i hope this fits in this topic, but there isnt really a section to discuss files so here goes:
i found the attached file when browsing another site, cant remember which one, i've had it a while and not really taken any notice of it.
im no electrician so i wonder if somebody could explain ....
they make it sound like childs to to making free energy, can it really be this easy?
Or are they not taking into account some crucialr factors?
Im more intrigued by the experiment near the top of the page, the one about the buzzer.
They seem to get 50v out from 21.5v in. Now if this is the case, why not just use some of this energy to put back the current in C2 to C1, and tap off the excess from C3?
Or will there be a difference in current? (sorry if this sounds stupid but as i say im no electrician)
If this is the case with the buzzer, why bother with the mechanical and solid state circuits at the bottom of the page!
I have some capacitors and an old doorbell lying about somewhere so i could test this, but id rather not waste my time if something simple could explain it.
Thanks Alot
Kane
Hi Kane,
I'm no electrical engineer or tech either. but having said that...just use this equation I got from an old physics text book I have PE=1/2CV^2 (potential enegy = 1/2 times capacitance times voltage squared.) I think you'll see that his charge shifting never gets the system to do better than 100%. i've performed many of these experiments and I think they are a dead end. Other names to look for are Bedini, Edwin Gray, Tesla, and Moray. Out of all these names Bedini only makes the claim of reaching his goals with "normal" capacitve and inductive circutry. However, one must consider their source here, I am only a building contractor.
-John
Hi !
Here is proposal shematic of how to make infinite charge and discharge of capacitors while doing work.
Shematic is just a start tought and it's not tried by me.
The goal is to constantly discharge one capacitor and charge other and not to WASTE a drop of charge.
Just like heaving two glasses one filled with water and the other is empty.
We can constantly fully fill other by emptying the first... and back.
Of course we have to LIFT first glass above the other or lifting it as emptying it to other.
The LIFT can be done with Trafo....
Like I said this shematic is just a start of thinking.
wizkycho
and again !
test 1 will show no matter C5 is connected or not that C3 and C4 end up with same energy ammount.
if C5 is connected there is some extra charge - created !!!
test2 why not use this extra charge to level up endcyclus energy of (C3,C4 -test1) C1 and C2
........
wiz
test 3
will this allmost completely discharge C1 and charge C2 with allmost complete charge of C1 ?
wiz
Quote from: wizkycho on September 06, 2006, 07:24:18 AM
and again !
test 1 will show no matter C5 is connected or not that C3 and C4 end up with same energy ammount.
if C5 is connected there is some extra charge - created !!!
test2 why not use this extra charge to level up endcyclus energy of (C3,C4 -test1) C1 and C2
........
wiz
TEST1 done !
Test completely confirmed extra charge and extra energy comming from "nowhere".
I used standard trafo 220V/2*24V 50W
primary was 2*24V. All conds are 470u/450V
C5 in test1 IS load.
I charged first cap with 6.2V
when discharged to other both caps ended up with 3.13V with or without LOAD
Tried with resisitors, diodes as load and result voltage was allways 3.13V
every other known source of energy would end up with less energy if load is connected.
This means, my fellows, that with this setup we can not destroy electron and second
with this setup we can METERIALIZE from "nothing" electrons...
"nothing" really is space or vacuum.
this is a short letter which is a key to additional tests in which we will "call" for more electrons
MATERIALIZE them to help us.
see the wizardry in this ?
wizkycho
Hi Igor,
Would you tell what voltage C5 got charged up? Make sure of the polarity of the induced voltage with respect to the polarity of C5.
Perhaps the switching speed of S2 (i.e. switching frequency) in your Test 1 drawing can be "matched" to the self resonant frequency of the parallel resonant frequency of C5 and the primer coil's inductance? Kinda harmonic parametric excitation Naudin or others wrote about? Of course I know, to make this, you would need electronic switching with a small pulse generator.
----------------------------------------------------
By the way, your setup reminds me of a similar topic here of last year: EMF recycler, http://www.overunity.com/index.php/topic,204.0.html
where I suggested replacing the resistor (which got warmed up) with a transformer's secondary and trying to use the energy at its primary coil usefully. What do you think?
Regards
Gyula
gyulasum
thanks for the another piece of puzzle.
Just to say that this is not spark-newman type device.
In this parametric-type-only at the end of cycle charges are lost , although he didn't do it emidiatelly and that is why he got
R1 hot. He played parametric ping-pong across R1. still no new charges are created to give this device some more swing.
R1 heats, R2 not. this could mean that some of energy from R1 (by materialization of elecrtons at the secondary) can completely replace accu batery input...and more.
So ping-pong is played by more and more players materializing aditional electrons at third trafo coil (not loosing any of original players) and using those charges for usefull work.
So we have solved energy crisis, now what...
I wonder how many of You are allready made your devices and telling to gass station plant guy that at your home you do everything on electricity and in the same time telling electric company guy that even your TV set is propeled with gass ?
Looking forward to join You.
Igor
Quote from: wizkycho on September 07, 2006, 03:51:56 AMQuote from: wizkycho on September 06, 2006, 07:24:18 AMtest 1 will show no matter C5 is connected or not that C3 and C4 end up with same energy ammount.
TEST1 done !
Test completely confirmed extra charge and extra energy comming from "nowhere".
I used standard trafo 220V/2*24V 50W
primary was 2*24V. All conds are 470u/450V
C5 in test1 IS load.
I charged first cap with 6.2V
when discharged to other both caps ended up with 3.13V with or without LOAD
Tried with resisitors, diodes as load and result voltage was allways 3.13V
Hi wizkycho,
That's very interesting experiment. If I understand what you're saying, that if you have three identical caps, one is charged to 6.2 V, and then you use your device to charge the other two caps to 3.13 V, then that is not yet free energy. Here is the equation to calculate the amount of energy contained in a cap:
E = 0.5 * C * V^2
E is energy (Joules) within the cap. C is capacitance in farads. V is the voltage. Remember you must square voltage. So 6.2 volts in 470 uF is 9.03 mJ of energy and 3.13 volts in 470 uF is 2.30 mJ times two is 4.6 mJ.
I'm wondering if this is what you were saying.
Paul Lowrance
Quote from: wizkycho on September 07, 2006, 08:23:11 AM
gyulasum
thanks for the another piece of puzzle.
Just to say that this is not spark-newman type device.
In this parametric-type-only at the end of cycle charges are lost , although he didn't do it emidiatelly and that is why he got
R1 hot. He played parametric ping-pong across R1. still no new charges are created to give this device some more swing.
R1 heats, R2 not. this could mean that some of energy from R1 (by materialization of elecrtons at the secondary) can completely replace accu batery input...and more.
So ping-pong is played by more and more players materializing aditional electrons at third trafo coil (not loosing any of original players) and using those charges for usefull work.
So we have solved energy crisis, now what...
I wonder how many of You are allready made your devices and telling to gass station plant guy that at your home you do everything on electricity and in the same time telling electric company guy that even your TV set is propeled with gass ?
Looking forward to join You.
Igor
Hi Igor,
Not so fast, please... ;) I did not mean to be negative on you or to show you that I achieved any remarkable results with these capacitor charging/discharging circuits because I did not. Sorry for this, I cannot report any overunity success yet.
I simply wished to ask how much voltage you got in your C5 capacitor?
I agree with you: the circuit in the link http://drspark.com/idea003.php is not spark-newman type device. It is a ping pong of charges among the caps I also agree but I have not found any extra output unfortunately. (I did these tests last year.) However, maybe by using transformer instead of resistor, as you do in your shown circuits, the possibility opens up I think by the counter EMF of the transformer primary coil that charges up C5. Last year I did not test it with transformer so this is why I am curious to know the voltage on C5.
Best Regards
Gyula
Quote from: gyulasun on September 07, 2006, 12:54:21 PM
Hi Igor,
Not so fast, please... ;) I did not mean to be negative on you or to show you that I achieved any remarkable results with these capacitor charging/discharging circuits because I did not. Sorry for this, I cannot report any overunity success yet.
On a conterary I think You where not in any way negative but constructive.
But if EMF recycler showned undoubtably chalorimetric Free Energy (and to say lots of it) it is most
likely a matter of simple electronics to make it OU.
So I just wondered how many have built this or something simmilar but keeping it quiet about.
Of course this gives them advantage in this space and time.
I'm thinking of the same strategy.
This sentance is the best way to keep it from public ;D
"telling to gass station plant guy that at your home you do everything on electricity and in the same time telling electric company guy that even your TV set is propeled with gass, and if somebody tries too sell you wood you just "admit" that Your house uses gass and electricity"
You can't just tell them "dissconect me" cause
emidiately they will start sniff around. And I'd rather would like to see WIB (Women In Black) than MIB. I just wouldn't know
what to do with MIB - I might hurt him. ;D
wiz
http://www.overunity.com/index.php/topic,903.0.html
wizkycho,
Could you please reply to my post.
Paul Lowrance
to gyula
--------
In test1.1
on 220V secondary I conected greatz and 100uF to +- of greatz.
After discahrging full (at 6.2V) one capacitor 470u through
primary 2*24V to empty 470u both were at 3.15V and 100uF on secondary got 3.3V.
If repeated 100uF got arround 2.5V in every cycle
in test 1.2 (emidiate power back)
I disconected 100u (C5) and conected output of gretz +- to fully charged (6.2v) 470u at primary winding
After discharge through primary to emty 470u both caps ended up at 3.4V.
It is a small change 3.15V to 3.4V.
in test1.2
I think 470u + 470U is to low impendance for secondarys such a short pulse.
what is needed is to use say 10u and discharge it after few pulses...
I'm going to build it parametrically (EMF Recycler)...
to Paul Lowrence
-----------------
I'm avare of equations and I'm not stating free energy
Hi Igor,
thanks for the info. Yes, the small voltage value you receive in the 100uF capacitor is because it is placed in the secondary and there the back EMF of the 2 x 24V primary cannot induce any useful voltage. I agree on trying lower value capacitors to find the best charging up time (4.7-22uF).
If you have a look at Naudin's site on his scalar battery charger circuit, you can find MOSFET switch circuits with their drivers what you can use for the EMF recycler too. The link is:
http://jnaudin.free.fr/html/scalchrg.htm
Regards
Gyula
Hi !
Here is the shematic of what I'm building right now.
at start I'll use 4 pole relay (hope that contacts will all make contact in a same time)
expecting COP 1.4 at first. it doesn't seem much at first but every wat counts.
sorry for the big picture, but if made smaller one can't see numbers.
SV1 i SV7 are contacts for secondary's of mains(220V~) toroid trafo (2*24V~).
(will try in bucking and serial connection). Mains primary is output connected to SV2
This setup allso use discharge from positive and negative plates of capacitors bank or standard operation
(J1 and J2 jumpers will connect to ground , (no coil on SV7))
power input will be adjusted for smallest input (meassured at R3 and R4)
there is no relay contact. I will see if it necessery later.
wiz
Hi all !
this will be test one !
it is a lot simplified schematic than EMF recycler itself, but reasambles key points of design.
pic 1
through S2 TWO currents flow from input source (24V) and stored current from serial connected caps.
Isn't this alone shows that output should be over 100% ? Am I missing some equation here ?
current through S1 is allso added to energy output (at primary).
pic2
through S1 TWO currents flow from input source (24V) and stored current from serial connected caps.
current through S1 is allso added to energy output.
current through S2 is allso added to energy output.
what do you think ?
can someone contact DrSpark to join us on this ?
btw. at the primary I will connect another trafo to step down voltage. I'll try it with relays, should work, but
can someone find appropriate solid state relays opto driven with FETs(low resistance) at the output ?
wizkycho
Perihelion Labs
Quote from: mramos on October 09, 2006, 08:51:21 AM
The relay coil will blow up the junction in the transistor without a diode across the coil. Also, is power negative? If not it will not go thru the diodes, and if the jumpers are on, the power will go right to ground? Is this the whole schematic? What are you attempting?
24V+ is input power (current goes in, arrow is wrong oriented)
pic1 and pic 2 are steps (reconnection achieved with relay(schematic before))
output at the "primary" output coil of trafo is alternating, scince the currents in "secondary" (input is alternating)
key is to recycle allready used energy, this is a shure thing working. cop 2 min not much but if cascaded...
got all parts and it is 80% assembled.
only need to connect some square gen. for relay output and input power. stay tuned.
let's see what this baby can do.
it will drive a 10Wmin. bulb and with no input at all whatsoever.
wizkycho
Quote from: wizkycho on October 09, 2006, 06:41:04 AM
Hi all !
this will be test one !
it is a lot simplified schematic than EMF recycler itself, but reasambles key points of design.
pic 1
through S2 TWO currents flow from input source (24V) and stored current from serial connected caps.
Isn't this alone shows that output should be over 100% ? Am I missing some equation here ?
current through S1 is allso added to energy output (at primary).
pic2
through S1 TWO currents flow from input source (24V) and stored current from serial connected caps.
current through S1 is allso added to energy output.
current through S2 is allso added to energy output.
what do you think ?
can someone contact DrSpark to join us on this ?
btw. at the primary I will connect another trafo to step down voltage. I'll try it with relays, should work, but
can someone find appropriate solid state relays opto driven with FETs(low resistance) at the output ?
wizkycho
Perihelion Labs
Hi all !
What do You all think will this work (pic)?
output is at PRI.
24V+ is input.
observe that current that has allready done work (now stored in capacitors) flows again with "fresh" current
through input coil (SEC on pic).
This alone should guarantee FE ?
if you missed the principle of work
http://drspark.com/idea003.php
please respond
wizkycho
Hi all !
frequency very low (3 - 4Hz)
used 10000uF
input voltage (instead of +24) is 7.5V
oscilgrames are as expected
dirver is four pole relay switch (that is why I wanted to keep low frequency)
osc1(1.gif) between M1 and M2
osc2(2.gif) between M1 and M3 (between M2 and M3 looks the same)
in the next post osc of output.
I will not try to go measure I/O energy ratio cause freq is too low and is hard to flaten input and output measurements
so there would be no mistake with RMS calcs. I want it to be pure and flat DC first.
next tests will use opto transistor switches, higher freqs, and lower capacitance (which is cheaper and easier to get higher voltage rated)
wizkycho
Hi all !
I have no much time now but I feel obligated to inform ya
that I have obtained Free Energy results with EMF recycler
for now 3.3W input 9.6W output. Folks, It is allmost 3 times !!!!
input is DC filtered with 4700uF
output is DC filtered with 1000uF
48Hz
there is no much place for false measurements.
please ask questions and will push this thing further.
I'll post more when I find some time.
Igor Knitel
Hi Igor,
Congratulations, and have a rest, think it over, but nevertheless, please draw the circuit diagram you have achieved overunity with. I know you already included several circuits but now would you do it again by drawing or connecting up everything you have changed, tested, modified to reach your present circuit of OU!
I think you wish to make a self-runner from it but it takes usually a DC/DC converter with a stabilised output to avoid the runaway situation. Because there is plenty of excess output, maybe a simple linear regulator would also do.
Thanks
Gyula
Congradulations on your hard work, i hope to hear from you soon! Evan
Quote from: gyulasun on October 23, 2006, 11:22:53 AM
please draw the circuit diagram you have achieved overunity with
I agree, please post your circuit diagram/parts list, and photos. This way other people can try to replicate your results.
Hi !
complete shematic
(last measurement)
If there are some mosfets instead of relay it would be motionless.
Capacitors can be smaller (yes they will discharge faster (loose voltage) but on the other hand other two will gain voltage faster).
High inductivity of trafo coil prevents start strong currents that capacitors are capable of giving.
should lower inductance...
Higher input voltages would give much more power out, and greater COP.
WARNING capacitors if overvoltaged can blow.
Igor Knitel
Hi Igor,
Thanks for the complete schematics!
My questions:
1) Have you tried to change the Duty Cycle of the input square wave? I guess it would open up further optimization in the input/output power ratio. At present you have a 50% duty cycle?
2) Did you include the relay power need in the COP calculations? Of course I understand if you did not, because later in case of using MOSFET switches this power need gets much less reduced. By the way kind of relay do you use, 12V DC or 24V, coil resistance?
3) Could you use an oscilloscope to show some voltage forms on C1 and C4 with respect to the ground? I guess you will see saw tooth wave shapes that get transformed to the primary side of the toroid trafo. Maybe some tuning/smoothing nonpolarized capacitor in parallel with the primary coil? The scope shoots would be helpful in designing the MOSFET switches too.
Great job, congratulations again.
Regards
Gyula
Hi again Igor,
Please would you do me a measurement ?
Would you connect a normal DC ampermeter (can be a digital or analog multimeter) in series with the output lamps and check the DC current feeding the lamps?
Because you measure the current INSIDE the circuit loop of C5 and B1 bridge and it may make fun with you. The best is to measure the current in series with the load where it directly connects to the C5 capacitor.
Regards
Gyula
Hi Igor,
Congratulations !!!!!
First, for your effort and your commendable work
and, if your measurements are ok, for your success.
I?ll try to understand the device. Probably I?ll need your help.
All people who believe and try to find Free Energy for a better world need people like you.
Regards.
Hi !
After many tests I can report that measurement artefacts are possible but seems at least very efficent.
Instead of using osciloscope tried with digital multimeter and got simmilar results.
Scince there are many voltage and current high spikes messurements could allso be false.
When Secondary was conected differently (see pic and put in schematic before)
relay lit up from the sparks due to severeal times
higher voltages and/or currents than the input (back currents and voltages induced).
Relay is rated 5A/220V~ at the contacts. Output was complete zero which confirmes that all relay contacts where all the time actaully - shorted (with sparks)!!!
with this different connection bucking or biffilar mechanisam is trigered.
additional test should be conducted in that way. creating more back spikes mabe even recharging conds directly ...
wiz
Hi Igor,
you now have the Newman effect !
Try to put several Relay contacts in series, so you will
have a faster cutoff of the current and also longer
gaps, so the sparks will not jump across all openings so
fast and do a shortout !
If you really got overunity results, you probably only have it because
of the spark gaps at the contacts !
A pure transistor switching would probably not get you any overunity
results...
You can also try to design an commutator wheel with graphite and
copper contacts and put a few wheels in series and thus have a very fast
cutoff of the current, as all contacts switch off together.
If you power it from a 12 Volts battery you can this way also recharge your
battery via the sparks jumping also back to your battery connection.
Please put the shunt at your output behind the capacitor, so you
measure pure DC current there and also please take scope shots and
post them.
Many thanks for your great work !
Best regards, Stefan.
Hi Stefan
A newbie but saw a possible help point.
As a kid I had a ball setting up photocells actuated by leds to oscilate a relay. the closer the led to the photocell the faster the cylce time of the relay. One to open turning off the led switches to NC to activate the led and so on so on. Just a thought to not loose the contacts but add a variable rate for switching.
Thanks
I enjoy the forum very much, Thanks you !!
Quote from: wizkycho on September 07, 2006, 08:23:11 AM
gyulasum
So we have solved energy crisis, now what...
I wonder how many of You are allready made your devices and telling to gass station plant guy that at your home you do everything on electricity and in the same time telling electric company guy that even your TV set is propeled with gass ?
Looking forward to join You.
Igor
So correct me if Im wrong, what you are saying is free energy is right here, that anyone can build it, and create their electric generators if they got these parts tonight?
Please just confirm you guys tested and got this working, is this really it? Could I really take a charge from a battery, do some switching and play with that one charge, multiplying it... forever?
Someone please just say yes.
Hi stonrman401,
From my part I can only answer a no to your question. My reply #9 in this thread I gave to Igor is still valid. Please read that thread thorougly.
What text you quoted from earlier post by Igor can be explained by Igor's 'little sarcasm'. You will understand it if you go through the mails written at that time.
And Igor's answer to your question is included in his first sentence in his reply #30.
rgds
Gyula
Hi guys,
I am happy to see others experimenting with this circuit. I have been messing with this circuit for about a year after I accidently discovered this strange effect while experimenting with my John Bedini motor. I believe this circuit or variations of this circuit was what Ed Gray was using during his multiple demonstrations of is so called "split the positive". I realize that he also used a spark gap but I believe that this was the essence of his secret. What I have discovered with this circuit is that you can not extract power with a transformer connected between the positives. I have done hours of load tests of measureing power in to power out and when I connected a transformer to try to extract the power from between the positives I start losing power. One difference is that I am using Lead Acid Batteries instead of capacitors. The reason I believe you lose power when you use a transformer is because when you extract power from the secondary winding it causes a magnetic equal and opposite reaction on the primary winding so this takes away energy stored in the magnetic field built up by the current flowing through the primary winding. Here is the key though....I have noticed that you can extract mechanical energy like through a DC motor with a loss of less than 1 percent. Go and do research on Ed Gray's motor and look through the old articles which are hosted on some websites. Just imagine how this circuit would "NOT FIT" with what is described by the articles of what he was doing. Have fun experimenting.
Chad
Right so this 1 cup into a nother cup, is there ways of amplifying that, what about a telsa coil, can that increase the power??
Not telsa telsa coil, that wire that is a coil.
parallel circuit :-\ ?
Please excuse my ignorance on electric....
It looks like Ed gray was able to amplify this effect somewhat by using a spark gap with his so called "Conversion Switching Tube". But you dont really need to amplify this effect so much. Look at one of Ed Grays experiments of running a starter motor for almost 8 days on four batteies. He had a bunch of free mechanical energy so just hook up this free mechanical energy to a generator.
This is the same thing I found on Bedini's web pages, except he was using batteries, as someone previously stated. Somewhere I read this originated from Tesla as an instructional gift to a friend.
The theory should be the same for batteries OR for caps, if previously charged initially.
Two sources in series charging 2 sources in Parallel, then reversing. The electrons are basicly shuffled back and fourth, each time, because the series set has a higher potential. Hi to low. When the opposite set is in series, they have the higher potential and the current reverses. The magic seems to come from the fact that the switching source, eiether relays or solid state transistors controll a much larger current that when switched WANTS to flow all by itself of course. Put the Load in the path of the switching current, and you have work.
This circuit is an enigma BECAUSE: ideally, the wattage disapated by the load should be a LOSS to the charging set of parallel bats or caps. In other words, loss of watts across load = loss of power charging the lower potential set. If this is the case, when the sets reverse, there will now be less potential on the now high side to charge the new low side. The charge on the batts or caps should get lower and lower with each passing cycle, as more and more and more power is lost from the closed system and deposited as work in the load resistance.
BUT.... it doesnt! This may very well be an over unity circuit. It is closed from the outside, all energy seems to be recaptured, and reusable, with each passing cycle.
Totally weird.
JLN tested this circuit with very strange results. He used low power, dry cells I think, 2n2222 transistors, I think, low low wattages, but the theory is the same to scale. The available power never seemed to get lower over time.
Here is one from that Bedini site. Same thing. This time simplified. A battery on one side, two caps on the other. The transistors take the caps from series to parallel and back. In Parallel, the caps charge to the battery voltage. In Series, they dump. Eiether way, back or fourth, the electrons pass through the load and are re-captured by the opposite side to be used again.
Same circuit, different transistor control.
Again, same idea. But this time one important change. As the electrons shuffle back and fourth, they are NOT sent through the load here. The electrons are free to shuffle without resistance directly in and out of the batteries. ( maybe a diode loss) BUT, as they shuffle, and the potential difference changes from one side to the other, two series load caps pass the alternating potential, and cause an alternating current flow through a rectifier, which DOES send electricity through a load. This serves to eliminate the resistive loss between charging / discharging sides. Instead, power is derived from the varying voltage, AND, without taking a single electron from the whole see-saw circuit above.
One thing to note, the series caps can only be seen on the flow diagram, near the rectifier. They are considered part of the load here and therefor not visible on the system diagram. They must be of anough capasitance to pass decent current through the load.
Also, I've modified one diagram to show only a half cycle, easier to understand. Here you can see the 3 transistors turned on at the same time from the control circuit. The opposite three are turned on alternatly, to reverse the current flow.
I think this is completely a better idea for a see-saw circuit. Those series caps are KEY to the prevention of resistive loss.
JLN's test:
http://jnaudin.free.fr/html/scalchrg.htm
Hi saintsnick-
Interesting information you've posted. The tesla 4 battery system is very interesting for sure as is the scalar battery charger system. I am interested in experimenting with both systems.
Have you built either systems and tested them yourself yet?
Best Regards,
I built the basic setup. As I stated above I was able to recapture almost all the power that was run through my motor. Loss of less than 1 percent for hours. But, if you set up a transformer as the load and try to take the power out of the system it becomes truly a loss. I learned this though experience. But you can run loads like dc motors or heating elements.
Chad
@chadj2-
I have recently set up a telsa 4 battery system. I am manually switching every hour or so or whenever the voltage difference between the series set and the parallel set gets down to 11 volts. I notice very little power loss after many hours of running. My load is 12 volt lamps. I am imagining small losses over time unless some of the load was itself a generator to replace the slight power loss. I will try to build an automatic switching system in the near future.
Regarding the scalar battery charger system, perhaps with using a mechanical switching system one would get constant sparking at the contact points with the caps and maybe then actually 'gain' in voltage over time on account of the "newman effect" This system has less complex switching components and could be more space and cost efficient then the 4 battery system on account of it needing less batteries for the same load.
Best,
@chadj2-
Thanks for your information. Even though one must be careful while measuring actual battery storage charges and loads etc. my initial small tests so far with this 4 battery system is looking promising.
I was wondering at what point in the voltages did you find it best to switch sets of batteries? Did you use regular lead-acid or deep cycle batteries?
This system obviously is a great energy conserver if nothing else and perhaps even OU or close to it with the addition of a generator and/or a bit of tweeking.
Can we invert DC into AC without a transformer?
All Info Is Appreciated-
Best Regards,
@saintsnick
i think nobody know an old 108 top hat can transistor
it is an Germanium To36 Transistor like 2N174 30 Amp 100 Watts
Next the circuit is an Design-inventor brain-fault only !!!
If you follow in your mind the discharge of the ecos , you understand
that they can only discharge to the halb supply voltage (both).
Also the next step : Charging ist also onle
half-full to fully the voltage ... and so on.
So it is nothing happened what the inventor try
So it is shure , if not mystic or physical "scalar" WAVES will be add
so , no FE OU or any succes will follow.
(Only lost?s)
G Pes
pg46
I used regular lead acid batteries for my tests. I am designing a sysyem based on this concept but a little different. I actually built a circuit to pass the current back and forth. I would use a full wave rectifier and a dc motor connected to it as my load. I would discharge one set of batteries until the recieving batteries would charge to 13.00 volts then I would switch directions and charge the other ones to 13 volts. I would take voltage samples every five minutes on each battery. I did this for hours, and discovered that I lost a little over half a percent each cycle. I am not sure if this loss was due to the diodes or that the batteries werent able to capture all of the power. I would refer you back to the Ed Gray articles where he said during one battery popping experiment that 99 percent of the power they just used went back into the battery.
Chad
Pg46
Sorry, I forgot to answer your second question about trying to get the power out of the system. If there is a way to get the power out of the system in the form of electricity I have not discovered it yet. However, think about it; we have re-discovered a source of free mechanical energy. All we have to do is hook that motor to a alternator and then all we have to do is make up that 1 percent loss we get and the rest of the power is free. I am in the process of doing this now but I lack in mechanical skills in building my setup. I have the electrical knowledge. I am trying to connect a golf cart motor to a alternator and extract the power in that fashion but I dont really know how I should build such a mechanical setup.
Chad
Hi Chad-
I guess we realy ought to move this over to the "battery systems" section.
Thanks for your reply. I am also recording only small losses in using this system. Quite amazing really!
As I am not using diodes just now I atribute those losses due to heat. Since I am using small dc motors or lights as loads they will heat up and so I believe the losses occur there. As you say though the losses are quite small in comparison to the energy you get to use for free to run the loads. Therefore I agree with you that we only need to replace those small amounts to obtain a 100% closed system without having any losses at all.
I rigged up a rapid switching system last week but was recording obvious losses. I am not sure exactly why that happened but I want to now set up a voltage only controlled switching system which should be nice and slow depending on the battery capacities and the load.
Since I am often using a small DC motor as a load anyways I was thinking of connecting it to a small dc generator to create power to put back into the batteries again. A dc motor can be used as a generator also although its not very efficient.
Keep up the good work and keep us posted.
Many thanks,
than you must try to light also an lamp,
so that the battery must "work" .
without work the battery charge have an long live
and low lost
and NO overunity.
try it with additional load (lamp.bulbs)
Pese
pg46
I also tried many months ago to use a rapid switching system to swap the batteries quickly and like you said I saw obvious losses. Through research and studying switch mode power supplies I think I know what the problem was. I was using multiple transistors to switch the batteries from parallel to series. As you may be able to see there is a problem that occurs if both transistors are on at the same time. The current short circuits and energy is wasted for whatever the overlap may be. The overlap could be microseconds but microseconds add up very quickly if you have a fast switching system. Like I said I pretty much have the circuit figured out I just need to figure out how I can mount the motor and generator onto a sturdy platform.
Chad
Some of you are missing my point. Look at this first diagram. I've cut the wires to the load. Notice, the see-saw circuit is still complete. There is still a current path from the high side to the low side. Like this, the series set will charge the parallel set. There is NO resistance in the circuit.
(There is a voltage drop as the current passes through the diodes though. In a more complicated circuit, forward biased transistors can replace the diodes and eliminate the voltage drop.)
My point however, is that there is NO resistive loss between the series set and the parallel set. With no voltage drop from diodes (if eliminated) AND no resistive loss with wires cut , every single electron will be re-captured by opposing batteries with the same amount of jules per electron.
Remember:
Joules/Coulomb = volts
Coulmbs/second = Amperes
Joules/second =Watts
Every single ounce of energy (measured in Watts) is recaptured by this system, BUT there is no work being done, Yet.
Now, add the load, but STOP any loss of any Wattage in the load by eliminating the ability of electrons to flow from the batteries through the load.
How? By placing series capacitors on the load.
Look at the pic.
Caps don't pass DC because electrons can't get through the dielectric.
AC however passes through, but not the real AC, it's like Faux AC current. The same electrons are bombarding the dielectric and still cant get through, BUT, the cap charges because of the voltage applied, which in turn causes an equal and opposite charge on the other side of the dielectric, which SUCKS electrons from the motor windings.
The Opposite cap charges in the opposite polarity at the same time, becuse it is hooked up to the opposite end of the batteries. The opposite charging cap has, on the other side of IT'S own dielectric, the opposite charge of it's primary side, which is Pushing electrons into the motor windings.
The TWO inner CAP plates respectively push and pull together forcing electrons through the motor windings, without EVER using a single electron from the batteries.
When the caps are done charging, like a fraction of a second later, the current flow through the load STOPS.
A fraction of a second later, when the current stops through the load, YOU reverse the whole SEE-SAW, and the current flow starts again through the batteries AND through the load, but now, in the opposite direction.
We are passing AC through the load. This MUST be a purely resistive load OR an AC motor, or it will not work.
The Frequency MUST be no slower than the charge time of the caps, or the current will stop. The bigger the caps, the longer the charge time, and the more time you have before you need to switch the system.
YES, if you use a rectifier right where the load is, you can have a steady DC output for a DC load instead of an AC load.
More importantly, based on average capacitor sizes, you're switching the system FAST to keep the current flowing through the load in an AC fashion. MANY cycles per second, NOT 1 cycle every three hours.
Bigger load motor, bigger caps needed to provide enough "inside" current for the load.
One final kicker. The potential difference between the outside of the caps while charging on any 1/2 cycle should be no greater than 1/4 the series battery voltage, BECAUSE:
series voltage-parallel voltage= potential difference between battery sides (with NO resistance between them)
ie. 24series-12parallel = 12remaining
divide the remainder by 2, half on the top side, half on the bottom.
12/2 = 6
SO again, if series voltage = 24Vdc. Load voltage = 6vac
MUST consider this rule for engineering something that actually works.
If you need higher load voltage, you need 4 times as many batteries.
ie... if load needs 12 volts, 12x4 = 48Vdc series batteries which is equal to 4 12v batteries on each half of the see-saw.
if load needs 120ac, buy stock in Duracell. ;o)
Hi Saintsnick,
I wonder if this setup with the 4 batteries would work with 4 capacitors of appropiate uF values? Of course in this case the initial charges should be supplied in advance to the capacitors, then the transfer of charges could take place?
Further, I guess some control circuit would still be needed to take care of possible runaway at the caps etc. But if this circuit works with capacitors instead of batteries, then the output voltage could easily be enhanced to higher values, depending on of course the needed uF value versus the voltage rating limits.
Thanks
Gyula
Yes, caps will work. Just as i said, and now you said too, you must charge the caps first. Batteries have acid to provide the inital charge. Caps can just be charged.
That scalar charger thing uses a cap on one side of the see-saw. So does that other battery switcher circuit I provided.
Ideally, caps should be better than batteries. Lighter, quicker to charge and dump, higher voltage capability instead of stacking volumes of batteries.
You just need to charge the caps first. This also means, if say you had a system shuffeling 240 volts back and fourth, you'd need to initially charge the caps to 960 volts! DANGEROUS!
Again, the magic seems to come from the ability to switch potentials (between batts or between caps) with very little effort. The only effort is the power consumed by the relay coil or the power consumed by the transistor. By doing the switching, you are creating possible HUGE potential differences which can do massive work with the right charge behind it, ALL FOR ALMOST NO EFFORT.
Big Work, Little Effort, smells like OU to me.
I honestly havn't built any of these circuits though. I DO consider them something I will tinker with, because I believe this is something that can actually work. Additionally there seems to be good results coming back from like minded fringe experimenters. There's already some good stuff happening on this board, here.
Similar idea of switching large energys with little energy. I saw some video on UTube or somewhere, some physicist theorising some principal on a white board. Magnet, with ferrite ring to conduct magnet lines. Interupted ring by superconductor&crystal structure, which happens to react to EM energy close to some common laser emmision frequency. With miliwatts of laser light, he switches on and off the ability of the ferrite ring to conduct magnetism, which is shutting on and off the much larger magnetic power eminating from the magnet. A coil picks up the difference in the change from total to no conductivity, from none to all magnetic lines of force. Big work, little effort. Yeah, the magnet will wear out I guess. But the principal is the same, Small Effort, Large Change.
Only human technology can make big changes with little effort. Relays are old news, but they do exactly that. Give it a source, like a battery current flowing through the contacts, and you can controll large volumes for little effort.
With Control of something large, you can cause Large alternations.
With Easy control of something large, you can cause Large Alternations Easily.
Relays or Transistors controling large power, causing large alternations, with little effort.
I really don't know if Newman has anything to do with this. Newman's motor is based on the similar principals of Edwin Gray's motors, Capturing Back EMF. Newman uses huge inductances for a huge kick back. His commutator only serves to cycle the field winding on and off and to direct the back emf, same as Gray. Nothing to do with sparks causing OU. ( I think) Gray however used high voltage spikes to slap the coils. Quick HV bursts, actually delivering less charge to the coils, yet causing momemtum and a very big back emf.
Gray DID however have a second device, a Spark emition and energy capture device.
Unless Newman had some other device, other than his motor. Nothing of this on his web page.
Quote from: saintsnick on February 05, 2007, 12:58:24 AM
I really don't know if Newman has anything to do with this. Newman's motor is based on the similar principals of Edwin Gray's motors, Capturing Back EMF. Newman uses huge inductances for a huge kick back. His commutator only serves to cycle the field winding on and off and to direct the back emf, same as Gray. Nothing to do with sparks causing OU. ( I think) Gray however used high voltage spikes to slap the coils. Quick HV bursts, actually delivering less charge to the coils, yet causing momemtum and a very big back emf.
Gray DID however have a second device, a Spark emition and energy capture device.
Unless Newman had some other device, other than his motor. Nothing of this on his web page.
In fact, Newman may have a spark device built within comutator. For reference, see the test results and comments at Naudin page:
http://jnaudin.free.fr/html/NMac0629.htm
I hope this helps, my self I'm still looking for answers and for now, I'm just taking notes on paterns/coincidences. So far, the *spark* looks to be the winner (IMHO). Why and how interacts with vacuum / aether is the big unknown.
For a better understanding, do you have a picture? switch and coils?
It's a bit confusing to me what secondary belongs to what primary (I understand the diagram is also a spatial representation...?...)
A functional description would help also along with timing diagram. Which coil fires, which coil recicles... I personaly don't understand the switch representation.
Thanks.
Hi Erfinder,
where are exactly your primary and secondary coils located ?
It does not get clear from your drawing.
It would be good, if you could post some pictures too.
As we are going to have open source energy solutions over here,
all solutions should be published as complete as possible.
The one who can present a working prototype which will
run on its own energy will get many prices and fame.
I am trying to setup my own free energy device prize soon.
Stay tuned.
Regards, Stefan.(admin)
Danke , das ist sehr ausf?hrlich um darauf zu arbeiten . Ich akzeptiere Deine Gedanken und Gr?nde , das Du Deine Informationen auf diesem Wege abgibst . Es ist richtig , das nicht jeder hier warten muss , um etwas kopieren zu d?rfen , sondern seinen eigenen Kopf benutzt und seine H?nde um etwas aufzubauen. Danke Pese
-----------------
Thanks, is to be worked very in detail over on it. I accept your thoughts and reasons, which you deliver in this way your information. It is correct, which does not have to wait everyone here to develop in order to be allowed to copy something, but its own head uses and its hands around something. Pese
---------------
http://ch.to/fe deutsch http://pese.150m.com/fe/ english LINK WORK NOW !
Hi erfinder,
I await your paper. Thank you for all the information you have given us. You have given me hope that Free Energy exists and that the public may one day have this knowledge as a known fact.
Regards,
Omar Rosado
Quote from: Erfinder on February 13, 2007, 01:19:25 PM
barbosi, pese,
and anyone else interested
Hello,
The 144 inches is based on a 22.5mm inch. ??? Yeah!!! I know how it sounds. I in my researching I have learned of a measuring system used by the ancients. This system was brought to my attention by Wayne Thompson. Information on this system can be obtained by reviewing his website.
Weights and linear dimensions are interchangeable, this being said anything goes.
www.themeasuringsystemofthegods.com/index.html
Quote taken from the site:
"The Three Metrics that are most common to Free Energy Devices are
1080/45 = 24 mm inch and the 1080/48=22.5 mm inch and the 1080/42 Metric.
The 25.4 mm Inch has NO scientific value as you are led to believe, it is only to deceive you."
I have not been able to locate where Tesla made the statement about the weights of his primaries and secondary coils, but the following quotes are very important to understanding my diagram and the patents which I suggested.
512,340
Coils for Electro Magnets
?I have found that in every coil there exists a certain relation between its self-induction and capacity that permits a current of a given frequency and potential to pass through it with no other opposition than that of ohmic resistance, or in other words, as if it possessed no self-induction. This is due to the mutual relations existing between the special character of the current and the self-induction and the capacity of the coil, the latter quality being capable of neutralizing the self-induction for that frequency. It is well known that the higher the frequency or potential difference of the current the smaller the capacity required to counteract the self-induction; hence in any coil, however small the capacity, it may be sufficient for the purpose stated if the proper conditions in other respects be secured.?
593,138
Electrical Transformer
?If the rate at which a current traverses the circuit, including the coil, be one hundred and eighty-five thousand miles per second, then a frequency of nine hundred and twenty-five per second would maintain nine hundred and twenty-five stationary waves in a circuit one hundred and eighty-five thousand miles long, and each wave would be two hundred miles in length. For such a frequency I should use a secondary fifty miles in length, so that at one terminal the potential would be zero and at the other maximum."
As I am constantly adding to and modifying my understanding it may take some time before my paper is finished; I hope that most who are viewing this can accept that. I will not be rushed, nor pressured into exceeding my means. Because it will take me some time I have no problem with answering a few questions I am no scientist, so my answers will not be in line with the mainstream view. It should be understood that I am not trying to give the answers away, as this would not benefit anyone, including myself, I will however help where ever I can those individuals willing to modify their view, find the answers themselves, as they are here and have been here since the very beginning. It is my opinion that a majority of what we consider fact is in fact nothing more than theory. Until electricity, magnetism, gravity, and electrostatics and their relationships to one another are perfectly understood (by observing them in nature) no new technology can nor will come forward.
Review the diagram, study the patents, and take note of the above quotes. All of these things combined are more than enough for anyone of any level to build a working device.
Regards
P.S.
I will not make photos, ever, so hate me or hate me. I am sorry, but nothing anyone says will change this. If this is not acceptable then I will leave, this is not a problem, I am here to inspire, not to change the world. The proof you require is within your grasp. Study, and build!
Quote from: Erfinder on February 13, 2007, 01:19:25 PM
...
The 144 inches is based on a 22.5mm inch.
...
www.themeasuringsystemofthegods.com/index.html
Quote taken from the site:
"The Three Metrics that are most common to Free Energy Devices are
1080/45 = 24 mm inch and the 1080/48=22.5 mm inch and the 1080/42 Metric.
The 25.4 mm Inch has NO scientific value as you are led to believe, it is only to deceive you."
