I realized an interview of the retired physicist Richard VIALLE (french), presenting his negative mass theory, a new model of gravity and of the mass and its applications to antigravity and overunity production of electric power.
Richard VIALLE has elaborated his theory in the beginning of the 80's but as an exceptional fact he also has realized many experiments showing the validity of the theory. He got gravitational anomalies and has created an overunity generator (free energy) running successfully according to his theory. These devices have been replicated and tested independently successfully.
Richard VIALLE first presents us his theory, its basis and foundations and the computations explaining it in a large part of the interview (many videos), then he explains the way the devices he invented work, their schematic and the way to reproduce them. Movies showing these devices working are included, concerning gravity anomalies (negative mass) and overunity.
This interview is the testimony given by Richard VIALLE to mandkind, the sum of almost 30 years of work which has been so slightly spread up to now. He doesn't want to make money with it or being glorified; but he only wants to spread these ideas so they could be used freely by everybody willing to reproduce the devices and use it for a progress. He is a man with a great ideal.
I spread the work of Richard VIALLE in a french forum attached to the website I created since march 2011. One of the subjects (all in FRENCH) dedicated to him and where you will be able to contact Richard VIALLE if you wish so (he is a member of these forums and wishes to use this way only to be in contact):
Richard VIALLE theory exposed and research documents written by him:
http://www.conspirovniscience.com/forum/index.php?showtopic=668
Interview - Richard VIALLE: Introduction & Part 1 (video 1/7)
Video is in french but an english subtitle has been made - please activate subtitle button in youtube window buttons (second button starting from left within the button bar at the bottom of the youtube video window)
Link: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Fqt3gC0qvRM (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Fqt3gC0qvRM)
Video 1/7
Abstract
Introduction:
why this interview was done and who is interviewed (what did he realize?)
Part 1:
Mass and Newton's equation of gravitation
Four-dimension-volume: non compressible 4 dimension volume: basis of the theory
Radius R0 of gravity expansion
Flow of the 4th space dimension dependind on time
Interview - Richard VIALLE: Part 2 & Part 3 (video 2/7)
Video is in french but an english subtitle has been made - please activate subtitle button in youtube window buttons (second button starting from left within the button bar at the bottom of the youtube video window)
Link: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=IZADt8osXwc (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=IZADt8osXwc)
Video 2/7
Abstract
Part 2:
Computation of the time flowing for gravitation in our 3 dimensions from the 4th one
Use of restricted relativity: modified equation of the flow
Gravitational mass moving: existence of negative mass
Alteration of negative mass with acceleration
Part 3:
Experimental set-up realized showing negative mass effects: scale with spinning disk (many versions) - description
Video of the scale with spinning disk and its abnormal gravitational effects
Coming later... download the english version of the scale report in PDF format (french available: http://www.zedico.info/Extraits_Publics/balance_a_disque_tournant.pdf (http://www.zedico.info/Extraits_Publics/balance_a_disque_tournant.pdf))
Interview - Richard VIALLE: Part 4 & Part 5 (video 3/7)
Video is in french but an english subtitle has been made - please activate subtitle button in youtube window buttons (second button starting from left within the button bar at the bottom of the youtube video window)
Link: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9gFXEH_e8jM
Video n°3/7
Abstract:
Part4:
Independant replication of the last version of Richard VIALLE's scale by Jean-Paul C.: pictures, movies, scheme, explaination of observed anomalies: experimental set-up
Part 5:
Description of the firts observed effects of the pigtaill system (QDC) by Alain B. and changement in electric resistors and of time flow speed
Movies of the runnng device showing abnormal resistor modifications.
Alain B.'s testimony of the time flow modification measured with mchanic and electronic chronometer.
I will publish here links when english subtitles will be done. Only french version exists for the missing videos up to now. Translation subtitles coming later...
Gravity modifications and electric overunity with COP>100 000 don't seem to interest anybody here.
As translations have been made to allow international workers to focus on it; we will save time if not translating other videos (many hours doing so, for english readers; interview was in french, and we will continue working on it only with french men, easier for us).
Thanks for your non interest.
I will take a look about your video, BTW Hector Perez (Rotoverter Inventor) have reported links between Overunity, Gravity manipulation and Time manipulation: Time and Space travel (and some other weird effects)...
Quote from: Pascuser on August 31, 2012, 03:45:45 AM
Gravity modifications and electric overunity with COP>100 000 don't seem to interest anybody here.
As translations have been made to allow international workers to focus on it; we will save time if not translating other videos (many hours doing so, for english readers; interview was in french, and we will continue working on it only with french men, easier for us.
Thanks for your non interest.
@Pascuser:
Did Richard VIALLE ever demonstrate a working over unit machine with a COP > 1? (COP > 100 000 would of course be even better.)
Did any one ever build a working OU machine based on Richard VIALLE's theories?
Is it your wish, that people read Richard VIALLE's theories and then try to build a working contraption?
Did you build a machine based on Richard VIALLE's theories?
Do you plan to build a machine based on Richard VIALLE's theories?
I would be interested in information about a truly working OU machine based on Richard VIALLE's theories. (I can read and understand French.)
By OU machine I mean for example his beam balance (in French: l'expérience dite "expérience de la balance" http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=b6EBXY4iXxQ (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=b6EBXY4iXxQ)).
Well, a balance moved. So what? Where is the free energy taken out of this experiment? How could one take out energy from this balance? Has any one demonstrated that energy taken out from this balance could do some work (e.g. drive a dynamo)?
I do not doubt that VIALLE's balance is interesting, but what can one do with it concerning energy creation? As far as I understand, one needs electricity to turn the disc with an electric motor. The small and slow movement of the balance arm (which stops after a short time, although the disk keeps spinning) can never generate enough energy to recover the electricity put into the electric motor driving the disc.
There might be a gravity abnormality, but one paid by feeding electricity into the electric motor driving the disk. Where is the OU?
Vialle seems to talk about a gravity abnormality (which needs energy to be caused), but where is the enormous energy to be gained? Electricity is fed into the balance (rotation of the disk) and a very slow and short term movement of the balance arm follows. Interesting effect, but where is the OU?
Greetings, Conrad
As you will hear and see in the interview serie (translation not finished for the full serie; only 3 firts videos up to now) Richard VIALLE has built his overunity device, I have visited him and seen it.
Then I have replicated it during 8 months; starting from the basic concept to his lat one. I have measured minimal COP of 300 with not a great precision. COP>100 000 has been measured with a physic measurement institue in Swiss and COP>10 000 has been measured with an individual with HF wattmeter.
In the interview all is given to understand anr replicate the overunity generator; as I have been able to, so no reaction to this post seemed pretty a shame.
This is not theory only, Richard VIALLE has designed a theory and has realized devices according to this theory and I have worked with him concerning 2 of the 3 main devices, to replicate, test with him and measure independantly.
All is in the interview; and an electronic file will me made for each device kind. I have yet completed the file for the first device, showing negative mass and antigravity effects (in french). I will begin to write the file about generator next; but again all is said and showed in the interview.
As documents are done, if there is interest, I will try to translate, but it takes as long as making the document in my native language, so with no interest, I will not invest hours in translating. For the moment I have not time for this; I write the documens in french first.
Replication of the overunity generator he designed by everybody is his aim; he doesn't hide anything because instead of useual inventors tryong to gain money and hiding a major secret to have the central place to geat rich, Richard VIALLE doesn't seek to have money.
A version of his generator produces about 10 Watts of electricity while recharging the batteries powering it. I only worked with version with inpout/output measurement, not a looped one like the one with batteries, because electronic with low power to achieve it muste be designed. I use lab material to power; so no loop. But you can build the loop version if you can design electronic device to power it with low loss; so you have a better proof than an input/output measurement.
Quote from: conradelektro on August 31, 2012, 05:29:14 AM
By OU machine I mean for example his beam balance (in French: l'expérience dite "expérience de la balance" http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=b6EBXY4iXxQ (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=b6EBXY4iXxQ)).
Well, a balance moved. So what? Where is the free energy taken out of this experiment? How could one take out energy from this balance? Has any one demonstrated that energy taken out from this balance could do some work (e.g. drive a dynamo)?
I do not doubt that VIALLE's balance is interesting, but what can one do with it concerning energy creation?
Greetings, Conrad
The scale device is not an alectric overunity device, it is a device using the negative mass to show some king of antigravity effect. About the scla I have published the electronic file:
http://zedico.info/Extraits_Publics/Pascuser/balance_a_disque_tournant.pdf
It shows all anomalies about this system.
The same theory of negative mass effect lead to building an overunity generator, using negative mass with resonant frequencies. The whole is ONE theory and I speak here of the overunity generator and not of the sacale.
As a physicist I am not only focused on the overunity generator; for me it is as important as antigravity effects; but as here this website is named "overunity" I write here about overunity and not the scale. For the scale, you have informations in the interview and the electronic file I finished recently in the previous link.
As I wrote here, I will write the following file about the generator, the same kind than for the scale.
On the contrary of what you could think, Richard VIALLE doesn't need somebody to design a device he invented and work only in his head.
His devices work since years in the real world, and he did it, not only invented an idea which could work or not.
Is his theory completely correct or not I can't say, but his devices show gravity anomalies and overunity, time modification too. And wether it is his theory that describes it or not is not very important, here I come to give you the way to replicate the devices and state yourself according to your interest: gravity anomalies and/or overunity electricity generation.
But as he designed it according to his theory and it worked, we could say that the theory has a not so bad heart of truth.
When you will have the same overunity statement than him and me (I did it in 2009) you will be able to see if you can do better. Because he extracted 10 watts only, but with a possibility to have 3000 Watts according to his theory, and with an accidental adjustment he once had 10 centimeters sparks bruning the while electronic: more power is so possible as he forecasted.
Quote from: Pascuser on August 31, 2012, 05:59:30 AM
On the contrary of what you could think, Richard VIALLE doesn't need somebody to design a device he invented and work only in his head.
His devices work since years in the real world, and he did it, not only invented an idea which could work or not.
Is his theory completely correct or not I can't say, but his devices show gravity anomalies and overunity, time modification too. And wether it is his theory that describes it or not is not very important, here I come to give you the way to replicate the devices and state yourself according to your interest: gravity anomalies and/or overunity electricity generation.
But as he designed it according to his theory and it worked, we could say that the theory has a not so bad heart of truth.
When you will have the same overunity statement than him and me (I did it in 2009) you will be able to see if you can do better. Because he extracted 10 watts only, but with a possibility to have 3000 Watts according to his theory, and with an accidental adjustment he once had 10 centimeters sparks bruning the while electronic: more power is so possible as he forecasted.
Thank you for your very good responses.
In my opinion it would be very useful to concentrate on just one working device which produces more energy than is put in. This device should be carefuly documented. Especially the measurements which seem to show OU.
All OU machines which I have heard about so far exhibit the same flaw:
One could extract free energy, but some little problems persist.It is always difficult to show OU with small outputs.
I admit that the effect is mind boggling and it should be examined carefully. But it is not very helpful to talk about huge energy gains befor they can be demonstrated clearly.
I will try to read all the information you provided (fortunately I can read French) and I will look at all the nice videos.
Again, please direct me to just one device that clearly shows OU. But I am not so very much intersted in the OU effect, lifting something by help of electricity (spinning a disk) is good enough.
Sorry, I got side tracked by the OU talk (OU never has been proven consistantly by any one). Richard VIALLE has discovered something very interesting. The OU angle and the OU claim will scare many people and is not helpful at all.
Greetings, Conrad
Quote from: Pascuser on August 31, 2012, 05:46:07 AM
Then I have replicated it during 8 months; starting from the basic concept to his lat one. I have measured minimal COP of 300 with not a great precision. COP>100 000 has been measured with a physic measurement institue in Swiss and COP>10 000 has been measured with an individual with HF wattmeter.
This is not theory only, Richard VIALLE has designed a theory and has realized devices according to this theory and I have worked with him concerning 2 of the 3 main devices, to replicate, test with him and measure independently.
A version of his generator produces about 10 Watts of electricity while recharging the batteries powering it. I only worked with version with inpout/output measurement, not a looped one like the one with batteries, because electronic with low power to achieve it muste be designed. I use lab material to power; so no loop. But you can build the loop version if you can design electronic device to power it with low loss; so you have a better proof than an input/output measurement.
The claim that a Swiss measurement institute measured COP > 10 00 has to be carefully documented (and published), nobody will believe it from hear say.
Please publish the measurements concerning "2 of the 3 main devices" you mention.
"A looped back device" (a self running device) which can be observed running uninterrupted for some days and which can be measure by independent observers would be a big help. And it is exactly that which nobody can provide when making OU claims.
Greetings, Conrad
P.S.: Again, Richard Vialle discovered something very interesting, you have collected information and you have made good videos about something interesting, but the OU claim needs something really substantial and carefully documented and freely published, or you will be just one of the many people claiming OU without substance. Claiming OU is not a light matter, you go against several hundred years of science. And to make people believe you, more than words or paper is necessary. It is particularly bad to say "this is a secret, I can not tell you that, this will be protected by a patent therefore I can not tell or show you that, and so on". If there are secrets to be guarded, please shut up and keep them.
Big COP has been measure with equipement I have not. I have no HF wattmeter nor physic test equipement of an official measurement institute.
But with a poor equipement you can have COP>300 or COP>500 as I got.
If you aren't interested of COP>1 process and need COP>10 000 measure to be interested, I can't do nothing.
Loop system has been described but I did not realize it myself beacuse electronic must be designed to have a low loss (because you have 10 watts only outoutting) oscillator+ pre-ampli+ampli and that costs a little. I have done affordable things: using the lab materiel I have.
Big COP have been measured at an official institute. What can be done is to give you the adress where the measurement was done. Do you wait that I buy such equipement for your pleasure? I am not a millionnaire. You can do like me and having hundreds of COp with little investment.
And you can design your own powering electronic device to have a loop if not convinced of your measurements. I have not designed such an electronic. But Richard VIALLE has had sponsors who did it. Their powering electronic is their intellecual property and will not be given; but it is not something weird: normal oscillator+ pre ampli+ ampli. I did not design it because it cots about 1000$ to design it as a self running system. For what? For a loop. But it will not give something more than a loop with 10 watts.
What is more interesting is to have more output power, so the loop will be easy: using output power to power lab material.
Anybody claiming proofs and demanding to have me or anybody buying material to have so can wait eternally. All is given here so everybody can do it himself and measure himself. If one is not satisfied, he can buy himsel material to measure or go to his local physic institute to bring his built replica and have his proof.
I am here to spread what has been made by Richard VIALLE. I made him myself, and one of his friend too. We verified that it worked are our mission on earth is not to satisfy everybody asking to do this or that to have their proof. I present what we get, honnestly; we did it with individual money and time and if you want to be fed with your ideally proof, you can provide yourself; I can't do more.
This is a working forum for people willing to work on project, this is not a drive service "please the proof, with film, reports, and hurry". We give what we have. You want to reproduce or test by yourself: it is great. You want more than we have: you won't have. if you want things like you want, do it yourself! YOU can test, measure and see. schema is affordable to reproduce for somebody with lab material (oscillator, generator , amplificator). If you have so it will cost additional 30$ to design the system, if you don't have, then see those who will do it. I myself could'nt do many things because I have not the material.
Pacuser you say "Big COP have been measured at an official institute. What can be done is to give you the address where the measurement was done."
Well, is there any documentation at this official institute? If there is, it might also be interesting for you to get it and to publish it here. It would enhance your credibility.
An OU claim does not work by saying "build it yourself and you will see".
If you make an extraordinary claim, please back it up by extraordinary evidence.
What I see in your videos is a very slow moving balance using up electricity to drive a disk. How one can ever extract even the energy used by the motor driving the disk, is beyond me. That would be a really difficult engineering task.
When I say, I am more interested in the "gravity effect", is does not mean that I believe the OU claim. Since this is an OU forum, I addressed the OU aspects of the system.
I see the same pattern as in all OU claims.
Greetings, Conrad
You really don't understand what you see in the videos and what I wrote before.
As as said many times and as it is in the video, the scale with the spinning disk has NOTHING to do with the overunity generator. It is not a disk nor a scale. The only common thing is the theory behind it to design these experiments.
The overunity generator is an electric device, with input frequencies and output frequencies and what you write only shows that you only watched firts video out of 7 and did not see at all the overunity generator.
If you don't watch the interview I can't help. Sorry, I have not much time to spend explaining that you must read and watch before all. I have a lot of work to do. You can call when you will have watched the videos, instead of only a fraction.; if not theere will be other peaople elsewhere. yet french people are beginning replication. I
f your harvest for overunity has exhausted here all too much to seek deeper because of no working devices and many other things fake or other, I understand because it is the way the system found to divert real research about it. You want to burry something exposed? The easy way: you give millions of false devices so everybody having spent years in nuilding only 10 of them will be discouraged for all his life. It works very well and is used since years. But I don't have to cop with the system results. We yet work on it, and we don't wait people to do OUR work about it. if you are not interestec because it is not enough proofable for you, then you can do something else; I won't blame you. I am not here to have people doing something for me, trying to catch workers as slaves, I am here to give something for people wanting to use it, no more. if you don't want to use it, don't use it.
I have built many devices not working at all; I now what this looks like; so I don't blame anybody. I have built too two working devices: Richard VIALLE one and a Tesla coil transmitter with Overunity. I could measure it durong months, and if you don't want to replicate it, I don't ask you to do it. The system won in many cases, I am not here to win again the system.
Quote from: Pascuser on August 31, 2012, 09:01:06 AM
You really don't understand what you see in the videos and what I wrote before.
As as said many times and as it is in the video, the scale with the spinning disk has NOTHING to do with the overunity generator. It is not a disk nor a scale. The only common thing is the theory behind it to design these experiments.
The overunity generator is an electric device, with input frequencies and output frequencies and what you write only shows that you only watched firts video out of 7 and did not see at all the overunity generator.
I have not found any useful information about the "electric device, with input frequencies and output frequencies".
Why don't you publish the schematics of this circuit?
Why don't you publish consistent measurements done on the "electric device, with input frequencies and output frequencies".
Why don't you publish a comprehensible description of the "electric device, with input frequencies and output frequencies".
Sorry, Richard Vialle seems to be nice man with many interesting theories, but to catch anybodies attention you have to give just a few good things:
- A clear description of the system you are talking about (
if it is not a scale, if it is not a spinning disk, what is it)?
- A credible proof that it works (not hear say, and it does not make sense if you are not allowed to show it because it is someones intellectual property).
I do not understand which system you are talking about. There might be some hints and some glimpses somewhere in 7 videos, but I have not found them and they can not be very clear, otherwise I would have understood them.
Please, just one diagram, one schematic, one photo, one set of comprehensible measurements (supporting the OU claim) of the "electric device, with input frequencies and output frequencies".The theory might be outstanding, but why wade through it if I can never clearly see the OU device you are talking about.
You mentioned some electronics which some firm built. If you can not show it, we can not talk about it.
Yes, I am difficult, but you have not shown a "electric device, with input frequencies and output frequencies" and you have not provided any proof that this invisible device is OU.
You show a big amount of theory. It would take years to try to understand it. But some clear information about the "electric device, with input frequencies and output frequencies" could be understood fast. And if this is good information, I will be prepared to wade through a mountain of theory. But hear say and hints, why should I waste my time?
Yes, I understand, the scale with the spinning disk is some sort of proof of principle. But on the other hand you are saying "the overunity generator is an electric device, with input frequencies and output frequencies". So, where is it? Please describe this electric device!
Have you personally built some scales or a "electric device, with input frequencies and output frequencies"? We have seen some scales, but we have not seen a OU device that could be describes as a "electric device, with input frequencies and output frequencies". Please show it in a clear and comprehensible way.
Do you want me to build some scale to prove a principle?
Or, if you want me to build a "electric device, with input frequencies and output frequencies", please give me clear directions. I am too dumb to build it after having seen the videos and after having read the PDF-files.
If you think that the information provided in http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nxFZmGKP4UI (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nxFZmGKP4UI) is scientifically useful or does allow replication, you are gravely mistaken. It is some casual discussion of alleged effects which one has to believe without any proof. How can one ever build this electronic circuits by just getting a brief glimpse. One needs exact specifications and a clear schematics.
You claim to be a scientist, so, please be scientific.
Greetings, Conrad
You have not watched the videos. Overunity generator, electronic, schematic is inside.
I looked at the discussions in http://www.conspirovniscience.com/forum/index.php?showforum=35
Well, the usual endless efforts to replicate something difficult and inconclusive.
All very interesting, all very mysterious, all very much unclear.
Have fun,
Conrad
@Pascuser:There might be something, may be one day one finds something. But it is by no means in any way clear at the moment if there is OU or not.
Some experiments might give hope, some experiments fail (specially when replicated).
Your videos give many hints and many glimpses at different set ups (bobbins, windings, principal circuits), but nothing that could be considered proof.
As you say, convincing measurements need very good and expensive instruments and also a lot of experience.
I wish you good luck, for me the whole thing is way beyond my means and experience. I can only judge whether something is for me or not. Others might be taken off their feet by the info you provide, for me it is like so many things I have seen. But my opinion is not important, you have to convince real scientists and people who are able and willing to spend a lot of money for it.
First I was really confused by the scale and the spinning disk, now, having seen the various circuits and windings on many different cores in the videos, and the discussion in the French OU-forum, well, so what?
Greetings, Conrad
As I wrote it before, there are 3 devices:
1)Scale with a spinning disk showing negative mass effect
2)Overunity generator (two versions with various possibilities + ferrite version no achieved yet)
2)Pigtail (gravity anomalies with a modified generator)
At the contrary of what you said, there is no complication for the overunity generator nor the scale with spinning disk. The only problem of lab material is for the pigtail
As I yet stated, you hace about $30 woth material to build the overunity generator (a copper bar and a copper wire for coils) in its simplest version and possibility; if you have a Generator able to deliver up to 4MHz and an amplifier; If you don't have it, a 50MHz generator can be bought new for $40 and an amplifier built for $40 too, and this is lab material usable for anything else.
Endless discussions in the french forum are about many things, but NOT about the scale (ther is no endless discussion but there has been a replication with abnormal resultst found as stated yet again) and there has been NO discussion about the overunitygenerator since the schematic was not given before the interview.
Discussions are about difficulties pour the pigtail and current ferrite generator under developpment. So you seem to have only understood little of that work. I don't blame, french is not a native language here. But the subtitles videos are made to allow english reader to understand.
The scale machine costed $70 of material to the builder (with a recuperated motor, if not add a motor price)
So there is no complexity or difficulty to have a replication. But here I posted these last messages to have replications, not as you think to give you the proof you need to stay in your seat looking other doing the job.
What YOUwanted is expensive: lab measurement material not in possession to have some claim you want and won't accept what is more when obtained. These measurements have been made in an institue. Are you satisfied with it? Not. Why? because you think it doesn't exist. So why would it be helpful for anybody else to do the measurment for you? And why would anybody buy an equipement for you? YOU have demands, you create your own constraints, and so you decourage yourself.
I only used my oscilloscope and resirtot and could have a COP>300 COP in one test, COP>500 in another, as stated.
I don't want to spend more time as today for useless discussions with person not watching videos carefully and not reading what is written. I can't spend time explaining again and again and repaeting things that have been said and written in the video, because you just didn't watch it. If you aren't interested, please don't make me loose my time. If so I won't answer, don't be surprised. If you don't want, aren't interested, want other people to do things for you to start something or anything else, go elsewhere, thank you.
If you are interested and have spent time to understand the videos and want to replicate a device, ask freely and I will help with pleasure. Here no replication was intended by Conrad but only useless discussions.
There is a theory and there a 3 devices. Each one is exposed in the interview videos. The first device corresponds to what has been translated with subtitles up to now: scale; and some theory.
Enough has been made to allow anybody willing to reproduce it.
When the remaining videos will have been translated you will be able to know what are the 2 remaining devices and to replicate them. Here the forum is intitled "New theories about free energy systems »Theory of overunity and free energy" and it is conform to what has been given in english for now. You have a theory, a new one, and this theory leads to free energy.
You can test the scale device to see the new theory fundamentals with existing documentation. What remains will come in english when translated.
Nobody else with actual real implication reads here? Only people specialized in polemics here? No matter. I will post all this elsewhere, where people work. Overunity, bye.
@Pascuser
Sounds good what you say about "2)Overunity generator (two versions with various possibilities + ferrite version no achieved yet)"
It is difficult to watch very long videos and to look for schematics in a pile of information.
Yes, I am lacy, yes, you do not have to do anything for me. But if you want to involve people it is much better to provide precise and helpful information.
My suggestion:
Please publish here your best schematic for a "Vialle overunity generator" with a good technical specification of the components.
Since you say you have built one, why not publish the one you have built.
It would also be helpful if you published here the measurements you did on your replication.
So, what do I want from you to start replication:
1 drawing showing the schematics (the electronic circuit, absolutely necessary)
1 page listing the components (so that I know what to buy, absolutely necessary)
1 page showing the measurements you did on this circuit (optional, not important at the moment)
1 photo showing the circuit in action (optional, not important at this moment)
Yes, may be I could dig out this information from long videos and from going through many pages in a French forum. You seem to have the information, why don't you make it easy for everybody to start a replication? You want to involve people. Fine, give me a chance, give me a reason to start.
You are throwing a flood of information at me. But the only thing I want to do is to build one specific circuit. So tell me the one thing, and if it is understandable I will build it.
You wrote many long explanations. A circuit diagram and a list of the components (used in the circuit) would have said everything. That can not be more work than what you have written so far in this thread. Also a lot of confusion would have been avoided.
It is my fault that I am too dumb to digest a life time of research done by Richard Vialle in one day. But I am clever enough to understand one single circuit in an hour. I can also build a single circuit in a few days once I have a specification of its components. And I can try to replicate measurements once you tell me which measurements to do on this single circuit. I have two oscilloscopes.
I can not build various circuits and various machines. And I can not study for months in order to get all the information. You do not have to teach me a whole theory. Just tell me one circuit, I am a simple person.
So, please, give me one circuit and a specification of its components! (If you have many circuits, please give me the one you think is best to show OU.)
Greetings, Conrad
Interview - Richard VIALLE: Part 6 & Part 7 (video 4/7)
Video is in french but an english subtitle has been made - please activate subtitle button in youtube window buttons (second button starting from left within the button bar at the bottom of the youtube video window)
Link: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BOjtRO1aqco
Video n°4/7
Abstract
Part6:
Theoretical explanations of the link between resistance change and time change with QDC (pigtail)
Looped expansion move of the 4th dimension in our 3D dimensions
Electric field and electric charge: energy fields drilling our 3D
Publication of Richard VIALLE's theory.
Part 7:
Origin of the available overunity: electronic oscillation within the atoms thanks to variable mass
Electrostatic equivalent mass
Atomic electrons into resonance
Theoretical basis of the way you can put into resonance electrons with a magnetic oscillating field
Interview - Richard VIALLE: Part 8 & Part 9 (video 5/7)
Download the file concerning the 1st selfgenerator here (french only for the moment, wait for a translation):
http://zedico.info/Extraits_Publics/Pascuser/autogenerateur_1.pdf (http://zedico.info/Extraits_Publics/Pascuser/autogenerateur_1.pdf)
-----
Error: Time 13min17s: divide K by additionnal factor 2
-----
Abstract:
Part 8:
Schematic of the overunity selfgenerator
Pictures
Overunity: Link with theory
Frequency for overunity
Cold current, hot current
Losses with Joule effect and skin depth effect
Part 9 (too much technical, don't watch it if not a physicist)
Calculation of power
Negative mass and electron spin
Overunity gain calculation withon the atom: way to have it and formula
Gravitation
Frequency for overunity: link with bar length
Document (french only for the moment, wait for a later translation) about the autogenerateur (selfgenerator) 2nd version: U shape
Download here (french): http://zedico.info/Extraits_Publics/Pascuser/autogenerateur_2.pdf
Excel File to calculate autogenerateur 1st and 2nd version caracteristics (french only for the moment, wait for a later translation)
Download here (french): http://www.conspirovniscience.com/stockage/richardv/Formules.xls
Jean-Louis Naudin (creator of JLN Labs) was interested in the overunity generator (asd he is french, he can read all the french documentation and understand very well interviews).
Since late august he was interested in working on it, and last days he did the work. His replications works very well. Up to know he didn't compute the COP; but could obtain all was described, and output power from a cut copper bar, with no electric contact inside; output tuning like described, and so on.
His web page describing his work (french page):
http://jnaudin.free.fr/rvproject/index.htm
Quote from: Pascuser on September 21, 2012, 02:22:44 PM
Jean-Louis Naudin (creator of JLN Labs) was interested in the overunity generator (asd he is french, he can read all the french documentation and understand very well interviews).
Since late august he was interested in working on it, and last days he did the work. His replications works very well. Up to know he didn't compute the COP; but could obtain all was described, and output power from a cut copper bar, with no electric contact inside; output tuning like described, and so on.
His web page describing his work (french page):
http://jnaudin.free.fr/rvproject/index.htm (http://jnaudin.free.fr/rvproject/index.htm)
@Pascuser
Merci pour publier les fichiers autogenerateur_1 et autogenerateu_2. C'est beaucoup plus clair maintenant.
Je suis très heureux que Jean Naudin s'occupe de cette invention. On va voir bientôt des résultats.
Cordialement,
Conrad
-----------------------------------------
@Pascuser
Thank you for the files autogenerateur_1 and autogenerateu_2, now we know what we are talking about. Your videos are nice, but just too much to digest. Most people (and I am such a person) need clear and precise circuit diagrams and at least some trustworthy results before spending money and time on a OU claim.
I think that the gist of the two files autogenerateur_1 and autogenerateu_2 can be understood (from the diagrams) by people who do not read French (or only have poor French reading skills).
The tests and explanations by Jean-Louis Naudin are just great (he does exactly what I expected from Pascuser). Naudin even designed a suitable pulse generator (Royer oscillator) http://jnaudin.free.fr/rvproject/html/ugentest3.htm (http://jnaudin.free.fr/rvproject/html/ugentest3.htm).
In case Jean-Louis Naudin gets encouraging results, I am in. Once Jean Louis Naudin sees something, I am prepared to wade through many videos and to try to understand an elaborate theory.
I encourage everybody to look at Jean Louis Naudin's pages http://jnaudin.free.fr/rvproject/index.htm (http://jnaudin.free.fr/rvproject/index.htm) (they are in French, but the photos and specially the schematics tell a clear story independent of language).
Greetings, Conrad
Nice to see JLN back into it after such a quiet time
Penno
Interview - Richard VIALLE: Part 10 & Part 11 (video 6/7)
Video is in french but an english subtitle has been made - please activate subtitle button in youtube window buttons (second button starting from left within the button bar at the bottom of the youtube video window)
Link: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nxFZmGKP4UI (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nxFZmGKP4UI)
Download the file concerning the 2nd U autogenerateur here (french only for the moment):
http://zedico.info/Extraits_Publics/Pascuser/autogenerateur_2.pdf (http://zedico.info/Extraits_Publics/Pascuser/autogenerateur_2.pdf)
-----
Video n°6/7
Abstract:
Part 10:
Autogenerateur: electric model
Pictures and movies of the U
Output power measurement
Loop running the autogenerateur: overunity
Negative power
Tuning input and tuning output
Many movies of experiments
Part 11:
Ferrite autogenerateur: new system
Diagram and pictures
Difficulties
@Pascuser:
In your video http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nxFZmGKP4UI (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nxFZmGKP4UI) and in Naudin's tests http://jnaudin.free.fr/rvproject/html/ugentest6.htm (http://jnaudin.free.fr/rvproject/html/ugentest6.htm) I see that
one needs a very high input (into the U-shaped coil) in order to get a small output (via the light bulb at the copper tubes).
In Naudin's test the input is about 6 Watt (205 mA at 29,5 Volt) and the output (via the lamp) is about 0,6 Watt (100 mA at 6 Volt).
The fact that the input does not change (in Naudin's test) whether the lamp is connected or not is interesting but can not prove OU.
So, my question: Why do you claim OU?
Greetings, Conrad
P.S.: Imagine a radio station (radio wave transmitter). The power input to the radio station does not change whether the people turn on their radios (radio wave receivers) or not.
File concerning the pigtail and its effect concerning gravity anomalies (french version only for now):
http://zedico.info/Extraits_Publics/Pascuser/queue_de_cochon.pdf
Quote from: conradelektro on September 26, 2012, 02:43:20 AM
@Pascuser:
In your video http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nxFZmGKP4UI (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nxFZmGKP4UI) and in Naudin's tests http://jnaudin.free.fr/rvproject/html/ugentest6.htm (http://jnaudin.free.fr/rvproject/html/ugentest6.htm) I see that
one needs a very high input (into the U-shaped coil) in order to get a small output (via the light bulb at the copper tubes).
In Naudin's test the input is about 6 Watt (205 mA at 29,5 Volt) and the output (via the lamp) is about 0,6 Watt (100 mA at 6 Volt).
The fact that the input does not change (in Naudin's test) whether the lamp is connected or not is interesting but can not prove OU.
So, my question: Why do you claim OU?
Greetings, Conrad
P.S.: Imagine a radio station (radio wave transmitter). The power input to the radio station does not change whether the people turn on their radios (radio wave receivers) or not.
Sorry, I yet said that I did not spend more time to explain what was yet explained.
Naudin did not measure overunity yet. Mosfet drivers dissipates much power in his amplifier (very hot). What goes inside the input is NOT what is consumed and dissipated by the mosfet to feed the input. This is obvious for every measurement: when you power on your oscilloscope to measure the voltage accross a circuit and calculate what is its consumption, you don't add the oscilloscope consumption of 100Watts to the consumption you are measuring of 1watt to say "it consumes 101 Watt".
You don't seem to have ever measured a COP in any device system for somebody bored with new systems because you have studied so much old systems.
If you don't believe int his device, don't ask about. If you want to have overunity, do the replication. All was explained in the french document as to do the device and to have overunity. I won't reply anymore about it if you don't make it. No replication = no explaination to give. Consider this is not an interesting experiment for you if what was given is not good for you.
If you have something to replicate, I will with pleasure help to tune and measure, if not, don't ask, as YET mentionned. Thanks. I am not a data bank to inform you about how electricity works, what is a power, what you must do or not, what you don't understand in Naudin measurements, etc because it is not my job. You must be a little bit skilled in electricity to know what you do. If not, wait that another one does it and watch what he will find, with no comment about what he did is wrong only because you don't know what must be done.
With no anger, but as yet mentionned NO time to spend for what is not important.
What os more, your example of radio station shows that you did not understand what Naudin did. The purpose was to show that output was not a derivation of input by a capacitive way between winding and U copper bar. In a radio station you don't ask this question. This WAS not a overunity measurement. Sorry that all this is writtend in french, but I won't do more about this. Wait further Naudin tests.
I pluged again my U autogenerateur overunity electric generator, replication of Richard VIALLE's one.
I made COP measurements since I never made COP measurements with the U only with the linear autogenerateur (1st version).
Measurements and experiments are rrported here:
http://www.conspirovniscience.com/forum/index.php?showtopic=922 (http://www.conspirovniscience.com/forum/index.php?showtopic=922)
I could clearly show a COP>1 and the way you can choose to have the COP value you want.
In a first experiment I have COP=1,2
In the next one I have COP=1,7
Then I show how you can have COP as big as you want, 10 or 100 or 1000 or 100 000 or 1 000 000 or infinite! Then you have something new: no COP can be calculated because now you produce energy while you are consuming.
I showed how this COP measurement is of no meaning for the new behavior of this system. You have a COP>1 but you have much more. You have a negative power production coming back to input.
This is the mechanism explaining the COP value as big as necessary: the output power is the same (diminushes slightly but little) while you diminush input power, and a production electric power comes back as a feedback to the input, and SUBSTRACTS to what you inputted.
So Your input can be reduced to as extent as you want, with an ouput slightly diminushed: so the COP=output/intput=nearly the same/what you want as nerby 0 as you want = infinity if you want.
This is for COP measurement and everybody can do it like me. You need to build the U generator, an oscillocope (with a ground isolated from earth, either a PC based oscilloscope with no ground or a classic standard oscilloscope with a ground transformer to isolate from earth ground) and a function generator.
What is more interesting in the system is to have more output power. Since you have an infinite COP, you have the same output power (it is the reduction of input used power that produces big COP).
This is the next step that Richard VIALLE did. He produced 10Watt instead of only 100mW with an output tuning (read the document to know more). And one times he could produce 300 000V arcing back to the input accidentally. This is the work to do... to have more power; when you understand that COP is overunity.
Overunity doesn't mean that you have the output power you want, but is only a ratio (output VS inout). A overunity is yet a big victory against the science system claiming it doesn't exist. But shutting off the system is not enough if you don't have a big output power to use it at home... So a research must be done to have a bigger power.
Jean-Louis Naudin made a web page to present my last results here:
http://jnaudin.free.fr/rvproject/html/pascuser_rep1.htm (http://jnaudin.free.fr/rvproject/html/pascuser_rep1.htm)
For the moment onlyfrench people are doing replication. Here I gave you infoirmations to do the same work. Again nobody asks you to understand all theory, you just have to do a replication and measure yourself. Many time wasted here in many subjects with hight cost. Here it is a low cost if you have some minimal equipement and skilled a little bit to kno what you are doing. So easy to do... but up to now only french replications.
I did not make an english translation yet of the documents, but I have no time to do all this for the moment, it will be done later. You can do the replication with a basic google translation.
As yet told here, I am here to present something that you can DO yourself.
Thank you Pasuser for presenting your measurements.
I think I understand now better what you are talking about.
But I do not see a way to exploit this "U autogenerateur" in any practical way. The generation of the input signal (which you are doing with a function generator and Naudin is doing with a special circuit) always seems to consume more power than one can ever get out of the "U autogenerateur".
So, if the generation of the input signal would be for free, one could gain something. But this is not the case in the real world. Theoretically there would be OU, but to show it, one has to spend more power than ever comes out.
In addition I have to think longer and more carefully about the way you are doing the calculations. With 100 and 150 Ohms in the input line, one could argue, that one needs the resistor to generate the effect (so it can not be subtracted, it has to be there). And for a 1000 Ohm resister the OU still needs to be shown.
Only when the consumption of the coil (wound over the U shaped copper tube) plus the consumption of the resistor (where the measurement is done) is less than the current through the lamp, the argument becomes valid. (But still, the generation of the 3.6 MHz signal would not be for free).
Nevertheless, a very interesting effect. I hope Jean Louis Naudin does more measurements and comments on the calculation.
Greetings, Conrad
Quote from: conradelektro on October 01, 2012, 01:01:43 PM
Thank you Pasuser for presenting your measurements.
I think I understand now better what you are talking about.
But I do not see a way to exploit this "U autogenerateur" in any practical way. The generation of the input signal (which you are doing with a function generator and Naudin is doing with a special circuit) always seems to consume more power than one can ever get out of the "U autogenerateur".
So, if the generation of the input signal would be for free, one could gain something. But this is not the case in the real world. Theoretically there would be OU, but to show it, one has to spend more power than ever comes out.
In addition I have to think longer and more carefully about the way you are doing the calculations. With 100 and 150 Ohms in the input line, one could argue, that one needs the resistor to generate the effect (so it can not be subtracted, it has to be there). And for a 1000 Ohm resister the OU still needs to be shown.
Only when the consumption of the coil (wound over the U shaped copper tube) plus the consumption of the resistor (where the measurement is done) is less than the current through the lamp, the argument becomes valid. (But still, the generation of the 3.6 MHz signal would not be for free).
Nevertheless, a very interesting effect. I hope Jean Louis Naudin does more measurements and comments on the calculation.
Greetings, Conrad
You are never happy with what you have. When I say that there is COP, you say it is not shown. When it is shown, you say it is useless.
But if you ever READ the doc (which is not the case because of repetitive question about the same things), YES here we show overunity but not a practical way to use it for your home!
It wad indicated in my report: this is a physic measurement.
Richard VIALLE made the U autogenerateur running in a loop with no consumption of input batteries, so YES there is a practical way to generate so much overunity that you can use it to compensate all input energy dissipated in the driver circuit. I yet wrote it many times.
The self running version was delivering constant 10W output power and no depleting batteries for many months.
And YES there is a way to have much more power, like Richard VIALLE showed it accidentally with 10 centimeters of spark on the input.
If conradelecktro is the only one answering in this post, because he does NO replication and only spends time to speak; always unhappy of what is done (he wants me to install a running U generateur in his home?!) I will no longer feed this post.
If overunity members are not able of more than what conradelkectro does, there is no reason for me to spend more time here. There is french workers doing replication, and if you want to spend your time in your garden to watch flowers and writing messages on the internet to spend what remains of your time, this is not a forum for me.
I thought that there would be SERIOUS people here, I was mistaken obviously.
French people seems more accurate to do good work than international one as I can see. This forum is useless if nobody does something valuable with a real investment in reading documentation and thinking about what was yet written. With no serious new reactions than Conradelektro (sorry, to be serious, you must start with a reading of writings, and DO something), you won't see me here more.
Salut Pascal, je me rend compte que sur ces forums, beaucoup parlent et personnes ne construisent, votre set-up semble très intéressant et en plus en francais, au moins je comprend. merci pour les infos, continue ton bon travail. tu sais il y a de l'avenir avec des scientifiques comme vous. bonjour du québec.
Merci!
Oui je suis très déçu par ces forums qui ont l'air remplis de mous qui ne font pas grand chose à par demander qu'on fasse tout pour eux. Un forum décevant de plus. Pour LA grande référence en la matière, ça donne une image de la nullité ambiante de l'ensemble du travail underground à ce sujet.
Heureusement l'ensemble du travail n'est pas à l'image du travail individuel de certains. Si vous êtes intéressés par cette thématique, vous savez où aller dans les zones en français. Quant à moi je quitte cet endroit inintéressant pour mon sujet et je vais aller poster ça ailleurs en anglais où d'autres travailleurs cachés existent peut être. Ici c'est de la confiture pour les cochons comme on dit (je ne sais pas si vous avez cette expression au Québec aussi?)
Quote from: Pascuser on October 01, 2012, 02:07:00 PM
You are never happy with what you have. When I say that there is COP, you say it is not shown. When it is shown, you say it is useless.
Richard VIALLE made the U autogenerateur running in a loop with no consumption of input batteries, so YES there is a practical way to generate so much overunity that you can use it to compensate all input energy dissipated in the driver circuit. I yet wrote it many times.
The self running version was delivering constant 10W output power and no depleting batteries for many months.
And YES there is a way to have much more power, like Richard VIALLE showed it accidentally with 10 centimeters of spark on the input.
@Pascuser:
You are making the most extraordinary claims (like Richard Vialle running an apparatus with no power input for months), but you do not show proof.
With all OU-devices it seems to be the same: in the best ones there is some hint (like your measurements), but the real self running machine never materialises.
You should not expect people to believe an OU claim. It goes against all things known so far.
Being angry is not productive.
If some one claims OU, the burden of proof is on him. You can not turn this around. Demanding that people build something does not solve your problem to produce irrefutable proof.
Yes, in the end, you have to be able to install somewhere a working device. In fact, you will have to show many working devices before someone takes this seriously. If you can not do that, you will not be believed.
You are just one person amidst thousands of people since more than a hundred years who claim to have an OU device. You have to see yourself from this perspective. How can anybody know you or Richard Vialle are the real masters who have done the most extraordinary thing in recent history? Just step back for a moment and then you will see, how others see you.
Richard Vialle is doing his thing for decades. Why has no working device materialised? There are understandable problems. But the people here can not solve them for you.
Greetings, Conrad
blabla bla bla.... and bla bla bla...
Showing proof...:(I showed!!!! It just happened that you DON'T EVER read messages, I have made videos to show, but you can't read what iw written, too busy in chatting on the internet)
DOING NOTHING: YOU DO NOTHING!!!!
blabla bla bla....
