Thomas Moray's book "THE SEA OF ENERGY" http://globalfreeenergy.info/2011/11/25/full-text-book-the-sea-of-energy-by-thomas-henry-moray-p1-p18/ Talks about being surrounded by a sea of vibrational energy and also hints that his device was a siphon for this energy.
So thinking in that perspective I made some interesting finds.
From my understanding you can look at the Geiger tube as a transformer that turns ionizing radiation into electricity. It does this using an electron avalanche or Townsend avalanche.
"The tube consists of a chamber filled with a low-pressure (~0.1 atm) inert gas. This contains two electrodes, between which there is a potential difference of several hundred volts. The walls of the tube are either metal or have their inside surface coated with a conductor to form the cathode, while the anode is a wire in the centre of the chamber. When ionizing radiation strikes the tube, some molecules of the fill gas are ionized, either directly by the incident radiation or indirectly by means of secondary electrons produced in the walls of the tube. This creates positively charged ions and electrons, known as ion pairs, in the gas. The strong electric field created by the tube's electrodes accelerates the positive ions towards the cathode and the electrons towards the anode. Close to the anode in the "avalanche region" the electrons gain sufficient energy to ionize additional gas molecules and create a large number of electron avalanches which spread along the anode and effectively throughout the avalanche region. This is the "gas multiplication" effect which gives the tube its key characteristic of being able to produce a significant output pulse from a single ionising event.[4" http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Geiger%E2%80%93M%C3%BCller_tube
So if you look up ionizing radiation, cosmic rays ARE on the list. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ionizing_radiation
And if you look into Thomas Moray's device he had an antenna bringing cosmic rays to his tubes/valves and he also had radio active material IN the tubes/valves.
I think of radio active material as a tuning fork tuned to a very high frequency sucking in and resonating with surrounding energy of the same frequency. So did Moray put the radio active material inside the tubes creating a resonant circuit tuned to cosmic rays?
Is this a way to siphon the sea of energy that surrounds us?
These are some of the experiments I will be performing in the Captret section http://www.overunity.com/13273/i-will-be-testing-high-voltage-capacitor-self-charge-t-h-moray-style/#.UQbIIGc7LRM
Other relevant links= Townsend discharge http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Townsend_discharge Electron avalanche http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Electron_avalanche
Looking at the available pictures of Moray's tubes, http://www.freeenergyplanet.info/free-energy-devices/images/2370_631_275-thomas-henry-moray-device.jpg I can see this theory really taking shape. You can look at this tube as a self exciting Geiger tube. Where the electrodes on the left are a Geiger tube/dynatron and the stuff on the right shoots x-rays (ionizing radiation) at it. It can be theorized that by running power through a loop like this would gain power from the gas multiplication effect of the Townsend avalanche and maybe the negative resistance characteristics of the dynatron (which doesn't need a heated cathode because the x-ray emitter supplies the electrons). http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dynatron
The many strange qualities of vacuum tubes fascinate me and seem to have more potential for free energy than conventional electronics.
Did some more research..
The Townsend avalanche seems to be the same thing as the nuclear chain reaction that powers nuclear power plants..... Except on a smaller scale (in the ion scale instead of protons and neutrons)....without radiation emissions (that aren't used)......And in a safe way because of the process's self limiting effect "Raether limit" where the gas in the tube becomes so ionized that it becomes conductive and self discharges .. in contrast to the run away nuclear chain reaction that ends up as a bomb.
It acts as a free current amplifier....
So by introducing one elctron or positron it will put out around 1000000000 to 10000000000 electrons.
Keep up the good work. It may be there is a lack of responses here as Moray's work has been discussed at length before. Probably one of the most in depth researchers on his material is Bruce Perreault. Are you familiar with him or his work? He has a web site or two (may have changed recently) but try www.nuenergy.org and www.sonomagnetics.com if you don't already know about them.
I have probly been over them links but I will check. Seems like I have read everything available on Moray. Even buying books that aren't available on the net.
Moray talks about his "detector".... I believe when he says detector he is talking about a version of the Geiger tube, which can also be used as an oscillator.
