to spread your supposed good will. 

Na, you know it reverses. You have ignored it when i spoke of it. Now I show the sim and you make fun of it, like a good little wig salesman.  8)

Keep em coming M. Its very educational for all.  ;) Soon you will be nothing but meat with eyes. ;D

Its 431am. I do it all for you M. Your a good guy. 8)    Night

Mags

 Hello all
May anybody here (experimenters only pls.) help me in understanding this?


I will not make any attempt with a battery, as I have made many experiments with the Adams motor, and similar pulsed motors, always with battery.
The goal to  achieve a self runner, even with an initial thrust is may be an utopia but. . . as a true friend of mine said, “ I wish to be judged for my aspirations, rather than for my achievements”


I made the Rovella device, as close to the original as I could with salvaged parts, and with the schematic posted in earlier pages.
Not got the repelling effect but I wish to understand why the two leds flashes only when the reed is at 80-90 degrees of the coils center.
Is it due of the coils capacitance ?, as there is a wide delay in time from the center line of coil core up to the 90 position.
Any help appreciated.
Cheers
Alvaro

Guys, if you really want to know about what is going on in circuit and the power source is still required, swap battery to capacitor of few farads and charge it before attaching. Then it will clearly show what is happening.
The walls of text in posts do not make any progress... ;)

Quote from: jeffc on April 11, 2012, 12:45:49 PM
He now says it is fake with batteries:
http://youtu.be/n93iIduG01I (http://youtu.be/n93iIduG01I)

And Stefan still  has it on the mainpage of overunity.com

*sigh*

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=MyRp3v2lP0g

Skycollection


Mags

Hi People,

Thanks to Magluvin for this vid.

What was I saying in my previous post?

Some time ago, some trolls were faking non working devices.
For ex:
The "MYLOW's Magnetic Motor based on Howard Johnson's Design"
The "Mike Modded Bedini Cole Window Motor"

About this (faked) Bedini Cole windows motor that was claimed to run of capacitor only: for my part, I spend some money, some time and some hope trying to replicate, more accurately as possible this bloody f' device. I failed, Of coarse!

Now, it sounds like we have a new brand of trolls that are faking genuine OU devices! IHMO, this (pathetic) 'progress' in frauds bodes very well for the 'OU' defenders. Does it not?

Very Best

Hi everybody!
Despite desperate attempts to buid Larsk-like motor, there's still hope). The clean idea for this motor is use its own EMF/BEMF to selfsustained rotation. So we have to remove all possible drags and encrease BEMF effect. I believe that along with mechanical improvements it's need to remove any core off the coils while the coils have to be increased in turnes as possible. No diodes, or three and more in parallel, discussible. The coils are shorted by default. Rotating magnets induce EMF in the coils. At right moment RS opens coil and the coil change polarity with BEMF spike pushing the rotor ahead. BTW reed switch makes drag on magnet, so it better be changed for hall probably. Cores are not totally under arrest, but should be the best of recommended by Bedini, fast and hysteresis-free.
What do you think? Whould it work?

Here you go Mags, this is basically a dead thread, so you can answer here:

Quote from: MileHigh on Today at 10:27:50 PM

The answer is 90 amps at 60 seconds.  I was giving you a chance to correct yourself.  So why did you say 75 amps?  Why is the answer 90 amps?  Try for the bonus question.

See folks. This will go on and on. With purpose. Ill let you have your thread back. ;]

Mags

@Abrec

For my part, I would not criticize any honest experimenter.
I'm not sure to understand you fully (scientifically-wise).
Anyway  I sometimes use my intuition.
Yes Intuition is not Science. :P

If you think that there's still hope with 'Larsk-like motor',
please test your own ideas.

I'm daily basically amazed by the creativity of people.

Very Best

Quote from: MileHigh on May 06, 2012, 05:03:37 PM
Here you go Mags, this is basically a dead thread, so you can answer here:

Quote from: MileHigh on Today at 10:27:50 PM

The answer is 90 amps at 60 seconds.  I was giving you a chance to correct yourself.  So why did you say 75 amps?  Why is the answer 90 amps?  Try for the bonus question.

See folks. This will go on and on. With purpose. Ill let you have your thread back. ;]

Mags

Im game. But your  8) rules dont apply.   ;D

First off, Im thinking why is he asking me what would happen if we switched the input to -4v from 3v. In what situation would that BE a situation. Its not. Its fantasy land circuitry. So is Ideal components and an I deal world.  And with the bonus question, there is no criteria as to when to make the switch, in time, or at what current level. To me, this would make a difference, as much as saying -3v to - 8 v.  And YOU MH require high detail from me and my answers to questions that lack detail enough that giving a detailed answer of all the variations that could be had could take a long time.

You expect me to present something more professional than the quality of your lacking request.