I can't expect more from somebody only chatting on the net!
"Greetings"
Quote from: Pascuser on August 31, 2012, 07:29:12 AM
Big COP has been measure with equipement I have not. I have no HF wattmeter nor physic test equipement of an official measurement institute.
But with a poor equipement you can have COP>300 or COP>500 as I got.
If you aren't interested of COP>1 process and need COP>10 000 measure to be interested, I can't do nothing.
Loop system has been described but I did not realize it myself beacuse electronic must be designed to have a low loss (because you have 10 watts only outoutting) oscillator+ pre-ampli+ampli and that costs a little. I have done affordable things: using the lab materiel I have.
Big COP have been measured at an official institute. What can be done is to give you the adress where the measurement was done. Do you wait that I buy such equipement for your pleasure? I am not a millionnaire. You can do like me and having hundreds of COp with little investment.
And you can design your own powering electronic device to have a loop if not convinced of your measurements. I have not designed such an electronic. But Richard VIALLE has had sponsors who did it. Their powering electronic is their intellecual property and will not be given; but it is not something weird: normal oscillator+ pre ampli+ ampli. I did not design it because it cots about 1000$ to design it as a self running system. For what? For a loop. But it will not give something more than a loop with 10 watts.
What is more interesting is to have more output power, so the loop will be easy: using output power to power lab material.
Anybody claiming proofs and demanding to have me or anybody buying material to have so can wait eternally. All is given here so everybody can do it himself and measure himself. If one is not satisfied, he can buy himsel material to measure or go to his local physic institute to bring his built replica and have his proof.
I am here to spread what has been made by Richard VIALLE. I made him myself, and one of his friend too. We verified that it worked are our mission on earth is not to satisfy everybody asking to do this or that to have their proof. I present what we get, honnestly; we did it with individual money and time and if you want to be fed with your ideally proof, you can provide yourself; I can't do more.
This is a working forum for people willing to work on project, this is not a drive service "please the proof, with film, reports, and hurry". We give what we have. You want to reproduce or test by yourself: it is great. You want more than we have: you won't have. if you want things like you want, do it yourself! YOU can test, measure and see. schema is affordable to reproduce for somebody with lab material (oscillator, generator , amplificator). If you have so it will cost additional 30$ to design the system, if you don't have, then see those who will do it. I myself could'nt do many things because I have not the material.
Dear Pascuser,
could you please ,like you kindly proposed ,give the address of the institute that made the measurements ?
I want to write them a letter about their test series concerning the device.
Thank you in advance
Quote from: xenomorphlabs on October 02, 2012, 06:13:50 AM
Dear Pascuser,
could you please ,like you kindly proposed ,give the address of the institute that made the measurements ?
I want to write them a letter about their test series concerning the device.
Thank you in advance
Dear xenomorphlabs,
Thank you for a real interest in investigating. I was afraid overunity forums was only full of Trolls having the main occupation in debunking and chatting only; critic with no other foundation than being a Troll willing to discourage anybody to dig in the subjectc (the exact definition of a Troll).
So a serious reaction like yours is pretty interesting. Nobody asked to investigate before, and nobody seems to have seen the videos of experimentations here.
I yet wrote the name of the institute in the french document autogenerateur_1.pdf as you will find it. In french, I understand it to be difficult for you to find.
So I give it again:
"Ecole Polytechnique de Lausanne", in Swiss. it is a high school (university). I don't know the exact name of the service, it was a person working in the department concerning radio waves and sound, physic measurement service, who did it. This was done in 2007 I think. It was organised by Richard VIALLE's sponsors to have a measurement done in a professional environement. I don't know the sponsors name but the Richard VIALLE's name is the key to seek.
You can have something more interesting: doing it at home. I made a video with the COP>1 measurement last sunday, as indicated in a previous post. J-L Naudin published my videos. So you have the exact way to do the measurement by yourself, you can watch the voltage indicators in my video, what I did and how, what I got, and do the same in your home; if you have a PC based oscilloscope or ground decoupled oscillocope. What I did is what was done is Lausanne, Swiss: a measurement with oscilloscope with a metal resistance (no leakage inductance); so the same method.
The videos I yet spread here (only Troll reaction up to now); maybe you will find interest because you really investigate:
http://www.conspirovniscience.com/forum/index.php?showtopic=922&view=findpost&p=23667 (http://www.conspirovniscience.com/forum/index.php?showtopic=922&view=findpost&p=23667)
http://www.conspirovniscience.com/forum/index.php?showtopic=922&view=findpost&p=23672 (http://www.conspirovniscience.com/forum/index.php?showtopic=922&view=findpost&p=23672)
To better understand, you should use google translation to read my experiment report accompagnying the work, because there is no subitle for my videos. You can understand what is in the video with my written comments (with automatic google translation):
http://www.conspirovniscience.com/forum/index.php?showtopic=922 (http://www.conspirovniscience.com/forum/index.php?showtopic=922)
Troll: 1 - Serious searcher: 1 ---> balanced
Other serious people here to change the balance a little more in the good direction?
@Pascuser
I have seen 'Interview - Richard VIALLE: Part 10 & Part 11' where he introduces the U-Shape device powered by an op-amp and this op-amp by a battery and claims negative power would load that battery. These oscillators consume power whether the device connected to them is OU or not.
But if power is floating back to the source, it is eventually enough to power an LC-Tank at the input side; simply feed the C with an initially voltage. When the load is connected to the U-Shape it should run.
@conradelectro : people like naudin and pascuser contribute to the OU-subject . I mean we should give them time to prove it. There are people who canÃ,,t contribute , because of the lack of skills and another mean posters here that destract on purpose. (I am sick of them)
Thank you TheCell
If you are interested in this device and have some measurement material, then investment will be a little only: a copper tube and a wire for windings, so don't hesitate to do it.
I have some last informations concerning the loop device. There was a switcher piloting the amplifier so that negative power from the U autogenerateur recharges the battery powering the whole system.
This is schematic fort switcher and amplifier to control the U:
http://img15.hostingpics.net/pics/279112decoupeurmisenforme.jpg (http://img15.hostingpics.net/pics/279112decoupeurmisenforme.jpg)
http://img15.hostingpics.net/pics/217266amplificateurmiseenforme.jpg (http://img15.hostingpics.net/pics/217266amplificateurmiseenforme.jpg)
Later, transistor 2SC2312 changed specifications and negative power could not come back from the amplifier with this amplifier. Only old 2SC2312 stocks (or 2SC1969) were working. Replacing it with a new one didn't work. The resistor Rce changed and became nearby infinite in new spec and it was the imperfection Rce not infinite that allowed a negative power return in this amlplifier set up.
But MOSFET transistors have this imperfection of Rce not infinite (but much less than 2SC2312 at the time... Rce is great in MOsfet) and you have negative power with it (but much less!!). So use another amplifier with a MOSFET driver to connect to the switcher, unless this won't work. If you have 2SC2312 from before 2007 then the last schematic will work fine!!
Here are tests done with this last schematic (old 2SC2312) but Richard ex-sponsors: output was charging a 12V battery pack while 24V battery pack powering the oscillator + amplifier + switcher was charging too (with negative power return):
http://img15.hostingpics.net/pics/243674charge1miseenforme.jpg (http://img15.hostingpics.net/pics/243674charge1miseenforme.jpg)
http://img15.hostingpics.net/pics/685334charge2miseenforme.jpg (http://img15.hostingpics.net/pics/685334charge2miseenforme.jpg)
Mr. Jean Louis Naudin is showing some very interesting results:
http://jnaudin.free.fr/rvproject/html/ugentest21.htm (http://jnaudin.free.fr/rvproject/html/ugentest21.htm)
It is not easy to generate the 3.6 MHz sinusoidal signal necessary to run the U-shaped generator coil (needs a signal generator and a HF amplifier).
Not counting the cost of generating the input signal, there seems to be more power coming out of the U-shaped contraption than is put in.
Naudin's measurements:
Wattage of the sinusoidal 3.6 MHz signal fed into the U-shaped generator is 4.5 Watt (input).
Current through the lamp is 6.4 Watt (output).
The measurements and the experiment need some impressive array of equipment, because the 3.6 MHz signal has to be carefully tuned and measured (true RMS).
Naudin substracts losses due to the characteristic wave impedance (Wellenwiderstand, Reflexion) of the input coil from the input Wattage, but this detail (0.6 Watt) does not seem to matter too much given the significant difference between input and output.
This becomes interesting, because the set up and the measurements are very carefully done and documented. There also seems to be a lot of room for improvements (size of and material used for the U-shaped generator).
Greetings, Conrad
It gets even better, Mr. Jean Louis Naudin has demonstrated real OU:
http://jnaudin.free.fr/rvproject/html/ugentest22.htm (http://jnaudin.free.fr/rvproject/html/ugentest22.htm)
Input 19 Watt (including the losses in the HF amplifier).
Output 31.2 Watts (over a resistor).
This is the best OU result I have ever seen on any OU forum. And it is well documented. The measurements are done very carefully with professional equipment.
It is hard to see a flaw in this OU experiment. I am a sceptic, but what I see there amazes me.
One does not have to know French to understand the photos, diagrams and numbers on Naudin's web site.
Greetings, Conrad
Same experiment here:
http://www.conspirovniscience.com/forum/index.php?showtopic=922&view=findpost&p=24375 (http://www.conspirovniscience.com/forum/index.php?showtopic=922&view=findpost&p=24375)
The amplifier used is the same used by Richard VIALLE when the looped circuit was performed (self powering device, recharging battery used to power the device while outputting 10 watts constantly during months). This amplifier was not working anymore since early 2008 because the transistor burnt in an accident, Richard VIALLE could not have negative power again with new 2SC2312 Mitsubishi (as said) transistor bought new, because transistor 2SC2312 were changed... he thought!
But latest informations given to us allowed a new departure: Mitsubishi 2SC2312 were falsificated by Chineese (fake ones) and so we could determine with pictures of fake that Richard bought fake ones... so it could be the explanation why the amplifier was no more working. J-L naudin and me wo ordered new GUENINE transistors, and he first obtained a new working negative power system operational, and me too.
Without this amplifier we had real overunity, but not enough to compensate amplifier losses (all measurements made up to now). With these transistors we have a negative power, compensating amplifier losses and a complete overunity system. So there is no more trouble to make a new loop now. These transistors are the key: 2SC2312 and 2SC1969.
Woww!!
Very well done Pascal and JLN
magnifique resultat bravo à vous et à Richard Vialle
Following your work and immense motivation to replicate.
Good luck at all
Laurent
Quote from: Pascuser on October 24, 2012, 07:08:58 PM
These transistors are the key: 2SC2312 and 2SC1969.
@Pascuser:
Where did you buy the transistors 2SC2312 and 2SC1969? I could not find them at Farnell.
There is the transistor 2SC3263 (VCBO VCEO 230 V, IC 15A, 60 MHz, audio and general purpose), which costs EUR 3,72 at Farnell?
http://at.farnell.com/allegro-sanken/2sc3263/transistor-npn-to-3p/dp/1192129 (http://at.farnell.com/allegro-sanken/2sc3263/transistor-npn-to-3p/dp/1192129)
I see that you used 7,2 MHz and 5,8 MHz in your replication. When using different frequencies, should not be there a different capacitor in parallel to the resistor? (Mr. Naudin uses C4 = 27pF in http://jnaudin.free.fr/rvproject/html/ugentest22.htm (http://jnaudin.free.fr/rvproject/html/ugentest22.htm))
In the last photo of http://jnaudin.free.fr/rvproject/html/ugentest21.htm (http://jnaudin.free.fr/rvproject/html/ugentest21.htm), Mr. Naudin also uses a capacitor (470pf + 500 pF variable) in parallel to the drive coil?
What is your opinion on the frequency (3.6 MHz, 7.2 MHz, 5.8 MHz) and the parallel capacitors (over the drive coil, and over the output resistor)? Your and Mr. Naudin's experience would be very valuable for future replicators. Are these capacitirs essential or can one compensate by changing the frequency?
I am very excited about your and Mr. Naudin's tests, this is what I was hoping for. Good documentation and good measurements.
Greetings, Conrad
There was an error in component specifications. Ceramic resistor used to measure output power was said non inductive by the vendor, but after a verification this afternoon (measurement with oscilloscope with the help of a real non inductive resistor) it WAS inductive.
So output power calculations are not good. I should have tested it before the experiment; I did it this afternoon. So the step is not yet passed. We stay on COP measurement (overunity output VS U input) with not yet the ability to compensate the powering system. (not yet overunity output VS U input + amplifier powering losses)
Here messages about it:
http://www.conspirovniscience.com/forum/index.php?showtopic=922&view=findpost&p=24401 (http://www.conspirovniscience.com/forum/index.php?showtopic=922&view=findpost&p=24401)
http://www.conspirovniscience.com/forum/index.php?showtopic=922&view=findpost&p=24408 (http://www.conspirovniscience.com/forum/index.php?showtopic=922&view=findpost&p=24408)
So step will continue in what Richard VIALLE did (he never succeded in doing what we claimed with the ceramic, but succeded in overunity with negative power, it is the following step to have a loop); as engaged since 10 days.
Regards
OK
Thanks Pascuser for your honesty and quick rectification
so i am always very motivated to step in
so my begin in replication
hope this will encourage some of you to join the replication
good luck at all
Laurent
Quote from: woopy on October 26, 2012, 06:52:43 PM
OK
Thanks Pascuser for your honesty and quick rectification
so i am always very motivated to step in
so my begin in replication
hope this will encourage some of you to join the replication
good luck at all
Laurent
Thank you for your comments.
Yes, at least the first replication device in this topic! As with null number of replication up to now, I thought before fench men were the only one able to bend a copper tube :D
So you will be able to do your own measurement and tests, and this is valuable as to do your own measurements. You will be able to make you own COP overunity measurement.
I don't understand why other people here with electronic equipment did not do such measurement at home, to see that with no trick at all we have more output power from the autogenerateur than consumed on his input... the one with an oscilloscope and function generator, two metal resistors and a copper tube with winding can do it and test everything.
From the starting of this topic I was here to have people doing the same and stating themselves, instead of being suspicious and only argue with words in their mouth as only tool. Because the device itself is so easy to do: a copper tube, you bent it, you wind. And no more.
Function generator with no amplifier is enough for all first tests, to demonstrate overunity. Oscillocope to do mthe measurement. I fist thought tahn on overunity forums there would be people with a function generator and an ocilloscope, maybe not everybody; but a lot; so what remains (a copper tube) is so easy ... that a testing was the first thing to do; and why I went here.
You are the first one willing not only to speak and watch, but doing! This is valuable. Why others did not do the same I can't understand.
Glad to see your beginning. I will help you with advices if you need.
Quote from: woopy on October 26, 2012, 06:52:43 PM
OK
Thanks Pascuser for your honesty and quick rectification
so i am always very motivated to step in
so my begin in replication
hope this will encourage some of you to join the replication
good luck at all
Laurent
Hi Woopy, or Anyone,
May I ask you why this thread came to a sudden end back in Oct.2012 as it looked kind of promising with even JLN showing some good documented results.
Can you shed some light on the demise of this thread??
I know that most of the info was coming to us from a French forum and I may have lost the answer in some of the back and forth translations there.--so, just curious to know what happened to it though.
Thanking you in advance,
Paul
These topics are hot topics with research and new interesting developments on the french forum with french men.
As nobody never showed interest here except woopy I never went here to give more in english. I never ended translations since nobody was interested with it. I only read attacks here, except woopy working on it. The stime spent to make subtitles for the interview showing the whole work of Richard VIALLE never gave any return; so all the work is english was only equal to zero return, so I adde zero work. An experimental work was much more interesting than speaking in a space with only echos answering.
We succeded (I say we, but it is not me because, it is another person, there are many researchers on this subject) in having back energy on the input with an amplifying aspect, usable.
The U generator has been proved many times overunity; I did it many times, JLN did it many times and measured it by other kind of apparatus; and three other person measured many times and published it, all on the french forum. An official website centralises these resultats (in french!). As nobody showed interest in english speaking world, we did not make any other efforts.
The system can have an enormous COP, 2 or 100 or 1000 or 10000 or infinity if you want. But this is something not understood here; although I explained it many times: yes there is huge COP; and people don't believe it. Because they DON'T read what I wrote and only explained what is in their mind in a cycling way; they thing that it should work as in their mind.
As I explained it, the system has a COP up to infinity, but not because output grows, but because input diminushes. For example you have 100mW output with 80mW input. If you set up the device more correctly, you will have 100mW output for 20mW input and with fine tuning you can have 100mW output for 0,5mW input; and fore some other tuning you can have 100mW output with -20mW input (yes the input doesn' consume but delivers power while output delivers power too!). But you only have 100mW.
People not reading say "you are a liar with a 1 000 000 COP, you would use it to power your house". They say that because they DON'T read anything and only speak in an empty space. You CAN'T power anything because your 1 000 000 COP does mean that you still have 100mW output for only 0.0001 mW input. Only the input is reduced, the output doesn't vary. You can have negative input, so it is free, but small output only, constant (in fact varying with input, but not in orders of the input, so you can have 80mW of output power if input is 0.5mW and 100mW of output power if input is 20mW. Lets say to simplify that output powers is the same because it varies not much; but input varies very very much).
But with 100mW, you don't power anything. What was the way of research has always been to grow up output power. We could have some watts; only about 5Watts to 7Watts, no more with a little COP only COP=2 for this greater output power.
The inventor was seeking to have a usable power not on the output, but on the input;, since with negative power on the input you can't define what is COP. The COP grows because the device delivers its overunity power as a substraction on the input, and not as an addition to the input. It is why you can reduce input to zero (COP= infinity) and even input negatice (COP not defined). So he worked this way and there have been results.
I know that someone on the french forum wants to spread again informations on the net in english about this work; and I gave the advice NOT to spend time going on overunity since it was a lost time, nobody working on it. People want to have time on fake researches with attractinbg promises. The U generator has nothing to attract with giant promises, but it has showed a clear overunity. Only this aspect is thr biggest, scientific and published measurement showing the reality of overunity clearly. But we don't announce kilowatts of output like many others, and nobody takes times to understand that a COP=1 000 000 anouncement is not fake because the don't understand the basic way it is true and only imagine "let us inject 10watts input, we have 10 000 000 watts output, this is not reasonnable and you lie". Yes this is not reasonnable because IT IS NOT with this conditions it works; you don't decide inputs, it is not a multiplier machine. I never said that you have 10 000 000W output, but when people imagine and you say it is not that way, they only go elsewhere and say tyou are a liar. This has been what I saw on overunity, so not spending more time for this kind of person.
Another thing: the electronic artillery you have to use to inject the input power is actually huge (because of function generator and voltage amplifier with big losses, classic electronic devices). So when you want to inject let's say 20mW of input power you will spend maybe 10Watts for this electronic; and you will get output power 100mW. So the device is clearly overunity COP=100mW/20mW=5 and this is a physic anomaly. But as you had to spend 10watts to have a net gain of 100mW-20mW=80mW you have nothing usable if you look at the whole chain going from batteries to power the whole electronic to the output. Since 80mW=10W=0.08/10=0.008 you have nothing gained! So I I said, we don't offer the moon. We offer real overunity, output VS input. But the way it works did not allow anything more.
It is why the inventor made some other tries. In fact with some tunings there has been possible to power a 10watts lamp with no battery consuling (batteries powering the whole chain recharging!); but this has been done in old work with sponsors of the inventor not wanting to share. I replicated it my best and two times I could have a no battery depletion with output of somes watts during more than one hour. But I could do it only two times.
So I said that the inventor tried other ways to have usable power and there has been more success like this. The detail I won't explian here because english is not my native language.
So if you are interested to read more about it, and in english, you can wait that the forum member makes translations and spreads it, but don't even think to find it on overunity: I told him not to lose time going here.
Sorry for this bad english, since french men understand better english than they write it.
Thanks for your interest.
I don't find useful information about the U... what is important about it? The length? The number of turns? the gauge of the outer wire? Is the copper U driven or is the coil on it driven? is there a design criteria? I tried to go through the french forum but just saw testing information not construction information
All replication notes are indicated in the posts at the beginning here:
http://www.overunity.com/12639/richard-vialles-new-theory-about-negative-mass-and-overunity/msg337174/#msg337174 (http://www.overunity.com/12639/richard-vialles-new-theory-about-negative-mass-and-overunity/msg337174/#msg337174)
http://www.overunity.com/12639/richard-vialles-new-theory-about-negative-mass-and-overunity/msg337176/#msg337176 (http://www.overunity.com/12639/richard-vialles-new-theory-about-negative-mass-and-overunity/msg337176/#msg337176)
I had beginned a translation, never achieved because of no interest in english world.
Here is the unfinished translation of the document concrning the 1st generation of autogenerateur:
http://zedico.info/Extraits_Publics/Pascuser/selfgenerator_1.pdf (http://zedico.info/Extraits_Publics/Pascuser/selfgenerator_1.pdf)
Quote from: Pascuser on January 16, 2014, 05:47:40 PM
All replication notes are indicated in the posts at the beginning here:
http://www.overunity.com/12639/richard-vialles-new-theory-about-negative-mass-and-overunity/msg337174/#msg337174 (http://www.overunity.com/12639/richard-vialles-new-theory-about-negative-mass-and-overunity/msg337174/#msg337174)
http://www.overunity.com/12639/richard-vialles-new-theory-about-negative-mass-and-overunity/msg337176/#msg337176 (http://www.overunity.com/12639/richard-vialles-new-theory-about-negative-mass-and-overunity/msg337176/#msg337176)
I had beginned a translation, never achieved because of no interest in english world.
Here is the unfinished translation of the document concrning the 1st generation of autogenerateur:
http://zedico.info/Extraits_Publics/Pascuser/selfgenerator_1.pdf (http://zedico.info/Extraits_Publics/Pascuser/selfgenerator_1.pdf)
Hi Pascuser,
Thanx so much for getting back to us on this thread. I can understand your concerns about the English speaking experimenters not jumping on this sooner.
As d3x0r says there seemed to be a lot of information about building this, was missing for us --but I attribute this to the lack of understanding the French texts and translations etc.
There is another member "Khwartz" was getting on to this (on the Dally thread today)and I believe he is bi lingual (English/French). He and maybe "Woopy" may be able to help you out in some of the translations for us -in helping us build and test this apparatus.
Looking forward to hearing from all of you.
Paul
Quote from: PARAV on January 16, 2014, 06:20:06 PM
Hi Pascuser,
Thanx so much for getting back to us on this thread. I can understand your concerns about the English speaking experimenters not jumping on this sooner.
As d3x0r says there seemed to be a lot of information about building this, was missing for us --but I attribute this to the lack of understanding the French texts and translations etc.
There is another member "Khwartz" was getting on to this (on the Dally thread today)and I believe he is bi lingual (English/French). He and maybe "Woopy" may be able to help you out in some of the translations for us -in helping us build and test this apparatus.
Looking forward to hearing from all of you.
Paul
@pacuser
Yes and thanks for kindly resharing the links :)
@else
uhmm ya; tesla hairpin circuit? With a closed shunt?
Edit; apparently not all incarnations are bent.
I have a coil that is 1000 turns of probably 24Gauge magnet wire... I should be able to put my signal generator across that and stuff some wires in the end and use the air core... so a length of electrical cord with all conductors shorted as the short, and a resistor across another connection....
at certain frequencies I can get a opposed differential on both ends... I attached a scope 2 probes also one to each end, and shorted their common to the signal generator ground; but it was very low voltage...
I maybe need to find low voltage lights
Quote from: Khwartz on January 16, 2014, 09:37:26 AM
Hi all! Sorry for silence (well, I suppose few would say "don't be sorry, Khwartz, we were so very pleased you go else where a little time ;) ), but the spreading of the results and basic theory of Richard Vialle's autogénérateur need some agreement, organisation and time for translation.
I was about to find something really relevant to show you first and for me nothing is more relevant than a curve of COP well calculated with checking of all peers. So here are some praphics which should speak by themselves:
@ Pascuser. And all.
Dear Pascal, I very understand you no more wanted to hear about this Web site and its community because of the huge amont of time you should have spent in your try here to spread Richard's work and try to get some help here.
Nevertheless, I would like to support or work in France by posting here the current results and trying to answer the questions which would be asked here (even I am not a specialist of! You and others in the forum of Conspirovniscience are infinitly more about the Richard's Autogen), to encourage the study of the "RA" and try to get the breaking of the problems of the amplification and frequency generator consuption, and the problem of low output.
Above is the original post in the "Kapanadze daily free..." thread in OU.com I had made a call for help.
No, I am not bilangua and I am very slow to type cause often on a mobile and it is huge work to try this because I am always running out of time thanks to my professional obligations :/
I just will try my best but please be patient for any answer and new posts. And of course, if the interest is maintained, any other help would be welcome to answer the questions (as I am not a specialist of the question myself I would rather prefer to focus only on spreading the French results and documents written by others than me, that I could try to translate).
Quote from: Khwartz on January 16, 2014, 10:26:42 AM
Here the link the the page of the discussion:
http://www.conspirovniscience.com/forum/index.php?showtopic=941&st=210&#entry31959 (http://www.conspirovniscience.com/forum/index.php?showtopic=941&st=210&#entry31959)
Here is the translation of one of the comments of Colas07 who made these measurements, largely confirmed by other experimenters and still rather closed to the predictions of Richard Vialle's theory:
Expert(e) [expert]
******
Groupe[group]: Membres[Members]
Messages[number of posts published]: 383
Membre n°[Member number]: 10156
Inscrit le[date of subscription]: 30/08/2012
I feed a 12V 5W light bulb
It consumnes 0.75W while the "U" [the "core" of Richard's autogen which has a U shape] only consumes 0.02W
COP = Pout / Pin = 0.7 / 0.02 = 35 but yes! A completly crazy thing!
I have done several times again the measurements in the same conditions and always the same!
I have taken my probe and a 50mA caliber multimeter at 330Khz directly on a light bulb and both give the same values....probe = OK!
I don't know why I am at 4.807Mhz and not at 3.6Mhz...it differs from Richard's predictions.
for the moment I don't see any error.... it is time to go on the next step.
---
Note from the translator: The theoretical power of a Richard's Autogen with a "U" of 1 m is 6 kW, which is in agreement with the several "burning circuits incidents" now registred while encounter this kind of power.
A call is made presently for help for reducing the consuption of the electronic stages.
Indeed, if we obtain even infinite COP in real while making the ratio output under input of the "U", as predicted by Richard's theory, we are hardly going up to 1.8 of COP, or just stay underunity, while making the ratio output of the U under input of the electronics which feeds the U. So we would much appreciate help from you guys if you are skill in these matter to reduce consumption in the electronic stage.
Cheers.
For this document, about the replication bby Pascuser, if at least 1 member here would be interested I complete the translation, so I will try to do; just please tell me.
http://api.viglink.com/api/click?format=go&key=0de1c882bae3a5d7344e394b19608218&loc=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.overunity.com%2F12639%2Frichard-vialles-new-theory-about-negative-mass-and-overunity%2Fnew%2F%23new&v=1&libId=e93cd949-7f40-49b0-8843-e331689ca53f&out=http%3A%2F%2Fzedico.info%2FExtraits_Publics%2FPascuser%2Fselfgenerator_1.pdf&ref=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.overunity.com%2F12639%2Frichard-vialles-new-theory-about-negative-mass-and-overunity%2F45%2Fpost%2Flast_msg%2F383453%2F&title=Richard%20VIALLE's%20new%20theory%20about%20negative%20mass%20and%20overunity&txt=http%3A%2F%2Fzedico.info%2FExtraits_Publics%2FPascuser%2Fselfgenerator_1.pdf&jsonp=vglnk_jsonp_138995888185412
Cheers.
Quote from: Khwartz on January 17, 2014, 06:45:36 AM
For this document, about the replication bby Pascuser, if at least 1 member here would be interested I complete the translation, so I will try to do; just please tell me.
http://api.viglink.com/api/click?format=go&key=0de1c882bae3a5d7344e394b19608218&loc=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.overunity.com%2F12639%2Frichard-vialles-new-theory-about-negative-mass-and-overunity%2Fnew%2F%23new&v=1&libId=e93cd949-7f40-49b0-8843-e331689ca53f&out=http%3A%2F%2Fzedico.info%2FExtraits_Publics%2FPascuser%2Fselfgenerator_1.pdf&ref=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.overunity.com%2F12639%2Frichard-vialles-new-theory-about-negative-mass-and-overunity%2F45%2Fpost%2Flast_msg%2F383453%2F&title=Richard%20VIALLE's%20new%20theory%20about%20negative%20mass%20and%20overunity&txt=http%3A%2F%2Fzedico.info%2FExtraits_Publics%2FPascuser%2Fselfgenerator_1.pdf&jsonp=vglnk_jsonp_138995888185412
Cheers.
Hello Khwartz,
Thanx for coming to this thread.
I have been studying the Richard Vialle concept from some of the info "Pascuser" has provided and have been grabbing bits and bites from JLN and the French forums as well and find that there is something definitely promising about this system.
I would definitely like to pursue this further. Hoping you and "Pascuser" and others can help with the translations and building instructions.
I'm sure other members will join in once they see some real positive information on this "Vialle" experiment.
Regards,---
Paul
Dear Paul. I am very glad you confirme your interest. Yes, I do share with you the opinion there is "something definitely promising about this system". Been years I follow the free energy quest and looks to me it is the best candidate until now for something real, and the most seriously studied system up to now. I mean the figures announced are far to be just a jock!
As I have understood the main problem was nobody has replicated in real time in the thread the device, giving the results day after day with the specifications of its built. Woppy disapeard but (in fact he chosed to continue on the French forum), I think that has been taken as if he has abandonned the try by disappointement.
So, despite I am not supposed to have the time, the organisation and test for, I will try to do it, to replicate and publish here. It has proven its u.o. and it was my sine ne qua non condition for any replication. But I insist: I have no test and no skill for electronics!
Any way, from your own viewpoint, which document or material you would like I translate in priority to publish ot here?
Quote from: Khwartz on January 18, 2014, 02:58:39 AM
Dear Paul. I am very glad you confirme your interest. Yes, I do share with you the opinion there is "something definitely promising about this system". Been years I follow the free energy quest and looks to me it is the best candidate until now for something real, and the most seriously studied system up to now. I mean the figures announced are far to be just a jock!
As I have understood the main problem was nobody has replicated in real time in the thread the device, giving the results day after day with the specifications of its built. Woppy disapeard but (in fact he chosed to continue on the French forum), I think that has been taken as if he has abandonned the try by disappointement.
So, despite I am not supposed to have the time, the organisation and test for, I will try to do it, to replicate and publish here. It has proven its u.o. and it was my sine ne qua non condition for any replication. But I insist: I have no test and no skill for electronics!
Any way, from your own viewpoint, which document or material you would like I translate in priority to publish ot here?
Hi Khwartz,
Thanx again for the come back.
I also have not much in the form of good test equipment on hand but have been working silently on many projects here at OU and the Energetic forum for the past 10 years.
I do have a pile of failed experiments littering my junk box to show for.
However, I have had a few successes with Joule Thieves ,Battery chargers, some Dr Stiffler experiments and a host of 1.5 volt inverter type circuits from "XEE". --I am now working with the Mazilli oscillator on "Geo's" RMG" at the moment as well.--Waiting for parts.
Anyway, to get back on the Richard Vialle project.--I would very much like you to translate and send the latest schematics and or parts lists if you can ,or any other pertinent test data the French guys have thus far achieved in the past couple of months or so. It does appear that it is fairly simple to build -in terms of the no. of parts and off the shelf components etc.
Hopefully then , some of the more experienced members with good quality test equipment can chime in and have a go at this too.
Regards, Paul
Hi Khwartz,
As requested by PARAV, please post the latest schematics and necessary information to enable me to attempt a replication.
Hi Hoppy and Paul.
Thanks for your interest in replicating and data for try to break the outpower and global COP problem of the Richard's autogenerator.
I will try to translate what you asked me and publish it here, but please be patient if sometime I take time to do so :/
Regards too, Didier.
PS: The experimenters in France are no more working on proving that the RAG is o.u. on the U shape (the U shape is not necessary,it is just more practical to have this shape on the bench than a 1 m long straight bar) between the output of the bar and the input of the coil wound around the bar, they work since 1 year on finding more accurately the exact tuning frequencies of the bar to recreate, at will, the huge picks of power registered last year. The problem of the amplification stage consumption gives hard time while global overunity COP looks having been achieved only in the laboratory of the original sponsor in Switzerland. High professional skills in electronics are very missing to reproduce the global overunity :/
Hi Khwartz ,
I'm new at this forum, english is not my native language but I can read and write.
I know the basics of electronics , electromagnetism , physics and mathematics ( I have completed 50% of electronic engineering at university) so I'm very interested in this device .
Please continue the job of the translation!!
regards!
Hi!
Having gone through materials the guys of the French forum Conspirovniscience proposed me to translate to answer to your demands here, I have already posted there a whole set of specifications for direct replication, and I am waiting now the checking and possible corrections and additional advises of the other members there before to translate and publish here.
You may wait few days, sorry for making you wait.
My own replication should follow in the next weeks too, as soon I will have the materials and équipements.
Note: While studying the materials I realise how far my citizenmates are advanced and how precised are their experiments, in adittion of having their well positive and fully disclosed results. Only one example: it has been successfully realised the continuous charge of 2 batteries alternatively AND delivering in the same time power to the load! Even if it has been made in a lobaratory of electronics and can be hardly reproduce by lack of skills in electronics, it amazes me to see how far these guys are while having had no support at the international, while so many people of very good will indeed, invest their time in far less advanced results and non completly disclosed, opensource material of fasly "humanitarian" inventors who never disclose "the main trick" (if it is not fake of course!).
I really which some of you, like you Hoppy, having good skills in electronics and serious both background and methodology, to run this thing and find the solution to reproduce what has been successfully done in laboratory and going further in the results of this well documented true o.u. phenomenon.
Regards,
Didier.
Quote from: verpies on January 21, 2014, 07:48:11 PM
QuoteDidn't JLN Naudin show the Vialle circuit anomaly is caused by ?:
- capacitive coupling,
- bad power measurements due to inductive resistors and multiplying average AC Volts by average AC Amps which almost never equal average power.
P.S.
The concept of RMS Power makes no sense to me.
For a sine wave, RMS Voltage * RMS Current * cos(phi) = Average Power.
Why would somebody be interested in RMS Power ?
Hi Verpies.
Thanks for the note.
I know Jean-Louis has worked on it but I have not yet go through all his materials about Richard's autogen.
For RMS Amps by RMS Voltage, well, isn't it give only APPARENT POWER?
Well, as I have seen it, the experimenters of the forum of Conspirovniscience are little clever than this and I can ensure you they know the difference with REAL POWER, know how to use oscilloscopes and probes, and calculate or read a power factor.
There is a thread I have started to use to update all data and results in English, would you be agree to post your next welcome objections when based on facts [or physics], like you have just done. It will help me much to clear all them so that anybody could profit.
I will copy-paste this one too.
Regards
So, no answer? Dear Verpies ;)
BTW, I went through a whole set of test of JNL on the Richard's autogenerator, he wrote at the end of more than ten of each either:
"Bonne construction et bonnes expériences avec cet autogénérateur en U de Richard Vialle."
-> "Good construction and good experience with this Richard Vialle's U shape autogenerator"
"Cette expérience tend à confirmer une fois de plus la théorie et l'expérience de Richard Vialle..."
-> "This experience tends to confirm once again Richard Vialle's theory and experience..."
So, JNL non conclusive on his tests on the Richard Vialle's autogenerator?!
Others excerpts:
"Nous avons précédement mesuré que la fréquence optimale de fonctionnement (lampe de charge allumée au maximum) du générateur en U de Richard Vialle est de 3.6 MHz et ce, en parfaite conformité avec son calcul théorique."
-> "We have previously measured that the optimal functioning frequency (the light bulb load lighted at maximum) of the Richard Vialle's U shaped autogenerator is 3.6 MHz and this, in perfect conformity with the theoretical calculations"
"Plus de puissance (10W) en sortie et - 4 w de puissance négative à l'entrée vec l'Autogénérateur en U"
-> "More outpower (10W) and - 4 W of negative input power with the U shape Autogenerator."
"La puissance en sortie de l'autogénérateur en U est bien là, c'est indéniable, la lampe de 10 W éclaire au maximum."
-> The power at the output of the U shape autogenerator is indeed here, it is undubitable, the light bulb glows at maximum."
Note:
These results are no more representative of the results obtained since JNL have made these experiments and tests. From only drop of power consumption under load, but true indeed in agreement with the theory, we are now on clear o.u. registring on the U shape (more power out of the 2 halves of the tube than the power feed in the coil), and less obvious and much harder to realise: making the circuit feeding the grid itself too! So TWO sources of power in the same time! I know, hard to believe but sure you may prove it for yourself; but needs skills in electronics I even do not have myself. I KNOW HERE SOME OF YOU GUYS HAVE THE NEEDED SKILLS, so I count on you to "break" it for yourself.
I went true lot of materials. Many Frenches has indeed already and successfully replicated the overunity of the U shape, you may try with me when I will post my own replication or you can start before while I will provide the specifications for the replication, of the basic already well mastered experiment. Then, or in parallel, I wish to provide "the state of the art" on the Richard Vialle's Autogen, with the discovered "avalanche phenomenon" and possible kW of power.
Regards.
Disclaims: "I take no responsibility for any mistranslation and let the owner of any copyright to ask for any correction. Any excerpt is for informative and non profit educational purposes."
Could someone could explain, how one can get more REAL REFLECT POWER (as registered by a professional HV DIRECT AND REFLECTIVE POWER meter), than the REAL POWER injected in a supposed PASSIVE dipole like a copper pipe wound with a coil? (To be more precise: two halves of copper pipe):
http://www.conspirovniscience.com/forum/index.php?showtopic=1476 (http://www.conspirovniscience.com/forum/index.php?showtopic=1476)
Even if you don't understand the words pictures, schematics and video, they should show you something, paticularly at the end of the vid in this page, of one of the basic experiment one can do.
Regards.
@Pascuser
Dear Pascal, if you come around, I would like to inform you that since yesterday I am no more able to post nor to send any PM in our forum in Conspirovniscience.com.
I have tried to unlog and inlog but couldn't inlog back, the page saying I had not the right secret code (for sure I had indeed).
I have asked for a new code but didn't receive anything, could you do something about? I would like to thanks you all for your last answers but still would appreciate if you could, all you guys, check and complete my list of items of specifics for replication, the one at the time "Lundi 20 Janvier 2014 à 15h35" [Monday 20th January, 3:35 pm], so that I could translate and publish it here to give the data for a "state of the art" replication here.
@Woppy
You had started to replicate in English, so I know you have some skills in English: wouldn't be a nice idea if you could complete the publication of your replication here? You have already all the materials for, I suppose, like pics and schematics ;)
Regards.
Hi Folks,
I've just found this thread. Never heard of Richard Vialle before...
Has anyone proposed a mechanism / a principle of operation for the aUto-Generator? It's an interesting design...
I.e. how does the magnetic field cause the electrostatic effect? Is it simply the 'left-hand-rule'? Are the 2 halves of the U acting as halves of a dipole antenna?
I'm interested in finding out more about the 'Pigtail' device. From what I can tell - it has gravity modifying properties, and that's something i'd like to work more on...
Can anyone elaborate on the pigtail device? Pascal has this page, but it's not very easy to follow in Google Translate:
http://jnaudin.free.fr/rvproject/html/pascuser_rep4.htm
I notice that his resonance is at 155Mhz - which would be far too high for my test equipment. I would have to make a much bigger coil...
I wonder - is it possible / worthwhile - making a 3-layer pigtail coil...? (I have a theory about higher dimensions & spirals...)
i.e, something like this:
- Layer 1 - magnet wire wound on 16Amp house cable
- Layer 2 - result of above wound on 16Amp house cable
- Layer 3 - result of above wound on copper/plastic pipe
:)
Regards, Tim
Hi tim123! Welcome on this thread to present the "how to do" of Richard's AutoGen.
The to halves are here to avoid what we call "hot current".
The "hot current", for Richard, is let's say "the ordinary current", the one we are used to use and think with.
It is said "hot" in opposition of "cold current".
The "hot current" is mostly known as a displacement of electrons from a nucleus to an other and called "free electrons", while the "cold current" is presented as the result of change of shape of the electron cloud around the nucleus.
Richard has calculated a frequency where we should couple with a frequency particular to the electron.
While we push this frequency by an outside excitation, we are supposed to increase the diameter of the electronic cloud by an increase of the amplitude of the waves made by the electrons around the nucleus. (The more than ten steps of test of JNL are said to verify the theory, as the power obtained out of the U shape.)
This alternative movement roughly similar to a "hot" alternative (so the ordinary one), EXCEPT IT DOES NOT PRODUCE ANY JOULE EFFET, so not generating any lose, BECAUSE OF NO REEL DISPLACEMENT OF CHARGES, only a 3D deformation of the electronic cloud. (I will translate more precisely later the exact words of Richard).
To be honest in respecting the spirit of the work done in my country, I have to say that Richard does not claim having understood everything perfectly. But the fact is that he has produced a theory with which he was able to create experiences which demonstrate the workability apparently both in antigravity and in overunity, and in this both domains it has been been documented antigravity and overunity phenomenons.
Any way, if we are aware that the theory needs to be improved so that we can exactly predict what is going on, we do have a theory which looks able to predict and produce that kind of phenomenons. It is the job of the experimenters now to go further in the observation so that this same theory could be refined.
For antigravity properpies, as I know and until now, none are associated with the RAG, only the "Pigtail" device, that I am not a specialist.
If we break the way to RE-produce the global overunity of the RAG, I will probably translate few materials on the Pigtail device. But here, at the PROMTECNO association (means association for promotion of new and forgotten technology - PROMotion des TEChnologies Nouvelles et Oubliées) we have taken the rule to focus on 1 main project called "project 0", the one we have estimated the most promising of all apparatus in the free energy realm. So I will try to follow the same path here and encourage others to do the same.
Have I answered to your questions, dear tim123?
Thank you Khwartz. You've given me something to work with. I'll read some more... :)
Just jumped in here so I'm not sure if this was completed yet but I decided to at least try to translate the rest of that document. This is the original one Pascuser put up and I believe Khwartz translated the first 5 pages. This is just a rough translation of the text without pictures or diagrams and no translation of the handwritten pages (last 2). But it at least gives a rough translation of the next 12 pages or so. This was done with Google translate:
Quote from: tim123 on January 23, 2014, 01:45:05 PM
Hi Folks,
I've just found this thread. Never heard of Richard Vialle before...
Has anyone proposed a mechanism / a principle of operation for the aUto-Generator? It's an interesting design...
I.e. how does the magnetic field cause the electrostatic effect? Is it simply the 'left-hand-rule'? Are the 2 halves of the U acting as halves of a dipole antenna?
I'm interested in finding out more about the 'Pigtail' device. From what I can tell - it has gravity modifying properties, and that's something i'd like to work more on...
Can anyone elaborate on the pigtail device? Pascal has this page, but it's not very easy to follow in Google Translate:
http://jnaudin.free.fr/rvproject/html/pascuser_rep4.htm (http://jnaudin.free.fr/rvproject/html/pascuser_rep4.htm)
I notice that his resonance is at 155Mhz - which would be far too high for my test equipment. I would have to make a much bigger coil...
I wonder - is it possible / worthwhile - making a 3-layer pigtail coil...? (I have a theory about higher dimensions & spirals...)
i.e, something like this:
- Layer 1 - magnet wire wound on 16Amp house cable
- Layer 2 - result of above wound on 16Amp house cable
- Layer 3 - result of above wound on copper/plastic pipe
:)
Regards, Tim
Were you using Google Chrome to translate that page ? or just copying it to Google translate page with another browser? I find Google Chrome works best for doing translations of actual web pages. Also I noticed the Baofeng UV-5R radio which if you are not familiar with is a Chinese made radio of excellent quality made somewhat for Ham Radio but they are great scanners and also can transmit outside the normal U.S. Ham bands (and yes they can do 151 or 155 MHz easily). All this in a radio that can be had for around $40 (sometimes less) in U.S. dollars. A few years back a radio with the capabilities of this one would have set you back $300 to $400.