Here is a guy who puts a commercial Geiger tube on an oscilloscope. 400v input from 2 AA batteries to run it. Every ionizing event creates a negative -4000v spike. But you have to realize that a commercial tube is designed to completely ground/breakdown/discharge from one event. I will be designing my own to get the best characteristics.
http://www-cs-faculty.stanford.edu/~nick/geiger/
I can easily picture building a wide flat Geiger tube to act as a solar/cosmic ray cell. I believe Tesla's cosmic ray collector using an insulated metal plate on antenna does the same thing without the avalanche amplification.
The charged electrodes are just to suck the electrons to it. As the electrons get closer the stronger (magnetic?) field of the electrode acts as a particle accelerator. Acceleration past a certain speed creates energy for the avalanche effect.
So I want to do some testing with already accelerated electrons from an electron gun/cathode ray tube, which I understand could work from high voltage static electricity too. And instead of relying on the electrode to suck the particle in, I want to try just shooting the electrons at the electrode plate.
Quote from: yellowsnow2 on February 01, 2013, 01:36:32 PM
.....gain power from the gas multiplication effect of the Townsend avalanche and maybe the negative resistance characteristics of the dynatron (which doesn't need a heated cathode because the x-ray emitter supplies the electrons). http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dynatron (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dynatron)
http://www.ietlabs.com/pdf/GR_Experimenters/1930/GenRad_Experimenter_May_1930.pdf (http://www.ietlabs.com/pdf/GR_Experimenters/1930/GenRad_Experimenter_May_1930.pdf)
http://www.overunity.com/3628/farnsworth-fusor-and-multipactor/#.URAarFoX6-M (http://www.overunity.com/3628/farnsworth-fusor-and-multipactor/#.URAarFoX6-M)
http://teslapress.com/vactube.html (http://teslapress.com/vactube.html)
www.google.com/patents/US1969399 (http://www.google.com/patents/US1969399)
http://www.overunity.com/1965/correas-pagd-in-action/msg23706/#msg23706 (http://www.overunity.com/1965/correas-pagd-in-action/msg23706/#msg23706)
http://www.silverbearcafe.com/private/07.12/plasmatron.html (http://www.silverbearcafe.com/private/07.12/plasmatron.html)
http://www.rexresearch.com/chernetskii/chernetskii.htm (http://www.rexresearch.com/chernetskii/chernetskii.htm)
....... European Space Agency ..
http://multipactor.esa.int/whatis.html
http://multipactor.esa.int/ (http://multipactor.esa.int/)
.... Department of Nuclear Engineering and Radiological Sciences, University of Michigan ...
Steady state multipactor and dependence on material properties
http://deepblue.lib.umich.edu/bitstream/handle/2027.42/70121/PHPAEN-4-3-863-1.pdf;jsessionid=32D79BF0DE58DA4E42B9B80D0F026F59?sequence=2 (http://deepblue.lib.umich.edu/bitstream/handle/2027.42/70121/PHPAEN-4-3-863-1.pdf;jsessionid=32D79BF0DE58DA4E42B9B80D0F026F59?sequence=2)
Thanks for the interesting and relevant links. I haven't made it through all of it yet.
This link you posted settles what this tube of Moray's actually is. It is a dynatron oscillator suped up with x-rays. Compare the Moray patent http://www.freeenergyplanet.info/free-energy-devices/images/2370_631_275-thomas-henry-moray-device.jpg
Compared to dynatron oscillator page 3 figure 1 http://www.ietlabs.com/pdf/GR_Experimenters/1930/GenRad_Experimenter_May_1930.pdf
So it would seem my theory might be going a different direction than Moray's device.
But closer to the Plasmatron in this link, with it's large reverse flow energy spikes. http://www.silverbearcafe.com/private/07.12/plasmatron.html
In a few more days when stuff comes in the mail I will start some testing.
Quote from: yellowsnow2 on February 05, 2013, 02:12:37 PM
Thanks for the interesting and relevant links. I haven't made it through all of it yet.
This link you posted settles what this tube of Moray's actually is. It is a dynatron oscillator suped up with x-rays. Compare the Moray patent http://www.freeenergyplanet.info/free-energy-devices/images/2370_631_275-thomas-henry-moray-device.jpg (http://www.freeenergyplanet.info/free-energy-devices/images/2370_631_275-thomas-henry-moray-device.jpg)
Compared to dynatron oscillator page 3 figure 1 http://www.ietlabs.com/pdf/GR_Experimenters/1930/GenRad_Experimenter_May_1930.pdf (http://www.ietlabs.com/pdf/GR_Experimenters/1930/GenRad_Experimenter_May_1930.pdf)
So it would seem my theory might be going a different direction than Moray's device.