...
Any hint why is used 22.5 inch mm and not 24 mm inch? Or may be used also 24 mm inch as well? What might be the noticeable difference?
Sorry I'm trying to grasp the concept...
Best regards.
HAHA I know how this works, or atleast what he's trying to do. I have a similar idea which I attempted but, for lack of equipment, vaulted for a later time. Here is my explanation of what is happening.
There are two forms of power, real power (which we use to light our houses) and reactive power. There are many fancy equations to explain reactive power, but the concept is simple: the voltage and current rise and fall at different times. In order to have real power, your voltage and current must rise to a maximum and fall to a minimum at the same time, in sync with each other. If the voltage starts to rise faster or slower than your current, reactive power is generated. The maximum reactive power you can have is when your voltage reaches a max at the exact same time your current reaches zero. In essence, your voltage is 90 degrees out of phase with your current.
How does this apply to over unity? In order to drive any kind of motor, you must have a coil with an oscillating magnetic field pushing and/or pulling against another magnetic field (the other field being a permanent magnet, energized coil, or eddy current). It is well known that the larger the current flowing in a coil, the greater the magnetic field produced.
With real power, you are limited in the amount of current you can generate. Transformations are possible, however the load required to produce a large current would need to be very big (i.e. small resistance). In a large coil, small resistance can be hard to achieve. This is where reactive power becomes much more interesting.
A standing wave can be produced in a single wire without a closed loop (i.e. ground connection). The very essence of a standing wave is reactive. Real power placed in the system is reflected back. The reflecting waves interfere with the outgoing waves and produce nodes and antinodes. At each voltage node, there is a current maxima. At each voltage antinode, the current is zero. Since power in an electrical circuit is P=V*I, a voltage of zero could yield a current of infinity. Thus, in a standing wave, the current maximum at each antinode can be extremely high.
By properly arranging your secondary coils to coincide with a current antinode, you could produce an extremely large magnetic field with only the loss of wire resistance. Place a magnet on an axial near this coil and you will cause the axial to spin. The interesting thing is that no real power is being used.... This is a reactively driven motor. Erfinder's circuit seems to be along these lines - a concept that reeks of over unity!
Whats even more interesting is that you don't need any special design. ANY electrical motor could be operated reactively - in theory anyway. The problem is going to be using low frequency oscillations to drive the motors, which will require very very very long lengths of wire. This doesn't mean the device needs to be large, you can make the self inductance/capacitance big enough so that the wave velocity (speed at which the waves travel) is much slower than the speed of light. That would make your wire lengths smaller - but not by much.
If you want to use higher frequencies, bear in mind that a motor has a certain time constant. You can only switch the magnetic fields so fast before the motor starts to rotate slower and ultimately stops.
Hope this helped,
Charlie
So, if you use the formula Tesla wrote (which I might add he did not come up with, it is a common equation for finding wavelengths - it works with sound also) λ (wavelength) = c (velocity)/ f (frequency - in hertz). If you want a quarter wavelength so that the top of your secondary is a voltage maximum and the bottom is zero, divide λ by 4. The frequency with a 144 inch wire (at a quarter wavelength) is 20,528,640 Hz (if you assume c = 186624) OR 20,350,000 Hz (assuming c = 185000).
I'm not sure I follow, but you want your primary to be 22.5mm because this corresponds to the first octave - the first octave of what? Your circuit has a switch. When the switch is open, you are charging a capacitor. Since the battery is DC the coils are not energized. When you close the switch, the capacitor becomes in series with the first and second primary coils, which seem to be paralleled with the secondary coils. The secondary coils are in series with each other. Like you said, the circuit is only on half the time. I don't see how the primaries and secondaries interact in your schematic, but I'm assuming the capacitor and the primaries make some sort of oscillation which inductively couples to the secondaries. I guess I'm just an idiot, but I don't get how this is suppose to be equal to unity.
Sorry for my ignorance...
@Erfinder,
1 picture could tell more than 1000 words... !
Should I now say I hate you ??? ;D
Regards, Stefan.
I think Stefan meant that in a joking way. He doesn't actually mean he HATES you. Please everyone, let's lighten up and calm down. We are all trying to help mankind in some way, let's all be civil and try to take a joke. OK
Peace everyone
Erfinder,
Hell, I'll build it.
Where is the primary coil located? The drawing does not indicate how the primary is wound.
Also, is there a ferrous core or just a core form (such as wood or palstic)?
Does closed magnetic loop core rotate?
Quote from: Grumpy on February 16, 2007, 12:33:03 PM
Erfinder,
Hell, I'll build it.
Where is the primary coil located? The drawing does not indicate how the primary is wound.
Also, is there a ferrous core or just a core form (such as wood or palstic)?
Does closed magnetic loop core rotate?
I'll make a wild guess about the primary coil location. See the attached picture.
Also regarding the magnetic ring, I guess it is composed of four segments, each segment having a Postive and Negative side. Each segment forms a ring, but there is a gap where the segments meet.
It seems to me that this device is a motor and generator at the same time. The magnetic ring is placed on a rotor and the rotary switch is placed on the rotor to switch polarity on the primary coil. The secondary coild could capture radiant energy at certain intervals, which is fed to the primary coils. Of course I could be assuming incorrectly...
I agree witht he primary location - didn't notice them before.
How many positions on the rotary switch? This looks like a comutator, so it would rotate with the "rotor".
I assume that the closed magnetic ring rotates, or is it fixed and just the comutator rotates?
Any recommendation for the coil windings? number of windings, wire size, etc.
Would think that core is non-ferrous for this application. Is this correct?
This arrangement, asuming it works, will jack with the vector potentials and cause a momentum violation - aka lift.
I agree with ResinRat2, I see Stefan made just a joke, knowing there is nothing to make you change your decision.
As you said...
Quote from: Erfinder on February 13, 2007, 01:19:25 PM
...
P.S.
I will not make photos, ever, so hate me or hate me. I am sorry, but nothing anyone says will change this. If this is not acceptable then I will leave, this is not a problem, I am here to inspire, not to change the world. The proof you require is within your grasp. Study, and build!
... he chose the only option you offered.
Anyway, back to the subject, the only problems I have are:
1. The switch configuration (there are 4 wires going into the switch and I cannot see clearly which one going where to make sense as a timing device)
2. Please give more directions for further lecture concerning vedic measures. There is a major difference berween the terms we use nowadays, compared with those in the far past. An example beside the "inch" concept, there is also this "octave" term. As you know, "octave" is a matter of multiplying a frecquncy (note) by 2.
From your previous example, there is a factor of 3 (like a third harmonic).
I would sugest to adopt a comon language, so all interested in the concept willing to debate on this mater, will be on the same page.
Although I'd prefer you leading this initiation, I cannot abuse your time, so if you please, give us some directions (links, documents, pictures, etc). This way, I believe more people will come in contact with the principles you are trying to put in our sight.
Thanks.
top two wires to switch.
Bottom two to brush that contacts switch.
switch just switches the coils on and off - just make several poles. Tesla original motor used AC rather than switch. coils are series connected, so no need to match comutator to poles.
Looks like when the switch is off, the back emf charges the cap. Is this correct?
when the switch is on, cap shorted through primary coils.
Battery size?
Wire size? Number of windings?
Core material?
Magnetic ring rotates?
That will do it...
Quote from: ResinRat2 on February 16, 2007, 12:00:40 PM
I think Stefan meant that in a joking way. He doesn't actually mean he HATES you. Please everyone, let's lighten up and calm down. We are all trying to help mankind in some way, let's all be civil and try to take a joke. OK
Peace everyone
@Erfinder,
sorry, ResinRat is right,
it was just meant as a joke,
sorry, if you did misunderstood it.
Have a nice evening.
Regards, Stefan.
Quote from: Grumpy on February 16, 2007, 04:57:05 PM
top two wires to switch.
Bottom two to brush that contacts switch.
switch just switches the coils on and off - just make several poles. Tesla original motor used AC rather than switch. coils are series connected, so no need to match comutator to poles.
Looks like when the switch is off, the back emf charges the cap. Is this correct?
when the switch is on, cap shorted through primary coils.
A switch controled by a camshaft and a pair of brush?
Still beats me. Hate me, make fun of me, but I think I was looking to intense to the picture and I might not see the obvious.
If you have time to spare, I would apreciate a drawing.
Quote from: Grumpy on February 16, 2007, 04:57:05 PM
Battery size?
I think is not as important as obtaining "true unity". I believe this means beside the union with the nature, it might use the power itself generates. For now, is hard to me to anticipate what it would be at the end of the road...
Certainly, it was suggested the spiritual vector in this engineered aproach.
Quote from: Grumpy on February 16, 2007, 04:57:05 PM
Wire size? Number of windings?
Here is the beauty, it has been sugested that not the number of windings is important, but rather the lenght of the wire of each wind.
Quote from: Grumpy on February 16, 2007, 04:57:05 PM
Core material?
My best guess is soft iron.
Quote from: Grumpy on February 16, 2007, 04:57:05 PM
Magnetic ring rotates?
That will do it...
My understanding is that actualy is an electric motor and the magnets are mounted on the shaft.
My question is: how can this magnet-ring could be implemented by a poor man? several short magnets mounted in circle will do it? The number of four (magnets) is critical? in this case we're doomed, 4 bar magnets will not look as a ring...
Got it.
Pulling old motor apart to scavenge parts.
I'll have to cheat on the magnets unless I can find horse shoe magnets locally or order them.
If you just need a closed magnetic loop - I'm there.
You are correct that there are two "fields" as you call them - I call them potentials. One is electrostatic and the other electromagnetic. The field in line with the axis of the ring is the electromagnetic one. The electrostatic one is wrapped around the ring.
I believe Tesla mentioned the mass of the primaries and secondaries in his Colorado Springs Notes. I have a gram scale for this since it is only a few feet.
I suspect this thing will do more than rotate, so I will position axis verticle.
Winding direction same for all coils? Tesla's patent shows many more coils so can not determine pattern for your version.
I don't know much about HD magnets so I google it.
It's stated at:
http://www.fieldlines.com/story/2005/9/24/152446/359
Quote
The problem with HD magntes is that the have 2 poles per face NS and in the opposite face SN, but when you break it in 2 pieces you get a magnet with one pole per face and the oposite pole in the other face. Thats what I have with my broken HD magnets and I can probe it when they atract or repel with the same or diferentes poles.
It doesn't look exactly the way is sugested. Or maybe this it should be? I thought the magnets should close their magnetic field.
About 10mm thick... this could be hard to find.
Unless several magnets are stacked one in the top of another.
maybe horse shoe magnets are easier to fit for this project.
Scroll to the bottom of this page. I think these are the kind of magnets you might try.
These are neodymium motor magnets.
http://www.engconcepts.net/List_Of_Motor_Magnets.asp
Quote from: IronHead on February 16, 2007, 08:30:35 PM
Scroll to the bottom of this page. I think these are the kind of magnets you might try.
These are neodymium motor magnets.
http://www.engconcepts.net/List_Of_Motor_Magnets.asp
It looks great, Thanks.
ERfinder,
The large diagram of the magnet ring looks like 8 magnets but on the yahoo forum you stated four magnets. I assume the number of magnets is not important as long as they close the circle? Correct? (Ordering some now)
Coil winding - The diagram looks like all the coils (primary and secondary) are wound in a counter clockwise direction TOWARD the magnet ring. Correct?
Kent
Just for confirmation, is this how is intended the rotary switch? (I still have trouble to figure what happens when EM field from secondary is collapsing - there has to be a LOT of HV spikes dumped into the battery)
Secondly, the HV capacitor in what kind of voltage range should be?
Thanks.
Erfinder,
When you say "ignition coil", I imagine you mean the basic design of the ignition coil; a single layer coil wrapped around some sort of soft iron - like a Tesla coil with a core. I say this because if you used a commercial ignition coil, you would have a lot longer wire than 144 inches. I am very curious about the 144 inch secondary and the primary of equal weight but larger diameter.
I have figured out why you are using a 24 pole switch (I think). If you use 144 inches for each secondary coil, and connect them in series, you will have 576 inch wire total. The square root of 576" is 24 - thus the 24 poles.
Hrmmm, I think I might be starting to understand this a little better. I remember reading in a book that Lord Kelvin related Tesla's magnifying transformer to an electrical musical instrument after Tesla explained to him how it worked. What you seem to be saying is that the magnetic field resonants at a particular frequency that is an OCTAVE of the speed of light. The length of coil is important because it makes an antenna-like connection to the radiating magnetic field of the permanent magnets. However, instead of trying to match the length to the actual frequency of light, you match it to an octave (maybe all magnetic fields are simply octaves of light). Thus, the wire is 144 inches instead of miles. I still haven't figured out why the primary must be roughly the same physical mass - maybe because there needs to be roughly the same amount of atoms in both coils?
If I'm getting warmer let me know haha!
PS in your first post you said that the primary had to be 144 inches long, and in this more recent one you say the secondary has to be 144 inches long... I think your first post is a typo, but correct this if I'm wrong.
Hello Charlie_V,
I couldn't of said it better myself. I thought about the matching weight being due to the similar number of atoms to vibrate in conjunction. And regarding the 144 inches being an Octave of the light, simply brilliant!
Let's hope Erfinder can confirm this...
Sincerely,
Omar Rosado
Quote from: Charlie_V on February 19, 2007, 08:58:22 PM
Erfinder,
When you say "ignition coil", I imagine you mean the basic design of the ignition coil; a single layer coil wrapped around some sort of soft iron - like a Tesla coil with a core. I say this because if you used a commercial ignition coil, you would have a lot longer wire than 144 inches. I am very curious about the 144 inch secondary and the primary of equal weight but larger diameter.
I have figured out why you are using a 24 pole switch (I think). If you use 144 inches for each secondary coil, and connect them in series, you will have 576 inch wire total. The square root of 576" is 24 - thus the 24 poles.
Hrmmm, I think I might be starting to understand this a little better. I remember reading in a book that Lord Kelvin related Tesla's magnifying transformer to an electrical musical instrument after Tesla explained to him how it worked. What you seem to be saying is that the magnetic field resonants at a particular frequency that is an OCTAVE of the speed of light. The length of coil is important because it makes an antenna-like connection to the radiating magnetic field of the permanent magnets. However, instead of trying to match the length to the actual frequency of light, you match it to an octave (maybe all magnetic fields are simply octaves of light). Thus, the wire is 144 inches instead of miles. I still haven't figured out why the primary must be roughly the same physical mass - maybe because there needs to be roughly the same amount of atoms in both coils?
If I'm getting warmer let me know haha!
PS in your first post you said that the primary had to be 144 inches long, and in this more recent one you say the secondary has to be 144 inches long... I think your first post is a typo, but correct this if I'm wrong.
I could see the idea about mass. Another way to *feel* it, is also the law of energy conservation (please don't boo yet).
E1=m1*c^2
E2=m2*c^2
So for an optimum transfer: m1=m2.
However, I still don't have a grasp of how an Octave is defined here.
The traditional way, adoptet in music too, is in relation of 2, not of 3.
Example:
The note A4 (La for others) is 440Hz, while A3 on lower Octave is 220Hz. That based on Middle C being C4.
Related to light wavelenght, not sure what color... Usually the value range from 400 to 700nm.
There must be something else I'm missing here.
Regards.
Quote from Erfinder (which means "Inventor" in German)
QuoteWow, still no response.....interesting.......
Wire sizes, and their relationships can be understood by dissecting an auto ignition coil (albeit this is limited, because the designers of these apparatus don't take heed to what Tesla said about weight). I do realize that in this example the secondary winding is small, but here scaling is an option. The sky's the limit.
For fun use a primary winding length of 144 inches, secondary length is irrelevant so long as the weight of the secondaries (individually) equal the weight of the primary. I have not constrained myself to any specifics when it comes to wire sizes and neither should anyone else.
Start with a 24 pole switch. Once you build and work with the circuit you will begin to understand that there is a relationship between the number of poles and primary winding length! Stick with the wire length of 144, and harmonics of this number!
The circuit was drawn the way it was so that it could be seen how one part of the system is related and interdependent on another. What should be observed is how the fields are built up and how they collapse, and where they go when they do! !!!Collapse!!! This circuit is of a motor, the rotary switch should be mounted on the same shaft as the magnet ring. The magnet ring is a mystery in itself, as their is no magnetic field being radiated from it .
Even though no questions or comments have been made, hold them (the questions) until after you have done what has been suggested. I say it like this because once you have built it, all your questions will anwser themselves.
The quest for overunity is a DEAD END. True Unity is the goal, systems where you take nothing you just use the flow! Riding the on the waves (fields) of nature!!!
Study the patents, study the diagram, and above all have fun, you have nothing to lose and everything to gain!!!
Primary is 144" based on 22.5mm per inch. This is 127.56" when converted.
144 x 22.5 = 3240 / 360 = 9 = 3 squared - not sure if this means anything...
(BTW - Dr. Stefan Marinov built a motor that has a similar closed magnetic loop. Few papers about it are on the web.)
Erfinder,
Having trouble finding the magnetic arc segments with magnetic poles in direction of circumference (or curvature). Motor magnets are inside to outside. To close the flux path, I need the poles in line with the curve. I found some curved ones that Unimag sells with their kits. Pole orientation appears corect, but may have several poles together inside. I can make a ring via the Edward Leedskalnin method that will contain the flux forever - using coils temporarily energized and then disconnected - will try the 144" if I take this route. I know this is not within the realm of your instructions.
I've arranged normal, square, axially magnetized, magnets in a closed loop (non-leaking) setup like Erfinder is talking about. You do not need specially bought magnets. You take the square magnets and place smaller magnets at the edges on one side, between them such that they arc - you will need tape. Refer to the picture I've posted. This will form a closed magnetic loop when complete.
I slightly disagree with some of Erfinder's theories. If a unity or over-unity device is to be made, it will involve magnetic field manipulation - instead of no field at all. The reason for this is not complex, a magnetic field is very similar to a fly wheel. They are both devices that store kinetic energy. The most important difference is that when a fly wheel's energy is used to do work, the kinetic energy is lost. However, in a permanent magnet, the kinetic energy is not lost. I have discovered that by proper manipulation of the fields, it is possible to create movements against gravity that do not follow E=mgh. It is also possible to manifest electricity directly without the hindering effects of back EMF. I would like to post how to do this at some point, but I am still experimenting and will refrain until I've verified my methods fully work (no hidden pitfalls).
This is what I've come to realize at this point:
The universe is held together by energy in two forms, kinetic and potential. Since the universe is isolated, the energy will cycle back and forth between these two forms, without loss - like a perfect pendulum. Storing potential will not work since this energy is not shared - it is only given or taken. However, kinetic energy is shared, it is what transfers the potential, it is the giver or taker - not that which is given. We do not see this sharing when dealing with masses because mass IS potential. If you move an object, the stored potential (mass) is not used. Thus, it appears that energy is conserved - and it will be since this is not the energy of the object but the energy imparted on it - we have balance, described by present-day science. Nuclear reactors, on the other hand, DO use this stored potential - which is why you get over-unity (of sorts), you put a little bit of energy into the system and produce a larger amount out (i.e. over-unity).
A magnetic field is much different. Here we have the energy in a true kinetic form. There exists no potential. We can see this through simple magnetic induction. Place a coil in a magnetic field and the coil will share the magnet's kinetic energy level. Now if you try to move the coil or magnet, you will be changing the shared kinetic energy. When the kinetic energy of a system changes, it is converted to potential. Thus, we see an induced voltage - charges moved to generate a potential energy. If you place a load on the coil, it will use that potential. When a potential energy is used (i.e. changed) it is converted to kinetic. Current in the coil is kinetic energy, but NOT the kinetic energy of the magnet! There must be balance. Therefore, the magnetic field of the coil will oppose that of the magnet by either pushing or pulling. This effect is what we call back EMF or back torque and is nature's attempt to remain at the initial kinetic energy level. This, to my knowledge, cannot be avoided.
However, do recall that in the nuclear case, it was possible to place some energy into system and produce more than what was put in. I believe this can be accomplished in the magnetic case as well - with no environmental impact. The trick is finding a way to greatly alter the magnet's kinetic energy field with the smallest amount of applied energy.
I am not trying to discredit Erfinder, I'm just trying to say there are many ways a blind man can describe an orange, neither way is wrong yet none will be completely right - that goes toward my own observations as well.
Erfinder is right on the money.
The resulting field, which will usually penetrate all materials (actually it can be trapped and you get some sort of wierd non-radiating result) will be lobed due to the bloch walls of the magnet segments. The coils at 90 degrees will cause this field to twist. I am guessing that a true rotation of this field will not occur, but I am not sure at this point. On second thought, it will rotate. Anyway, this field has "momentum" characteristics and has been linked to gravity, yet its functionality still escapes modern physics. I need to build it to complete my understanding of it. Anything else is just a guess.
Magnetic field is a standing closed field. This is the wrong "harmonic" as Erfinder would put it. All magnets have a frequency, but I do not know how to determine this. It is very limited compared to the field that Erfinder is talking about. there are actaully two potentials at right angles to each other. In particular terms of Einstein, one potential represents time and the other is space, but the time one has ben shown to exist without the space one - therefore the time one is considered primary. The space potential will be in the center of the rotor and wrap around the ring. The time one will be all around the ring and perpendicular to the axis. I am not positive which one he is stimulating - perhaps both.
Charlie - Kinetic is secondary to the potential that creates it. There exists only the potentials.
You must have potential of male and female to have a flow. (work of Walter Russell)
You can use the potentials to create a region of high vacuum or pressure. Ion pumps are used to create extremely high vacuum.
I believe that 4 magnetic segments are required for the given arrangement - not that variations would not work - but you would need to know the concepts well to adjust the system.
Will take a little time to put this together.
If you are worried about not having the right number of magnets, then instead of using a smaller magnet between the 2 larger, use a piece of plastic cut into a triangle - so that they arc. Have 4 triangle plastic pieces to connect 4 magnets. That will give you the right number of magnets and allow for closed loop.
In the drawing that Erfinder gave, of course the wheel will rotate. When the secondaries become energized, the field will try to traverse the path of the magnetic ring, encounter an opposite force and produce movement. Don't get me wrong, I'm always open to new ideas. If I get some time I will construct this circuit. It seems pretty simple and I have tons of magnets laying around - they are rare earth though, hope that doesn't mess anything up.
Thank you guys, this topic is realy refreshing. I miss a lot of basic knowledge and I have to do a lot of reading and digesting the information.
For those willing to pass the gate, I found this site explaining paramagnetism:
http://www.naturesalternatives.com/lc/lcparamagnetism.html
I hope there is no missleading information (please let me know if it does) and if anyone has more, please post the links. I have to admit, with all my desire to crack "the code", studying the sugested material was doomed to failure because of lack of basics.
As me, I suspect there are many others who may think they know. Please give the oprtunity not only to learn how to catch a fish, but also "what is a hook, what is a sinker, where to look for a catch"
Please go on, you have all my attention and I'll try to catch-up.
Thanks.
Erfinder,
Is the diameter of the magnets and comutator important? You mention 135 rpm. The duration of the pulses will depend on the diameter. I think that the commutator should be small in diameter to keep the pulses short. For proof of concept, this probably doesn't matter.
Still have not found magnets other than the colored ones that I mentioned. I can make them with iron powder and epoxy (or even wax, etc.) - cured in a solenoidal field.
Colored magnets here: M-941 (half way down page)
http://www.teachersource.com/catalog/page/Electricity_Magnetism_Engines/Magnet_Products/?id=9f64d1e8afe8270d1c2ce4d23ab35b2f
EDIT:
Matching mass of the coils implies a harmonic balance between the molecules themselves. There are "frequencies" from the atom on up to the mass of the wire - it would not surprise me if these are harmonicly related. Also, there seems to be no mass requriement or relation between the magnet ring and the coils - only between the number of poles and the coils/wire length. To me, this implies that the magnets are a means to create the field(s) and their mass is not that important. Only curtain outside fields will effect a closed magnetic loop - have to look that up - can't recall exactly
Taking this logical deduction more towards the "fringe" - this device should show a mass deviation and possibly a time dilation.
Sidebar question: should the rotor be electrically isolated from the housing or electrically connected?
If Michael Faraday had researched the fields and potentials that create magnetism and electricity - we would already be exploring the edges of our galaxy.
P.S. Erfinder is also correct about the mental blocks.
I have a good idea of the outcome, it's the process of getting there that I need to understand. I do not have your understanding of the measuring system and it's relation to the fields. I understand what you call the different octaves, but not why 22.5mm is required for resonance between the these octaves. I guess the "why" does not matter as long as it works.
Since a 6" ring is required (outside diameter) with 2" i.d. - I will have to make magnet segments or Leedskalnin type ring. The latter sounds easier.
Using iron ring of above dimensions, 144" coils in four segments spaced 90 degrees and wrapped around ring to create 4 poles trapping flux in core.
Hey Grumpy,
I've got the same problem you do. I think I can see what will happen when the secondary coils are energized but don't see the connection between the "octaves" and resonance. As barbosi pointed out earlier, the definition of an octave is a frequency multiplied by a factor of (2^n). Erfinder uses (3^n). It is also confusing why he took the square root of light velocity and not an "octave" integer. Got any insights as to why/what this is/does - any hints Erfinder?
I noticed earlier that your conversion of 144" (22.5mm) was 127.56" for a conventional inch. I might be wrong, but shouldn't that be 162.56"? The conventional inch is based on a 25.4mm scale (1"=25.4mm). So to convert 144" we multiply it by (25.4/22.5) or (1.2888888...9) = 162.56. I think you have your conversion factor inverted.
I drew up a quick sketch of what I think the field interactions will be like (let me know if this is what you were thinking too). It appears to me that when the switch discharges the capacitor, you will get an increase in current (since the capacitor will act like another 12V battery in parallel). This will energize the secondary coils causing the PM wheel to move - cutting the connection. The induced "back EMF" of the secondaries will collapse. Through induction, the primaries (now disconnected) will recharge the capacitor. In this case, the permanent magnets do not supply the back EMF, they only produce a force to rotate the wheel (cutting the connection). The back EMF is produced by the fields in the secondaries collapsing and inducing a voltage into the primaries.
Yes, this circuit is only on half the time. I'm pretty sure that placing a load on the rotor would cause it to stop. If not, it will be draining energy from the battery - but hopefully I'm wrong! It would be interesting if, instead of a battery, a pre-charged capacitor is used.
You can almost ignor the magnetic field. There is a field in the center of the ring that wraps around the ring = this is evident when the magnetic field is closed like this. If a consuctor is placed through the ring and the magnetic field in the ring varies - the field will induce a voltage in the conductor. Kinda like moving a magnet along a wire. From the polarity of this voltage - you can deduce the rotation of the current loop that creates the magnet. This field exist for the solenoids but will be buried in the magnetic field. I have always refered to this field in the center as the A-Field (aka "magnetic vector potential" in modern physics) and consider it primary to the magnetic field since it can exist when the magnetic field is cancelled. Erfinder appears to take the opposite view - refering to this field as a second octave of the magnetic field.
I would venture a guess that if I can make a magnetic field rotate electrically, then I can make this center field rotate as well. With this thought in mind, perhaps Erfinder also has a non-mechanical version.
While searching for the magnets, I'm looking into Vedic math and physics.
127.56"
(By the way, 1/22.5 is .0444444... see the repeat?)
22.4mm/25.4mm = 0.8858 x 144 = 127.56 (You went the wrong way.)
Digging out the ol' Walter Russell books...
The "Devine Cosmos":
EDIT:
Are these octaves the same as the three octaves on Walter Russell's periodic chart? I figure they must be - Tesla refered to the Aether as a "gas" and the 25 "elements" below Hydrogen would be gaseous entities.
The fields that we speak of are composed of these "gases" - whoa! Feel a little dizzy. Lots of ideas just fellinto place. Telsa, Keely, Reich's Orgone, etc.
Help me understand this.
Harmonic scales (first two):
SVP Harmonic Relationships:
First thing I would like to say is that Grumpy, your conversion from 22.5mm to 25.4mm is wrong. 1" = 22.5mm; so if you divided these two by each other you would get 1,
1"/22.5mm = 1
Likewise, the conventional inch is 1" = 25.4mm; if you divide these two together you will get 1
1"/25.4mm = 1,
So, to find the conversion factor;
1"/22.5mm = X/25.4mm
Simple algebra here (I do hope algebra isn't too mainstream),
X = 1in.*25.4mm/22.5mm
X = 1.28888888888888888888888888888888888888 Now, to convert 144" to conventional inches, you multiply it by our conversion factor (144*X) and that equals 162.56".
Second, Erfinder, I know that a battery is like a capacitor. The difference is that normal capacitors do not hold as much energy as a battery. There are things called "super capacitors" which can hold more energy than normal capacitors (I'm not sure if they hold as much as a battery though). I would like to know what I have posted that is "mainstream". Do we need to come up with other names to call voltage, current, and magnetic field so that we are not "mainstream"? My drawings are more of questions. I'm trying to realize the greatness of this circuit, I draw pictures because a picture is worth a thousand words - and if my thinking is wrong CORRECT IT! Don't attack me for being "mainstream" and declare my
"words limit every aspect of any and everything" - WTF budday... WTF.
QuoteCharlie_v had you really studied the drawing, you would see that the circuit immediately changes the EMF of the battery to BEMF which goes right back into the battery, and the capacitor.
Isn't that what I said?
QuoteThe induced "back EMF" of the secondaries will collapse. Through induction, the primaries (now disconnected) will recharge the capacitor. In this case, the permanent magnets do not supply the back EMF, they only produce a force to rotate the wheel (cutting the connection). The back EMF is produced by the fields in the secondaries collapsing and inducing a voltage into the primaries.
I missed saying battery - it will recharge the capacitor AND battery - there, said it!
Third, Grumpy, I don't really understand what your talking about when you say, "If a conductor is placed through the ring and the magnetic field in the ring varies - the field will induce a voltage in the conductor." When you say conductor, do you mean the aluminum axial that the magnets are wrapped around? Could you draw a picture of what you mean - it would be easier for me to understand. Is it the secondaries that change the field that you talk of? Sorry, just trying to understand things here. Thanks!
Last thing to wrap up. Mainstream science is not 100% completely wrong. If it was, none of us would be typing on a computer, living in a home with electricity, and reaping the benefits of indoor plumbing. I do feel that mainstream does limit themselves creatively. Remember, even Tesla used modern science in his research - if you don't believe me, read any number of his actual works - they sound pretty mainstream to me - just unrestricted!
Charlie,
At first, I too came up with 162.56", but my interpretation of the meaning of "144 22.5mm inches" would mean that the 144" is "shorter" than 144" since the inch is based on 22.5mm per inch rather than 25.4mm per inch.
22.5mm x 144" = 3240 / 25.4 = 127.56
Just a difference of interpretation...
----------------
What I mean by a conductor is a piece of wire or other conductive object. Here is a link to a conversation I found about it:
http://www.advancedphysics.org/forum/showthread.php?s=7a03b285c2ec2004f4ec037bfcd9b7c2&t=5907
DOH! My apologies Grumpy! Your absolutely right about the dimensions. 22.5mm is going to be shorter so it would be 127.56". I realized this too late and you had already replied haha. I had my X in the wrong place.
Thanks for the picture too. So, the current traversing the switch, assuming the switch and aluminum axis are not insulated, is what will produce the force on the wheel? Or would it be the eddy currents generated by the secondaries on the aluminum axial - kinda like putting an aluminum can in the center of an induction motor?
After looking at it, it seems the secondaries are at right angles to the magnetic ring so their flux shouldn't affect it - I think. I made a magnetic ring like that before a long time ago. Metal objects wouldn't stick to the magnets because the flux was completely enclosed. I didn't try to see what other magnets would do if placed on the loop, but they probably would've had no effect.
Quote from: Charlie_V on February 22, 2007, 07:36:04 PM
...
Last thing to wrap up. Mainstream science is not 100% completely wrong. If it was, none of us would be typing on a computer, living in a home with electricity, and reaping the benefits of indoor plumbing. I do feel that mainstream does limit themselves creatively. Remember, even Tesla used modern science in his research - if you don't believe me, read any number of his actual works - they sound pretty mainstream to me - just unrestricted!
I think what Erfinder2 was saying is that mainstream sience was deflected about 200 years ago. Of course algebra, geometry, etc. were older than that and it was imposible to simply hide them (or twist them).
An example might be the concept of "octave" which by "convenience" was defined as 2^n of frequency. Which one is the first frequency? We can choose one with no relation to music whatsoever.
Another example I think is "phi". Although was known and used in the history, nowadays has no meaning.
The same with Fibonacci numbers. Next logical step for mainstream sience is to take them out from curiculum, since they appear not to have any pragmatic use and replace them with study of, lets say... Project Management with implications on Stock Market growth.
Also, related to the ring magnet, I guess Erfinder2 wanted to say "circular" instead of radial, when he was sugesting how to build the magnet:
Quote
Grumpy if you can can make the magnets know this, they must be radially magnetized.
Although the magnets are 1/4 of a ring, the magnetic field should close circularly.
Regards.
:)
Glossary
Air Gap A low permeability gap in the flux path of a magnetic circuit. Often air, but inclusive of other materials such as paint, aluminium, etc.
Anisotropic Magnet
A magnet having a preferred direction of magnetic orientation, so that the magnetic characteristics are optimum in one preferred direction.
Closed Circuit This exists when the flux path external to a permanent magnet is confined within high permeability materials that compose the magnet circuit.
Coercive Force
(Hc) The demagnetizing force, measured in Oersteds, necessary to reduce observed induction, B, to Zero after the magnet has previously been brought to saturation.
Curie Temperature
(Tc) The temperature at which the parallel alignement of elementary magnetic moments completely disappears, and the material is no longer able to hold magnetization.
Demagnetization Curve The second quadrant of the hysteresis loop, generally describing the behavior of magnetic characteristics in actual use, also known as the B-H curve.
Eddy Currents Circulating electrical currents that are induced in electrically conductive elements when exposed to changing magnetic fields, creating an opposing force to the magnetic flux. Eddy currents can be harnessed to perform useful work (such as damping of movement), or may be unwanted consequences of certain designs which should be accounted for or minimized.
Ferromagnetic Material A material whose permeability is very much larger than 1 (from 60 to several thousand times), and which exhibits hysteresis phenomena.
Flux (?) The condition existing in a medium subjected to a magnetizing force. This quantity is characterized by the fact that an electromotive force is induced in a conductor surrounding the flux at any time the flux changes in magnitude. The cgs unit of flux is the maxwell.
Fringing Fields Leakage flux particularly associated with edge effects in a magnetic circuit.
Gauss Lines of magnetic flux per square centimeter, cgs unit of flux density, equivalent to lines per square inch in the English system, and webers per square meter or Tesla in the SI system.
Hysteresis Loop A closed curve obtained for a material by plotting corresponding values of magnetic induction, B, (on the abscissa) against magnetizing force, H (on the ordinate).
Induction (B) The magnetic flux per unit area of a section normal to the direction of flux. Measured in Gauss, in the cgs system of units.
Intrinsic Coercive force
(Hci) Measured in Oersteds in the cgs system, this is a measure of the material's inherent ability to resist demagnetization. It is the demagnetization force corresponding to zero intrinsic induction in the magnetic material after saturation. Practical consequences of high Hci values are seen in greater temperature stability for a given class of material, and greater stability in dynamic operating conditions.
Irreversible Loss Defined as the partial demagnetization of a magnet caused by external fields or other factors. These losses are only recoverable by remagnetization. Magnets can be stabilized to prevent the variation performance caused by irreversible losses.
Isotropic magnet A magnet material whose magnetic properties are the same in any direction.
Magnetic Field strength
(H) A measurement of the magnetic ability to induce a magnetic field at a given point. This is measured in Oersteds.
Magnetic Flux The total magnetic induction over a certain area.
Magnetizing Force
(H) The magnetomotive force per unit length at any point in the magnetic circuit. this is measured in Oersteds.
Magnetomotive Force
(F) The magnetic potential difference between any two points.
Maxwell A unit of magnetic flux. One Maxwell is one line of magnetic flux.
Oersted, Oe A unit of magnetic field strength or magnetizing force.
Orientation Direction The direction in which an anisotropic magnet should be magnetized in order to optimize the magnetic properties.
Saturation This is a condition where all magnetic moments have become oriented in one direction.
Stabilization Exposing a magnet to demagnetizing influences which are expected in the application in order to prevent irreversible loss during the operation of the magnet.
I don't think this evice should be viewed in terms of eddy currents and induction.
Erfinder is coupling to the other field that I mentioned which is in the center of the ring. From what little I know, this field has been linked to gravity in several experiments and the results have been published. This field is not rally seen as a tool yet, just a convenient way of calculating things. It was not even proven to be tabgible until about 50 years ago or so.
Here is a quote from Walter Russell's book "The Secret of Light", pg 260:
QuoteNo matter what instrument produces octave tones, it's frequencies and other dimensions must be in the orderliness demanded by the opening and closing spiral pairs which control those tones by conditioning them. Likewise, no matter what instrument, wether larynx of man, string of violin, carbon wave field or color spectrum, its sole motivating power for producing change of dimension for the purpose of producing change of tone is electric pressure directed by desire and borrowed from the keynote of the octaves stillness. Furthermore, all power thus borrowed for one expression in any octave tone must be in balance with the opposite of that tone within which those borrowings have been debited.
This outstanding fact of natural law must be borne in mind in considering those principles as applied to the mechanics of the universal wave which produces the octave wave tones of the elements of matter with such precision that any effect produced by any of them in combination, or separately, will produce that same effect always.
Probably makes little sense - see, it is difficult to correlate Walter Russell's description with modern terminology and understanding.
Quote from: Grumpy on February 23, 2007, 09:50:19 AM
...
Here is a quote from Walter Russell's book "The Secret of Light", pg 260:
QuoteNo matter what instrument produces octave tones, it's frequencies and other dimensions must be in the orderliness demanded by the opening and closing spiral pairs which control those tones by conditioning them. Likewise, no matter what instrument, wether larynx of man, string of violin, carbon wave field or color spectrum, its sole motivating power for producing change of dimension for the purpose of producing change of tone is electric pressure directed by desire and borrowed from the keynote of the octaves stillness. Furthermore, all power thus borrowed for one expression in any octave tone must be in balance with the opposite of that tone within which those borrowings have been debited.
This outstanding fact of natural law must be borne in mind in considering those principles as applied to the mechanics of the universal wave which produces the octave wave tones of the elements of matter with such precision that any effect produced by any of them in combination, or separately, will produce that same effect always.
Probably makes little sense - see, it is difficult to correlate Walter Russell's description with modern terminology and understanding.
Thanks for the first book. It will take a while to mull things over...
[EDIT]
Excelent lecture!While I hope this book to help understand, do you have the second one you mentioned? You'll never know, after finishing the current book, I might be wiser and capable to make sense with the second one.
I freed my mind alright, so the only think I feel, I'm dumb. But I try!
Are the frequency ratios to insure a vortex is created within the center?
There are a few tests you might be able to do. Sorry, this might sound too mainstream :( - but its good to experiment.
Keep the rotary switch with magnets the same, remove the coils, and pass a current through the switch (aka charge and discharge the capacitor with the switch - which I'm assuming is electrically tied to the axial). If there are any interactions like that in a homopolar motor, this will cause the axial to spin.
If it doesn't spin, put back the coils, like in the original circuit, and repeat. If it spins with the coils, then it MIGHT be eddy currents. To make double sure, replace the aluminum axial with plastic and repeat. If it does not turn without aluminum, then it is an eddy current interaction. If it does turn, then the secondaries are interfering with the magnetic ring somehow.
OR, you could just take a measurement of the current with the magnetic ring verses without the magnetic ring. With the ring , the current should be larger.
I think I see what Erfinder is explaining. The ring puts a magnetic vector potential (MVP) in the conducting axial that the magnets are wrapped around. The MVP can produce voltage if it is changing. We typically think of these magnets as being DC - mainstream science would say this, but Erfinder has proof that they are really AC - with a perceived high frequency oscillation. The circuit is tuned to an octave of those magnets. When the capacitor discharges, the magnetic vector potential (I'm calling it this for lack of a better term) will increase the current in the system. I still think that the axial spins from eddy current interactions - remember aluminum is paramagnetic - but the over all current in the system is increased. In my mainstream-evil views, the increased current will create a larger magnetic field in the secondaries. When the secondaries collapse, they will induce a larger voltage into the primaries and recharge the capacitor and battery. Thus, things will run on unity like Erfinder said. If I'm right, that would be very, very awesome. If I'm again wrong, let me at least use some lubrication.
Yea, I'm probably going to get attacked for saying stuff like this. It's ironic, on conventional science forums I'm attacked for being unconventional. On these type forums, I'm attacked for being mainstream. I suppose I'm at a happy medium... or maybe I should just stop posting all together.
Side Rant: Ed Leedskalnin thought there were only three things: a north magnetic particle (he called them little magnets), a south magnetic particle, and the neutral matter between. His research led him to believe there was no electricity - only magtricity. I have a good friend who rebuilt Ed's motor and has made some amazing discoveries.