Quote from: e2matrix on January 23, 2014, 11:44:11 PM
Were you using Google Chrome to translate that page ? or just copying it to Google translate page with another browser? I find Google Chrome works best for doing translations of actual web pages. Also I noticed the Baofeng UV-5R radio which if you are not familiar with is a Chinese made radio of excellent quality made somewhat for Ham Radio but they are great scanners and also can transmit outside the normal U.S. Ham bands (and yes they can do 151 or 155 MHz easily). All this in a radio that can be had for around $40 (sometimes less) in U.S. dollars. A few years back a radio with the capabilities of this one would have set you back $300 to $400.
Hi E2M :)
Chrome... I've just downloaded the PDF the page refers to - it's in French, but I can sort of get it.
That's a good tip about the radio - it's a bargain! Thanks. My oscilloscope only does up to 60Mhz though.
It seems that to add layers would be an obvious route for experimentation...? (Although wrapping the wire would be a bit of pain)
@e2matrix
Thanks for the rough translation from Google.
We could think indeed I would have translate the first pages of Pascal's first part report on the RAG but nope, it is Pascal himself while he started this thread. But he abandoned the project while not succeeding to get enough interest from the Community here to generate direct replications (Woppy is French tongue, as I can know...).
I could complete the translation of the two parts of this document but it is very technical indeed and for now I would prefer to focus on the simplest principles and very basics, directly applicable stuff for replication and improvement of the electronics.
I insist: For the Community in France, the system has already been proven working, so no need for now for unusual ideas but all at the opposite: to go further in the way already taken and known having already worked. What is needed is mostly a better electronics, an electronic of the level the engineer in electronics had worked out and obtaineed perpetual charging batteries at the input (!) in addition of a load at the output.
Regards.
@All you guys of Conspirovniscience.com
Please, if you see any error in what I report here or you can complete, feel free to do so! :)
Bien amicalement, Didier.
Quote from: Khwartz on January 24, 2014, 06:08:32 AM
...the system has already been proven working...
Hi Khwartz,
So the Pigtail is an autogenerator *and* it shows gravity effects too...
Can you give an outline of the most impressive results so far - i.e. what should an experimenter be aiming to replicate?
Is there a circuit diagram available for the reportedly OU version?
Thanks :)
Quote from: tim123 on January 24, 2014, 06:36:32 AM
Hi Khwartz,
So the Pigtail is an autogenerator *and* it shows gravity effects too...
Can you give an outline of the most impressive results so far - i.e. what should an experimenter be aiming to replicate?
Is there a circuit diagram available for the reportedly OU version?
Thanks :)
some informations here
http://jnaudin.free.fr/rvproject/index.htm
http://www.magnetosynergie.com/forum/viewtopic.php?f=64&t=1475
@Woppy
You had started to replicate in English, so I know you have some skills in English: wouldn't be a nice idea if you could complete the publication of your replication here? You have already all the materials for, I suppose, like pics and schematics ;)
Regards.
Hi Kwartz
Yes i did a replication of the Vialle U autogenerator. I include here a old video of my first attempt.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mztzakUYoXw
My problem was that, at this time, i did not have a good enough signal generator to test different frequencies (around 3.6 MHz).
So i decided to replicate the Royer oscillator as per Jean Louis Naudin. And it work fine as per the first try.
But i realised very soon that the U gen is very sensitiv , and even a very small difference in the length of a wire could affect the results. And also probably each different copper tubing and the wrapping wire could need a different frequency and need a fine tuning at the input and output. So i got some crude results showing me that the system is working as described.
The JLN Royer oscillator is a good demonstrator but limited to the entry of this fantastic project. Than if you want to really go on, you need sofisticated material and knowledge and perseverance.
So i am now following the progress of the very good workers at Conspirovniscience, but i am no more directly activ in this field.
I am personnaly convinced that Richard Vialle is onto something , and i am happy that you try to enlarge the audience for this project. Bravo
Hope this help and good luck at all.
Laurent
Theory of the Autogenerator...This page on JLN's website summarises Vialle's theory of the U-autogen, and it's ok in Chrome translate:
http://jnaudin.free.fr/rvproject/html/principervgen.htm
Quote...the conductor is subjected to a magnetic field, its scalar component will act on the electrons orbiting the core and deform its orbital radius creating an electrostatic field for attracting the electron by the core. The amplification factor of the oscillation toward and away from the core the electron is called "coefficient surespace". The larger it is, the greater the surunité...
Quote from: woopy on January 24, 2014, 08:50:39 AM
Yes i did a replication of the Vialle U autogenerator. I include here a old video of my first attempt.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mztzakUYoXw
Thanks Woopy. Cool vids... I'll have to catch up with your LENR experiments soon. :)
On the Pigtail... I've just watched the first 3 of Pascal's vids. In the third, they show the spinning disc experiments, and the pigtail.
When the pigtail is powered up, it's acting as an RF antenna. Probably quite a powerful one. It would be interesting to know what the range of it's signal is... 5 miles, 50 miles?
Anyhow, it clearly messes up the electronics in the digital scale, so it gives erroneous readings. So all the vid actually shows is that unshielded RF can screw up digital electronics, which is not much of a surprise...
So - has anyone recorded a weight change with the pigtail - using a set of mechanical scales? If so - is there a link / reference?
Thanks :)
Tim
PS. Of course, Pascal's experiments showed a mechanical balance...
So have there been any developments in the last year or so - since the vids, and since JNL?
Are people still working on this in the french-speaking world? The forum links seem to end in February 2013...?
JLN's later work on this is interesting:
http://jnaudin.free.fr/rvproject/html/ugentest27.htm
I'm impressed with his building skills... Cool Single MOSFET amp... Still no actual OU though... I wonder if his design meets Mr Vialle's approval?
The thing with HF is capacitive coupling becomes really easy, and powerful.
I'd like to see JLN's Nextgen wire-core being placed inside an induction heater coil, with a ZVS driver - and see if it causes an increase in power draw proportional to the load...
Quote from: tim123 on January 24, 2014, 06:36:32 AM
Hi Khwartz,
So the Pigtail is an autogenerator *and* it shows gravity effects too...
Can you give an outline of the most impressive results so far - i.e. what should an experimenter be aiming to replicate?
Is there a circuit diagram available for the reportedly OU version?
Thanks :)
Hi again tim123 :)
I know near nothing about the "pigtail" and to be honest, I don't want to invest time in this device while it is not, this one, our "project 0" (the one everybody is invited to focus as the most promising for free energy production).
If you read my previous posts I think I have answered too to the question of "the most impressive results":
- COP up to infinite but mostly around 2.0 for basic experiment and 5 for more advanced one.
- Infinite charge of a pair of batteries in input AND with a load in output.
- Calculated potential for up to 6kW for a 1 m "barre" looks verified by the last 12 months of experiments where the equipments blows under the power (the "negative" one, to be exact, if I am not mistaking).
For the specifics for direct replication, I am waiting to obtain that the list I have made been fully checked by guys more familiar that me with the Richard's Autogenerator (which is indeed something else than the Pigtail, as I can know).
I will publish this list as soon as I can and then translate probably a whole existing replication if I can download the pics and schematics so I could upload them here.
Please just be patient cause it represents much data for me to get, condense, translate and publish, while somtimes I spend more of 1 hour to publish 1 post one my mobile :/ (20 min juste for this one! Lol)
Best regards.
Quote from: wings on January 24, 2014, 07:00:01 AM
some informations here
http://jnaudin.free.fr/rvproject/index.htm
http://www.magnetosynergie.com/forum/viewtopic.php?f=64&t=1475
This is indeed one of the replication I think about to publish here in english. But as is not the most recent one and nor the shortest! :P Not sure it will be the first one, if I do.
Quote from: woopy on January 24, 2014, 08:50:39 AM
@Woppy
You had started to replicate in English, so I know you have some skills in English: wouldn't be a nice idea if you could complete the publication of your replication here? You have already all the materials for, I suppose, like pics and schematics ;)
Regards.
Hi Kwartz
Yes i did a replication of the Vialle U autogenerator. I include here a old video of my first attempt.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mztzakUYoXw
My problem was that, at this time, i did not have a good enough signal generator to test different frequencies (around 3.6 MHz).
So i decided to replicate the Royer oscillator as per Jean Louis Naudin. And it work fine as per the first try.
But i realised very soon that the U gen is very sensitiv , and even a very small difference in the length of a wire could affect the results. And also probably each different copper tubing and the wrapping wire could need a different frequency and need a fine tuning at the input and output. So i got some crude results showing me that the system is working as described.
The JLN Royer oscillator is a good demonstrator but limited to the entry of this fantastic project. Than if you want to really go on, you need sofisticated material and knowledge and perseverance.
So i am now following the progress of the very good workers at Conspirovniscience, but i am no more directly activ in this field.
I am personnaly convinced that Richard Vialle is onto something , and i am happy that you try to enlarge the audience for this project. Bravo
Hope this help and good luck at all.
Laurent
Salut Laurent :D
So nice to have you back on board on this thread! :) :) :) I was feeling a little alone ;)
Well, so very great too that you have summarised your experience with the Autogenerator, the U shape one. It describes very well imho the level where we are now and how much we need patient and skill experimenters to go further.
Woppy, could you help me in the different translations?
BTW, thanks for sharing your videos in English 8)
Just want to note for readers here that this experiment shows only the very basic principle: lighting a light bulb from the two halves of copper without connection with the inpout.
A second stage of experiment is to reduce the input power while been under load (while the light bulb is connected at the output of the halves).
Then, the third stage it is to obtain overunity of the specific ratio: output power of the load under the input power of the input of the coil wrapped around the halves.
The fourth is to get the "avalanche" effect, a huge pic of power in the system (and try to not blow everything! ;) ) and to obtain the second and general overunity COP: outpower of the load under the consumption of the whole powersupply system and frequency generation and control; while this ratio can be NEGATIVE! means THERE IS NO CONSUMPTION, BUT PRODUCTION OF ENERGY FEEDING BACK THE SOURCE ITSELF.
The fifth is to use this power to feed back an "input" pair of batteries (alternatively feed) while still have the two halves on load.
Each of these 5 stages have been successfully realised, even if the fifth one needs to be made at will and with full control out of labotatory, on which guys are already working here but do need help! :-\
The six, would be I think to stabilize everything and reach great useful power to feed a home.
Did I missed something, dear Woppy? :P
Otherwise I have still too this long list of specifications here:
http://www.conspirovniscience.com/forum/index.php?showtopic=1504 (http://www.conspirovniscience.com/forum/index.php?showtopic=1504)
Time: " Lundi 20 Janvier 2014 à 15h35".
Could you check it yourself and/or invite others of Conspirovniscience.com to do the same, so that I could post it here translated when fully checked? As you may feel, there some nice insistence here for real objective stuff for replication 8)
Bien amicalement, Didier.
Quote from: tim123 on January 24, 2014, 12:40:29 PM
Theory of the Autogenerator...
This page on JLN's website summarises Vialle's theory of the U-autogen, and it's ok in Chrome translate:
http://jnaudin.free.fr/rvproject/html/principervgen.htm
:) Yes, indeed! And you have very well chosen "the core" ... of his theory regards to his Autogenerator :D and I confirm the translation too :) (thanks for economising my time :P).
I never got any responses...
wasn't the primary project the two bars; of which one bar can be removed, and the other bar removed, and be left with clips just inside the thing with no metal, right?
Doing some more research, I found that M. Vialle has his own website:
http://richard-vialle.info/
A note to the francophone members - Google translate does a reasonable job, so you guys probably don't need to do any translating. What i think people will find useful is links to the most relevant pages, such as the above website.
I can't believe no one thought to post a link to Richard's website... :o
It's much easier for you guys to find the most relevant info, that it would be for a non-francophone. So if you can do that - and post links - Google can translate...
The forum link Khwatz gave here is a good one to follow:
http://www.conspirovniscience.com/forum/index.php?showtopic=1504
Some more links to relevant pages:
- BUILD: http://richard-vialle.info/index.php/articles/systemes-exprmt/8-auto-generateur-richard-vialle-seconde-generation
- TUNING: http://www.promtecno.org/reglages_1.php
In the forum, people have referred to big back-pulses of power which destroyed amplifiers... A link to more info on that would be good...
This is another active thread on the topic:
"Proto for R.Vialle - Amp Generator current"
http://www.conspirovniscience.com/forum/index.php?showtopic=1430&st=0
This is an interesting vid by JLN - he shields the copper core with an earthed aluminium foil screen - and the output from the bulb goes up...
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mAfrJy5EINY
The resonant frequency is apparently determined by the length of the copper core - which is quite remarkable, I think...
JLN's 'Nextgen' core - made of a long length of folded wire - has the same 'sweet spot' resonance - in two totally different coils...
Here, JLN says:
"If the entire length of wire was used, it would give a calculated according to the theory of Richard Vialle 1.55 MHz."
http://jnaudin.free.fr/rvproject/html/ugentest26.htm
Can someone please tell me what the formula is?
Hi Khwartz :)
I've seen your efforts on the other forum to get info from people. Thank you.
I have a plan for a replication, image attached. It's Richard's V1 gen - the straight one...
I want to use a straight, and short coil so i can try 2 ferrite cores (which I have) inside the copper tubes. I'd also like to try folded lengths of wire - like JLN did - and see how that changes the resonance.
The total length for the coil would be 1/3m - 330mm. With each tube at 150mm.
I will power it from my DC bench power supply, using a ZVS driver - designed for induction heating - to drive the tank circuit (capacitor not shown in diagram). I have used this arrangement before and it works well...
But - I'm not sure about the resonant frequency I should expect for the two 150mm tubes - and if it's very high, I may need to use fewer turns for the coil...
So - if you could dig out that formula for me? That would be very helpful...
Thanks, Tim :)
Quote from: d3x0r on January 25, 2014, 08:58:44 AM
I never got any responses...
wasn't the primary project the two bars; of which one bar can be removed, and the other bar removed, and be left with clips just inside the thing with no metal, right?
Richard original experience was made with a straight plain barre of copper, that why indeed we continue to speak about "barre" for the two halves of metal core even when it is a pipe.
Yes, both halves could be removed in his first experiment but it has the purpose to be able to know the ideal distance they were supposed to be separated, now we know it can start from millimeters to centimeters.
And yes, if I remember well, even clips functioned in the air of the extrimities of the coil ;)
@tim123
QuoteI can't believe no one thought to post a link to Richard's website... :o
Dear tim123, we were not about to share links to French pages but to translate them, and the web-site about Richard is not Richard's one but indeed BlueDragon one, I would say, for Richard. The translation were supposed to be published on the web site too. But I cannot translate everything in one time! Lol
True that Google can make a pretty good job, but it will have hard time with expressions. Could be I will use. Until now I didn't cause for appropriate translation needs to understand first the principles that Google will never be able ::)
Two threads could be interesting: the replications of Colas, which is advanced stuff where he is looking for creating the "avalanche" of power by looking for systematically the right frequency
http://www.conspirovniscience.com/forum/index.php?s=1875e5c1fd575d82c78b7170a6438d0b&showtopic=941 (http://www.conspirovniscience.com/forum/index.php?s=1875e5c1fd575d82c78b7170a6438d0b&showtopic=941)
and the BlueDragon's topic, where it is the basic experiment at its start
http://www.conspirovniscience.com/forum/index.php?s=1875e5c1fd575d82c78b7170a6438d0b&showtopic=1476 (http://www.conspirovniscience.com/forum/index.php?s=1875e5c1fd575d82c78b7170a6438d0b&showtopic=1476)
Best regards.
Quote from: tim123 on January 25, 2014, 03:03:54 PM
Hi Khwartz :)
I've seen your efforts on the other forum to get info from people. Thank you.
I have a plan for a replication, image attached. It's Richard's V1 gen - the straight one...
I want to use a straight, and short coil so i can try 2 ferrite cores (which I have) inside the copper tubes. I'd also like to try folded lengths of wire - like JLN did - and see how that changes the resonance.
The total length for the coil would be 1/3m - 330mm. With each tube at 150mm.
I will power it from my DC bench power supply, using a ZVS driver - designed for induction heating - to drive the tank circuit (capacitor not shown in diagram). I have used this arrangement before and it works well...
But - I'm not sure about the resonant frequency I should expect for the two 150mm tubes - and if it's very high, I may need to use fewer turns for the coil...
So - if you could dig out that formula for me? That would be very helpful...
Thanks, Tim :)
Good project! :)
For the formula, I cannot help you directly, I need to ask Pascuser who is Master in physics. I don't have the technical skills in maths to up to this level.
But Pascuser has done spreadsheets with the standard formulas and caracteristics, but as soon as you change something, not sure then you can really use it. As Woppy noted, it has been found very sensitive to the variation of very little details and he abandonned because he had not the tools to be more precise. Colas has few good tools and looks for a way indeed to systematically found the right frequency. Look at these diagrams in this page (date " Samedi 28 Décembre 2013 à 22h36):
http://www.conspirovniscience.com/forum/index.php?showtopic=941&st=480 (http://www.conspirovniscience.com/forum/index.php?showtopic=941&st=480)
The "negative power" is obtained while using the Pascuser's spreadsheet you will find just after:
"R : La puissance négative s'obtient lorsque les éléments suivants sont réunis :
1/ Le système est conçu suivant les caractéristiques calculés dans le fichier Excel :"
In this page:
http://richard-vialle.info/index.php/articles/systemes-exprmt/15-auto-generateur-richard-vialle-faq (http://richard-vialle.info/index.php/articles/systemes-exprmt/15-auto-generateur-richard-vialle-faq)
Good luck for the Google translation ;)
@all
Good news! :D
The checking of the list of the specifications for the replication have been made (thanks to BlueDragon :) ).
I will be able to translate and post it soon so that anyone could replicate, yest and work on it for improvement.
@tim123. You will see that multiple layers is said not ideal because what we look for is a very regular magnetic field, and straight "barres" look not be the easiest to tune and has not such much knowledge and results than the U shape. But any material for the "barre" could work even it is the ones having the more free electrons which looks working the best, like zinc, copper, etc. Anyway, not restrain yourself to try anything you want; been aware is it not what has been proved already working ; ) You will have too the ideal diameter for wire, kind, etc. :)
Best regards,
Khwartz.
Hi Khwartz,
I noticed in the forum that BlueDragon says to "number of turns?" - "This is an important data which affects agreements output and input. it is our nemesis..."
What does he think about this:
- If the frequency for a 1m bar is 3.6Mhz
- Wavelength of 3.6Mhz = 83.27m
- 1/4 Wavelength = 20.81m
So if we were to use 20.8m of wire - when driven at 3.6Mhz it will act like a resonant monopole antenna, I believe. Would this be the ideal configuration?
If so - then it works out like this:
- On a 1m long core of 12mm diameter
- Wire thickness (/ spacing): 2.13 mm
- Total length of wire: 20.82m
- 476 turns
I'd be interested to know what he thinks... I could join the french forum if you get fed up with being go-between. :)
I would probably like to try the short straight bar first - can you ask him or Pascal what the frequency should be for 300mm - as shown in my diagram. Thanks.
Regards, Tim
Here they are! :) the specifications for the basic replication: the "U" shape = the most documented one and the one who has produced "the electrical incident", as Pascuser call it, or "the power avalanche" (or just "avalanche"), as I call it - the original straight one has too produced the avalanche (with up to 1 m long of spike voltage) but less studied until now. (Thanks to BlueDragon for his comments I have "freely adapted" for the publication here :) ).
(U shape: the cheapest and easiest replication but enough to registrar the first level of o.u.)
THE "BAR":
- Diameter:
A tube of hollow copper, of 12 mm of out diameter.
The purpose being to place the copper in the magnetic field of the winding.
- Thickness:
1 mm thick.
It would be not to avoid the skin effects but it is simpler to have a hollow one, to drill a hole there or to weld a spring pin of 4mm to leave inside.
In this design, because of the frequency, most power will be on the mm of the hollow copper. So some simple hollow copper is an easy way out and it is a cheaper than solid copper bars.
- Shape:
Cylindrical.
In a general way, it is always preferable to make circulate currents in cylindrical drivers, rather than cubic or other, because there is for the latter particular effects at the levels of the edges.
In every case, prefer cylinder to any other shape for U shape.
- Material:
Any conductive and not conductive material would be used, but the power obtained at the output would have a direct relationship with the number of free electrons of the main atom of materials. (Copper, silver, zinc, etc.) The copper is the most common, for a first reproduction, is better to go with the copper.
- Number:
1 only simple pipe.
Tested with a single tube for the simple and good reason it is because the whole tube has to immersed in the magnetic field. If we use several pipes, then all the surface of the pipes are not immersed = > the results will thus be bad or low, according to the power of the applied field.
- Assembling:
A single type of assembly: 1 meter of copper pipe, with a cut in the middle of the U, spacing of 1 in 5mm with insulation.
- Note:
Needs to understand that the U is in fact only a mass of copper of a certain length which must be immersed in a sinusoidal magnetic field with a particular frequency.
THE COIL:
- Diameter:
Related to 1.5mm ² maximum of section.
- Kind:
A single solid wire to wind the whole U, without " cut + weld", and no litz wire.
An enamelled wire like for flyback, or "telephone wire", diameter of 0.4mm to 1mm can be enough, the objective being to build a coil which creates a regular magnetic field.
- Material:
Copper cause cheap and mostly use in electricity.
- Isolated or not?
Insulated, or enamelled but with layer of insulation between winding and bar.
It is necessary that the winding is isolated of U for the simple and good reason that the objective is to produce a magnetic field in which will immerse the U.
We winding close around the U to limit the power necessary, because the U is really "excited"(really "got excited") by the magnetic field. If the designer is capable of supplying a magnetic field ultra powerful, the winding necessarily is not as necessary to be stuck on the pipe.
- If insulated, nature of the insulating material and its thickness
Standard insulation wire of telephone (the girdle of the phone wire, the small girdle/loom surrounding the copper wire, and not the big girdle/loom which binds the pairs of wires), or as the voltage used in the winding, the varnish put on the enamelled thread is widely enough.
- Number of turns:
Looks to be an important datum which influences the tuning of output and input.
It is our pet peeve, but actually, the objective being to produce a uniform magnetic field, the winding with joined spires is recommended.
- Number of layers:
Only 1 to have a uniform magnetic field.
- Note:
If we use the enamelled wire, make sure that there is no conductivity between the U and the enamelled wire.
LIST OF THE EQUIPMENTS TO RECORD THE OVERUNITY OF THE BAR ITSELF:
For the generator of frequency, use either a generator of frequencies of laboratory, or a Chinese generator with AD9851.
The generator of frequency of laboratory should allow to deliver up to 10 volts and 200 mA, what is enough for the beginning.
The DDS AD9851 will require necessarily a pre-amplifier and an amplifier.
It is not advised to connect the AD9851 directly on the winding: the amperage will be too low and potentially the AD9851 is going not to like!
Cheap way: it is thus necessary to turn to a DDS AD9851 followed by an amplifier for the frequency band 3Mhz in 6Mhz range. Unfortunately, these amplifiers are not common.
For the reading of the power in input of the U and out of the U, the various threads of the forum of Conspirovniscience.com speak about it. [You can Google for raw translation to have ideas but I will try to translate one or two threads of.]
Looks far to be easy because it is very complicated to obtain a power (with caring cos.Phi - power factor) from an unclear sinusoid.
The only really applicable solution it is to equip itself with not inductive resistance to take a part of the current, then make screen shots of the oscilloscope, then to do the calculation of the powers manually time after time (manually = via spreadsheet or a software).
An oscilloscope 2 ways minimum, 4 ways better, which connects to the PC where we are capable of getting back information directly on the PC for data treatment - the thread of PascUser is an example for this kind of processes.
VARIOUS SPECIFICATIONS:
- Cut of the bar perpendicularly to its length.
- Spacing of 2 to 5 mm dielectric insulation.
- Compensation of the loss of diameter in the separation by an any insulating material for a winding of regular shape and diameter.
- Ending of the extremities of the winding so that it does not take off, and place a small cardboard cylinder at the end of copper to continue to wind little beyond the copper, from 0.5cm to 1cm.
- Installation either of a wire of short circuit of 1m of length, or a system of coil plus variables capacitances, between both extremities of the very bar to tune the output of the U.
- Installation of a load in parallel of the output tuning circuit (bulb or linear resistance more ideally for the measures and the calculations of output power).
- Feeding of the winding either directly by a generator of frequencies which can deliver a range frequencies from 1 to 10 MHz, or an equivalent system with with very low consumption but being able to deliver enough power.
Generally, in input to give between 5 and 10v for 30mA in 500mA, if we have a waves generator of high-tech laboratory, otherwise to use a DDS AD9851 to generate the frequency, then place after an amplifier HF which is linear on the frequency band 2Mhz to 8mhz. Generally, needs to be contrusted, or to order to shops for American radio ham and to import one.
Best regards, Khwartz :P
Quote from: tim123 on January 26, 2014, 06:16:16 AM
Hi Khwartz,
I noticed in the forum that BlueDragon says to "number of turns?" - "This is an important data which affects agreements output and input. it is our nemesis..."
What does he think about this:
- If the frequency for a 1m bar is 3.6Mhz
- Wavelength of 3.6Mhz = 83.27m
- 1/4 Wavelength = 20.81m
So if we were to use 20.8m of wire - when driven at 3.6Mhz it will act like a resonant monopole antenna, I believe. Would this be the ideal configuration?
If so - then it works out like this:
- On a 1m long core of 12mm diameter
- Wire thickness (/ spacing): 2.13 mm
- Total length of wire: 20.82m
- 476 turns
I'd be interested to know what he thinks... I could join the french forum if you get fed up with being go-between. :)
Hi dear tim123.
I very understand your idea :D
No need to ask him, you may do it like this :)
An advise he gave already to wind your wire is to wind in the same time time 2 wires with one having the thickness of your spacing. Of course, you take off the spacer then. Double faces glued, glued around the pipe, could help ;)
In other words, the regularity is main here as the clarity/purity/simplicity of the waves are of main importance, according to BlueDragon.
QuoteI would probably like to try the short straight bar first - can you ask him or Pascal what the frequency should be for 300mm - as shown in my diagram. Thanks.
Regards, Tim
Look at the first attempt of Richard in JNL Website or in "Richard's website", you should find the datum.
Otherwise, I do recommend you to registre in Conspirovniscience.com and to PM directly to Pascuser (or PascUser) as he well bins English language; you could report your data here too so that the Community here could profit too ;)
I think Woppy could answer you here directly in this thread (or PM him too).
Best regards.
Ok, Pascal's spreadsheet is here. It contains the formula - and it's pretty easy to figure it out.
http://richard-vialle.info/index.php/telechargement/finish/4/24
It says, for 12mm copper bar, at 300mm, the frequency should be 6.56Mhz. :)
I have to say - compliments to the chef! - Pascal's spreadsheet is formidable!
Quote from: Khwartz on January 26, 2014, 01:21:05 PM
I very understand your idea :D
No need to ask him, you may do it like this...
Dear Khwartz, I'm afraid that I don't think you did understand my idea, but it's ok. I will join the frenchies forum (assuming they'll have me), and post me questions there directly. Sorry, I should have done that originally. :)
Quote from: tim123 on January 26, 2014, 02:02:15 PM
Ok, Pascal's spreadsheet is here. It contains the formula - and it's pretty easy to figure it out.
http://richard-vialle.info/index.php/telechargement/finish/4/24
It says, for 12mm copper bar, at 300mm, the frequency should be 6.56Mhz. :)
I have to say - compliments to the chef! - Pascal's spreadsheet is formidable!
Nice you could upload it here cause I couldn't with my mobile and its software.
Quote
Dear Khwartz, I'm afraid that I don't think you did understand my idea, but it's ok. I will join the frenchies forum (assuming they'll have me), and post me questions there directly. Sorry, I should have done that originally. :)
Ho yeah, great! Nice to know you know better than me what I understand or not! ... and bye! Any way, you will find there indeed in Conspirovniscience.com, the website about Richard's work, and JNL website, all what you need directly from Pascal (Pascuser) or any replicator there. No need for me to continue indeed :) Very thanks for freeing my time for my others activities :D 8) Indeed!
Ordinary copper pipe.
Pics from Colas, which illustrate the specifications for basic replication (same for more advanced at this stage).
Best regards.
For the general use, see the video of the replication of the basic experiment by Woppy, up in this thread (in English ;) ).
And in attachment, the schematic used by Woppy which comes from JLN website (careful: Woppy says he has enhance the velocity of a diode compare to JNL choice).
I've had a good chat with BlueDragon on the other forum, and I'm good to go...
http://www.conspirovniscience.com/forum/index.php?showtopic=1504&st=30&#entry43408
This is another thread on the forum - in which Pascal talks about an 'OU event' - which is interesting stuff:
http://www.conspirovniscience.com/forum/index.php?showtopic=752
QuoteIt has been observed over a bulb, without changing the frequency of and a very weak light, barely blushing, then the light amplitude increased slowly at first then faster and faster and then the bulb has blown but in a way that neither Richard nor I had seen before: a white smoke occurred in the bulb, leaving the filament which seemed to have heated to extreme temperatures (white very intense).
Quote from: Khwartz on January 26, 2014, 12:59:32 PM
Here they are! :) the specifications for the basic replication: the "U" shape = the most documented one and the one who has produced "the electrical incident", as Pascuser call it, or "the power avalanche" (or just "avalanche"), as I call it - the original straight one has too produced the avalanche (with up to 1 m long of spike voltage) but less studied until now. (Thanks to BlueDragon for his comments I have "freely adapted" for the publication here :) ).
.../...
Sorry, couldn't correct it in the original post: it is 8 cm long spark, not 1 m.
8 cm of spark would mean: 8 cm * 30 kV/cm = 240.000 V in dry air and in 50 Hz. (Without power consumption but feeding the initial source of power.)
I've completed the first stage of my build. Image attached... :)
- The coil is on a 350mm pipe. It's 0.63mm wire. So it's about 500 turns. Hope it's not too much...
- The 2 cores are 15mm copper pipe, with end caps & brass bolts soldered to the outside ends.
- On the inside the have loose end-caps, with rubber washers stuck on.
- The white PVC tape on the copper tubes is a spacer - to hold the tubes in the center of the coil tube
- The 2 ferrite cores fit into the pipes spookily well. (Note, I can run the tubes with or without them...)
I've tun out of time to test them today. Hopefully will be able to start playing tomorrow.
Quote from: Khwartz on January 27, 2014, 07:40:56 PM
Sorry, couldn't correct it in the original post: it is 8 cm long spark...
Hi Khwartz :)
I totally didn't get that before... 8cm would be, as you say, a lot of volts! I might need more insulation between the tubes... Will have to see...
Do you do experiments? Any chance of a Khwartz replication? :)
Regards, Tim
Hi tim123.
Not sure if you ask me questions or if you ask help or advises from me.
As I could have understood you were not about to grant me enough credit on my ability to understand what you write nor the knowledge or understanding I can have on Richard's Autogenerator. So, could you specify to me your position, please?
Regards.
Hi Khwartz,
I thought that you weren't going to give me credit for having my own ideas, as you just dismissed my first idea... :(
I spent some time thinking about how the coil may act as an antenna. I thought that it might be important. I did the calculations, and i shared my idea in good faith, hoping that you would discuss it with me. But instead you said:
QuoteI very understand your idea.. No need to ask him, you may do it like this...
And you just repeated the normal build instructions... So it seemed to me that either you a) missed the point what i was saying, or b) you thought my idea was stupid. I was disappointed by your response...
Note - it is *because* i value your opinion, that i was disappointed...
I don't know if the length of wire in the coil is important, but I would like to be able to discuss this, and other things with you... I would hope that you might also do a replication, so we can compare notes...
I do value and respect your opinion, and i hope that is mutual. I hope we can work together on this and have some fun, and learn some new things...
:)
Regards, Tim
Quote from: tim123 on January 30, 2014, 03:42:21 AM
Hi Khwartz,
I thought that you weren't going to give me credit for having my own ideas, as you just dismissed my first idea... :(
What do you mean by "dismissed"? If it is to tell you that your idea of doing it in first step was not in agreement with what far more experienced people than me say, indeed. If means to discourage you to follow your own idea, read back better because I have even taken time to advise you how to do with a easy way BlueDragon had teached just before (wiring 2 wires same times, etc., I have just adapted the advise to your case where the space between the main wire would not be necessarily same thickness); don't you remember that?
I have no time to waste. I do that to help something I think of VERY main importance (avoiding wars for energy control, drinking water for the whole planet, anything manufactured or transported cleaner and cheaper so that anybody could live in abundance and not in the lacking feeling), while I would be already supposed to have no time for.
So, I ask again my question: do you ask for any help, advise, specific translation to clear an automatic translation of any kind? or do you prefer to just refer to our guys in the community of Conspirovniscience? (And don't see any reproach here because there not any; I just want to know, to not having the feeling I was spending my time for nothing while trying to help).
Warning: I insist on the fact that IF YOU ACCEPT MY ADVISES, THOSE COULD BE WITH OR AGAINST YOUR OWN IDEAS...
Quote
I spent some time thinking about how the coil may act as an antenna. I thought that it might be important. I did the calculations, and i shared my idea in good faith, hoping that you would discuss it with me. But instead you said:
And you just repeated the normal build instructions... So it seemed to me that either you a) missed the point what i was saying, or b) you thought my idea was stupid. I was disappointed by your response...
BlueDragon gave you the same exact advise. It wasn't to say it was not "a good idea" to try in absolute but just to advise you to follow a logical and recognised methodology in your progression to master this device.
Could be I should not have been so direct and so synthetic in my advise going to the core of the answer. Looks you indeed more appreciated the answers of BlueDragon and Pascuser, while indeed they concluded the same as me. INCLUDING to encourage you to do any way you feel nice to do, except to do it AFTER having mastered the basic experiments, while I have even told you to follow your idea if you wished.
All this is much time and efforts for very few results, imo.
Quote
Note - it is *because* i value your opinion, that i was disappointed...
Could be I am not writing enough good English, and I apologise for I still work on it, cause for me there was no "stupidity" at all in your idea, ALL THE CONTRARY!, only me trying to help but having the feeling of wasting my time a few, while I had well understood your idea (have a look in my thread in cos.com and you will see that I have even worked futher your idea).
Quote
I don't know if the length of wire in the coil is important, but I would like to be able to discuss this, and other things with you... I would hope that you might also do a replication, so we can compare notes...
I do think your idea is enough interesting to be tried, but I just don't think that is a good idea for a first step, BlueDragon too, Pascuser too, and many others sure like Hoppy or Woppy, would say the same:
we don't try to acheive better than our peers while we have not yet demostrated any mastering of what our peers have done successfully before us.. It is just this. While wanting to change think right at the beginning you just take a VERY VERY BIG risk to get disappointed because you could easily go in too much complexity of too much factors to master in the same time. Learn how to glue bricks in a straight wall, then you will be more easy to test any other shape of walls: round, elliptical, star like, whatever you like, but it is JUST an advise: in our opinion, you will take less risk to go through disappointment if you chose a gradual path (where ever you want to bring this path). BUT if you have a huge "risky fiber" in you, so go ahead with your idea and any possible disappointment will be nothing for you because it will not stop you and you will take lesson of your experience in any way (... Could be to go back at the first step, who knows! ;) )
Quote
I do value and respect your opinion, and i hope that is mutual. I hope we can work together on this and have some fun, and learn some new things...
:)
Regards, Tim
I would like much.
To answer your question about my replication:
I have no problem to produce the "U" as in addition to be trained in industrie and climatic engineering (with own work in ecological energetic engineering), I am trained plumber and electrician ;) The problem is that I very don't like to make electronics and not skill in any way in pratice.
I have an oscilloscope making frequency generator too but it doesn't go up to 1 MHz.
BTW, could be it is you who could help me in the electronics. I know the very basic of, of course as electrician, but don't ask me to make a transistor working as it should do! :o
In addition to this, could be you could help me as I still can't download any spreadsheet, cause still on mobile, could you tell me which longer I should take for the whole bar to have the fundamental Richard's frequency as per calculation under 1 MHz? We have to remember that 3.6 MHz is only for 1 m bar of copper... few meters of copper pipe is not a problem for me, until 10 meters I think I can handle; I could even bind it circular to economise the space (it has been done already, the shape, until now, has not been off any importance, except for practical use and could be to minimise the length of the connection wires).
Any way, I hope some other guys of ou.com, like Hoppy will join us and magpwr could be too, but still not sure.
Best regards,
Khwartz.
Quote from: Khwartz on January 30, 2014, 08:13:16 AM
So, I ask again my question: do you ask for any help, advise, specific translation to clear an automatic translation of any kind? or do you prefer to just refer to our guys in the community of Conspirovniscience?
Hi Khwartz,
Nothing specific today, but tomorrow - who knows... I would just like to be able to chat to you and the other guys - when things come up...
QuoteIt wasn't to say it was not "a good idea" to try in absolute but just to advise you to follow a logical and recognised methodology in your progression to master this device.
we don't try to acheive better than our peers while we have not yet demostrated any mastering of what our peers have done successfully before us..
I was just discussing what i had in mind. I was not trying to achieve anything - just a better understanding of the device, and what people had already done.
I didn't know when I asked the question, if anyone had thought of it before or not. It might have already been researched, and if not i was just sharing the idea hoping it might help...
Quotefor me there was no "stupidity" at all in your idea...
While wanting to change think right at the beginning you just take a VERY VERY BIG risk to get disappointed because you could easily go in too much complexity of too much factors to master in the same time...
Ok, cool. I hear what your saying... No problem.
But, if everyone does exactly the same build, and the same experiments - then they will get the same results, and as i understand it, we're still looking for a missing element...
I will approach this project in my own way - because that's how i understand things. I can't do it anyone else's way...
QuoteBTW, could be it is you who could help me in the electronics. I know the very basic of, of course as electrician, but don't ask me to make a transistor working as it should do! :o
I'll do my best, but I'm very much still a beginner... :)
Quotecould you tell me which longer I should take for the whole bar to have the fundamental Richard's frequency as per calculation under 1 MHz?
According to the spreadsheet - you have to go over 13m long for a freq of <1MHz...
I think a new signal-generator would be much cheaper than 13m of copper tube... :)
Regards, Tim
Experiments - Step 1 - Groundwork
1) Test the long coil's natural resonance frequency, empty, and with the various cores.
1a) Setup
----------- ----------------
| Sig-Gen |+++++| Exciter Coil |
----------- ----------------
| | Long Coil |
| ----------------
| | |
---------------| 50 Ohms |
| |
| --------------------
| | 2pF Capacitor |
| --------------------
| |
Scope Gnd Scope Probe
- Exciter coil is 5 turns of wire loosely wrapped around long coil
- 2pF capacitor is to decouple the probe's own capacitance from the circuit. It's 2cm of co-ax cable.
- Tested across a 50 Ohm resistor
1b) Results
- Resonant frequency was found by finding the maximum voltage across the resistor.
- Various cores were tested...
- The folded wire is similar to JNL's 'Nextgen' version core.
Test # Coil Core Frequency Voltage (Peak)
-------- ---------- ----------- ----------------
1) Empty 4.93 Mhz 65 mV
2) 2 Copper Tubes 5.56 MHz 52 mV
(No ferrite)
3) " with ferrite - same ! -
4) Single copper tube 5.52 MHz 52 mV
5) Folded wire 4.35 MHz 61 mV
Quote from: tim123 on January 30, 2014, 01:17:51 PM
Hi Khwartz,
Hi tim.
QuoteNothing specific today, but tomorrow - who knows... I would just like to be able to chat to you and the other guys - when things come up...
OK, I get.
QuoteI was just discussing what i had in mind. I was not trying to achieve anything - just a better understanding of the device, and what people had already done.
I didn't know when I asked the question, if anyone had thought of it before or not. It might have already been researched, and if not i was just sharing the idea hoping it might help...
Ok, cool. I hear what your saying... No problem.
Could be nice but very up to you, tim.
QuoteBut, if everyone does exactly the same build, and the same experiments - then they will get the same results, and as i understand it, we're still looking for a missing element...
In a way your are true about if everyone does the same. But it not "do all the same all the time", where did you read that, dear tim :/ but to try to acheive first what is INDEED WORKING already, before to do what ever OTHER way.
For missing element, not so much cause all need to be done HAVING ALREADY BEEN ACHIEVED. Just the problem is that it was in laboratory and by a electronic engineer having unlimited means in terms of material and finances.
We basically know what to do for the whole overunity COP, and have been obtained occasionally in a few range, but not having the skills and means yet to produce at will what has been done, as the guys report.
They're just looking for the right way to tune and a way to have a very low consumption electronics allowing smoothly the negative power to be collected when it goes toward the initial power supply.
What ever idea you may have are welcomed.
I have answered you the way I have because it was about to replicate the device and for your first step. I didn't see anywhere it was just "questions in the air just to know", or you change your mind since.
Once again: FEEL FREE TO DO WHAT EVER WAY YOU WANT.
If the reasons we advise you to replicate first the basics to master them to obtain the lighting of a light bulb and them recording the overunity of the bar, are not clear enough for you, dear tim, I am sorry, I have done all what I can do about and now it is up to you.
Now, if you want we discuss this device and is replication, could be it would be better if you could specify clearly if your question is for general understanding, checking, proposition of ideas or for direct current replication.
QuoteI will approach this project in my own way - because that's how i understand things. I can't do it anyone else's way...
OK, it is your very right, and I can understand.
QuoteI'll do my best, but I'm very much still a beginner... :)
So do I in a way, even if I know this device since a while and have had accessed to the knowledge about since longer and easer than you probably.
I thought my job was mainly to know all about so that I could answer the questions for non French speakers here, and most of all to promote it so skills and means could add to break the last steps for the full mastering.
I remember you that I have started this in the context that no one from France wanted no more to care to make this device and the work of Richard known internationally because of the first unsuccessful attempt by Pascuser when he opened this thread.
Now, Pascuser and the others who can communicate in English too are OK to help back and answer to the questions you may ask. In a way, I am no more useful except to publish the results from cos.com. But I will continue to go through the most advanced thread, the one of Colas07, from its beginning so I could be always updated and full aware of state of the art the the experiments and updated regards to the results, successes, failures, actions of success and unsuccessul actions, so I could relevantly advise.
Questions could be asked directly to others and I could check to indicate if the replications are or not in agreement with what we already know. But I insist: saying it is not in agreement doesn't mean you can't do it, it is just that one could be aware of one choice and fully evaluate ones decision.
Anyway, still need to clarify a point with you: if I see something which looks to me against the lessons already taken from the past, lessons which have made the device working, do you want I indicate you it? Once again, feel free to care or not, but at least knowing the lessons of the past (successful ones) could help you in case of disappointment in your tries.
QuoteAccording to the spreadsheet - you have to go over 13m long for a freq of <1MHz...
Thanks a lot for the datum.
QuoteI think a new signal-generator would be much cheaper than 13m of copper tube... :)
~ 48 € for the pipe and 60 € for the copper wire.
But what would worried me by doing so would be to change much the conditions of what has worked already.
With this device it is VERY DIFFERENT than all the others in ou.com which have not been proved as clear and full documented and already replicated by many, like the "RAG" (Richard's AutoGenerator) is; here we have a device who already produces systematically an overunity, that's why it is less, i.m.o., a problem of "finding new ideas" than to do better and more accurately what has been already done.