But closer to the Plasmatron in this link, with it's large reverse flow energy spikes. http://www.silverbearcafe.com/private/07.12/plasmatron.html (http://www.silverbearcafe.com/private/07.12/plasmatron.html)
In a few more days when stuff comes in the mail I will start some testing.
other interesting readings related to plasma Self-Organization
http://www.dtic.mil/cgi-bin/GetTRDoc?AD=ADP015026 (http://www.dtic.mil/cgi-bin/GetTRDoc?AD=ADP015026)
http://epsppd.epfl.ch/Praha/WEB/98ICPP_W/H094PR.PDF (http://epsppd.epfl.ch/Praha/WEB/98ICPP_W/H094PR.PDF)
...
http://www.rrp.infim.ro/2008_60_3/43-885-898.pdf (http://www.rrp.infim.ro/2008_60_3/43-885-898.pdf)
... plasma source of life
http://www.dapla.org/pdf/Lozneanu1.pdf (http://www.dapla.org/pdf/Lozneanu1.pdf)
Quote from: e2matrix on February 03, 2013, 11:58:23 PM
Keep up the good work. It may be there is a lack of responses here as Moray's work has been discussed at length before. Probably one of the most in depth researchers on his material is Bruce Perreault. Are you familiar with him or his work? He has a web site or two (may have changed recently) but try www.nuenergy.org (http://www.nuenergy.org) and www.sonomagnetics.com (http://www.sonomagnetics.com) if you don't already know about them.
Hi,
Very good input.
I did said the same thing on this forum many times.A simple spark discharge is in fact a current multiplier.It is like a nuclear chain reaction, but happening with electrons.A single electron at the beginning, and kA range of current at the end of spark discharge enters the circuit.It is OU in front of our noses.
Regards,
Pix
Quote from: yellowsnow2 on February 03, 2013, 07:18:49 PM
Did some more research..
The Townsend avalanche seems to be the same thing as the nuclear chain reaction that powers nuclear power plants..... Except on a smaller scale (in the ion scale instead of protons and neutrons)....without radiation emissions (that aren't used)......And in a safe way because of the process's self limiting effect "Raether limit" where the gas in the tube becomes so ionized that it becomes conductive and self discharges .. in contrast to the run away nuclear chain reaction that ends up as a bomb.
It acts as a free current amplifier....
So by introducing one elctron or positron it will put out around 1000000000 to 10000000000 electrons.
Hi yellowsnow2,
Sorry to repeat, my reply was directed to you:
>>>Hi,
Very good input.
I did said the same thing on this forum many times.A simple spark discharge is in fact a current multiplier.It is like a nuclear chain reaction, but happening with electrons.A single electron at the beginning, and kA range of current at the end of spark discharge enters the circuit.It is OU in front of our noses.
Regards,
Pix<<<<
@ yellowsnow2,
Please see : http://www.google.com/patents/US20110188278 (http://www.google.com/patents/US20110188278)
and attached.
Regards,
Pix
Quote from: wings on February 05, 2013, 04:27:10 PM
other interesting readings related to plasma Self-Organization
http://www.dtic.mil/cgi-bin/GetTRDoc?AD=ADP015026 (http://www.dtic.mil/cgi-bin/GetTRDoc?AD=ADP015026)
http://epsppd.epfl.ch/Praha/WEB/98ICPP_W/H094PR.PDF (http://epsppd.epfl.ch/Praha/WEB/98ICPP_W/H094PR.PDF)
...
http://www.rrp.infim.ro/2008_60_3/43-885-898.pdf (http://www.rrp.infim.ro/2008_60_3/43-885-898.pdf)
... plasma source of life
http://www.dapla.org/pdf/Lozneanu1.pdf (http://www.dapla.org/pdf/Lozneanu1.pdf)
Naudin .. Electrical power from the plasma ?