Here's his sight, http://www.coralcastlecode.com/index.html
Look at his experiments, they are pretty awesome - and yes his website looks a little cheesy haha. I wouldn't just throw away magnetic fields just yet, even if there is something to this magnetic vector potential thingy.
Oh by the way. I have taken apart 30 or more hard drives in my life time - usually to get at their juicy bearings. All the magnets I've ever pulled out were (according to ResinRat2's diagram) Lateral Parallel Multi-poles (always 2 poles). They have a curved, crescent moon, shape but are not like a bent bar magnet. I don't think you could form a closed magnetic path with hard drive magnets. They make them like this because its easier to shield them in this arrangement. Here's a little drawing of the HD magnet's poles.
So, if Erfinder used hard drive magnets, either he has really rare hard drives, broke them so that their poles were like bar magnets - placing them in a special arrangement, or his magnetic ring is not as closed loop as he thinks it is. Not trying to attack you Erfinder, just pointing out how it would be hard to make a closed loop path with regular hard drive magnets. I've seen all kinds, hard drives from the early 90's up to today. They all have this pole configuration. If you did have some odd ball HD magnets, could you clue us in on the brand of hard drive?
You could take a horse shoe magnet and cut them so that 4 made a closed loop - maybe?
Last post?
You posted on several other forums and got nothing. You post here, get a handful of interested people, and then depart?
OK - if that is the card you wish to play then so be it. What is - is best.
Charlie_V - This subject is worth persuing even without a guide. Can you contact your friend that studied Leedskalnin's work? Perhaps he can lead us to the water where we will either sink or walk on it - or at least point the direction. I agree that it apears that horseshoe magnet sections would work. I do not believe that the HD magnets will cancel. The flux direction is through the face and you will need end-to-end to cancel in a ring. If you have four of these, form and ring to verify this assumption.
Barbosi and others - a start would be to read what you can find online about Edward Leedskalnin (built Coral Castle), Walter Russell, and the Tesla patents that Erfinder listed.
Hello Erfinder,
Thank you for everything you have shared with us. It has been a great experience. Even though you have given us much, I wish you would not depart, but that is not my choice. I guess you must have your reasons for doing so.
I can understand why you may depart, probably because you know that you have given us enough so that we may start to design and eventually develop your device.
Sincerely,
Omar Rosado
Quote from: Erfinder on February 24, 2007, 09:27:03 AM
Good,
You have found the magnets, now put arrange them as I have suggested.
This will be my last post, people want to think and do what they want and I respect this. Someone was once asked if there is a solid state device based on what I have attempted to share here, my answer is yes. You must sincerely study and comprehend, and understand what was given in order that you may understand the solid state, as solid state takes us into the third and fourth octaves. Our collective understanding of electricity, magnetism, is wrong but I leave this for you all to discover for yourselves. I have been told that I speak in riddles, this is not my intention, it is next to impossible to share what I have awakened to with people who are not willing to open their minds to newer and better things. I wish all of you the best, and leave you all with your understandings, and the tip of the iceberg of mine, I leave all of you with an image of true solid state, where only an understanding of natures forces Paramagnetism (EMF), and Diamagnetism (BEMF), coils, and magnets are the only tools required to tap into the unlimited power of the universe. Soon we will understand and use this untapped power source and will be enabled to fulfil our greatest dreams. The day we collectively master diamagnetism (BEMF) will with mark the day when humanity finally remembers the techniques with which the pyramids, and other ancient megaliths were constructed, this will also mark the day when we remember how to fly!
Remember the following universal truth
"Positive charge attracts positive charge, and expels negative discharge. Negative discharge repels both negative discharge and positive charge."
The Universal One
Positive Charge = Paramagnetism = EMF
Negative Discharge = Diamagnetism = BEMF
Regards
Erfinder2,
Thanks for sharing with us your knowledge.
I guess it's up to us how to put together separate pieces of the puzzle to form a SIMPLE construct (read UNITY). This is what I hope and I was looking for years.
It's in our will to share with eachother what we'll find: simple, obvious (read truth) and I hope all this effort not to go in vain.
I whish you didn't stop writing at post no. 13, you know is not good for the morale, but hey, let's not get distracted.
Thanks for stoping by and sharing this message of hope.
The similarity is striking (24 pole)
I agree Grumpy, I think there is something to this circuit design. I've been trying to contact Jon, but he hasn't responded yet. He just became a father so I'm sure he's been busy.
Those magnets will not form a closed loop when connected - I tested it. It creates an "Axial, Multi-poles" configuration as shown in ResinRat2's diagram. This makes me wonder what Erfinder's definition of "closed loop" was. Its hard to follow someone who uses "ancient" measuring systems and personalized terminology!
Quote from: Charlie_V on February 24, 2007, 04:28:34 PM
... This makes me wonder what Erfinder's definition of "closed loop" was.
In Reply #93 on: February 21, 2007, 01:15:49 AM, Concept_Device.jpg, Erfinder2 shows the magnet field distribution (top-right drawing).
Also in Reply #86 on: February 18, 2007, 08:14:35 AM, he said.
Quote
Ironhead (Thanks Ironhead) provided a wonderful link where you can get an idea of what the ring should look like.
http://www.engconcepts.net/List_Of_Neodymium_Horseshoe_Magnets.asp
Just remember you need 4 magnets no more no less in this machine, at this point!
I hope not the magnets supplier is the main concern now, but rather to grasp the concept.
Regards.
Stick with the curved bar arrangement. This is a well-known way to trap the magnetic flux and free the A-field.
6" OD and 2" id - no thickness specified but 2" would make the cross section square - damn big hunk of metal.
Quote from: Charlie_V on February 23, 2007, 06:34:32 PM
...
Here's his sight, http://www.coralcastlecode.com/index.html
Look at his experiments, they are pretty awesome - and yes his website looks a little cheesy haha. I wouldn't just throw away magnetic fields just yet, even if there is something to this magnetic vector potential thingy.
I'm confused about the info in this site.
He shows the secret, presents 2D and 3D drawings and after reading through the whole site, I couldn't see how this secret might help. Nor the experiments. No presentation on test setup, what is done, how is done, what are the conclusions.
If he descovered the secret, certainly was not very convincing while presenting it.
Help...?...
hello this is my first post on this site
the last four day's I have bin reading this forum.
and I have learned a lot about magnetism.
Manny thanks to all off you, in some way somthing was triggered in me to get me go in this direction because my dayli works is electronics and iI have bin thinking a lot about magnetism and from what I read it staats my thinking that magnetism is a frequency combined with energy X.I can not realy explane but I go from my sence and feeling about this matter I have not read the patens yet but will do so in the up coming week and then wil start to build the device I will keep you all posted and may also ask some questions.
the way i have read it, just start and do it.
erfinder said al he need to
Vielen dank und bis bald (manny thanks and til soon)
Satyoda
May the force X be with you
Charlie_V
Jon has nailed "IT" - the primal force - before electric.
(I believe others have found it also, yet chose not to disclose it for whatever reason.)
Perhaps Erfinder, too, has found it.
All,
I've started to chew the riddle and I'd like to share my first thoughts with you.
From "Divine Cosmos":
Quote
Returning to the more ?comfortable? arena of physical matter, Kozyrev?s work
showed that torsion fields can be absorbed, shielded or sometimes reflected. For
example, sugar can absorb, polyethylene film and aluminum can shield, and
other forms of aluminum or mirrors can reflect.
and later,
Quote
? A body placed for a certain time near a process [that generates torsion waves] and
then brought to a torsion balance [would] produce the same effect on [the torsion
balance] as [the original torsion-generating] process [produced by] itself. [The]
memorizing [of] the action of processes is a feature of [all] different substances, except
aluminum.
Erfinder2 also said:
Quote
The ring is mounted on an aluminium core. Aluminium is paramagnetic. Paramagnetism draws paramagnetism to itself and expels diamagnetism!!!!!! Aluminium in comparison to iron doesn't concentrate the paramagnetic field. In the aluminium the field sloshes back and forth spilling diamagnetism into the circuit.
Positive Charge = Paramagnetism = EMF
My conclusion:
From here we learn that aluminium (paramagnetic), can absorb (atract) torsion fields (in our case EMF = Paramagnetism) and also when the field seize to exist, doesn't memorize the action of the field.
Eventualy, "other forms of aluminum" (here I have trouble making connection - with "other forms") can reflect (repel) torsion fields, in this case the diamagnetism (aka BEMF).
Coments, debates, other correlations?
Regards.
Quote
The ring is mounted on an aluminium core. Aluminium is paramagnetic. Paramagnetism draws paramagnetism to itself and expels diamagnetism!!!!!! Aluminium in comparison to iron doesn't concentrate the paramagnetic field. In the aluminium the field sloshes back and forth spilling diamagnetism into the circuit.
Positive Charge = Paramagnetism = EMF
It's important to remember the context of the information, Perception!
Aluminum is aluminum until it's in a magnetic field-then it's paramagnetic(+) weakly attracting, paramagnetism(+) is attracted to paramagnetism(+) but repels Diamagnetism(-). Which is odd isnt it? like charges attracting and unlike charges repelling, the opposite of static charges in air ? Hmm
Aluiminum not being ferromagnetic like iron can then be considered to have changing magnetic forces not concentrated, but moving.
I think it is a little confusing because everyone who talks about it is saying the same thing but with a different interpretation. Thats what I was talking about when I said a blind man can explain an orange in many different ways, neither of the explanations are wrong yet none will be fully correct - because he will never be able to explain its color.
I feel that magnetic fields are the backbone of the universe. They penetrate everything - there is no material known that is not effected by a magnetic field (to some degree). Whether this magnetic field is the real object or a secondary result of the A vector thing, who knows and does it really matter? Jon's research definitely supports the idea of the universal backbone, Erfinder's does too but with a different interpretation.
I personally feel that science is misled in that moving charges are what cause the magnetic field. I think it is the opposite, it is the magnetic field that moves the charge. Likewise, the magnetic field inside a permanent magnet does not really come from inside, the metal atoms are aligned in a configuration that "draws" the magnetic field to it (from the outside).
The research I've been doing these past few years deals with alternative ways to manipulate these fields. I have found that a permanent magnet and a coil have a very special relationship that is not given enough credit. When the field seen by the coil is changed, the coil reacts to oppose this - common knowledge. What I find so very fascinating is the fact that the permanent magnet's field is left untouched! The coil is generating an opposing field unto its own, completely independent (yet coupled) to the magnet - the energy in the magnet's field is not taken!!! The coil is making it's own field!
There is so much more to "induction" than what is in the books. I have found that the electric generator is designed wrong. The technique used to change the field is completely and totally inefficient and useless! There is a much better way, one in which the opposition of the coil does not thwart the change. The new technique I've discovered needs much more testing. Unfortunately I don't get a lot of time to experiment so it's taking much longer than I had hoped :( But if everything continues the way it is going, I would venture to say that a magnet is a device that traps a small amount energy, yet allows one to do work with that energy without ever expending it - a Pandora's box to modern physics.
Charlie_V,
In the very first post, Erfinder2 said the circuit is of a motor (please read).
Then in Reply #80 on: February 16, 2007, 10:57:46 PM: THIS IS NOT A GENERATOR! It is a machine designed to explain and clarify!
The way I understand, in the same words, the machine is a didactic material (suposedly working) which is a motor (not a generator).
Also, the way I understand, the picture with 4 secondaries and 2 primaries (the first drawing) is a simplified (working) version of the machine presented in Erfinder's last post.
As you know, repeting the words in solving a ridle is part of the solution. Most of the time might sound boring, fruitless, but after a while, lokking to the same thing from another angle, BANG! And it was so simple...
The way I look at the ridle, is that it has 2 components (at least for now).
1. The mechanism.
1.1 How EMF is built in each coil and what is the interaction between fields (switch=ON)
1.2 How fields are collapsing and again, what is the interaction between fields (switch=OFF)
2. The measuring system. Is meant to tune the motor to different octaves (and as result, rpm).
Now Charlie if you'd like to help, because I have no experience with electric machines whatsoever, could you please try to explain point no 1. The mechanism? The way you see it. As a motor. If you consider this cannot work, please explain why.
The thead transformed into an educational one, so at this point personaly I would apreciate your thoughts.
Thank you.
Here's some info:
Paramagnetic- aluminum,nickel,osimium,oxygen
Diamagnetic- bismuth,carbon,zinc,tin,copper,silver,gold,mercury,water
Triboelectric material:Electrostatic
Most (+)
Air
glass
nylon
paper
cotton
polypropylene
silica
teflon
Most(-)
Here's a thought-
Schauberger said Matter is a TRIPOLAR Mass having (+), (-) and neutral elements, he also said centripital inward flows are cooling and energizing.
- So why is it almost every OU machine runs cool?
- Why did erfinder2 say the BEMF was the dominant force?
I think because the (+)EMF doesn't drive the motor, it is a means to an end, that is to produce a BEMF(-negative) driving force(ie suction-cooling). The (+) EMF is only to disassociate the potentials into (+) and (-) potentials, the (-) potential is then used as the dominant force, always acting inward, take the analogy of the figure skater moving her arms inward and accelerating her spin.
The problem is the potentials must balance, but the flow remains constant, so im guessing from the schematic that the (+)EMF has no interaction with the closed Bfield but the (-) potential moves inward possibly reacting with the diamagnetic core.
From the schematic you will also notice the HV capacitor circuit is in a closed loop with the primary coils and has no route to the negative 12v terminal other than interaction with the secondaries?
On the other hand the secondaries form a switched series connection with the 12v battery.
Another question, where in nature do you see large currents? Answer- Nowhere
Almost all natural and atomic forces are electrostatic in nature, so maybe the Bemf isn't just (-)negative, it's another kind of electricity, negative electrostatic or as many say high voltage. I can tell you from experience conventional current flow acts nothing like high voltage/electrostatic energy, which was exactly what Tesla was working with when he found success.
It seems the more I learn the more I realize schauberger was exaclty right, "Do the opposite of what we do today". I think all fields are electrostatic in nature, conventional physics agree's with this, so why are we obsessed with trying to manipulate these fields with current? Somewhere along the line we missed something VERY important.
I am getting so close I can taste it, But I can't seem to make the jump from shauberger's machines to electromagnetic ones, they are one and the same only the medium is different.
[EDIT] The picture posted was removed due to some flaws
Please refer to http://www.overunity.com/index.php/topic,133.msg24510.html#msg24510
How about we take it slice by slice and try to comment with the intent to extract all we could possibly know. Later it will be another slice.
First the machine, later the magic numbers and their corelation.
Here you have a picture with the case "Switch=ON"
What do you think it happens here? strictly currents, fields.
quote: "Our collective understanding of electricity, magnetism, is wrong but I leave this for you all to discover for yourselves. I have been told that I speak in riddles, this is not my intention, it is next to impossible to share what I have awakened to with people who are not willing to open their minds to newer and better things."
ERfinder,
No disrespect, but "our understanding of electricity..." is what we have and yet we search. The fact that several of us are chasing this proves we are "willing to open their minds". Those patents have been available for a long time, yet our way of thinking continues. Please teach/show us what you see different in them. It would be a breath of fresh air.
Kent
[EDIT] The picture posted subject of this discussion was removed due to some flaws
Please refer to http://www.overunity.com/index.php/topic,133.msg24510/topicseen.html#msg24510
The drawing concept I posted (for my better understanding) is a modified version of the original drawing:
http://www.overunity.com/index.php?action=dlattach;topic=133.0;attach=5577
compared also with drawing:
http://www.overunity.com/index.php?action=dlattach;topic=133.0;attach=6000
bottom right.
The modifications are:
1. the switch is shown in ON position (for case study)
2. added dots to show and put in correlation the start windings.
3. for symmetry purpose, Primary 2 was flipped horizontaly with its connections, with full respect to the original drawing (also in respect with second drawing)
I also took in consideration previous statements that all the coils have the same winding sense and "Tesla coils" are identical. Just as a reference, I chose the "start of coils" to be located in proximity of the rotor.
Personaly, I don't see any difference. However, if anyone notice something, please let me know, I don't intend to broadcast missinformation.
However, trying to make sense also with the [constructive] criticism, personaly I see I assumed in my drawing the sense of EMF pointing to rotor. Since this is a mater of winding sense, this should be corrected and also stated as being important.
I'm open to suggestions.
Regards.
PS: Kent, I agree with your point, and remembers me a saying "In the absence of light, darkness prevails".
Having said that, I think Erfinders' point is that each of us interested on his concept, have to walk the walk. It appears important that the discovery has to be done individualy, not "delivered".
The problem I see is not the "darkness", but rather a powerfull light (mainstream teachings) that block (distract) attention from other light sources. On the other hand, The Truth should be said loud and clear and not to be left lurking to find its way out.
Meanwhile, patience is a virtue.
I think I would have to agree with Barbosi on one point--
"On the other hand, The Truth should be said loud and clear and not to be left lurking to find its way out."
Fundamentally we are given a riddle, the problem is 90% of the people do not intimately understand the diagram or the conventional process, if they build it- they will have to tune it, so right there the failure rate would be huge.
The message is cryptic, it has a theme but there is no correlation between the information and the machine.
Im sorry erfinder but I have seen this hundreds of times and in EVERY case the thread dies, as well there is a definate pattern.
- person discloses revolutionary machine
- Major details and underlying process never truly revealed
- Initial anticipation and hope gives way to doubt and mistrust
- personal attacks begin ****We are here***
- person threatens to leave
- forum members recant statements
- person usually gives ultamatum and disappears- thread dies
To me there is one universal truth outweighing all others.
" A technology not used is a useless one"
No one seems to understand that tesla, schauberger died broke, what happened to there dreams of a better society?. I have come to believe men of knowledge and understanding are a dime a dozen, show me a man who's compassion for individuals and humanity overrides his vanity and he will be my hero.
Here you have the second picture with the colours inverted to be more lisible.
I apologize for any missinterpretation of the previous drawing (I'll try to remove it completely afterwords)
Here is a fresh new start for thinkers, is open for debate, the diagram is in the rght lower corner.
Here is the first important question: where is the start of each coil? Specificaly for the "Tesla coils", are the start for both coils on the same side or oposite side?
What do you think? What Tesla would have done? Why?
Thanks.
[EDIT] added references for primaries an secondaries.
First of all the brushes have moved from pic 1(upper left) to pic 3(lower right)?
I have no idea what tesla would have done, the guy was light years ahead of us.
Here is what I see:
this is a rotary gap dual tesla coil, supposedly a motor
Switch closed:The primary 1-2/HV cap circuit is closed, current flow in the secondaries in series with the battery can charge the primaries and cap with a low voltage. The cores(stator) have a growing magnetic field normally having no interaction with the closed field PM (rotor).
Switch open: The collapsing stator field Bemf on the primaries discharges the cap which more than likely ionizes the rotary switch gap leading to a VAD or spark discharge. This charges the Cap with a reverse polarity first and may weakly pulse the battery. The secordaries will do the same, however the induced Bemf is not the same the secondaries should have a higher voltage.
The rotor PM's field is closed so I can't see the ineraction here, My stab in the dark guess would be that the quickly collapsing field sucks pixie dust from invisible elven faries panties therefore powering the rotor. Sorry wrong guess- the collapsing field interacts with the aluminum core somehow turning the field, maybe ineracting with the pm field, Im not afraid to say I just don't know. Even my best guess(not the pixie dust) just doesn't cut it.
so what I know doesn't amount to much as far as a powering mechanism is concerned.
@allcanadian,
While you were posting, I've sent you a PM with my interpretation.
Not saying that this is related to the Erfinder Device, but since you guys are dying to disect something, check this out:
http://www.americanantigravity.com/marcus.html
Damn that was exactly the mechanical/electrical equivalent I was looking for, I just couldn't put the two together, as usual it's always easier after it's explained.
erfinder thank you for the analogy, again I don't expect you to tell us exactly what happens, but we at least need a crumb trail to follow or were lost. This may obvious to you, but not to us, Ive spent weeks wracking my brain trying to come up with a electrical equivalent to what schauberger has been saying, I read his book 3 times.
It's like me telling you- build me a 1700 sq/ft house in 8 months by yourself, But how? - just figure it out!
at least you would have some reference material, we don't- there's nothing out there that explains this in terms we can readily understand.
So if you really want to help us, we will need clues to follow, in return I promise you if this works I will tell everyone who will listen. That is our goal I think, we are in trouble and we must act, if not who will?
At the start of an impulse, the electrons do not move, even in modern theories or terms. The EMF moves at near light speed down the wire and the electrons align to it and then start to slowly move in the opposite direction - creating what is called "current" in modern terms (see "drift current" or "drift velocity").
In pulse circuits for all sorts of free-energy, overunity, and radiant energy devices - current is not desired. so, people attempt to create an extremely fast, unidirectional pulse that ends before the current begins to flow causing a shockwave or cavitation effect.
Well said
On the lighter side, check out these images:
http://www.vortexpluswater.com/vortex_basics.htm
Hmm. How would you create a BEMF without first creating an EMF?
Take a battery and two simple wires that are say 3x10^8meters long each.
If you connect that battery to the wires and they are open ended, it will take that battery 2 whole seconds to 'figure out' that there isn't a closed loop, if you disconnect that battery from the wires at any time less than 1 or 2 seconds, there will be a very HV developed on that wire.
This HV developed is the result of the cavitation effects that Erfinder talks about, very similar to what happens when the magnetic fields in inductors 'collapse'...
Now, according to Erfinder, this HV BEMF, when used right, provides us with great things ;), I need to study more to figure all this out ;P
I just wanted to give out the above info while I had it...
OH, and, for those looking for the right magnets to use to build a device based on what Erfinder has shown, you should be able to use 4 large spherical magnets, they WILL CERTAINLY VOID the magnetic fields and hold those fields into A CIRCLE, just like Erfinder's diagrams show. So, for those that can't locate the right magnets, give spherical magnets a try.
my 2 cents
Erfinder's dimensions are very specific.
Ring OD is 6" based on a 22.5 mm inch
Ring ID is 2" based on same.
Erfinder is not just creating a field. He is harmonizing with the universe - molecules, , atoms, everything.
Little known to most people, there is a magnetic vector potential between planets. The entire universe is connected and we are connected to it.
The Joe Cell and Orgone collect a gas finer than hydrogen that responds to your thought and mood. Walter Russell was right on the money, but few grasp his meanings.
Erfinder,
I have one question. What happens when you take the magnet ring out? I know this will throw off the octave coupling thing. But what physically happens to the circuit/rotor rotation when you do this?
Other than increasing the "current" in the system with the magnetic ring in resonance, I would suspect that without the ring you would have pretty much the same operation, except the capacitor and battery would not be charged. Am I correct in saying this?
Thanks!
P.S. does anyone know how to turn off the coo coo and other annoying clock sounds on this website? It drives me crazy!
ERFINDER
Who or what did you study that enlightened you to this wealth of new knowledge? My gut tells me that you just don't talk the talk and that is why I have been studying every word you have said. I have learned more here the past week than I have the past few years. Thank you for your help....Jeff
Hello bocas,
As to who, I believe that Erfinder has already mentioned in this thread people like Nikola Tesla, Viktor Schauberger, and Walter Rusell.
As to what, the works of the previously mentioned, and I would also guess nature.
Regards,
Omar Rosado
Quote from: bocas on February 28, 2007, 07:44:30 AM
ERFINDER
Who or what did you study that enlightened you to this wealth of new knowledge? My gut tells me that you just don't talk the talk and that is why I have been studying every word you have said. I have learned more here the past week than I have the past few years. Thank you for your help....Jeff
QuoteGrumpy,
Centripetal motion (EMF) gives birth to centrifugal (BEMF)! BEMF is Centrifugal, you cannot have centrifugal motion without centripetal. If you do come up with a way you will be the first! Instead of trying to get BEMF alone we should concentrate on the relationship EMF has to BEMF, and how they are used to produce implosion.
I know. This was a trick question. However, I am not convinced that BEMF could not exist without being initiated by and EMF. They are just opposites of each other.
"A centripetal force is that by which bodies are drawn or impelled, or any way tend, towards a point as to a center."
So, centripetal comes together or toward a center point. Centrifugal flows apart or away from a center point.
QuoteViktor Schauberger's saucer models incorporated a vortex in which air entered at the top and flowed right through the center of the saucer. Schauberger's vortex was an open system. A whirlpool or tornado or hurricane are examples of the kind of vortex upon which Schauberger's ideas are based. There are two directions of vortex movement, centripetal or inward moving vortex and centrifugal or outward moving vortex. Centripetally moving, that is inwardly moving spiraling air or water, takes up less space and is cooled by this motion according to Schauberger (1). The example we see in daily life is the motion of water in a toilet after flushing. He called this centripetal movement "implosion". Implosion was always accompanied by explosion as the fluid expanded again in an outward, centrifugal spiral. The process is first centripetal then centrifugal. The form this vortex took is really dictated by function according to Schauberger. The "function" is the energy flow. The spiral vortex is the shape the energy flow takes in its movement (2). Energy flows in at the top of the vortex in the characteristic double-spiral manner. These air molecules are imploded, that is, they are made more dense and they yield heat as they progress (3). Air molecules are squeezed tighter and tighter together as they move down the vortex until the sub-atomic particles themselves become unglued transforming into new and unrecognized forms of energy (4). As the vortex itself decreases in diameter implosion and speed are increased until they reach the point within the vortex where centripetal forces stop and centrifugal forces take over.
A field, wether it is refered to as a potential or a vector is still a field. Calling it a vector implies that it has a direction and magnitude. Calling it a potential implies only magnitude. Calling it a field implies neither and both at the same time.
I spoke of the "field" in the center and correlated it to modern terms so that others can look it up and get familiar with the idea that there are other "fields" besides the magnetic and electric ones. Until we all speak the same language, we have only our common language and this is mainstream terminology.
Reviewing the works of the following will assist us in the endeavor:
Nikola Tesla
(Self explanatory) Erfinder listed 4 patents to study which were posted earlier in this thread.
Victor Schauberger
I have the following book: "Living Energies: Exposition of Concepts Viktor Schauberger" by Callum Coats
Karl Schappeller (also spelled Carl) See attached file (in German) and link below (English):
Cyril Davson's Book on Karl Schappeller "The Physics of the Primary State of Matter"
http://panacea-bocaf.org/files/patrickkelly/Davson.pdf (this is a 46 meg file!!!)
Walter Russell
I have "The Secret of Light" and "A New Concept of the Universe".
John W. Keely
I had "Universal Laws Never Before Revealed: Keely's Secrets ? Understanding and Using the Science of Sympathetic Vibration" by Dale Pond - need to get another copy.
EDIT: Sources of info on Keely:
http://www.frank.germano.com/svp.htm
(see "References" section at end of page)
EDIT:
Attached image of the "fields" of a toroidal ring to give a better idea of where they are at. The aluminum core of the ring will effect this field as Erfeinder mentioned previously.
second of the three books that I mentioned last week:
Third of the three books that I mentioned last week:
I think I understand the circuit erfinder proposed, as I have read every Tesla article I can get my hands on , as well as schauberger.
As Tesla proposed there must be a transformation of energy, Emf to Bemf, Low potential to high potential-returned to source, my problem is the relationship between the stator coil fields and the magnetic ring, I think it is inward flow.
The larger problem, is perspective and equivalence, I don't have a mechanical analogy for a magnetic field, one example is erfinder solved one of my questions regarding Bemf, Bemf is equivalent(loosely) to cavitation- a gas, because emf is like a fluid.
So I am compiling a list of equivalents, I would like you guys to comment on , so we all understand this better. I will assume there are (+), (-) and Neutral components to every energy state, just in case.
(+)Emf-fluid-creates heat-resists motion
(-)Emf- fluid-
(N)Emf-
(+)Bemf-gas-cold-High potential-cavitation-increased motion
(-)Bemf-gas-cold-high potential-cavitation
(N)Bemf
open magnetic field-
closed magnetic field-vacuum?
open electric field-
Closed electric field-
Well, there's my problem, I don't know anything.
I'll have to think about this more.
Quote:
When we transform the form of that which we removed into its opposite we can place as much of this back into our source as we desire, limited only by the capacity of the source. This is lesson one!
Does this have any relevance to the teslas radiant energy collector?
A while ago I was thinking this, that an inductor could be charged with Emf, then seperated from the circuit and put in series with a (+)capacitance(plate up high) and a Ground plate, the Bemf returns to source but also drags in atmospheric charge into a capacitor, then repeate the cycle. I keep thinking that external energy has to be moved into a system without work .
Can the higher potential Bemf above the source potential be used to move charge into the system?
By the way I like what your saying. It is a lot easier to understand whats happening when you lose the mainstream terminology, it puts things in a better perspective.
Erfinder,
Thank you for answering my previous question about the magnetic ring. I have two more questions.
Since the magnetic ring does not effect how the circuit functions, why do we need a specific number of magnets (or any magnets at all)? How would the octave equations change if you removed the magnetic ring?
Again,
Thanks!
P.S. Just call me Charlie
Quote from: Erfinder on February 27, 2007, 05:20:21 PM
Hello,
This should have been obvious! The primary coils are connected in series. The secondary coils are connected in series. One positive pole of the primary and secondary coils are connected in parallel. An EMF leaves the battery and is not allowed to return. Many of you are going to argue this and say that the current returns to the battery via the secondary winding. You would be wrong! Why? 1. Refer to quotes from Tesla patents back on page 7. 2. Currents behave differently when they are pulsed! Study how they behave, how they flow.
I'm OK substituting "electric current" ("electron flow") with term and concept EMF. Also with science explaining and describing in great detail only half of the process (how current/EMF returns to source)
However, I have trouble understanding the process described here within a time diagram.
Since this device is designed to explain, here is what I understand and please correct me where I'm not seeinng the right thing:
Condition: assuming we don't know what the rotor is going to do, lets say we are manually operating the switch between ON and OFF position.
1. At t=t(0), the switch is ON. At this timeEMF from batery flows through secondaries and HAS the return path back to battery. Unless is switched back OFF before the "current" starts to flow. In this last situation the ON duration should be extremely short. The lenght of the wire is 144*22.5*4=12960 mm (almost 130 m). Now, at the speed of EMF (...?...) you do the math. Bottom line, it has to be a significant period of time with the switch ON when EMF flows in the circuit and return to the battery via secondary circuit.
2. At t=t(1), the switch goes OFF. Here I can see the rupture, the EMF is not allowed to rush at the same presure back to batery, The presure decreases and we have the cavitation like fenomenon. Here happens a lot of things which will be analysed later,...
3. At t=t(2) the switch goes again ON, we don't know yet what are the efects of previous state, but essentially the process restarts again like at point 1.
Are there any flaws in my logic so far? I would like to walk on solid ground based on consensus, before analysing the next.
Regards.
PS: Lets analyze the capacitor's role later as well.
quick recap:
QuoteThe BACK EMF FIELD. THE FIELD OF DREAMS!!!!!
EMF = PARAMAGNETISM
BEMF = DIAMAGNETISM
Quote"Positive charge attracts positive charge and expels negative discharge. Negative discharge repels both negative discharge and positive charge."
Analogy:
EMF (paramagnetism) attracts EMF (paramagnetism) and expels BEMF (diamagnetism).
BEMF (diamagnetism) repels both EMF (paramagnetism) and BEMF (diamagnetism)
Will add more in a minute...
EDIT:
The Radial UniverseThe entire mechanical principal of Nature, by means of which its light illusions of motion are produced, is the consequent effect of such radial extensions. Because of it, the seeming multiplication and division of the universal equilibrium into the opposed electrical pressures of gravitation and radiation, which form the foundation of this universe of change, are made possible.
OK, since electrons do not exist, electric current is a missinterpretation, please explain what is EMF and what is BEMF.
Thanks.
Erfinder,
That's very interesting to think about. I have noticed that there is a very special point when you bring two magnets together, whether they are attracting or repelling, there is a "neutral" point. This neutral point is not in modern science. Science would say that the field between two magnets, in attraction, is uniform. However, there is a definite spot of neutrality - as you say the point where the fields enter the void and come out again. I have also seen the neutral spot in electric fields between two plates. Like you said, there is a void in a battery (or capacitor), is this the "neutral spot" you were talking about?
In your circuit experiment, I guess my main question is what added benefit does having the magnetic ring give? It adds four neutral spots; do these increase performance, motor rotation, etc.? To me (and this is probably a bad character flaw of mine) if something has no effect on operation, then it is probably better (i.e. cheaper) to leave it out.
Many thanks for your continued help/guidance!
Grumpy & Erfinder,
Thank you for all of the references. I also found this 3 hour video of Dale Ponds talking to a group about Keely. Really interesting. Thanks again....Jeff
http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=9125003792513982191
http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=-5430570751600484561
2, part of video
pese
Erfinder,
Reading I clarified a lot of things. I still have questions and probably many of them will have an answer later in learning process.
I would like to ask you though:
When you say there are two circuits (1 primary and two secondaries each) in parallel, that means the connection is a "node" (in sense of wave not electric)?
Second. numer 3 seams to have a great significance (not only 2 as opposed energies), it appears to be the important neutral. How is this related to VOID? Is this the VOID? If the answer is somehow complex, could you please point to a certain reference reading material? I feel this is important because in vedic mathematics there are 3 circles with 360 degrees and lenght 360 each witch will give 1080 the famous number. also the way the Octave is defined is in relation of 3 (=frecquency+2*frecquency ?) Just playing with numbers....
There are many other questions, but I think is enough for now.
Or are we failing to ask other questions at this time? What would you state so we would burst the right question?
@All,
Thank you for the reference material. Lately I was busy dissecting the information. While the progress is quite small if measured in number of pages, the content is briliant and realy enjoyable. I made few others to start reading it and they all are impressed. Don't know about copyrights and other nonsense like that, but if possible, I would file them in "Download" area with a brief description. This way information will not be scatered and a curious mind would find easy what he needs.
As for me, I'm sure this is the start of an enjoyable jorney.
Thanks.
Since we have learn about vedic science, I found on http://www.abovetopsecret.com/forum/thread120045/pg1 some info about Vedic Physiscs.
All credits go to "Indigo_Child" I just put his post into a pdf file.
Related to the current thread or not, judge for yourselves.
I think the number three is important because there are three states in the universe, a positive, a negative, and a neutral. Thus, vibrational modes will be on octaves of three, oppose to music where it is only two.
Personally, I think we should spend more time developing something that I call passive amplification. What if we could change a magnet's field without having to fight the coil? Using a small amount of energy, the field would go from zero to full strength in an oscillatory cycle. By placing a coil perpendicular to this changing field, we could generate electricity. The coil and magnet would periodically attract and repel in the normal fashion, yet the object producing the field alterations would be unaffected. Thus, a passive amplification is accomplished since the amount of electricity would not be directly based on how much energy you put in, but by how strong the permanent magnet was and how fast you altered the field (the latter being dependent on energy input). The amount of electrical energy could therefore far exceed the input energy - creating power in a closed loop fashion.
Science currently teaches that electricity is created not by the permanent magnets in the generator, but by the work that's placed on the axial (rotor). In this thinking, the magnets are simply a force-producing object, conveying no energy to the system. This, my friends, is wrong. The source of energy (from any generator) comes from, and only from, the magnets - not the input work.
The only real steps taken in science are through creativity, the rest are a methodical mimicking of those steps. 176 years ago, a creative man discovered that changing a magnet's field caused current to flow in a coil. As great an advance as this was, the man unfortunately altered the fields through physical movement of the coil/magnet. The methodical mimicking that followed produced the idea that this was the ONLY way to change the fields - never thinking that there might be other, extremely more efficient, ways.
There is a device named Kosol spherical device.
Might be interesting as lecture the Theory with regard to the fileds.
http://www.geocities.com/phoenix_risingiii/KosolDevice/section1.html
EDIT:
Many interesting aspects related to terminology, field theory, materials, etc. made me put this work in pdf format. I thought this could set a common language and minimum knowledge.
Quote from: Grumpy on February 22, 2007, 06:18:00 PM
Harmonic scales (first two):
SVP Harmonic Relationships:
EDIT:Grumpy,
Whit regard to your post:
http://www.overunity.com/index.php/topic,133.msg24132.html#msg24132
Where did you find those pictures? I couldn't find them in the pdf file from SVP?
I just found a page with info http://ray.tomes.biz/ and for some pictures Grumpy posted, available at http://ray.tomes.biz/maths.html
Interesting enough is "Flow of Energy" with a picture meant to encourage you to explore the mentioned website.
Here you can see 144
If anyone still paying attention to this thread, did you figured out why there are four secondaries and only two primaries? In fact the question is "why only two primaries? why not four, or 12 or 24?"
Regards.
Hi All,
I have been following your posts with great interest. I have made some interesting observations after reviewing Tesla's patent 568,176 in light of what ERFINDER has posted.
1. item "C" in figure 1 (the circuit controller (tesla) or rotary switch (erfinder)) is positioned on top of the rotor or electromagnetic motor. This is obvious from the patent text but not from the patent diagrams.
2. The position of the brushes "F" in figure 2 are interesting. They indicate to me that the "size" of the circuit controller (tesla) or rotary switch (erfinder) and the electromagnetic motor are the same. This is not obvious at all. This correlates to the information erfinder has posted. The only difference is that Tesla is using 4 poles compared to erfinders 24
P.S I have attached the patent diagrams for ease of reference.
3. The position of the brushes in figure 2 also line up with the neutral point (VOID) of the magnets if I understand correctly. This also correlates to the information erfinder has posted. Is this a coincidence? hmmm
Also of interest are the following excerpts from "The physics of the primary state of matter" Schappeller
p146 " The essential condition is that every magnet must consist of 3 parts: two poles and a neutral."
p147 "the magnets are set in opposing pairs N + S (plus and a minus) and the neutral is the central core of air space or neutralised interpolar energy. And this neutrality or impolarity is the real source of the electric current".
Regards,
Nat
Hi again,
Just had an after thought about the difference in the number of poles in the circuit controller "4" for Tesla and "24" for ERfinders rotary switch.
Well Tesla would be running his AC generator at high voltage which would result in higher rpm and the requirement for less poles to achieve resonance.
Compared to ERfinders which is presumably running at a much lower voltage, for example 12 volts, which would result in lower rpms (compared to Tesla's) and would thus require more poles in the rotary switch to achieve resonance.
Regards,
Nat
Quote from: barbosi on March 15, 2007, 10:59:21 AM
If anyone still paying attention to this thread, did you figured out why there are four secondaries and only two primaries? In fact the question is "why only two primaries? why not four, or 12 or 24?"
Regards.
Hello Barbosi,
Erfinder tells me that this motor has two of these Tesla Transformers (Patent #593138). This is not a Tesla Coil, it is a Tesla Transformer and it is not wound like a flat spiral as shown in the patent. He also said he has already explained this. That is all I know.
Regards,
Omar
Hi Barbosi,
If I understand the meaning of neutral (void) correctly. Then when the 4 magnets are connected in series then it creates 4 points of neutral (void). i.e where the magnets connect. I have drawn red circles around what I understand to be the neutral points in the attached diagram.
I guess this also applies to the battery then as indicated by ERfinder. There is a positive , a negative and neutral.
Hence an efficient machine may as well "collect" from the 4 points of the neutral.
I hope this helps. Anyone care to confirm this.....
Regards,
Nat
Hi Again,
Thanks ERfinder.
I found this interesting website that appears to illustrate this neutral point in a magnet. If I understand correctly then neutral, VOID, and bloch wall are all the same thing.
The only thing is I thought the north pole was positive and the south pole negative. But this shows it the other way around. Anyway I guess it helps to clarify the neutral point in the middle of the magnet. As it appears that this is a very important point to understand.
Below is the reference to the entire article - also very interesting
http://www.dprins.demon.nl/convergence/9919.html
Anyway this brings me to my next interesting comparison of
1. Tesla patent 464,666 Electromagnetic motor
2. Tesla patent 568,176 Apparatus for producing electric currents of high frequency
3. ERfinders magnet ring.
If one compares the shape of the coils in patent 464,666 with the magnets in 568,176. They appear to be one and the same.
In 464,666 we have what appears to be 6 coils, each in the shape of a horseshoe magnet. Which will give a configuration of NSNSNSNSNSNS. What is also shown here is that the coils appear to just touch each other (This is important according to ERfinder - he said that "the magnets must touch and their poles void"). Also interesting is where Tesla had placed some of his coils namely N1 and S1. They are placed at the neutral points. Actually it appears that the all the coils are placed in all the neutral points as there are neutral points in the middle of the magnets (coils) as well.
Now if we compare this to 568176 we have 4 horseshoe shaped magnets also in a NSNSNSNS configuration. But the only difference is that the magnets do not appear to be touching but are very close to each other. Is this possibly due to the fact that the magnet shapes and sizes of the time were very limited. Highly likely I would think.
And again ERfinders magnet ring is also in A NSNSNSNS configuration.
So to summarise my observations to date are:-
1. We have Tesla constructing rotors using a NSNSNSNS configuration with magnets or coils and they are either touching each other or are very close to each other.