Now tell me what is real and what is not.   Its all a game to you. Fantasy Island   Hey Boss, De Plane. De plane.

I am not going to name all of the electrons involved and give you charts and paths and the pressures they all encounter "articulate, in depth" just to fill your funky aganda.
Ya gotta be nuts.  And even then I dont think it would be good enough.

So you can spin this all you wish as to why Im not going to continue this artificial issue with your artificial circuit and artificial workings of a circuit that dont exist.

Just like above in this very thread. You implied that your little rendition of Lars circuit was the one you believed that he used because you had a so called discussion with lars.
Tell me MH, tell me where Lars says that he agrees that your circuit is the one in his device. I can show you where he says that your version would work also. Yet you pawned this off on us above as fact.  You Lie your lil butt off. Just like you accuse Rosemary of.

Sorry M 8) , ya get nuthin.  :o ;D

Mags

Here is bonus question again:

QuoteBonus question:  Precisely what happens if the ideal voltage source switches to negative four volts after 90 seconds?  It's an ideal instantaneous switch in polarity.  Explain what happens.  Use your command of English to explain exactly what happens.

It's perfectly clear.  90 seconds after the start of the experiment the voltage polarity switches to negative four volts.

So the full question is as follows:  There is a circuit that consists of an ideal voltage source connected to an ideal inductor.  That's it,  there is only a single component in the circuit besides the ideal voltage source.  The ideal inductor is two henrys.  The ideal inductor is connected to the ideal voltage source and that marks the start of the experiment.  For the first 90 seconds the polarity of the ideal voltage source is plus three volts.  Then at the 90 second mark the polarity of the ideal voltage source changes to minus four volts and it remains at minus four volts thereafter.  Please describe exactly what happens in this circuit.

Do you comprehend the question now?  If instead of answering if you just give me attitude I will assume that you can't answer the question.

I suppose that you will continue experimenting with your coils.

MileHigh

Yes, my coils. I havnt finished testing them with my magnets.  :o ;D

Mags n The Moonies

Play with them but it would be better if you knew how they worked!   :(

This Ideal stuff can confuse.  You probably expected me to say something other than -4v, or else why would you ask it of me.  ;) This IS the issue with Ideal Ideas. It is basic. Its as basic as you can get. No scratches in the glass. None.

Isnt it funny to think that the 4v ideal source would remain at 4v at all times, even when the current is flowing opposite of the 4v emf at the time of switching. But it does. Ideally.

Ideally, the 4v Ideal source is like the super nova black hole of 4v power supplies. Its the MH-4000/GIGIDI. (invented by Kramerica industries ;] ) You can take all of Rosemary's batteries and hook them up to the MH-4000 and the MH-4000 will pull the battery voltage down to 4v no matter what configuration the batteries are in, series or parallel, backward, forward. Rock steady 4v champion of power supplies.

But until "ideal" inductors and Ideal power supplies are for sale, I would rather learn about what is available and can be had, in the simplest form possible.

We can not actually experience Ideal circuits. We can only theorize and dream. But with what we have, I can get hands on experience, and make changes and see and feel the results. This is how you learn. Not with the karate book from the library in your basement for five years. Ive seen it. It doesnt work very well.

Like if you have a simple 1 coil pulse motor. Read as many books as you wish, but find one that would show the effects of changing the angle of the coil while running. Or adding backing mags. Its just not out there. So who has the advantage, the straight coil guy, or the one that has more moves and knows how to move them? ;]

Ideally, to provide an understanding, it can also make for confusion later. In the real world, those voltages have way more dynamic than Ideal. I dont believe it is that difficult to understand in real world materials as compared to Ideal. it is a raw form, but no where near the same results any way you put it.

Mags n The Moonies

Magluvin:

Being dismissive of ideal components is a huge mistake because all real components are based on ideal components.  The solutions to circuit problems when using ideal components are easier as compared to using real-world components.  Ideal component concepts are used nearly every single say by electronics professionals.

I have seen free energy types being dismissive of discussing ideal components before and it's a shame.  it shows an inability to "think outside of the box," and it's a pretty small box.

I will leave it to anybody in the thread to discuss the circuit and question posed if they want to.  You know the great irony - people "experiment" with coils without understanding how they work.  I won't answer the question.  If somebody does the work to figure it out and get it right so much the better for them and they will learn much better than being spoon-fed the answers.

MileHigh

Well we will just have to see if anyone takes you up on this wonderful offer. Lets imagine each one that shows up ya get $100 bucks. Lets see how business goes. ;]

Mags

I am expecting nobody to pursue it and I don't think you can answer the question so you will not pursue it either.  That's the way it goes.

Quote from: MileHigh on May 06, 2012, 10:58:09 PM
I am expecting nobody to pursue it and I don't think you can answer the question so you will not pursue it either.  That's the way it goes.

So be it. Ainsi soit-il. Ita sit. Amen!