http://jlnlabs.online.fr/cfr/ape/apenrg.htm (http://jlnlabs.online.fr/cfr/ape/apenrg.htm)
and going back to the Dynatron here some explanation
http://users.tpg.com.au/users/ldbutler/NegativeResistance.htm (http://users.tpg.com.au/users/ldbutler/NegativeResistance.htm)
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Negative_resistance (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Negative_resistance)
In early research it was noticed that arc discharge (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Electric_arc) devices and some vacuum tube (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Vacuum_tube) devices such as the dynatron (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dynatron) exhibit negative differential resistance effects.[4] (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Negative_resistance#cite_note-4)Practical and economic devices only became available with solid state technology (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Solid_state_(electronics)). The typical true negative impedance circuit—the negative impedance converter (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Negative_impedance_converter) – is due to John G. Linvill (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/John_G._Linvill) (1953)[5] (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Negative_resistance#cite_note-5) and the popular element with negative differential resistance—the tunnel diode (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tunnel_diode) – is due to Leo Esaki (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Leo_Esaki) (1958).[6] (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Negative_resistance#cite_note-6)
http://www.nobelprize.org/nobel_prizes/physics/laureates/1973/esaki-lecture.pdf
Well I made a really simple Geiger tube. just a metal tube(cathode) with a copper wire (anode) with 3mm spacing like the commercial units. Mine is enclosed in a pill bottle since my alpha emitter is put inside the bottle. Starting off trying it at regular pressure. Commercial ones run about +1.4psi.
PROBLEM. I need a 400-500v power source. My camera circuit will only charge it to 220v. Need a new idea for a simple cheap power source. Or do I need more surface area to hold more charge.
Picture of the inside http://i.imgur.com/eWeGTqC.jpg
Put together (little round thing by the needle nose is my alpha emitter from a smoke detector) http://imgur.com/DZhrYL1
This posted by "Pix" is very interesting http://www.google.com/patents/US20110188278
Quote from: yellowsnow2 on February 09, 2013, 08:37:28 PM
Well I made a really simple Geiger tube. just a metal tube(cathode) with a copper wire (anode) with 3mm spacing like the commercial units. Mine is enclosed in a pill bottle since my alpha emitter is put inside the bottle. Starting off trying it at regular pressure. Commercial ones run about +1.4psi.
PROBLEM. I need a 400-500v power source. My camera circuit will only charge it to 220v. Need a new idea for a simple cheap power source. Or do I need more surface area to hold more charge.
Picture of the inside http://i.imgur.com/eWeGTqC.jpg (http://i.imgur.com/eWeGTqC.jpg)
Put together (little round thing by the needle nose is my alpha emitter from a smoke detector) http://imgur.com/DZhrYL1 (http://imgur.com/DZhrYL1)
This posted by "Pix" is very interesting http://www.google.com/patents/US20110188278 (http://www.google.com/patents/US20110188278)
Hi Yellow,
Check this giegercounter circuit www.uzzors2k.4hv.org/index.php?page=geigercounter (http://www.uzzors2k.4hv.org/index.php?page=geigercounter) I believe it utilizes a camera type circuit in it. Have a look -and good luck.
Paul
how much power is available per square meter in cosmic rays at sea level?
how much a hundred miles up in space?
fritznien
Quote from: PARAV on February 09, 2013, 10:56:59 PM
Hi Yellow,
Check this giegercounter circuit www.uzzors2k.4hv.org/index.php?page=geigercounter (http://www.uzzors2k.4hv.org/index.php?page=geigercounter) I believe it utilizes a camera type circuit in it. Have a look -and good luck.
Paul
Hi Yellowsnow2 -
Sorry I forgot to tell you about the nifty little DIY kits you can order from Electronic Goldmine -- "www.goldmine-elec-products.com"--and check out their Geiger counters you can buy assembled and or in kit form --The one you might be interested in, is kit no. -or part no. "G18410". Uses a 9 volt battery and it puts out, --I think, about 450 volts for the GM tube--check it out.
Let us know what you think about these units as , I too! am thinking down the same lines as you are on this ----keep up the good work.-Paul
Thanks for the suggestions for a power source guys.
But I realized I could make a completely adjustable power source from my neon transformer. I am designing it to be adjustable between 500-1200v. Since my tube is crude and only uses air, it will most likely need more voltage than commercial ones. I read an old study into Geiger tubes and the different gases effect the recovery time and voltage needed, mainly. I used this free circuit design simulator to figure it out http://qucs.sourceforge.net/
I also have most of the stuff needed to try this electron avalanche drive circuit. http://www.google.com/patents/US20110188278 Except for the commutator.