2. We have Tesla constructing coils and placing them at the neutral points
3. This correlates to ERfinders schematic and postings.
4. And also we have Tesla constructing a segmented circuit controller that appears to be the same size as the rotor to control the number of pulses
Regards,
Nat
Hi again,
I think at this stage it is appropriate to refine the definition of Neutral in relation to magnets and coils.
Neutral , void and bloch wall appear to be the same thing.
When does it occur? Well it occurs when two magnets are joined together in a NSNS configuration. The SN in the middle cancel out and become neutral and you are left with a N & S at each end.
It also occurs in each magnet naturally at the mid point between the N & the S poles.
So for example if we connect 8 square magnets to together in a we get NSNSNSNSNSNSNSNS in a straight line. All the intermediary N & S poles cancel and become neutral and we are left with N at the start and S at the end.
So if we connect 8 magnets together to form a ring as in the configuration above all the N & S poles cancel out and we are left with only neutral points. The neutral points being where the magnets connect and in the middle of the magnets. This principle appears to also applies to coils.
Regards,
Nat
Hi Again,
The horseshoe shaped coils in Tesla patent 464,666 puzzles me. I am starting to think that Tesla has created a ring shaped induction coils of some sort. It is very hard to tell.
He describes it as "a rotating armature of independent field magnets or coils exerted successively and not simultaniously"
He says in the text "wound with coils D, closed upon themselves, as is now the general practice in motors of this kind"
hmmm if we think of these coils as being magnets as he has indicated that they could be magnets then they wouldnt have any polarity and become neutral. So coils closed upon themselves must become neutral too.
Just thinking aloud.
Regards,
Nat
http://leedskalnin.com/
Replicated patent 464,666: http://leedskalnin.com/ResonanceMotorlg.html
There used to be a video but I can't find it anymore.
There is also another video below for a different motor, but there was a video for that one pictured above.
@ Omar,
I agree with you, my question remains: why only 2 primaries? There are 2 more secondaries without primaries. Why without? Cost reduction? don't think so!
@All,
EDIT: intermediate question: Why do we need primaries? just for battery recharge?
And a bigger one (may answer the first question): where is generated the twist/torque? All I could find is (see emphasis added):
1. From wikipedia (we all trust for mainstream science)
Quote
Constituent atoms or molecules of paramagnetic materials have permanent magnetic moments (dipoles), even in the absence of an applied field. This generally occurs due to the presence of unpaired electrons in the atomic/molecular electron orbitals. In pure paramagnetism, the dipoles do not interact with one another and are randomly oriented in the absence of an external field due to thermal agitation, resulting in zero net magnetic moment. When a magnetic field is applied, the dipoles will tend to align with the applied field, resulting in a net magnetic moment in the direction of the applied field. In the classical description, this alignment can be understood to occur due to a torque being provided on the magnetic moments by an applied field, which tries to align the dipoles parallel to the applied field. However, the truer origins of the alignment can only be understood via the quantum-mechanical properties of spin and angular momentum.
2. From "Kosol device" I posted earlyer:
Quote
In the Russian research of torsion fields, it was discovered that aluminum was unique in that it had the ability to reflect some radiated torsion fields, that would easily travel through copper and other substances. It will also conduct eddy currents quite well and used to be used as wiring in homes. It's resistance to electricity is higher then copper, so eddy currents will be reduced a little, and thus EM fields may be increased with a lower stability factor. When eddy currents are present the metal can be repelled along with the eddy currents produced in it by an AC field. The effect is amplified when the metal is cooled with liquid nitrogen. Spinning aluminum by one pole of a magnet produces a repulsive force.
3. Erfinder said:
Quote
Remember the following universal truth
"Positive charge attracts positive charge, and expels negative discharge. Negative discharge repels both negative discharge and positive charge."
The Universal One
Positive Charge = Paramagnetism = EMF
Negative Discharge = Diamagnetism = BEMF
It should look prety obvious how is the mechanism works, but I have to admit, I have trouble making sense to the whole picture (I'm a slow thinker too). The closest representation I could imagine is Grumpy's picture here reproduced again. And this would represent just the rotor. As side efect, this device could be a lifter.
How coils' fields interact with the core, is still a blur.
As for dimensions, octaves and so on, I prefer to live it for later understanding.
Hi again,
I think I need to refine my observations and definition further:-
So to summarise my observations to date are:-
1. We have Tesla constructing rotors using a NSNSNSNS configuration with magnets in the basic shape of a ring (the polarity of the magnets cancel and give a neutral magnetic ring). He also used coils that "closed upon themselves" to produce the same "effect". That the coils(that are closed upon themselves) / magnets are either touching each other or are very close to each other. Tesla used 6 & 4 magnets in his rotor designs and for whatever reason decided on 4 magnets as being a better number 5 years later.
2. We have Tesla constructing primary & secondary coils and placing them at the neutral points (points of neutrality)
3. This correlates to ERfinders schematic and postings.
4. And also we have Tesla constructing a segmented circuit controller that appears to be the same size as the rotor to control the number of pulses. He used 4 poles or 4 segments
5. The number of RPM's appear to be very important
Draft - Definition of Neutral in relation to magnets
Neutral , void and bloch wall appear to be the same thing.
When does it occur? Well it occurs when two magnets are joined together in a NSNS configuration. The SN in the middle cancel out and become neutral and you are left with a N & S at each end.
It also occurs in each magnet naturally at the mid point between the N & the S poles.
So for example if we connect 8 square magnets to together, we get NSNSNSNSNSNSNSNS in a straight line. All the intermediary N & S poles cancel and become neutral and we are left with N at the start and S at the end.
So if we connect 8 magnets together to form a ring as in the configuration above all the N & S poles cancel out and we are left with only neutral points. The neutral points being where the magnets connect and in the middle of the magnets. Hence we have a ring of neutral polarity.
These principles appear to also apply if the magnets are very close together
This principle appears to also applies to coils that are "closed upon themselves". i.e toroids or coils in the shape of a ring
Regards
Nat
Hi Nat,
What do you think:
You have a soft iron toroid and you cut a slice (like you byte a donut). You replace that slice with a permanent magnet (the perfect geometric replacement). Is this a perfect replacement for the magnet ring from Erfinder's device? (It still is a magnet closed upon itself, with no externaly radiating magnetic field)
Later, the point is why 4 magnets? For the outside world, the donut is seen as a neutral, self canceled magnet, no poles, yet manetic field is prezent but contained.
The only thing I see is: if an external field would interact with this contained field, it would determining a "push". Because the ring is secured to the aluminum rotor, there is the torque.
And again, if this happens only because of the field contained in the ring, why is the need for aluminum core?
Bump.. bump...
Quote from: tao on March 19, 2007, 10:32:19 AM
http://leedskalnin.com/
Replicated patent 464,666: http://leedskalnin.com/ResonanceMotorlg.html
There used to be a video but I can't find it anymore.
There is also another video below for a different motor, but there was a video for that one pictured above.
Hi Tao,
The video is on a link that says
Res. Motor (exp. w/dc) on the left side of the home page:
http://leedskalnin.com/ResonanceMotorMovie.html (http://leedskalnin.com/ResonanceMotorMovie.html)
Regards,
Omar
Quote from: barbosi on March 19, 2007, 10:40:49 AM
@ Omar,
I agree with you, my question remains: why only 2 primaries? There are 2 more secondaries without primaries. Why without? Cost reduction? don't think so!
Hello Barbosi,
I am still understanding the device as you are. Hopefully we may learn the answer to this question soon.
Regards,
Omar
Hi Barbosi,
Answer to Q1.
The quick answer is that this is probably straying from the path set.
The key elements given are:-
1. a rotor with an aluminum core
2. 4 magnets in NSNSNSNS configuration touching or perhaps very close
Answer to Q2.
Not sure yet. But I am guessing that the 4 magnets form some sort of circular looking neutral magnetic current. And 6 magnets may perhaps form a more oval shaped neutral magnetic current. But this is speculation at this stage.
Answer to Q3
Not sure yet. But I think ERfinder has posted about this. Tesla does mention somewhere that aluminum would replace iron. Perhaps this is what he meant by that as he never clarified what he meant by that. At least I havent seen anything about it.
Regards,
Nat
One question at the time.
Can be the toroid from the picture a direct replacement for the magnet ring?
(the gray colour represents soft iron, blue&red a magnet)
Consider the question out of Erfinder's device context. You just found this on the street and you wonder if there are any field lines, if there is any Bloch wall and where. From what perspective? Inside of the toroid, and outside.
Unrelated to the question: Tao, Omar, this (http://leedskalnin.com) is a clasic case of frustration. "We did it, we found the secret, look at the pictures, look at the clips". Bottom line there are no plans to replicate, no valuable explanations, however, if you feel you are impressed and you feel you're going closer to the Truth, you may consider to donate 30$, or buy a T-shirt. I think TV producers have a bigger potential for ratings in this rather than reality shows. Hope ---> Buy
The pieces of the puzzle are slowly coming together I must say. This is beginning to make sense.
Below is an interesting diagram from the "Living Energies" Viktor Schauberger. In light of what ERfinder has said about 8 neutral points....count how many arrows there are on the diagram for centriptel and centifrugal there are....8 on each!
Quote from: barbosi on March 20, 2007, 09:05:01 AM
Unrelated to the question: Tao, Omar, this (http://leedskalnin.com) is a clasic case of frustration. "We did it, we found the secret, look at the pictures, look at the clips". Bottom line there are no plans to replicate, no valuable explanations, however, if you feel you are impressed and you feel you're going closer to the Truth, you may consider to donate 30$, or buy a T-shirt. I think TV producers have a bigger potential for ratings in this rather than reality shows. Hope ---> Buy
Hello Barbosi,
They have a missing piece of the puzzle, that is for sure. Focusing on money will not help on development of this technology. One must do as Erfinder has, and understand what has been said, draw correlations between past genious authors, and formulate your own conclusion.
Regards,
Omar
I agree. Couldnt have said it any better.
The evidence is mounting that is for sure.
Just wanted to bring this up.
Erfinder's original image that he posted AND that Tesla patent 464,666 reminds me of k_pullo's NOWARM Motor at http://www.geocities.com/k_pullo/nowarm.htm
Have a read, interesting to say the least...............
;) :)
Hi All,
Please find below a summary of some references and observations to date for, what appears to be a key missing piece of the puzzle, namely ? neutral points or neutral polarity.
Written References
1. ?comments in The Secret Doctrine concerning the ?Keely Motor?, a free energy device constructed by John Worrel Keely, which operated through the creation of a neutral centre, or in Viktor Schaubergers terms, a biological vacuum?.
Reference p74 Living Energies ? Schauberger
2. "Mr. Keely, in explanation of the working of his engine, says: 'In the conception of any machine heretofore constructed, the medium for inducing a neutral centre has never been found. If it had, the difficulties of perpetual-motion seekers would have ended, and this problem would have become an established and operating fact. It would only require an introductory impulse of a few pounds, on such a device, to cause it to run for centuries. Reference http://www.theosociety.org/pasadena/sd/sd1-3-10.htm
3. Reference "The physics of the primary state of matter" Schappeller
p146 " The essential condition is that every magnet must consist of 3 parts: two poles and a neutral."
p147 "the magnets are set in opposing pairs N + S (plus and a minus) and the neutral is the central core of air space or neutralised interpolar energy. And this neutrality or impolarity is the real source of the electric current".
4. EDWARD LEEDSKALNIN
http://www.keelynet.com/unclass/magcur3.txt
To the electrical engineers the positive electricity is everything, the negative electricity is nothing, but to the physicists the negative electricity is everything, and the positive electricity is nothing. Looking from a neutral standpoint they cancel each other, so we have no electricity, but we have something. If we do not know how to handle the thing that comes through a wire from a generator or a battery, we will get badly shocked. Read the booklet "Magnetic Current" (MAGCURNT.ASC) then you will know what the thing is, and the way it runs through a wire.
In a permanent magnet bar between the poles there is a semi-neutral part where there is not much going in or out, but on the earth there is no place where the magnets are not going in or out, but the magnets are running in and out at pole ends more than at the Equator. Now you get the equipment and I will tell you so you can see for yourself?..
http://www.keelynet.com/unclass/magcurnt.txt
Observations of Neutral Points in the Tesla Patents
Reference: Tesla patent 568,176 Apparatus for producing electric currents of high frequency
1. We have Tesla constructing rotors using a NSNSNSNS configuration with magnets in the basic shape of a ring. But the magnets do not appear to be touching but are very close to each other. So the question is can the polarity of the magnets cancel given that they aren?t touching and give a neutral magnetic ring). I have performed some very basic tests with some magnets separated with some small pieces of wood approximately the width of the magnet. Then moved a compass over the neutral area and it does appear to be still neutral as the compass needle doesn?t move.
2. The position of the brushes in figure 2 also line up with the neutral point (VOID) of the magnets
Reference Tesla Patent 464,666 Electro Magnetic Motor
1. In this patent we have what appears to be 6 coils, each in the shape of a horseshoe magnet. The horseshoe shaped coils in Tesla patent 464,666 puzzles me. I am starting to think that Tesla has created a ring shaped induction coils of some sort. It is very hard to tell.
He describes the rotor as "a rotating armature of independent field magnets or coils exerted successively and not simultaniously"
He says in the text "wound with coils D, closed upon themselves, as is now the general practice in motors of this kind"
If we think of these coils as being magnets, as he has indicated that they could be magnets, then they probably wouldnt have any polarity and become neutral. So it appears that coils closed upon ?themselves? must become neutral too.
2. Also interesting is where Tesla had placed some of his coils namely N1 and S1. They are placed at the neutral points. Actually it appears that the all the coils are placed in all the neutral points as there are neutral points in the middle of the magnets (coils) as well.
Regards,
N.
One of the slices in FEMM...
hmmm well when I look at Tesla Patent 464,666 now I see 3 horseshoe magnets with coils on each pole and a straight magnet connecting the N & S poles to make them neutral.
But that is a big guess.
Regards,
N.
EDWARD LEEDSKALNIN AC generator
why do I get the feeling that the flux lines are pulsing from the neutral point.
Like a stone being dropped into a lake. and the rings form around it.
Reference - Schauberger
"Energy is radiated out from the center of the vortex (5). The Schauberger vortex may be visualized as a figure "8" according to Dr. Gordon Freeman, with the energy radiating out at the narrow mid-point between the upper and lower loops (6). This energy is produces levitation. It may be diamagnetic energy as Schauberger believed (7)."
http://www.missilegate.com/rfz/schauberger.htm
Energy is radiated out from the centre .....And the figure 8 represents the bloch wall---> The void---> The neutral point!!
Second thoughts Erfinder???
I saw your image for a minute and refreshed and it was gone...
Do you think we are not ready for it?, Or did you have an error in the image?
Quote from: Erfinder on March 22, 2007, 11:27:46 AM
hmmm.....
In downloaded form the text was not visible. May be Erfinder is fixing it. At least I hope this is the reason.
I wish to warm this awkward silence with something I knew since my childhood and some of you know but some maybe not.
Since all we are aware of 3D domain, I would like to share what I call a glimpse into time domain and link with 3D.
Lost in the middle of nowhere with no compass? If you got a wrist watch, you're in business. Point the little needle at the Sun. The angle bisector between the little needle and number 12 on your dial will point to South. Off course you have the Sun in your sight for this.
Reciprocally, knowing South direction, you can for your particular spot in space find your time.
Hi All,
I had a vision this morning about what is happening with the flux lines when the 4 magnets are connected into a ring. Everyone needs to think in terms of a cyclone or hurricane. I will post a diagram in a minute which I think should clear up a few things.
Regards,
N.
Heres a diagram of what I saw this morning.
ERfinder, please confirm for accuracy.
So the 8 neutral points of the magnet ring form a vortex.
Step 1 - This results in centripetal motion (implosion)
Step 2 - This results in centrifugal motion (explosion)
Step 3 - A super big series of pulses from the VOID which is represented as a figure "8"
The way I perceive it (for a bar magnet) I found in "Living Energies" and shown in the attachment (modified).
For a 1/4 circle segment magnet... I think it follows the shape.
When you join 4 magnets to form a toroid... I still have trouble to "visualize" how they behave (according to my picture).
Found another reference
p291 the Living Energies
"Creating what viktor referred to as a 'void' in the physical matrix........This is no inert, empty vacuity, however, but a living vacuum of huge potential, for all it now contains is pure neutronic energy, which in light of the above should be the most primordial of life-cohering essences and therefore originate from higher, more sublimely dynamic realms such as the 5th (dimension).
New diagram
oh i left out that the rotation should resemble a figure "8" at all neutral points
Updated to include the figure 8
Isnt it interesting how it represents a flower--->petal--->8
Thanks for the drawings and explanations.
Quote from: Erfinder on March 23, 2007, 10:35:39 AM
...When poles void the flux curvature stops! Our proof of this is can be seen when two opposite magnet poles are allowed to touch and void, the flux at that point no longer manifests externally?, flux curves around this point.
Pretty obvious and easy to experiment to prove the theory.
Quote from: Erfinder on March 23, 2007, 10:35:39 AM
Once the ring is voided completely something very unexpected happens. North, South, and Void are made to manifest on one plane! The flux lines travel like spiraling rays into and out of the ring!
...
Intuitively, not only that makes sense, but I believe many vould have the feeling that is happening. However, is hard to have a debate in absense of phisical proof as result of experimentation. Since nobody with a stick can poke the light to prove its existence, maybe there are other ways to convince. I still believe I'm missing a valuable piece from the puzzle: What is the nature of North and what is the nature of South? This can eventualy lead to the more practical question: why gravitive vs. radiative? To be more precise, the question refers to a regular bar magnet (first figure).
[EDIT] Excerpt from http://www3.sympatico.ca/slavek.krepelka/ttf/hilite.htm
Quote
Two magnets in unlike pole orientation attract. Two magnets in alike pole orientation repulse. The only problem is, that if you release at least one of the magnets in alike orientation, it will flip around into unlike orientation and attract to the other magnet anyway. Are we to believe that the unlike, attractive pole orientation natural to magnets is equivalent to the forcefully retained repulsive orientation? Are we to believe that the fact, that mathematics can treat the two orientations in reverse, means that these two orientations are really inversely equivalent, when a simple observation states otherwise? Why would any rational person assume that magnets may exert repulsive force on each other when the natural magnetic force without exception is always attractive, even if it may mean that two magnets in alike orientation attract themselves away from each other? Sound like bull? If you wind a rope around a tree, you can pull a stone away from yourself pulling on the rope, can't you?
It fits with this theory, but again I'm still missing the whole picture.
Not just one question.
1. What is the nature of North and what is the nature of South?
2. From fig. 1 Northe and South are two whirlpools bracing eachother in both gravitive and radiative manifestation?
3. While the funnels are shown in 3D, the axis given by the whirlpools are represented in the same plane. The radiative manifestation (outward whirlpools) shouldn't be spatial distributed, all around "Bloch wall"?
4. What mutations occur when you split a magnet to form two?
Regards.
PS: I notticed you edited your posting. I do not intend to be a drag, if you may point me to the readings, I'll do my work. If you consider this would be a noise to the purpose of the thread, please PM me with the info.
Erfinder,
I greately apreciate your answers.
For a fairly rapid progress, studying is not always enough. One need to pause and reflect to ideas. With so much reading material, dispersion is not helping. At least now we can have the bird view of the filed and if one needs to contemplate a specific aspect, is free to do so in his own time and at his pace.
I understand many will be shocked, or indiferent, or not convinced, but so far I can asure anyone in this position, the lecture is full of sense while intriguing. While some aspects may not reflect common knowledge, the more you read the more it makes sense. However, the thinks one may not comprehend or agree upon, are subject for later reflection (what can it be more rewarding than trying and finding answers to questions few can deliver)
Thanks again and enjoying the quest.
Quote from: Erfinder on March 23, 2007, 02:42:06 PM
Barbosi,
Quote from: barbosi on March 23, 2007, 12:44:36 PM
1. What is the nature of North and what is the nature of South?
My friend the answer to this question is more complicated. It took me two years to understand it, thinking only on it day and night and you want me to sum it up for you in a sentence or two! I will give it my best, but many of you will not like the anwser!
Let the truth be told, there is only one substance. That substance is Mind. Within Mind exists all knowledge and power. Mind is Still Magnetic Light. All idea in Mind is complete in it's entirety, it is however without form. Mind has but one desire and this desire is to create bodies for it's ideas. It is enabled to do this through thinking. The thinking process of Mind is a dual process, Concentration, and Decentration. Concentration represents a seeming moving away from ones center in Mind. Decentration represents a relaxing from thinking and return to ones center in Mind, this process is expressed electrically. That being said the natures of north and south should now be apparent. For too long the Creator has been stripped out of the equation, no longer!
Quote from: barbosi on March 23, 2007, 12:44:36 PM
2. From fig. 1 Northe and South are two whirlpools bracing eachother in both gravitive and radiative manifestation?
It must be understood that a magnet has four poles, not two! Two poles charge the magnet, and two poles discharge it! There are therefore four vortex! Two of them contract towards the center expressing the gravitive, or concentrative power of Mind Thinking, and the other two expand from the center expressing the radiative, or decentrative power of Mind Thinking. This is demonstrated in the diagram.
Quote from: barbosi on March 23, 2007, 12:44:36 PM
3. While the funnels are shown in 3D, the axis given by the whirlpools are represented in the same plane. The radiative manifestation (outward whirlpools) shouldn't be spatial distributed, all around "Bloch wall"?
To answer this question I give you the following exercise. Imagine you are standing on the top of a pyramid. From your position you are enabled to see all within your field of view. Imagine that your field of vision opens up and you are able to see 360 degrees from this position. When you do this imagine 5 more pyramids have just appeared, they all combine with the one you are standing on top of to form a cube, and you are perfectly centered amongst all of them as you are on the apex of all of them. This is the position from which the Bloch Wall occupies, it is from this position that the Bloch wall views the four vortex. From your postion things contract towards you and expand away from you.
Your last question you don't need me to answer as you know very well what happens when a magnet is broken, and in time you will know why.
I changed my post a bit because I was not direct enough, and at the same time I felt that the my attitude reflected a bit of impatients. That was the reason for the change. As far as reading material goes, you have all that you need posted here, and on the CD I sent you! You don't need anymore then that. Give yourself time, the anwsers you seek will unfold if your desire for it to unfold is strong enough.
Regards
Hi All,
Thanks for the feedback ERfinder. I will have to do some more research. I feel that we are making some progress to understand & cross reference what you are presenting here even if it is a small amount.
In the meantime I have been researching & cross referencing your description of the process at work here and shall post it shortly.
Regards,
N.
Hi All,
In analyzing ERFINDERS magnet ring we need to review & understand Viktor Schauberger?s implosion references.
IMPLOSION ? A REVIEW
Reference http://www.rhfweb.com/schauberger.html
The principles involved with Implosion technology: All movement is the outcome of attraction or repulsion; between expansion and contraction. All life forms develop as a mirror image, or, as consequence of this activity, between polarities. By imitating the examples which nature shows us - both the creative and formative natural processes can be enhanced to a maximum output situation. When this natural principle is artificially accelerated, this energy source is made available
In Implosion technology, two types of motion are combined or simultaneously taking place ? Centrifugence & Centripetence
The working mechanism: the double cycloid spiral curve (as in a vortex) concentrates , contracts and compacts the water. This contraction cools and this cooling creates a vacuum. This vacuum augments suction, the whole process generates a diamagnetic force. Compacting physical matter to point beyond which it "dissolves" into its energetic form and thus allowing it to return into the physical, can be achieved artificially or mechanically.
Lets keep the review of implosion from above in mind when we analyse what has been described as happening in the magnet ring
Step 1. Connecting 8 neutral points (4 arc shaped magnets to form a ring) in a NSNSNSNS configuration forms a magnetic ring ? a vortex.
(This creates a path of least resistance - Reference http://www.earthtransitions.com/livingwater/lw_implosion.htm)
Step 2. This causes centripetal motion to occur.
(spiralling from the outer rim to the centre).
Implosion ? Schauberger
Attraction - Schauberger
?Contraction? - Schauberger
Step 3. Implosion causes centrifugal motion to occur.
(Spiralling from the centre to the outer rim)
?Explosion? - Schauberger
?Repulsion? ? Schauberger
?Expansion? - Schauberger
Step 4. Energy is radiated out from the centre of the vortex.
Reference http://www.missilegate.com/rfz/schauberger.htm
or ?Energy is radiated from the void?
From the vacuum (Shauberger)
From the neutral centre (Keely)
From the ether (Tesla)
From the 5th dimension (Reference Shauberger - p291 Living Energies)
The energy that is radiated is in the form of diagmagnetism ? Schauberger
Reference
http://missilegate.com/rfz/schauberger.htm
Energy is radiated out from the center of the vortex (5). The Schauberger vortex may be visualized as a figure "8" according to Dr. Gordon Freeman, with the energy radiating out at the narrow mid-point between the upper and lower loops (6). This energy produces levitation. It may be diamagnetic energy as Schauberger believed (7).
So in summarising it appears that Schauberger's references correlate with ERfinder's posts.
Regards,
N.
Hi All,
This is probably back tracking....But another interesting configuration of 2 magnets.......
Regards,
N.
Hi Again
Oh forgot to mention where this is from - Tesla's "Notes on a unipolar dynamo" Sept 2 1891
Regards,
N.
Hi to all,
today I started to read the post again because I still need to get the right magnets,
the arc magnets or horse-shoe discussed before not seem to be the right one's
180 degree or are these four magnets ?
I have found these on http://www.magnetsales.com/Info_R2.htm
on page 41 of catalog 7, these have an 120 degree angle so it would take 3 to form a circular shape this company can make custom design.
to make the design from the first drawing you would need four with a 90 degree
to create 8 voids but in the last drawing I count 16 are their now 8 magnets inside or are the blue and red one magnet?
also the center of the 3D shows two rings one blue and one red.
red the magnets and bleu? blue=south an red = north?
sins I found this forum I can hardly go to sleep and I surf all the links from one site to another in order to change my thinking and understanding I always say everything you can think of is posible and this have helped me always to get at my goal.
As Yoda would say feel the force and erfinder the field
Hi All,
Can anyone confirm that these are the correct magnets to get? I have just sent them an email to confirm they aren't multi poled.
M-941 Curved Pieces for Unimag Set (set of 10) - $5.95
http://www.teachersource.com/catalog/page/Electricity_Magnetism_Engines/Magnet_Products/?id=9f64d1e8afe8270d1c2ce4d23ab35b2f
Cheers
Nat
Quote from: nat1971a on March 26, 2007, 09:14:50 PM
Hi All,
Can anyone confirm that these are the correct magnets to get? I have just sent them an email to confirm they aren't multi poled.
M-941 Curved Pieces for Unimag Set (set of 10) - $5.95
http://www.teachersource.com/catalog/page/Electricity_Magnetism_Engines/Magnet_Products/?id=9f64d1e8afe8270d1c2ce4d23ab35b2f
Cheers
Nat
Hello Nat,
I hope this post clears your doubts:
http://www.overunity.com/index.php/topic,133.msg24259.html#msg24259 (http://www.overunity.com/index.php/topic,133.msg24259.html#msg24259)
Also see Erfinder's reply after the previously mentioned post.
Sincerely,
Omar
Quote from: nat1971a on March 26, 2007, 09:14:50 PM
Hi All,
Can anyone confirm that these are the correct magnets to get? I have just sent them an email to confirm they aren't multi poled.
M-941 Curved Pieces for Unimag Set (set of 10) - $5.95
http://www.teachersource.com/catalog/page/Electricity_Magnetism_Engines/Magnet_Products/?id=9f64d1e8afe8270d1c2ce4d23ab35b2f
Cheers
Nat
The problem I see with those magnets (except the chance to be multipole) is that you should brake them in half. In this adventure you should be very lucky or extremely carefull because you'll need four *exact* size for timing/sync considerations. You have 3 pulses per each tronson between two voids.
But if afford, buy 2-3 sets and see what you get.
Also it was like 6 inch ring OD if I rememer...
Regards.
Hi to all,
the way I see it, it could also be a multi pole because you would get also 8 voids
the magnets from post 116 would have three voids per magnet plus the 2 when you put them together.
the voids each are 90 degree turned from each other the 2 voids in the middle would murge to one void.
I dont think that in the device from Tesla a multy pole was used but mabe the directions of the void is what this device is making this ticking because from the drawing from erfinder we can see two layer's of magnets so if the second layer of magnets is shifted from the top layer then al the voids would be facing each other in a different angle.
the rotation of both field would not be in fase and we would get a stress in the field with a high frequency.
this high frequency would start to resonate with the coils.
the induction of the coils would give out the electrical energy.
We will only know for sure if I ore somebody else would bild the device.
The company neotex in Berlin Germany also got something but it looks to smal I will oder some and also look in to some old drives i got.
tomorrow I am gone move to my new house so I wont be able to start testing my idea with in the next week but I will keep you posted.
keep on digging and soon we will be free
satyoda
Although I'm in a phase toward comprehension, I'll try to share my understanding so far.
For this, I'll try to use not my words, but rather quotes (Leedskalnin) which I found most representative for this understanding.
First, with regard to magnetism, I found Edward Leedskalnin's experiments quite revealing and go beyond the presentations form school books. So if you can and need to prove yourself, I recomend experiencing Leedskalnin instead of Erfinder's setup. As he said, the setup is more directed towards comprehension. But first is comprehension of simple basic things.
Before I start, I find apropriate one quote as a base for reasoning:
Quote
All our ideas should produce good and lasting results and then anything that is good NOW would have been good in the PAST and it will be good in the FUTURE and it will be good UNDER ANY CIRCUMSTANCES, so any idea that does not cover all this broad base
IS NO GOOD.
To be right, one's thought will have to be BASED ON NATURAL FACTS, for really, Mother Nature ONLY can tell what is right and what is wrong and the way that things should be.
My definition of right is that right is anything in nature that exists without ARTIFICIAL MODIFICATION and all the others are wrong.
Now suppose you would say it is wrong. In that case, I would say YOU are wrong yourself because you came into this world through natural circumstances that YOU HAD NOTHING TO DO WITH and so as long as such a thing exists as yourself, I am right and you are wrong.
Only those are right whose thoughts are BASED on natural facts and inclinations.
Now, Erfinder said about magnets that inside there are two flow movements, one from North to South and another from South to North. These are not at the same strenght, one is dominant. The proof is in Edward Leedskalnin's experiments (see whole text at http://www3.sympatico.ca/slavek.krepelka/exper/magcur.htm):
Proof 1 (There are 2 magnetic currents - here is used a copper wire as electromagnet instead of a magnet):
Quote
Balance the 3Ft compass well, so that it would stop on its right magnetic position.
Place the car battery south of your gismo, positive terminal east and negative terminal west. Connect the east end of the 16Ga copper wire with the positive terminal and the west end of the copper wire with the negative terminal lead. Hold the copper wire just above the compass, a quarter of an inch north of the compass end, level and square. Touch the battery and the magnet will swing east.
Place the battery north of your gismo with its positive terminal east and its negative terminal west. Connect the west end of the copper wire with negative terminal and its east end with the negative lead. Place the copper wire a quarter of an inch south of the compass end. Hold the copper wire just above the needle, square and level and touch the positive terminal. The compass will swing west. If the battery is right and the NS magnets strong enough, and the compass rod is well balanced, it will repeat the same thing every time.
See also attached picture: Ed_Leedskalnin-currents-flow.gif (source http://peswiki.com/index.php/Directory:Leedskalnin_Magnetic_Currents:Monsieur_Bonheur)
Proof 2 (magnet poles are not equal in strenght)
Quote
Place the north pole of the U magnet under a box with iron filings, and see how much it pushes up. Repeat with the South Pole and see how much it pushes up. Do this several times over and you will see that the south pole pushes up more than the north pole. This experiment shows again that the magnets are in equal strength on level ground.
See also attached picture: Ed_Leedskalnin-pushpull.gif (source http://peswiki.com/index.php/Directory:Leedskalnin_Magnetic_Currents:Monsieur_Bonheur)
Now that we know about existence of two currents, can we may make a connection with Ed Gray's statement about "splitting the positive"? don't know (yet).
More to come...
Another experiment described at http://peswiki.com/index.php/Directory:Leedskalnin_Magnetic_Currents:Monsieur_Bonheur I find quite puzzling see also picture:
Quote
Discover for yourself that magnetic force is a movement!
If you do this experiment, you'll see for yourself there is indeed movements in those magnetic currents. More than that, you'll see differences in the two directions of the flows. By magnetising two small strand of hard steel wire and bending them you will create imbalance and discover something special. (Use a long magnet bar, so you can avoid the influence of the opposite poles.)
I coudn't find this particular experiment allegedly proposed by Ed Leedskalnin, but anyone can perform it, it would be interesting to know why South poles repel and North poles attract.
I'll be back when I can present answers or I have a decent formulated question (it bothers me now the relationship betwee magnetic fields and the aluminum core "In the aluminium the field sloshes back and forth spilling diamagnetism")
PS:
Quote
Remember the following universal truth
"Positive charge attracts positive charge, and expels negative discharge. Negative discharge repels both negative discharge and positive charge."
The Universal One
Positive Charge = Paramagnetism = EMF
Negative Discharge = Diamagnetism = BEMF
From the information provided and the way I understand them I?ll give it a try. I apologize in advance if I am wrong somewhere in my interpretation.
About magnets:
From the drawing provided the objective is to have magnetic field in toroid shape formed by permanent magnet. The simplest way to do this is like shown on the drawing, with combinations of 4 or more magnets. Why? Permanent magnets in toroid shape do exist and are very much used but they are not magnetized in the way this application demands. Their usual magnetization is one pole on the top and the other on the bottom, but that?s not the case here where there are no poles. In order for one to magnetize the toroid magnet as it is asked here you will need some ?special? magnetizing coil which will produce magnetizing magnetic field which will rotate 360 degrees only once. I am not aware of existence and use of such a magnetizing coil. So to keep things simple you take four magnets that are axially magnetized and combined them to achieve the desired effect. I have attached drawing to support this explanation. On the 4 points where the magnets are touching, there is a little ?fringing? flux, if I may call it like that, but that?s miniscule compared to magnetic flux inside the formed toroid.
About the coils;
I have no particular comment since I was kind of jumping through the forum and didn?t find the direction of the axis of the coils. I guess there can be only two ways, which the coils can be wounded. One would be, the axis of the coils would be radial to the center of toroid, the other would be perpendicular to the first one. Both are self-explanatory.
About the electronics:
From the drawing provided circuit consists of two coils (primary, secondary), two capacitors (one capacitor is battery) and one switch.
Switch closed: The current from battery is flowing in the secondary, and by that transferring energy to magnetic field of the coil.
Switch open: New circuit forms. Now two coils and two capacitors are connected. One capacitor is the battery and the other is if I picked it up correctly High voltage, small value capacitor. So there will be a series connection of two capacitors, which will give a small value of total capacitance, and on the other side we will have two coils in same order of inductance value connected in series. What will happen is resonance or exchange of energy between the two coils (the half of the magnetic energy which was stored in secondary will go to primary if they have the same inductance once this circuit is formed) and the two capacitors. So the energy will go back and forth (magnetic in coils, electric in capacitors). One thing to note here during resonance is that since the high voltage capacitor is small in capacitance compared to battery, high voltage will be developed on it, compared to the voltage on the battery, which will not be affected at all during this resonance, because of its high capacity.
Switch closed again:
The current from the battery is flowing in the secondary. The primary coil and small HV capacitor are forming a resonant circuit on its own, because there is energy left in the capacitor or primary coil (depends when do you turn the switch), but now since the big guy is gone (battery) this will be a damped oscillations, depending on the Q of the new formed resonant circuit.
During this operation of the circuit, what are the interactions of the magnetic fields of the primary, secondary and toroid I haven?t think about that and I don?t know. First I would need to know the exact orientation of the coils.
Godspeed.
Regards.
Quote from: DigiLab on March 29, 2007, 01:37:22 AM
From the information provided and the way I understand them I?ll give it a try. I apologize in advance if I am wrong somewhere in my interpretation.
Hi DigiLab,
Although the magnet drawing is nice, I believe Erfinder would agree with me that is not a correct interpretation of the magnetic flux inside the magnet. As there are no magnetic straight lines, but vortex curves.
Latelly I have been seeking much about how the magnetic motion vortices near the void. As Erfinder has said, the most important thing for now is figuring out what is the magnetic void. Today I found a link about a book by Howard Johnson that possibly provides a bit of detail how is this motion:
http://www.cheniere.org/books/HoJo/index.html (http://www.cheniere.org/books/HoJo/index.html)
I found this yesterday: (Scroll down to the section named "Cluster hits the magnetic bull?s-eye", of Jul 18 2006, 03:24 PM)
http://www.unexplained-mysteries.com/forum/lofiversion/index.php/t72381.html (http://www.unexplained-mysteries.com/forum/lofiversion/index.php/t72381.html)
Maybe the previous links can provide further insight on the nature of the magnetic void.
I am attaching a set of images I have found on various websites on the subject.
Regards,
Omar
Hello everyone,
On the topic of the magnetic void, I have read that matter moves away from the void. Maybe this explains the equatorial bulge.
Regards,
Omar
@ DigiLab,
Nice to see a simulation on the magnet ring. As Omar said, the flux lines are different, but the current simulators cannot represent but only what they were thought.
Also, about:
Quote
On the 4 points where the magnets are touching, there is a little ?fringing? flux, if I may call it like that, but that?s miniscule compared to magnetic flux inside the formed toroid.
Even with the flux motion as presently "known" by the simulator, I believe:
As you see, there is a distorsion also at the neutral point of each magnet (Bloch wall). Looking carefuly, you may notice that actualy the flux lines are not perfectly paralel with the curved sides. Hence those ?fringing? flux appear as I said, at the contact points AND at the neutral point.
Bottom line, even wiith the [flaweded by simulator] simulation is shown that the perceivable flux lines are contained in the toroid. As per ?fringing? flux, I figure that in real life, a magnet manufacturer cannot control the production as he may wish, so I'm convinced the ?fringing? flux will be real too.
What I consider important is to accept (at least for the sake of argument) there are 2 whirlpools bracing eachother but with opposit direction of flow N->S and S->N and also the new introduced centrifugal [equatorial] flux that appears not to be acknowledged so far because it couldn't be measured/detected.
[@ Omar] The representation in my mind is a combination between Cluster_Animation_L.gif and VortexDetail2.jpg with the mention that first gif doesn't show both currents nor the whirl motion. To be complete, it should have both blue and red flows with opposite directions and this for both up and bottom side of the animation (pressed to the center by the white arrows).
For the VortexDetail2.jpg it lacks the funnel equatorial shape and overall the "spheric" aspect.
Although we may argue about the distribution and the shape of this centrifugal vortex, I think is safe to say it makes sense its existence.
One other thing that was bearely said and I agree with is that all this complex motion has to be a pulsating one not a continous flow.
What I can intuitively guess (feel) is that the nature of those two magnetic currents is different. One is paramagnetic and the other is diamagnetic(?) Which one is which, in context of charge-discharge... I don't know yet. This is what I feel because the stated property of aluminum "In the aluminium the field sloshes back and forth spilling diamagnetism" and this has to do with interaction of the other fields, resulting the torque.
Regards.
Quote from: orosado on March 29, 2007, 02:44:13 PM
Hello everyone,
On the topic of the magnetic void, I have read that matter moves away from the void. Maybe this explains the equatorial bulge.
Regards,
Omar
I think this was explained as "Concentration" and "Decentration". More details in Walter Russell material I guess.
Regards.
Quote from: barbosi on March 29, 2007, 05:13:41 PM
Quote from: orosado on March 29, 2007, 02:44:13 PM
Hello everyone,
On the topic of the magnetic void, I have read that matter moves away from the void. Maybe this explains the equatorial bulge.
Regards,
Omar
I think this was explained as "Concentration" and "Decentration". More details in Walter Russell material I guess.
Regards.
Hello Barbosi,
Yes, you are right it has to be mentioned by Walter Russell. I only have his book called "The Law of One", and not other books which may explain this. I have to get the other books. Thank you for your explanation.
Regards,
Omar
@ DigiLab,
Even if you figured by now, the core of the coils are in the same plane with the toroid closed loop magnet.
Regards.
please detail natures laws! so that we may start to use them instead of mans, which is all we have at the moment.
i have been through this thread a number of times, and i still dont understand.
if you would teach - im sure we all would learn.
Well, Erfinder, I for one WANT to move on!!!
Your words struck a cord with my pasts understandings of things, and like Emerson and Thoreau, I am all about being with and learning from NATURE.
This first post, I just want to talk about the VOID, figure I should start piece by piece.
From you writing and my readings, I see the VOID as the state of pure STILLNESS in the universe. It is where everyTHING emanates from and where everyTHING returns to. EveryTHING that comes from the VOID(which is everything) WILL return to this VOID.