Like if I change the length like this, I won't be able to find a wire of 500 m of more than 0.5 mm of diameter, and with 87 milliOhms by meter instead of 24 milliOhms for 1 mm and 0.01 milliOhms for 1.5 mm. See the additional losses if only 0.5 mm! And power needed to feed that monster?! And most important: many conditions and material changed. This could value a try, but after having acheived with less power.
Do you have cheap but stable and precise enough frequency generator to advise me? Or any equilavent?
Here what Hoppy has wrote to me:
"
I have read through the build & test specification but unfortunately I do not have the required frequency generator. I don't think that a DDS AD9851 with an HF Amp is a suitable substitute to a properly calibrated frequency generator.
"
But think he said that to be able to go up to the advanced experiments where precision looks to be important.
Quote
Regards, Tim
Best regards, Khwartz.
Very nice clear report. Thanks tim.
The 2 copper pipes were 300 mm long right? Could remember me the Richard's frequency for 600 mm? Please.
Quote from: Khwartz on January 31, 2014, 02:55:05 AM
Anyway, still need to clarify a point with you: if I see something which looks to me against the lessons already taken from the past, lessons which have made the device working, do you want I indicate you it?
Yes, please do. I intend to replicate just as everyone else has done, just in my own way, but if I'm doing it wrong - then I want to know... :)
Quote~ 48 € for the pipe and 60 € for the copper wire...
Do you have cheap but stable and precise enough frequency generator to advise me? Or any equilavent?
Here's a new 5MHz sig-gen for £25 from china. If you look around you can get a few secondhand bargains too:
http://www.ebay.co.uk/itm/0-5MHz-SG1005-Function-Signal-Generator-Source-Frequency-Counter-DDS-Module-Wave-/251316032611
QuoteWith this device it is VERY DIFFERENT than all the others in ou.com which have not been proved as clear and full documented and already replicated by many, like the "RAG" (Richard's AutoGenerator) is; here we have a device who already produces systematically an overunity, that's why it is less, i.m.o., a problem of "finding new ideas" than to do better and more accurately what has been already done.
Can you post a link to the engineers report please? In french is ok...
QuoteBut think he said that to be able to go up to the advanced experiments where precision looks to be important...
I have no experience yet of some of the test equipment - like SWR meters etc... I'm looking forward to finding out... Once I get to needing them, I'll be looking for some bargains... Hopefully will have enough precision.
Regards, Tim
Quote from: Khwartz on January 31, 2014, 03:04:21 AM
The 2 copper pipes were 300 mm long right? Could remember me the Richard's frequency for 600 mm? Please.
My 2 tubes are 150mm each - and the brass bolts make them a bit longer.
The coil is about 340mm - so it covers them completely.
The spreadsheet said about 6.5MHz, but when i tested it - it was best at about 3.6MHz - exactly the same as the 1 meter U!? I will be testing it again today - and recording it properly - given time...
For a 600mm tube, the sheet says: 4.64 MHz...
:)
Tim
PS - I am also going to make a longer folded wire core - to see if I can bring the freq down to your sub-1MHz... 15m of wire should do it...
I've built an amp to drive it... Sames as JNL's:
http://jnaudin.free.fr/rvproject/html/ugentest27.htm
- IRFP450 - £2.50
- Heatsink & Wire- from old HiFi - £0
- Phenolic Base - £2
- Connector - £1.50 ish
- Rubber feet - 20p
- Heatsink glue - 20p
- Total cost - £6.40 ish
Isn't it cool :)
(I hope it works)
Quote from: tim123 on January 31, 2014, 06:22:11 AM
My 2 tubes are 150mm each - and the brass bolts make them a bit longer.
The coil is about 340mm - so it covers them completely.
The spreadsheet said about 6.5MHz, but when i tested it - it was best at about 3.6MHz - exactly the same as the 1 meter U!? I will be testing it again today - and recording it properly - given time...
Sorry to say that but are you sure you aren't still confusing between a search for coil resonance instead of Richard's frequency? ;) (as BlueDragron already noticed it to you; relevant note or not, see after...)
This is something which intriguing me much and I will need to clarify it with the guys in cos.com: if Richard's frequency couple with a supposed SPECIFIC frequency of the stuck electrons with the nucleus of the copper, how this frequency could CHANGE with the length of the bar?!
Indeed, if the frequency change, so the imposed exciting vibration of the stuck electrons changes. Would mean that has not basically to do with an intrinsic frequency proper to the stuck electrons but would have more to do with looking for a kind of sonic LIKE resonance of the wall bar (the ones which would have the largest amplitude, in the range of sensibility of the nucleus components), so indeed depending of the length and of the material, but could be an ELECTROMAGNETIC one (resonance).
By this resonance, closed enough to the frequency of the nucleus components (would be electrons or not, and probably electrons a per Richard's calculations), these components see indeed their oscillating mouvements strength by vibrational parametric coupling (accumulation of energy in the waves in the the form of increasing amplitude), until a point (could be concerning Ferranti effect but on short distances in this case? Or a like phenomenon of obtention of paroxysmal excitation) so that to be able to, they need to pump zero point energy to maintain their binding with the nucleus; while in between the excitation impulse, in the nodes of the sinus wave, they would release in our dimensions, the energy they had pumped just before in the "ascending" phase of the sinus wave. (Which ould mean the existence of a kind of "one way path" for that kind of energy in this case, a "zpe valve phenomenon").
If my conjecture is true enough, in my understanding, it would explain why Richard's frequency changes with the length and material indeed; do you see what I mean? do you see the tiny conceptual change in the understanding it would be? (If I am not mistaking.)
Quote
For a 600mm tube, the sheet says: 4.64 MHz...
:)
Tim
OK, thanks for specifying :)
Khwartz
Quote
PS - I am also going to make a longer folded wire core - to see if I can bring the freq down to your sub-1MHz... 15m of wire should do it...
You mean like with the JLN'S NextGen?
Any way, you look having made a clean and cheap amplifier 8)
Quote from: tim123 on January 31, 2014, 06:10:51 AM
Yes, please do. I intend to replicate just as everyone else has done, just in my own way, but if I'm doing it wrong - then I want to know... :)
OK, so you have to know that the efficency in the induction between the coil and the core (like copper pipe) looks to be of main importance. So each time you add space in between and/or dielectric insulation, like the thickness of the pvc pipe, you weaken the efficiency, so the outpower you could be able to obtain at the output.
I understand your present configuration helps you to test different cores, but when you have chosen one, better to wrappe as close as possible of the core, the wire of the coil, totally joined enamelled wire directly wrapped on a very thin layer of isulation like Teflon tape, looks having been the best until now.
So, in the same idea, I advise you to change your "female" 10-12 mm copper caps for "male" ones you could weld inside the copper pipe and not outside, while outside it makes exceeding thickness. ;)
Quote
Here's a new 5MHz sig-gen for £25 from china. If you look around you can get a few secondhand bargains too:
http://www.ebay.co.uk/itm/0-5MHz-SG1005-Function-Signal-Generator-Source-Frequency-Counter-DDS-Module-Wave-/251316032611
Wow! Very cheap indeed :) :) :) thanks a lot for the help :p
Quote
Can you post a link to the engineers report please? In french is ok...
Lol, if we had it, we wouldn't have needed to work so hard to recover the way to do! ;)
The problem was Richard had a private sponsor in Switzerland but Richard came in disagreement apparently with the company because the company looked having no intention to spread the device but to keep it secret. So all the équipements and documents have been kept by the company and even were protected by kind of copyright, so couldn't be disclosed. So we only have the memory of Richard (and Pascuser too I think cause helped Richard), as reference, but don't have the details of the electronics, so that is the problem. :/
Quote
I have no experience yet of some of the test equipment - like SWR meters etc... I'm looking forward to finding out... Once I get to needing them, I'll be looking for some bargains... Hopefully will have enough precision.
Regards, Tim
A "miniNVA" could help you but I think it is more than 200 €. Looks Verpies' in/out power comparator could help you if you can do it for a much lesser cost.
http://www.overunity.com/12736/kapanadze-cousin-dally-free-energy/dlattach/attach/130707/ (http://www.overunity.com/12736/kapanadze-cousin-dally-free-energy/dlattach/attach/130707/)
Best regards,
Khwartz
Hi Khwartz,
I wanted to measure the resonance of the coil itself - with the various core - just to get a feel for it. I had another go yesterday -and got different results... I've had problems with my scope probes affecting the frequency of the circuit - and also my exciter coil had too much inductance...
I will reply to BlueDragon's post on the other forum today...
QuoteThis is something which intriguing me much and I will need to clarify it with the guys in cos.com: if Richard's frequency couple with a supposed SPECIFIC frequency of the stuck electrons with the nucleus of the copper, how this frequency could CHANGE with the length of the bar?!
Yes, that occurred to me as well...
Quote..would have more to do with looking for a kind of sonic LIKE resonance ...
That's an interesting idea... I made a set of tuned windchimes last year, and learned about the modes of resonance you can get with them...
Tubular bell chimes actually have a really wierd set of harmonics - which combine together to sound 'like' the fundamental frequency - but it doesn't actually make the fundamental...
"The three lowest modes of vibration of a chime tube have frequencies with ratios 2:3:4.
The ear perceives this as the pitch one octave below the fundamental by the missing fundamental effect."
http://hyperphysics.phy-astr.gsu.edu/hbase/music/tbell.html
You know how wind-chimes are supported by string about 1/5th of the way down the tube? That's because there's a 'node' at that point - and if you hold the tube there - it only produces the 'fundamental' frequency (i.e. 2:3:4).
Perhaps if the magnetic field was zero, or at least stable, at the node point - it would help the tube 'ring'...
And, if the coil was tuned in just the right way - i think that's exactly what you could get - with standing waves of magnetic field, which have null points in between them... ;)
Nice one :)
Tim
PS - for the signal-generator - if you can buy a secondhand high quality one on ebay - or maybe from a shop where you live - then that may be better than the cheap chinese one...
I have 3 different cheap chinese ones - and they work fine - but you do get what you pay for - and none are perfect.
Quote from: Khwartz on February 01, 2014, 05:17:12 AMwhen you have chosen one, better to wrappe as close as possible of the core, the wire of the coil..
So, in the same idea, I advise you to change your "female" 10-12 mm copper caps for "male" ones...
Thanks for the tips. I'll see what i can find for inside plugs. After talking about windchimes I'm wondering about having movable plugs - to test the output along the tube - maybe find the 'node' points..?
QuoteLol, if we had it, we wouldn't have needed to work so hard to recover the way to do! ;) ...
Ah, i see... :/
Talking about the sonic / standing waves idea again... I wonder what the speed of sound in copper is - and whether it is related? Perhaps all these things have to synchronise for full effect...?
:)
Tim
Quote from: Khwartz on February 01, 2014, 03:05:46 AM
This is something which intriguing me much and I will need to clarify it with the guys in cos.com: if Richard's frequency couple with a supposed SPECIFIC frequency of the stuck electrons with the nucleus of the copper, how this frequency could CHANGE with the length of the bar?!
Perhaps through acoustic standing waves, which are formed by reflections from two ends of the bar and their frequency is determined by the length of the bar and the speed of sound in the bar.
Speed of Speed of Loss factor Loss factor
Longitudinal Shear Longitudinal Shear
Material waves waves waves waves
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Diamond 12000m/s
Aluminum 6374m/s 3111m/s 0.00003-0.0001 0.0001
Hard Ferrite 6300m/s
Steel 5960m/s 3235m/s 0.00002-0.0003
Iron 5957m/s 3224m/s 0.0001-0.0004 0.0002-0.0006
Soft Ferrite 5700m/s
Copper 4759m/s 2325m/s 0.002 0.002
Brass 4372m/s 2100m/s 0.0002-0.001 <0.001
Gold 3240m/s 1200m/s 0.0003
Lead 2160m/s 700m/s 0.05 - 0.3 0.02
Quote from: Khwartz on February 01, 2014, 03:05:46 AM
...would have more to do with looking for a kind of sonic LIKE resonance of the wall bar (the ones which would have the largest amplitude, in the range of sensibility of the nucleus components), so indeed depending of the length and of the material, but could be an ELECTROMAGNETIC one (resonance).
By this resonance, closed enough to the frequency of the nucleus components...
Acoustic vibrations are known to affect nuclear structures. There is even a book about it
here (http://www.amazon.com/Nuclear-Acoustic-Resonance-Dan-Bolef/dp/0121112500#reader_0121112500).
Quote from: verpies on February 01, 2014, 08:46:21 AM
Perhaps through acoustic standing waves, which are formed by reflections from two ends of the bar and its frequency is determined by the length pf the bar and the speed of sound in the bar.
Acoustic vibrations are known to affect nuclear structures. There is even a book about it here (http://www.amazon.com/Nuclear-Acoustic-Resonance-Dan-Bolef/dp/0121112500#reader_0121112500).
Nuclear Acoustic Resonance, new one on me, cool, thanks Verpies :)
Reminds me of Keely... His research was so different from most - using acoustics...
I've had quite a few problems measuring resonant frequencies... So, the last set of results are only useful as a relative guide.
- Capacitance in scope probes. (Solution - Input signal probe left off)
- Capacitance in signal generator. (Solution- an extra earth wire to the coil)
- Too much inductance in exciter coil(?) (5 turns replaced with 2)
I've measured resonances for the 2 copper cores at a range of frequencies from 3.5MHz up to 25MHz - depending on the method chosen. So the results are somewhat inconclusive - and suggest the circuit as a whole is resonating, rather than the bars alone at some specific freq.
My current best estimate for the Vialle resonant freq of the bars is 7.9MHz - which is considerably higher than the predicted 6.5MHz...
I think I'll have to try it with more power - using the amp - and see how it behaves then. That'll have to wait for the heatsink glue.
Khwartz,
I read the comments about 'standard resonance' vs. Vialle resonance on , and i think I'm only seeing the standard version ATM. The amp should help...
I'm re-reading some Keely stuff. This one's interesting - and it could be related...
"Sound and Gravity" - http://www.keelynet.com/davidson/sound1.htm
Hi tim and Verpies.
Very thanks for your contributions :)
I hope I will be able to answer or comment in more details soon.
For now I would like just to point out I was more about true electromagnetic resonance like based on the speed of the electronic phase wave in the material (~ 277 000 000 m.s^-1 for the pure copper), but any synchronisation with soundwave could be interesting too, indeed! (Thanks Verpies to remember resonance magnetic effect studies :) and very great you have developed skills about waves, dear tim, cause all is about waves in physics, imo :) ).
May one of you calculate the resonance modes of copper bars, based on the speed of the electronic phase wave? Looking for the parallel with the WSR (which is itself related to the fourth lengh wave and Ferranti effect)? And see if we could find something approaching Richard's frequency or the one you find experimentally? ;)
Best regards to all and see you hopefully tomorrow :)
Quote from: tim123 on February 01, 2014, 06:54:38 AM
Hi Khwartz,
I wanted to measure the resonance of the coil itself - with the various core - just to get a feel for it.
Understand :)
Quote
I had another go yesterday -and got different results... I've had problems with my scope probes affecting the frequency of the circuit - and also my exciter coil had too much inductance...
OK.
Quote
I will reply to BlueDragon's post on the other forum today...
Very good, he very well knows about all of this.
Colas07 and Bigaros, in addition to Pascuser have much practice of the device.
Bigaros is one of the firts having replicated the avalanche effect, if I am not mistaking, but sure he has worked on it.
Colas tries to replicate it systematically and get skills in tuning with the help of the Smith chart. I am still continuing to go through the 18 page of his very interesting replication which has became a real research now.
Quote
Yes, that occurred to me as well...
That's an interesting idea... I made a set of tuned windchimes last year, and learned about the modes of resonance you can get with them...
Could probably help us indeed you know that stuff now :)
Quote
Tubular bell chimes actually have a really wierd set of harmonics - which combine together to sound 'like' the fundamental frequency - but it doesn't actually make the fundamental...
:) In the TPU replication here in ou.com, if I remember well, few sent 3 frequencies at the same time to run the device and were much about and skill to produce accurate frequencies, very precised and stable I suppose, frequencies like with using
vacuum tubes instead of usual silicon electronics.
Quote
"The three lowest modes of vibration of a chime tube have frequencies with ratios 2:3:4. The ear perceives this as the pitch one octave below the fundamental by the missing fundamental effect."
http://hyperphysics.phy-astr.gsu.edu/hbase/music/tbell.html
Interesting, thanks for sharing :)
Quote
You know how wind-chimes are supported by string about 1/5th of the way down the tube? That's because there's a 'node' at that point - and if you hold the tube there - it only produces the 'fundamental' frequency (i.e. 2:3:4).
Very interesting indeed :)
Quote
Perhaps if the magnetic field was zero, or at least stable, at the node point - it would help the tube 'ring'...
I follow you :) but the waves lengths are not of the same magnitudes ;)
Quote
And, if the coil was tuned in just the right way - i think that's exactly what you could get - with standing waves of magnetic field, which have null points in between them... ;)
That is the TPU base. It is in the nodes, null points, the extra energy coming from zpe is supposed to come in our dimensions. But remember these are just conjectures and has not been truly proven nor verified.
Otherwise, not sure we can produce "nodes" of magnetic field. Of voltage, current, wave phase, but for magnetic would need to ne checked, if magnetic field is not already a steady standing waves system.
Would we have a kind of phase wave for a magnetic field?
But "ringing" devices were made until now by voltage and current waves.
Quote
Nice one :)
Lets see if we can do something with ;)
Quote
Tim
PS - for the signal-generator - if you can buy a secondhand high quality one on ebay - or maybe from a shop where you live - then that may be better than the cheap chinese one...
I have 3 different cheap chinese ones - and they work fine - but you do get what you pay for - and none are perfect.
Very Thanks for the advise, dear tim, but for now I can't afford probably, even for a second hand. But I will look for the price and the disponibility. I will ask Colas and BlueDragon for the specifics of such material. Woppy told me that if he can he will buy one for his possible replication :)
Best regards,
K.
Quote from: Khwartz on February 02, 2014, 05:14:53 AM
May one of you could calculate the resonance modes of copper bars, based on the speed of the electronic phase wave?
How is that different from a ¼-wavelength EM antenna ?
What is the direction of propagation that you envison?
P.S.
If you assume that electrons are responsible for the electric current in a solid conductor, then their speed calculates to be very slow (on the order of cm/h). Though, it is only an assumption, based on the prevalent inability to form an alternate explanation for current conduction in solid conductors.
Quote from: tim123 on February 02, 2014, 04:55:13 AM
I'm re-reading some Keely stuff. This one's interesting - and it could be related...
"Sound and Gravity" - http://www.keelynet.com/davidson/sound1.htm (http://www.keelynet.com/davidson/sound1.htm)
The nuclear frequencies, that the author describes in this article, are known to be dependent on magnetic flux density. e.g. for Copper, this resonance occurs at 1132Hz/Gauss, 1110Hz/G for Aluminum, 1058Hz/G for Manganese, 267Hz/G for Zinc, 138Hz/G for Iron (saturated), etc...
Hence, in Earth's magnetic field of 0.5G, Copper atoms will resonate at 566Hz and in the field of a strong electromagnet or a permanent magnet (e.g. 10000G), copper atoms will resonate at 11.32MHz.
The author of this article has taken his research further and patented
this device (http://www.overunity.com/12736/kapanadze-cousin-dally-free-energy/dlattach/attach/128521/).
The device described therein uses acoustic vibrations in a
magnetic circuit (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Magnetic_circuit) containing a PM (http://www.overunity.com/en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Permanent_magnet), to produce excess energy.
Quote from: Khwartz on February 03, 2014, 01:46:47 AM
Would we have a kind of phase wave for a magnetic field?
In a ferri/ferromagnetic core - yes. See
here (http://jnaudin.free.fr/steorn/html/vrmexpen.htm).
In a paramagnetic material or vacuum - I doubt it.
Quote from: tim123 on February 01, 2014, 07:07:44 AM
Thanks for the tips.
Your very welcomed, dear tim :)
Quote
I'll see what i can find for inside plugs.
OK.
QuoteAfter talking about windchimes I'm wondering about having movable plugs - to test the output along the tube - maybe find the 'node' points..?
Good to try :)
QuoteAh, i see... :/
Yeah, but the kind of amplification system looks have been the one JNL based his schematic until the V6 wich looks the best amplifier he made.
I note for you that his amplifiers are not the best system for advanced experiments up to date.
The best system up to January 2013, where COP of 35 has been very rigorously registred, WOULD be with what Colas called a "CLASS E or F, 90-95 % HF AMPLIFIER", like the RM KL-500/24, you will find here (sorry, I have only the page in French but you should find a equivalent in French):
http://www.cbplus.com/cat/product982/product_info.html (http://www.cbplus.com/cat/product982/product_info.html)
Careful: I was not saying Colas used this kind of HF amplifier, he used JNL's V6. But he has very hard times with having much transistors 4 € /unit burnt and a very poor efficiency for the amplifier like 35% if I remember well. Then looks it has "strange behaviours" like very unlinear evolution with frequency.
Could be, if you are skill enough in electronic you may built your own knowing the characteristics of the RM-KL ;) but if you have the means, the advantage is nobody could say the material would not be appropriate to the frequencies or has any error.
QuoteTalking about the sonic / standing waves idea again... I wonder what the speed of sound in copper is - and whether it is related? Perhaps all these things have to synchronise for full effect...?
:)
Tim
I think you could have something here, like having a common harmonic of all but close enough of the electronic vibrations.
According to Richard it would be the frequency of the bound electrons.
As I can know, superconductivity at law temperatures are about phonons. ;)
Speed of sound in copper: ~ 3 570 m.s^-1.
Quote from: Khwartz on February 04, 2014, 07:14:30 AM
Speed of sound in copper: ~ 3 570 m.s^-1.
Not quite - see
here (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Speeds_of_sound_of_the_elements_%28data_page%29) and
here (http://www.classltd.com/sound_velocity_table.html) and
here (http://www.engineeringtoolbox.com/sound-speed-solids-d_713.html).
Longitudinal: 4760m/s - 5010m/s
Transverse: 2270m/s - 2325m/s
Extensional: 3570m/s - 3810m/s
For most acoustics, the Longitudinal speed is relevant.
Quote from: verpies on February 04, 2014, 02:09:49 PM
Not quite - see here (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Speeds_of_sound_of_the_elements_%28data_page%29) and here (http://www.classltd.com/sound_velocity_table.html) and here (http://www.engineeringtoolbox.com/sound-speed-solids-d_713.html).
Longitudinal: 4760m/s - 5010m/s
Transverse: 2270m/s - 2325m/s
Extensional: 3570m/s - 3810m/s
For most acoustics, the Longitudinal speed is relevant.
Fuck-up to you, verpies! Your are so nuts that you even don' t understand what means "~" and not able to realise that we are indeed in the case mainly of longitudinal waves in the case of bars.
GO TO TROLL A OTHER THREAD!I had already noticed in the discussion I had created on the possible basics of overunity that you were not even able to read my posts before to critic, here you have already done the same an other post: you borrow thoughts, you imagine in your your mind thoughts which are only there and then you try covertly attac these same conclusions which are only in your mind, like if it were other's. You're a silly man and I will no more respond or react to any of your post where ever you post them.
Quote from: Khwartz on February 04, 2014, 04:10:15 PM
Fuck-up to you, verpies! Your are so nuts that you even don' t understand what means "~" and not able to relise that we are indeed in the case mainly of longitudinal waves in the case of bars.
GO TO TROLL A OTHER THREAD!
I had already noticed in the discussion I had created on the possible basics of overunity that you were not even able to read my posts before to critic, here you have already done the same an other post: you borrow thoughts, you imagine in your your mind thoughts which are only there and then you try covertly attac these same conclusions which are only in your mind, like if it were other's. You're a silly man and I will no more respond or react to any of your post where ever you post them.
Then why did you list the extension sound velocity instead of the longitudinal?
Quote from: Khwartz on February 04, 2014, 04:10:15 PM
Fuck-up to you, verpies! Your are so nuts that you even don' t understand what "~" means
I understand the approximation sign "~" but a 33% error qualifies more as a discrepancy than an approximation.
I strive for more precision than
1/
3 and that's why I pointed out this discrepancy. Also, I quoted 3 references to justify it.
Quote from: tim123 on February 01, 2014, 11:43:23 AM
I've had quite a few problems measuring resonant frequencies... So, the last set of results are only useful as a relative guide.
- Capacitance in scope probes. (Solution - Input signal probe left off)
- Capacitance in signal generator. (Solution- an extra earth wire to the coil)
- Too much inductance in exciter coil(?) (5 turns replaced with 2)
OK.
For questions about probes and specific use of the instruments, BlueDragon, Colas07 and zgreudz in cos.com will better help you than me ;)
QuoteI've measured resonances for the 2 copper cores at a range of frequencies from 3.5MHz up to 25MHz - depending on the method chosen. So the results are somewhat inconclusive - and suggest the circuit as a whole is resonating, rather than the bars alone at some specific freq.
Lol, it is very conclusive indeed, dear tim, cause it has been found by Biganos that making a common point between the bar and the coil, setting them in series, boots the outpower :P
Colas who told me that he has used this way in his very successful advanced replication but he tunes separatly the coil and the two halves pipe to maximise the power transfer between the power supply in input and between the two halves and the load, for the output
. NOT to make or use it AS an antenna but just because the tuning
LIKE in antenna tuning, helps to transfer all the power and so increases the whole potential power of the device.
When not accurately tuned, input and output will "reflect" a part of the power they try to transfert which get lost while making standing waves.
Note tha
t we are not here, until now, looking for standing waves but all the contrary, trying to get and SWR near equal to zero so a "impedance match" betwen the "source" (the amplifier, in the case of the imput) and the "receiver" (the coil, still in case of the input) will be satisfied; same principle applies for the output between the cores and the load.
Note too that then, when all is tuned, while looking for Richard's frequency (what ever value it takes in pratical), the device will indeed produce power which will act
LIKE a reflective power regards to the input.
It is this power, which is called "negative power"
.It comes when we increase the power of the load and the consumption weakens very dramatically at the input (giving COP around 35, like 7 W at output and 0.2 W at input - phases, cos phi, been checked, output load been compare with DC resistance when powered with same voltage and hot filament temperature -these are true fully checked REAL POWER consumptions),
even becoming null (giving an INFINITE COP)
to go COMPLETELY NEGATIVE (THE AMPLIFIER NO MORE DELIVERING POWER BUT RECEIVING IT!).So, for me your observation looks very far to be "unconclusive", dear tim; what do you think? ;)
QuoteMy current best estimate for the Vialle resonant freq of the bars is 7.9MHz - which is considerably higher than the predicted 6.5MHz...
The experimental margin error is +/- 2 MHz. Could comes from the fact as I noticed it in a previous post, that the calculation are based on the lengh or the core while the wiring of the load circuit could act like leakings for the waves on the bar, like a near closed toroid bar through the filament of the load an varing in impedance with the temperature of this same filament while we increase the output power. But it is just an idea, I can very mistake ;D
But I do insist the fact that Richard is very humble man who knows his theory needs to be brought futher with better models of calculation or corrections in the very basics of his theory.
BUT, many replications, like those of JNL, have verified the theoretical Richard's frequency, proved as giving overunity AS PREDICTED. In a first sight, looks to me only since, we can see that we have a shift of +/- 2 MHz, could be indeed since we create a common point between the coil and the bar; to be checked...
Quote
I think I'll have to try it with more power - using the amp - and see how it behaves then. That'll have to wait for the heatsink glue.
Indeed, you are very true, tim, this device needs to go above a threshold of amps in the output, so first in the input, to run o.u.
Even more: it is the creation of a huge short-circuit current in the shunt that will induce the negative power in the coil and reduce the input power consumption, nulling it and then feeding the input. So yes, amps looks to be very important. :)
Nice to see you again having your heatsink glue! :) :)
Quote from: verpies on February 04, 2014, 05:13:35 PM
I understand the approximation sign "~" but a 33% error qualifies more as a discrepancy than an approximation.
I strive for more precision than 1/3 and that's why I pointed out this discrepancy. Also, I quoted 3 references to justify it.
I said I will no more comment your posts. Troll an other thread!
Quote from: tim123 on February 02, 2014, 04:55:13 AM
Khwartz,
I read the comments about 'standard resonance' vs. Vialle resonance on , and i think I'm only seeing the standard version ATM. The amp should help...
Indeed, it has been seen already that the phenomenon of overunity appears only when amps are enough.
BTW, did you test it with the shunt? Because if you have not shunt across the load and the cores, you won't get any overunity (but could be you understood it too :) ).
Quote
I'm re-reading some Keely stuff. This one's interesting - and it could be related...
"Sound and Gravity" - http://www.keelynet.com/davidson/sound1.htm
Why not! Could give some good parallels :)
Best regards,
K.
This was the first results from Colas07:
COP 2.6 ACHIEVED.
http://www.conspirovniscience.com/forum/index.php?showtopic=941&st=120 (http://www.conspirovniscience.com/forum/index.php?showtopic=941&st=120)
Translation in order of the sentences and labelsSimple asset of the calculations:
Generator 10 Vpp - 4.213 MHz.
DC power supply 24 V.
Jean-Louis Naudin's V6 amplifier, consuming 1.35 A.
Input connection.
Output of the "U".
Canal 1: measuring voltage on the light bulb.
Canal 2: measuring current with zgreudz's current probe.
The wires between the light bulb and the measurements are as short as possible.
The scope is not grounded.
------------
Frequency:
4.213 MHz.
Chanel 1 RMS:
6.52 V.
Chanel 2 RMS:
753 mV.
Wattmeter placed between the amplifier and the coil of the "U" with two coax wires. Set on 5 W caliber. Not enough power to calibrate the SWR (ROS [French for "SWR"]).
Direct power =
2.7 WReflective power =
0.7 WUseful power in the coil of the "U" =
2 W (2.7 - 0.7 = 2 W).
Calculation of the power on the light bulb:
P = U * I * Cos(phase)
P =
6.52 * (
753 mV / 1000) * Cos(
6°)
["750 mV" is an "abusive", but known, way to say "750 mA" while these amps are measured by the drop of voltage on a "zgreudz's probe" of 1 Ohm - composed of 18 resistors of 18 Ohms each in parallel. So that we have directly the reading of the milliamps while reading the millivolts on the oscilloscope. ]
Power at the connections of the light bulb =
4.88 W******** COP = P.out / P.in = 4.88 / 2 = 2.441 ********
------------
Frequency:
4.075 MHz.
Chanel 1 RMS:
6.75 V.
Chanel 2 RMS:
777 mV.
Direct power =
2.5 WReflective power =
0.5 WUseful power in the coil of the "U" =
2 W (2.6 - 0.5 = 2 W).
Calculation of the power on the light bulb:
P = U * I * Cos(phase)
P =
6.75 * (
777 mV / 1000) * Cos(
5°)
Power at the connections of the light bulb =
5.22 W******** COP = P.out / P.in = 5.22 / 2 = 2.612 ********
Quote from: d3x0r on February 04, 2014, 04:57:00 PM
Then why did you list the extension sound velocity instead of the longitudinal?
Sorry, in my speed to answer to verpies I have mixed the both: in solid, as I can know, longitudes waves not applies, they are extentional and transversal.
The value I have taken is only a Wiki one and I do not claim to be specialist of, that why I have used "~" the value, so the intelligent enough persons who need more accurate value could make their own search, while I had not the time for nor the present necessity to.
http://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Speeds_of_sound_of_the_elements_(data_page) (http://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Speeds_of_sound_of_the_elements_(data_page))
It is not that verpies didn't give accurate nor useful data, it is just he is on this thread to try to discredit my efforts to make Richard Vialle work known and try to distabilise me while I think he did not appreciate I left him alone on the other thread I had created where he continuously criticised me without even taking time to read my posts well and their interety.
Verpies then came here and started trying to spread false data on Richard work and the replications of the Autogenerator, and try to spread the idea that we don't know what we do in France and that we don't know anything in physics, while the skills in physics in Condpirovnisciences.com goes up to Master and Doctorate.
So verpies here only fakes to help, imo, he just tries to destabilise the creator of the thread, while only caring about anything which would be wrong (or taken as) but without a obvious common sense because at the very base his intentions is only to discuss his previous (missing) opponent from an other thread.
Been years I follow threads in different community, it came easy to differenciate someone who brings a correction for The General Interest, from one who just tries to put an other at wrong to discredit him/her.
Sorry if you didn't bother, but like this I will have fully clarified my position.
Quote from: Khwartz on February 04, 2014, 09:53:40 PM
It is not that Verpies didn't give accurate nor useful data, it is just he is on this thread to try to discredit my efforts to make Richard Vialle work known and try to destabilise me
Khwartz cannot know that. It's pure speculation on his part.
See for yourself - my first message in this thread is
here (http://www.overunity.com/12639/richard-vialles-new-theory-about-negative-mass-and-overunity/msg385838/#msg385838).
Note that I had made only technical questions and statements in this thread,
without any personal remarks.
As a matter of principle, opposition and criticism of technical ideas is not wrong scientifically and is in accordance with the scientific nature of this forum,
...but wait, I have not even criticized Khwartz or his ideas in this thread - I just pointed out a numerical inaccuracy and asked him some apparently inconvenient questions, to which he did not reply.
If I wanted to get rid of Khwartz, I could have him banned from this forum for misconduct with one PM to Stefan (see forum's rules).
...but I am not going to go that tattletale route. Instead I am going to point out that the equation:
P
AVERAGE = U
RMS * I
RMS * cos(Φ)
is valid
only for pure sine waves.
If the continuous Out/In power ratio is really >2 then it should be possible to loop that power and achieve a self-runner within a month.
If that does not happen soon, then the methodology of power measurements will have to be reavaluated, e.g. because:
1) Waveform shapes
2) Crest factors
3) any DC components
4) Quantization errors of ADCs
5) The maximum frequency rating of the RMS or U*I multiplier.
6) The relationship between the sampling rate and the maximum frequency content of the measured signal.
7) Resistance and inductance of current sensing resistors or the frequency response of magnetic current probes,
8) The position of the voltage probe in relation to the current sensing element (before/after).
9) Stray capacitances
10) EMI
...etc.
@Khwartz
Does it exist a more effecient version than the "U" shape one?
Do you know what happen with JLN? His site have no update since a while... :(. ?
@ tim
Correction:
Quote
Quote
[Quote from: tim123 on February 02, 2014, 10:55:13 AM
Khwartz,
I read the comments about 'standard resonance' vs. Vialle resonance on , and i think I'm only seeing the standard version ATM. The amp should help...
Indeed, it has been seen already that the phenomenon of overunity appears only when amps are enough.
BTW, did you test it with the shunt? Because if you have not shunt across the load and the cores, you won't get any overunity (but could be you understood it too :) ).
Dear tim, in fact the output tuning circuit of the more recent experiments than initial Ricard's experiments no more use the shunt wire but only the coil and capa tunning.
I don't know if it is a so good thing because it won't allow so much amps in short circuit but Colas's beginning 2013 results were indeed without pure shunt wire.
Correction:
QuoteQuote
My current best estimate for the Vialle resonant freq of the bars is 7.9MHz - which is considerably higher than the predicted 6.5MHz...
The experimental margin error is +/- 2 MHz. Could comes from the fact as I noticed it in a previous post, that the calculation are based on the lengh or the core while the wiring of the load circuit could act like leakings for the waves on the bar, like a near closed toroid bar through the filament of the load an varing in impedance with the temperature of this same filament while we increase the output power. But it is just an idea, I can very mistake ;D
But I do insist the fact that Richard is very humble man who knows his theory needs to be brought futher with better models of calculation or corrections in the very basics of his theory.
BUT, many replications, like those of JNL, have verified the theoretical Richard's frequency, proved as giving overunity AS PREDICTED. In a first sight, looks to me only since, we can see that we have a shift of +/- 2 MHz, could be indeed since we create a common point between the coil and the bar; to be checked...
"Could comes from the fact as I noticed it in a previous post, that the calculation are based on the lengh or the core" ->. Could comes from the fact as I noticed it in a previous post, that the calculation are based on the length of the core
Quote from: verpies on February 05, 2014, 04:58:00 AM
Khwartz cannot know that. It's pure speculation on his part.
See for yourself - my first message in this thread is here (http://www.overunity.com/12639/richard-vialles-new-theory-about-negative-mass-and-overunity/msg385838/#msg385838).
Note that I had made only technical questions and statements in this thread, without any personal remarks.
As a matter of principle, opposition and criticism of technical ideas is not wrong scientifically and is in accordance with the scientific nature of this forum,
...but wait, I have not even criticized Khwartz or his ideas in this thread - I just pointed out a numerical inaccuracy and asked him some apparently inconvenient questions, to which he did not reply.
If I wanted to get rid of Khwartz, I could have him banned from this forum for misconduct with one PM to Stefan (see forum's rules).
...but I am not going to go that tattletale route. Instead I am going to point out that the equation:
PAVERAGE = URMS * IRMS * cos(Φ)
is valid only for pure sine waves.
If the continuous Out/In power ratio is really >2 then it should be possible to loop that power and achieve a self-runner within a month.
If that does not happen soon, then the methodology of power measurements will have to be reavaluated, e.g. because:
1) Waveform shapes
2) Crest factors
3) any DC components
4) Quantization errors of ADCs
5) The maximum frequency rating of the RMS or U*I multiplier.
6) The relationship between the sampling rate and the maximum frequency content of the measured signal.
7) Resistance and inductance of current sensing resistors or the frequency response of magnetic current probes,
8) The position of the voltage probe in relation to the current sensing element (before/after).
9) Stray capacitances
10) EMI
...etc.
I said I will no more comment your posts. Troll an other thread!
For open heart visitors only:
Know that verpies is NEAR true about the "inaccuracy" of the formulas:
P = U * I * cos (phi)
for non-pure sinus waves.
What he very "forgets" is that the RANGE of the COP is not of 1.2 or 1.3, where we could have some doubts, but of more than 2.0 (200%).
One who knows about oscilloscope traces and shape of the waves, will see by visual on the oscilloscope screen the ORDER OF MAGNITUDE of the integral of the curve, the measure of the "surface" of the shape of the wave.
Anyway, whatever kind of measurement has been used since, THE ORDER OF MAGNITUDE OF THE COPs has been fully confirmed, would be by oscilloscopes, would be by HF WATTMEATERS, and would be by INTRAGRATION OF ANY POINT OF THE CURVES, so been so accurate that we calculate for each very thiny peace of time the actual real power we get.
For information, the self loop have been already made in laboratory, but as used to, verpies HAS NOT TIME TO REALLY READ MY POSTS OR TRULY STUDY THE SUBJECT BEFORE TO SPEAK, BUT SURE HE HAS TIME FOR CRITICISM AND TAKING OTHERS FOR MORE IDIOTIC THAN THEY ARE... and he is still only interested in trying to discourage anyone to have interest in Richard's works (I don't know if he is even aware of his own intentions but this is very what I can perceive like outload from him; notice he is the inly one from who I could perceive anything like that.)
Quote from: wistiti on February 05, 2014, 09:10:51 AM
@Khwartz
Does it exist a more effecient version than the "U" shape one?
Do you know what happen with JLN? His site have no update since a while... :(. ?
The U shape allows negative COP, means in addition to feed a load it can feed the power supply too which becomes a receiver. It is more than than infinite efficiency, so imo hard to do better ;)
Now, what we are looking for is no more the overunity we have achieved since long, but greatter power reproduced at will and fully predictable.
There is BTW a few variation of, like the one with ferrites which looks to better concentrate the magnetic flux of the coil in the core, while it is a very important principle in this device the core be fully magnetically induced at maximum by the coil magnetic flux.
The U shape has just the very advantage to take less place than if 1 m straight and shorten the wires of connection.
A circular one can be made too; no significant difference in its behaviour has been detected as I could know until now.
You can even make several spirals of, it will take even less space.
Then know that the 1 m Richard's Autogenerator should produce up to 6 kW, according to Richard theory but needs to be reproduced at will, and true that the models of calculations needs to be improved to be more accurate.
Hope this has helped you, dear wistiti, and thanks for your interest :)
As I couldn't connect back to cos.com to check if my post was fully OK, I post it here in double, but it is many for the Frenches :
; )
-----
Hi All! :)
I have tried to contact Selfonlypath, a French Youtuber I know for his great interest in ZPE Quest, for his very high professional skills in electronics, and mostly for the "selftrigging system" he has developed with others skilled partners on internet.
He was no more reachable on Yotube nor on his web site :/
Lucky enough, a post I made in the thread in ou.com grants us of a PM from Tagor. He gave me news about Selfonlypath.
Here my answer to Tagor wishing he could reach him (WARNING:
it is not because I have talked about PROMTECNO that it obliges anyone in anything, these are only suggestions and ideas I post here so everyone here could react and give one's thought...):
-----
Quote
Hi Tagor.
So very thanks for giving news from [Selfonlypath].
Even if we were not always on the same wave length, may I say, I mostly respect the so very nice and very professional job he made in zpe researches.
If I had the means I would employ him in this activity.
PROMTECNO would need his professional skills in electronics and is very brilliant selftrigging system for having an automatic search system for keeping tuned with the best Richard's frequency in real time, so selftrigging while the power increase in the Richard's Autogenerator.
You know we have already overunity but we miss the expertise in electronics to acheive systematic results for higher power.
My suggestion would be that [Selfonlypath] rents his time and skill to PROMTECNO, like been "auto-entrepreneur" or "salarié porté" (independent worker but with no engagement and necessicity of minimum income to function and very easy to manage - he may call me +336 XX XX XX XX - if he want any advise, I have helped several already to have their own activity and I am independent worker too...).
An other idea: I AM SURE HE HAS ALL THE SKILL AND TOOLS WE NEED TO OBTAIN THE ENOUGH POWERFUL AND MASTERED AUTOGENERATOR UP TO POWER HOMES AND SO ON, why not having an agreement (in addition to the previous) he would be emploied in a company the association PROMTECNO would create as a non profit trust? He would have a salary and in a very constructive activity i know he is passionate for. What do you think?
Best regards,
Didier.
PS: I will publish this message in Conspirovniscience, having [Selfonlypath] first name hidden and replace by his nickname, so that the other members of PROMTECNO could express their own thoughts...
Quote from: Khwartz on February 05, 2014, 07:06:06 PM
Lucky enough, a post I made in the thread in ou.com grants us of a PM from Tagor. He gave me news about Selfonlypath.
from Dan Combine on evgray
Quote
To all,
no, I contacted him recently, and he is still unemployed, no investors, nothing.
As he is still unemployed, he cannot continue the ZPE research anymore due to funding issues.
He has put all his videos private, until better opportunities arise.
Note that he is a well respected PhD that got layed off due to company restructuring (crisis etc.).
He has spend 1.5 years full-time on ZPE research, but one day you need to pull the trigger, to maintain a living.
He is now trying to find a senior engineering job, to re-enable an income.
Note also that he is a tantrik yogi. He cannot lie, nor cheat, nor can be greedy. I thought this was important to mention!
-Dan
you need to contact him
Thanks, I will try.
Quick update: I've been learning about SWR meters, and vector-network analysers / antenna tuners... I'm slowly getting used to the concepts. I *almost* understand Smith charts... I only ever really get things when i can play with them...
I really want a VNA... I looked into making one myself. I found this excellent page on all the different products available - ordered by *how* they work:
- http://www.rigexpert.com/index?s=articles&f=aas
There are some that are quite affordable - i.e. under £200... Note that a decent SWR meter is at least £70 - and that gives much less info...
But the ones that look best are about £300. Not sure i can justify it...:
- Sark110 - https://sites.google.com/site/sark110va/home
- MiniVNA - http://miniradiosolutions.com/minivnapro
I'm considering making my own SWR meter with an arduino, and a directional coupler, and I'd really like to build my own VNA, but that is a big project...
Heatsink glue has arrived. Will complete the amp later. Not sure if my sig-gen will drive the MOSFET directly - so I may have to make a little pre-amp.
:)
Tim
Merci Khwartz!