My megohm resistors should be coming in today. And my megohm potentiometer should be 2 or 3 days. This will make an adjustable voltage divider circuit for the neon transformer.
Here is a DIY ion chamber (low power in, less avalanche action) http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cfVBW622Vbs
http://tarielkapanadze.ru/science-eng.htm
Hi all!
Details on the website http://tarielkapanadze.ru/science-eng.htm
[/font]
So I quickly looked over this kapnadza stuff. If they are using a gas discharge tube and making fancy waves for it, then it seems to be basically the same concept as the patent I link in my last comment. If that is the case then they are doing it the hard way. Instead of doing all that work to make it solid state, they should just make a commutator like in the patent I linked. The commutator is an adjustment for duration and timing of the current to the spark gap/gas discharge tube to tweak it for best Townsend avalanche action. Then once you find the sweet spot you scope it and reproduce it in solid state.
Im sticking to the Geiger tube testing first.
Hey,
I think you are into a right path into something.
But what was the purpose of the antenna in Moray's setup? It was quite useless.
The substance which converts cosmic rays into lower frequency energy is a radioactive material.
This is the antenna.
Quote from: telecom on February 14, 2013, 01:01:44 PM
Hey,
I think you are into a right path into something.
But what was the purpose of the antenna in Moray's setup? It was quite useless.
The substance which converts cosmic rays into lower frequency energy is a radioactive material.
This is the antenna.
That is a good question. In reality no one has seen the patent for Moray. The pictures of tubes and stuff are actually from his health based machine. He talks about a "detector" in his writings. Most ion chambers and Geiger tubes are referred to as detectors. He talks about "Swedish stone" which could refer to radioactive material or a semiconductor material. ...I am more convinced that Moray just made a resonant circuit tuned to an extremely high frequency to tune into the frequency of background radiation. He writes that his machine is faster than the speed of light. Well, to tune into back ground radiation you would need oscillations faster than the "frequency" of light.
Since starting this thread I have concluded that my idea strays from Moray's method.
FYI I have started testing my idea and should have something to post this weekend.
Quote from: yellowsnow2 on February 16, 2013, 12:45:17 PM
That is a good question. In reality no one has seen the patent for Moray. The pictures of tubes and stuff are actually from his health based machine. He talks about a "detector" in his writings. Most ion chambers and Geiger tubes are referred to as detectors. He talks about "Swedish stone" which could refer to radioactive material or a semiconductor material. ...I am more convinced that Moray just made a resonant circuit tuned to an extremely high frequency to tune into the frequency of background radiation. He writes that his machine is faster than the speed of light. Well, to tune into back ground radiation you would need oscillations faster than the "frequency" of light.
Since starting this thread I have concluded that my idea strays from Moray's method.
FYI I have started testing my idea and should have something to post this weekend.
To tune to the background radiation the antenna size should be less than the size of the atom according to this article:
http://www.blazelabs.com/f-u-rtg.asp
But in any case, looking forward for your results!
Ok I did some testing. I was able to get my 6000v neon transformer down to adjustable between 0-900v for a few minutes at a time before my resistors started melting down. I tried 2 different tube designs and couldn't get any results. I also tried the full 6000v rectified. I did some more research and found that I was going about catching the voltage spike all wrong. And my power source seemed to have a 200v reverse current leakage.
So I really need to make a more controllable power supply. I going to try making a voltage multiplier circuit. I'm really heavy on the theoretical and less on the doing part. One thing I can't find info on is how do you choose the capacitors and diodes when making a voltage multiplier?
One question I can't find an answer to is what is the relationship to the voltage? Is it supposed to be right under breakdown voltage, which I am thinking? And will I be able to actually see the voltage output (without a scope) if I route it to my 10kv capacitor?
I found this great video of a home made one that works. The tube is made from a film bottle. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=sIO3DUrB-IY
And I found the circuit design on how to draw the output the correct way from this link (warning PDF) http://www.centronic.co.uk/downloads/Geiger_Tube_theory.pdf To correctly catch the output you put a resistor between the cathode and ground and positive lead between the resistor and cathode, with negative lead to ground. Like in Figure 12 page 18. I was just using 2 diode to catch any reverse flow. Totally wrong way.
So the experiment continues. I'll post some video when I get some actual results.