The VOID is the ONE constant, like what the Taoist's call the TAO. In our world everyTHING exists in POLARITY, this is because everyTHING that comes from the VOID must do so IN OPPOSITES, so that there is ALWAYS BALANCE.
This is why you(Erfinder) are constantly saying there is no free energy, because under this understanding, there can't be! There can only be a balance of energies TO AND FROM THE VOID. But, that doesn't mean that we can't USE these balanced situations to our advantages to provide us with SEEMINGLY free energy...
From this understanding, things like tornados or vortexes or magnetic fields, all these things seems so one dimensional. But, adhering to the VOID way of things, each of those things are appearing in our 'world' in A BALANCED STATE. Sure, a tornado seems violent, but it's existance could only be possible if there was a higher order BALANCE involved.
More on this later.........
Any comments Erfinder?
Erfinder,
I think we are at a point where presenting the way you did it in your last post wouldn't jeopardize the technical part you started with. You don't need to spell out technical details, I'm sure there is much more you want to share. You pointed to some topics that would encourage serious readers in their research, while replication of an aparatus is futile.
If you can help (also with examples from nature) to understand at least partialy some abstract things, there would be a better chance for those who realy pay attention to this topic to connect the dots. Personaly, I'm OK if the technical aspect will be left to a rest (at least for a while). Technical creativity is, with no disrespect, just another way to express the urge of creation.
I guess I said just enough for you not getting discouraged in your efforts.
Regards.
Howdy all, this is my first post here. I stumbled across this thread in researching some info about Leedskalnin's generator. What an opportunity this turned into.
I spent the day reading through the post, trying to absorb as much as I could, and needless to say answer some questions. I had been keeping track of questions and answers along the way, but at this point, most of them have been answered or aren't important. However, I am attempting to answer the questions from ERFINDER on post 191. AS these are more of guesses provided to stimulate thought, express my own questions in the answers, and see if I am thinking along the correct lines.
Keep in mind, I have almost ZERO understanding of modern Electrical theory, and as I have been studying Reich, Leedskalnin and what little I can understand from others (Tesla, Keeley, etc), I am beginning to understand that modern Electrical Theory is only relevant to itself. As Charlie_V pointed out, it isn't all wrong, as we have many modern conveniences and marvels we wouldn't have without this understanding. But I do believe it is a dead end street, and as ERFINDER and some of the greats of history have stated, it is only a partial usage of the available electricity. I think this is an obvious statement, as Leedskalnin still has the proof standing in FL. Moreover, as ERFINDER stated, the ancients weren't primitive or "unenlightened" - they understood things we can not to this day The pyramids were the tallest/largest structures until sometime in the middle of 1900's. That is a staggering accomplishment - considering we can't replicate it or understand it today.
But I digress, so on to the questions....
erfinder - post# 191
What happens when you are spinning in one direction at the speed of light and you instantaneously spin at full speed in the opposite direction?
In a word, Field "collapse". You will be thrown to the outside of the circle - the car will fall to the center of the circle. In our magnet field, this will cause more "opposite" poles to be "thrown" out of the field, and more "like" poles to be drawn in - back to the simultaneous EMF-BEMF diagram.
The void represents the point where centripetal motion becomes centrifugal motion. This happens in one fluid motion!
When we do this 8 times in our circular magnet arrangement, we are
increasing the potential differences by a factor of 8 (as opposed to using a single bar magnet). This probably corresponds to the 4 secondaries - I am guessing one secondary for each of the "opposite" poles for both primaries. In other words, each Primary and Secondary need 4 pole exchanges (positive and negative for each primary - so that w can have "flow" and not stasis). This "induces" two positive and two negative into each winding. This is strictly guessing/thinking aloud, but I assume it has something to do with the mathematical/harmonic octave thing and our need to reverse the pole so we can pass through the neutral. This allows our BEMF to flow back into the battery, and allows us to "fill it" to its capacity. Or as Erfinder stated:
"When we transform the form of that which we removed into its opposite we can place as much of this back into our source as we desire, limited only by the capacity of the source. This is lesson one!"
And this leads to the thought.....
"In a pulsing circuit such as this the conductor simulates the VOID!!!"
So if the conductor is "simulating the void" it raises two questions:
1.) Are we actually negating the field effect that each pole exhibits (this has to be part of that diamagnetism/paramagnetism issue), so that when our field is traveling near the speed of light, the secondaries simultaneously see the field as positive and negative, and has full "access" to the power "potential" of the "void"?
2.) If we are simulating the void in the conductor, when (or how) are we able to have any work done through the circuit? In other words, is our circuit simultaneously acting as the positive and negative pole as well as the void? If so, I guess it is technically happening at different places throughout the circuit, only simultaneously at the same time. Much as the magnet disc itself has reversing poles, while still continuing in the same direction.
What causes the field lines of a permanent magnet to expand outward?
Exploration to find more of like magnetic poles - to remain in balance. Why this is, I do not know - nature of the beast I suppose. How it is designed. Your explanation of the Mind indicates a cognitive force/desire to seek out its natural partner with the express intent of creation. I have no problems with this, if am I understanding you correctly. I am a firm proponent of "kind after kind", as is shown throughout nature. Of course this gets into the topic of defining WHAT the void is, so we can then understand why magnets race out and into it. Aside from answering "the basic building block of the universe", I am going to ponder this some more, and see if there are any more clues around to help arrive at a logical answer.
Why is the point of maximum expansion of the field lines at the equator?
I didn't know that it was, I assumed it traveled much in the same aspect as a bar magnet - axially through the planet, with least resistance through the VOID at the equator (internally, not on the crust) - but to answer the question, theoretically, this is the Zero point of the two poles. Therefore, the equator would be the closest to the "source" (the void, Bloch wall, neutral) and therefore, the strongest "concentration" from point of "origin".
What is the difference between a man made permanent magnet and those constructed by nature?
Materials, and the way they are made. But this begs the question of how a load stone is magnetized? Crystalline structure verse electromagnetic polarization? Is there possibility for other crystalline structures to be magnetized and other structures which could be made to align? (answer: "yes" from today?s post)?
What is the nature of a flux line?
Path of least resistance to seek out its own. According to Leedskalnin, it is a corkscrewing simultaneous positive and negative "magnet" orbiting a neutral (void). Flowing from the "common" neutral at the middle of the earth, out the end of each of earth's poles, traveling back to the opposite pole (pushing against each others opposite magnet - negative can't move with out the push from the positive - and vice versa) and seeking to reenter the "common" void through each opposite pole.
Hence, we can assume, the cutting of Flux lines, although physically possible, is not harmonious with nature, as this is not the way they flow and thus the reason for the last 20 pages of discussion. There is a better way, as many have proven in history, (and it appears) that this machine is to demonstrate.
Sit back and relax take in a deep breath and exhale it slowly, and think about what Tesla could have meant when he said closed on themselves referring to the coils in patent no. 464,666). If you get stuck, as I am sure you might, go pay Ed Leedskalnin a quick visit. Study his Perpetual Motion Holder, closed upon themselves indeed!!!
Would this be a closed loop coil? Basically a coil that connects each end to itself (or another coil)? Could these be energized through inductance, and then used to step up or down to a secondary winding? Could the secondary be connected to the Primary with no adverse effects since the flow is not going to exceed the capacity of the conductors ability (Lesson #1)?? (/Begin Ramblings) Isn't this the definition of Overunity? Since the magnetic flow in a coil would be the same as it is in our permanent magnet disc, simulataneous, perpetual, and at the speed of light, the only "work" that would come from that flow would be once it is induced into an external device/coil/winding/"do-hicky". I guess this is why there is no free energy, at some point, the coil would need to be recharged. But I assume that a similar principle to the stationary magnetic disc could be used to perpetually "re-energize" the coil, since the disc already has "flow". In short, just inducing the flow from the magnet, to a coil, which would then act as its own permanent magnet - at the very least have permanent "potential". But isn't this the principle behind Leedskanlin's Perpetual Motion Device - just with additional/transforming coils? The core/magnet could be closed to simulate our disc magnet, and the flow would be forever inducing into the coils.
This can't be right, it seems too simple. (/End Ramblings)
I can't say I understand the workings of your device, other then through application of the principals as I see them outlined above. But it does beg one other question I had:
erfinder - Post# 80
2. Rotor (aluminum core)
The magnet ring forming the rotor is made out of 4 permanent magnets the gap between each magnet does not exist, this was drawn this way to show that there are four magnets. The magnets must touch and their poles void!
The magnetic flux must not be allowed to leak out of the material! (these magnets are the same as those found in computer hard drives, just thicker, approx. 1cm thickness)
Is this why the Aluminum core - to prevent "magnet" leakage? Didn't Tesla have a similar motor/generator setup, but the aluminum become magnetized? ( I think I saw an explanation that these are similar to the electric meters the Electric Co. provides for reading Kwh usage on our houses). Is this because the aluminum is "0" resistance to magnetic flow? Conducts "magnets", but does not attract/repel nor hold residual polarity? I am sure this leads back into the Diamagnetic/Paramagnetic discussion which is over my head. In short, is it safe to assume:
Paramagnetism is a materials ability to be influenced by a magnet, and create/release more magnets - even if the material itself is "not magnetic". Diamagnetism is basically the opposite, in that it repels the source magnets, while not be intrinsically magnetic?
Anyway, enough rambling for now. Am I on the right track, or am I all wet? Thanks for your time to post here, and for sharing your insights. I hope this will be a place I can ask things in my simplified layman?s understanding, and receive answers at the same level, which will ultimately lead to bigger and better concepts with the ability to perform some of these experiments.
You know, I told you guys long ago and even posted an image on how to make this magnetic ring void. No one listens to me. I told you that a hard drive magnet would not "void" the polls and that an axially aligned magnets put in a shape of a ring would. You don't need special magnets to do this.
I know this because in my early days of experimenting with magnets I made a ring out of 150 magnets rectangle magnets, each with a piece of plastic on one side (so that they gradually arched). The magnets were 3/4" x 1/2" x 1/4" N48 neodymium, so a ring of 150 of them was quite huge - probably around 1.5 feet in diameter. When I closed the gap, I found that there was no visible field anymore. Metal would not stick to them. The flux was completely contained within the ring. Unfortunately the ring didn't serve the initial goal I was going for and I took it apart. I wish I had experimented a little more with it, seeing what would happen if you placed a magnet on the outside, if it would appose or attract or do nothing.
I still have the magnets but not the time to set up the ring (took me two days to do that). Besides, I've come up with other ideas with magnets to work on. I have discovered that if you are going to do anything practical with magnets and coils (just magnets and coils) you need to find ways to alter the magnet's field. A static field is no good and will never yield a thing. You want something in your system changing. Like I always say, a magnet is in constant static motion. They don't give like a battery, they share. Anyway, Erfinder's motor thingy should work. You guys need to just build it - I would build it but I don't have the time.
I disagree with Erfinder on one matter, perpetual motion is not fake, but it should be called perpetual work. The fields that are magnets make up everything, they are infinite in nature. They are like rings, they have no beginning and no end, they simply circle in constant motion. We give them labels such as "north pole" and "south pole" and "void" but they are really just a single entity - I call it kinetic energy. They are the kinetic side of the universe (the electric field is the potential side and matter is what flows between them). God placed energy into this universe, and this energy swings back and forth like a pendulum without friction. A unity device would convert 100% of the energy placed on it to work. In the end however, this energy is used up. An over unity device actually puts back the energy into the system, thus doing work yet returning the energy it used. Magnets are the key, how you change their field is the solution.
One quick thing about the harmonic modes. At work I was experimenting with acoustic resonators - both quarter wavelength and half wavelength. Something I noticed, and you can do this with the math, in both half wavelength and quarter wavelength harmonic cycles, the 3^n "octave" modes appear. However, standard 2^n octave modes are only present in half wavelength resonators.
I also saw that the 3^n modes in my quarter wavelength glass resonators were stronger than the regular harmonics not at 3^n. This was pretty interesting.
Hi All,
I thought I would share my thoughts about what happens when 2 vortexes (or 2 of ERFINDERS magnet rings) are running in opposite directions.
So lets imagine a magnet ring (ERFINDERS) of NSNSNSNS runs clockwise at light speed. Lets also imagine another vortex (another magnet ring configured SNSNSNSN) running counter clockwise also at light speed. What is the effect of this?
Well i did some research into antigravity (or levitation) a few years back and apparently if you could configure two vortexes running in opposite directions it would produce levitation (or antigravity). How accurate this information is, is anybodys guess.
Heres a reference i found......but there are many more
"If a second arrangement of spinning magnets, or a spinning magnetic
disc, is coupled to the first, but arranged to spin in the opposite direction, the two opposing magnetic vortices will set up an anti-gravity force."
http://anina.typepad.com/anina/2005/07/vortexes.html (http://anina.typepad.com/anina/2005/07/vortexes.html)
Regards,
Nat
hmmm I wonder what 3 magnet rings does.....................
RE:
Sit back and relax take in a deep breath and exhale it slowly, and think about what Tesla could have meant when he said closed on themselves referring to the coils in patent no. 464,666). If you get stuck, as I am sure you might, go pay Ed Leedskalnin a quick visit. Study his Perpetual Motion Holder, closed upon themselves indeed!!!
hmmm i am starting to think that the core was a ring of iron.
Charlie,
Sharing your experience with quarter wavelength and half wavelength resonators is a great thing. Now it starts to make sense although not completely, about 28 pulses per cycle, aka 3 pulses between two voids in the magnet. All the time I was asking myself why 3? why not 5? or 1? Now it opens a field for reflection and I thank you for that.
Now few questions meant to prove we often stop short by asking questions. And I consider the value of this topic being exactly the oportunity of asking ourselves questions and to debate. Of course we all have our blunders - Errare Humanum Est, but I personaly I cannot stop asking myself. And often I ask for help.
You said:
Quote
They are like rings, they have no beginning and no end, they simply circle in constant motion. We give them labels such as "north pole" and "south pole" and "void" but they are really just a single entity - I call it kinetic energy.
I could agree about giving labels, but you do not explain what is energy. I'm not aware of anyone explaining what it is, but rather giving the notticeable efects of energy [not the cause]. The most notorious ones are maybe kinetic and potential energy. But this is when you are an observer in vicinity of manifesting energy. Imagine you are on planet Pluto and still can see the "manifesting energy" on Earth. How would you consider it now that the reference changed? kinetic? potential? any other?
Quote
They are the kinetic side of the universe (the electric field is the potential side and matter is what flows between them).
And what might be the other side of universe? Arethere only two sides, or there are more? How many we can identify with our perception in our reality and how many we don't?
Quote
God placed energy into this universe, and this energy swings back and forth like a pendulum without friction.
At least we perceive two movements of pendulum created by (as we have been thought) potential/gravitational energy and kinetic energy. How about a torsion pendulum? What energies are involved? Is there the void (the spot where centrifugal and centripetal energies void eachother)? Is there a moment in the local referential system where stillnes can be noticed? Why at that moment of stillness there is the maximum stress (potential/pressure)?
I gave these examples because somehow I sense you feel you answered questions and nobody was paying attention. I think many have greater questions than I have. I'm all ears to hear what are those questions, do I have a clue?
Anyway, between answers to "where are we coming from?" and "where are we going to?" there might be answers with more practical use which might lead to a contraption to keep your fridge off the grid. It would be sad if it remains unknown the source of our vicious ambition. The cause of all effects.
Best regards.
No offence but I think you guys have lost track of what erfinder is saying.
Let's go back to our basic premise of motion, which is flawed.
You believe in perpetual motion and free energy? I do to, but not like you
---- Physics tells us the electron(-) spins around the proton(+) and neutron, this is matter, atoms form molecules, molecules form tangible things we can see. So if the basis of that which everything is made of is moving, then everything is in perpetual motion is it not? This motion is energy and is free if you can harness it, so you(your body-it's atoms) and everything around you for a billion light years is moving to some extent.As well as the various fields, which must move as well, the only time I can see them not moving is when there speed and direction are the same, relatively speaking.
Our basic understanding is flawed as well, here is a simple example.
We have a fan that is pushing air in one direction, it produces a pressure in front of the blades to do this. It must also produce a suction as well behind the fan, so where does the suction end and the pressure begin exactly? At some point the suction transformes into pressure-it's opposite, this point of neutrality is neither pressure nor suction so what is it? a void
So has motion stopped at this point where suction ends and pressure begins? No -the air is still moving forward, from the suction-through a neutral point(void)- to the pressure region.So the air never stopped moving but transitioned from suction to pressure(it's opposite), so if I could pinpoint the exact position of this void could I use it?
What about this rythmic exchange erfinder is talking about?
So what happens when our fan starts and stops suddenly? A suction-a void-and a pressure are created, then when the fan blades stop does the motion stop? No , the air keeps moving forward it has energy, a suction behind the flow- a pressure in front of it-therefore somewhere inbetween there must be neither suction nor pressure, a point of neutrality(a void), all moving forward.
So what would happen if the fan started again, a pressure created in front of the fan----but this pressure region was very near the suction region that just left a second ago.So we have a rising pressure region behind a moving suction region, a double whammy. The pressure drawn to the suction(it's opposite)through another point of neutrality(void) between the two.
So how does this apply to the machine erfinder proposes?
From above we should understand that, everything has a point of neutrality-a void, which seperates that which are opposite(ie voltage,charges,pressure). We should also understand that opposites attract, but the opposites do not need to come from the same source.
We have a closed magnetic ring with eight voids, voids seperating the polarities that is all, there is no magic here. If a coil pulses a magnetic north into the void what happens? It will seek it's nearest opposite, the closest south pole in the magnetic ring. But the magnetic ring is just that(a ring, a loop) so any change in one part must effect the whole.
Can you have pressure without suction? No , Can the coils field be drawn into the ring without pulling from somewhere else? No, it must form a loop. So we have a permenant magnet loop and a loop of coils, all interacting. One coils field enters the ring then leaves with the same energy as it must, but because it entered it changed the whole dynamic of the ring. The coils field entering the ring could be like ringing a bell, the vibration circling the ring always being added to as resonance, the diamagnetic Al core repelling a changing magnetic field, which means it must attract somewhere. When you ring a bell does it stop immediately? No
The only requirement for generating current is a changing magnetic field not work persay, so with the insane amount of interaction going on, (and it is mind boggling) I think this machine could fly, not literally.
This is a slow process but I think the fog is slowly thinning, the similarities between this process and Victor schaubergers are too blatant to ignore. That is reciprocal or rythmic motion and transformation.
Hey erfinder Victor.S mentions "quality" relative to water and air, I take this to mean it's energy state, it's potential charge, temperature, gas/mineral content relative to everthing else. But this quality magnetic field concept eludes me, I can only guess that it would be an opposite, that the Bemf magnetic field is different, maybe the collapse can push as it pulls.?
Erfinder,
I am not asking you to give a detailed comment on the device below.
I just want you to look at it and let me know if 'based on the way you SEE things', could it work?
Don't worry, I'm not trying to jump ahead, I want to KNOW before I build!, but I was just always curious about this device.
Thanks
Quote from: Erfinder on April 02, 2007, 05:26:21 PM
... the Perpetual Motion Holder! Study it, and see this persons short comings! Leedskalnin connected the coils of his ring to a car battery for about 2 seconds (and that's it just 2 seconds!!!), and produced a magnetic force which could hold 30 lbs. 1 battery, 2 coils 1 bar bent into a U shape with a removable cross bar. Simply amazing! Not only this but he demonstrated that he could get the electricity back out!!!!!!!
...
Erfinder, there is something I would like to ask about Perpetual Motion Holder: Leedskalnin suggested the coils to be wrapped on brass or aluminum spools. All replications I could find were using aluminum. Are these materials relevant?
Quote from: barbosi on April 02, 2007, 05:45:50 PMAll replications I could find were using aluminum. Are these materials relevant?
http://www.keelynet.com/energy/emery.htm
This guy replicated the experiment with a steel bar, aluminum spools, and various gauged wires. Not to be a wise-acre, but I would say this is proof of concept, and that the materials are not relevant.
Of interest from this article is Leedskanlin's book:
QuoteFrom Leedskalnins' Mineral, Vegetable and Animal life treatise:
"If the perpetual motion holder's North pole prong is put East. South pole pointing West, and then elevate the cross-bar's center up to tilt the South pole vertically hanging magnet, then the magnet will swing South and when the cross-bar's center is elevated up to North pole vertically hanging magnet, then the magnet will swing North.
The cross-bar's ability to swing the North and South pole magnets off its center will remain as long as the cross-bar is not disturbed. It has little power but it could be made stronger by making bigger dimensions.
From the above experiment you can see the perpetual motion holder can act as a living thing. It knows which way to swing each magnet. This shows if more magnets are added to a living thing then it can perform things it could not do before.
Its hard to keep up with all these posts. I can only respond when I get home from work.
barbosi, to address some of the questions you raised, I don't think anyone can fully answer them. I feel that energy is the universe. But energy can take on only two different forms, potential and kinetic. You can have them both at the same time, or one after the other. But energy will only be in either of these two states. When it comes to energy transitions, there is no void. How those states interact is like you said, in the eye of the beholder.
When I said that magnetic fields were the kinetic side of the universe, I didn't mean the universe had sides, I meant that the magnetic field was the rudimentary state of kinetic energy. I feel there is no lower level that kinetic energy can be manifested as. A moving mass is a higher order manifestation because at the core of the mass there are both magnetic and electric fields keeping each atomic piece whole. Every atomic and subatomic particle ever studied IS an electromagnetic wave, we gave them names such as electrons, protons, neutrons, quarks - all are simply kinetic and potential energy interactions. Each can be dissected into smaller particles, which are really dissections of their electric and magnetic entanglement.
As for torsion pendulum's, there is never a void when it comes to the energy itself. There are neutral spots in the fields. There would have to be. You will find that at each kinetic void, there is a potential maxima. And at each potential void, there is a kinetic maxima. There is no such thing as "stillness" there cannot be, there is no void in energy transformation. It is either potential, kinetic, or both - never none.
QuoteWhy at that moment of stillness there is the maximum stress (potential/pressure)?
Hehe, you answered your own question, because at the moment of kinetic stillness there is all potential energy, and zero kinetic.
Its like this, the universe is isolated, the energy in this universe cannot go anywhere. The universe as a whole is frictionless, nothing can escape because there is nothing outside itself. So the energy is locked within, the energy placed here by God - whether this energy IS God (which I think Erfinder is alluding to and which I fully agree with), who knows - but it is here and it cannot and will not leave. It will only transition endlessly from one state to the other.
Ed Leedskalnin's perpetual motion holder reminds me of a magnetic capacitor. You can hold the flux for a very long time but when you break the path, you change the magnetic field and convert the kinetic energy to potential energy (aka the voltage that appears across the coils). And with coils that large, I imagine that theres quite a large amount of flux, which would explain its ability to hold up 30lbs.
However, this got me thinking, what would happen if you removed the coils from the core after applying the flux. Then moved the bar away without the presence of the coils. Would the flux remain like a permanent magnet or would it still be lost?
Quote from: Charlie_V on April 02, 2007, 09:15:59 PM
However, this got me thinking, what would happen if you removed the coils from the core after applying the flux. Then moved the bar away without the presence of the coils. Would the flux remain like a permanent magnet or would it still be lost?
From the above link (http://www.keelynet.com/energy/emery.htm):
QuoteA friend of mine is an electrician and he was able to scrounge up two five-hundred foot rolls of 14 gauge wire. Although Ed?s specifications called for 16 gauge wire, I decided to go ahead and make the two coils (aluminum core). After wrestling with the wire for hours, they ended up working out great. It all worked out quite well; that is, according to its originator - achieving a perpetuating magnetic current in the core of the metal.
To prove the experiment I wired the coils (when the device is in a perpetuating state, the coils can be manipulated in any way and even taken off) to a light bulb and broke the circulating current, demonstrating to the professor the amount of light that would flash in the bulb.
I then set the current in motion again and left it in his office for a week. The professor agreed that the same amount of light came out as did the week prior.
Hrmm, yea but he didn't remove the bar when the coils were taken off. Or if he did he didn't say what affect removing the bar without the coils achieves (if any).
Quote from: Charlie_V on April 02, 2007, 10:34:55 PM
Hrmm, yea but he didn't remove the bar when the coils were taken off. Or if he did he didn't say what affect removing the bar without the coils achieves (if any).
Wouldn't disconnecting the coils from eachother be akin to removing the coils in your scenario Charlie?
Quote from: Erfinder on April 02, 2007, 05:26:21 PM
Through your combined efforts we will one day all be on the same sheet of music singing the same song, and what a song it shall be!!!
I have faith in your efforts!
Regards
Erfinder,
You have already given us so much... Yet we still have much to learn.
I only hope that our day of realizations come sooner than later... Of course, having you just tell us everything won't let us truely LEARN what we need to. So, I have to respect your desires to force us to learn ourselves.
just testing to see if this post makes it to the page ...
i have been trying for some time and it never shows .. . if it does, ... uh
hi everyone,
dont have much time but ..
like ERFinder said, take a deep breath visualize and imagine everything moving and acting just as he says ... remember you are learning something new - it should seem foreign but feel right
realize that this is a process of reeducation and a totally different mindset ... for example, you may be a carpenter and have the formulai, preferred tools and process to achieve the works, but we are talking masonry here ... the knowledge you have may or may not aid, assist and work for you, but only once you know the process of what it means to work masonry,... will you be able to apply the skills and tools you have. ... my apologize everyone, but if you have ever taken a physics course you learn the theory and fundamentals before you get to do the labs ... to understand the concept and theories you must listen, digest, ponder and ask questions and always restate/recapp/declare what you have learned even each lab - usually it is done in little chunks that are then compliled into one master conception/lab - what we have learned thus far ... it has been helping me.
What is it that truly defines the discovery process - ERFinder is showing us right now ... stop and listen - keep it simple ... dont overthink it and worry about physics - physics does not apply right now - only giving this topic our undivided attention to discuss and understand these conceptions first - then apply what we think is necessary when all is said and done... i believe that this is where we need to start as that has been posted several times already
- he has stated that we have already been given what we need to know, he said it is simple, so maybe just follow the leader and keep it as simple as possible - it has been very somple things that he has stated thus far - maybe that all there is to it ... lets state what we know from his teachings - dont forget - make this understanding yours so you know it! not just mere words.
look at what is being given and engage each thing one step at a time to understand this process in a digestable fashion- it sounded to simple for me to accept at first and i complicated things - but it is really this simple and this conversation and discovery could get there alot faster if we all talked about this beginning with what we have been given and know thus far in a simple chronological order - keep it simple for now as it sounds like it will get complicating enough to warrant such desire to do labs and ponder viable physics laws etc in the future.
So i will start it ... ERFinder stated that we need to understand a magnet first - according to ERFinders model and direction.
So, What do we know of about the Magnet field in question (not the ring model)?
See attached model - "the real magnet Field.jpg"
LEVEL 1:
-FIND:
Simply identify and relate to the following nature and elements of a magnet according
to ERFinders direction:
* field motion
* field nature
* identify, define and describe the nature of the GIVEN elements - see below GIVENS
- GIVENS (the elements involved in this model):
1. Flux
2. Void
3. Positive Charge (inward motion)
4. Negative Discharge of Energy (outward motion)
5. Fields
6. Electricity
7. direction/movement
8. displacement
9. vortexes
10. equator
Anyone?
this is how we approach problem solving in all discovery processes (physics, science, health, etc) this process may aid us to stay on track and we can keep each other focused and organized and on the topic - maybe we'll get some better head way?
Thank you all for sharing your opinions and knowledge. It is realy refreshing to know people are up for a debate. And mostly I have to thank everyone for not taking this debate emotinal, and explaining the way everyone see it.
Maximumgravity1, I understand you have some background in studying Leedskalnins. My self I could find to much on this topic, in fact I'll list here what I got so far:
- http://www.keelynet.com/leed.htm
- http://www.keelynet.com/unclass/magcurnt.txt
- http://peswiki.com/index.php/Directory:Leedskalnin_Magnetic_Currents:Monsieur_Bonheur
- http://www.keelynet.com/interact/archive/00000377.htm
- http://www.keelynet.com/energy/emery.htm
- http://www3.sympatico.ca/slavek.krepelka/exper/magcur.htm
- http://www.leedskalnin.com/
Some of the links do not provide details on replication, anyway, this is the whole colection I got with certain relevance on the topic.
Quote from: Maximumgravity1 on April 02, 2007, 07:06:41 PM
Quote from: barbosi on April 02, 2007, 05:45:50 PMAll replications I could find were using aluminum. Are these materials relevant?
http://www.keelynet.com/energy/emery.htm
This guy replicated the experiment with a steel bar, aluminum spools, and various gauged wires. Not to be a wise-acre, but I would say this is proof of concept, and that the materials are not relevant.
Of interest from this article is Leedskanlin's book:
QuoteFrom Leedskalnins' Mineral, Vegetable and Animal life treatise:
"If the perpetual motion holder's North pole prong is put East. South pole pointing West, and then elevate the cross-bar's center up to tilt the South pole vertically hanging magnet, then the magnet will swing South and when the cross-bar's center is elevated up to North pole vertically hanging magnet, then the magnet will swing North.
The cross-bar's ability to swing the North and South pole magnets off its center will remain as long as the cross-bar is not disturbed. It has little power but it could be made stronger by making bigger dimensions.
From the above experiment you can see the perpetual motion holder can act as a living thing. It knows which way to swing each magnet. This shows if more magnets are added to a living thing then it can perform things it could not do before.
EDIT:
Now I got it. If the coils can even be removed, is clear the spool material is irelevant.
The reason I asked about the material the spool is made of and if is important, was based also om Erfinder's device which uses the aluminum core for the rotor. As it is important for its qualities, I asked is in this case of Perpetual Motion Holder if aluminum may play its role as in Erfinder's device. As side dish, is having brass the same or similar qualities?All the best,
b
Tao,
QuoteWouldn't disconnecting the coils from each other be akin to removing the coils in your scenario Charlie?
I guess what I'm saying is if you remove the coils completely (not just disconnect them). Then once removed, you alter the flux path by taking the bar off the top of the U. Will you lose the magnetic flux that was circulating in the U,I path? I want to say it would leave regardless if the coils are there or not, but I'm not sure.
Anyway, its not that important hehe.
Barbosi,
I too appreciate debate without emotional influx, as it leads to better understanding for all involved. I know sometimes reading things on the internet can cause people's intentions to be misunderstood, and taken out of context, and I am glad you didn't misunderstand my intent. So, having said that, if I appear blunt, don't take it personally, sometimes it takes the simple way of hearing your thoughts given back to you to make you realize it didn't sound like you intended - I know that is what it takes for me most times. As Zepharim stated, keep it simple, and restate the known.
Anyway, I have found many variations of the links you posted above. Another good, but very hard to decipher-the-message-of-the author site is:
http://www.coralcastlecode.com
This is a more visual approach to much of what is happening. After I looked over the site for a few weeks, and read through most of the pages a dozen or so times, I really began to want explanations in words - not just pictures. I found the links section quite helpful, and actually found many very fascinating tangents and side thoughts in looking through them. One of particular interest ties back to the Royal Egyptian measurement system, which Erfinder seemed to overlap with much of his discussion of the length of the wire.
When I couldn't find much more Leedskalnin reference material, I found it helpful to begin searching for "Coral Castle". This opened up some useful (and not so useful) areas. Of course, I am by no means an expert on Leedskalnin, nor do I claim to understand anything more then his simplest of ideas, but I believe the most useful info I have found about him, has been in reading his own writings. Even http://www.coralcastle.com has some limited, but useful info. I will look through my links tonight and see if there is anything else I think might be especially helpful.
Anyway, to reiterate Zepharim, I think it is about the simplicity of the concepts that modern thought is overlooking. As erfinder stated at the outset, his device is to teach
basic concepts, nothing more. As such, I think the "concept" part is the clues he is leaving in his wake of clues and trails. In looking at Leedskalnin's perpetual motion holder, I believe it is the concept at work that we are to derive from the lesson. Why exactly is the iron core able to hold the "magnets" spinning in perpetual motion? Why does removing the bar release the magnets, and allow work to be done? Why does it store this ability indefinitely? Tied to all of this seems to be the underlying "concept" that Leedskalnin himself was professing from the outset - it has to do with misconception of how "magnets" flow, what they are, and how they behave in given circumstances.
I think this is a clue:
QuoteIn a car battery the North Pole magnets run out of positive terminal and South Pole magnets run out of negative terminal. Both kinds of magnets are running, one kind of magnets against the other kind, and are running in the same right-hand screw fashion. By using the same whirling motion and running one kind of magnets against the other kind, they throw their own magnets from the wire in opposite directions. That is why if you put a magnet metal across the copper wire the one end is North Pole and the other end South Pole.
Here is another:
QuoteI think the batteries are not made right. Sometimes there is more of North
Pole magnets than there is South Pole magnets. They should be equal. the same
as from generators which do not run the South Pole magnets in frame or base,
but run directly away the same as they run the North Pole magnets.
From the following experiment you will see that the battery is not balanced
right. Put the copper wire across the box, one end East, the other end West,
connect one lead a foot West from East end and the other lead with West end,
hang a magnet in spider web, put the magnet in same level with the copper
wire. Keep the copper wire end a little away from magnet?s North Pole, con-
nect East lead with positive terminal, tap the negative terminal several times
with the loose clip. and see what the magnet is doing. Change the terminal,
change the tapping, move the box and copper wire to the South Pole end, repeat
the same thing. Then you will notice sometimes the copper wire end pushes
away the North Pole magnet, and sometimes it pulls it in and the same thing
happens with South Pole magnet, and sometimes it does nothing. So it shows the
battery is irregular.
Connect the leads with battery?s terminals to make a loop, keep the leads on
the same level with battery, drag a hanging magnet over the loop and the
connections between the battery?s terminals. You will see that one end of the
magnet keeps inside the loop, and the other outside, and the same thing
happens when the magnet crosses the connection between the terminals. This
experiment indicates that the North and South Pole magnet currents we not only
running from one terminal to the other, but are running around in an orbit and
are not only running one time around, but are running many times wound until
the North and South Pole individual magnets get thrown out of the wire by cen-
trifugal force, and by crowding. While the North and South Pole magnets were
in their own terminals they only possessed pushing power, the pulling power
they acquire only if the other kind of magnets are in front of them, like the
permanent magnets if you put the opposite magnet in front of it, then they
will hold together The same way you have done with the six inches long pieces
of copper and soft iron wire.
From the experiment with the car battery you can see the principle how
permanent magnets are made by North and South Pole individual magnet currents
running in a single wire from battery. How did the magnets get in there? As I
said in the beginning. the North and South Pole magnets they are the cosmic
force, they hold together this earth and everything on it. Some metals and
non-metals hove more of the magnets than others. The North and South Pole
magnets have the power to build up and take down, for instance in welding the
magnets take the Welding rod down and put it on the welding, in electroplating
they put one metal on the other, and if you burn a metal too much in an
electric furnace the metal will disappear in air.
I believe the importance of these statements can be seen in close study of the experiments Leedskalnin outlines.
Quote from: barbosi on April 03, 2007, 12:24:26 AMThe reason I asked about the material the spool is made of and if is important, was based also om Erfinder's device which uses the aluminum core for the rotor. As it is important for its qualities, I asked is in this case of Perpetual Motion Holder if aluminum may play its role as in Erfinder's device. As side dish, is having brass the same or similar qualities?
All the best,
b
I too wondered this same thing, in comparing copper and aluminum. I could be wrong, and I hope Erfinder will correct me if I am missing the point, but I think it is about the concept of what the Perpetual Motion Holder is doing. I believe it could be made "better" or more effective with some improvements, but as it is (and as Leedskalnin did this in the same spirit as Erfinder - a simple demonstration of a concept) I believe the "concept" of how it works is more important then inderstanding the individual components. I think back to his chocolate cake analogy - I believe this is to teach us the concepts of how to mix ingredients, and light the oven, not explain why a gas oven bakes more evenly then an electric one. Once we know how to make a "basic" cake - ANY CAKE - then we will have the tools to make more elaborate cakes, ribs, and flamb?. Right now we are getting bogged down in trying to determine if we should use semi-sweet chocolate or bakers chocolate. I don't believe it matters. The concept of "cake" is all that matters at the moment.
Quote from: zepharim on April 03, 2007, 12:09:46 AM
...
- GIVENS (the elements involved in this model):
1. Flux
2. Void
3. Positive Charge (inward motion)
4. Negative Discharge of Energy (outward motion)
5. Fields
6. Electricity
7. direction/movement
8. displacement
9. vortexes
10. equator
....
zepharim,
I think you are absolutely right with this approach. Equaly important I consider seting up a common language. This is required also because different inventors/scientists in the past although were working on the same field, described same things using different terminology. At least for me, this is a major issue.
Another issue is with the "GIVENS" as you say. An example (see quote) is the terms I marked on bold (Positive Charge, Negative Discharge). Consider now dealing with a virgin mind and before explaining what Positive Charge and Negative Discharge is, that virgin mind looks at the words and automaticaly assumes there is also Positive Discharge and Negative Charge. As we speak, I still don't know if this assumption is correct or not.
The problem I fight is not accepting the information and pondering, but rather to remove redundat information. As Erfinder said, we have more than enough. I search now to find what is just enough, minimal to sink in.
Regards.
i just spoke to emagnets and they told me about 250 ukp to tool up for a magnet.
but when i mentioned 6 inch od and 2 inch id they told me its too big for them to make.
this magnet is huge. and i think will have to be home made, unless we can scale it down.
Thinking to Leedskalnin's perpetual motion holder, I cannot help it to bring back the theoretical setup I proposed, with an iron toroid and a magnet inserted as a slice. (http://www.overunity.com/index.php?action=dlattach;topic=133.0;attach=7396)
From Leedskalnin I learn that in this case iron is just a conductor for the magnetic current (a shunt, a short circuit) and doesn't have a neutral point.
In the case I proposed with the toroid, the iron is acting like a pipe, offering just a path where the magnetic current / flux lines (as described by Leedskalnin, north and south magnets or as described by Erfinderin his Natures_Magnet.png) is flowing.
In the case of perpetual motion holder, here is my interpretation (more or less romantic). Once started in motion in the iron core, the "North magnets" and "South magnets" are searching for their pair in whirling motion. In all this whirling motion, they cannot reach eachother, but as long they have a way (path) to continue the search, they will do it. And will use all means to maintain that path. It's like being cursed perpetualy to search for their pair.
That's it. Other views?
i was under the impression that the number of void points ( the one in the middle of each magnet, and the ones where the joins between the magnets) is important to maintain the harmony of this thing, i figured it will inject a field from the coils into the magnet ring, and will pick up back from them the opposite type of field.
and so maybe shorting out all but 1 void via a steel bar, would render it inoperable or very lobsided.
has anyone crunched the numbers on this thing yet, they are all inter related but i cant find the starting point.
I just found a picture that might suggest the rush into void.
Notice flows in opposite direction too?
Source: http://www.goldenmuseum.com/index_engl.html site dedicated to Golden Ratio.
Quote from: BarbosiIn the case of perpetual motion holder, here is my interpretation (more or less romantic). Once started in motion in the iron core, the "North magnets" and "South magnets" are searching for their pair in whirling motion. In all this whirling motion, they cannot reach eachother, but as long they have a way (path) to continue the search, they will do it. And will use all means to maintain that path. It's like being cursed perpetualy to search for their pair.
That's it. Other views?
I wonder if they are actually searching each other out? The only difference between this ring and a bar magnet of eaqual length is the poles connect back together. So in the case of the bar magnet, if you hook four bar magnets end to end, you are in essnece creating a single magnet of equal length and strength (possible room for argument for the strength) to a single bar magnet. The only difference is instead of the magnets generating from a single void, they are passing through four voids. Does this alter them in some way? Recharge them? Give them more strength? I don't know, but it does instantly and simultaneously change their polarity - while continuing in the same direction - away from the "perceived" center point, and out the respective "new" poles. So the north end at the end of a chain of 4 bar magnets is still the same north end as that of just one.
Now if we bend that bar in a circle, we have the disc magnet of erfinders, and a similar contraption to Leedskanlin's PMH (Perpetual Motion Holder). The only difference, instead of four magnets with 8 voids, there is now only two magnets - or three voids (the one central of the bent bar, and one formed at each of the ends of the "keeper"). I don't know if this is important or not.
I think the similarities are close enough to be overlooked between what you and I are saying. The difference I believe comes in that if you have a set of magnets induced into the bar, and continual chase each other looking for their mates, it implies a finite amount of magnets. I am not sure this is the case. With the multiple voids, it leads me to believe there can be "MORE" magnets than were originally induced. It also leads me to believe this is what Leedskanlin was getting at when he said:
"From the above experiment you can see the perpetual motion holder can act as a living thing. It knows which way to swing each magnet. This shows if more magnets are added to a living thing then it can perform things it could not do before."
Do more "voids" equal the ability to hold more magnets? I don't know. Probably not, the material will hold the same amount of magnets it is capable of before it spills out of the material. However, in the case of performing a functioning circuit, it does provide more opportunity for reversal of pole charge - while moving in the same direction. I perceive this as more opportunity to induce charge into something. Much like adding coils to cut flux lines.