I will surely replicate when i will have some spare time!
And for Jean-Louis Naudin? some news???
Merci encore pour ton temps!
Quote from: Khwartz on February 05, 2014, 06:28:58 PM
Quote from: verpies on February 05, 2014, 04:58:00 AM
If the continuous Out/In power ratio is really >2 then it should be possible to loop that power and achieve a self-runner within a month.
What he very "forgets" is that the RANGE of the COP is not of 1.2 or 1.3, where we could have some doubts, but of more than 2.0 (200%).
<snip>
HAS NOT TIME TO REALLY READ MY POSTS OR TRULY STUDY THE SUBJECT BEFORE SPEAKING.
Based on the above quote that's apparently not true.
Actually, Khwarts did not read my post above before stating that "he very forgets" - the very transgression he accuses me of.
I admit that I sometimes do not understand his posts due to grammatical errors, but at least I try to reply. He does not even make that effort.
Quote from: Khwartz on February 05, 2014, 06:28:58 PM
One who knows about oscilloscope traces and shape of the waves, will see by visual on the oscilloscope screen the ORDER OF MAGNITUDE of the integral of the curve, the measure of the "surface" of the shape of the wave.
I have a lot of experience in measuring HF power and the COP = ~2 does not impress me as a value that's beyond a measurement error. I already listed 10 reasons how this can happen:
1) Waveform shapes
2) Crest factors
3) any DC components
4) Quantization errors of ADCs (two such errors get multiplied in power calculations
before integration !).
5) The maximum frequency rating of the RMS or U*I multiplier.
6) The relationship between the sampling rate and the maximum frequency content of the measured signal.
7) Resistance and inductance of current sensing resistors or the frequency response of magnetic current probes,
8) The position of the voltage probe in relation to the current sensing element (before/after).
9) Stray capacitances
10) EMI
Quote from: Khwartz on February 05, 2014, 06:28:58 PM
For information, the self loop have been already made in laboratory,
Really!?
Show us all this extraordinary feat.
Quote from: Khwartz on February 05, 2014, 06:28:58 PM
BUT SURE HE HAS TIME FOR CRITICISM AND TAKING OTHERS FOR MORE IDIOTIC THAN THEY ARE... and he is still only interested in trying to discourage anyone to have interest in Richard's works (I don't know if he is even aware of his own intentions but this is very what I can perceive like outload from him; notice he is the inly one from who I could perceive anything like that.)
More personal remarks and Ad Hominem attacks. Note, that this is a blatant violation of the forum's rules and against the common scientific etiquette.
Is Khwartz an amateur scientist/engineer or an amateur psychologist/telepath ?
I could use some advice... I seem to have 2 bad IRFP450 mosfets... I tried the amp - no joy. So I tried my spare - same.
I followed the instructions here for testing a mosfet, and they both failed the test...
http://www.utm.edu/staff/leeb/mostest.htm
http://www.edaboard.com/thread125626.html
Can anyone tell me if there's anything wrong with the above test? Or is there another test?
Maybe I just got sold some rubbish... :(
UPDATE: I found my DMM was only putting out 1.5v in diode test mode. I used the other - and it worked... So now I have to figure out why my sig-gen won't drive the amp... :-\
It has to be something to do with the negative vs. ground issue...
UPDATE 2: I think the solution is to drive the sig-gen off the same power supply - but I can't do that - it's PC driven etc... So...
I have an arduino, a 40MHz DDS board, and an LED module I can make a sig-gen from - and I can drive it from the same PS...
It's time i got into that sort of thing - so here's my reason... :)
@tim
Nice to see you just go forward, and far further I can go in electronics :P
That's very great imo cause we do need these skills :)
Nice to see you "manipulating directly the material" and see what you can obtain from Richard's autogenerator. ;)
@ wisttiti
Nice to know it could have helped you and you are very welcomed for my time :)
For JNL, I will try to ask on cos.com if any knows.
Bien amicalement...
@ All (except verpies ;) )
Still verpies continue to take the Frenches who work on this device, more idiotic than they are and continue to not truly read obsviously the already published data I have summarised here; about which he looks been THE ONLY ONE having "so much" difficulties with my bad english ;D
Well, I have no doubt on his knowledge and skills in electronics, that I far to have and that I even not making of any claim on that point. But still he can't face he only works with the idea that we couldn't have thought to his own objections! I am sure he will experience a big realise, the time he will do :)
In the cos.com community (Conspirovniscience.com community), I have seen many guys coming to help someone in one's replication. It could be to encourage but it could be to correct any point, suggest other veryfications, nor been agree with the results, but I never seen someone yet coming with his big feet to only notice possible outpoints or needs for improvement, and most of all: without outlining the positive points; do you see what I mean? ;)
The funny things is: far to destabilise me, verpies does help me much! :D You don't believe it? I'll tell you: I was wishing he comes here because I know his background in electronics and physics in general. Reacting he gives much interesting data and notes that I can use to help the community :) :) :)
My job is mainly the one of a reporter here, just here to spread the available data on a device, I think and been not alone to think so, very very promising and the present actual better candidate for a futur home green power supply; while I can garanty you I have been following much other candidates, here and on other communities (see my YouTube channel, for example).
All the problem was that Pascuser made, imho, the very comprehensive mistake to title and present the subject mainly on his theoretical aspects, and that Woppy didn't continue to publish his replication in this thread but in the French forum, not allowing the community here which hears nothing to the French language ;) to see "by there own eyes", may I say, the results, the measurements and the calculations of the experiments, and this in real time. I think this is what missing the most.
So I am glad from you tim you decided to go on a replication. I am afraid I won't be able to go so far that you intend to go, with better tools I will never have :)
Hope you, wistiti, you will find some spare time too :)
BTW, I was continuing to go through the replication thread of Colas07 which has became a true research thread.
There are many interesting data and I will try to compile or summerise them when I will have complete its study. In a way, the very advantage you will have then by reading me, is that you won't need to go through yourself unproductive tries but you will have the most condensed compilation of actions of success (and could be of unsuccessful paths, but knowing already they have been unsuccessful).
Just to note that if I've talked about the first results of Colas been at the very beginning of 2013, I remember anyone here, there have been registred negative COP, not just 2.6, not just 35, not just INFINITE, but even NEGATIVE COP (the device feeding both the load and the power supply), and this checked by different means.
For those who are enough deficient to not understand my bad english, I remember too that I have already talked about the case of the laboratory and why we can't show the results and why we need enough trained in electronics (but construcrive minds only ;) ) to reproduce it, while 2 persons at least has testified of the acheivements of the laboratory, of engineer working months full time on the device with huge means in terms of equipments and an unlimited budget.
We, from cos.com, wish that the spirit of community will succeed by the sharing of data and means, to do has well and even better than the laboratory had done.
The good news is: since their own experiments, many progresses have been done on the mastering of the device. I think we are indeed very closed to fully master "the beast" :)
I will continue to do my best to share the informations I could collect from your Frenches buddies; despite any attemp to discourage me to do so ;)
Anyway, if I no more do, I think others can take already the relay now. It was my job to catch attention on this device and I did so, so now I could even retreat! :P but I won't do this pleasure to my contradictor cause here it isn't just about "my little ideas" ; right? ;)
Quote from: tim123 on February 06, 2014, 01:50:17 PM
I followed the instructions here for testing a mosfet, and they both failed the test...
http://www.utm.edu/staff/leeb/mostest.htm (http://www.utm.edu/staff/leeb/mostest.htm)
Can anyone tell me if there's anything wrong with the above test?
Yes, the voltage applied to the gate by some multimeters might be insufficient to turn it on.
Also, the gate junction will not hold the charge after the multimeter is disconnected from some transistors with integrated resistors or heavy gate protections.
Quote from: tim123 on February 06, 2014, 01:50:17 PM
Or is there another test?
I'd recommend the following test for enhancement mode MOSFETs.
In case a multimeter is not available, you can use a second battery with a light bulb in series, instead of the meter.
The 10kΩ resistor is for safety only (in case the pins of the MOSFET are mixed up) and unmistakeable people can omit it.
verpies and Khwartz, I know both of you are good people just trying to get to the truth of free energy. Please don't let yourselves get stuck in a self running loop of misunderstandings and worse ;) I think much of the problems are from language (and sometimes the associated differences in general expression). Lets don't let this thread turn in to a flame war. It's some very good info and work going on here. I bought some components in hopes of trying some things with this myself. I just need to go back to understand how to make the U shaped coil and I'll be ready for some experiments. Cheers
Despite what Khwartz thinks, I'd like the Vialle's circuit to have COP > 1, too.
I just don't want it to be another HF power measurement error.
To answer shortly about measurements:
I have asked on cos.com about the verpies's list, it has been found not long enough! ::)
Indeed, zgreudz is electronic engineer and runs a whole engineering office, do you know about what? About measurements! ;D^10
Now, PascUser, Master in physics, confirms that in most of the case all these tools are not needed, like while we take the signal out of an enough quality amplifier of pure sinus waves. Isn't what verpies said that the formula P = U . I . Cos (pho) "only", so does apply in case of pure sinus waves? ;)
Anyway, only 1 kind of critics are accepted in the cos.com community regarding replications: the ones which
a) explain "why" exactly there is a problem;
b) gives the solution with appropriate schematics and the justification of ots accuracy.
I will see in my means it could run the same way here.
BTW thanks for your help, dear verpies: thanks to you I have learnt much more about measurements :) and great you have answered tim, woth schematics and explainations.
But please, cease to take the systematic point of view that, us, Frenches, we do not know what we are doing; like your said "capa phenomenon", I have checked, it has been well studied alteady, I can tell you in details.
Sorry but indeed, I can't just translate like that all the materials of the French community.
I can understand that extraordinary claims needs extraordinary proves, but please, let me the time to go through all these materials! :-\
I try first to be synthetic, to summaries, not expect me to go in all details!
Replications should be run here, so you will have the occasion to constructively criticise these replications, questioning the results and I hope proposoting the solutions to make better, otherwise it is me who will ask Stefan to banish YOU, from here, for trolling this thread...
Quote from: e2matrix on February 06, 2014, 06:30:07 PM
verpies and Khwartz, I know both of you are good people just trying to get to the truth of free energy. Please don't let yourselves get stuck in a self running loop of misunderstandings and worse ;) I think much of the problems are from language (and sometimes the associated differences in general expression). Lets don't let this thread turn in to a flame war. It's some very good info and work going on here. I bought some components in hopes of trying some things with this myself. I just need to go back to understand how to make the U shaped coil and I'll be ready for some experiments. Cheers
Hi e2matrix! :)
Thanks for your constructive intention :) :) :) :)
Could be verpies is not so bad but I still think he has not himself realised he was ONLY running 1 side of the problem, and you have surely noticed: I don't appreciate his way to think we are necessarily idiotic, unskill, having not the capability to question our own work in France (despite the very well known case of JLN).
zgreudz, I have mentioned just before, came 2 years ago on the cos.com community indeed to prove that all these was just mismeasurements
2 years after he is still there and is one of the best sustainer. Non to speak of his regular coming on different replication threads to check if everything is in order about the measurements technics.
For now verpies knows near nothing about this device (compare to the quantity of data accumulated) and its replications. So at least he could restrain his skepticism and wait for more informations before to tend to say that it can be true or we have not made a good deal of self checking and self criticism.
Sorry to repeat myself but
what is needed is higher skills in the fabrication of very law consumption amplifier with some very specifics like a kind of two way chanel or very very specific transistors, to allow the "negative power" to go through the initial power supply and be harvested in the batteries.I repeat, yes, it has been done already by the Switzerland former sponsors of Richard, two persons can testify of: Richard himself and PascUser that they had acheived these results.
We need the whole community to help because we need to do an amplifier of the quality the sponsors had made. Then we would be able to selfrun, and then simple "cheap chinees multimeter" will be large enough to prove the selfrun ;)
If verpies can moderate is doubts on our skills in France, I am ready to hear better what he says for a constructive approach ("constructive" doesn't to necessarily be agree or believe, but to grant a certain level of good will and not running always possible outpoints nor thinking only the person knows), otherwise he may go to hells ;)
@ tim
Dear tim, you remember you asked me about the pigtail ("Queue De Cochon", or "QDC" in French).
BlueDragon told me that it had evrething with the Richard's Autogenerator!
Indeed, it was in the purpose to economise place that the "RAG" has been made spiralling by PascUser.
Then it has been fond that the space around the QDC was physically affected by the QDC, and when placed on an Robertval balance, strange phenomenons were registered and measured. The frequency for the QDC to influence space was 175 MHz.
Blue confirms too that Keelies ideas are what could be the closest of Richard's theories. Nevertheless, I have to indicate that hugely enough, the first looks to be "eatheroman" while Richard used the very classical physics and its tools at the very base of his work.
Hope this clarifies a few the question ;)
Best regards,
K.
Hello All! :)
Here is a post which should make happy our dear verpies, not for the content itself, the data, but because he would feel free to laugh at me at will! ;D
BTW,
this is an important post because this is the viewpoint of skeptic AND a high level engineer, director of a engineering office, specialist in measurements.
I have to say he has not succeed himself to prove yet any conclusive overunity for his own Autogenerator, even if he still continues to invest time on the Autogenerator, in the teem of the Promtecno association.
So, I let him expresses himself as he was nice enough for me to answer me in English:
QuoteExpéditeur: zgreudz
Destinataire: Khwartz
Envoyé en copie à: bluedragon
--------
Quote
Salut zgreudz
{Hi zgreudz}
Je sais grâce à BlueDragon que tu t'y connais en terme de mesures, or je voudrais te demander de bien vouloir jeter un oeil à la liste de points de méthodologie de mesure de puissance pour laquelle je souhaiterais que tu m'indiques lesquels dont tu tiens compte déjà et lesquels tu envisages déjà de mettre en place dans tes propres expérimentations.
{I know thanks to BlueDragon that you know about measurements, while I would like to ask you agree to have a look at the list of items of methodology measurements of power about which I wish you could indicate me which ones you actually take in account and which ones you project to set in your own experiments. }
C'est sur le fil de proximité informative avec overunity.com.
{This on the mirror like thread with overunity.com.
http://www.conspirovniscience.com/forum/in...=60&#entry43927 (http://www.conspirovniscience.com/forum/in...=60&#entry43927)
Je sais que c'est en anglais (le but du fil étant d'intéresser justement les non-francophones) et il y a des points je ne sais même pas ce que c'est. Par contre, si tu as vraiment besoin d'aide pour que je te traduire tout ou partie, je suis quand même là pour ça, donc juste demande moi en cas vraiment de besoin ;)
{I know it is in English (the purpose of the thread is indeed to interest the non French tongue) and there are items I even don't know what's that could be. But if you truly need help from me to translate all or a part of, I am here in this purpose, so just ask me in case you need ;) }
Bien amicalement,
{Best regards, }
K.
Bonjour Khwartz
You mean this ?
Quote
(The objection was that working by intragation time after time the data of an oscilloscope, RMS amps and RMS voltage, is not enough to certify a power reading, and that we need to take care too of:)
1) Waveform shapes
2) Crest factors
3) any DC components
4) Quantization errors of ADCs (two such errors get multiplied in power calculations before integration !).
5) The maximum frequency rating of the RMS or U*I multiplier.
6) The relationship between the sampling rate and the maximum frequency content of the measured signal.
7) Resistance and inductance of current sensing resistors or the frequency response of magnetic current probes,
icon_cool.gif The position of the voltage probe in relation to the current sensing element (before/after).
9) Stray capacitances
10) EMI
Yes these are classical precautions that I adressed when I have done measurements on the U I built. First I have to precise I am a skeptical one (openminded but still for me extraordinary claim needs extraordinary evidence) and at this very moment I found no evidence of overunity on the U and on the GEGENE....But still I am working actively on the subject. So in my opinion it is a bit premature to spread the word when no massive overunity has been demonstrated or ruled out.
1 & 2 are related to devices where there are a lot of harmonics like the tesla coil on a induction plate (GEGENE). For this I built specific measurement devices (electronics wide band current transformer probes). Actually I built 2 matched sensors to compare input and outpout which "identical" devices (in measurement world, identical means having the same mean value within a given tolerance range icon_smile.gif. But this does not apply strongly on the U because the harmonics are limited (except with some bad oscillators)
3 and 4: I adressed by using long term data acquisition (many periodes see below) and fitting a sinus signal on the curves (because here, as Pascuser said, in that case, all signals are nice and sinusoidal). The model is : V[t]= A Cos[omega.t]+B.Sin[omega.t]+C, I estimate A, B, C linearly (linear regression in analytic form) and omega by minimization of the residual error. Then I can calculate the power, impedances, etc. See on my thread that Blue indicated.
5) & 6) all measurement are done with a 4 channels TDS3034 Tektro scope 2.5Gs/s, which can store about 10000 samples per sweep (mean 20 periods max @5MHz), so having enough bandwidth + time and spatial quantization for a precision better than 2% at 5MHz. For quick and dirty evaluation when installing the measurement I use the internal measure functions of the scope, after I check that they are compatible with the results I get from raw samples.
7) & icon_cool.gif For this I built a specific probe (called "Sonde de Zgreudz" on the forum) which is simply an aselfic, ohmic probe of low value resistance. I qualified the probe with reference impedances that I linked to a calibrated measurement bridge HP4784A. So in a way my probe is (remotely) tied to a measurement standard. The position of the probe is taken into account in this (see also my early tests in my thread about the U).
9) Stray capacitances are mesured on the U ( by using my aselfic probe actually) as well as inductance and ohmic losses. From this I built an electrical distributed model of my U. This model, fed by this parameters show the exact measured resonance on my U...meaning my U does not exhibit Vialle effect. I made the tests at low power (only with the signal generator, no amplifier).
My opinion is still there is no proof of evidence of overunity on MY device. I still think also that measuring the currrent and voltage with a floating scope connected at the junction between U and current shunt is a flawed method, especially on high impedances shunts , because in my understanding the return impedance on the scope common is not negligible (this impedance is essentially capacitive). And this is the method that gave overunity results on many experiments.
Voili voilou
{That's all buddy}
PS: je bosse actuellement et activement avec Promtecno sur un ampli plus adapté à faire démarrer le bousin, ainsi que sur un systeme "tout Arduino" mais je ne suis toujours pas dans le camp des convaincus.
{I am presently working hard with Promtecno on an more adapted amplifier to start the raw beast, and on a system "full Arduino" but I am still not on the side the convinced guys.}
A+
{See you}
Z.
Please have a look on my thread, all slide are in french but you can link them.
I told you, you would enjoy it, my dear verpies ;)
Best regards to All!
K.
Hi Khwartz,
I don't know of the history between you and Verpies, but I do find his posts helpful, and not at all negative or troll-like.
We have to expect and welcome any criticism that may come from the traditional-physics perspective - because they're often right.
I think verpies is just concerned with the difficulty of making good measurements. I certainly am. For example - one thing i intend to test, as soon as it's running, it to use a (specially made, HF) FWBR & capacitor to rectify the output to the load - so I can measure it as DC... Much easier. I have little confidence in my own ability to measure HF AC...
I would like it if we could all just play nicely together... :)
Regards, Tim
Quote from: Khwartz on February 06, 2014, 10:32:33 PM
Dear tim, you remember you asked me about the pigtail ("Queue De Cochon", or "QDC" in French).
BlueDragon told me that it had evrething with the Richard's Autogenerator!
Indeed, it was in the purpose to economise place that the "RAG" has been made spiralling by PascUser.
Then it has been fond that the space around the QDC was physically affected by the QDC, and when placed on an Robertval balance, strange phenomenons were registered and measured. The frequency for the QDC to influence space was 175 MHz.
Blue confirms too that Keelies ideas are what could be the closest of Richard's theories. Nevertheless, I have to indicate that hugely enough, the first looks to be "eatheroman" while Richard used the very classical physics and its tools at the very base of his work.
Hope this clarifies a few the question ;)
Hi Khwartz,
I thought so... So perhaps the QDC is the most efficient design - at least in terms of space... Perhaps that answers wistiti's question.
I just got an ebay bargain - I could use to drive a QDC... :) - I got a 1-500MHz Linear amplifier - 150W... For cheap.
But I would need to analyse the autogenerator - and impedance match it - to make sure I don't blow up the amp... Hence my interest in VNAs etc... I also don't have a sig-gen for that frequency ATM... Would have to make one... Maybe from an NE602...?
My feeling is that Keely-physics is the real physics...
:)
Tim
Hi Verpies,
Pascal, on COS, made a very fair comment in response to your questions about the measurement of OU:
Quote"The only answer is that person din't do the measurement. "
http://www.conspirovniscience.com/forum/index.php?s=b5ae51d1f0280696b70b9930c4822192&showtopic=1504&st=60#
It's a super-easy thing to replicate. It's not a Rarenergia machine, or LENR, just tube and wires... Do you do replications?
Regards, Tim
Dear tim, I am since long enough in the communities to note when someone just tries to attack me or just share one's informations. There are specific traits and words used and the behaviour has nothing to have with a true friendly approach. (Note that has nothing to have with the relevant aspects of the objections.)
I know he has nothing against you, so it is not the same and study well his posts they were not exactly presented and not with the same emotion or attitude than the one he started to use at the very beginning when he addressed to me, and I can tell you, I saw it immediately and fully clearly, same way anyway he used in an other thread I had created he borred me so much I left him alone. ..
But tim, be sure I have no problem with positive, honest and RESPECTUL criticism, but don't ask me to be nice with the guy who still walk on my foot and intends to stay on!
What I won't never accept is his way to presuppose wrongness when he still not have the data and think he is "the only one" to know something in electronics and physics.
When he will grant more credit to our work and the honesty we invest in it in France, been able to recognise the positive aspects too, could be I will change my mind about him, but I have no reason to be nice with someone who has actively tried to insidiously denigrate my work here. Sorry for that.
Now, as you can see on my previous report, I have no problem to be contradicted and even could ask for! ;D and indeed, verpies's objections helped me to find other very relevant data for the community here (even if these are not what I would expect ;) ).
Expressing objections is one thing, the way to do is an orher...
Best regards,
K.
Quote from: tim123 on February 07, 2014, 05:02:56 AM
Hi Khwartz,
I thought so... So perhaps the QDC is the most efficient design - at least in terms of space... Perhaps that answers wistiti's question.
I just got an ebay bargain - I could use to drive a QDC... :) - I got a 1-500MHz Linear amplifier - 150W... For cheap.
But I would need to analyse the autogenerator - and impedance match it - to make sure I don't blow up the amp... Hence my interest in VNAs etc... I also don't have a sig-gen for that frequency ATM... Would have to make one... Maybe from an NE602...?
My feeling is that Keely-physics is the real physics...
:)
Tim
Go ahead with your ideas of experimentations! Tim, any tries if made with application, care, and well analysed is always useful :)
I still know nothing about Keely, but why not? :)
Have a nice day there!
K.
Wow, when people say that arduino's are easy to program, they're right... Since I last posted, I've built & compiled a library to run the DDS, and tested one to run the LCD...
Not tested the DDS yet - need connectors... Debugging might be a challenge...
Quote from: tim123 on February 07, 2014, 05:07:14 AM
Pascal, on COS, made a very fair comment in response to your questions about the measurement of OU:
I read his reply, but I have an impression that I have been misunderstood.
Quantization error is created by any ADC.
It is a vertical error - not a horizontal one (such as clock jitter or undersampling and aliasing).
With two channels (one for current, one for voltage) these quantization errors get multiplied during power calculation.
See the graph attached below how that appears in an extremely bad case or read
this thread (http://www.overunity.com/10517/standing-wave-coil-frequency/msg309219/#msg309219) where someone else makes a bad power measurement because ignoring these vertical quantization errors.
Note that I never wrote that a 2-ch scope is incapable of measuring power accurately.
Also, I never wrote that power measurement by 2-ch scope is good only for pure sine waves.
P
MEAN = MEAN(U
I *I
I) , where the subscript "
I" denotes "instantaneous".
is a universal method of power measurement if done with due diligence* and it will correctly measure any waveform, regardless of waveform shape and I-V phase offset.*
However this:
P
MEAN = U
RMS * I
RMS * cos(Φ)
is
not a universal method of power measurement. It is good only for pure sine waves. Even if the waveform is pure, then it is still subject to the frequency limitation of the multiplier inside the RMS converter.
BTW: you cannot determine if a sine wave is pure just by looking at it on the scope's screen in time domain.
See
this video (http://youtu.be/aDiCqgWWqDU?t=43m01s) for what I mean.
Quote from: tim123 on February 07, 2014, 05:07:14 AM
Do you do replications?
When I see an anomaly then I do.
* In this case "due diligence" means ensuring simultaneous sampling of the voltage and current channels (non interleaved sampling), ensuring that
ENOB (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/ENOB)s of ADCs are fully utilized (thus quantization errors are minimized), ensuring that the current sensing resistor is really non-inductive with HF spectral measurements, not undersampling any of the channels - preventing aliasing, arithmetically averaging the instantaneous U
I * I
I multiplication results to obtain average power (not performing any RMS operations on them!).
Hi Verpies,
thanks for that very clear explanation... I think that measurements are often a source of disagreements...
So, what about that VNA project? :)
Regards, Tim
Hmmm, it appears that one of my posts didn't get posted...
I was asking Verpies for some tech help with the VNA... Will do it in a PM...
Quote from: Khwartz on February 07, 2014, 05:30:15 AM
Dear tim, I am since long enough in the communities to note when someone just tries to attack me or just share one's informations. There are specific traits and words used and the behaviour has nothing to have with a true friendly approach. (Note that has nothing to have with the relevant aspects of the objections.)
I know he has nothing against you, so it is not the same and study well his posts they were not exactly presented and not with the same emotion or attitude than the one he started to use at the very beginning when he addressed to me, and I can tell you, I saw it immediately and fully clearly, same way anyway he used in an other thread I had created he borred me so much I left him alone. ..
But tim, be sure I have no problem with positive, honest and RESPECTUL criticism, but don't ask me to be nice with the guy who still walk on my foot and intends to stay on!
What I won't never accept is his way to presuppose wrongness when he still not have the data and think he is "the only one" to know something in electronics and physics.
When he will grant more credit to our work and the honesty we invest in it in France, been able to recognise the positive aspects too, could be I will change my mind about him, but I have no reason to be nice with someone who has actively tried to insidiously denigrate my work here. Sorry for that.
Now, as you can see on my previous report, I have no problem to be contradicted and even could ask for! ;D and indeed, verpies's objections helped me to find other very relevant data for the community here (even if these are not what I would expect ;) ).
Expressing objections is one thing, the way to do is an orher...
Best regards,
K.
I'll just inject one more thought here. Having been on the Internet since the times before they even had web browsers I learned early on that it is often a big difference between talking to someone face to face and getting cues from their tone of voice versus writing text on the Internet where you cannot really tell a person's tone of voice easily. Maybe things would be different if you were talking in person to verpies. This is one reason smilies were created to assist in understanding a person's tone but not everyone is keen on using them. I also do not see verpies as being trollish here - just wants to know that all has been done correctly as most people want to know this for the purpose of determining if it is worth investing their time and money in doing a replication. Thanks for your understanding and continued sharing of info here.
Quote from: tim123 on February 07, 2014, 07:21:32 AM
Wow, when people say that arduino's are easy to program, they're right... Since I last posted, I've built & compiled a library to run the DDS, and tested one to run the LCD...
Not tested the DDS yet - need connectors... Debugging might be a challenge...
Nice to know they are easy but I have to ask if you have previous programming skills or have worked with C++ language or similar? I thought about getting an Arduino when they first got started but due to price decided to go with the Texas Instruments version called Launchpad as it was practically being given away at around $4. But so far it has sat there as it looked like it would take way more of my time than I would like to spend to just get the basics down. Of course there is less support for the Lauchpad than the Arduino but still a lot out there. May I ask which Arduino you got or would recommend as I looked again recently and see a lot of choices now?
Quote from: e2matrix on February 07, 2014, 02:35:23 PM
Nice to know they are easy but I have to ask if you have previous programming skills...
Ummm, actually it's my job... I feel like i cheated... :-[
;) lol
I've got an Arduino Uno (£10). The Due has much more power...
There's soooo much choice now with single-board-computers... Was looking at the Raspberry Pi - cos it's so popular. Olimex do some great boards... The problem is *always* the software - and the arduino folks seem to have it sussed with their 'wiring-code' language...
The one that's *really* interesting is this one: http://www.parallella.org/
Their SBC has a normal processor, and 16 extra processors in another chip. All for $99.
More processing power per watt that anything else available! I think i need one... :)
Quote from: verpies on February 07, 2014, 12:38:51 PM
I read his reply, but I have an impression that I have been misunderstood.
Quantization error is created by any ADC.
It is a vertical error - not a horizontal one (such as clock jitter or undersampling and aliasing).
With two channels (one for current, one for voltage) these quantization errors get multiplied during power calculation.
See the graph attached below how that appears in an extremely bad case or read this thread (http://www.overunity.com/10517/standing-wave-coil-frequency/msg309219/#msg309219) where someone else makes a bad power measurement because ignoring these vertical quantization errors.
Note that I never wrote that a 2-ch scope is incapable of measuring power accurately.
Also, I never wrote that power measurement by 2-ch scope is good only for pure sine waves.
PMEAN = MEAN(UI *II) , where the subscript "I" denotes "instantaneous".
is a universal method of power measurement if done with due diligence* and it will correctly measure any waveform, regardless of waveform shape and I-V phase offset.*
However this:
PMEAN = URMS * IRMS * cos(Φ)
is not a universal method of power measurement. It is good only for pure sine waves. Even if the waveform is pure, then it is still subject to the frequency limitation of the multiplier inside the RMS converter.
BTW: you cannot determine if a sine wave is pure just by looking at it on the scope's screen in time domain.
See this video (http://youtu.be/aDiCqgWWqDU?t=43m01s) for what I mean.
When I see an anomaly then I do.
* In this case "due diligence" means ensuring simultaneous sampling of the voltage and current channels (non interleaved sampling), ensuring that ENOB (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/ENOB)s of ADCs are fully utilized (thus quantization errors are minimized), ensuring that the current sensing resistor is really non-inductive with HF spectral measurements, not undersampling any of the channels - preventing aliasing, arithmetically averaging the instantaneous UI * II multiplication results to obtain average power (not performing any RMS operations on them!).
Thanks too for your very detailed explainations which looks to meet the zgreudz's procudures in COS.
May I ask you to answer point by point to the answers zgreudz made to your own objections, to see if both of you could come on a an agreement on what would be a "Fully Accurate Procedure" for measurements which could be practiced here?
Here again his own answers:
Quote
(The objection was that working by intragation time after time the data of an oscilloscope, RMS amps and RMS voltage, is not enough to certify a power reading, and that we need to take care too of:)
1) Waveform shapes
2) Crest factors
3) any DC components
4) Quantization errors of ADCs (two such errors get multiplied in power calculations before integration !).
5) The maximum frequency rating of the RMS or U*I multiplier.
6) The relationship between the sampling rate and the maximum frequency content of the measured signal.
7) Resistance and inductance of current sensing resistors or the frequency response of magnetic current probes,
icon_cool.gif The position of the voltage probe in relation to the current sensing element (before/after).
9) Stray capacitances
10) EMI
Yes these are classical precautions that I adressed when I have done measurements on the U I built. First I have to precise I am a skeptical one (openminded but still for me extraordinary claim needs extraordinary evidence) and at this very moment I found no evidence of overunity on the U and on the GEGENE....But still I am working actively on the subject. So in my opinion it is a bit premature to spread the word when no massive overunity has been demonstrated or ruled out.
1 & 2 are related to devices where there are a lot of harmonics like the tesla coil on a induction plate (GEGENE). For this I built specific measurement devices (electronics wide band current transformer probes). Actually I built 2 matched sensors to compare input and outpout which "identical" devices (in measurement world, identical means having the same mean value within a given tolerance range icon_smile.gif. But this does not apply strongly on the U because the harmonics are limited (except with some bad oscillators)
3 and 4: I adressed by using long term data acquisition (many periodes see below) and fitting a sinus signal on the curves (because here, as Pascuser said, in that case, all signals are nice and sinusoidal). The model is : V[t]= A Cos[omega.t]+B.Sin[omega.t]+C, I estimate A, B, C linearly (linear regression in analytic form) and omega by minimization of the residual error. Then I can calculate the power, impedances, etc. See on my thread that Blue indicated.
5) & 6) all measurement are done with a 4 channels TDS3034 Tektro scope 2.5Gs/s, which can store about 10000 samples per sweep (mean 20 periods max @5MHz), so having enough bandwidth + time and spatial quantization for a precision better than 2% at 5MHz. For quick and dirty evaluation when installing the measurement I use the internal measure functions of the scope, after I check that they are compatible with the results I get from raw samples.
7) & icon_cool.gif For this I built a specific probe (called "Sonde de Zgreudz" on the forum) which is simply an aselfic, ohmic probe of low value resistance. I qualified the probe with reference impedances that I linked to a calibrated measurement bridge HP4784A. So in a way my probe is (remotely) tied to a measurement standard. The position of the probe is taken into account in this (see also my early tests in my thread about the U).
9) Stray capacitances are mesured on the U ( by using my aselfic probe actually) as well as inductance and ohmic losses. From this I built an electrical distributed model of my U. This model, fed by this parameters show the exact measured resonance on my U...meaning my U does not exhibit Vialle effect. I made the tests at low power (only with the signal generator, no amplifier).
Quote from: e2matrix on February 07, 2014, 02:28:35 PM
I'll just inject one more thought here. Having been on the Internet since the times before they even had web browsers I learned early on that it is often a big difference between talking to someone face to face and getting cues from their tone of voice versus writing text on the Internet where you cannot really tell a person's tone of voice easily. Maybe things would be different if you were talking in person to verpies. This is one reason smilies were created to assist in understanding a person's tone but not everyone is keen on using them. I also do not see verpies as being trollish here - just wants to know that all has been done correctly as most people want to know this for the purpose of determining if it is worth investing their time and money in doing a replication. Thanks for your understanding and continued sharing of info here.
I here you well, dear e2matrix, all this is true, but what about:
Quote from: verpies on February 04, 2014, 04:10:12 AM
How is that different from a ¼-wavelength EM antenna ?
What is the direction of propagation that you envison?
P.S.
If you assume that electrons are responsible for the electric current in a solid conductor, then their speed calculates to be very slow (on the order of cm/h). Though, it is only an assumption, based on the prevalent inability to form an alternate explanation for current conduction in solid conductors.
While he even doesn't know of what I was talking about and presupposes here too the unworthyness of the ideas of who he is adressing?
Putting words in my mouth to then state they are erroneous? ^^
A post made in COS:
Quote
Hi All!
Realising that the procedures to check the overunity could be not yet completly sure at 100 %, and "extraordinary claims needs extraordinary proves", I will no more report any results from here to ou.com (I said results, not necessarely to no more give data and adives according to what I can study here), until having measurements fully valid. For the calculations, I will let the ou.com community to check for itself.
I was here to report and create interest for your work here, and yes, 6 persons have expressed already their interest in replicating, but I have made the mistake to report could be too fast; I apologise for the readers of ou.com.
I still "believe" the overunity has been produced and in great amount, the success of selfrun of the exponsors engineers tends to tell me that, but it was about to give true accurate data so that new replicators could really know the state of the art of the knowledge about Richard's Autogenerator, and like someone said before me: "To know or to believe, that's the choice!"
Best regards,
K.
These attachments are the only documents having been saved from the ex Richard's sponsors.
They make NO proof while anyone could say there is a fake (the seflrecharge log of the battery).
The schematic DIDN'T WORK! It was the V6 version while it would at the V10 they started to succeed in selfrunning (but it is not a "loop" indeed). They are reported having gone until a V12.
These schematics would be all about to let the negative power feeding back the batteries, while in the last versions, there was apparently an alternate system between 2 batteries, one feeding and the other receiving the negative power alternatively.
Best regards,
K.
Here few advises from
Biganos, one the most experimented, working on the Autogenerator presently to get more power, because
for him the results in enough replications have already been largely successful and it is needed to go further now:
QuoteIl me semble important pour qui souhaite toucher du doigt le principe de reproduire simplement ce genre de manip afin de constater par soi-même l'effet Vialle.
"It seems to me important for whom wishes to start to have some reality on the principle, to simply reproduce this kind of experience, to notice by oneself the Vialle effect."
QuoteToutes les mesures que les gens veulent entreprendre sont certes intéressantes et pourraient permettre d'avancer, mais jusqu'à présent la majorité de ceux qui partent de but en blanc vers des choses trop complexes passent à côté de l'essentiel.
"All the measurements people want to perform are certainly interesting and could help to go forward, but until now, those who start right away towards too much complexities, miss the essential."
Quote
En résumé, le meilleur conseil à donner c'est de répliquer quelque chose de simple en se basant sur des montages éprouvés.
"To summarise, the best advise to give is to replicate only something simple based on already well mastered set-ups."
QuoteEt pour cela les paramètres ne sont pas critiques. Peu importe si le barreau fait 1m ou 98,6cm. Peu importe si on fait une coupure de 4mm ou 8mm pourvu qu'elle soit isolante. Peu importe si on bobine avec du fil émaillé ou du fil gainé... On pourra toujours obtenir un résultat en jouant un peu sur la fréquence et l'accord de sortie.
"And for this the parameters are not very important. Who cares if the bar is 98.6 cm! Who cares to have 4 mm or 8 mm of separation, if is at least insulated. Who cares to wrap with enameled or sheathed wire!... one will be always able to obtain the results while playing a few with the frequency and the output tuning."
-----
Hope this will clarify the order of magnitude of the importances of the parameters in your first level if experiment:
- lighting a bulb despite the separation between the tow halves.
Best regards,
K.
Here is the shape "known" to produce overunity.
It is the shape too been the most documented, the most known and mastered.
The following page compiles many of its replications:
http://www.conspirovniscience.com/forum/index.php?showforum=37) (http://www.conspirovniscience.com/forum/index.php?showforum=37))
BR
K.
I'm sorry to hear about this Khwartz, it's always a shame when egos get in the way of science... :(
I could use some tech help - if anyone's able... I have the arduino + AD9850 all hooked up & working :)
- It has 2 pins that output a sine-wave at 2.5v Pk
- It has 2 pins (from the comparator) that output a 4.5v square wave - and I'd like to use that to drive my MOSFET
- But I need 4v to ground - and these are differential outputs. The voltage to ground is much lower - and it's not a pure wave either.
Can anyone tell me how I should connect the DDS to the transistor? :-\
Hi tim :)
Thanks for your support and I understand your feeling about science and ego, but as you have seen, I have an ego too ;)
Just hope this won't discourage you all too much from the core of our quest here.
I don't care of the legal threat of the guy who communicate under the nickname of Pascuser. As I have just told him by mail, I prefer to die than to let someone cheating on an other one in his back. Why? Because it is by this kind of rumors one can destroy lives by ruining the reputation of someone without he even knows (many cases in history, and in France we had few very examples of that about specifics communities like Jews, Protestants and now Muslims).
At least I could met in disagreement with verpies here, but it did restrain me to support his own objections in COS, and to recognise and thanking him for his positive contibutions.
Anyway, let's Pascuser does anything he wants, let's just focusing here on our purpose: to see how to make this device "spits out" the kW ;)
Best regards,
K.
PS: sorry to not have the skills to help you in anything about the Arduino :/
Quote from: Khwartz on February 08, 2014, 11:54:29 AM
Thanks for your support and I understand your feeling about science and ego, but as you have seen, I have an ego too ;)
:o I hadn't noticed! ;)
QuoteJust hope this won't discourage you all too much from the core of our quest here.
Not at all... :)
I'm just looking at options for connecting the DDS output to the MOSFET:
a) Opto isolator. Quite like this idea... Can get some on ebay (£1 each) that'll go up to 10Mbs - which would be a 5MHz Square wave...
b) Differential amplifiers... Another possibility...
Of course, I realised that if I use either of these - I can use my PC-based sig-gen... But it was cool getting the arduino working, and I'm still working on the VNA idea...
I saw that Colas was using a MiniVNA on his U-gen... That's a cool bit of equipment.
:)
Tim
Hi Pascuser and Khwartz,
please calm down and stop to fight here.
Well, sounds funny to me, but I am not a member of any secret service or
party.
I just run this website just as my hobby, but in this moment I just don´t have so
much time to read all the threads, cause I need to work and also am working on
my own projects...
So please calm down and just be friendly to each other...
Many thanks.
Regards, Stefan.
Quote from: tim123 on February 08, 2014, 01:07:04 PM
:o I hadn't noticed! ;)
;D
Quote
Not at all... :)
:)
Quote
I'm just looking at options for connecting the DDS output to the MOSFET:
a) Opto isolator. Quite like this idea... Can get some on ebay (£1 each) that'll go up to 10Mbs - which would be a 5MHz Square wave...
b) Differential amplifiers... Another possibility...
Of course, I realised that if I use either of these - I can use my PC-based sig-gen... But it was cool getting the arduino working, and I'm still working on the VNA idea...
I saw that Colas was using a MiniVNA on his U-gen... That's a cool bit of equipment.
:)
Tim
Indeed! For the miniVNA :)
For the rest, you know I absolutly and fully ... incompetent ;)
:)
Quote from: hartiberlin on February 08, 2014, 06:06:38 PM
Hi Pascuser and Khwartz,
please calm down and stop to fight here.
Well, sounds funny to me, but I am not a member of any secret service or
party.
I just run this website just as my hobby, but in this moment I just don´t have so
much time to read all the threads, cause I need to work and also am working on
my own projects...
So please calm down and just be friendly to each other...
Many thanks.
Regards, Stefan.
Lol, nice to see you take it so cool, while you were the one who was difamed! Indeed.
Well, I have reported what I had to report (as my job any way in this thread is to report, it doesn't change ;) ); so very nice if we can go further now :)
Best regards to you, and thanks again for this forum you run,
K.
A more interesting report:
As per the terms of use and licence which folow,
http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-sa/3.0/fr/deed.en
I will translate progressively the "FAQ" of the website
http://richard-vialle.info/~richardv/ (http://richard-vialle.info/~richardv/)
Here is the FAQ page (in French of course):
http://richard-vialle.info/~richardv/index.php/articles/systemes-exprmt/15-auto-generateur-richard-vialle-faq (http://richard-vialle.info/~richardv/index.php/articles/systemes-exprmt/15-auto-generateur-richard-vialle-faq)
The English version to come soon, but item by item :P
B.R.
K.
Lol, looks someone can't restrain him to do exactly what he exactly complained about the community here: to give altered and misleading informations ;D
Just only one example: he says I had issues with justice, well, it is an easything in France to know that if it true or not, as we can ask the paper to the State. I will send my empty one to you, Stefan, if the previous contradictor sends to you his own, and you will be able to attest who is a liar (or not so bright IQ) :)
Just one note more, cause I sense like a strategy to engage me in an unlimited discussion to ruin my time and disgusting people here of this thread:
It is true I have very insisted that the community there anwers the questions asked here. This is not a secret cause, contrary to Pascuser statement ("contrary" would it mean a "lie" here too? ;) ), I did have written in English in a thread the Community there has indeed created in this purpose, it is even name "[Special] Khwartz - proxy informatif avec Overunit". Lol! According to his previous words, I was nor encouraged to publish here nor supported by the Community there? ;)
For the "kWs", I remember you one of my previous "technical report" here, where I specified that Biganos is working on the purpose to obtain more power, and I have never written here the kW had been produced, only a "theoretical possibility" and even saying that the theory itself needs to be bettered cause it doesn't predict with full accuracy the experimental results; my words can be checked very easily here anyway. So, up to you to conclude yourself on is willness to respect the truth here :)
Many words, indeed, imho, just to try to make us forgotten HE was THE ONE who difamed (he difamed Stefan and The Community here), and that I had the courage to strictly report them (even with the original words in French! if you noticed) DESPITE his very very verulent threats in legal issues (copies of his mails still available, and of his injures too! ;D ).