Coupled-cavity TWT The Coupled-cavity TWT uses a slow wave structure of a series of cavities coupled to one another. The resonant cavities are coupled together with a transmission line. The electron beam (shown in figure 9 as red beam) is velocity modulated by an RF input signal at the first resonant cavity. This RF energy (displayed as blue arrow) travels along the cavities and induces RF voltages in each subsequent cavity.
If the spacing of the cavities is correctly adjusted, the voltages at each cavity induced by the modulated beam are in phase and travel along the transmission line to the output, with an additive effect, so that the output power is much greater than the power input.
http://www.radartutorial.eu/08.transmitters/tx13.en.html#charac
Would be nice to use old dials from the aircraft instruments as a good source of alpha particles.
Perhaps just glue them to the inside of the tube with the varnish.
Quote from: telecom on February 17, 2013, 10:24:10 PM
Would be nice to use old dials from the aircraft instruments as a good source of alpha particles.
Perhaps just glue them to the inside of the tube with the varnish.
I already have an alpha emitter from a smoke detector. They contain Americium two thirty something. But once things are set up I plan on testing different timings of ionization events by adjusting the amount of alpha emissions. I am starting to think (after tons of research) this will act like a wattage amplifier. Getting more than put in by the energy from the AMERICIUM which lasts ~250 years. It may not be capable of a lot of amplification, and may need several tubes to amplify a 100 watt power source to run a house (best case scenario).
Ok guys...I hope you haven't gave up on me. I dropped close to $100 on getting a good power supply. I bought a variac to adjust the wall AC from 0-150v and I bought a 12 stage voltage multiplier circuit (output half wave DC). This will give me an easy to control output of DC 0-~10KV. And since it is DC half wave, I can use a transformer to isolate the VM and another transformer to convert the output spikes to lower voltage higher current.
But that means I will need to make 3 transformers from scratch.......One at 1:1 isolation trans...2nd to knock output voltage down to under 1000 volts so I can read the output. I may also try routing it to my 10kv capacitor. and 3rd to convert output down to 115v for usable output.
So any help on understanding how to make high voltage transformer would help. The info i can find isn't helping a whole lot.
Hi yellowsnow2,
If you really wish to make your own transformers then perhaps this video may be informative enough to you (or maybe too basic?):
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=s6NyTprQCBI
Other possibility is to collect some microwave oven HV transformers from discarded ovens, they have a 1.2 to 1.5kV secondary coil and you could connect some in series to increase output HV voltage. You can find several web pages on how to dismantle such oven trafos should you wish to rewind them or whatever. You may find local service shops who repair or collect out of order mw ovens or maybe ask your next door neighbours etc.
Gyula
My search for transformer info was a hard one. They all over complicate things and make it really hard to find the amount of turns. They focus way to much on explaining the math on the core and don't explain how the turns are figured.
But I finally found how you do it. The core size you want is found by watts squared x 0.14= core size in square inches.
Primary turns= (K*E) / A ....A= core in Sq. inches....K= 6.5 for 60hz and 7.507 for 50hz...E=voltage
And for the secondary ... Take the primary number of turn divided by the primary voltage equals the voltage per turn on the secondary.
This little bit of info took me many many hours to find explained in a way that could be understood.
http://www.wisc-online.com/Objects/ViewObject.aspx?ID=ACE12707
http://www.wisc-online.com/ListObjects.aspx
Quote from: Dave45 on February 23, 2013, 01:42:26 PM
http://www.wisc-online.com/Objects/ViewObject.aspx?ID=ACE12707
http://www.wisc-online.com/ListObjects.aspx
Very good links, very helpful to understand this stuff..Thanks.
That teaches the final equation I needed.
So to make an isolation trans., the tube will just be considered a capacitor and I will need to impedance match the load side by adding a resistor the size of the source's internal resistance. Using a 1:1 ratio and using the formula I typed out last post for the rest......I'm getting there :)
I was going to make the same one as in the video using a film canister. But now I am thinking the 8kv required just complicates things to much. Instead I will build a smaller diameter one similar to commercial size so it will only require around 500v. This will allow me to use easily available transformer cores. And probably just rewire a microwave trans. core for the output, since output should be around the 4kv range instead of the 80kv in the film canister size.
yellowsnow2
These links include freely downloadable softwares to help calculate transformers.
http://www.electronicecircuits.com/electronic-software/transformer-calculation-software (download button is in the middle when scroll down a little)
http://code.google.com/p/trafo/
Quote from: gyulasun on February 23, 2013, 06:02:11 PM
yellowsnow2
These links include freely downloadable softwares to help calculate transformers.
http://www.electronicecircuits.com/electronic-software/transformer-calculation-software (download button is in the middle when scroll down a little)
http://code.google.com/p/trafo/
Wow really nice find....To bad it doesn't work with 64 bit windows... I'll have to set it up on a friends computer..