Maximum,
My thoughts on the magnet are that when the ends are connected the potential is lost and the lines of force between the poles are gone or much weaker. Also, I think that the void is different where north and south unite each magnet as compared to the void separating the poles. One separates and the other unites.
Any thoughts?
QuoteMy thoughts on the magnet are that when the ends are connected the potential is lost and the lines of force between the poles are gone or much weaker.
Bocas,
I don't know, I am exploring this along with everyone else, but let me take a stab at this....
Lets reverse the perspective and analyze it from the perspective of what could
NOT happen if there were
no potential, and the lines of force
were weaker.
If the lines of force were weaker, we should be able to test for this. We could assume that the voltage flowing around (as seen in the PMH from the Matthew Emery link before) the PMH would drop - as can be seen by the amp meter that Emery connected, it did show a drop to about 6 amps while in perpetual state. Since Amperage is the "flow (movement) of electric charge", we could assume that this could be true. However, when the bar keeper is removed, the light bulb lights just as intensely as it did immediately after charging the coils. This can happen even after 6 months. To me, this seems to show a lot of potential - that does not diminish over time (assuming no disturbance). Wikipedia says "Electric potential may be conceived of as "electric pressure". Where this "pressure" is uniform, no current flows and nothing happens. " We know current is flowing because the amp meter says so.
I am not sure how we would test for the force between the poles being gone or weaker, other then a physical force test. In the case of the PMH, the "keeper" is able to sustain between 25 to 30 lbs of force (which is work) depending on size and scale, If the poles were weekend, I would think the top bar would fly off with little to no pressure - possibly even repel the bar since the pull of gravity is exerting its own force on the bar, and without a charge, the bar will at least lay across the top of the "U". Since this force is able to sustain itself over the same 6 months that the charge is flowing, I would have to assume that this is not the case either. Again from the Emery experiment page:
QuoteDespite the idiotic statement oft quoted by some anal retentive physicists and scientists that 'magnets cannot DO work'....a magnet stuck on a refrigerator door that stays there for 10 years has DONE work by resisting gravity. Case closed, magnets CAN do work.
Some will groan but I do notice a correlation with two things Keely wrote, using a hammer to EXCITE some of his devices into operation AND that magnets can have weights added to them and over time their flux density will increase (similar to Leedskalnins' claim of magnets being 'living' and thus amenable to growth).
This further indicates that the forces between the pole do not grow weaker - but can grow stronger.
QuoteAlso, I think that the void is different where north and south unite each magnet as compared to the void separating the poles. One separates and the other unites.
I am inclined to agree with this - as I do not understand what the "void" is in either case. I have seen the "void" between the "individual magnets" described as a "neutral". There would be no movement of north against south if that "neutral" were not there - as the two would occupy the same space. And although I am inclide to agree that the individual magnet's "neutral" seems to "unite" as opposed to "repel", I think ERFINDER lets us in on a bit of a clue:
"Positive charge attracts positive charge and expels negative discharge. Negative discharge repels both negative discharge and positive charge."
The Universal One
If we break this down to thelevel of the individual "magnets" and not just assume the poles on the bar magnet, I think this is saying "Positive seeks positive, and expels ("gives off" as opposed to repel???) negative charge." "Negative charge does not seek negative or positive". I am still trying to wrap my head around this, and I may be misinterpreting it.
Here is Jon DePew's thought on the neutral:
http://www.coralcastlecode.com/id17.html
From the coralcastlecode.com site, this image of the Fleur De Lis is a pretty interesting visual interpretation.
(https://overunityarchives.com/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.coralcastlecode.com%2Fsitebuildercontent%2Fsitebuilderpictures%2Fasmf.jpg&hash=a3eed3a1e7d2f5128bfbaa9a2e92c66933ffb70f)
EDIT - I could have saved myself some work, in reviewing ERFINDERS comments, I found this:
Reason why the number of magnets is important...
Each segment centers a field which extends from the Bloch wall. The Bloch wall the point of stillness, the point where the Creator centers the created, the point between the two poles. Here it can be said that the potentials at the poles represent the total power of the neutral point, that the poles represent the neutral point divided, the neutral point, where one becomes two, and two become three. The neutral and the two extended poles.
Each segment thus has it's own potential (both the potential and frequency of what we falsely call magnetism is extremely high). If people knew how to construct circuits which functioned on the principles of induction versus conduction, from this one change an entirely new way of doing things would be born. Connecting the magnets in series is like connecting batteries in series. More batteries results in more current in the circuit, the same holds true for the magnet segments, as the two are mirrors of one another, just instead of conducting currents you are inducing fields. Through the ring we connect to the wheel work of nature!!!...
...There is a current flowing within the magnet ring, a magnetic current...
But I think it was a worthwhile endeavour talking it through....
EDIT 2... reorganized erfinder's quote to the original order in which he stated it
I have sent an email to Scotty of www.leedskalnin.com to ask for his input into this thread. Hopefully he can help me/us to understand some of Ed's work as he is one who actually did Ed's suggested experiments. And then, in turn, understand more of ERfinder's comments.
I am also rereading "The Secret of Light" by Walter Russell as it was many years ago when I first read it. I feel this is one of Walter Russell's best writings and I will try to share some of its contents soon.
Just wanted to let others know I too was following/learning from this thread.
Kent
Hi All,
RE: ERFINDERS QUOTE "It must be understood that a magnet has four poles, not two! Two poles charge the magnet, and two poles discharge it! There are therefore four vortex! Two of them contract towards the center expressing the gravitive, or concentrative power of Mind Thinking, and the other two expand from the center expressing the radiative, or decentrative power of Mind Thinking. This is demonstrated in the diagram. "
The following diagram of Walter Russell's shows us the 4 poles that ERFINDER is talking about.
http://www.vortexpluswater.com/vortex_basics.htm
Regards,
Nat
Keely's definition of neutral centre
http://www.svpvril.com/definitions.html#NeutralCenter
"Every molecule, every mass, every moving body in space, every solar system, every stellar system, EVERY ROTATORY SYSTEM, is built about a NEUTRAL CENTER. It is the indestructible unit around which all that we recognize as matter is built. Immovable itself, it moves all things. Indestructible itself throughout infinity of time, it creates all things. It produced and preserves the incalculable energy of motion of the entire Universe. It bears the unthinkable burden of the mass of the Universe. It is the most wonderful thing Man has discovered in the Universe since he discovered fire.
........Through its inflow of sympathy, through the solar intermediate, the sun, it receives the life flow from the SUPREME NEUTRAL CENTER that enables it to perpetuate its existence. Thus through the outflow from this Supreme Neutral Center that pivoting point of the Universe controls the existence and motion of not only every stellar, solar and planetary mass in space, but also the rotatory vibration, in every individual molecule, intermolecule, etc. through all the subdivisions of matter, thereby sustaining their existence and motion with the life flow.
..........No machine heretofore constructed has been made with a neutral center. This conception of mechanics has never before dawned on man's thought field. Had this been done, perpetual motion would have become a demonstrated fact. Were a machine so constructed as to use its properties, an introductory impulse would suffice to run it for centuries
Nat,
Thanks for the info, some new sites to mull over.
It appears by the silence that people are reading and thinking...LOL
I too went back through some old links (for barbosi, sorry most of them are dead, rehashes, or irrelevent), and re-read some things trying to get to the base and start with a firm foundation. In my mind it is becomiing apparent that what has been said about mistakenly identifying magnetism, electron flow and electricity is ever more bluring the lines, and I am begining to see all current flow as just an exchange of magnetic field flow - in the coils, in the core, in the air, in the wire - it is all just at various levels of resistance and ease of flow - which I guess is the point.
In checking an old link, I had found an interesting patent by Daniel McFarland Cook (http://my.voyager.net/~jrrandall/CookCoil.htm). I believe the author of the site made a few too many assumptions and that is why he failed to reproduce the experiment, but I have been unable to get my mind off of this and on to anything else for the last few days, so I had to get back to basics of how this device would work - at the "flux" or "field" or "individual magnet" level.
I went back through Leedskanlin's "Magnetic Current" text, several things poped out to me in regards to this thread, the PMH, ERFINDERS diagram, and the Cook pattent. Since all of these deal with flow via induction, that is the areas that caught my attention. In short, there was one basic truth, that seems overly obvious upon first reading, but most of his experiments and remainder of the text deals with this one statement:
"Magnetic currents are made by concentrating. then dividing and then shifting the existing North and South Pole individual magnets from one place to another."
This takes on subtle nuances in his explanations of how flow occurs, but it all revolves around concentration, division, then shifting the flow ( and in many cases the individual poles). This smacks of the point that ERFINDER was pushing with neccesity of the 8 neutrals and instantaneous pole reversals with simultaneous flux flow in, out and within the same plane...we have concentration (the magnet, battery and capacitor), flow (because the magnet is in a circle, all flux flow radiates through the edges of the magnet on the same plane and will be spun), and shifting the flow (I believe all done through the primary and secondaries and makes me wonder if the spinning of the magnet is necessary)
"...When currents reverse they reverse the magnet poles in the coil..."
"...When you were making the small magnets with a single copper wire you wasted too many North and South Pole individual magnets. You only got in the steel wire very small part of the magnets that came out of the copper wire. You are still wasting the North and South Pole magnets. You do not get one-half of the magnets in the steel or iron bar from those which are in the coil.
To get more magnet out of a coil put the coil in steel or iron tube, then the tube outside the coil will be a magnet the same as the coil's core, but the magnet poles will be opposite. it means at the same coil end if the core end is North Pole the tube end will be South Pole. In this way you will get almost again as much magnet out of the coil and in the core and tube. You can do better yet, join one end of the coil's core end with the same metal, joining core with tube. make two holes in end of metal for the coil wire ends to go out, fasten a ring on top, now you have the most effigy client electric magnet for lifting purposes. It wastes no magnets that come from your battery or dynamo..."
"...All currents are made in the same way by filling the coil and iron core with North and South Pole individual magnets and then giving enough time for the magnets to get out and then start over again..."
"...Now you see those little individual magnets ran out of the U shape magnet and ran in the soft iron core, but the soft iron core never held the magnets, it pushed them out..."
"...As soon as those little individual magnets get pushed out of the soft iron core then they run in the coil. When they run in the coil they are in bulk form. The coil's part is to divide those little individual magnets from bulk form in small paths. The coil is not necessary to make magnetic currents. Currents can be made with a single wire. The coil is necessary to increase the amount and strength of the currents..."
"When the magnets that are in bulk form enter the coil then the coil divides them in small paths.... Now the wire in the coil is one continuous magnet. One side of the wire is South Pole and the other North Pole. Now we have those little North and South Pole individual magnets in the wire, but they are not running in the way we want. They are running across the wire. We want the magnets to run through the wire lengthwise, but there is only one way to do it, we have to increase the number of those North and South Pole individual magnets. To do it the coil will have to approach and enter the U shape magnet, but when the coil reaches the middle of the U shape magnet the limit is there so the running of the currents stop. In the core and the coil there is plenty of those little magnets, but they stopped to run through the wire length wise, now they run only across the coil's wire, to make the magnets run in the wire lengthwise again the coil will have to get away from the U shape magnet. As soon as the coil begins to move away from the U shape magnet. then those little North and South Pole individual magnets begin to run again through the wire length-wise, but in opposite direction until the magnets in the iron core are gone."
"...When the individual North and South pole magnets are running through a wire lengthwise they are running in slant and whirling around while running ahead..."
"...It is well known that it is many times easier for the magnets to run in metal than in air, now you see when the magnets run in the wire they hesitate to run out of the wire across the same way as they came in, so more of the new magnets are coming in the wire crosswise, then they can get out crosswise, so they get pushed out through the wire lengthwise. Now you know how the alternating magnetic currents are made..."
"...The reason I call the results of North and South Pole magnet's functions magnetic currents and not electric currents or electricity is the electricity is connected too much with those non-existing electrons. If it had been called magneticity then I would accept it. Magneticity would indicate that it has a magnetic base and so it would be all right.
I know Leedskalnin is a bit basic and simplistic in his descriptions, but to me that seems an ideal re-starting point. I promise my posts will start getting shorter.
Hi,
The key points to read & understand as I see it are (and this is directed at the magnet ring as this appears to be the missing piece of the puzzle):-
1. the definition, concept & process of a neutral point or neutral centre or void or bloch wall or neutral polarity - they are all the same thing to me
2. the concept of path of least resistance
3. magnetic current flows from the north pole to the south pole
4. the definition and process of implosion and how that relates to vortices
If one can focus on these 4 points and apply it to the magnet ring then it should slowly become clear what the process is and how it works as it has for me. Mind you I dont think I understand all of it but some of it. And a lot more research is still required.
It will also help to temporarily forget about mainstream principles while applying and thinking about the above points. It may also involve a lot of thinking as it has for me.
It will help to think of the magnet ring as a body of water and to think of the individual magnets like Leedskalnin did and how that relates and forms a vortex.
It appears that this knowledge has been with us for a long time but the information is scattered all over the place and people have been refering to the same things but using different names and hence can be confusing.
Regards,
N.
This will help also. Build the vortex bottle using two water bottles and give it whirl a couple of times. Then relate that to the magnet ring and think of the magnet ring as a body of water and the individual magnets are floating in there.
http://jnaudin.free.fr/html/vtxbottle.htm
To clarify point 4....when i say implosion .....i mean implosion & explosion (centripetal & centrifugal)
Hi all,
Done a bit of re-reading and some thinking. I'll try to keep it short and eventually split on several postings, to give opportunity for challengers for feedback on specific topics.
Please consider the magnet model presented by Erfinder and shown again by Nat from Russell's works. I think the shape is to simplistic hence wrong. It has to be different at Equator to resemble somehow with platonic solids (ideally a sphere). I'll live here and for people they doubt my statement I can give more reasons. For now, just think and as model you have the attached picture. The vertical spikes are the in-vortex funnels and the middle is the neutral point with the out-going twirls (Equator). I'm not challenging all the model but just the shape at Equator. And this explains the field lines at Equator ALL AROUND, not only two bumps with arbitrary locations.
I think I chose wrong the words. I meant a sphere is a more simple shape than Russell's. Or maybe the diagram is shown static? the two horizontal funnels are rotating along the Equator? (between "Cancer" and "Capricorn" lines) That would make sense to me.
Again, I don't challenge the Principle, but just the Equator.
Trivialization of this concept: To test North & South field lines, take a magnet bar with iron fillings spread on a paper. The field lines have the same shape if you roll the magnet in such way to expose the every point of Equator to iron fillings. This of course cannot be proved if centrifugal field has nothing to do with the material world. Is this the case?
Examples from nature:
- the apple is round at its equator.
- More drastic but pretty graphic is the tornado and how it looks at the point where implosion becomes explosion (see pictures). Explosion is equally distributed all around not only in two static "trumpets".
Regards.
PS: If this is not relevant for the apparatus principles, just let me know. As comprehension might take some time, I'm curious about other aspects as well.
EDIT:
Just found another Russell representation (third picture) showing the belt like shape at equator
Hello everyone.
I found and interesting link that seems to be in line with this thread.
http://www.vortexscience.com (http://www.vortexscience.com)
check out the section under Magnetism...
forgive me if it has been posted before
Thanks,
am1ll3r
Don't know if this will make it on the board but here goes. First post here. Have been reading this thread almost since the start as a guest. I have been working on this concept device for 2 weeks with a friend of mine. We have been looking at designs and theorys related to some of this through Teslas work for many years. I for one think there is truth in between the cracks that most people simply step over(hehe).
I have not decided if we will be posting images of the device yet since we are worried about getting beat up on by the smart guys here. We do have a model and I will be happy to share ideas with others that also have a model built.
Since magnets seem to be the main concern I will say that we have used magnets from old MFM hard drives that were full hight models(40 meg models). The magnets within these drives were the right size and dimentions. If they work?? Well that is what we will find out.
The nice thing for myself and my friend working on this is we have very little background in terms of higher education and mainstream teachings. We are rather self taught by our own research with Tesla, Meyl, Eirc Dollard, etc.
By the way I'm wondering how many of you are actually trying to do this experiement to learn and how many are simply here to debate with eachother. It seems to me the point of the information presented was to understand it and build it. Debate and questioning the accuracy of the original poster seems off base. I have chosen to simply believe the possiblity of some thing new or misunderstood.
Point being a simple man like myself has been able to skim plenty of info here to move forward and make progress. You guys that have been here for while should go back to page 8 and start again in my opinion if you have not already!! Way to much looping going on here I think.
Pehaps simple faith like what you might have for a god is more appropriate when taking a step such as this. It sort of reminds me of the last Jones movie where he had to take a leap of faith to cross the canyon. He took the step and all of a sudden there was perfect clarity.
Anyway nuff said. Great to be here with you guys!! Very exciting times we live in for sure. Love the thread for the most part and can't wait to see whats around the next bend.
Hi All,
My impression from russells diagram is along the lines that he was trying to illustrate the concept of how it worked. I dont think it was ever intended to show what it looks like. It's the concepts that are important.
From what I gather the bloch wall actually looks like a cube of some sort
Regards,
N.
Hi Turbosetch,
Please post your pictures of your device once built as it will be interesting to get your feedback.
Cheers,
N.
I apologize if I offend anyone by insisting to understand.
In my defense:
Quote from: Erfinder on February 21, 2007, 02:49:48 PM
... Please don't attempt construction until you know what the outcome will be. ...
Quote from: Erfinder on March 28, 2007, 05:15:37 AM
... You all are missing the point! And that is how flux behaves when the poles void, how the flux moves, and how we interact with this flux. This is not a free energy machine, it is a teaching tool, it was designed to condition the mind to recognize certain fundamental truths which have been up till now overlooked!
...
Try as you may without first having the fundamentals burned into your soul, you will fail!
Quote from: Erfinder on March 23, 2007, 02:42:06 PM
...
Within Mind exists all knowledge and power.
...
Quote from: Erfinder on February 28, 2007, 05:46:56 AM
...
Please take note of the fact that I am to the best of my ability trying to use a language everyone can understand. One where people of many different backgrounds may participate in this discussion. (Attracting that which is like myself unto myself, and expelling mainstream! One must also live the principles!)
...
Every aspect of this is important, the machine is a tool which demonstrates certain principles, if you cannot understand the principles then you should not build the machine! This is the point I have been trying to make since I first began posting.
...
Don't believe me like a blind follower, study and discover these truths for yourselves!
...
I know what all of you want! But I will not give it to you, as you don't need me to give it to you. Soon some of you will begin to understand some of the things which have been said so far, and will be glad that I let you think for yourself and not spoon feed you what you wanted to hear.
...
Thanks to everyone who posted links and information.
Best regards.
No need to apologize Barbosi.....this is a learning curve for everyone including myself....Erfinder said it took him 2 years ...day & night...to understand this....
I would like to find out "exactly" what the make up of the corel castle rocks were. They said there was large poles that were used to hang things from not lift.
The comment of bassalt being a mag channel under the right situation has made me realize just what has been offered here. I encourage all of you here to save "every" page and drawing for later reference then throw the physics book out the window and start from scratch. Take a magnet and with another one, map its field. put the next one on and map it again. Then the next and the last. Spin it and get an idea of what is going to happen. Visualize it. Now add the electric coils and do it again.
I am going to say both (diamagnetic,paramagnetic) as I'm not sure which is the right one without going back through a lot of posts. Paramagnetic is what I thing is right. Now you have a platform of it with a spinning field on at least three equal points, what is it. A levitation device. So I might be wrong but..... could be how two ton rocks were made to move without any real effort.
Thanks so much Erfinder, you have really give my brain a spin and allowed me to see into a void that I have never traveled before.
sugra
Hi All,
I found this diagram of Keelys the other day. It is interesting to compare this with Erfinders drawing
Cheers
N.
http://www.svpvril.com/Cosmology/cos9.html
Reference
Quote from: nat1971a on April 05, 2007, 07:40:31 PM
http://www.svpvril.com/Cosmology/cos9.html
Reference
Thanks Nat, this and Keelys' diagram inspired me and made the click.
I was looking for a graphical representation of vortexes in a magnet and I didn't see the diagram as a conceptual drawing. Is a diagram with Mind's operating process. What I was looking for was like to visualize someone's faith and asking to draw it . Or drawing how you invent a thing then how you relax and enjoy the creation.
This is how Mind works people! Remember, Mind = the only substance...?
Barbosi,
No problem. It is very important that everyone understands the concepts otherwise this knowledge will become lost again.
Cheers
N.
d
Regarding ERFINDER's attachment of Russell's drawing. Am I missing the point? Isn't this a representation of the earth? Isn't this discussing how the "flux" (gotta find a better word) flows into, around, and about the poles and the equator? I notice many references to the earth - the Tropic of Cancer, and the Tropic of Capricorn. These are the bounding lines in the middle.
Of particular interest is the detail that is hard to see. He has identified the Radius of the East - West Vortices as being 23? 27' 9". I am not entirely sure of the significance of this radius, but it is eerily close to the 23.5" tilt of the earth on its axis. Interestingly this measurement occurs along the horizontal, but with gyroscopic precession, I can see this being translated into a longitudinal tilt. I found that the official term is obliquity of the ecliptic, and is officially 23? 27' 8.26". SO I presume that is the significance of the radius - LOL.... ;D
Closer examination revealed one Radii to be written as 23? 27' 8" and the other as 23? 27' 9". Interestingly enough, they switch positions from east to west vortex.
Also, in looking at the radius of the North - South vortices, it appears to be 20" (seconds). It could be 20?, but the graphic is so compressed, it is hard to tell. I am thinking the 20? makes more sense, as this might account for Magnetic Variation, and correspond to the "wandering" of Magnetic North. In a quick search, the closest I could find was a 537km discrepancy between True and Magnetic North (another site stated 5? 40" in 1994 in the UK). I found 1 degree = 69 miles, 1 minute = 1.15 miles and 1 second = 0.02 miles (just over 100 feet) - http://nationalatlas.gov/articles/mapping/a_latlong.html
By my rough addition, 5? 40" = 391 miles - or 629.25ish km. So that again seems a pretty strange coincidence.
Moreover, in his notes, there are many Celestial references. Among these are the Oblateness of the earth, the correlation to a true sphere and its poles aligning with the axis of rotation, or the equator aligning with the Ecliptic. Since there is an "Ecliptic Expansion" marked on the diagram. This Link (http://journals.cambridge.org/download.php?file=%2FIAU%2FIAU2004_IAUS223%2FS1743921304005265a.pdf&code=743789e6620b4911bb451e4f5abcf862) leads me to believe that this is Corona Discharge and and Borealis Displays.
Lastly, in looking at the lines of flux, it appears that these are in orbit around a sphere. The fact that all the lines say "South by way of West" is confusing, but I assume it details South Magnets, flowing westward. In short - the "discharge" that Russell details is equivalent to what ERFINDER quoted prior:
"Positive charge attracts positive charge and expels negative discharge..."
As we see the only opposition to this labeled as "North by way of East" on the southern vortex. But now I am confused as to what the North and South pole really are, and are they attracting or repelling "positive" or "negative" magnets? Is there even really such a thing? Are there really charges, or just opposite flows?
Time to go ponder this....
A glimpse into the void???
http://www.svpvril.com/svpcosmo/cosmos1.html
Be sure to step through each page.
Interesting hand-dandy reference guide:
http://www.svpvril.com/images/MatEn2.html
Now if I could just wrap my head around all of this....
This started out so familiar and in the end, my head hurt - but in a good way....
http://www.svpvril.com/Fig_1.html
Once again, be sure to step through
Last one, getting punchy due to the late hour....
We, thinking we are physical beings only, see mass and matter all around us needing to be moved by the exertion of work. The truth is, this is not the truth. This is an illusion. The universe is constructed of Mind Stuff coalesced by spinning around vacuous centers (vortices). These centers can be induced into motion by THOUGHT. In more ordinary terms these can be manipulated by music by virtue of its harmonics. I donate the following knowledge to the world to use or abuse as it sees fit.
Dale Pond, February 22, 1999
Exd 3:14 And God said unto Moses, I AM THAT I AM: and he said, Thus shalt thou say unto the children of Israel, I AM hath sent me unto you.
This verse is finally begining to make some sense.
I would like to ask a simple question again. Who is actually working on a model? Please PM me if you want to remain silent. We had some thing strange happen last night that I cannot understand and would like to discuss it with some one else to see if in fact they have experienced the same effect.
To sum it up for a moment while fooling with a strong magnet around the coils the device began to hum without any power applied. It was very very suttle and was difficult to determin the point of origin besides the whole device. It was sort of like a 60hz hum you would get from a transformer but higher pitched. When we hook test equipment up to measure for voltage we cannot recreate the effect. It seems to change the tuning perhaps. This model isn't even built its just the magnets and coils right now. No switching no motors. We do have the capacitors (we used 2).
Should I be worried about any harmful potentials with this sort of device. I don't see how any voltage could be steped up that much with this small a transformer should we be creating actual flow here??!!
Did you see this movie?
No. Should I? :)
Doctor Strangelove I presume from some checking. Is it good?
Here is an interesting note. Look at figure 3 and figure 5. Hint: Count the contacts.
Hi guy
i am not a prophet
but what does that mean to you ?
Stand up for LOVE !
Frequency to me is the key to this. 3 of them to be specific. I don't want to say any thing more until I know what I am talking about.
In the workshop right now working on some ideas.
http://www.padrak.com/ine/WALTON696.html
ERFINDER,
I am unable to find Tesla's Patent #568177 "Apparatus for producing Ozone". I have tried the US Patent online search tool with no results, and the Keely listing of his patents - still with no results. Is this a possible typo, or is this found in some source not online.
My mistake - I found it - had the wrong link selected. All four patents are listed on Keelynet.
http://www.keelynet.com/tesla/
Interestingly, couldn't find them in the US Patent database....hmmm....
Thanks for your help - and for this thread. I am really begining to see the whole of creation in a new light - thank you for that.
It was posted before and I found it excelent: http://www.pat2pdf.org/
Punch the pat# and get the pdf.
HAPPY EASTER EVERYONE!
Hello all,
I was referred to a website, and I found an interesting page:
http://www.revelatorium.com/ChaptA.htm
Attached are some images regarding magnet flux.
Regards,
Omar
Hello all,
Again another reference to the previously mentioned site.
http://www.revelatorium.com/Chapt05.htm
I find the heart shape very relevant to all of this. Notice the heart shape in the pink lines. Both heart are overlaid inverted, perfect balance.
Attached are heart images.
Regards,
Omar
The comment erfinder made stands out very clear. "BALANCE". Take two tanks of water side by side, one twice the size of the other. Open a path between the two and it will equalize. Same with a pair of batteries. Same with magnets, it will find the equal point between and sit there, ect ect ect. Create an imbalance and nature will do its darnest to equalize it back. Such a wonderful journey this is turning out to be.
suggie
Well all I'm lost once again with this thing. Spent 18 hours messing with this model and something like this one. Can't explain the hum we can create and can't seem to measure anything with the exisitng equipment.
On another thought back to the main design here I have considered building a electronic switch that could do the flip flop required in this model and have a controllable rate of switching.
Taken from another idea but I think could be adapted as the concept seems to be the same:
The 555 timer chip is wired completely norm ally as a slow-running oscillator. It is in a standard "hot" electricity circuit which is grounded. For that reason, the output of the 555 chip on Pin 3, is fed to an opto-isolator, which keeps the two circuits completely separate. The 555 chip just switches the 2N3584 transistor hard on, which in turn, triggers the SCR into it's ON state, where it stays until the power in the capacitor has been transferred to the batteries as a massive pulse. When the voltage on the capacitor drops far enough, it starves the SCR of current, which causes the SCR to turn OFF, where it stays until triggered again by the 555 chip.
Quote from: turbosetch on April 07, 2007, 11:36:42 PM
...
On another thought back to the main design here I have considered building a electronic switch that could do the flip flop required in this model and have a controllable rate of switching.
...
Hi turbosetch,
I recommend that you first fully understand how Erfinder's device works, before attempting to modify the design.
Regards,
Omar
I have said this a million times " semi-conductors are nothing like mechanical switches".
Electronics are lossy, they produce heat the lowest form of energy and can't handle high voltage spikes. You may as well add a bunch of resistors while your at it, that may help-Not.
Just found (http://www.svpvril.com/bjerknes.html) an article about "Hydrodynamic Analogies to Electricity and Magnetism".
Following Keely's Laws of Attraction and Repulsion, Dr. Bjerknes presented at Electrical Exhibition in Paris an aparatus intended to show the fundamental phenomena of electricity and magnetism by the analgous ones of hydrodynamics.
Some vibrating spheres were shown acting like magnets and also in some experiments it looks like Leedskalnins North and South independent poles.
Note:
Keely's Laws of Attraction and Repulsion:
Law of Attraction
"Juxtaposed coherent aggregates vibrating in unison, or harmonic ratio, are mutually attracted."
Law of Repulsion
"Juxtaposed coherent aggregates vibrating in discord are mutually repelled."
In electric terms, applying a random (discord) frequency to a resonator there is not much success. However at resonance (concord) the energy spent is minimal.
Any corelation to paramagnetism and diamagnetism? Any chance that a magnet to exhibit both of them and in relation with another magnet, function of relative position to have concord or discord (attract / repel)?
From unification of 4 magnets we got a single [round] void point [neutral by J Keely] [Mind by W Russell]. Not only a point but a whole circle which is "unity" and "infinity" in sacred geometry.
How could work the principle "receive for regiving" in this situation?
Barbosi,
You got me thinking. I started to review again, it seems the line of thinking should head towards "what is a field", "how does it work, and what can it do in relation to the magnet and the other fields"?
"Receiving and regiving" seems to be the entire operating structure of this circuit. It is all about inducing current from one coil to the next, creating fields, colapsing them, and using them to perform work through strictly electrical means.
Here is what I found:
Quote from: erfinderI repeat this is not a generator. The circuit is designed to concentrate fields, conduct fields, and causes the fields to preform work on the voided magnet ring as they pass through the circuit. The secondary windings together make up a capacitor! (Think Bifilar) A tuned HV capacitor! The battery provides the the circuit with necessary currents (for best results a normal 12 volt automotive battery is suggested). That which is taken from the battery is put back in the battery. The primary transforms the current into one field, the secondary another. The arrangement of secondary windings produce a field which is more electrostatic than magnetic, this field resonates with, and adds to the field of the primary. When the fields of the primary and secondary collapse they return to the source, the secondary returns to the battery, and primary to the HV capacitor.
P.S. All currents alternate, even DC! You should think of DC as Extreme high frequency AC. DC currents must alternate or there would be no motion, the currents would not flow!!! Its all about fields.
...........
Grumpy,
We should talk, I like that you mentioned Leedskalnin. His wheel, and my magnet ring are one in the same, there is no difference in function, only in shape of magnets. Excellent investigating! Now you must try and understand how his wheel worked, you do this and you are light years ahead of the rest, and in a better position to help others. Also I like your mentioning Dr. Stefan Marinov, (electric motor without magnetic B-Field) getting warm!
Ask yourselves why Tesla only produced machines which operated at high frequencies, and high voltages!!!!! DEAD GIVEAWAY!!!! Stop thinking discharge!!! Start thinking Stress (dielectric stress maybe?!?!?!?) At the frequencies Tesla was using BACK EMF PERMIATED EVERYTHING!!!!! High frequencies solidify space, according to Tesla!!! At the voltages Tesla was using the stress (pressure) on space (aether) was ENORMOUS!!!. Patent No. 568,176 page 2, paragraph 15 reads:
"The secondary of L which constitutes the source of currents of high frequency which may be applied to many useful purposes, as for electric illumination, the operation of Crooke's tubes, or the production of high vacua."
"OR THE PRODUCTION OF HIGH VACUA!!!!!!!!"
our limited thinking has us limiting this last statement to vacuum tubes...... Friends Tesla was talking about space itself, anywhere any space can be brought to a state of high vacua!!!!!
Use the force, uh I mean field,
The BACK EMF FIELD. THE FIELD OF DREAMS!!!!!
EMF = PARAMAGNETISM
BEMF = DIAMAGNETISM
Quote from: Grumpy
Erfinder is right on the money.
The resulting field, which will usually penetrate all materials (actually it can be trapped and you get some sort of wierd non-radiating result) will be lobed due to the bloch walls of the magnet segments. The coils at 90 degrees will cause this field to twist. I am guessing that a true rotation of this field will not occur, but I am not sure at this point. On second thought, it will rotate. Anyway, this field has "momentum" characteristics and has been linked to gravity, yet its functionality still escapes modern physics. I need to build it to complete my understanding of it. Anything else is just a guess.
Magnetic field is a standing closed field. This is the wrong "harmonic" as Erfinder would put it. All magnets have a frequency, but I do not know how to determine this. It is very limited compared to the field that Erfinder is talking about. there are actaully two potentials at right angles to each other. In particular terms of Einstein, one potential represents time and the other is space, but the time one has ben shown to exist without the space one - therefore the time one is considered primary. The space potential will be in the center of the rotor and wrap around the ring. The time one will be all around the ring and perpendicular to the axis. I am not positive which one he is stimulating - perhaps both.
Charlie - Kinetic is secondary to the potential that creates it. There exists only the potentials.
You must have potential of male and female to have a flow. (work of Walter Russell)
You can use the potentials to create a region of high vacuum or pressure. Ion pumps are used to create extremely high vacuum.
I believe that 4 magnetic segments are required for the given arrangement - not that variations would not work - but you would need to know the concepts well to adjust the system.
Will take a little time to put this together.
Oro,
I think I understand and if I am off base why don't you correct me. All the switch represents with its 24 poles are a timing which creates a frequency. Even Er has stated in previous posts here the mechanical aspects of this device are not required. Magents and coils is what he said. As I have been working on this I have been seeing the relations to other designs.
Oro how many of these have you built so far?? I have 2 on the bench now one with some variations. I have one that seems to have a mind of its own and gets angry when you get magnetic fields around it.
I have read this entire thread 3 times now. Where are all the builders it seems we are alone.
In a nut shell I think this model does not have to have a mechanical switch but rather a electronic one. Er speaks of frequency, he also speaks of RPM. 24 points tied together as they are here at a certain RPM which is stated 135 RPM, leads to a frequency of switching which can be duplicated with less energy consuming parts than an actual switch.
One way or another I am trying what I can. Er has left us enough to play with and play is what I will do. I wasn't born smart like some people.
Hello turbosetch,
I am nobody to correct you, but Erfinder has stressed many times that this device is a learning tool, nothing else. Thus, it would be appropiate to construct it faithfully to preserve the lesson being taught. After you have built it once as originally planned, you will be able to learn what is being taught, and then move to the next step. My point is, why complicate things with a timer when you can leave it simple for the purpose of learning. In the end of course you may do as you will, but will you understand the lesson? I know very well this device can run on a timer, I asked Erfinder myself long ago.
I applaud your efforts, but I prefer to do things with a clearer vision. Learning the basics is a part of this. This is why Erfinder has given us bits of information on a step-by-step basis. He genuinely wants us to learn, not replicate blindly.
You have taken the reverse route to learning the lesson present by this device. I am trying to point you to the proper direction, but you seem fixed on doing things your way and not the way the teacher intended. You need to listen to the teacher. The teacher is Erfinder. And he has told us numerous times, not to try to build the device if we don't understand what is going on.
I am in the learning phase just as you are. You probably know more than I do about this. So don't take my advice as a personal offense, I just don't want anybody getting lost on the way. Please be patient and read well what Erfinder has written for us.
Sincerely,
Omar
Quote from: turbosetch on April 09, 2007, 02:20:25 AM
I think I understand and if I am off base why don't you correct me. All the switch represents with its 24 poles are a timing which creates a frequency. Even Er has stated in previous posts here the mechanical aspects of this device are not required. Magents and coils is what he said. As I have been working on this I have been seeing the relations to other designs.
Oro how many of these have you built so far?? I have 2 on the bench now one with some variations. I have one that seems to have a mind of its own and gets angry when you get magnetic fields around it.
I have read this entire thread 3 times now. Where are all the builders it seems we are alone.
In a nut shell I think this model does not have to have a mechanical switch but rather a electronic one. Er speaks of frequency, he also speaks of RPM. 24 points tied together as they are here at a certain RPM which is stated 135 RPM, leads to a frequency of switching which can be duplicated with less energy consuming parts than an actual switch.
One way or another I am trying what I can. Er has left us enough to play with and play is what I will do. I wasn't born smart like some people.
Omar,
Fair enough. I, if you cannot tell by now learn from example. When Er says to not build until we understand, that is a problem. This whole thing can be a bit confusing. In one respect the model is to teach yet on the other hand we should understand first. Honestly I'm kind of sorry I started to post here after weeks of being a fly on the wall.
I'm not sure why most of us are here. I will tell you this much, I'm not here for money, fame, or the quest for free energy. When I wake up in the morning I go to work. I do the same job every day. When I work on projects like this it fills a void inside me. I don't know why I do what I do, perhaps its to understand anything I can.
This sort of discovery science (or whatever) is what makes we want to live. I'm sorry if I was a bit harsh in my last message. Its possible I may never understand what Er or anyone else says he wants to teach but I will wake up every morning and try.
I would say its possible that I am confused as to what the very lesson to be learned is here.
Thanks anyway for the good words.
Hello turbosetch,
I understand what you are saying more than you know. I myself am a wage slave, and I also learn by exploration. But throughtout the years I have learned to tame my exploratory nature, and follow instructions, just because it is a shorter path to a goal.
Like yourself, I only research this technology because of an inner calling. I want to prove scientifically, for myself at least, that God exists. I know such a thing as free energy does not exist, there is only a conversion of energy. And that energy comes directly from God. I tell you this as an ex-atheist who discovered that life is too grand to be a coincidence.
Sincerly,
Omar
Quote from: turbosetch on April 09, 2007, 04:20:21 AM
Omar,
Fair enough. I, if you cannot tell by now learn from example. When Er says to not build until we understand, that is a problem. This whole thing can be a bit confusing. In one respect the model is to teach yet on the other hand we should understand first. Honestly I'm kind of sorry I started to post here after weeks of being a fly on the wall.
I'm not sure why most of us are here. I will tell you this much, I'm not here for money, fame, or the quest for free energy. When I wake up in the morning I go to work. I do the same job every day. When I work on projects like this it fills a void inside me. I don't know why I do what I do, perhaps its to understand anything I can.
This sort of discovery science (or whatever) is what makes we want to live. I'm sorry if I was a bit harsh in my last message. Its possible I may never understand what Er or anyone else says he wants to teach but I will wake up every morning and try.
I would say its possible that I am confused as to what the very lesson to be learned is here.
Thanks anyway for the good words.
Hi turbosetch,
I appreciate your tenacity on building things and I have an idea that might suit all of us in our search (it serves also the principle ?receive for regiving?).
What do you say to save your current work for later when we all have a better understanding and meanwhile using your craftsmanship try and build much simple things. I say simple for simple concepts although I am convinced the construction itself might be challenging. We all know we need to understand Leedskalnin's Perpetual Motion Holder and I think very few of us (if any) built one. Myself I wish to have one to play with and to find answers to questions. It looks impossible that two iron pieces can hold indefinitely together without glue and no additional energy applied to them and in top of this to produce energy. It is not much energy delivered hence ordinary people and scientists have no look at this. But this is a perpetuum mobile.
If you find intriguing enough this simple device and you have the will and materials to build it, I personally would consider sharing this experience with us more relevant and helpful than many other sites that published successful replications. The reason is you could give feedback in almost real time to any question we may have and together we can have a common understanding on the principles.
Reference:
http://www.leedskalnin.com/
http://www.keelynet.com/energy/emery.htm
http://www.keelynet.com/unclass/magcurnt.txt
In essence all you need is:
iron or soft steel bar one and one half inch in diameter (see references for details)
two aluminum spools six inches long and big enough for the bar to go in, with 1500 turns of 16 gauge insulated copper wire.
a car battery
See for yourself if this Perpetual Motion Holder is real and let us know how it performs. Questions will follow for sure.
What do you say can you help us?
Regards.
PS: I recommend everyone the movie ?The Prestige? about Tesla as an episodic appearance but with his role (discovery) at the core of the play. I've seen it 3 times now and I still got the feeling I didn't get all the messages. David Bowie is playing Tesla's character.
Quote from: barbosi on April 09, 2007, 11:58:37 AM
PS: I recommend everyone the movie ?The Prestige? about Tesla as an episodic appearance but with his role (discovery) at the core of the play. I've seen it 3 times now and I still got the feeling I didn't get all the messages. David Bowie is playing Tesla's character.
Hi Barbosi,
I saw the movie a while ago. I must say I liked it more than I thought I would. Of course the part I most like is the appearance by Tesla. In the special features of the DVD more is said about him.