Sadly enough, Pascuser "needs" to justify his infamous words to the Community here I've testified, not allows me to report the materials of his "private" website (didn't he write something like that in his post? ;) ) Conspirovniscience.com, but I should still be able to report from
http://richard-vialle.info/
I have already up-load the most useful materials anyway and we have some materials too in JLN's website.
You may copy paste here any extract for purpose of more accurate translation than the automatics available on web.
Don't know if BlueDragon will continue to update the "proxi/mirror thread" there, but he was engaged in a nice job of harvesting the data spread in the French community so I could publish it here with translations and explanatory comments.
I hope he will continue to do so in the thread he indeed created for me, I've just mentioned before:
"[Special] Khwartz - proxy informatif avec Overunit"
so that he could keep you all update (like that our friend Pascuser will be satisfied to drain more traffic ;) ).
I would invite you all anyway to follow BlueDragon own thread of replication (but don't be hurry, he could take his time :) I mean months the time to have a good equipment for), cause he was very engaged to produce the best quality procedures for measurements (under zgreudz checking if he agrees), and knowing him a little bit, I know it will be done with the maximum of rigour and honesty ("kiss" to you Blue ;) ).
I remember you too that it is "zgreudz" there who is skills in measurements: the very skills of the specialist engineer in measurements he is indeed ("Zgreudz" here, but looks he not used to post in ou.com).
BTW, you know what? It is very at the moment I have proposed to run a laboratory like procedure of certifying the resluts obtained by the different replicators there, so yes I could report here only valid results, that things screwed up; do you realise that?!
It was a proposition consisting to use the very skills of each one of the most experienced in the Autogenetator, to reach a good enough level of certification of the resuls (see, a very ugly proposal, right? ;) ).
For example, as Pascuser is obviously skill in physics and maths, I have proposed him to check the calculations, while of course zgreudz would have checked the procedures of measurements. All this very unlogical as you can see, but all to ensure YOU here, to get true valid data once I would have reported them.
Looks the true problem has been that I have proposed a work they hardly felt able to do (of course I sent copies of my PMs while several persons needed to agree - here too, a very "unlogical" behaviour from me! ;) ), while they are for most, already on tasks taken them already too much of their time: following all the possible replications there, or to recheck the existing, and yes, would be a very huge work indeed.
I think the opposition in the two interests: their actual tasks and my proposal, made them screwed up; or would it be for few of them they apprehended the risk to demonstrate too much errors in the previous procedures?
I would very doubt about BlueDragon cause I think I have well perceived is integrity (and very nice behaviour :) ), nor from zgreudz, cause he looks very very professional in his way and didn't be afraid to publish his own "no results" on overunity tries (the why I came to insist having a system of "certification" of the measurement procedures, and for the device itself, because I saw it could still have few - indeed rather few - boubts on several results published and that I have reported).
I don't say there was not overunity but just that as you know, but I repeat on purpose: "extraordinary claims needs extraordinary proof" (yes, but note that is doesn't means necessarily any "professional tools": if you self run something, you selfrun it! you don't need any instrument for this, except could be a clock! ;) ).
Okay, this post is long enough! ^^ I hope next one will be for a new "TR" ("Technical Report"), and the first Q&A of the site about Richard's work translation. (To not distract of the true purpose of this thread ;) ).
B.R.
K.
Quote from: Khwartz on February 07, 2014, 03:41:49 PM
May I ask you to answer point by point to the answers Zgreudz made to your own objections, to see if both of you could come to an agreement on what would be a "Fully Accurate Procedure" for measurements which could be practiced here?
Sure
Quote from: Zgreudz
(The objection was that working by integration time after time the data of an oscilloscope, RMS amps and RMS voltage, is not enough to certify a power reading, and that we need to take care too of:)
In some cases yes, but it can be a good method, especially if the RMS values refer to pure sine current and voltage waveforms and the phase offset is constant.
Also, multiplying U
RMS * I
RMS * cos(Φ) is not the only method for measuring power with a scope.
The other method is quickly sampling and multiplying instantaneous values of current and voltage instead of calculating the RMS values of each component and multiplying them. This method is immune to variable phase offsets and non-sinusoidal waveforms.
Quote from: Zgreudz
>> 1) Waveform shapes
>> 2) Crest factors
...are related to devices where there are a lot of harmonics like the tesla coil on a induction plate (GEGENE). For this I built specific measurement devices (electronics wide band current transformer probes). Actually I built 2 matched sensors to compare input and output which "identical" devices (in measurement world, identical means having the same mean value within a given tolerance range icon_smile.gif. But this does not apply strongly on the U because the harmonics are limited (except with some bad oscillators)
If the spectral purity of current and voltage waveforms has been verified by some kind of spectrum analyzer than it is acceptable proof that that they indeed are pure.
Eyeballing sine waves on a time-domain display does not ensure their purity above 4-bits of ENOB. e.g. see
this video (http://youtu.be/aDiCqgWWqDU?t=43m01s).
Quote from: Zgreudz
>> 3) any DC components
>> 4) Quantization errors of ADCs (two such errors get multiplied in power calculations before integration !).
...addressed by using long term data acquisition (many periodes see below) and fitting a sinus signal on the curves (because here, as Pascuser said, in that case, all signals are nice and sinusoidal). The model is : V[t]= A Cos[omega.t]+B.Sin[omega.t]+C, I estimate A, B, C linearly (linear regression in analytic form) and omega by minimization of the residual error. Then I can calculate the power, impedances, etc. See on my thread that Blue indicated.
Curve fitting assumes a certain form of the signal - it does not verify that form.
If the spectral purity has been verified in pt.1 & 2 then analytic sine curve fitting is appropriate. If not - then it is not.
A more universal method of power measurement (independent of the waveform shape and phase shift) is to sample the current and voltage SIMULTANEOUSLY (at maximum ENOB of those ADCs) at high rate and multiply the instantaneous values for each sample pair. Finally sum and divide the results of these multiplications to calculate the arithmetic mean.
Quote from: Zgreudz
>> The relationship between the sampling rate and the maximum frequency content of the measured signal.
...all measurement are done with a 4 channels TDS3034 Tektro scope 2.5Gs/s, which can store about 10000 samples per sweep (mean 20 periods max @5MHz), so having enough bandwidth + time and spatial quantization for a precision better than 2% at 5MHz.
At these sampling rates, I have no doubt that the horizontal resolution is sufficient for a signal having no more than 5MHz of harmonic content. However, this information provides no data about the vertical quantization errors during these measurements.
Quote from: Verpies
5) The maximum frequency rating of the RMS or U*I multiplier.
Just because the scope samples at 2.5Gs/s does not mean that its internal RMS calculators run at this frequency and they make their internal calculations with ENOB
2 precision (and that all of the ADC bits are even used) . Do they, are they?
For example, take a look at
this guy (http://www.overunity.com/10517/standing-wave-coil-frequency/msg309219/#msg309219) - his was using a scope with 8-bit ADCs but was using only 2-bits of them, in one extreme case !!! If his internal RMS calculator had calculated an RMS value based on this data, then the result would be worthless even if he fed his scope with pure sine waves.
Also,
if sampling and multiplying instantaneous values of current and voltage was implemented instead of calculating the RMS values of each component, would this scope sample both channels simultaneously and multiply each sample pair at 2.5G multiplications per second in order to create the values for its "Math Channel" ? (a.k.a. the instantaneous power channel).
Finally how does this scope calculate the arithmetical mean of this Math Channel? Does it sum all the samples and divide them? With what internal precision and over how many samples?
Quote from: Zgreudz
For quick and dirty evaluation when installing the measurement I use the internal measure functions of the scope, after I check that they are compatible with the results I get from raw samples.
I have a difficulty comprehending this statement.
Are those"raw samples' , numerical samples downloaded from the ADCs to a computer and then an RMS calculation is being performed on them there?
Quote from: Zgreudz
>> 7 ) Resistance and inductance of current sensing resistors or the frequency response of magnetic current probes,
...For this I built a specific probe (called "Sonde de Zgreudz" on the forum) which is simply an aselfic, ohmic probe of low value resistance. I qualified the probe with reference impedances that I linked to a calibrated measurement bridge HP4784A. So in a way my probe is (remotely) tied to a measurement standard.
Does "aselfic" = non-inductive ?
So what is the measured resistance and inductance of this non-inductive current sensing resistor (CSR)? At what frequency did the HP4784A measure the inductance of this resistor?
Quote from: Zgreudz
>> 8 ) The position of the voltage probe in relation to the current sensing element (before/after).
...The position of the probe is taken into account in this (see also my early tests in my thread about the U).
I did not read about these early tests if they were described in French.
Is the current probe inserted before or after the voltage measuring point (relative to the power source) ?
Quote from: Zgreudz
9) Stray capacitances are measured on the U ( by using my aselfic probe actually) as well as inductance and ohmic losses. From this I built an electrical distributed model of my U.
The power transmission by stray capacitances and unexpected mutual inductances as well as EM really worries me.
Were those stray energy transfer paths measured at the operating frequency or much lower?
Where can I see the "distributed model" together with the values of these stray capacitances and mutual inductances?
I know the JL Naudin has made similar measurements of those stray paths, but I lost the link to his article about it.
As promised, the translation of the
1rst Q&A of the present FAQ of the website on the work of Richard
http://richard-vialle.info (http://richard-vialle.info)/
(In agreement to the licence terms of the website, already published and taking no liability for any error of translation or modifications in between of the original terms of licence or of the original terms I translate here. These warnings will apply for any further written by me on this website. )
-----
> Une expérience scientifique est une expérience qui contredit l'expérience commune. Gaston Bachelard
.
A scientific experiment is an experience which contradicts the common experience.
Gaston Bachelard> Auto-générateur de Richard Vialle, première génération
.
Richard Vialle Auto-generator, first generation> Articles Expérimentations
.
Experimental publications> Autogénérateurs - Questions fréquemment posées
.
Autogenerator - Frequently asked questions> Note : Nous essayons autant que faire se peu de répondre aux questions fréquentes de la manière la plus pédagogique possible, et suivant les expériences terrains que nous avons eu avec les autogénérateurs, aussi cette FAQ peut évoluer dans le temps grâce aux retours des différentes équipes de recherche.
.
Note: We try as much as we can to answer to the frequently asked questions with most educational way possible, and regards to the field experiments we had with the autogenerators, though this FAQ may evolve through time thanks to the return results of our different researching teams.> Q : Dans certaines vidéos et sur le forum vous indiquez qu'un générateur a été construit avec l'aide de sponsors et la surunité pouvait recharger les batteries qui alimentaient le système, pouvez-vous détailler ?
.
Q: In certain videos and on the forum you indicate that a generator was built by means of sponsors and the overunity could recharge batteries which fed the system, may you detail?> R : Il s'agissait d'un auto-générateur complètement autonome fonctionnant sur batteries, et disposant de circuits fait-maison pour la partie oscillation et amplification.
.
R: It was about a completely autonomous auto-generator working on batteries, and having home-made circuits for the oscillation and amplification parts.----
B.R.
K.
Quote from: Khwartz on February 02, 2014, 05:14:53 AM
May one of you calculate the resonance modes of copper bars, based on the speed of the electronic phase wave?
Quote from: verpies on February 04, 2014, 04:10:12 AM
P.S.
If you assume that electrons are responsible for the electric current in a solid conductor, then their speed calculates to be very slow (on the order of cm/h). Though, it is only an assumption, based on the prevalent inability to form an alternate explanation for current conduction in solid conductors.
Quote from: Khwartz on February 07, 2014, 04:00:44 PM
While he even doesn't know of what I was talking about and presupposes here too the unworthiness of the ideas of who he is addressing?
I did not assume unworthiness. You just mentioned speed of electrons in a solid conductor and I analyzed their speed because they move so slow.
The legacy science states that electric current in solids is due to the motion of electrons. My Post Scriptum was aimed at classifying this belief as a mere assumption. If the "current is only electrons" assumption is rejected then faster standing waves inside solids become possible....and worthy.
Quote from: Khwartz on February 07, 2014, 04:00:44 PM
Putting words in my mouth to then state they are erroneous? ^^
In English this is called a
Strawman debating technique (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Strawman).
It is dishonest and I did not use it on you.
@ verpies
Dear verpies.
Very thanks for having taking time to answer completely and precisely to the last degree of list of answers.
I will try to contact Zgreudz by PM here, as my connection with COS has been broken, to ask him if he could agree to answer your present new questions. I would dream that because if would the beginning of a true scientific team work which could benefit to any of us. (But to be true, I am not sure to be able to reach him.)
I could answer to few of your questions if I had still access to COS, but for now, I haven't the means and time to create an other nickname using an other web available i.d. to do so. But for "aselfic" = non-inductive, indeed, you're right: "self" = "coil" or "inductance".
Thanks again for your work :)
@ tim
(Warning: THIS IS JUST A SUGGESTION; say that cause looks making proposals are taken by few, as orders ... ;) )
Dear tim, would it be possible for you to copy paste the verpies's previous post in "my" ex-proxithread with here, in COS, and ask if "someone" will have the kindness to invest too the time needed to specify each point on a futher level, so that we could stabilise each item up to a possible and wishfully standard procedure for each item, that then each of us could follow with good confidence?
B.R.
K.
Quote from: verpies on February 09, 2014, 10:57:59 AM
I did not assume unworthiness. You just mentioned speed of electrons in a solid conductor and I analyzed their speed because they move so slow.
The legacy science states that electric current in solids is due to the motion of electrons. My Post Scriptum was aimed at classifying this belief as a mere assumption. If the "current is only electrons" assumption is rejected then faster standing waves inside solids become possible....and worthy.
Thanks for the clarification :)
Indeed, I was talking about "phase waves", the speed of the phase waves, so not indeed of the speed of electrons, I know very slow.
Looks I had not well understood your words if you in fact, was reinforcing the idea. Sorry for that! Still need to work my English :-\
Quote
In English this is called a Strawman debating technique (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Strawman).
It is dishonest and I did not use it on you.
Thanks for the information ;)
Hi Verpies,
since you took the time to answer directly to the info I provided to Khwartz, I will answer to you directly. But as I told Khwartz by PM I have no time to spend in discussions on this forum, by lack of time, not by lack of interest. Furthermore, I have no will to argue for or against the subjects that are raised by Khwartz (not me) or by any other members, about the reality of the effects of RV theory. My own personnal belief is that the most probable overunity measurement comes from measurement errors. This does not prevent a rigorous study of the phenomena, there is always an occasion to learn something :)
For Khwartz: please do not put me anymore in such situation, where I am kind of forced (by sheer politeness) to answer on your behalf. Thanks for your understanding.
By the way, my speciality is metrology at LOW frequency at very high precision (FemtoFarads, nanometers) , but not RF measurement. So by using some methods I am familliar whith, I may miss some big issue an RF engineer could see immediately. :)
This will be my last replie for a long time I guess. :)
So now back to the technical points:
Quote from: verpies on February 09, 2014, 10:29:02 AM
Sure
In some cases yes, but it can be a good method, especially if the RMS values refer to pure sine current and voltage waveforms and the phase offset is constant.
Also, multiplying URMS * IRMS * cos(Φ) is not the only method for measuring power with a scope.
The other method is quickly sampling and multiplying instantaneous values of current and voltage instead of calculating the RMS values of each component and multiplying them. This method is immune to variable phase offsets and non-sinusoidal waveforms.
If the spectral purity of current and voltage waveforms has been verified by some kind of spectrum analyzer than it is acceptable proof that that they indeed are pure.
Eyeballing sine waves on a time-domain display does not ensure their purity above 4-bits of ENOB. e.g. see this video (http://youtu.be/aDiCqgWWqDU?t=43m01s).
Curve fitting assumes a certain form of the signal - it does not verify that form.
If the spectral purity has been verified in pt.1 & 2 then analytic sine curve fitting is appropriate. If not - then it is not.
A more universal method of power measurement (independent of the waveform shape and phase shift) is to sample the current and voltage SIMULTANEOUSLY (at maximum ENOB of those ADCs) at high rate and multiply the instantaneous values for each sample pair. Finally sum and divide the results of these multiplications to calculate the arithmetic mean.
At these sampling rates, I have no doubt that the horizontal resolution is sufficient for a signal having no more than 5MHz of harmonic content. However, this information provides no data about the vertical quantization errors during these measurements.
Just because the scope samples at 2.5Gs/s does not mean that its internal RMS calculators run at this frequency and they make their internal calculations with ENOB2 precision (and that all of the ADC bits are even used) . Do they, are they?
For example, take a look at this guy (http://www.overunity.com/10517/standing-wave-coil-frequency/msg309219/#msg309219) - his was using a scope with 8-bit ADCs but was using only 2-bits of them, in one extreme case !!! If his internal RMS calculator had calculated an RMS value based on this data, then the result would be worthless even if he fed his scope with pure sine waves.
Also, if sampling and multiplying instantaneous values of current and voltage was implemented instead of calculating the RMS values of each component, would this scope sample both channels simultaneously and multiply each sample pair at 2.5G multiplications per second in order to create the values for its "Math Channel" ? (a.k.a. the instantaneous power channel).
Finally how does this scope calculate the arithmetical mean of this Math Channel? Does it sum all the samples and divide them? With what internal precision and over how many samples?
Actually, I tried everything: I don't thrust too much scope's calculations so I used it as a data sampler. I did some FFT on the sampled data (via LTSpice by replaying the data), mostly for the GEGENE project because here the signal where really shitty. For the RV U I calculated the data with an Excel spreadsheet and analysed the residues (difference beteween model and data). I think you make a point by suggesting that the sampling might be not simultaneous on the scope I have. I had the same doubt and I checked the data logging by using two different channels to test the same signal. I have not documented everything though. You can have a look (pardon my French ) at http://www.conspirovniscience.com/forum/index.php?showtopic=961&view=findpost&p=24626 (http://www.conspirovniscience.com/forum/index.php?showtopic=961&view=findpost&p=24626) and here for the GEGENE: http://www.conspirovniscience.com/forum/index.php?showtopic=1040&view=findpost&p=27533 (http://www.conspirovniscience.com/forum/index.php?showtopic=1040&view=findpost&p=27533)
Quote from: verpies
I have a difficulty comprehending this statement.
Are those"raw samples' , numerical samples downloaded from the ADCs to a computer and then an RMS calculation is being performed on them there?
Yes,as I sait I prefer to work on numerical data ('"raw sample"), directly downloaded from scope and then do my own cooking. But sometimes it is handy to have an eye on the scopes measurements on screen, so I just checked them agains the raw data.
Quote
Does "aselfic" = non-inductive ?
Yep, sorry for the french garbled jargon. ;-)
Quote
So what is the measured resistance and inductance of this non-inductive current sensing resistor (CSR)? At what frequency did the HP4784A measure the inductance of this resistor?
I did not read about these early tests if they were described in French.
Is the current probe inserted before or after the voltage measuring point (relative to the power source) ?
Indeed HP4784A is a low frequency device, limited to 1MHz, and I made the tests on components at 100kHz whith this device and compared the results on the measured components with the probe at 5MHz and 100kHz without significant dispersion. So yet it qualifies exactly the probe at 100kHz not 5MHz, but the component I used (R+L+C) are rather calm between 100k and 10MHz, resonnant frequencies are more in the 250MHz domain.... If you don'y mind reading some French, I think I put it on the link: http://www.conspirovniscience.com/forum/index.php?showtopic=961&view=findpost&p=24655 (http://www.conspirovniscience.com/forum/index.php?showtopic=961&view=findpost&p=24655) and mostly here:http://www.conspirovniscience.com/forum/index.php?showtopic=961&view=findpost&p=24860 (http://www.conspirovniscience.com/forum/index.php?showtopic=961&view=findpost&p=24860)
Quote
The power transmission by stray capacitances and unexpected mutual inductances as well as EM really worries me.
Were those stray energy transfer paths measured at the operating frequency or much lower?
Where can I see the "distributed model" together with the values of these stray capacitances and mutual inductances?
I know the JL Naudin has made similar measurements of those stray paths, but I lost the link to his article about it.
I put the model here (essentially it is only the library component for LTSpice and how to use it): http://www.conspirovniscience.com/forum/index.php?showtopic=974&view=findpost&p=24914 (http://www.conspirovniscience.com/forum/index.php?showtopic=974&view=findpost&p=24914) The data measurement are here: http://www.conspirovniscience.com/forum/index.php?showtopic=961&view=findpost&p=24923 (http://www.conspirovniscience.com/forum/index.php?showtopic=961&view=findpost&p=24923). I think I made all measurement at 100k but here we are dealing with 1nF...
I analyzed JLN data and they were bizarre (Capacitance values he measured were non physical, like association of 3 caps in triangle/star configuaration that needs a negative capacitance to give the measured results, this kind of stuff. I think his LCR meter was probably the cause)
Quote from: tim123 on February 08, 2014, 11:37:45 AM
and it's not a pure wave either.
Whaddaya mean it's not pure?
Did you follow the guidelines outlined in the datasheet for using this comparator?
This comparator is used to convert a
filtered sine wave into a square wave (...in effect: analog to digital).
Quote from: tim123 on February 08, 2014, 11:37:45 AM
- It has 2 pins that output a sine-wave at 2.5v Pk
If you need to amplify this analog sine wave output then use a strong op-amp or another type of analog amplifier.
Quote from: tim123 on February 08, 2014, 11:37:45 AM
- It has 2 pins (from the comparator) that output a 4.5v square wave
If obtaining a rectangular waveform is your goal, then you can use this digital output directly or to drive a digital amplifier.
Quote from: tim123 on February 08, 2014, 11:37:45 AM
Can anyone tell me how I should connect the DDS to the transistor? :-\
You can connect this output resistively/directly to a JFET or BJT parts ...but not to most MOSFETs :)
Quote from: tim123 on February 08, 2014, 11:37:45 AM
...and I'd like to use that to drive my MOSFET.
Some logic-level MOSFET's gates can be driven by only 4V, but not many.
For most Power MOSFETs you need a strong
digital gate driver like the
UCC27511 (http://www.ti.com/lit/ds/symlink/ucc27511.pdf).
Remember to set the right goals for your design:
Do you want an analog amplification or a digital amplification?
Do you want to amplify the output current or voltage or both (power) ?
P.S.
Most optocouplers cannot handle >1MHz signals and analog signals.
Transformers cannot handle DC nor low frequencies and high frequencies at the same time.
Quote from: verpies on February 09, 2014, 12:46:47 PM
Whaddaya mean it's not pure?
Did you follow the guidelines outlined in the datasheet for using this comparator?
Hi Verpies,
It's not pure if I connect it up wrong ;) - at least - that's how it looks on my DSO scope - it may be a sampling artifact...
Thanks for the info. a 'Gate Driver' is exactly what i need. I just didn't know it. :)
What I'm trying to do is drive an IRF450 mosfet from a sig-gen. The IRF450 really wants a 10v square wave.
I figured out that a differential amp might do it... And I got some cheap optos which do 10MBs - but only 5.5v...
The UCC27511 only seems to be available as SMD - not DIP... I can get a UCC27524P though...
Thanks again
Regards, Tim
Quote from: Khwartz on February 09, 2014, 11:16:56 AM
Dear tim, would it be possible for you to copy paste the verpies's previous post in "my" ex-proxithread with here, in COS, and ask if "someone" will have the kindness to invest too the time needed to specify each point on a futher level, so that we could stabilise each item up to a possible and wishfully standard procedure for each item, that then each of us could follow with good confidence?
Hi Khwartz,
while I am somewhat in awe of Verpies understanding of, and his clear enumeration of the issues involved in these measurements, I'm not sure that presenting them to COS is the right thing to do...
If they were my questions, I would, of course. But Verpies is not doing a replication as far as I'm aware, and his questions - I believe - were rhetorical. He is not seeking answers to thse questions, and nor am I - at least - not today.
At the moment, I'm not at the stage where I need to know the answers the verpies questions, but if i get to that stage, and i think that it would help - i will ask the COS guys...
Pascal seems to be very frustrated with the whole project. It seems that despite his hard work he has been unable to replicate the effect. Perhaps he has given up on it. I think there is no 'right' way for the replication. If there was, Pascal would be happy...
I do think that there *is* something to be discovered in the general arrangement of: feeding signals into masses... Keely acheived OU & antigrav & more - all using sound, and for some reason, M. Vialle's generator reminds me of Keely's work... John Hutchison's HF anti-grav too...
I think it's remarkable that the speed of sound in 1m copper (3.6Km/s) is *exactly about* (It's a scientific term ;)) 1000 times less than the Vialle resonance... That is spooky. :)
So, what I'm saying is: as the right way to build or drive the device has not yet been found, we can't expect to follow a formula... We have to use our imagination and knowledge, and just try stuff out...
:)
Tim
Quote from: tim123 on February 09, 2014, 01:37:18 PM
The UCC27511 only seems to be available as SMD - not DIP... I can get a UCC27524P though...
UCC27524P does not have differential inputs nor independent source/sink outputs and is weaker than the UCC27511.
You do not need a DIP anyway, the SMD driver can be glued to the Power MOSFET because it needs to be very close to the MOSFET's gate terminal.
See how closely Itsu had mounted his SMD driver to the transistor in
this video (http://youtu.be/avcGWerjM0M?t=0m22s).
Quote from: Pascuser on February 09, 2014, 02:14:13 AM
2) Khwartz went in the french forum and asked the autorisation to spread informations about RV in the englishe world. This has been granted with the mention not to spread it on overunity, because only critics were here.
There you are really wrong.
We already have over 70.000 members over here and there are certainly many very brilliant researchers
who DON`T are sceptics...
Surely some prefer just to read and not take part in the discussion....
If the Vialle´s work can not stand a few sceptics over here, which might point out measurement errors,
then what ?
If he is valid and genuine it will progress , also over here !
P.S: Please ALL stop posting private email messages and private names here, due to the Terms of Service and privacy policies
I must delete these messages.
Thanks for your understanding.
Regards, Stefan.
Quote from: tim123 on February 09, 2014, 02:19:34 PM
Hi Khwartz,
Hi tim :)
Quotewhile I am somewhat in awe of Verpies understanding of, and his clear enumeration of the issues involved in these measurements, I'm not sure that presenting them to COS is the right thing to do...
Okay, I can understand that :)
QuoteIf they were my questions, I would, of course. But Verpies is not doing a replication as far as I'm aware, and his questions - I believe - were rhetorical. He is not seeking answers to thse questions, and nor am I - at least - not today.
Understand too :)
QuoteAt the moment, I'm not at the stage where I need to know the answers the verpies questions, but if i get to that stage, and i think that it would help - i will ask the COS guys...
I get your logic but I am not necessarily agree with the result of your logic because of a difference of reality (data), I think.
If we need to know which procedure is good to follow to get an overunity, we need to know which procedures have indeed produced o.u. in the former experiments, but if we are not sure of the results because of doubts about the measurements so we are in doubt too about which procedure to follow. So for me the question is still mostly relevant. Without good data, many time is lost each time.
QuotePascal seems to be very frustrated with the whole project. It seems that despite his hard work he has been unable to replicate the effect.
As I could remember he did replicate "the effect", if it is the "Vialle effect": producing a little avalanche of power from 2 halves insulated and separated pipes, by means of a coil and specifiques frequencies.
(This effect is mostly easy to obtain if having good range of frequencies. See Biganos's adives I've reported here.)
If I remember well too, he obtained the phenomenon called "negative power" (drop of the power consumption as the interpretations read by the measurements, and he get similar results than JLN and even worked like a mirror with him, positively critiquing each other).
Still if I remember well, it was about to fail to reproduce the laboratory selfrun of the sponsors, and to get true power, so the famous "kW" (6 kW for 1 meter bar) Richards has calculated, nor the "very avalanche of power" (long arch of Richard (?) and of 1 or tow experimenters since).
As I have understood him, is very deception is not getting the true power, the power which could be used to power a house.
QuotePerhaps he has given up on it. I think there is no 'right' way for the replication. If there was, Pascal would be happy...
I am not agree with you, dear tim, there are "rights ways", in my opinion. Like Colas07 does or the PROMTECNO team does too.
For them, overunity is very easy to obtain; all the problem is that it is based on their interpretation of their measurements. So still the same: to really be sure they do indeed the right way, we need to be sure of what they do about the measurements; we just come back at my first point ;)
BUT, as JNL, as Pascusier, as Colas, as Biganos, they all have achieved very very interesting results which could be indeed overunity.
So the logical thing for me would be to do at least as good as they have been able to do and then to go further with more rigour in anything.
But I know it is not really the way you feel you have to do ;)
QuoteI do think that there *is* something to be discovered in the general arrangement of: feeding signals into masses... Keely acheived OU & antigrav & more - all using sound, and for some reason, M. Vialle's generator reminds me of Keely's work... John Hutchison's HF anti-grav too...
Yeap, if Keely achieved all this :)
QuoteI think it's remarkable that the speed of sound in 1m copper (3.6Km/s) is *exactly about* (It's a scientific term ;)) 1000 times less than the Vialle resonance... That is spooky. :)
;)
QuoteSo, what I'm saying is: as the right way to build or drive the device has not yet been found,
I not necessarily agree as I said just before. If the COPs 2.6, 35, and even negative are accurate, indeed there are already existing "right ways to build".
For me, the most important thing is not to replicate but to check if the different levels of effects do exist, but to check if the very promising and interesting results already obtained are valid or not, to check the already done and published replications cause then it would tell us which were "the right ways". And any way, as to the "building", I don't see truly variation, there is NO difficulty, as I have seen, it is in having enough powerful amplifiers, learning how to tune the input and the output (all this looks to me rather mastered), AND HAVE ACCURATE MEASUREMENTS so that we could give VALID results which could guide us accurately too and economise our time by avoiding misleading results.
The previous have been shown as enough to obtain the first levels of effect up the negative power and high COP (still of course if the measurements were indeed accurated...).
Quotewe can't expect to follow a formula...
Following the way of Colas and soon of BlueDragon, and I am pretty sure you will registre intersting things, or of course, demonstrate the non accuracy of their procedures. But for now, still need to be checked.
It have been made already a whole bunch of replications, it is not like if nothing had been done with no results! ;)
QuoteWe have to use our imagination and knowledge, and just try stuff out...
:)
Tim
Follow your own intuition, but please, just remembered my words and the warnings of Biganos ;) (and Blue) dear tim :)
:D :D :D :D :D :D
@ Zgreudz & verpies
Just have seen your post, dear Zgreudz 8)
My eyes indeed get near wet when I discovered it while I didn't expect so fast but so so wished it! :)
Sorry if some time I so want things could go in the right direction, that my suggestions are near taken like obligations! ;)
I knew your level of skills and I knew those of verpies. It is MOSTLY valuable for everyone that you I took time to answer once again to the technical points about measurements procedures.
I hope you and verpies you have well understood it had nothing with a kind of competition but just to benefit and add your both knowledges and experiences about measurements, with the advantage you have, dear Zgreudz, of having praticed the RV U (even with a skeptical point of view).
So now I would just ask if you, dear verpies, you would be okay to comment Zgreudz last answers, not in the purpose to have then new answers from Zgreudz, but just to complete the clarification of each item so that the replicators or the researchers could use these data as a data base to run accurate procedures.
I remember you, you have NO obligation! I just try to put some organisation in the whole thing. My time is precious and I suppose the time of many others here too. So if I could help to win so time to everybody here while having more accurate and efficient procedures, I would be very satified of what I do here and now (aside the translations and compilation work).
VERY THANKS TO BOTH OF YOU FOR YOUR INTEREST AND GENEROSITY (for the time granted),
B.R.
K.
Quote from: verpies on February 09, 2014, 03:58:01 PM
UCC27524P does not have differential inputs nor independent source/sink outputs and is weaker than the UCC27511.
You do not need a DIP anyway, the SMD driver can be glued to the Power MOSFET because it needs to be very close to the MOSFET's gate terminal.
See how closely Itsu had mounted his SMD driver to the transistor in this video (http://youtu.be/avcGWerjM0M?t=0m22s).
Hi Verpies,
Itsu's driver was mounted in an adapter socket... Is this the right thing?
http://www.coolcomponents.co.uk/sot23-to-dip-adapter.html?gclid=CLHD3-etwbwCFUjpwgodXz0AGg#.
Do you just superglue the chip to the board?
Quote from: tim123 on February 10, 2014, 05:34:09 AM
Hi Verpies,
Itsu's driver was mounted in an adapter socket... Is this the right thing?
http://www.coolcomponents.co.uk/sot23-to-dip-adapter.html?gclid=CLHD3-etwbwCFUjpwgodXz0AGg#.
Do you just superglue the chip to the board?
Hi Tim,
that looks like the correct adapter for the ucc27511, yes.
You need to solder it on the adapter, for a nice video about SMD soldering, see: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3NN7UGWYmBY
The flux is a must in my opinion, and at my age the maginifier as well ;D
Regards Itsu
Hi Itsu, Thanks! :)
PS: Bits ordered...
Completion of ::) the translation of the
1rst Q&A of the present FAQ of the website on the work of Richard
*** THE THREE ANOMALIES ***
http://richard-vialle.info (http://richard-vialle.info)/
(In agreement to the licence terms of the website, already published and taking no liability for any error of translation or modifications in between of the original terms of licence or of the original terms I translate here. These warnings will apply for any further written by me on this website. )
-----
> Une expérience scientifique est une expérience qui contredit l'expérience commune. Gaston Bachelard
.
A scientific experiment is an experience which contradicts the common experience.
Gaston Bachelard> Auto-générateur de Richard Vialle, première génération
.
Richard Vialle Auto-generator, first generation> Articles Expérimentations
.
Experimental publications> Autogénérateurs - Questions fréquemment posées
.
Autogenerator - Frequently asked questions> Note : Nous essayons autant que faire se peu de répondre aux questions fréquentes de la manière la plus pédagogique possible, et suivant les expériences terrains que nous avons eu avec les autogénérateurs, aussi cette FAQ peut évoluer dans le temps grâce aux retours des différentes équipes de recherche.
.
Note: We try as much as we can to answer to the frequently asked questions with most educational way possible, and regards to the field experiments we had with the autogenerators, though this FAQ may evolve through time thanks to the return results of our different researching teams.> Q : Dans certaines vidéos et sur le forum vous indiquez qu'un générateur a été construit avec l'aide de sponsors et la surunité pouvait recharger les batteries qui alimentaient le système, pouvez-vous détailler ?
.
Q: In certain videos and on the forum you indicate that a generator was built by means of sponsors and the overunity could recharge batteries which fed the system, may you detail?> R : Il s'agissait d'un auto-générateur complètement autonome fonctionnant sur batteries, et disposant de circuits fait-maison pour la partie oscillation et amplification.
.
R: It was about a completely autonomous auto-generator working on batteries, and having home-made circuits for the oscillation and amplification parts.> Le système autonome de Richard VIALLE débitait 600mA sous 24V sans charge (donc 14,4Watts consommés) sur la sortie du U et 200mA lorsqu'une charge de 10Watts (ampoule) était branchée en sortie avec court-circuit. Donc l'oscillateur + amplificateur consommait 200mA sous 24V = 4,8Watts
• Richard VIALLE's autonomous system took 600mA under 24V without load (thus 14,4Watts consumed) on the output of U and 200mA when a load of 10Watts (light bulb) was connected to the output of it with short circuit. Thus the oscillator + amplifier consumed 200mA under 24V = 4,8Watts > Ce qui est surtout intéressant, c'est que même si la batterie marquait un débit de 200mA; lorsqu'elle était coupée par la suite (au bout de 5h d'utilisation) pour passer sur une deuxième batterie (les 2 batteries fonctionnaient l'une après l'autre en alternance); le temps de la stabilisation de la batterie (repolarisation) elle remontait jusqu'à sa valeur INITIALE de tension de charge, sans aucune diminution.
• What is especially interesting, it is that even if the battery displayed a current of 200mA; when it was afterward cut (at the end of 5 hours of use) to pass on the second battery (2 batteries worked one after the other in alternation); the time of the stabilization of the battery (repolarisation ) it raised back until its INITIAL value of tension of charge, without any decrease.> Normalement une batterie de 24V (mettons qu'elle était à 24,3V par exemple) qui va débiter va diminuer en tension. Elle va par exemple être arrêté au bout d'un certain temps lorsqu'elle fait 21V. Puis elle se repose, se stabilise chimiquement et thermiquement et se repolarise. Elle va arriver à remonter par exemple jusqu'à 23,5V. La différence est dûe à l'énergie délivrée sur le circuit qui l'a consommée. Mais là non, la batterie remontait à la même tension de 24,3V.
• Normally a battery of 24V (let us say that it was in 24,3V for example) which feeds the curcuit will decrease in voltage. It will be stopped after a while for example at 21V. Then it rests, stabilises chemically and thermically and re-polarises. It will succed to go back up to for example 23,5V. The difference [with 24.3 V] is due to the energy delivered on the circuit which consumed it. But here not, the battery went back to the same voltage of 24,3V.> Donc avec ce système ils ont pu faire tourner le montage sur une ampoule pendant plusieurs semaines en continu sans jamais devoir recharger une quelconque batterie qui est restée toujours à tension maximale. Si on calcule le débit d'énergie on peut voir que c'est impossible normalement.
• Thus with this system they were able to make run the set-up on a light bulb during several continuous weeks without ever having to recharge battery which always stayed in maximal voltage. If we calculate the flow of energy we can see that it is normally impossible.> De plus elle débitait sur une charge de 10Watts allumée très fort (à 13Watts de sortie en fait d'après ce que me disait Richard VIALLE); tout en ne consommant que 4,8Watts qui finalement n'avaient pas de signification réelle car la batterie se rechargeait.
• Furthermore it fed a load of 10Watts lit very brightly (to 13Watts of output in fact according to what told me Richard VIALLE); while consuming only 4,8Watts which finally had no real meaning because the battery recharged itself. > La recharge de la batterie est une anomalie qui ne devrait pas avoir lieu et qui montre bien qu'il se passe autre chose qu'un phénomène électrique. La puissance négative est déjà là comme première anomalie, réduisant l'entre à 4,8Watts de conso au lieu de 14,4Watts pour une sortie de 10Watts, produisant, deuxième anomalie la surunité COP>1.Troisième anomalie, il y a quelque chose qui s'est produit qui se décharge sur la batterie et qui recharge la batterie.
• The recharge of the battery is an anomaly which should not take place and which shows well that there is something else than an electric phenomenon. The negative power is already there as first anomaly, reducing input at 4,8Watts of consumption instead of 14,4Watts for an output of 10Watts [or even 13W], producing, the second anomaly the overunity: COP > 1. The third anomaly, there is something which occurred which discharges onto the battery and which recharges battery.----
B.R.
K.
PS: Blue, what about to use my translations here to put on your "http://richard-vialle.info/ (http://richard-vialle.info/)" website? :)
Quote from: hartiberlin on February 09, 2014, 07:44:41 PM
There you are really wrong.
We already have over 70.000 members over here and there are certainly many very brilliant researchers
who DON`T are sceptics...
Surely some prefer just to read and not take part in the discussion....
If the Vialle´s work can not stand a few sceptics over here, which might point out measurement errors,
then what ?
If he is valid and genuine it will progress , also over here !
P.S: Please ALL stop posting private email messages and private names here, due to the Terms of Service and privacy policies
I must delete these messages.
Thanks for your understanding.
Regards, Stefan.
Very great, dear Stefan, you cleaned up a little bit the place so that the visitors, replicators and researchers, will not be distracted from the subject of this thread.
Best regards,
K.
Quote from: zgreudz on February 09, 2014, 12:21:26 PM
You can have a look (pardon my French ) at
http://www.conspirovniscience.com/forum/index.php?showtopic=961&view=findpost&p=24626 (http://www.conspirovniscience.com/forum/index.php?showtopic=961&view=findpost&p=24626)
I smiled in a positive manner when I saw this low-inductance Current Sensing Resistor (CSR) depicted in the photo below.
I'd like to share with you a piece of knowledge that might be used to improve this CSR even further.
The common electronics knowledge states that a coiled wire presents more inductance than a straight wire, right?
Well, not quite ! - it turns out that the inductance depends non-monotonically on the pitch angle of the turns :o
See the graph below:
Quote from: tim123 on February 10, 2014, 05:34:09 AM
Do you just superglue the chip to the board?
I usually just glue it to the MOSFET front-to-front and connect it with very short wires or use the MOSFET's leads to reach the driver directly ;)
Quote from: Khwartz on February 10, 2014, 06:05:19 AM
...
Thus with this system they were able to make run the set-up on a light bulb during several continuous weeks without ever having to recharge battery which always stayed in maximal voltage.
Hi Khwartz,
thanks for your translations. :)
This explains why the guys on COS were testing whether batteries spontaneously recharged when near the autogen. I saw a vid...
So the batteries did 'discharge' when powering the device, and after 5 hours had a lower voltage.
At this point they were swapped - but they just needed a 'rest' - and did not actually need to be recharged. Interesting.
Regards, Tim
Quote from: verpies on February 10, 2014, 06:50:14 AM
I'd like to share with you a piece of knowledge that might be used to improve this CSR even further...
Hi Verpies,
Are you suggesting that the angle between the individual resistors should be about 15 degrees (instead of parallel)?
Quote from: tim123 on February 07, 2014, 03:17:06 PM
Ummm, actually it's my job... I feel like i cheated... :-[
;) lol
I've got an Arduino Uno (£10). The Due has much more power...
There's soooo much choice now with single-board-computers... Was looking at the Raspberry Pi - cos it's so popular. Olimex do some great boards... The problem is *always* the software - and the arduino folks seem to have it sussed with their 'wiring-code' language...
The one that's *really* interesting is this one: http://www.parallella.org/ (http://www.parallella.org/)
Their SBC has a normal processor, and 16 extra processors in another chip. All for $99.
More processing power per watt that anything else available! I think i need one... :)
LOL - thanks for 'fessing' up. Fascinating devices but I think unless I find a specific need for one I probably wouldn't spend the time needed to learn programming them.
Guys, Ramset's just revived this old thread and posted a doc - which is very interesting...
http://www.overunity.com/647/lyne-atomic-hydrogen-furnace/msg387251/#msg387251
Right at the end it's selling another book, and says:
QuoteI suggested using an iron pipe and 15 kv transformer, based on
Tesla's use of an iron "antenna" in a Colorado Springs experiment. With
an approx. .1 amp/120 volt input (12 watts), an output of 48 kw was
achieved. Since the K-capture level of iron is 7,110 volts, I suggested
tuning the two 7,500-volt legs to 7,110 with a variac (total voltage
14,220), at which the output jumped to 66 kw, a gain of over 38%.
It made me wonder if the 'type 3' or 'avalanche' event in the autogen happens at *a specific voltage*...?
Quote from: verpies on February 10, 2014, 06:50:14 AM
I smiled in a positive manner when I saw this low-inductance Current Sensing Resistor (CSR) depicted in the photo below.
I'd like to share with you a piece of knowledge that might be used to improve this CSR even further.
The common electronics knowledge states that a coiled wire presents more inductance than a straight wire, right?
Well, not quite ! - it turns out that the inductance depends non-monotonically on the pitch angle of the turns :o
See the graph below:
Hi verpies.
Surely because of my lacks in electronics, I don't understand well the relevancy of your note regards to the graph you provides and the "pitch angle".
Indeed, but could be because you had not the translation of the captions, but one of the characteristics of Zgreudz' probe is that there is NO wire at all inside: all noninductive resistors are welded with only very few millimeters, the rest of the connection having been cut. So I very hardly see where it could have a "pitch angle of coil" somewhere :o :o
If remembered well, the final inductuance has been checked and corresponds to the theoretical value (
I invite you to built one and check by yourself and even publish your actual results by measurement, if you have to professional tools for - Aligent, HP, ... -).
So, could you clear me more the relevancy of your note? Please.
Regards.
K.