Well looks like my orders just shipped out today, so it will be a few.
The distance between the anode and cathode determines the voltage required. But I have many questions regarding the size differences of the two electrodes and how it will effect the output. Anode being just a wire and cathode being the tube and having more surface area.
For anyone that might be following this thread
I have been researching the quantum mechanics of this townsend avalanche stuff and have come across a few things.
A geiger tube basically creates an uncomplete ionization in the tube. With one side being positive/magnetic north the other side being negative/magnetic south. With the center gas being a compressed insulator. This all mirrors the idea of "band gap" http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Band_gap Which is the energy potential needed to knock an electron loose from the atom. And the neutral point between insulator and breakdown to conductor
So the so called Geiger Plateau is a mirror image to the Band Gap of solid state physics. It is in this range that carrier multiplication occurs.
So you are operating the tube in the band gap, assisting it to this energy level with the input power. Then you introduce a photon which is called an ion pair, when it actually interacts with something. This ion pair adds enough energy to the already charged medium to break the threshold voltage and knock loose electrons. These loose electrons are accelerated by the repulsive force of the negative ionization around the cathode towards the anode. But the anode and cathode are separated by an insulating barrier of non ionized gas. But the electron is now accelerated enough to shoot through this barrier which causes more reactions...
Now this process does have a name...It is called quantum tunneling. Quantum tunneling http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Quantum_tunnelling
And new discoveries in Graphene have shown it to be a good photovoltaic material. The explanation sounds a lot like a Townsend avalanche is happening in the solid graphene. Which raises the question, why would this phenomenon only occur in a gas medium? It actually may not be limited to gas. Theoretically you could charge any solid matter to it's band gap (if it has one) and it would react just the same as the gas in a geiger tube. Here is the research on Graphene.. warning PDF
http://koppensgroup.icfo.es/2012arxiv12101205v1_cond-ma.pdf
So now we are back to more similarities to nuclear fusion. I am really thinking that the Townsend avalanche is cold fusion.
Quote from: yellowsnow2 on February 26, 2013, 02:15:05 PM
For anyone that might be following this thread
I have been researching the quantum mechanics of this townsend avalanche stuff and have come across a few things.
A geiger tube basically creates an uncomplete ionization in the tube. With one side being positive/magnetic north the other side being negative/magnetic south. With the center gas being a compressed insulator. This all mirrors the idea of "band gap" http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Band_gap Which is the energy potential needed to knock an electron loose from the atom. And the neutral point between insulator and breakdown to conductor
So the so called Geiger Plateau is a mirror image to the Band Gap of solid state physics. It is in this range that carrier multiplication occurs.
So you are operating the tube in the band gap, assisting it to this energy level with the input power. Then you introduce a photon which is called an ion pair, when it actually interacts with something. This ion pair adds enough energy to the already charged medium to break the threshold voltage and knock loose electrons. These loose electrons are accelerated by the repulsive force of the negative ionization around the cathode towards the anode. But the anode and cathode are separated by an insulating barrier of non ionized gas. But the electron is now accelerated enough to shoot through this barrier which causes more reactions...
Now this process does have a name...It is called quantum tunneling. Quantum tunneling http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Quantum_tunnelling
And new discoveries in Graphene have shown it to be a good photovoltaic material. The explanation sounds a lot like a Townsend avalanche is happening in the solid graphene. Which raises the question, why would this phenomenon only occur in a gas medium? It actually may not be limited to gas. Theoretically you could charge any solid matter to it's band gap (if it has one) and it would react just the same as the gas in a geiger tube. Here is the research on Graphene.. warning PDF
http://koppensgroup.icfo.es/2012arxiv12101205v1_cond-ma.pdf
So now we are back to more similarities to nuclear fusion. I am really thinking that the Townsend avalanche is cold fusion.
Can you please post a update, and/or link where you went ?
Sincerely.