Regards,
Omar
Barbosi, It is very strange that you bring up Ed here. My friend / partner in magnetics has been looking at Ed's work for the last week with wide open eyes. I have read Ed's paper and thats about it. Since this is right in line with what my partner is working on I will build the device and document it. Its a win win for us all it sounds like. Depending on parts we can have something by the end of the week maybe. I will let you know how things go.
I got an email from Er and he has cleared things up for me a little so I will put a hold on the model here and try to understand a little more. It sure is tough to put your hands in your pockets and read a bit some times. I just get so excited after I read just a little then I want to go and proove the concept!!
Oro,
Sounds like we are very much the same with our inner motivating drive!! Sure is a good group here so far.
Quote from: turbosetch on April 09, 2007, 03:33:53 PM
Oro,
Sounds like we are very much the same with our inner motivating drive!! Sure is a good group here so far.
Hello turbosetch,
This forum has all types of people, thankfully most of the people contributing on this thread are open minded. I think its about time we humans wake up from this dream state we call life, and realize the truth about many things.
Ed Leedskalnin was right on about many things. You will not waste your time learning his works in depth. Barbosi pointed you to a couple of good links regarding Leedskalnin. You can also type Leedskalnin on
Google Video and on
Youtube to see videos.
Regards,
Omar
Maximumgravity1,
I'm glad you posted some quotes that made me look for other facts.
It's about Dr. Stefan Marinov motor that works without any aparent magnetic filed, just pure electric current as defined in mainstream science. Although it's working, it's proof of how waistful humans can be. It makes you be hapy that our electric motors use magnetic field and save you energy.
Another think it proves is the electric current is just one side of the story, or just another manifestation of a more simple, logical, unifying energy.
And yet another visual proof of what Erfinder (and not the only one) said about DC: It's rather a high frequency AC (Frequency maybe about infinite ?...?). This motor works with either AC or DC.
Judge for yourselves at http://www.electricstuff.co.uk/bbmotor.html
For reference is attached just a sketch with the motor construction. A big fat short which keeps the shaft in motion.
PS: Grumpy, are you still arround?
Yes.
Quote from: Grumpy on April 09, 2007, 05:11:55 PM
Yes.
I know you were ahead to [m]any of us.
Any thoughts on the topic? What we are still missing (not required to spell out things for us, just your concerns)?
Regards.
He hasn't built it and until he or someone else does, it is unproven.
Walter Russell, Ed Leedskalnin, and Nikola Tesla all knew this and they proved what they said was true by building devices that worked.
For some humor:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BMjSQmz1VHM
or better
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wvRzWYCZ2e0
I bought some steel rods and straight bar tonight at my local home improvement store. I am going to try to find some wire at the local Radio Shack tomorrow. I want to play with both Leedskalnin's PMH and the concept of some transforming coils with a PMH device. If I cant find the wire at the Local Radio Shack, I will have to order some online, but hope to have something assembled in a day or two. BTW, if anyone is interested, there is pretty decent iron bar/rod supplies through blacksmithing/ferrier supply places online. Unless you are locked in a city, chances are you will be able to find a local ferrier (horseshoer) service that will be able to help with some basic shaping and raw materials. I found a few places on-line that sell bar and rod in 80" lengths. Most are between $2.25 - $8 per 80" piece. So the raw materials are not that expensive (although there is a shipping surcharge on iron, and it is heavy so freight could add up). If, like me, you don't have torches laying around, or don't have access to them at your work, this is where the ferrier/blacksmith/metal fabricator will most likely come in handy, and most any thing basic can be cut or shaped (i.e bent into a "U" ) for a few dollars.
Hi,
Heres a pic of eds PMH.
N.
And a drawing
Maximumgravity1,
I admire your determination. I'm so glad you accepted the challenge. Many of us for diferent reasons cannot do what you are up to. Please keep us up to date with your results and no matter the results, I'm sure you'll be assaulted with questions. Please be prepared to post pictures and video clips.
Thanks for your efforts.
Erfinder,
I want nothing more then to understand the lesson. I am still lost in what your trying to teach. The numbers mean some thing as I see them with Ed's work and many others yet I seem to not be able to make the connection. Would it be fair to say that myself anyway am not able to grasp the concept?
I will go back again and read all you have posted and make further notes. The riddles here are perplexing to me. I for one am not looking to be spoon fed but perhaps you could simplify things for the simple minded.
I want to understand my heart is in the right place but frustraition is what I am fighting right now.
I guess I will fade back until I one day understand the meaning of this all.
Thank you for what you are trying to do, I appreciate it.
Hello all....This is Scotty from Leedskalnin.com...I felt my ears twitchin' so i thought i'd drop in....If anyone would like to know about the pmh, i would be glad to answer...as i have done at OU.com before.
I also have a full spectro analysis that i had done on the coral from Ed's castle posted on my site...I too was curious so Matt Emery sent me some...It was tested at my workplace (a steel foundry) where we have a spectro lab.
I have also had the a pmh tested with a gauss meter quite extensively and will be posting pics on my yahoo group soon...
The point with the pmh by Ed himself is that there is a small current circulating in the metal...The circulating current causes the same effect on a small needle as the current in a copper wire does.
The pmh obeys the right hand rule of electricity, except that Ed says that the South pole individual magnets run from the south pole prong to the north pole prong, and the North pole individual magnets run from the north pole prong to the south pole prong.
Each knid of magnet particle run in a right hand twist against each other.
When these particles are in a battery, they have the want to push away from their own terminal because many of the same pole are near each other. When the connections are made, these magnets obtain pulling power because they are attracted to the opposite kind.
A current carrying wire does not have concentric circles of magnetism surrounding it.
If a foot long copper wire is placed in an E/W position, connecting East to batt pos and West end of wire to batt neg, (put batt south of wire) then the whole length of the North side of the wire is a North pole and the whole length of the wire is a South pole on the south side.
The reason for this is the centrifugal force that throws the magnets out of their right hand twisting path as they interact with the copper atoms and the other kind of magnet running against them.
Lenz's law is caused by the North and South pole individual magnets running in a right hand twist.
There are always excess magnets in any wire that come from the Earth's field, but they are not facing the right way and so will not run..They point accross the wire.
When the battery is connected the magnets build up and any excess magnets in the wire are forced TO TURN ON THEIR AXIS.
It is well known that you have to move a coil through a field to get power, and the sine wave shows how the magnets build up to a maximum for that particular field, wire and coil size ect. When the polarity reverses it shows that the individual N and S pole magnets have flipped on their axis and now run the other way, which is demonstrated in Ed's notes.
Now when you use a square wave into a coil the situation is different. In this case the magnets are dumped into the wire all at once and are running in a slanted fashion and the centrifugal force is greater...then the current goes off while at maximum, and all the magnets that are in the wire, which at that moment is overloaded with them, try to turn on their axis to face accross the wire as they do when there is no pressure in it...the problem is that there are too many magnets in the wire, and as each magnet turns it wants to seperate from any of the same polarity.
When the magnets were running in the wire they were running head on, but now they try to position themselves tail to tail pointing accross the wire. Because there is too many of them in the wire when the current is switched off at max value they create a large outward burst from the coil in a radiant manner....it is like trying to line up bar magnets very close together with all the north poles one end and the south poles the other end....they will want to spread out....some of the magnets flip so fast that they start to run in the opposite direction...back emf and the higher voltages obtained demonstrate this...so did Tesla.
It all happens in a tiny fraction of a second, probably better if i drew it all up..
Now it's late and i gotta go beddy bye...
Best wishes
Scotty
Quote from: Erfinder on April 10, 2007, 02:49:17 AM
...
Your negative comments don't effect me. It is ignorance which makes us say some of the things that we say! Ignorance of nature's ways, nature's laws! You all would test me, and as usual in these situations I give you yet another gift!
Think for yourselves! Don't listen to them when they say you must experiment! Nature doesn't experiment, if she did your lives would be a living hell!!!
...
Spoon feeding is not my thing! If just 10 of you could begin to comprehend the insights I have brought to this thread, this discussion would go around the world overnight, this would attract others who are further along in their development.
...
Hello Erfinder,
As always, thank you for your patience with us. I know that you have shared a lot, knowledge that take years to acquire. For that I am grateful.
Don't be discouraged by those of the negative kind, they are just on the wrong path. They are only filled with fear. Fear is the only thing that keeps us down. We all need to gather courage. With courage anything is possible.
Please know that if some of us we stay silent a while it is because we are digesting the information and insights you have shared. I believe that those of us that have a positive attitude are doing our best to comprehend your teachings.
Regards,
Omar
Quote from: scotty1 on April 10, 2007, 07:51:53 AM
Hello all....This is Scotty from Leedskalnin.com...I felt my ears twitchin' so i thought i'd drop in....If anyone would like to know about the pmh, i would be glad to answer...as i have done at OU.com before.
Hello Scotty,
Welcome to the thread! Your experience with the PMH is of our interest. I admire your dedication to Leedskalnin's work and replication efforts.
Regards,
Omar
Hello all,
I have read and reread this forum and I must say I cant get enough of it!
I am still trying to grasp the full workings of this device and to help with that I taken all Erfinder's posts and assembled them into one list along with the photos.
http://docs.google.com/Doc?id=dg764fg_1hrmr3w
I know all the threads are important to help us learn but referencing back through 30 pages of posts can get tedious.
Hope this helps ;D
LOL
THanks am1ll3r
i was about to do that as i had done the same thing this morning before work ... just wanted to create an outline - an agenda to learn as i had posted earlier (in accordance with ERFinders direction) ... lol
Thanks again ... :-D
Ok, I am going to just throw this out there, because I feel I am getting close, but lacking a few key points. As is typical, I could be way off, but I am starting to see some correlations in the numbers....
TO get back to basics:
Everything stems from Mind - Mind establishes Spirit - which begins to vibrate/resonate to "do work" for lack of better term. This "work" compiles to form matter. Thus all matter is a vibration or resonant frequency of Mind (all matter is an illusion - but a bit deeper for where I am heading).
In order to manipulate that vibration (matter) at a "higher level" which does not involve brute force, the concept is to "just resonate" at a level which the "brute force" is capable of.
It is quite obvious by now that the concept of ERFINDER's circuit is to teach about resonate harmonics. The idea, as I understand it, is to manipulate (with little effort or force) a "lower" harmonic, so that we can resonate a "higher" harmonic, and achieve "more perceived work" with little to no additional force, other then that which is already supplied by nature. By resonating these harmonics, we are able to achieve an amplification of frequency (vibration), and manipulate the higher frequencies, exactly the same as we manipulate the lower ones, and more importantly - we can do this BY manipulating the lower frequencies. The effects of the lower are simultaneously transferred to the higher. This allows us to achieve a "higher frequency" of "work" from a lower one. Therefore, we only have to impact the lower frequency enough, to create changes up the line, to "tap into" those higher frequencies - thus the perception of "free energy".
I don't know if Leedskalnin?s Sweet Sixteen is two consecutive music octaves or not, but there are some interesting parallels. In scavenging some of the research throughout this thread, I found the following:
QuoteThe Church changed the frequencies for the music scale to steer people away form the truth of Vedic Physic and the 6 healing Frequencies They changed A, 432 to A , 440. D = 288 hz, E= 324 hz, F= 360 hz, G= 384 hz, A= 432 hz, B= 480 hz, C= 540 hz, D= 576 That will help you understand better.
The Geranium wheel has to do with the original scale for music and healing. This also involves sine waves, harmonics and the timing and motion of everything in the universe. This is because we live in a harmonically created universe with music as the key.
http://www.themeasuringsystemofthegods.com/page2.html
There are some very interesting numbers in those frequencies - particularly 360, 432 and 576. 432 is the number that Erfinder repeatedly states is our target frequency, because it resonates on the second octave - and thus provides our ratio of 3:1. 576, coincidentally, is the product of 144 and 4. 144 is the length of our secondary. Multiplying it by 4 is the same ratio Tesla used in his patent that erfinder quoted previously, and for an ideal setup, should be the length of our primary (I am guessing) - or it is possible we are simulating that length - I am still not sure. Moreover, there is a three "note" step between "A" (432) and "D" (576). In the Do, Re, Mi scale - that is So to Do. Again, I may be reading too much into this, but mighty coincidental.
As for the 360, this opens a whole new can of worms - this is coincidentally the number of degrees in a circle. Moreover, when we divide 360 by 16 (Ed's sweet sixteen) it gives an arc angle of 22.5?. This same 22.5 is the entire topic for discussion of the 22.5mm/1" threads. This also is one of the keys to tying in our first and second octaves I am not very good at math, but I believe there has to be a correlation between these two. Most likely in the triangle wedge that is formed in the 16th of the circle, and the resulting base leg of that triangle - the part that would "square the circle". Moreover, I believe it must be relatively "simplistic" (read natural) as this number seems to go back to the Sacred Egyptian measurements as well, and should be discernable by simple observation and basic inductive reasoning. There seems to be a lot more to this then what I am able to wrap my head around at the moment, so for now, I am leaving it until I get more clues.
Finally on this topic of the Sweet Sixteen:
QuoteEd mentioned Sweet Sixteen yet no one understands what this means. This is what it means.
16 X 16 = 256 / 2
= 128 / 2
= 64 / 2
= 32 / 2
= 16 / 2
= 8 / 2
Sweet Sixteen was an indicator that we needed to do the above math, but why? It is clear that the result we end up with do not parallel with what I have already stated, but when you realize that the Tesla Alternator had 16 magnets and Ed's generator has 24, the next step is to do the same thing with the number 24.
24 X 24 = 576 / 2
= 288 / 2
= 144 / 2
= 72 / 2
= 36 / 2
= 18 / 2
= 9 / 2
These seem to break down as fractions of the 16's. 1/2, 1/4, 1/8. 1/16, 1/32, 1/64, etc. This in and of itself is a
squaring (EDIT: doubling) of the denominator. I believe this further solidifies that we are talking about harmonics, and these are resonant frequencies of that harmonic, down the scale on a "manipulatable" level that we have access to. I am not entirely sure as to the reason we square the first number (the number of magnets)
other then we are squaring the numbers of the harmonics. I believe this is probably backwards reasoning, and I believe we are probably squaring the number of magnets for a different reason, and as such, have to square the divisor...Most of the rest of the topics about the octaves makes good sense, and I can see the relationship between the secondary length, the frequency obtained by the RPM (however, no clue how the "arbitrary" RPM numbers were chosen) and finding a "harmonic number" of the speed of light in the octaves. The one that I can find no correlation to whatsoever, is why the octaves are divided by 42, 45 and 48. Maybe I am missing a part of the conversation somewhere and will go back.
Anyway, these are my thoughts, I may be missing something, or may be drawing wrong conclusions, but I feel (in my gut - which I am told to trust) that this is begining to think along the proper lines.
One thing I forgot to add, ERFINDER somewhere along the way stated something about his circuit and Leedskalnin's generator working in a similar manner, but the magnet configuration is different. Moreover, he indicated that we should study Ed's PMH. It appears to me that all of Leedskalnin's magnets are either hooked together in series, or are acting as their own PMH. Since the magnets are V-Shaped, the only part we see sticking out of the concrete ring are the ends - which are touching together. The "V" opens up, and points to the middle of the circle. It appears as if all the magnets are touching at each tip of the "V". What we are seeing sticking out the end of the concrete is the union of two separate "V" legs. If it helps, visualize VVVVVVVVVV times 24, and then wrap them in a circle so the points are sticking to the outside.
This opens some interesting possibilities. Since these are all touching, pole to opposite pole, it does make me believe they are working in series, while at the same time, not voiding their poles (as does erfinders magnetic ring). But at the same time, is creating a void at the junction - which happens to be sticking out of the cement ring.
Moreover, it appears that there are 5 rows of magnets laminated together to form each individual magnet. These 5 magnets are also acting in series, increasing the strength of the magnets, and voiding the poles between each plate. Of interest is the 4 lobed ring at the top of the cement circle. It seems to have 4 points driving down into the ring, and splitting every "V" at the 90? mark (conveniently designating N,S, E, W). This ring looks like it could be acting as a PMH - but purely speculation.
Moreover, it appears that Leedskalnin's center rotor is acting as a 6 pole rotary switch - much like erfinders 24 pole switch. The only difference is I don't believe there is any external power source. Of interest from this page again:
QuoteThis is the inner view of the device; you can see the backs of the u magnets. The centerpiece is just to collect the magnetic flux produced by the magnetic array of the device. This flux (These terms are also accurate magnetic current, either even gravity waves) can be collected in an electrostatic capacitor to create a large discharge if required.
http://www.themeasuringsystemofthegods.com/page4.html
Many people have stated the long tube behind this device was a capacitor. Since ERFINDER mentioned that the secondaries in his circuit are mostly electrostatic in nature and acting as capacitors to recharge the battery, while the primary recharges the capacitor, it leads me to believe that we do have the same sort of setup, only the magnets are configured differently, and the voids appear to be powering Leedskalnin's machine directly, while in ERFINDER's they are the "conduit" to escalate the frequency into the next octave.
But again, I could be wrong, still guessing as I don't entirely understand how either of these devices work.
One point I should clarify, as it was late last night, and I believe the brain was getting in the way of the gut....
Anyway, the denominators on Ed's Sweet Sixteen are doubled not squared. Regardless of what the sweet sixteen is exactly, it seems apparent to me that it is a "scale". It works nicely both geometrically and mathematically. By dividing each harmonic by 1/2, it seems apparent that these numbers form a very familiar sequence:
1/2, 1/4, 1/8, 1/16, 1/32, 1/64, 1/128, 1/256, 1/512, 1/1024, 1/2048, 1/4096, 1/8192, 1/16384, 1/32768
This is all 16 numbers. From 128 on up, the geeks among us will begin to recognize these as divisions for RAM. From 1024 up, these are the "true" numbers corresponding to megabytes 1mb=1024kb, 2mb=2048kb, etc. This works nicely with computers, and I see a correlation. In short, this is the binary 1, 0 state that a memory register can be - either true or false - charged, or not charged. They are all factors of 1+1=2. It flows up the scale that 2+2=4, 4+4=8, 8+8=16, etc... The reason I see a correlation is that we have two poles - two charges - to magnets at work. 1pole + 1pole = 2 poles. We have two streams at work, and this is the culmination of the factors of those streams.
This may just be coincidence, but I believe there is a correlation, if we take the 185,000 from Tesla (the speed of flow in a circuit), and divide it by the 13th iteration (1/8192) - we get 185000/8192 = 22.5830078125. This isn't exact, but mighty close to our 22.5 that keeps tying our harmonic levels together as well as our arc segment angle.
Anyway, that might make my "feelings" a little more understandable. I still don't see how it all connects together to make something useful, but I feel it is on the right track to understanding.
***EDIT: one thought that occured to me why we square the number of magnets is it is a litteral "squaring of the circle" - at least a squaring of the magnets that make up the circle...
check out what bruce has to say about harmonics
http://www.scribd.com/doc/6636/Cathie-Bruce-Harmonic-695
he's on the same wavelength.
Hi All,
I've just noticed something bizarre in the following pictures. The formation of the maps represent the shape of ed's generator. There appears to be a relationship of some sort. And somehow I get the feeling it also relates to waters drawing of the 4 squares too.
N.
in the second map drawing one wouldnt notice it unless looking hard for it. quite odd really
Hi All,
Heres my thoughts on the numbers:-
John Harrison (1693-1776)
said " the natural scale of music is associated with the ratio of the diameter of a circle to its circumference i.e pi 3.14.....
"If you consider a complete circle to be one octave"........
....."twelve equal semitons make one octave"
So does this mean that 12 semitons or segments or magnets (arranged in a circle) is an octave.........
http://www.lucytune.com/new_to_lt/pitch_01.html
Regards,
N.
so it appears multiples of 12 produces harmonics
12,24,144,432 etc
Here's my take on the numbers. Sweet sixteen are the 7 tones or elements in the octave which Erfinder says is 3240 Hz. I haven't figured out the difference between 16 x 16 and 24 x 24 yet.
I have two words: Pi, Phi.
Pi is the transcedental number as I said in a previos post.
Phi is the link with our dimensional world. Nature builds all with respect to this number. If there are numbers with certain "power", those numbers are Fibonacci numbers. Fibonacci series is F(N)=F(N-1)+F(N-2), in other words, each Fibonacci number is the sum of the two previous ones: 1, 2, 3, 5, 8, 13, 21, ..., 144, etc.
The Fibonacci numbers and relation with Phi: F(n)/F(n-1) -> Phi when N ->infinite.
With Pi and Phi we got the solution to the "squaring the circle" challenge.
On Phi music scales are created,human body and other living creatures as well, and is the base for arts including architecture (not in our modern times though).
Google for Phi and you'll find plenty of information along with wonderful aritmetic and geometric properties.
I have though my lack of understanding with the link between mathematics involving direct application in engineering. If I don't find the answer for myself, I'll ask here later.
EDIT: I forgot to mention 432[Hz] - square root of 186624[miles/s] - is musical note A or La which is used [to be] by orchestra to accord their instruments. It was mentioned before by Maximumgravity1, but I thought to remind about it, because it is considered a "special" note in the spectrum. With any other note the accord (tunning) of instruments is considered hard to accomplish. Played at once by all instruments, any other note will sound dissonant. Not the case with A (La).
A pretty good website about phi is: http://goldennumber.net/
All,
Here is what I found so far:
In nature it's all about Phi and proportions.
Using Phi and proportions of Phi = balance.
The design of Great Pyramid of Giza, Egypt, is based on Phi and later calculations based on physical dimensions shown that is a solution to ?squaring the circle?.
The Pyramid dimensions are like in attached picture, and ?squaring the circle? means the area of the Pyramid base (the square) is the same with the circle with diameter equal to the hight of Pyramid. And also it means the perimeter of the base is equal to circle's perimeter.
Image courtesy of http://www.goldennumber.net, Gary B. Meisner, Copyright 2006.
Warning: for anyone who intend to use material from this site please visit:
http://goldennumber.net/images.htm
I hope you know by now relationship between Phi and Fibonacci numbers.
If we consider from now Phi = 144 (Fibonacci number not the actual golden ratio; Phi is here just to match the picture notations) we get Pyramid's height = 12. Also if we multiply all dimensions with 3 (still proportions hence balance), will get:
Phi X 3 = 432 (square root of light speed)
1 X 3 = 3 (which gives 6 inch diameter of rotor ?? and perimeter 6 X 4 = 24 number of poles on switch ??)
Sqrt(Phi) X 3 = 36 (...?...?... We got interpretation for the square but not for the circle yet...)
So far I didn't make any use of measure units, just playing with numbers.
However, while considering previous posts from Erfinder to get further, I got confused.
Formula Tesla used:
(speed of light) / (frequency of circuit) = (length of stationary wave) X ? = (length of secondary coil)
186624 / f = Lambda X ? = 144
Lambda = 186624 / f
Lambda = 186624 / 3240 = 57.6 [miles]
Lambda X ? = 57.6 X ? = 14.4 [miles] -> It looks like 144 but not 144. If I consider 324 instead of 3240 (an ordinary typo), I get 144, but is still MILES not inch.
However:
14.4[miles] X 63360 = 912384 [inch] -> I'm lost!
And also I think there is a typo when Erfinder said 1 inch = 0.2272727 miles (with emphasis on repetition), In fact 1 inch = 0.002272727 miles (based on 1 mile = 63360 inch).
That's it for now, still out of phase why different mm measures for the same inch, but I hope also with your help to have some progress.
Regards.
Well, I for one, am excited. I think the begining is a good place to start, as I see too many peices with no understanding how they got there. Thank you once again for you efforts and your patience. It looks like the site is off to a good start, and I hope we can soon begin to lift the shroud and unravel the mystery...
http://www.vortexscience.com/magnetism.php
Looks like reality as we know it is out the window - time to choose the red or the blue pill....
No doubt, pass pill over here ... time to see just how far this rabbit hole really goes ;-D
Just found Leedskalnin's Magnetic currents book at http://magneticcurrent.blogspot.com/index.html
Hi All,
I think I just found some more evidence of what Tesla was really working on. This is in relation to him refering to his quarter wave length in the secondaries.
Reference Occult Ether Physics...William Lyne 2nd edition
p55
"The sphere experiments were designed to use mechanical and electrical wave methods to construct a model to probe the ..reactions of solid bodies in the ether."......
?Thomsons system was later investigated by Bjerknes. He showed that when two spheres immersed in an incompressible fluid were pulsated, they exerted a mutual attraction, while if the phases differed by a half wave, the spheres repelled. At one quarter wave difference, there was no action. Where pulses were non-instantaneous at distances greater than a quarter wavelength, attractions and repulsations were reversed.?
The important point here is "at one quarter wave difference, there was no action."
So what does this mean? Well what does this represent? This represents the void!!!!!!!!!!!! ...the neutral point.......the point of no attraction and no repulsion.
It may help to watch the following video too and all the other assumptions one can make from this.
"The Way Electricity Runs In A Wire(AC) Magnets NSNSNSN."
http://www.leedskalnin.com/MagneticCurrentVideoArchive.html
Regards,
N.
Hopefully everyone will get on the same page soon. Really I need to speak for myself as I have been looking on and reading. It was interesting to read the statement from Erfinder stating that all that was needed was a magnet and a coil. Later on it seems as things have changed as now we are more into switching. I am wondering if the first part was to try and understand the magnetic fluxes and magnetic directions and then lead to the switching after the magnetic fluxes and magnetic directions were understood. I hope that the new site in which Erfinder has started will guide everyone through it and led us all to the goal, what ever that may be. There is one question in which I have no answer for. I have looked at the replays and there really has not been a defined statement on really what all of this is leading to? Are we on the brink of something that will produce power for us at no cost or is this a historical learning curve of what happened in the past with Tesla and the rest of the people who tried to do things and yet even today we are not sure how or what they really did?
I will apologize ahead of time if I have made some statements out of contrast, I was just trying to clear up some thoughts and questions that I did not see asked, or did not see a clear answer for.
Regards
Trump
Hi Trump,
Erfinder has highlighted that we need to understand the principles first before building anything as they are so different to what we presently understand. Unfortuneately this involves lots of reading, study and thinking about what Tesla and others were doing back then.
The end goal of course is to build something that produces magnetic current to run our lights etc for free. Erfinder has presented schematics for us to study to help in comprehension. Once comprehension is obtained then one should be able to build without any problems.
It must be stated that this will not be understood overnight.
Regards,
N.
Hi Again,
To explain the evidence further it is appropriate to highlight where Tesla refers to the secondary being of one-quarter wave length. It is highlighted below in the patent on his transformer. As stated earlier in my previous post the one-quarter wave length resonates with the neutral point (void).
The length of the secondary coil B or of each secondary coil when two are used, as in Fig. 3, is, as before stated, approximately one-quarter of the wave length of the electrical disturbance in the secondary circuit, based on the velocity of propagation of the electrical disturbance through the coil itself and the circuit with which it is designed to be used-that is to say, if the rate at which a current traverses the circuit, including the coil, be one hundred and eighty-five thousand miles per second, then a frequency of nine hundred and twenty-five per second would maintain nine hundred and twenty-five stationary waves in a circuit one hundred and eighty-five thousand miles long, and each wave length would be two hundred miles in length. For such a frequency I should use a secondary fifty miles in length, so that at one terminal the potential would be zero and at the other maximum.
http://www.tfcbooks.com/patents/transform.htm
Regards,
N.
On this diagram you can see where the quarter wave length is....
i.e where the wave intersects the dotted line equals the neutral points.
Again, I apologize for being off topic and out of line. I wish to thank you nat1971a for your understanding and explanation of what Erfinder has set out for us to understand prior to building anything. I seen earlier postings that other people tried to build what they thought Erfinder was referring to. It may behoove me at this point to go to his web site and print out Tesla's first patent in which Erfinder posted and read it over and over, until I can understand the principles of what is going on. I hope nat1971a that the people who understand what Erfinder is refereeing to can also tooter others who are not on the right frequencies of understanding.
Regards
Trump
Give it a try trump;
The best minds are the self taught ... as they learn everybit of it on there own asking the questions and realizing answers ... not plagurizing regurgutated notebook materials without any personal involvment -- exploration is best experienced by the person who wants to know,... is it really the same for the one who reads about it only??? take the mind of the inventor/explorer and make it your own ... mission, if you will.
You cannot be where Bruce Lee was if you dont follow his footsteps and learn what he learned. ... you wont have the rythym, the speed, endurance, the moves ... because you didnt take the time to train yourself like he did ... that is where we are now ...
dont read into it, just read it ... at a comfortable pace ... its all there waiting to be realized.
im glad i jumped on this ride... dont overthink it ... just get a drink, sit in your lazyboy with your lamp on and read it, review and ponder what you have read when going to sleep .. like the Finder said - it will click sooner or later ... dont forget the gang is here to
if you dont know some of the things brought up ... just ask ... but like ERFinder stated, dont expect to get spoon fed ... You need to make it your own ... You do want to go beyond one device ... dont you?
just imagine, when we all are done, we will all think independantly the same and in accordance with the knowledge of ... telsa ... leedskalin ... ERFInder ;-D ... etc ... i tell you, there IS more to Telsa patents, it has taken me 4 attempts thus far, and i have realized things that i have missed and they are fascinating to me! - like i can see the relationship with the brushless motor, induction coils, capacitors beyond conventional teachings .. you know what i mean?
Anyway, with out much ado .. good luck trump ... relax into it ... take it from someone who complicates the uncomplicated at times... relax and just read, you have nothing to loose and at worst you will know all about the AC electric motor designs from Telsa himself ... LOL ... and not to mention, it is a good read.
Cia for now
Z
http://simple.wikipedia.org/wiki/Magnetism
http://www.phy6.org/Education/Iexplore.html
Not much info there, not to be spoon-fed, but can you give a dog a bone?
Zepharim, rabbit hole just got deeper!
midnight_blue,
Any information is good as long as it does not offset the thoughts of what Erfinder is trying to have us understand. This may be hard enough to put your mind back so far in time to try and understand things. I think I will follow the yellow brick road and see where he leads us.
Regards
Trump
OK, zepharim. I have looked at Patent #1, can you give me your interpretation of what you have got out of reading it? I kind of wonder if your grasp of it and what I got out of it are anything at all alike. Again I think that one thing that I need to do and also it may apply to others is to focus on just the words and not think of the year as most of the items did not exist back then as we have them today. I have not gone back up to the web site to see if conversations have started yet, but I will do that next.
Regards
Trump
Hi Gang,
Remeber to follow the first step of ERFinder ... as follows:
******************
"The following was taken directly from the patent and should be read and reread until it becomes apart of your soul and not just your intellect!
At this point you are not looking for anything specific, you only want to make this information your own!
By reading and rereading the highlighted content of this patent until you know it as if you yourself were the author of it,
you will begin to comprehend the true purpose of this text,
you will be presented with the theme ... the key which forms the basis of all of Nikola Tesla's innovations."
"Let A B represent the poles of an alternating current motor, of which C is the armature wound with coils D, closed upon themselves, as is now the general practice in motors of this kind.
"The poles A, which alternate with poles B, are wound with coils of ordinary or coarse wire E in such direction as to make them alternate north and south polarity, as indicated in the diagram by the characters N S.
"Over these coils or in other inductive relation to the same are wound long fine-wire coils F F and in the same direction throughout as the coils E. These coils are secondaries, in which currents of very high potential are induced.
"I prefer to connect all the coils E in one series and all the secondaries F in another.
"On the intermediate poles B are wound fine-wire energizing-coils G, which are connected in series with one another and also with the series of secondary coils F, the direction of winding being such that a current-impulse induced from the primary coils E imparts the same magnetism to the poles B as that produced in poles A by the primary impulse. This condition is indicated by the characters N' S'.
"In the circuit formed by the two sets of coils F and G is introduced a condenser H; otherwise the said circuit is closed upon itself while the free ends of the circuit of the coils E are connected to a source of alternating current.
"As the condenser capacity which is needed in particular motor of this kind is dependent upon the rate of alternation or the potential, or both, its size or cost, as before explained may be brought within economical limits for use with the ordinary circuit currents if the potential of the secondary circuit in the motor be sufficiently high. By giving to the condenser the proper values any desired difference of phase between primary and secondary energizing-circuits may be obtained."
******************
Once we have fully digested it ... then we will step through it together ... i for one, have not digested it all ... i am still seeing things that i missed before ... but this is an experience for myself, and the awakening is slow as i stray from the objective stated above ... I want to read until it clicks ... as ERFinder has stated .. make it your own for now .. then on to the next step ...
The true purpose of the text ... what is it! well thats the 50 million dollar question right now isnt it ... i can see what it does, how to construct the device BUT .. what is it that it is actually being stated in this patent .. it is apparently very clear, its just hard to allow myself to slow down, digest and adopt it as my own ... when i look at it like that, i cant begin to tutor someone until i see it all first ... i have not taken it all in as my own yet ... i am currently stepping through it as though i have not done so before and it is perpetually inlightening thus far ...
here is soemthing i started with ... i hope i dont confuse this for you
.. ERFinder, if you are reading this please correct my advice - if it be tainted - for the gangs sake ...
Anyway, assume its yours !!! ... well, the first question for me was what am i doing, why, how ...
This is where i seen that there was more to it as it was an improvement to an existing concept that leads into a new concept but still with the same objective ... in mind !!!
The true purpose of the text is ... you tell me ... sometimes, the best way to learn is to teach ... but you cannot teach what you dont know, and i just dont know yet either ... possibly almost, but almost doesnt quite cut it ... dont doubt yourself, just read it and try to understand it and explain it as to a 6 year old ... this should help you as it really challenges how much of it you have really made yours ... remember, its there in plain sight, you just need to read and understand what you are reading until it is natural and an automatic reflex for you ... this is the step we are in right now ... go with it.
if you have a specific question, just ask, but to ask me to tell you what i get out of it ... lol, there is not enough space and time ... and i may confuse matters even worse ... lol ...
i must goto bed ... must work in 1 hour ... havent slept yet .. i will post more when i can .. forgive my blurbage, i am very sleepy .. i must sleep
g'night
Sincerely,
Z
RE "Let A B represent the poles of an alternating current motor, of which C is the armature wound with coils D, closed upon themselves, as is now the general practice in motors of this kind.
It appears the "coils closed upon themselves" means that the coil is connected to the armature & the armature itself acts as a primary.
REFERENCE
In another modification the compensating coil is closed upon itself, forming a short-circuited secondary, to which the armature itself acts as primary .
http://encyclopedia.jrank.org/MOS_NAN/MOTORS_ELECTRIC.html
Is anyone having any problems logging into Free web? I have tried it a couple of times and it does not work. Seems maybe the pass word needs to be changed? No idea right now.
zepharim that was a nice posting , I like the way you listed everything.
Trump
Thanks Trump, hope it helped ...
try this link - my shortcut didnt work cause ERFinder changed some pages around. He has added to the Step 1 phase of this at the following link:
http://www.freewebs.com/walter-russell-effect/ (http://www.freewebs.com/walter-russell-effect/)
Our group rocks! ;-D
Nat ... im not saying this is wrong information, but lets not jump around and possibly complicate the issue with additional resources ... we know that the conventional outlook is missing the point, so lets not turn to the conventional for explanations at this time ... look at lines 15-20 ...
the armature can consist of independant field coils or magnets... ... this patent is self explanitory ... no need to go anywhere else...
Lets just stick to the patent and let Telsa explain his work. This is where we need to focus for the time being ... we need to make this our own ... think/profile like Telsa ...
Read the following link for Step 1 ... it states that ... http://www.freewebs.com/walter-russell-effect/theteslapatents1.htm (http://www.freewebs.com/walter-russell-effect/theteslapatents1.htm)
When the time comes that you know this patent inside out ... as though you created it ... then we will continue to the next step .. Dont forget, if one falls behind, we all wait for that person ... so lets stick together and stick to the artinerary ... savy? (Jack Sparrow...hee hee)
At this point you are not looking for anything specific, you only want to make this information your own!
Gotta get back to work ... ciao for now
Sincerely,
Z
Just wanted to say you can also find these Tesla patents at the US patent and trade office website. They usually have them in better clarity (maybe thats just me though haha). The website is
www.uspto.gov
click on "patents" on the left, then click "search" (which is the sixth link down, under "patents"). Then just type in the number of the patent (under patent number search) and it pulls it up. You wouldn't believe all the stuff they got. I found a patent for earth batteries that was dated 1830!
Erfinder, just thought you might want to add this website to your links - as an alternative incase keely went down or something. No biggy if you don't though.
Laters,
Charlie
HAHAHAHA, I thought I read patent 464,666 before but I suppose I didn't. Atleast I didn't read it carefully. Do you know what this motor is doing? Do you know!!!?!!??! Sorry for my excitement, but I had an idea like this before. Apparently, Tesla beat me to it by 116 years or so.
Let me give you a few quotes of importance in this patent.
Line 11:
"The general object of my present invention is to secure artificially a difference of a quarter of a phase between the currents in the two energizing-circuits of an alternating-current electro-magnetic motor of that general class invented by me..."
A quarter of a phase is 90 degrees (a complete phase being 360 degrees). This my friends is VERY awesome. If you don't know what this means yet, let me quote one more thing.
Line 38:
"no means have heretofore been proposed that would secure in this way between the phases of the primary or inducing and the secondary or induced currents that difference - theoretically ninety degrees - that is best adapted for practical and economical working."
And there he says it, 90 degrees that is best adapted for practical working. So I ask why is 90 degree phase the best for practical working??!?! He is talking about the phase difference between the voltage and the current of the motor.
Let me explain some simple transmission theory, it is very well known that in your house the voltage and current from the power lines is in phase with each other (for the most part). As long as the voltage and current are in phase (meaning a 0 degree difference), then you will have the maximum power delivered to your house.
Let us assume that you placed a large, tunable capacitor in parallel with the mains. As you started to tune it, the phase between voltage and current would start to increase. You would notice the lights in your house starting to dim. When phase reached 90 degrees, the lights would be completely off. The electricity would be on but it would seem like everything was turned off. This is because at a 90 degrees phase difference, the average power delivered to your house is zero. Average power is what makes all our devices run. When the average power is zero, engineers call this reactive (or imaginary) power. The graphs I made show you the mathematical relationship between voltage, current, power, and phase (P(t)=V(t)*I(t)). You will notice that in the 90 degree case, the instantaneous power goes negative. Negative power means that energy is returned to the system.
Lets assume that you disconnect the power lines and allowed a generator to run, powering your house. Tuning the capacitor again, when the phase difference is 90 degrees, the generator will run as though there is no load. So you see, having an average power of zero is the same as having the generator disconnected - yet still running. This is why electric companies charge for reactive power, they are still using fuel to power their generators.
Now, science teaches us that if the average power is zero, then no useful work can be done. However, Tesla has figured out a way of powering a device with reactive power. This is amazing! By doing this, the power used to turn the motor is returned to the system (the negative portion of the instantaneous power). The battery is never used up. It runs on unity!!! Holy crap balls!!
Now think about what a wise man said before:
Quote from: Charlie_V on April 01, 2007, 11:59:04 PM
...
I also saw that the 3^n modes in my quarter wavelength glass resonators were stronger than the regular harmonics not at 3^n. This was pretty interesting.
When you get it, tell me, tell the others on the forum.
:-X
Hum, Charlie_V, I know what you are getting at, as I also seen that stated in the patent about the 90 degrees statement, I need to think on the philosophy that you stated a little more. I am glad that Erfinder posted the comment about the web site being down as I sure could not sign on today, thanks again Erfinder. I hope when we get into some of the discussions we all try and help each other and that may align our thought patters a little better. what one person may see clear and the next may have a foggy vision of it until the light is turned on so to speak. I am anxious to get started even though I have been silent for a long time on this site, I have enjoyed it a lot. I am glad I finally stepped in and got my feet wet. I hope we all can talk and read and listen, that seems to be what is needed. Charlie I like your demonstrations and you have a good point on how you presented the message. I may not sleep tonight just thinking about it, thanks !
Regards
Trump
Hey guys, first post here :-)
I've spent the last few days reading through the topic. I might of missed a page here or there, but i've gotten through most of it.
Upon reading through Patent 464,666, the first thing I noticed is the a huge similarity between tesla's diagram and the one which Erfinder posted in his first post. I can't believe I would be the first person to notice this, but I can't remember reading anybody saying it before. For a start, theres the fact that the "poles" seem to be wound identically. The main difference seems to be that there are more of them in tesla's device.
I havn't really got the background to figure it out by myself, but I also wouldn't be surprised if tesla's device has the same number of "void points" (or whatever they are) in the inner arc shaped coils per pole, as Erfinder's device has (its just his uses permanent magnets). I guess if this turns out correct, then each of those windings would have 5 points, with the edge points shared with the neighboring coil. This doesn't seem to me to be at all unreasonable. I could be totally wrong tho :-)
And, based on the diagrams, I also presume that Erfinder's HV capacitor is equivalent to the condenser that Tesla speaks of? I really have not the slightest clue what a condenser is, so I wouldn't mind if somebody explained it to me, but by their representations in their respective diagrams, they appear to be the same thing.