Quote from: tim123 on February 10, 2014, 12:01:38 PM
Hi Khwartz,
thanks for your translations. :)
This explains why the guys on COS were testing whether batteries spontaneously recharged when near the autogen. I saw a vid...
So the batteries did 'discharge' when powering the device, and after 5 hours had a lower voltage.
At this point they were swapped - but they just needed a 'rest' - and did not actually need to be recharged. Interesting.
Regards, Tim
Hi tim :)
Hehe, nope! Lol
You confuse the description of how a battery works, while we suppose it runs few hours, then been stopped to make it rests and "repolarises" (means that the battery "re-balances" its chemicals inside and does raise back its voltage to 23.5 V). But all this is NORMAL process without the RAG.
How it worked with the RAG and the 2 batteries, as I have understood it, it's about 2 kinds of systems:
1. It is just a very specific transistor or kind of, which allows, by a "virtual resistance", an imperfection in the building of (by the fabric), the negative energy to go through the electronic to feed back a single battery.
2. A kind of alternative system which feeds some energy in the RAG one time with the first battery (we could call "exciting time") and a second time while the first battery is disconnected to fully allow the negative power to "sail up" to the second battery (we could call it "charging time").
Could be both were used.
That's why we near all advise in the French community, to go by gradients in the replication:
1. Obtention of the lit of the light bulb and verify by oneself it was function of the frequency injected;
2. Obtention of a decrease of power consumption at the imput of the bar while we put it on load = production of "negative power";
3. Obtention of the maximisation of the COP until been "negative": the bar gives back more power than it takes;
4. Obtention of the recharge of a battery (or 2 alternatively) while still the bar lits the light bulb at maximum;
5. Obtention of the range of kilowatts (at the output of the bar or in the direction of the batteries?) with full bending, control, of the power.
These are the logical and progressive steps one should go through, to "not miss the essential" (as Biganos said, but in French ;) ).
Note: if I remember well, the transistors (?) were "Toshiba" or "Mitsubishi", something like that, but for the little story, what I do remember well is that just after the sponsors were about to protect their circuit by a patent, the imperfection of the transistor have been corrected by the fabric to no more have the "virtual resistance" and couldn't no more allow the negative power to sail up through.
To be able to have a chance to do so, the French experimenters found old series of transistors dating before "the correction".
For the recharging phenomenon by only proximity, it looks like true too ;)
Note that the "charge time", in the experiment, is mater of a hundred of minutes, not hours :)
And you're welcome for the translation :)
Best regards,
K.
----
Translation of the captions of the first attachment:
Mesure à vide 10 min avant.
• Measurement without load 10 minutes before. Mesure à vide 5 min avant.
• Measurement without load 5 minutes before. Fin de l'expérience.
End of experiment.Début remontée batterie.
Beginning of the raising back of the battery. Fin remontée batterie.
End of the raising back of the battery. ----
The second attachment is a version of a circuit used by the sponsor. It could allow negative power but looks this version was not still workable for the selfrun which looks have been acheived at the V10 version of 12 at the patent stage.
Quote from: tim123 on February 10, 2014, 02:11:42 PM
Guys, Ramset's just revived this old thread and posted a doc - which is very interesting...
http://www.overunity.com/647/lyne-atomic-hydrogen-furnace/msg387251/#msg387251
Right at the end it's selling another book, and says:
It made me wonder if the 'type 3' or 'avalanche' event in the autogen happens at *a specific voltage*...?
Thanks for this insisting datum, dear tim.
As far the Autogen is concerned, the French experimenters are clear: it is not a question of voltage but of amps (and frequency + tuning).
It is the shunt like system at the output of the bar which, by a high short-circuit current like, induces a magnetic field in the coil which then produces the negative power.
As you know already now, if any failure have been registered in the production of the first and second stages of effects, it was a failure to have enough power in imput to allow amps.
Nevertheless, from my own viewpoint, most, if not all experiments, have been done with rather law voltages so could be nice to make a systematic test of the voltage factor, against graph, duty cycle if drived with scare waves shapes. Still, it should not be done imo before the 3rd level of replication mastering.
Hope this will help you,
B.R.
K.
PS to my citizenmates of Conspirovnicience.com and the PROMTECNO Association (only 16 € a year to support it ;) )
: you may* correct me at anytime. :) No correction will be considered like a king of tacit agreement on my understanding of Richard's Autogenerator ;) . (*: "may" mode for a suggestion or proposal; the mode of an order is "must" ::) ).
Edirion error.
Quote from: tim123 on February 10, 2014, 12:06:02 PM
Are you suggesting that the angle between the individual resistors should be about 15 degrees (instead of parallel)?
Almost.
15 degrees twist angle would be optimal if one resistor was used...but since this CSR is composed out of 18 resistors, then the optimal twist angle would be different.
@Khwartz
I did not write that the construction of this CSR was flawed (1nH is pretty good already). I merely wrote that it can be further improved.
That graph shows that a coiled wire can have a lower inductance than a straight wire, which goes against the common wisdom.
Quote from: verpies on February 11, 2014, 02:01:04 AM
Almost.
15 degrees twist angle would be optimal if one resistor was used...but since this CSR is composed out of 18 resistors, then the optimal twist angle would be different.
@Khwartz
I did not write that the construction of this CSR was flawed (1nH is pretty good already). I merely wrote that it can be further improved.
That graph shows that a coiled wire can have a lower inductance than a straight wire, which goes against the common wisdom.
Lol, now I think I get!
Indeed, I didn't realise the red dot ligne was straight wire! ;)
Soo Well Seen! Indeed, dear verpies: according to this graph, a pitch angle of ~15° would be better than 0°! 8)
Good one! ;)
Will need a try :)
Best regards,
K.
Thanks Khwartz, and Verpies, for your clarifications... :)
Does anyone know a source for solid copper bar as described for making the U-coil? Most copper bars for making house electrical grounds are actually steel with a copper coating.
Quote from: tim123 on February 11, 2014, 04:59:09 AM
Thanks Khwartz, and Verpies, for your clarifications... :)
You're very welcome! :)
Quote from: e2matrix on February 11, 2014, 04:25:41 PM
Does anyone know a source for solid copper bar as described for making the U-coil? Most copper bars for making house electrical grounds are actually steel with a copper coating.
Hi dear e2matrix.
If you have a look at page 8:
http://www.overunity.com/12639/richard-vialles-new-theory-about-negative-mass-and-overunity/105/#.UvsHpctKHqA (http://www.overunity.com/12639/richard-vialles-new-theory-about-negative-mass-and-overunity/105/#.UvsHpctKHqA)
You will see it is copper pipe.
It has been observed that solid bar doesn't give really more power than a pipe. And U shape bar with copper pipe have been the most replicated with success and the best known in terms of results.
For 1rst step, looks any material and shape will do. Even air! Lol (if the metallic connection plugs are inside the extremities of the thou air-coil.
For step 2, could be better to not have too large insulation on the bar but wires can be plastic insulated like normal wires for home power.
For step 3 could be better as thin as possible layer of insulation on copper pipe and enamelled wire.
You will see page 7, the specifics:
http://www.overunity.com/12639/richard-vialles-new-theory-about-negative-mass-and-overunity/90/#.UvsH1stKHqA (http://www.overunity.com/12639/richard-vialles-new-theory-about-negative-mass-and-overunity/90/#.UvsH1stKHqA)
B.R.
K.
Khwartz, Thank you - that is very helpful. I'm glad pipe works well as I already have some 1/2" copper pipe. I've also got a big coil of 3/4" copper pipe - probably 30 to 40 feet of it rolled into a flat pancake coil. That might make an interesting setup and I think I've got enough insulated wire to wrap it. But I'll probably stick to the more basic design for starters.
Quote from: e2matrix on February 12, 2014, 02:26:44 AM
Khwartz, Thank you - that is very helpful.
You're welcome and nice if it could help you :)
Quote
I'm glad pipe works well as I already have some 1/2" copper pipe.
Great! :D
QuoteI've also got a big coil of 3/4" copper pipe - probably 30 to 40 feet of it rolled into a flat pancake coil.
Lol, was it to produce hot solar water? ;) could you upload a pic, looks I miss some reality on, to have a clear concept of...
QuoteThat might make an interesting setup and I think I've got enough insulated wire to wrap it.
I think it is very good to follow one's intuition and "possible sign" of "The Divine Providence" (what ever meaning you may give to "Divine" ;D )... but in its right time ;) :)
QuoteBut I'll probably stick to the more basic design for starters.
Hehe, think it could be
a good idea so you could progress by little successes which will encourage you to continue and to overcome the little unsuccesses you could create in between :) then having enough certitude to take more risks with not yet tried at all solutions ;) (not bolded for you, e2matrix, but for any other reader.)
Very Thanks for your interest in this replication and study,
B.R.
K.
Translation of results obtained with the Autogen as in:
http://richard-vialle.info/~richardv/ (http://richard-vialle.info/~richardv/)
Hall of Fame
• Hall of Fame :)
Ils l'ont fait ! résultats des COP>1
• They have done it! Results of the COP> 1
Maj le 20/12/2012
• Up-dated December 12, 2012
Date
Date
Pseudo
Nickname
* Puissance en entrée de l'autogénérateur (mW)
* Power at the input of the autogegerator (mW)
** Puissance en sortie de l'autogénérateur (mW)
** Power at the output of the autogegerator (mW)
=== COP (Rapport Pout/Pin)
=== COP (Ratio Pout/Pin)
12/10/2012
JEAN LOUIS NAUDIN
* 3700
** 6696
=== 1,81
21/12/2012
COLAS07
* 2150
** 4760
=== 2,21
26/10/2012
JEAN LOUIS NAUDIN
* 1700
** 2610
=== 1,54
21/12/2012
COLAS07
* 1250
** 2100
=== 1,68
12/10/2012
JEAN LOUIS NAUDIN
* 256,73
** 619,67
=== 2,41
12/10/2012
JEAN LOUIS NAUDIN
* 251,86
** 554,63
=== 2,20
12/10/2012
JEAN LOUIS NAUDIN
* 252,76
** 482,23
=== 1,91
12/10/2012
JEAN LOUIS NAUDIN
* 250,3
** 427,64
=== 1,71
12/10/2012
JEAN LOUIS NAUDIN
* 231,2
** 265,21
=== 1,15
11/10/2012
PASCUSER
* 77,76
** 182,25
=== 2,34
11/10/2012
PASCUSER
* 87,20
** 173,01
=== 1,98
11/10/2012
PASCUSER
* 75,90
** 162,56
=== 2,14
11/10/2012
MIZUNO57
* 82,13
** 126,15
=== 1,54
11/10/2012
PASCUSER
* 51,79
** 112,50
=== 2,17
11/10/2012
MIZUNO57
* 81,80
** 104,17
=== 1,27
30/09/2012
PASCUSER
* 38,20
** 66,60
=== 1,74
17/10/2012
PASCUSER
* 4,66
** 56,20
=== 12,06
11/10/2012
PASCUSER
* 7,99
** 39,35
=== 4,92
31/10/2012
MIZUNO57
* 27,75
** 31,39
=== 1,13
11/10/2012
PASCUSER
* 4,64
** 22,09
=== 4,76
Résultats triés suivant la puissance en sortie mesurée.
• Results sort out by measured output
Les puissances sont mesurées pour Pin, avec une résistance en entrée du bobinage ou un TOS-Mètre, pour Pout, avec une résistance de charge en sortie du Barreau, une ampoule ou au TOS-Mètre.
• The powers are measured for Pin, with a resistor at the input of the coil or a TOS-Meter [measures forward and backward power for high frequencies], for Pout, with a load resistor at the output of the Bar, a light bulb or a TOS-meter.
In this page of JLN's website:
http://jnaudin.free.fr/rvproject/html/pascuser_rep3.htm
(http://jnaudin.free.fr/rvproject/html/pascuser_rep3.htm)
the last graph at the end of the page is COP against the value of the resistance load.
You will see the right side since 1000 Ohms, negative; means that the autogen would feed back and no more consuming power as a balance between the energy received and the energy delivered, as at the output than at the "input".
Best Regards,
K.
Hi Verpies or Itsu,
the gate-driver has arrived. It should be fun soldering it's tiny-little pins... :o
The guy in the vid Itsu linked made it look easy, but I think he's had practise...
I think that the example diagram top-right page 2 of the datasheet, (for non-inverting input) is probably the one I should use...
http://www.ti.com/lit/ds/symlink/ucc27512.pdf
I could use some help in choosing a value for the resistor R3 please... I don't really understand what it's there for TBH...
Also, can you tell me what the function of the capacitor C2 is (between Vin and Gnd)? Also, how do I choose a value for it?
Apologies for my ignorance... I'm still very much a novice... :)
Regards, Tim
PS: While doing the washing-up, I decided that the cap is almost certainly just a smoothing cap... And the resistor is probably for limiting current... Hmmm.
Translation of the
2nd Q&A of the present FAQ of the website on the work of Richard
*** COPs (definitions of) ***
http://richard-vialle.info (http://richard-vialle.info)/
(In agreement to the licence terms of the website, already published and taking no liability for any error of translation or modifications in between of the original terms of licence or of the original terms I translate here. These warnings applies to any writting by me on this website. )
-----
Q : Vous parlez souvent d'un COP, qu'est ce que c'est et que signifie-t-il ?
• You often speak about a COP, what it is and what does it mean? R : Le COP est le coefficient de performance d'un système, c'est à dire sa capacité à fournir une certaine quantité de travail par rapport à l'énergie nécessaire à son fonctionnement. Pour un climatiseur par exemple, le COP sera le rapport entre l'énergie nécessaire à son fonctionnement et la quantité de chaleur qu'il peut restituer.
• The COP is the coefficient of performance of a system, that is its capacity to supply a certain amount of work regards to the energy necessary for its functioning. For an air conditioner for example, the COP will be the ratio between the energy necessary for its functioning and the quantity of heat which he can restore [while working as heat pump]. [This definition is quite good but not completely accurate. The ratio discribed previously is indeed the ENERGY CONVERSION EFFICIENCY of the system; as we haven't the Greek letter "eta", the standard symbol for, we will coine the acronym "ECE" here to shorten it. The exact definition of "COP" in our air conditioner and heat pump engineering offices - from which this concept and acronym come from -, is in fact the ratio of the USEFUL POWER under the PURCHASED POWER. Indeed, if the energy used to make the system functioning is free though the COP is infinite (solar panels, wind turbines, etc.); for COP, we essentially speak about "OPERATING COST". K.] Le COP Global, qui prend en compte l'ensemble des énergies utilisées par le système, ne peut jamais être supérieur à 1, sauf anomalie des lois physique
actuelle. Ainsi un climatiseur ne peut avoir un COP Global > 1 car il puise de l'énergie calorifique dans l'air environnant via une pompe à chaleur.
• The Global COP, which takes into account all the energies used by the system, can never be upper to 1, except current physical laws anomalies. So an air conditioner cannot have a Global COP > 1 because it draws some calorific energy from the air surrounding via a heat pump. [Here there is still the same and very often made confusion: what is named here "Global COP" is indeed THE "(GLOBAL) ENERGY CONVERSION EFFICIENCY". Nevertheless, if you change "Global COP" by "(global) energy conversion efficiency", the definition then becomes correct. K.
Les auto-générateurs Richard Vialle ont un COP > 1 (production de puissance supérieure à la puissance consommée) et un COP Global pour l'instant proche de 1 (sauf certains accidents ou nous dépassons largement de raison le COP de 1, accidents que nous tentons de reproduire, comprendre et dompter).
• The Richard Vialle's Auto-generators have a COP > 1 (production of [useful] power superior to the [purchased] consummate power) and a Global COP [yes, "Global COP" here, but correctly defined and not as the author defined it] for the moment close to 1 (except certain incidents where we exceed widely out of reason the COP of 1, incidents which we try to reproduce, to understand and to bind).
[Note:
I know these concepts of "COP" and "ECE" are very confusing. There are often confused even by physicists! While not by trained in heating or air conditioning engineers who have coined these concept and acronym as already noticed before.
If the definition in the article before of "Global COP" was flawed by lack of differentiation (differentiation between "summation of all powers in input" versus "summation of all purchased powers in input") remains that here, and mostly in case of claimed overunity devices using EM energy in input and providing EM energy at the output too, "COP" and "ECE" tends to become the same while we get close to 1.0 and become the same when > 1.0! IF we refuse to see that ZEP energy IS an INPUT energy too.
Demonstration:
COP = Sigma Useful Powers / Sigma Purchased Powers
Sigma Purchased Powers = power coming from powers supplies of purchased energy (like batteries, grid)
When the power coming from power supplies of purchased tends to zero, COP tends to infinite.
ECE (flawed) = Sigma Useful Powers / Sigma all Input Powers (except ZPE input)
Sigma all Input Powers = power coming only from power supplies of purchased or not purchased energy, but "usual energie" so not ZPE input.
When the power coming from power supplies of purchased or not purchased energy, but "usual energie", tends to zero, (flawed) ECE tends to infinite too .
ECE (true) = Sigma Useful Powers / Sigma all Input Powers
Sigma all Input Powers = power coming from all power supplies of purchased or not purchased energy, including ALL "usual energies" (like Earth magnetic field) AND ZPE input.
When the power coming from purchased energies tends to zero, true ECE tends to 1.0.
So COP and ECE are fundamentally two different concepts and it is necessary that we state if we talk about a UNCOMPLETED energetic conversion efficiency or A TRUE COMPLETE one.
In the case of the Autogenerator, the confusion becomes even worse cause there are 2 levels of "COP" (and so 2 levels of "ECE" too).
The first level is the ratio of the useful power delivered by the "bar" (the two extremities of the core of the Autogenerator), to the power consumed by the coil and drawn from most often an amplifier. It's the COP-bar (or "COP S" if you want, "S" for "specific").
The second level is the ratio of the useful power delivered by the "bar" (and sometimes by the coil itself while producing "negative power" back towards the power supply), under the power consumed by the whole system and drawn from the power supply. It's the COP of the Autogen"; which is the true "Global COP".
So when in the previous article it is talked about "COP" it was indeed the "COP S" but when about "Global COP" in his definition it was indeed by error a "global energetic conversion effeciency", while we do need a "Global COP" but correctly defined. (My apologies if the attempt of explanation of the differences between these concepts is not yet so clear, I will try to improve it later if needed, regards to your possible questions.).]
-------
Hoping this could help,
Best regards,
K.
Quote from: tim123 on February 15, 2014, 05:38:29 AM
Hi Verpies or Itsu,
the gate-driver has arrived. It should be fun soldering it's tiny-little pins... :o
The guy in the vid Itsu linked made it look easy, but I think he's had practise...
I think that the example diagram top-right page 2 of the datasheet, (for non-inverting input) is probably the one I should use...
http://www.ti.com/lit/ds/symlink/ucc27512.pdf
I could use some help in choosing a value for the resistor R3 please... I don't really understand what it's there for TBH...
Also, can you tell me what the function of the capacitor C2 is (between Vin and Gnd)? Also, how do I choose a value for it?
Apologies for my ignorance... I'm still very much a novice... :)
Regards, Tim
PS: While doing the washing-up, I decided that the cap is almost certainly just a smoothing cap... And the resistor is probably for limiting current... Hmmm.
Right, C2 is a decoupling ceramic capacitor of about 0.1uF as close as possible (ontop) to Vdd and ground.
R1 and R2 (if you did order the ucc27511 as i had and which was suggested by verpies you need R1 and R2, so the top left diagram) are indeed
for current limiting, in this case (if R1 and R2) seperate for sink and source current, but you need verpies to have it explained better allthough the
data sheet does mention what they are for.
You need some magnifier and some flux and a desolder wick to successfully solder those tiny chips ;D
Good luck, regards Itsu
Quote from: tim123 on February 15, 2014, 05:38:29 AM
I think that the example diagram top-right page 2 of the datasheet, (for non-inverting input) is probably the one I should use...
http://www.ti.com/lit/ds/symlink/ucc27512.pdf (http://www.ti.com/lit/ds/symlink/ucc27512.pdf)
I could use some help in choosing a value for the resistor R3 please... I don't really understand what it's there for TBH...
If you have the UCC27511 then you need to choose the values of R1 and R2.
R1 determines how quickly the MOSFET turns on and R2 determines how quickly the MOSFET turns off.
In other words, R1 affects the rise-time and the R2 affects the fall-time of the gate voltage and drain current.
This is because the Gate of the MOSFET is like a capacitor, thus the smaller the resistance of these resistors, the faster this gate capacitance gets charged/discharged.
You can start with a 47Ω carbon resistors, and go down from there if you need faster rise/fall times.
If you have the UCC27512 then you need to choose only the value of R3.
R3 determines how quickly the MOSFET turns on and off. (the rise time and the fall time of the gate voltage and drain current.)
You can also start with a 47Ω carbon resistor, and go down from there if you need faster rise/fall times.
Quote from: tim123 on February 15, 2014, 05:38:29 AM
Also, can you tell me what the function of the capacitor C2 is (between Vin and Gnd)? Also, how do I choose a value for it?
It's a power supply smoothing cap and a filter that prevents the pollution of power supply lines.
It is there to keep the supply voltage to the UCC2751x steady. This little driver draws so much current when it charges the gate capacitance of the MOSFET that the power supply lines to it can sag or become noisy. A ferrite bead or a choke in series with the supply line is also recommended to filter out the spikes caused by this driver for other devices on the same power supply.
P.S.
In both cases I recommend connecting VDD pins of the UCC2751x drivers to a +15VDC power supply line through chokes in series (or
ferrite beads (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=81C4IfONt3o)) and ceramic capacitors in parallel to the GND pins ( with as short leads as possible, a.k.a. piggybacking ).
In the datasheet, L1, D1, C1 constitute an example load and do not have to duplicated. For testing purposes another load can be used (e.g. purely resistive). Also remember that V
SOURCE for the MOSFET can be much greater than V+ or V
DD for the driver.
Below are some sample applications of the UCC27511 drivers for a totem-pole digital power amplifier driving a large transformer.
Warning: These circuits are not current limited thus they will blow up in the absence of the square input waveform.
Hi Guys,
thank you for your replies. I did buy the ucc27511. Two of them actually, just in case...
I hadn't realised it worked like that - i.e. with the source for the gate on 1 pin, and the sink on another... That's really cool.
:)
Tim
R Vialle revue et corrigé by anonymous
from this video
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fdlZ03-8MaA
R Vialle == Meyer/Mace
http://www.overunity.com/4333/meyer-mace-isotopic-nmr-generator/#.Uv-UFKyweFA
Despite the apparent physical impossibility of soldering the teeny bits together - it is done :)
It's not as hard as I thought - as long as you:
a) take your time
b) use plenty of flux
c) balance a small drop of solder on the tip of the iron
d) use both hands to steady the iron...
I've soldered the smoothing cap at the back. The 2 resistors are only low power - will see how they do... I just have to hook it up to the IRF450 now...
PS: It's so small, my camera can't get a decent pic - even in macro mode...
Quote from: tagor on February 15, 2014, 11:29:08 AM
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fdlZ03-8MaA (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fdlZ03-8MaA)
R Vialle == Meyer/Mace
IF this is true, then the EM and/or acoustic frequency must coordinated with magnetic flux density and/or sound wavelength (like in a tuning fork).
Magic frequencies that are related only to the type of the gain medium (copper, brass, iron...) and that work for all devices, regardless of natural or artificial magnetic fields and sizes, are highly unlikely.
P.S.
French is a beautiful language but I can't understand what the author is saying in this video ;(
Quote from: verpies on February 15, 2014, 09:20:34 AM
Below are some sample applications of the UCC27511 drivers for a totem-pole digital power amplifier driving a large transformer.
Warning: These circuits are not current limited thus they will blow up in the absence of the square input waveform.
Hi verpies.
Just for my own education as I know nothing in electronics and such circuits myself: what is the use of the double wiring (I mean the orange one) in this transformer? Is this to use back efm?
BTW, thanks for the data you provide here, thanks for your help. For my concern I do learn things with what you bring ♡♡ even completely null in electronics :-\
Regards,
K.
Quote from: tagor on February 15, 2014, 11:29:08 AM
R Vialle revue et corrigé by anonymous
from this video
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fdlZ03-8MaA
R Vialle == Meyer/Mace
http://www.overunity.com/4333/meyer-mace-isotopic-nmr-generator/#.Uv-UFKyweFA
@ verpies
This comment below could help you to understand more what it is was about in its main ideas.
For more specific I will study his website and see if anything would be relevant to be translated and shared here (if the author allows me, otherwise only "short excerpts for educational purpose" ;) ).
@ tagor
Hi tagor for this very interesting input :)
I had made myself the parallel between both systems.
What the Anonimus obviously forgets is that the cutting has a specific purpose, according to the experimenters of Cos.com: to very limit the "hot current" in the bar itself.
Remember:
"hot current" => Joule losses; "cold current" => no Joule losses. BTW, the verification of the usefulness of the cut in the midle of the bar is very easy to do: just have a try without and with the cut!
One experimenter has made the opposite: testing with many cuts. Need to find it back to report you the results to know if more cuts increase or decrease the efficiency.
Don't think Richard changed Michel Mayer work and just "change the packaging" as this Anonymous supposes. Richard looks have his theory first and only then after found experiences to prove his theory. The proof for me is there is no true polarisation system in the Richard's Autogen, while he would easy inspiring himself to enhance his own device.
But good to have different approaches to be able to compare the results; isn't? ;) So indeed: any relevant input is welcome! :)
@ tim
Wow! So little! Lol :)
Best regards,
K.
Quote from: Khwartz on February 17, 2014, 05:10:53 AM
Hi tagor for this very interesting input (https://overunityarchives.com/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.overunity.com%2FSmileys%2Fdefault%2Fsmiley.gif&hash=f8f8faa5737a843fa5f3e4af986c18073b26d5a4)
I had made myself the parallel between both systems.
What the Anonimus obviously forgets is that the cutting has a specific purpose, according to the experimenters of Cos.com: to very limit the "hot current" in the bar itself.
Remember:
"hot current" => Joule losses; "cold current" => no Joule losses.
BTW, the verification of the usefulness of the cut in the midle of the bar is very easy to do: just have a try without and with the cut!
K.
yess it is very important , see the MEg and the BITT
and on conspi the LABO work
Quote from: Khwartz on February 17, 2014, 04:27:00 AM
what is the use of the double wiring (I mean the orange one) in this transformer? Is this to use back efm?
Yes, this additional winding collects the energy in "back emf" and feeds it back to the power supply.
In conventional power supply designs with totem-pole drive, the primary windings usually have clamps or snubber circuits across them. Often realized as transient voltage suppression diodes ...or zener diodes ...or metal oxide varistors, etc....
The purpose of all of these snubbing/clamping components is to
dissipate the energy in unwanted and dangerous switching spikes.
As a result, this spike energy gets wasted as heat. The justification for this is that it's better to dissipate those spikes than blow up transistors and other components ...and to create EMI.
This design does not dissipate this unwanted energy but
captures it and feeds it back into the power supply. That's why the caption under the diagram states "...with lossless clamps".
BTW: Those "back emf" collection windings should mirror the main windings (ideally should be wound bifilarly and parallelly with the main primary winding). If space is an issue, then it is allowable to wind the "back emf"collection winding with a thinner wire than the main winding (but still mirroring it as closely as possible).
As usual in any true transformer (e.g. T2), all of the primary and secondary windings should consist of even number of back-and-forth layers covering the full circumference of the core ...or the following flux leakage happens.
Flux leakage causes loss of energy transfer efficiency, non-linear characteristics and exacerbated switching spikes.
P.S.
The latter recommendation does not apply to "flyback transformers", since those are not true transformers anyway.
Hi Folks,
A quick update on progress:
- Gate driver attached to IRF450.
- 15v on the gate from power supply #1
- 50-60v on the load / drain from power supply #2
- Signal from USB sig-gen.
Tested with 'scope & a light-bulb load - it works perfectly. Thanks again Verpies & Itsu for your help... :)
Next stage is to test it with my Vialle gen coil & tubes. Maybe tomorrow.
I know I need to add a snubber first... I will probably just connect a diode in reverse across the coil to start off with...
Regards, Tim
Quote from: verpies on February 17, 2014, 10:25:39 AM
As usual in any true transformer (e.g. T2), all of the primary and secondary windings should consist of even number of back-and-forth layers...
Hi Verpies. Why an even number of layers? Why would that make a difference?
Ok, it's not yet perfect... It's not giving me a clean square wave output above about 100KHz... Above 400KHz - there's no waveform - but there is still power going through...
I'm guessing that the resistors between the driver & gate are too high value at 48Ohms... (Verpies?)
Quote from: tim123 on February 17, 2014, 01:38:04 PM
Hi Verpies. Why an even number of layers? Why would that make a difference?
To cancel the circumferential current.
Notice that as a toroidal winding advances along the circumference of the toroidal core, the current advances with it, eventually forming ONE LOOP of current around the core's major axis. This current creates magnetic field that is perpendicular to the plane of the toroid, and as such it is not contained within the toroid (and it must close through air).
Quote from: JL Naudin
In a common toroidal coil, each layer is equal to a "one turn coil" whose axis is parallel to the axis of the toroid. So, one layer of toroidal coil is equal to a flat coil of one turn and thus it can tap or produce EMF outside the torus.
So if you have 100-turn classical winding that spans the entire circumference of the toroid, then this winding acts like 1 turn of wire along the circumference of the core, in addition to 100 turns of classic toroidal windings.
There is even
this patent (http://www.overunity.com/12639/richard-vialles-new-theory-about-negative-mass-and-overunity/dlattach/attach/133608/) that's centered around this issue.
Quote from: tim123 on February 17, 2014, 01:30:26 PM
- 15v on the gate from power supply #1
Is the 15V power supply to the gate driver stable? Is it bypassed with close ceramic capacitor close to the driver?
Quote from: tim123 on February 17, 2014, 01:30:26 PM
I know I need to add a snubber first... I will probably just connect a diode in reverse across the coil to start off with...
Snubber is necessary only if you interrupt the current trough the coil. If you do and if you do not snub the resulting voltage spike (or feed it back to the power supply with lossless clamps) then this spike will kill your transistor or interfere with its switching.
Quote from: tim123 on February 17, 2014, 02:19:26 PM
Ok, it's not yet perfect... It's not giving me a clean square wave output above about 100KHz... Above 400KHz - there's no waveform - but there is still power going through...
I'm guessing that the resistors between the driver & gate are too high value at 48Ohms... (Verpies?)
Maybe. Show me the
voltage waveform between the gate and the source of the MOSFET and I will be able to reply with certainty if that is the problem.
Quote from: tagor on February 17, 2014, 06:39:57 AM
yess it is very important , see the MEg and the BITT
and on conspi the LABO work
;)
But for the "conspi the LABO work": no more access since an argument with Pascuser ;)
Quote from: Khwartz on February 18, 2014, 07:04:19 AM
;)
But for the "conspi the LABO work": no more access since an argument with Pascuser ;)
Oooooooooooh yessss
can you change your IP ? (it is more than five years of works )
Quote from: verpies on February 17, 2014, 07:01:32 AM
Yes, this additional winding collects the energy in "back emf" and feeds it back to the power supply.
In conventional power supply designs with totem-pole drive, the primary windings usually have clamps or snubber circuits across them. Often realized as transient voltage suppression diodes ...or zener diodes ...or metal oxide varistors, etc....
The purpose of all of these snubbing/clamping components is to dissipate the energy in unwanted and dangerous switching spikes.
As a result, this spike energy gets wasted as heat. The justification for this is that it's better to dissipate those spikes than blow up transistors and other components ...and to create EMI.
This design does not dissipate this unwanted energy but captures it and feeds it back into the power supply. That's why the caption under the diagram states "...with lossless clamps".
BTW: Those "back emf" collection windings should mirror the main windings (ideally should be wound bifilarly and parallelly with the main primary winding). If space is an issue, then it is allowable to wind the "back emf"collection winding with a thinner wire than the main winding (but still mirroring it as closely as possible).
Wow! Great stuff, so looks to me interesting indeed to work with scare shape waves :) Biganos of Cos said the Autogen can be feed to with.
For winding: BlueDragon advised to wrap several wires same time and then you make you connections. Here it would be between the 2 wires of the bifilar. What do you think? Do you think it could fit the requirements of this very interesting transformer?
Thanks for the specifics too about true transformers :)
Regards.
Quote from: tim123 on February 17, 2014, 01:30:26 PM
Hi Folks,
A quick update on progress:
- Gate driver attached to IRF450.
- 15v on the gate from power supply #1
- 50-60v on the load / drain from power supply #2
- Signal from USB sig-gen.
Tested with 'scope & a light-bulb load - it works perfectly. Thanks again Verpies & Itsu for your help... :)
Next stage is to test it with my Vialle gen coil & tubes. Maybe tomorrow.
I know I need to add a snubber first... I will probably just connect a diode in reverse across the coil to start off with...
Regards, Tim
:)
Quote from: tagor on February 18, 2014, 07:16:52 AM
Oooooooooooh yessss
can you change your IP ? (it is more than five years of works )
Logically I should be able to do it now has I get a new Internet connection. But by my location Pascuser who is webmaster too, could recognise me I think while validate my new login ;) but if not stopped by him, I may copy for my own use the whole work so even if my account is them close again, I could have the materials to work on; but need I could succeed to create the new account and go "off the eyes" of "the owner" of the place ;)
Cheers :)
Quote from: Khwartz on February 18, 2014, 07:17:03 AM
For winding: BlueDragon advised to wrap several wires same time and then you make you connections. Here it would be between the 2 wires of the bifilar. What do you think?
Yes, the Aiding Bifilar Winding can be a substitute for a Back & Forth Winding, but it is less symmetrical due to the odd "back connection" and it has more self-capacitance.
However the Bucking Bifilar Winding is not a good replacement for a Back & Forth Winding.
In fact the Bucking Bifilar Winding is a very bad choice for a transformer winding (it's good for a wire-wound resistor, though)
Quote from: verpies on February 18, 2014, 06:38:49 AM
Show me the voltage waveform between the gate and the source of the MOSFET...
Hi Verpies,
attached are 2 photos of the scope showing the voltage at the MOSFET's gate.
This is with about 10v into the gate-driver...
Yellow trace is the signal-generator - blue is the gate.
Quote from: tim123 on February 18, 2014, 03:00:19 PM
Hi Verpies,
attached are 2 photos of the scope showing the voltage at the MOSFET's gate.
This is with about 10v into the gate-driver...
Yellow trace is the signal-generator - blue is the gate.
Indeed the gate is not charged quickly enough at 1.3MHz and its amplitude suffers (6V
PP )
..but at 110kHz it is fine (9.8V
PP)
So the prudent thing to do is to increase the power supply to the UCC gate driver to 15V and/or decrease the gate resistors five times (or more).
Quote from: tim123 on February 18, 2014, 03:00:19 PM
Hi Verpies,
attached are 2 photos of the scope showing the voltage at the MOSFET's gate.
This is with about 10v into the gate-driver...
Yellow trace is the signal-generator - blue is the gate.
Tim,
The transistor you have, the IRF450 is too slow to switch at 3.6MHz and even at 1.3MHz.
If you add the switching times given in the datasheet you get 525ns. The total switching time should at least 5 times smaller than the period. To be comfortable, you should aim for 10 times less.
For 3.6MHz, the period is 277ns and for 1.3MHz is 769ns.
Therefore the total switching time should be at most 277/5=55.4ns or 769/5=153.8ns.
Moreover for such high switching frequencies you should choose a SMD case, not a through hole one.
Quote from: verpies on February 18, 2014, 10:33:19 AM
Yes, the Aiding Bifilar Winding can be a substitute for a Back & Forth Winding, but it is less symmetrical due to the odd "back connection" and it has more self-capacitance.
However the Bucking Bifilar Winding is not a good replacement for a Back & Forth Winding.
In fact the Bucking Bifilar Winding is a very bad choice for a transformer winding (it's good for a wire-wound resistor, though)
Wow! I am amazed how much you are deep in your knowledge on all this stuff!
Very great stuff, imho :) thanks for taking time to provide these interesting details, which all added could make a big difference :) :)
Best regards.
K.
Translation of the
3rd Q&A of the present FAQ of the website on the work of Richard
*** NORMAL EFFECT? (Capacitive coupling? electromagnetic shone radiation? ...) ***
http://richard-vialle.info (http://richard-vialle.info)/
(In agreement to the licence terms of the website, already published and taking no liability for any error of translation or modifications in between of the original terms of licence or of the original terms I translate here. These warnings applies to any writting by me on this website. )
----
Q : La surunité ne pourrait-elle pas être expliquée par des phénomènes physique connus (transformateur, couplage capacitif, ondes électromagnétiques, etc.), n'est ce pas le cas ?
● Q: Couldn't the overunity be explained by known physical phenomena appearance (transformer, capacitif coupling, electromagnetic waves, etc.), is this not the case?R : Extrait du document sur la première génération d'auto-générateur de Richard Vialle et autre inventor :
● R: Excerpt of the document on the first generation of Richard Vialle's auto-generator by other inventor:"Après que j'aie vue cela chez Richard VIALLE, cet aspect de production en sortie [...] m'avait fait penser que le courant de sortie pouvait n'être qu'un effet normal dû à un couplage capacitif entre le bobinage servant de plaque de condensateur et la pince croco (ou tout autre morceau du fil conducteur) servant de deuxième plaque, l'air et le plastique du fourreau les séparant étant le diélectrique. Finalement la pince croco ne ferait que dériver du courant depuis l'entrée, courant qui ne proviendrait d'aucun effet anormal.
● " After I saw it from Richard VIALLE, this aspect of output production [...] had reminded me that the exit current could be only a normal effect due to a capacitif coupling between the winding serving as plate of capacitor and the crocodile clips (or any different piece of the electrical wire) serving as the second plate, the air and the plastic of the sheath separating them being the dielectric. Finally the crocodile clips would only be deriving from the current since the input, current which would come from no abnormal effect.Après en avoir débattu longuement avec Richard VIALLE et que des tests et mesures aient été menés aussi bien par moi que par Alain B. et Richard VIALLE, on peut affirmer que ce n'est absolument pas un couplage capacitif qui dérive de l'énergie depuis l'entrée qui puisse expliquer ce phénomène.
● Having discussed it for a long time with Richard VIALLE and that tests and measures led as well by me as by Alain B. and Richard VIALLE, we can assert that it is absolutely not the capacitif coupling that derives from the energy from the input which can explain this phenomenon.Les arguments qui montrent que ce n'est pas le cas : le calcul du courant qui circule dans le très mauvais condensateur constitué par la capacité bobinage/pince croco montre qu'on devrait avoir vraiment beaucoup moins que ce qui sort dans l'ampoule.
● The arguments which show that it is not the case: the calculation of the current which circulates in the very bad condenser constituted by the capacity winding / crocodile clip shows that we should really have much less that what goes out to the bulb. Des considérations sur des différences de potentielles nécessaires pour mettre les courants en mouvement par cet effet capacitif en ayant fait de nombreux tests de br anchement de certains points à la masse montrent qu'il n'y a pas de différence de potentielle suffisante.
● Considerations on potential differences necessary to put the currents in movement by this capacitif effect by having making numerous tests of connection of certain points for the mass show that there is not enough potential difference. Et des tests de court-circuitage de ce pseudo-effet capacitif par des feuilles d'aluminium reliées à la masse du générateur de fonction montrent que la production de sortie reste présente (très légèrement diminuée).
● And tests of bypassing of this capacitif pseudo-effect by aluminum sheets connected with the mass of the function generator show that the production of output remains present (very slightly decreased). Donc un effet capacitif, il peut y en avoir un, mais il est largement négligeable face à ce que nous mesurons, et aussi bien les calculs de courant, mesure de différence de potentiel et expérience de court-circuitage de cet effet montrent qu'un large effet anormal subsiste qui n'est pas du TOUT explicable par la dérivation capacitive depuis l'entrée.
● Thus a capacitif effect, can have one but he is largely unimportant compare to what we measure, and as well the calculations of current, measure of potential difference and experiment of bypassing of this effect show that a wide abnormal effect remains which is not AT ALL explicable by the capacitive deriving from the input. Le rayonnement électromagnétique non plus ne peut pas expliquer ce qui est obtenu.
● The electromagnetic radiation either cannot explain what is obtained. Non seulement le calcul montre que la bobine réalisée par le fil entourant le fourreau a une longueur totalement inadaptée à un rayonnement de la longueur d'onde émise, même par des harmoniques ; mais de plus l'énergie rayonnée n'est pas suffisante pour provoquer l'éclairage par effet d'induction.
● Not only the calculation shows that the coil made around the sheath has a length totally in disagreement with the radiation of the emitted wavelength, even by harmonics; but even more: the shone energy is not enough to cause the lighting by effect of induction. Enfin l'enveloppement de l'ensemble du demi-barreau avec son bobinage dans une feuille de papier d'aluminium mise à la Terre a montré que la production de sortie était toujours présente (mais diminuée ; en fait la fréquence d'obtention de surunité était modifiée, en modifiant la fréquence on pouvait obtenir la même luminosité).
● Finally the envelope of the whole half-bar with its winding in an earthed aluminum sheet showed that the production of the output was always present (but decreased; in fact the frequency to obtain the overunity was modified, by modifying the frequency we could obtain the same luminosity). Donc le rayonnement n'est pas non plus la cause.
● Thus the radiation is not either the cause. De toute façon pour terminer, les mesures de puissance réellement consommées en entrée ont ensuite pu montrer que la puissance entrée est très inférieure à la puissance sortie (que la puissance d'entrée soit ensuite rayonnée ou couplée capacitivement à la sortie ou par tout autre artefact, et les pertes par effet Joule dans le bobinage d'entrée qui la consomment).
● Anyway to conclude: the measures of power really consumed at the input were then able to show that the input power is very lower than the out power (what ever the input power is then shone or coupled capacitively with the output or by any different artefact, and the losses by effect Joule in the winding of input which consume it). Ceci montre qu'il y a une anomalie et donc bien de la surunité."
● This shows that there is an anomaly and thus indeed overunity. " -------
Wishing this could help,
Best regards,
K.
Hi Folks,
It's all working ok, and I have some results... :)
1) I'm able to light a small incandescent bulb from the 2 copper tubes in the coil. Picture attached of the setup.
- The resonant frequency for my 2 6" copper tubes is around 3.7MHz.
- It is a sharp resonance being much dimmer at 3.6 or 3.8MHz, an the lamp doesn't light at all past about 3.5/3.9Mhz...
2) Power into the transistor is about 60v, and 0.37a (about 22w)
3) The gate-driver setup has a sweet spot at about 5.7v.
- It keeps the current through the gate & the mosfet reasonably low, but there's a peak of lamp brightness there too.
- Above 5.7v the load current reduces, and the lamp dims, up to about 7v where it reaches it's former brightness again.
4) The scope shot shows:
- Yellow - the Gate voltage
- Blue - the Drain voltage
5) I think my gate driver needs power resistors - the 1/4w ones can't take the current with the full 15v available. They get very hot at 9v.
They're currently at 10 Ohms, I'm tempted to try 5 Ohms to see if I can improve the gate signal.
The UCC211 can handle 0.3a continuous at 18v according to the specs - so a pair of 5 watt resistors maybe?
Maybe I'll just put a load of 1/4w ones together so I don't have to worry about them burning out...
6) In order to measure the input & output HF power, I'd like to build something like Verpies HF wattmeter...
I suppose an off-the-shelf SWR meter would be good enough to make relative measurements though...
:)
Tim
I've combined 2 lots of 5, 47 Ohm, 1/4w resistors, to make 9.5 Ohms, 1.25w resistors - for the gate driver. I feel much happier now - though they do still get hot at higher volts.
And some more results:
- I've found a new resonance at 7.3MHz - which lights the bulb more brightly, for less power...
- and a few others too - here's a list:
(apologies for the subjective bulb-brightness-units ;) )
Frequency Bulb Brightness Power Supply
----------------- --------------------------- -----------------------
- 1.5 MHz Weak
- 1.8 MHz Less Weak
- 2.45 MHz Strong 0.61a at 46v
- 3.7 MHz Stronger 0.49a at 46v
- 7.3 MHz Strongest 0.42a at 46v
Another note:
- The ferrite rod-cores make no difference at all to the operation of the device...!
- I've tried them in and out at the resonance points, and the performance is the same, and the tuning is the same too.
:)
Tim
Another quick update... I added a variable tuning capacitor across the coil - and found that it increases the bulb's brightness (when tuned), and reduces the power draw too. (As suggested...)
The same value capacitance works for both the 3.7 and the 7.3 MHz resonances.
The capacitance required for my coil is about 145pF.
Quote from: tim123 on February 20, 2014, 11:14:17 AM
1) I'm able to light a small incandescent bulb from the 2 copper tubes in the coil. Picture attached of the setup.
Can you estimate the inductance of bulb's coiled filament?
Quote from: tim123 on February 20, 2014, 11:14:17 AM
- It is a sharp resonance being much dimmer at 3.6 or 3.8MHz, an the lamp doesn't light at all past about 3.5/3.9Mhz...
...does the MOSFET produce a strong signal above 3.5/3.9MHz ?
Quote from: tim123 on February 20, 2014, 11:14:17 AM
2) Power into the transistor is about 60V, and 0.37A (about 22w)
DC ?
Quote from: tim123 on February 20, 2014, 11:14:17 AM
3) The gate-driver setup has a sweet spot at about 5.7v.
...
- Above 5.7v the load current reduces, and the lamp dims, up to about 7v where it reaches it's former brightness again.
That's strange
Quote from: tim123 on February 20, 2014, 11:14:17 AM
5) I think my gate driver needs power resistors - the 1/4w ones can't take the current with the full 15v available. They get very hot at 9v.
Yes, they can heat up at high gate currents and high duty cycles. I think you're running at 50% DUC.
Quote from: tim123 on February 20, 2014, 11:14:17 AM
They're currently at 10 Ohms, I'm tempted to try 5 Ohms to see if I can improve the gate signal.
Remember that the UCC driver can be damaged by momentary source currents above 4A and momentary sing current above 8A. So if you are supplying it with 12V then the lower resistance limit for the source resistor is 12V / 4A = 3Ω and for the sink resistor is 12V/8A = 1.5Ω.
You should also try asymmetrical source/sink gate resistors to obtain a symmetrical gate signal. That's why the UCC driver has separate source and sing outputs. Adjust those resistors so the gate voltage falls at the same rate as it rises. Right now the gate waveform rises faster than it falls.
Quote from: tim123 on February 20, 2014, 11:14:17 AM
The UCC211 can handle 0.3a continuous at 18v according to the specs - so a pair of 5 watt resistors maybe?
...but the driver is supplying current to the gate only momentarily (not continuously). The UCC can handle sourcing 4A and sinking 8A momentarily, without a problem if it is supplied and bypassed with a capacitor closely.
Quote from: tim123 on February 20, 2014, 11:14:17 AM
Maybe I'll just put a load of 1/4w ones together so I don't have to worry about them burning out...
That's safer than one big 5W resistor because you can accidentally buy a a wire wound 5W resistor that will not work at all as a gate resistor, because of its inductive nature.
When you connect bunch of smaller resistors, make a tight bundle and keep the leads as short as possible. Remember that the thinner and longer a wire is, the more inductance it has.
The exact formula for the inductance of a straight wire is: L=0.002*Length*[ ln(4*Length/Diameter) - ¾]
, where length and diameter are expressed in centimeters and the inductance in μH.
Quote from: tim123 on February 20, 2014, 11:14:17 AM
6) In order to measure the input & output HF power, I'd like to build something like Verpies HF wattmeter...
I suppose an off-the-shelf SWR meter would be good enough to make relative measurements though...
My wattmeter is still a work in progress. The ADL5391B multiplier for 1GHz is hard to get and the ADL5391A is for 2 GHz, but it is unbuffered so probably high impedance GHz buffers need to be added to its inputs do deal with input offsets.
The off-the-shelf SWR meter should be rated down to 1MHz for your purposes. They often have a much higher lower frequency limit than that. So watch out for the upper and lower frequency limits.
One more update:
- I can confirm that removing the bulb causes the power drawn to go up. In other words, adding the load causes the input power to drop.
- I've tried it with a range of resistances, a rough example:
- Open circuit 0.5a
- Short circuit 0.7a
- 1 Ohm load - 0.4a
---------------------------------------
Hi Verpies,
inductance reduces the output - I tried a series variable inductor, and it just reduced the output. I tried a 10w LED bulb instead, and that was good... I could measure the bulb...?
The MOSFET's good over 10 MHz it seems. The big resistance of the 60w bulb was killing the circuit before. I tried my coil instead - and it worked a lot better.
All my power measurements are DC.
The gate-driver sweet spot has gone away... Not sure why.
I did make a better pair of resistors. I understand what you're saying about making the 2 values different to improve the waveform... Maybe tomorrow...
:)
Tim
Further tuning.
- The 145pF capacitance in parallel with the coil is still good.
- I've tried adding small amounts of inductance & or capacitance in series or parallel with the bulb, and have only seen the bulb dim.
- I've tried connecting the GND to one or other of the bars - and that gives a small increase in brightness - when connected to either bar.
What's going on...?
Capacitive vs. magnetic coupling...
There are 2 reasons why it looks like the effect is due to capacitive coupling:
1) The addition of the ferrite cores makes no difference
2) Placing my hand on the coil makes the bulb go out. If it was magnetic - I don't see how this could happen.
Relative Power Usage
- The test bulb with 12v DC uses 0.4a, and makes about 40,000 Lux (as tested with a luxmeter at zero distance)
- If powered by the circuit - the bulb needs about 45v and 0.3a to reach the same brightness. (Ignoring the gate driver)
Questions
- If it is capacitive coupling, I don't understand why it has particular resonance points. I suppose caps do have their own resonances...
- I don't really get why the 2 bars inside the coil would be oppositely polarised.
Next Steps
- I have a ZVS driver with a bad mosfet that I need to fix. Maybe tomorrow.
- I want to try running the coil with the ZVS driver - it's likely much more efficient.
- In order to do that - I also have to add another layer of winding to the coil - so there will be two. I know that's not typical for the device, but hey...
- I might actually just do a new coil, with fat wire - as the ZVS driver prefers lower inductances, and fewer turns.
Quote from: tim123 on February 21, 2014, 01:17:36 PM
- I've tried adding small amounts of inductance & or capacitance in series or parallel with the bulb, and have only seen the bulb dim.
That's to be expected. Inductance in series decreases the average current through the bulb at high frequencies. That's why I asked you to measure the inductance of the bulb (note that I did not ask you to add inductance to the bulb). For a bulb to be a good indicator of output power at high frequency it has to have a straight filament (or low pitch helix filament) so its inductance is at the minimum.
Quote from: tim123 on February 21, 2014, 01:17:36 PM
- I've tried connecting the GND to one or other of the bars - and that gives a small increase in brightness - when connected to either bar.
That's hard to explain. For sure such connection shorts out the stray capacitance formed between the device and the ground.
Quote from: tim123 on February 21, 2014, 01:17:36 PM
There are 2 reasons why it looks like the effect is due to capacitive coupling:
1) The addition of the ferrite cores makes no difference
2) Placing my hand on the coil makes the bulb go out. If it was magnetic - I don't see how this could happen.
That's logical reasoning.
Quote from: tim123 on February 21, 2014, 01:17:36 PM
Relative Power Usage
- The test bulb with 12v DC uses 0.4a, and makes about 40,000 Lux (as tested with a luxmeter at zero distance)
- If powered by the circuit - the bulb needs about 45v and 0.3a to reach the same brightness. (Ignoring the gate driver)
That's a good test of the output power if the luxmeter does not get saturated and the inductive
reactance (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Reactance_%28electronics%29#Inductive_reactance) of the bulb is low. Putting the bulb and the sensor in a dark box would be prudent (see Grumage's Wattbox).
However the bulb is not a good indicator of the input power at all, because a bulb in series with the input measures current,
not power and the
MPTT (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Maximum_power_transfer_theorem)rears its ugly head.
Quote from: tim123 on February 21, 2014, 01:17:36 PM
- If it is capacitive coupling, I don't understand why it has particular resonance points. I suppose caps do have their own resonances...
Capacitances form frequency-selective LC tanks with delibrate and stray inductances.
Also, don't forget about the formation of
standing waves (http://youtu.be/DovunOxlY1k?t=1m40s), which are easily disturbed by the change in length of the reflecting medium, speed of propagation (affected by capacitances and inductances) and position of reflection points and impedance mismatches at reflection points (also affected by capacitances and inductances and resistances there).
Quote from: tim123 on February 21, 2014, 01:17:36 PM
- I want to try running the coil with the ZVS driver - it's likely much more efficient.
A Mazzilli circuit?
If so, it might be more efficient but also less controlable. You will not be able to tune its frequency precisely.
Quote from: verpies on February 22, 2014, 05:55:00 AM
That's to be expected. Inductance in series decreases the average current through the bulb at high frequencies. That's why I asked you to measure the inductance of the bulb (note that I did not ask you to add inductance to the bulb).
Hi Verpies,
I did try to measure the inductance using a meter, but it couldn't get a reading - it came up with a negative value.
QuoteHowever the bulb is not a good indicator of the input power at all, because a bulb in series with the input measures current, not power and the MPTT (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Maximum_power_transfer_theorem)rears its ugly head.
I don't really get that TBH - surely the bulb is showing real power - as it needs both volts & amps in phase etc...?
I do get how there's an 'optimum' load - i.e. resistance - that is apparent in the circuit. It 'feels' like the small bulb isn't too far off ideal. The 60w bulb is terrible - i.e. far too high resistance - virtually no power transfer. The LEDs are good.
If the bulb's resistance was the same as the supply - would it then show real power accurately?
QuoteCapacitances form frequency-selective LC tanks with delibrate and stray inductances.
Also, don't forget about the formation of standing waves (http://youtu.be/DovunOxlY1k?t=1m40s)...
It is interesting that all versions of the Vialle gen. have similar resonant frequencies. I wonder if the U-shaped bar also has a higher resonance at around 7.2 MHz like my small one does...
It's odd that mine works at 3.7MHz - despite only being 1/3 the length of the normal version. I currently have no hypothesis to account for that.
QuoteA Mazzilli circuit? If so, it might be more efficient but also less controlable. You will not be able to tune its frequency precisely.
Yes. Agreed about the frequency being difficult to predict / set - I do have some variable caps though. To get it working at 4 MHz would need a coil with very low inductance and low self-capacitance too. Which might be difficult to acheive.
Unfortunately I have replaced the mosfets, but the driver's still not working... It'll take another leap of understanding for me to fix it.
Quote from: tim123 on February 22, 2014, 09:32:26 AM
I don't really get that TBH - surely the bulb is showing real power - as it needs both volts & amps in phase etc...?
Actually the brightness of the bulb depends only on current in any direction ( P=I
2R ).
For a bulb measuring the output power, the current depends only on output voltage and bulb's resistance (I=V/R
BULB)
For a bulb measuring the input power, the current depends on power supply's voltage and bulb's resistance and
DUT (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Device_under_test)'s resistance* ( I=V/(R
BULB + R
DUT)) ).
* actually complex impedance = reactance + resistance. (X+R)
Quote from: tim123 on February 22, 2014, 09:32:26 AM
If the bulb's resistance was the same as the supply - would it then show real power accurately?
Only if it was the sole receiver of that power. If there is another element in series with that bulb (e.g.
DUT (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Device_under_test)), then it will not be a good indicator, since the resistance of that additional element will disturb the 50% power sharing ratio between the PS & bulb.
That's why you can trust non-inductive bulbs to accurately indicate output power (because in that case the bulb is the indicator and load in one and the
MPTT (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Maximum_power_transfer_theorem) can be applied only to 2 devices: PS and the bulb).
However, you cannot trust non-inductive bulbs to accurately indicate input power (because in that case the bulb is not the indicator and load in one - it is merely an intermediary between the power supply and a 3rd element in that circuit (e.g.
DUT (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Device_under_test)). Thus the
MPTT (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Maximum_power_transfer_theorem) must be applied to 3 elements: PS, bulb and the
DUT (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Device_under_test).
Quote from: tim123 on February 20, 2014, 11:14:17 AM
Hi Folks,
It's all working ok, and I have some results... :)
1) I'm able to light a small incandescent bulb from the 2 copper tubes in the coil. Picture attached of the setup.
- The resonant frequency for my 2 6" copper tubes is around 3.7MHz.
- It is a sharp resonance being much dimmer at 3.6 or 3.8MHz, an the lamp doesn't light at all past about 3.5/3.9Mhz...
2) Power into the transistor is about 60v, and 0.37a (about 22w)
3) The gate-driver setup has a sweet spot at about 5.7v.
- It keeps the current through the gate & the mosfet reasonably low, but there's a peak of lamp brightness there too.
- Above 5.7v the load current reduces, and the lamp dims, up to about 7v where it reaches it's former brightness again.
4) The scope shot shows:
- Yellow - the Gate voltage
- Blue - the Drain voltage
5) I think my gate driver needs power resistors - the 1/4w ones can't take the current with the full 15v available. They get very hot at 9v.
They're currently at 10 Ohms, I'm tempted to try 5 Ohms to see if I can improve the gate signal.
The UCC211 can handle 0.3a continuous at 18v according to the specs - so a pair of 5 watt resistors maybe?
Maybe I'll just put a load of 1/4w ones together so I don't have to worry about them burning out...
6) In order to measure the input & output HF power, I'd like to build something like Verpies HF wattmeter...
I suppose an off-the-shelf SWR meter would be good enough to make relative measurements though...
:)
Tim
Hi tim.
Nice to see you are in progress :)
For reducing load for power consumption protection, I understand what you mean, but remember that more the output is (short-circuit and light bulb are powerful), more the negative power has changes to take place at the input.
For SWR meter, do you mean like a mini NVA or a HF FWard BWard power meter & SWR Meter? If last one, Blue has registered funny behaviours in his last vid.
Cheers
K.
Quote from: tim123 on February 20, 2014, 12:59:58 PM
I've combined 2 lots of 5, 47 Ohm, 1/4w resistors, to make 9.5 Ohms, 1.25w resistors - for the gate driver. I feel much happier now - though they do still get hot at higher volts.
And some more results:
- I've found a new resonance at 7.3MHz - which lights the bulb more brightly, for less power...
- and a few others too - here's a list:
(apologies for the subjective bulb-brightness-units ;) )
Frequency Bulb Brightness Power Supply
----------------- --------------------------- -----------------------
- 1.5 MHz Weak
- 1.8 MHz Less Weak
- 2.45 MHz Strong 0.61a at 46v
- 3.7 MHz Stronger 0.49a at 46v
- 7.3 MHz Strongest 0.42a at 46v
Another note:
- The ferrite rod-cores make no difference at all to the operation of the device...!
- I've tried them in and out at the resonance points, and the performance is the same, and the tuning is the same too.
:)
Tim
Nice results and Very Well presented! Imho :)
Quote from: tim123 on February 21, 2014, 01:17:36 PM
Further tuning.
- The 145pF capacitance in parallel with the coil is still good.
- I've tried adding small amounts of inductance & or capacitance in series or parallel with the bulb, and have only seen the bulb dim.
- I've tried connecting the GND to one or other of the bars - and that gives a small increase in brightness - when connected to either bar.
What's going on...?
Capacitive vs. magnetic coupling...
There are 2 reasons why it looks like the effect is due to capacitive coupling:
1) The addition of the ferrite cores makes no difference
2) Placing my hand on the coil makes the bulb go out. If it was magnetic - I don't see how this could happen.
Relative Power Usage
- The test bulb with 12v DC uses 0.4a, and makes about 40,000 Lux (as tested with a luxmeter at zero distance)
- If powered by the circuit - the bulb needs about 45v and 0.3a to reach the same brightness. (Ignoring the gate rdriver)
Questions
- If it is capacitive coupling, I don't understand why it has particular resonance points. I suppose caps do have their own resonances...
- I don't really get why the 2 bars inside the coil would be oppositely polarised.
Next Steps
- I have a ZVS driver with a bad mosfet that I need to fix. Maybe tomorrow.
- I want to try running the coil with the ZVS driver - it's likely much more efficient.
- In order to do that - I also have to add another layer of winding to the coil - so there will be two. I know that's not typical for the device, but hey...
- I might actually just do a new coil, with fat wire - as the ZVS driver prefers lower inductances, and fewer turns.
Did you try to connect one extremity of one half bar to the same side extremity of the coil? Biganos did it with success and an other experimenter of Cos too. If I remember well they connected it to the "0" point of the signal; something like that. (Which looks to me avoid at least partially the possibility of capacitive coupling while both coil and bar are connected...).
Hi Khwartz,
thanks :)
I'm considering buying one of these SWR meters - 1.8 - 525MHz:
http://www.pjbox.co.uk/maas-rs-600-swr-pwr-meter.html
I'm considering getting into CB radio - to make the purchase worthwhile... lol. Actually - I'm planning on doing a load of experiments with HF eventually too - such as John Kansias's burning salt-water, Hutchinson effect etc... So i'm sure it'll be useful.
I'd like a VNA - but I'm not sure I can justify the expense of buying one... I'm still mulling the idea of making one, but I can't even get my ZVS driver going... :(
:)
Tim
@ verpies & tim
QuoteQuoteQuote from: tim123 on February 21, 2014, 07:17:36 PM
There are 2 reasons why it looks like the effect is due to capacitive coupling:
1) The addition of the ferrite cores makes no difference
2) Placing my hand on the coil makes the bulb go out. If it was magnetic - I don't see how this could happen.
That's logical reasoning
Wouldn't be you both forget it is supposed to be about mainly inner coupling with the energy of electrons? And that it is supposed too to be about a magnetic flux sent back in the coil by the cold current in the bars (for negative power)? That inner core doesn't matter much because current locates maily close to the outsurface the the bars? none of what you notice looks to me to avoid these supposed and expected phenomena; or I am mistaking?
QuoteThat's a good test of the output power if the luxmeter does not get saturated and the inductive reactance of the bulb is low. Putting the bulb and the sensor in a dark box would be prudent (see Grumage's Wattbox).
Good one! Again :)
QuoteHowever the bulb is not a good indicator of the input power at all, because a bulb in series with the input measures current, not power and the MPTT rears its ugly head.
Wasn't it only for comparison test on DC power, to have an "unit" for output power estimate then, when the bulb placed at the output ofthe bar?
QuoteUnfortunately I have replaced the mosfets, but the driver's still not working... It'll take another leap of understanding for me to fix it.
Just to let you know that Blue, in his last vid, uses Arduino stuff and Biganos amplifier.
Quote from: tim123 on February 23, 2014, 05:14:22 AM
Hi Khwartz,
thanks :)
I'm considering buying one of these SWR meters - 1.8 - 525MHz:
http://www.pjbox.co.uk/maas-rs-600-swr-pwr-meter.html
I'm considering getting into CB radio - to make the purchase worthwhile... lol. Actually - I'm planning on doing a load of experiments with HF eventually too - such as John Kansias's burning salt-water, Hutchinson effect etc... So i'm sure it'll be useful.
I'd like a VNA - but I'm not sure I can justify the expense of buying one... I'm still mulling the idea of making one, but I can't even get my ZVS driver going... :(
:)
Tim
Hi tim :)
I think what ever you'll do will be a step in an positive direction :)
If you need financial support, I think I can help you up to 50€ in the next weeks, for the verpie's wattmeter or your NVA built. If you're OK, just PM me data for sending in PM.
Best regards,
K.
Quote from: verpies on February 22, 2014, 09:16:04 PM
However, you cannot trust non-inductive bulbs to accurately indicate input power (because in that case the bulb is not the indicator and load in one - it is merely an intermediary between the power supply and a 3rd element in that circuit...
Hi Verpies,
in this case, isn't the bulb the DUT? As we're trying to measure the power through it - and there's nothing else in the (output) circuit.
Also I have a couple of questions that perhaps you could help with:
1) The driver for the Vialle gen is clearly the most important part, and the hardest to get 'right'...
What do you think would be the 'best' way to drive the device - given the requirements of:
- High efficiency,
- Variable, high frequency
- Balanced output, sine-wave oscillator
For example, I have a linear amp - with a D1020UK, MOSFET. Balanced push-pull type. I've not used it yet. I'm reluctant to hook it up to the VG in case i kill it. That MOSFET is cool - but expensive. Is there anything similar but cheaper you know of?
A multipactor might be good. Shame they're not available to buy these days...(?)
I would like to be able to explore the higher harmonics of the series that is apparent in my device: 3.7, 7.3 MHz found, - so 14.6, 29.2 may be there too etc... Although the reactance of the coil may prevent them...
2) I think it's clear that there is capacitive coupling between the coil & tubes. The fact that putting my hand near the device makes the bulb go out is compelling evidence. Also, it would be remarkable if there wasn't, so:
I'd like to cancel out the electrostatic part of the equation - so we just have the magnetic component... How could I best do that?
- coil with 2 layers, one wound CW, the other ACW, drive one layer -ve, the other +ve...?
- shielding?
Regards, Tim
Tim,
What is the difference between:
- Touching a device changes the tuning and so the output by changing stray capacitance
And
- The device works by and because of capacitive coupling?
BTW, is that my translation so bad that the tests to check capacitive coupling looks not relevant for you? But true that verpies could suggest other relevant stests, so...
Quote from: Khwartz on February 24, 2014, 06:19:36 PM
Tim,
What is the difference between:
- Touching a device changes the tuning and so the output by changing stray capacitance
And
- The device works by and because of capacitive coupling?
Hi Khwartz,
I don't know. It's a good question... Changing the tuning would decrease the magnetic field... It would be so useful to have my ZVS driver working - as it auto-tunes...
If it does change the resonance - and the bulb then lights up at a different frequency - what would that mean I wonder?
QuoteBTW, is that my translation so bad that the tests to check capacitive coupling looks not relevant for you? But true that verpies could suggest other relevant stests, so...
No mate, it wasn't bad. I was just wondering if there was a way to cancel it out completely in the device itself - so I didn't have to try doing those calculations... ;)
I could do the alu-foil shield - but i believe what Pascal said - and I'm not sure if it helps...?
I was also wondering if perhaps the cap-coupling might interfere with the desired effect - i mean - it's supposed to work because of the magnetic field - but maybe the electrostatic field is interfering with it... Just a thought.
The best idea i can think of so far - but it's not perfect - is the 2-layer counterwound coil - fed with balanced + & - signals... That way the 2 counterwound coils would make the same magnetic field - but the electrostatic field would (more or less) cancel out.
Maybe it would be possible with a normal bifilar coil...?
Regards, Tim
Quote from: tim123 on February 23, 2014, 01:25:11 PM
in this case, isn't the bulb the DUT? As we're trying to measure the power through it - and there's nothing else in the (output) circuit.
Correct, the output bulb is the DUT and a power indicator in one.
However, the input bulb is not the DUT.
Quote from: tim123 on February 25, 2014, 06:47:27 AM
Hi Khwartz,
I don't know. It's a good question... Changing the tuning would decrease the magnetic field... It would be so useful to have my ZVS driver working - as it auto-tunes...
Wow! Selftuning :D looks like the wonderful "seltrigging system" of the Youtuber (still a French) Selfonlypath ;)
QuoteIf it does change the resonance - and the bulb then lights up at a different frequency - what would that mean I wonder?
Imo that capacitive coupling could interfere, especially stray capacitance, but it isn't necessarily "the Why" of the possible overunity, "the Why" of the phenomenon.
QuoteNo mate, it wasn't bad. I was just wondering if there was a way to cancel it out completely in the device itself - so I didn't have to try doing those calculations... ;)
OK, great to know my translation are compressible :p and nice to see you have a plan here :)
QuoteI could do the alu-foil shield - but i believe what Pascal said - and I'm not sure if it helps...?
Could be good you try for yourself! Don't think it is what it will take you the most time to do it, dear tim.
QuoteI was also wondering if perhaps the cap-coupling might interfere with the desired effect - i mean - it's supposed to work because of the magnetic field - but maybe the electrostatic field is interfering with it... Just a thought.
Better to verpies to answer you that point :/ and/or check by yourself.
QuoteThe best idea i can think of so far - but it's not perfect - is the 2-layer counterwound coil - fed with balanced + & - signals... That way the 2 counterwound coils would make the same magnetic field - but the electrostatic field would (more or less) cancel out.
If you say so, I am OK to believe you, tim, cause I don't know so much about coils ;)
QuoteMaybe it would be possible with a normal bifilar coil...?
But verpies' additive one! :p
QuoteRegards, Tim
Best regards, K.
@ ATOMMIX
Care to show your objective results (like your saucer you will oviously finish very soon as sure as your are in your statements) and then we will care objectively of your objections... ::)
Quote from: Atommix on February 26, 2014, 03:09:09 AM
I have been trying to up load attachments here there seems to be a block on them ?
ATOMMIX
can you send me your documents and I post them here ?
deleted by tagor
Quote from: tagor on February 26, 2014, 05:53:00 AM
i sent you my email
here it is
http://www.overunity.com/downloads/sa/view/down/556/ (http://www.overunity.com/downloads/sa/view/down/556/)
http://www.overunity.com/downloads/sa/view/down/557/ (http://www.overunity.com/downloads/sa/view/down/557/)
http://www.overunity.com/downloads/sa/view/down/558/
ionic displacement current with hydrogen @attomix?
@Atommix
I am not qualified at all to know the value of your work and you must be free to publish it in this website. But please, even if "negative mass" in the title of this thread, could you open a new thread about your own work so that it would not too much interfere with the continuity of the work done here?
Anyway, it is just my opinion and invite the other users to say if they prefer a new thread for or to mix the whole here.
Nevertheless, the work of Atommix looks huge enough to justify a new thread and to avoid the risk here of confusion.
Cheers,
K.
I agree with Khwartz, Atommix, please start your own thread.
This thread is about the Vialle gen. Let's keep it on topic.
Updates:
1) ZVS driver:
- I bought this ZVS driver (http://www.rmcybernetics.com/shop/induction-heater-circuit) but it failed. I replaced the mosfets - but it still doesn't work - so...
- I've ordered some parts and I'm going to re-use what I can from the board and build a new one.
- Likely Problem - it may not run at a high enough frequency. Will see...
2) Coil:
- I've wrapped a second layer on the coil (not yet tested) - for 2 reasons:
a) To equalise the voltage in the coil around each bar...
With a 1-layered coil, the voltage drop across the coil would be reflected in the bars - i.e. the bar nearest the +ve terminal would see a higher-voltage / larger electric field than the one near the -ve.
This provides a mechanism for capacitive coupling *between* the bars. (I'm pretty sure)
With a 2-layered coil - where the second layer comes back to the start, the voltage drop is equal all the way along the coil.
So this *should* eliminate cap-coupling between the 2 inner bars.
(It wouldn't eliminate it between the bars and GND though - but that doesn't matter)
b) Verpies said that a single layer winding acts like a single turn in a toroid coil (in a different plane) - and it seems logical that it should apply to a straight coil too, to an extent.
So it may have some bearing on this too.
3) Homopolar Generator similarities...
There are *may be* some similarities between the VG and the HPG...
If you re-arrange the HPG to be linear it comes out similar to the VG.
So the magnetic field may be inducing current flow by that mechanism too...
Just a thought.
:)
Tim
Quote from: tim123 on February 27, 2014, 01:43:58 PM
Updates:
1) ZVS driver:
- I bought this ZVS driver (http://www.rmcybernetics.com/shop/induction-heater-circuit) but it failed. I replaced the mosfets - but it still doesn't work - so...
- I've ordered some parts and I'm going to re-use what I can from the board and build a new one.
- Likely Problem - it may not run at a high enough frequency. Will see...
2) Coil:
- I've wrapped a second layer on the coil (not yet tested) - for 2 reasons:
a) To equalise the voltage in the coil around each bar...
With a 1-layered coil, the voltage drop across the coil would be reflected in the bars - i.e. the bar nearest the +ve terminal would see a higher-voltage / larger electric field than the one near the -ve.
This provides a mechanism for capacitive coupling *between* the bars. (I'm pretty sure)
With a 2-layered coil - where the second layer comes back to the start, the voltage drop is equal all the way along the coil.
So this *should* eliminate cap-coupling between the 2 inner bars.
(It wouldn't eliminate it between the bars and GND though - but that doesn't matter)
b) Verpies said that a single layer winding acts like a single turn in a toroid coil (in a different plane) - and it seems logical that it should apply to a straight coil too, to an extent.
So it may have some bearing on this too.
3) Homopolar Generator similarities...
There are *may be* some similarities between the VG and the HPG...
If you re-arrange the HPG to be linear it comes out similar to the VG.
So the magnetic field may be inducing current flow by that mechanism too...
Just a thought.
:)
Tim
Hi tim.
Just to say I thought you were about a capacitive coupling between the bars and the coil, which was indeed checked by Pascal. Between the bars themselves is very something else and even not sure it is something to be avoid to get better results.
Anyway, good to have a try :) but remember you didn't obtain with standard setups the huge COPs we are supposed to obtain with the standard setups. So imho, hard to know if any setup will be better because you have not yet any true comparison base. So still I think that would be better methodology to first achieve what has been already achieved apparently as level of results, before to go on our own ideas.
Best regards,
K.
Quote from: Atommix on February 27, 2014, 01:54:00 PM
I do not wish to put a negative cloud on anything but this thread is about negative mass and it is very important .
The other point is the error of personal petty politics of the mind set that says this is mine and that is yours ? Knowledge is not owned or controlled and must never become a theory .
There is only one universe it is this one ! I except that humans want to find the truth and claim it as there's so to climb up the ladder and begin to glow like a light house
illuminated by self . mmmmmmmmm I have pondered along the threshold of truth and see only one truth .
When the one is made of the many it is then that the real truth becomes a bell that rings its vibrations in the minds of all that think .
Also many walk down the path and straight into a dark wood where the only light that shines is in there head and continue to get lost in the darkness of self . So no I will not follow your advice or your theory for it is already lost in the wood.
Dont take that personal just except that a theory is just a theory and fact is a reality ! If an angel were to find you in the dark wood and taped you on the shoulder and stop you are lost deep in the wood and said follow the light and you will find fact not fiction . You would say but it is not the light I see in my head and continue to follow it until the end of time.
I am that angel ! and your theory is taking you deeper into the dark wood ! so please continue and I will keep watch over you and from time to time I will hit you on the head with my magic feather and tel you the truth.
There are masters and time lords demons and angels Aliens ghosts dimensions and the fabric of space in these woods do you think you will re-invent its reality ? NO !
GOOD LUCK
Regards
Atommix
Indeed, this thread was about negative mass too but we focus on the VG and Richard's theories.
You looks like having deep understanding and large views. PLEASE, open a new thread, like "New Ideas On Negative Mass, by Atommix", so that other guys here could focus on your own ideas, work and test them.
Here we test Richard Vialle's ideas. You have differents, so that's VERY GREAT, but not here please, Atommix, so that visitor could follow easier the thread.
Best regards,
K.
Translation of the
4th Q&A of the present FAQ of the website on the work of Richard
*** HOW TO GET "NEGATIVE POWER"? (Power produced by the input itself of the device, feeding back the power supply system, batteries, etc.) ***
http://richard-vialle.info (http://richard-vialle.info)/
(In agreement to the licence terms of the website, already published and taking no liability for any error of translation or modifications in between of the original terms of licence or of the original terms I translate here. These warnings applies to any writting by me on this website. )
----
Q : A quel moment puis-je obtenir "de la puissance négative" ?
• Q: At what moment may I obtain "some negative power "? R : La puissance négative s'obtient lorsque les éléments suivants sont réunis :
• R: The negative power is obtained when the following elements are combined: 1/ Le système est conçu suivant les caractéristiques calculés dans le fichier Excel :
Fichiers:
Feuille de calcul des paramètres pour l'autogénérateur de Richard Vialle Version:17.09.2012
http://richard-vialle.info/index.php/telechargement/finish/4-systemes-experimentaux/24-feuille-de-calcul-des-parametres-pour-l-autogenerateur-de-richard-vialle (http://richard-vialle.info/index.php/telechargement/finish/4-systemes-experimentaux/24-feuille-de-calcul-des-parametres-pour-l-autogenerateur-de-richard-vialle)
• 1/ The system is designed according to the characteristics calculated in the Excel file :
Files:
Worksheet of the parameters for the autogenerator of Richard Vialle Version:17.09.2012 Ce document vous permettra de calculer les paramètres relatifs au générateur de Richard Vialle.
Licence Creative Commons Date 2012-09-22 Taille du fichier 35 KB Téléchargement 725
• This document will allow you to calculate the parameters relative to Richard Vialle's generator.
License Creative Commons Date 2012-09-22 Weight of the file 35 KB download 725 2/ Un signal alternatif est injecté dans les spires qui entourent le barreau de cuivre. Ce signal doit correspondre à une fréquence qui se situe aux alentours de la fréquence calculée dans le fichier mentionné plus haut
• 2/ An alternative signal is injected in the coil which surround the copper bar. This signal has to correspond to a frequency which is located near the frequency calculated in the higher mentioned file. 3/ La "sortie" (la sortie du barreau de cuivre) doit être accordée, c'est à dire qu'un circuit d'accord RLC est positionné en court circuit afin de relier les deux sorties du barreau. Celà permet alors de faire sortir la puissance suruniaire du barreau et de provoquer la génération de la puissance négative qui se propagera alors au travers des spires (et donc à l'entrée)
• 3/ The "output" (the output of the copper bar) has to be tuned, that means a RLC tuning circuit is positioned in short circuit to connect both outputs of the bar. This allows then to get out the overunity power of the bar and to cause the generation of the negative power which will propagate then through the coil (and thus in the input). ----
Wishing this could help,
Best regards,
K.
Hello tim, how it's going for you, did you get what you needed to go forward? Did you acheive o.u. on the bar? For my own concern I have achieved o.u. "global COP" on my own activity (see our MPs) the first week of March but need to be continued ;)
Nice to see you soon back,
Bedt regards,
Khwartz.
They talk about negative energy (apparently) on a certain frequency and some other things, so it must be the primary changing of sign, if so when they use a good battery as a primary energy it must recharging.
It is like two batteries set in a circuit without other component, one in one sens (+ to -) the other in the other sens (- to +), the battery who have the highest voltage recharge more or less slowly the less charged.
Exactly, PiCéd: if you read the previous pages you will see infinite recharging batteries is reported having been achieved in a private and industrial electronics laboratory :) and this, even feeding a load in o.u. two, at the output of the bar! :p
Thanks for your interest :)
B.R.
K.
Quote from: Khwartz on March 16, 2014, 08:27:22 AM
Hello tim, how it's going for you, did you get what you needed to go forward? Did you acheive o.u. on the bar?
Hi Khwartz,
I've just received some mosfets to build a new high-power ZVS driver... I now have a SWR meter too.
My feeling is that my SWR meter will not accurately measure the output from my IRF450 pulse-driver - it needs a sine-wave. The pulse-driver's too inefficient too.
I did test the bar-gen with a 2 layered coil...
With a 2-layered coil - which cancels out 99% of capacitive coupling - the Vialle effect does not occur.
Single-layer coil - wire goes from one end of the coil to the other and stops.
There is a (full) voltage difference between the 2 ends of the coil - and hence the 2 bars...
Vialle effect occurs...
Tube A Tube B
50v 0v
========= ========
IN -------------------------------- OUT
50v 0v
2-layer coil - wire goes to the end of the coil, and then back again.
The voltage drop across the wire averages out.
No Vialle effect.
Tube A Tube B
25v 25v
========= ======== Voltage drop...
50v IN ---------------------------------| 25v > (50-25 = 25v)
0v OUT ---------------------------------| < (25-0 = 25v)
This does NOT mean that the device may not have an OU mode of operation, BUT it does mean that capacitive coupling is an important part of the device / effect - and without it - nothing happens.
The fact that there is no resonance, and virtually no output from the bars with a 2 layered coil means, I think, that M. Vialle's theory of operation is incorrect - as the varying magnetic field alone does not cause the effect.
http://jnaudin.free.fr/rvproject/html/principervgen.htm
The device with a 2-layer coil is an effective induction heater though. After the tests - the bars were hot.
Thinking about it - I could test the opposite. If I wire the coil up differently, I could cancel out the magnetic field - leaving only the capacitive effect...
Anyhow - it's clear that it'll only work with a 1-layer coil.
I still want to find and build a good efficient sine-wave (inverting) driver for it - and make the measurements properly - but I'm not sure which circuit to use... Could use some advice on that TBH...
Quote from: Khwartz on March 16, 2014, 08:27:22 AM
I have achieved o.u. "global COP" on my own activity (see our MPs) the first week of March but need to be continued ;)
Eh?
:)
Regards, Tim
Hi tim, sorry for late response :/
Very nice to know you still going forward on the experiment :)
Still I don't very comprehend how you're so sure to conclude to capacitive effect, while 2 or more layers have been said destroying harmonics and so avoid anyway the Vialle's effect :/
In addition to this, still 1 layer, at the opposite, will work even foiled in a aluminium sheet, grounded or not. So, in this case, how capacitive coupling could occur? Between what and what? (Don't hesitate to join draws or schematics to illustrate cause I still very not follow your reasoning :/ ).
For the "overunity COP activity", didn't you received from me any PM about?
Best regards, Khwartz.
Hi Khwartz :)
this project has helped me forward in many ways. I've learned a lot.
- I've bought & read the books on the UK Ham Radio course - so I can understand RF better.
- I've bought an SWR meter, a CB radio and an antenna tuner (ATU)
- I've built my first antenna - which works really well (SWR 1.08)
- I built the IRF450 pulse-driver.
Capacitive coupling is *definitely* occurring in the Vialle device - and it is because of the single layer coil. With such an arrangement - capacitive coupling is certain.
I am not saying that it's not OU - I've not been able to test that yet.
No, I did not receive a PM... ???
Hi tim! Nice to see you progress in anything :P
For "capacitive coupling", could be it occurs, but for me you still haven't demonstrated that is the "real why" the Vialle effect occurs: IT IS NOT BECAUSE TWO PHENOMENONS LOOKS SYNCHRONISED THEY ARE LINKED! ;)
Still as I see it: the Vialle effect could occur BECAUSE of very thin harmonics like Biganos looks having demonstrated, if I remember well it was him. And as BlueDragon, if I remember well too it is him who wrote this: any multiple layers destroys these harmonics.
Anyway, please I really really need to understand: why folding the single layer in an aluminium foild won't avoid mostly if any capacitive coupling? Why this test already praticed by Pascal, JLN and others, is not relevant for you? Please, really, go into physics more precisely if needed, with schematics and so on if needed too. 8)
Infinite Exponential Happiness. Khwartz.
PS: OK, I will check for the PM why you didn't receive it :)
Here the PM you were supposed to received (copy-pasted from my sent box) ; )
Quote
QuoteQuote from: tim123 on February 23, 2014, 07:51:58 PM]
Hi Khwartz,
Hi tim,
Sorry for late reply :/
Quote
it's very kind of you to offer to help with costs :), perhaps if i can achieve something worthwhile, in time... I'm ok for money really...
Very nice to know that :)
Quote
Spend it on buying yourself a sig-gen...?
The problem for me is time!
I'm already working since few years to try to make a system "overunity": my own activity! Lol and until now my "global COP" (compare to basic needs for famuly and personal fonctioning) is still underunity :/ so that why theoretically I should not be supposed to have any other activity until my family could have enough to survive.
But true Free Energy is an very important Quest, imo, and it makes for me a diversion to change my mind too.
But I am used to fix and repair material things at work so it won't change my mind if I do experiments for now, intellectual work only better change my mind ;) So I am not in a hurry to buy anything for now too...
Quote
:)
Tim
Khwartz.
BTW, We have had a "Global Overunity COP" in our activity this month :p
Quote from: Khwartz on March 27, 2014, 04:32:55 PM
BTW, We have had a "Global Overunity COP" in our activity this month :p
Hi Khwartz,
sorry for my late reply... :)
I finally understand what you're saying. lol. Glad to hear it.
No progress to report - getting sidetracked with house-building, work, etc...
Regards, Tim
Hehe, OK ;)
Good progresses on your other duties :)
Infinite Exponential Happiness,
Khwartz.
Translation of the
5th Q&A of the present FAQ of the website on the work of Richard
*** I HAVE ONLY 1.8MHZ AT THE OUTPUT! :/ ***
http://richard-vialle.info (http://richard-vialle.info)/
(In agreement to the licence terms of the website, already published and taking no liability for any error of translation or modifications in between of the original terms of licence or of the original terms I translate here. These warnings applies to any writting by me on this website. )
----
Q : J'ai construit un oscillateur amplifié de type "ROYER" comme Jean-Louis Naudin, mais je n'ai que 1.8Mhz à la sortie d'un transistor
• Q: I built a "ROYER" amplified oscillator as Jean-Louis Naudin, but I have only 1.8Mhz at the output of a transistorR : C'est normal, car c'est lié au principe du montage de l'oscillateur de Royer.
• R: It is normal, because it is related to the working principle of the Royer oscillator. Si vous avez un oscilloscope : Mettre CH1 sur un pin de la bobine et CH2 sur l'autre pin de la bobine et la masse au moins de l'alimentation.
• If you have an oscilloscope: put CH1 on a connection of the coil and CH2 on the other connection of the coil and the mass at least and the neutral point of power supply. La fréquence se calcule à partir de la période séparant les alternances de ch1 et ch2...
• The frequency is recalculated from the period separating the alternations of ch1 and ch2... Il ne faut pas non plus connecter une bornes de la bobine à la masse si l'alimentation n'est pas différentielle et découplée de la terre sinon cela court-circuite une branche de l'oscillateur, toujours pour la même raison.
• You should not either connect one side of the coil to the mass if the power supply is not differential and not decoupled from the ground otherwise it short-circuit a branch of the oscillator, always for the same reason. Si vous avez un fréquencemètre : prenez la mesure directement en sortie du barreau, la frequence de sortie est celle de l'entrée, et donc du montage "ROYER".
• If you have a frequencymeter: take the measure directly out of the bar, the frequency of the output is the one of the input -----
Infinite Exponential Happiness,
Khwartz.
bonjour
@Khwartz (http://www.overunity.com/profile/khwartz.32841/)
en cherchant le dossier sur tantatron
j'ai decouvert que albert a cree sa propore societe : tantatron
( ses travaux sont maintenant totalement sous NDA )
mais je peux fournir ses coordonnées
A+
PS
societe de cote de toulouse
Salut Tagor.
Merci beaucoup pour ces infos et je veux bien que tu m'envoies ses coordonnées en message perso car cela tombe très bien ; en plus Toulouse n'est pas loin de Bordeaux :)
Cordialement.
Quote from: tagor on August 01, 2014, 08:18:36 AM
( ses travaux sont maintenant totalement sous NDA )
j'ai fais une grossiere erreur d'interpretation ... il n'y a pas de NDA sur ses travaux
( cela concernait uniquement les contrats avec l'armée )
:) merci pour la précision :)
@ Tim123
Hello Tim123, did you finished your home work? ;) did you continue to test the Richard Vialle Autogen?
Quote from: Pascuser on August 28, 2012, 07:03:17 PM
I realized an interview of the retired physicist Richard VIALLE (french), presenting his negative mass theory, a new model of gravity and of the
apres une longue cooperation avec Vialle , pascuser a intensement critiqué celui ci à cause de son manque de rigueur
vous pourrez constater le manque de rigueur de pascuser ici :
http://overunity.com/16760/mister-nader-hoville-you-are-very-very-very-wrong/msg493440/#msg493440