Of course, the two major differences I can see are tesla's use of AC power as opposed to DC power, and the lack of a rotary switch. Also, the side of tesla's circuit which contains the condenser is not electrically connected to the rest of the circuit wheras Erfinder's is. However, my gut tells me that the use of a rotary switch is related to the use of a DC power supply as opposed to AC.
Either way, I guess Erfinder would not of gone to the trouble of giving us his device if it was identical to tesla's! I'm quite sure tho that if people are having trouble figuring out how Erfinder's device works, they only really need to look at tesla's patent. It can't be *that* hard... mind you, you guys have been going on about it for months now it seems :-p
For reference, see tesla's patent (http://www.keelynet.com/tesla/00464666.pdf) and Erfinder's device (http://www.overunity.com/index.php?action=dlattach;topic=133.0;attach=5577;image)
Anybody feel like correcting me on my numerous mis-interpretations of tesla and Erfinder's devices? :-)
This patent that Erfinder also recommends looking into does use DC and a rotary type switch. APPARATUS FOE PRODUCING OZONE
http://www.google.com/patents?vid=USPAT568177&id=BrJrAAAAEBAJ&printsec=abstract&zoom=4&dq=568177#PPP1,M1
this may be his switch...
Quote from: zaydana on April 17, 2007, 01:10:02 PM
Hey guys, first post here :-)
I've spent the last few days reading through the topic. I might of missed a page here or there, but i've gotten through most of it.
Upon reading through Patent 464,666, the first thing I noticed is the a huge similarity between tesla's diagram and the one which Erfinder posted in his first post. I can't believe I would be the first person to notice this, but I can't remember reading anybody saying it before. For a start, theres the fact that the "poles" seem to be wound identically. The main difference seems to be that there are more of them in tesla's device.
I havn't really got the background to figure it out by myself, but I also wouldn't be surprised if tesla's device has the same number of "void points" (or whatever they are) in the inner arc shaped coils per pole, as Erfinder's device has (its just his uses permanent magnets). I guess if this turns out correct, then each of those windings would have 5 points, with the edge points shared with the neighboring coil. This doesn't seem to me to be at all unreasonable. I could be totally wrong tho :-)
And, based on the diagrams, I also presume that Erfinder's HV capacitor is equivalent to the condenser that Tesla speaks of? I really have not the slightest clue what a condenser is, so I wouldn't mind if somebody explained it to me, but by their representations in their respective diagrams, they appear to be the same thing.
Of course, the two major differences I can see are tesla's use of AC power as opposed to DC power, and the lack of a rotary switch. Also, the side of tesla's circuit which contains the condenser is not electrically connected to the rest of the circuit wheras Erfinder's is. However, my gut tells me that the use of a rotary switch is related to the use of a DC power supply as opposed to AC.
Either way, I guess Erfinder would not of gone to the trouble of giving us his device if it was identical to tesla's! I'm quite sure tho that if people are having trouble figuring out how Erfinder's device works, they only really need to look at tesla's patent. It can't be *that* hard... mind you, you guys have been going on about it for months now it seems :-p
For reference, see tesla's patent (http://www.keelynet.com/tesla/00464666.pdf) and Erfinder's device (http://www.overunity.com/index.php?action=dlattach;topic=133.0;attach=5577;image)
Anybody feel like correcting me on my numerous mis-interpretations of tesla and Erfinder's devices? :-)
Hello zaydana,
Welcome to the forum! I hope you enjoy your stay.
I would not classify Erfinder's device because we are still struggling to understanding the basics of magnetism. Until we progress as a group, we will not be able to have a clearer understanding of what has been shown to us.
It seems to me you need a basic course in electronics. Of course most of what is mainstream science is not a good representation of reality, but I think at least knowing the basic electric devices would be a good start.
Regards,
Omar
Zaydana,
I think most of your observations were confirmed by Erfinder himself - but I could be wrong as I am going from memory. I would recommend reading through the entire thread carefully. I think there is lots of good info in it, and all of it is worth a read.
orosado - well, I do know some basic electronics (enough to fix things around the house when they die). However, magnetics, high voltage stuff and etc. are not generally covered in books on basic electronics. Besides, I guess that a "condenser" wouldn't be covered in such books anyway - at least it hasn't been in any of the ones i've read.
I think the patents that Erfinder pointed us to when he first joined the thread are probably a good way to try and understand his device. He did say at the beginning that they were all we would need. However, it seems that people didn't really take that fully to heart. I'm yet to check out the patent which am1ll3r linked to, but if that explains the reason for a rotary switch, I think we may already be able to understand the majority of Erfinder's device by just looking to the way which Tesla describes similar components in his (which, I might add, seems to be how Erfinder originally intended us to understand it).
Quote from: zaydana on April 17, 2007, 09:25:58 PM
orosado - well, I do know some basic electronics (enough to fix things around the house when they die). However, magnetics, high voltage stuff and etc. are not generally covered in books on basic electronics. Besides, I guess that a "condenser" wouldn't be covered in such books anyway - at least it hasn't been in any of the ones i've read.
I think the patents that Erfinder pointed us to when he first joined the thread are probably a good way to try and understand his device. He did say at the beginning that they were all we would need. However, it seems that people didn't really take that fully to heart. I'm yet to check out the patent which am1ll3r linked to, but if that explains the reason for a rotary switch, I think we may already be able to understand the majority of Erfinder's device by just looking to the way which Tesla describes similar components in his (which, I might add, seems to be how Erfinder originally intended us to understand it).
Hello zaydana,
Erfinder has a list of books on his website. The various authors of those books are the ones that enlightened Erfinder to develop his device. So more than a few are actually responsible for the understanding of reality that Erfinder has achieved through his hard work. It is my belief that he has gathered a mass of common knowledge from all of the authors mentioned on his list which has led him to his discovery.
I think Erfinder once wrote here that to be able to understand the patents he listed, one must also read and comprehend all of the books on his list. I believe they form a solid base upon which to understand Tesla's message on those patents.
I think we have a lot of reading to do before we may be able answer any of Erfinder's questions. After all it took him years of intense research for him to reach his goal. It would be impossible for us to fully understand nature's ways without following Erfinder's advice. It will take a lot of hard work on our part to understand Erfinder's device, but I believe it is well worth it.
Sincerely,
Omar
A condenser is the old school (by old school I mean pre-1940/1950's) term for a capacitor. Capacitor = condenser, they are the same, no difference.
I have a question for Erfinder. Are you powering stuff with your device, if you are what kind of things? Have you hooked it up to run your lawn mower (I know that would be the first thing I would do haha - I hate those stinky gas mowers). If you aren't using it, why not?
Thanks,
Charlie
PS (note added later) the US patent and trade office website has a much better copy of the 464666 patent, you can find it here:
http://patimg2.uspto.gov/.piw?docid=US000464666&PageNum=2&IDKey=1FD5C73AECA6&HomeUrl=http://patft.uspto.gov/netacgi/nph-Parser?Sect1=PTO1%2526Sect2=HITOFF%2526d=PALL%2526p=1%2526u=%25252Fnetahtml%25252FPTO%25252Fsrchnum.htm%2526r=1%2526f=G%2526l=50%2526s1=0464666.PN.%2526OS=PN/0464666%2526RS=PN/0464666
You might need to download a viewer, I prefer AlternaTIFF - its free and works great. you can find that here (just follow the steps):
http://www.alternatiff.com/
Charlie,
I am sure we all wonder what Erfinder has and what it does. I am for one not going to push it as he will tell us and show us in time. I am not saying anything bad about your posting Carlie as you are doing a good job and I am still thinking on a couple of this you have mentioned. If everyone just knew what kind of golden opportunity they have right now I guess they would set up and bark like a dog they would be so happy. This opportunity is not something that comes around very often, if you really believe it, which I do. I wonder at times if we should take the stated questions and directly relate the answers right in the same subject area, that way it should blend in and you would not need to go back and try and plug things in and it may also be better for everyone, even the ones that are missing the point.
Thanks Erfinder :o
Regards
Trump
Sorry, I'm not trying to be pushy (although after re-reading it, it does seem like I am). Really, all I was trying to get at is if he is using it or not - I would hope so. If he isn't, well... he should, unless something was missing (no time, doesn't work like that, etc.)
Well its my bed time,
Night guys,
Charlie
Erfinder,
I think we need a Roseta Stone. Ponder about this and if you find it right you may add it to menu in your website).
You mention "quality" in couple occasions and I'm not sure how to take that:
In your post http://www.overunity.com/index.php/topic,133.msg27159.html#msg27159 you say:
"... A stone ground into a fine powder mixed with a binding agent, and then sun dried makes a perfect new age surf board. You only require the proper quality magnetic fields to ride on! No power supply just magnets and coils! ..."
Then later in http://www.freewebs.com/walter-russell-effect/anyandeverything.htm you state:
"Electricity = Light, Sound = Light
These two represent different qualities of Light. Quality! There is something new!"
It seems "quality" is regarded as two different interpretation:
1. achievement or excellence
2. a characteristic
Can you explain?
Quote from: barbosi on April 18, 2007, 09:15:36 AM
Erfinder,
I think we need a Roseta Stone. Ponder about this and if you find it right you may add it to menu in your website).
You mention "quality" in couple occasions and I'm not sure how to take that:
In your post http://www.overunity.com/index.php/topic,133.msg27159.html#msg27159 you say:
"... A stone ground into a fine powder mixed with a binding agent, and then sun dried makes a perfect new age surf board. You only require the proper quality magnetic fields to ride on! No power supply just magnets and coils! ..."
Then later in http://www.freewebs.com/walter-russell-effect/anyandeverything.htm you state:
"Electricity = Light, Sound = Light
These two represent different qualities of Light. Quality! There is something new!"
It seems "quality" is regarded as two different interpretation:
1. achievement or excellence
2. a characteristic
Can you explain?
Hello Barbosi,
It seems to me when Erfinder mentions quality, it is in the definition of "a charaterictic".
Erfinder correct me if I am wrong.
Regards,
Omar
Hello to all,
Erfinder once told me that a coil can act as a capacitor. I guess a proper quality coil would act as a capacitor. In this quality would refer to winding scheme, like a Mobius or Rodin coil.
Regards,
Omar
Orosado,
I recall that when a coil has a negative inductance in a circuit, it has the same phase as a capacitor....Jeff
A coil can act like a capacitor if the inductance is large enough. Current doesn't change instantly, a voltage across the coil is usually produced first, and the voltage dies down as current starts flowing through the coil. So, if you had a proper arrangement, then the voltage decay across the coil could be slow enough to make a capacitor like effect.
The same can be said for a capacitor. Yes, capacitors have inductance. This is because voltage cannot change instantly. The plates of a capacitor cannot instantly be charged. So at first, the current is very large and begins to decay (as the capacitor is charging). During the initial time frame, there is a magnetic field spatially 90 degrees from the capacitors electric field.
This effect is how antennas work. If you can tune things such that the magnetic and electric fields are in phase time wise (not spatially because the magnetic and electric fields are always physically 90 degrees apart with space), then you will produce radiation (aka radio waves).
For some reason, they never explain things well in science books. It took me a long time of thinking before I could visualize this.
Hope that helps,
Charlie
here is the patent on the coil to replace the capacitor and to neutralize the inductance in an ac motor for commercial efficiency purposes - forgive my dry loose terminology on this topic ...read this one and be amazed... their is a neat clue in this little one! - hmm set up differently in the AC motor we are studying ... isnt it ... theres even a capacitor?
eg: Telsa states that this coil setup neutralizes the inductance, as the AC "operates disadvantageous by giving rise to false current which often reduces, what is known as, commercial efficiency of the aparatus composing the system ... i see what he saying ... cool eh dudes!?!!!
Man i love this stuff... yeee hoooo!!!
Quote from: zepharim on April 18, 2007, 01:35:47 PM
here is the patent on the coil to replace the capacitor and to neutralize the inductance in an ac motor for commercial efficiency purposes - forgive my dry loose terminology on this topic ...read this one and be amazed... their is a neat clue in this little one! - hmm set up differently in the AC motor we are studying ... isnt it ... theres even a capacitor?
eg: Telsa states that this coil setup neutralizes the inductance, as the AC "operates disadvantageous by giving rise to false current which often reduces, what is known as, commercial efficiency of the aparatus composing the system ... i see what he saying ... cool eh dudes!?!!!
Man i love this stuff... yeee hoooo!!!
Hello zepharim,
According to Wikipedia, that is the patent in which Tesla introduced the Bifilar coil. Apparently having two conductors in the coil neutralizes induction because the magnetic field around both conductors is the same.
Regards,
Omar
Hi ERFinder,
I wish i was not so condiluted ... but in time ... thanks be to your patience.
Lines 26-31 Patent - 512.340
It can be seen in my last post regarding the coil patent - Telsa stated that his coil windings will achieve the same effect as the cap thus eliminating the need for the caps - but also suggests that the induction is neutralized also - I see that the relationship between capacitance and inductance (forgive the mainstream) are relative. anyway thats another topic.
OK lets get this show on the road:
The Electro magnetic motor patent 464.666 -
To put it simply, I see that Telsa is transfering electricity from one place (in this case a circuit) to another place (in this case another seperate circuit) via a wireless medium (in this case the electro magnetic field - telsa coils).
This is what i get out of it thus far ... as for the 6 energizing coils being capacitors .. i didnt quite look at it that way - it is with much shame to have to admit its not totally my own yet .. :-(
In short, this is truely the beginning of wireless technology - wirless power!
Transfer/Replication of energy across distances via a wireless medium such as a magnetic field - via capacitance?!!?
If anyone is making the same mistake i am and not sleeping enough ... start getting sleep ... more has sunk in by taking it in stride (and alot faster than when i dont sleep) i am a techno junky now ... i think im gonna have to start an TA clinic (Telsa's Anonomous) ...;-D
Alright gang, what do you see!?
Sincerely,
z
Hi to all,
The way I read the patent
1 this is not a induction motor (read carefully line 15 to 20)
2 the primary an secondary coils are acting as a capacitor and their for must have an equal weight.(See line 21 to 24)
3 the value of the capacitor H must stand in relation to the value of the coil capacitor (See line 55 to 58) in order to get a 90 degrees shift see line 43 to 44 an also 60 to 61
4 the drawing in a non working model but only an explanation see line 62 and 63 and 68 to72
5 the drawing is showing that the coils should be wound close together (some where else I read isolated from each other with wood) here is our capacitor (see line see line 66 to 68)
6 the alternating current mention in the patent is a switching DC power (see line 103-104)
7 This is only one field it would take more of these setups to make a working motor, generator See page 2 line 13 till the end( we also have seen this in the 3D drawing from erfinder.)
Tesla is talking about induction in this system sins at that time there was no word for what was happening But it is NOT induction as we know
If a coil is induced by a sort current the resistance will build up enormously an their wil be no flow of the current in the coil wire and their for the hole system is not consuming power from the power source.
This is creating a void sins everything must be in harmony the coils acting as a capacitor will be charged from the electrostatic
I am assuming that the magnets are used to multiply the frequency of the power source by acting of the voids from the coils and the magnets.
only Erfinder or Tesla could confirm these
I am looking forward to his answer
regards,
Hello Erfinder,
Dr. Pavel Imris uses in his publications "Bandkondensator" as (primary) coil,
Condensator=capacitor, with the effect : "Blindstrom" to "Wirkstrom" !
He also describes the different behaviour between inductance and capacitance !
About wireless "tele"-communication:
Antonio Meucci
S
dL
p.s.: hypothese: actio= centrifugal force-field (expansion)then reactio will be a =
centipetal force field(compression) or vice-versa
hi all. ;D
this is my first post. sorry my bad English.
I will try to explain some consideration.
I do not want add or to place idea of Erfinder, but, the magnetism and electric energy are one e different only in the frequency.
How thus?
If to catch one magneto or bar of steel carbon and to pass a small chain in form of frequency and its polos to place bobbins connected in parallel, we obtain to extract to power forces.
It is the same principle of the magneto turning around the bobbin, but what it makes energy is how much the turn determines 60hz in cycles for second.
What he determines the generation of being able is the frequency and not it mechanic moviment.
Then I could say that to be able electric it is a question of magnetic frequency.
In the device of Erfinder, the magnetos are made use in perfect order of frequency between polos N and S in second octava.
Erfinder congratulations. :D
Its simple and obvious thought opens the doors for new and intriguing key to understand the universe and its functioning.
Hi all, I changed my posting as it seemed that I was off track, I will just read and then read it again Sorry Erfinder .
Regards
Trump
Here it goes, I'm making the first step stating the obvious.
1.it's about stress (potential), the higher the stress (potential), the more energy released. The easy way to associate this is with a rock on top of the mountain. It just rests there. But if put in motion, all its static (potential) energy is transforming in kinetic energy. The higher the mountain (potential/stress), the higher the energy. Induction is most efficient in this case. As we deal with a step-up transformer, on secondary will have a greater voltage. Also looking at the drawing, at all time there will be two physically opposed coils with opposition of phase, hence the stress is doubled. I'm not a motor guy, but if not the opposed coils but rather adjacent coils is the mechanism (to have a shorter path), the same principle applies.
2.The HV coils are closed upon themselves. How? F coils are in series and also with G coils that are in series too. The loop/circuit is closed by the capacitor. All this closed loop circuit can be easy charged (and eventually may maintain its energy if needed). There is a pretty crude drawing attached showing this. There are no coils, nor correct spatial distribution, it shows just the closed path.
3. F and G coil fields are in phase with their corresponding primaries, so the contribution has an enhancing role towards the rotor.
4.Because secondaries cumulate a great inductance, the capacitor might decrease in value
I hit the ice first, lets roll.
PS: I forgot about coils D (rotor). Again I'm not a motor guy but I think being closed by themselves means they are in series and closing the loop. A ring with 6 coils in series.
Err hmm well... hmmm... Firstly, I would like to comment on the patent that
zepharim found. Firstly, Tesla is talking about efficient mainstream motor operation. Tesla quotes:
"operates disadvantageous by giving rise to false current which often reduces,
what is known as, commercial efficiency of the apparatus composing the system"
If the power you are feeding a typically modern-day motor (and modern-day motors haven't changed in 116 years) then the maximum power will be delivered when the inductance is canceled out. This is easily achieved by adding capacitance to the system. Though I will not go into the details of this, he is simply "tuning" a motor for max "real" power input. Remember, in Tesla's day, they had no idea what tuning was (Tesla discovered tuning). This is a very special (very creative) method for adding capacitance since Tesla has figured out how to do this with a coil. Very awesome, thanks for finding it!
Secondly, and I mean no disrespect from you or to you
Erfinder (and if you can teach me otherwise I will listen), but I strongly disagree with your statements:
QuoteStatic electricity (electrostatics) as it is called is the dominant force! It is the only force!
and
QuoteSo friends please don't waste your time day dreaming over what you can do with magnetism! Magnetism is a dead end. We will discuss this also. I say over and over again "what we call magnetism" as what magnetism truly is we cannot use!
I have said this many times and I will say it again, magnetism is just as important as electrostatics. But neither is the dominant force, they are both dominant. Magnetism
causes electrostatics, electrostatics
causes magnetism, they go hand in hand (the yin to your yang ha!) Magnetic fields are the kinetic energy of the universe, electric fields (electrostatics) are the potential energy of the universe. The magnetic field is very special though - I cannot stress this enough, you all have no idea.
A permanent magnet does not lose flux when inducing voltage in a coil. Thats all I can say at this time.
"Ere many generations pass, our machinery will be driven by a power obtainable at any point in the universe. Through space there is energy. Is this energy (static) or kinetic? If static our hopes are in vain; if kinetic - and this we know it is for certain - then it is a mere question of time when men will succeed in attaching their machinery to the very wheel work of nature."
I know what this means, and it made me rather happy when I read it. This kinetic energy he speaks of is the magnetic field, not the electrostatic field. In Tesla's day, permanent magnets were not powerful enough. Neodymium has changed that! When applied properly (and right now no machine available uses the magnetic field properly) a flux change of 10 Gauss will produce 50mV, just think what a flux change of 530 will accomplish?!?! Hopefully I will have that answer soon.
Anyway, I have thought very long about how to use an electrostatic field instead of a magnetic. The problem I run into is the fact that electrostatics have to be stored. They must be moved from one point of the circuit to the other -
they do not share. A magnetic field
does share, and this is the key. I pray that
Erfinder has found a method to allow electrostatics to share. The only way I can see a use in electrostatics is to convert them to magnetic. A very large voltage that discharges fully can produce a tremendous current. I have seen this first hand.
What you've said makes great sense to me barbosi. Sorry that last post was to cover some of what was said earlier today.
From what I see, the coils are closed because if you follow the wires, the left side of the capacitor is connected to the G's. Following them around, the last G coil at the 9 o'clock position is connected to the first F coil. This goes back around till the last F coil, at the 12 o'clock position, is connected to the right hand side of the capacitor. To me, this forms a large loop of wire connected to the capacitor.
From what I said earlier (with my ever so fancy graphs :D), he is using reactive power, (which means power that you put out is returned back) to drive this motor. It's incredibly ingenious! I think it would be better if he placed permanent magnets on the rotor. From the patent, it looks like he is using eddy currents to make it rotate.
(Just added) Oh yea, when they say "the grid is too large to modernize" this basically means that the old parts are rotting, there are so many interconnected wires across the nation that they have a hard time locating the rotting parts, and when they do it costs so much to replace that they can't afford it. So, the power grid is rotting out from under their feet, and with more people ever mounting in the world, this rotting grid cannot support the increasing load. Its actually way worse than this too, but they don't talk about it much because they don't want to instill fear. Its not good guys, Erfinder is 120% right!
Hi again. :D
I imagine that coils tesla was a high-voltage resonante to stimulate currentes in the circuit through high frequency(stress).
Tesla used this to generate its waves.
But the peoples think that he is for generating sparks.
The more stress more easy to break the substance.
I see a magneto as a powerful cell. He has all power there inside.
He has its state + and -. potential difference.
One impulse (High Voltage ressonant) opens the doors for a flow of power.
As Erfinder it says, magnetism and electric to power is one, requires only one initial kick.
The sources are infinite. It is enough to look at for the universe. It by itself works.
congratulations ;)
Hello all,
For easier viewing I color traced the the 2 circuits of patent 464666.
It cleared things up a bit for me when I looked at it this way.
(https://overunityarchives.com/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fhome.comcast.net%2F%7Eamiller375%2F464666.jpg&hash=fdb4e074a7d57fcb1144ce695e6bb7ea82c2052b)
Charlie_V
LOL ... Telsa did use electrostatic and magnetic fields and swapped between the 2 - as they are the same in many fashions .. electronic oscillators (utilizing an inductor and a capacitor) http://www.howstuffworks.com/oscillator2.htm (http://www.howstuffworks.com/oscillator2.htm)... but lets stay on track and stick to the plan and ride it out ... try not to over think it ... its to easy to return to the mainstream and that is what we have just done .. stay focused dude ... ;)
sincerely,
Derrick
I am not wild, only crazy :P ;D
I am not wild, only crazy As my father already said.
Everything is a thought.
Before materializing itself it is an electromagnetic wave of the thought.
:-\
Quote from: am1ll3r on April 18, 2007, 11:16:57 PM
Hello all,
For easier viewing I color traced the the 2 circuits of patent 464666.
It cleared things up a bit for me when I looked at it this way.
(https://overunityarchives.com/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fhome.comcast.net%2F%7Eamiller375%2F464666.jpg&hash=fdb4e074a7d57fcb1144ce695e6bb7ea82c2052b)
Hello am1ll3r,
I was thinking about doing this today! It makes perfect sense to color the graphics on patents. I have always wondered why patents are black and white only. If only colors would be allowed the patents would be clearer to understand.
Regards,
Omar
Thanks ERFinder,
Alrighty then ... we have all jumped ship abit...lol ... man this is so hard to stay on topic ...
its like being a child again and our parents say no ... but we arent soaking it in, it takes lots of bitter pouting and bullheadedness to finally get it throught our stubborn heads no means "stop - not like this" ... lol
Anyway,
Back to the objective: Dont look for meaning but make these understandings your own:
"Let A B represent the poles of an alternating current motor, of which C is the armature wound with coils D, closed upon themselves, as is now the general practice in motors of this kind.
the Armature [c] spins as a result of the magnetic field influenced by the so called induction effect from the energizing coils
1. Poles A are telsa coils
* Consist of 2 coils (F wrapped around E) wrapped around an iron core
E - 1 primary coil wrapped around Iron core [Pole A]
F - 1 secondary energizing coil wrapped around [E]
2. Poles B are electro magnetic coils
* Consist of 1 coil wrapped around an iron core
My kids up ... i will be back later on today ... someone want to start to discuss this further ... you know, discuss what is being done in each paragraph and ponder and ask questions together at each paragraph?
Sincerely
z
First a little note, as far as I know,in this circuit are not involved high frequency currents. In later patents, the same transformer will use them.
Thanks for the colored drawing, it makes me follow much easier to follow.
Although I cannot say at this moment what is the voltage stored in capacitor, my intuition tells me that is used to store high potential (duh! nobody uses a capacitor to store zero volts).
Also, the connection between green circuit and blue circuit is the Null point. A professor of mine used to say at the exam: "If the circuit is powered with 10KV, and your calculations show that point has 0 Volts, your biggest satisfaction will be not to prove it with instruments, but rather with your life. If you have guts, stick your finger on that spot!"
What bothers me though is why the green circuit goes back (counter clock wise)? Why didn't follow the direction of blue circuit (clock wise)? I think there is the catch. Anyone?
Sincerely yours, me.
Quote from: Erfinder on April 19, 2007, 02:46:01 AM
Hello,
Good idea adding color to the figure! Unfortunately your image is missing a color! There are two secondary circuits! These two are connected in series! The intersection formed by these two circuits is extremely special! Why? Review it. Discuss it!
Lets look at nature for a minute. In nature when you walk through the woods or through a meadow you should ask yourself what power makes all this possible! What force, or energy is being expressed? Nature has a power source where is it? What is it? Is it electric or magnetic? How does nature view the electric and magnetic?
It is obvious that nature prefers to produce salts, minerals, which are dielectric materials! She does produce metals but you find them embedded inside the dielectrics she produces! This in itself shows you which force nature regards as the force! Electrostatics (This is a terrible term. I hope in time it will change to reflect the reality of the nature of this force)!
The energy of the future has a name... Magneto-Dielectric Energy! Where magnetism is static, and electricity is characterized as a high potential high frequency field, which moves inward (implosion) and outward (explosion) simultaneously! This action simulates the VOID, the zero point which mainstream science is desperately searching for. We will discuss this further after all the patents have been demystified.
Regards
Hello Erfinder,
This is great! I am finally seeing some group progress.
I noticed that when you added the new color, some traces are missing. I added them, tell me if you think this is correct.
Regards,
Omar
Quote from: Charlie_V on April 18, 2007, 09:24:40 PM
...
It's incredibly ingenious! I think it would be better if he [Tesla] placed permanent magnets on the rotor. From the patent, it looks like he is using eddy currents to make it rotate.
...
It looks to me this is what Erfinder did. As I said being impaired on motors, I cannot see where/how the torque occurs.
An AC induction motor uses eddy currents to rotate the axial (rotor). On the rotor, there will be an aluminum or copper loop that is closed. When the magnetic field from the driving coil (also called stator windings) is generated, a current flows in the aluminum and produces an opposite magnetic field that pushes/pulls against the driving coils. This rotates the axial.
When you place magnets on the rotor, they change the name to synchronous motor. The reason for the name change comes in the difference between the two motor's operation. In an induction motor, the rotor does not turn at the same rate as the frequency of the current. It lags behind and has a maximum limited speed. The more load the more it lags, they call this "slip" because the rotor rotation is "slipping" behind the frequency of the current.
In a synchronous motor, the magnets are interacting with the coils. And in fact, this interaction causes the rotor to match the frequency of the current, placing the rotation in synchronization with the current (thus the term, synchronous). These motors are typically far more efficient (which can reach close to 90% sometimes) and they produce more torque at much higher RPMs. The problem is that it's hard to build large magnets at the utility scale, so these motors are limited to smaller power ratings (like 100kW - which to me is plenty!)
Anyway, this isn't really related to the subject at hand, but thought it would help in the long run when it comes to motors and what not.
Laters,
Charlie
Charlie, thanks for explanations.
I still don't see the reason why G coils follow the path back against the current in coils F.
Somehow I can visualize a "counter symmetry" between two fields, with a maximum potential achieved at the capacitor and with a null at the junction of two circuits. If you like, I can associate this with a vortex.
On the other hand, if the coils G would have followed the same rotation sense as coils F (clock wise), the same high potentials could be achieved at the capacitor terminals, but in this case the null point would have been a regular median point (in terms of potential)
Which one I would prefer better? I'd like to have an answer regarding the intimate reason Tesla had. Without this I still would say "Tesla's way" but this is a cheerleader answer.
Anyone sees this issue with more clarity? Or other way perhaps...
Regards.
It is all here:
http://magnetism.fateback.com/index.htm
Well, most of it anyway.
(Erfinder might even agree to some degree.)
Thanks for the info.
That proves we're not on unexplored grounds.
All the best.
Ok, all. I am not getting it right now. I had some medical issues that kept me away for two days and now it seems you all are way ahead of me. If it would be better for all that I disappear, and let you all continue just tell me. Erfinder I sure don't want to hold up the progress, sorry I could not participate in this ever minute like the others. If I am allowed to continue I would ask to be helped on some of the puzzling areas of the patent's.
Regards
Trump
Hi all
1886 - Old motor rotating field AC
(https://overunityarchives.com/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fimg64.imageshack.us%2Fimg64%2F1136%2Ffermot4kk5.gif&hash=a2e30c60a460ce3f30b130e406c174cc520a4d7a) (http://imageshack.us)
Another old generator
(https://overunityarchives.com/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fimg216.imageshack.us%2Fimg216%2F8919%2Ffermot1op3.gif&hash=3edb0693ca00d3b119dc548858407ba96cda8211) (http://imageshack.us)
That's a pretty heavy duty site you listed there Grumpy....My head is spining again....hey wait, I think that is the point...er the distance from source...or density....see there it goes again....
2nd thoughts,
I am not about to give up on something so important to me. I will just ask questions until I get the answers to my question resolved. Again, this is way to important to me to just give it up. Hope everyone can help me out and then, hopefully we can all learn together.
Trump
@All
I ran into this site and found a good documentary of Tesla that maybe some have never seen. You can go here;
http://best.online.docus.googlepages.com/
Go into Biographies -> N-Z and click on
Tesla - The genius who lit the world.
Enjoy
Quote from: Trump on April 19, 2007, 11:20:33 PM
2nd thoughts,
I am not about to give up on something so important to me. I will just ask questions until I get the answers to my question resolved. Again, this is way to important to me to just give it up. Hope everyone can help me out and then, hopefully we can all learn together.
Hello Trump,
You don't have to give up. If you have any doubts you cannot resolve yourself, just ask the group. I sure don't want anyone to be left out. You don't have to feel that way. Just take your time and read and digest everything.
Regards,
Omar
Hi Folks,
First Post. I am a retired Marine Engineer from 'down under'. Just registering my interest at present.
Thanks Erfinder for taking us on such an exciting journey.
Regarding the coil set-up in Tesla's motor: I've had the thought for
a couple of days now that he is bashing opposing currents or fields together to produce R.E. Cant really put any sense to it.
I'm down the back - by the naughty corner!!
Rance.
I believe zepharim is correct in his thought process, I see the same wireless transmission of electricity. To Charlie_V, barbosi, I believe you 3 bright minds will lead us all through this. Though Charlie_V sometimes strays I really like his thought process.
Quote from erfinder
"Now imagine that tomorrow all of the worlds generators stopped producing electrical current! Ooh, wow!! That could never happen! Yes it could, and if it did we would be back in the stone age! How could that happen? 1. Our electrical grid is extremely old, and too large to modernize, what ever that means! 2. We have no back up grid if anything happened to the main grid! 3. We only have a few generators! 4. We have no backup generators! 5. The power grid is centralized! These are the most obvious!
For the sake of future generations change your thinking, we need a new type of grid. The type Tesla constructed and perfected for us!!! The anwsers are here, and have been here for over 120 years, lets put them to use!!!"
Appears painfully obvious wireless transmission would be the answer. Now how did Tesla visualize that to make it possible? Initially I thought generation in every home, but now I am not so certain of this.
Thanks midnight,
It s nice to see that im not the only one who can see it ...
The following is what ERFinder recently posted ...
In a nutshell, i do beleve these 2 consolodated coils are Osciallation leading to resonance. as the capacitant and inductive effects more or less store energy as well as channeling and guiding etc.
Conventional teachings refer to electronic oscillator as moving 2 forms of energy back and forth through a circuit ... however if the energy is actually the same being then it is just juggeling it around via differed influentual methods - telsa coils and electromagnetic coils
... capacitance stores the by product of both transfers together ... if that makes any sence at all ...lol.
QuoteThere are two secondary circuits! These two are connected in series! The intersection formed by these two circuits is extremely special! Why? Review it. Discuss it!
The first circuit of energizing coils (Telsa Coils) appear to be capacitative transfer of Electrostatic field energy, where as the second circuit of energizing coils appear to be inducing magnetic field energy from the Electrostatic field energy.
Assuming that the intersection ERFInder is referring to is the Capacitor, this is special in that it stores the consolodated energy traversing through the combined circuits. Also, as the capacitor charges and reaches its maximum capacity the circuit completes and the cycle of energy flow and transference (electro/magneto dynamo.. ha ha!) repeats; only this time, a little more at a time ... under proper circumstances, this appears to potentially charge itself.
Now, assumming that it is the connection of the 2 circuits directly, it is special as it is changing the direction of the flow from the fisrt circuit of Telsa coils back through the second circuit of electromagnetic magnetic coils ... thus combining the 2 (Forms) influencial energies into one (giving magnatude, direction etc ???) and then storing into the capacitor and of course repeating the above as noted above.
Electrostatic field energy - im kind of seeing this as actual kinetic electricity -
Also i noted that Telsa included the use of the Square
root mathmatics ... ancient stuff?
i was referring to the magnetic coil patent 512340 - sorry gang?
Just a thought ... but i just had a flashing wonderment ... if i am seeing this correctly ... did telsa hide the ability to access energy for free via there devices ... in detail, did he trick the big wigs into building the devices for humanity under the delussion the Front) that they were AC in nature and that the little people can alter existing devices (made from the big wigs) so we could acutally aford to buld the devices ourselves by just modifying the existing devices out there ... like a 10 dollar blender motor ... just replace some capacitors etc etc?
I eagerly await some feedback ... gang, what do you thing?
Sincerely,
Z
Quote from: zepharim on April 20, 2007, 10:06:12 AM
...
Just a thought ... but i just had a flashing wonderment ... if i am seeing this correctly ... did telsa hide the ability to access energy for free via there devices ... in detail, did he trick the big wigs into building the devices for humanity under the delussion the Front) that they were AC in nature and that the little people can alter existing devices (made from the big wigs) so we could acutally aford to buld the devices ourselves by just modifying the existing devices out there ... like a 10 dollar blender motor ... just replace some capacitors etc etc?
...
Hello zepharim,
If that is true, that would be very wise of Tesla. But I doubt that is the case, I hope I am wrong. Like Erfinder once told me, Tesla himself made Alternating Current obsolete.
I would like to know what Erfinder thinks of Tesla's vision of wireless power. Is a transmitter really necesary when all one needs is to locally harness the wheelwork of nature?
Regards,
Omar
Quote from: zepharim on April 20, 2007, 10:06:12 AM
...
Also i noted that Telsa included the use of the Square root mathmatics ... ancient stuff?
...
In this patent (464666)? Where?
This is what I see Tesla is doing in this patent. He is modifying a 2 phase motor by applying an alternating current to only one phase, the primary of pole A. The other phase is the secondary of pole A and pole B which is not connected to the source and allows it to reach very high voltages. A capacitor is added to tune it a 90 deg. phase difference. This is all that this patent covers as far as I can tell. Thoughts?
Jeff
barbosi, Not only you, but others ask the same questions, " where did it say that? What patent are you talking about? yes I am behind a lot of you, but this seems very valuable to me that if you relate to the specific patents and where on what patent you are talking about it would really help everyone a lot. Myself, I am looking for a specific reference point to go back to. Fitting the puzzle together people is what others have tried to do for 120 years. It may be just a fore site of mine, but, it seems we have a lot of people are whizzing through this that have a lot of electrical and electronic back grounds, that is good, but I see a lot of people making statements and not stating where in the patent, and what patent they are talking about. If everyone stays on this pace I think we will be just like the countless numbers of people who have tried to figure this out many many years ago, and finally just gave up as they did not understand Nikola Tesla's patents. I think we have a very good chance in overcoming the problem of understanding Nikola Tesla patents as we have Erfinder helping us.We must stick together and learn and have a way to reference back on topics so everyone can understand every part of the patents. I really hope it is just me and the rest of you are really on top of this and everyone has both patents all ironed out. If all of the issues here are just my issues then please help me by letting me know where your information fits and what patent you are talking about. I am not giving up on this and hope that everyone else feels the same. Again, people have been trying to understand Nikola Tesla's patents out for 120 years. I feel we may have a group of people who can do this as we have a great leader Erfinder IF? we can stay on track and learn together. Hope Erfinder agrees with me on this.
Deepest Regards
Trump
In all my comments I only refer to pat#646666. However, a patent has not only words, but also drawings. It might be the case when someone sees a particular shape in coil distribution, of poles, etc. To me a set of specific shapes, are connected to geometry and from here to sacred geometry which has to do with fancy numbers etc. That was the reason I asked in the early post. People might see something I'm blind.
Back on the track, from the Tesla's patent (lines 90-99):
Quote
"On the intermediate poles B are wound fine-wire energizing-coils G, which are connected in series with one another and also with the series of secondary coils F, the direction of winding being such that a current-impulse induced from the primary coils E imparts the same magnetism to the poles B as that produced in poles A by the primary impulse. This condition is indicated by the characters N' S'.
So suddenly there are not AC currents but also pulses? Is this thing ready to harvest BEMF?
From what I've read, I'm also thinking the same as you guys are. However, I would like to add a different point of view real quick. This pertains to patent 464,666.
It's well known that when you produce resonance in a circuit, the impedance from capacitance cancels with the impedance of the inductor - we get voltage and current in phase (max power through). However, the over all impedance of the circuit can act differently. In a series RLC circuit, the impedance goes to zero at resonance, so you get maximum current at resonance. In a parallel RLC circuit, the impedance goes to infinity, so you get maximum voltage.
What if you magnetically couple these two circuits? One circuit will have almost no impedance while the other is nothing but impedance. They will both oscillate at the same frequency but the over all impedances will be mismatched (so their oscillation will be out of phase). You will have resonance without power usage - pure reactive power.
Now when I look at this patent, that is pretty much what I see. The first circuit, composed of primary windings, is the parallel circuit. The capacitance in the first circuit is internal (a self capacitance in the wires themselves) which is always viewed as paralleled. The second circuit is series'ed. The first circuit will have large voltage while the second has large current. This is similar to a Tesla coil actually - only the capacitor of the series circuit in a Tesla coil is made to be internal and the parallel circuit's capacitance is an actual element.
What is very interesting, as Erfinder pointed out, is the intersection of the secondary windings. Look at how the wires are coiled to produce the magnetic fields. They are looped. The field flows from the "transformer" (being the secondary circuit coiled by a primary) to the stand-a-lone secondaries. Basically, the magnetic field in the secondary is made to flow within itself. The primaries are just injection points to couple the circuits. The fields are shown in a single instant. In the next instant, the fields would be reversed, all the North's becoming South's and vice versa.
Like what I said earlier, to me I see a rotating magnetic field produced from purely reactive power. That is so very cool. And I'm sure putting magnets on the rotor is what will make up for resistance losses so the device can run truly on unity. This is probably where the resonant/octave tuning comes into play.
Charlie,
As you know, if you want to consider parasitic capacitance on primary coils (E), then you know a greater parasitic capacitance is in secondaries (F and G) and you cannot ignore them. (I prefer to call the coils by letters to make shorter sentences, easy to follow.) I would rather say that given the frequency range this motor is supposed to run (Hz), a few pF would not play a big role. Bottom line Tesla states the purpose of playing with this configuration is to achieve 90 degree phase shift with a smaller and cheaper capacitor.
However, If anyone sees the need to consider the parasitic capacitance, I'm all ears to arguments.
Although apparently we see the same things, personally I'm not convinced and I want to double check and to make sure.
Quote from: Charlie_V on April 20, 2007, 01:08:50 PM
From what I've read, I'm also thinking the same as you guys are.
...
What is very interesting, as Erfinder pointed out, is the intersection of the secondary windings. Look at how the wires are coiled to produce the magnetic fields. They are looped.
...
When you say looped do you mean from capacitor, F coils go round
clock wise then hit the sweet spot Erfinder pointed out and G coils return
counter-clock wise to capacitor?
If so, the next statement sound about right, although I cannot make the whole sense.
Quote from: Charlie_V on April 20, 2007, 01:08:50 PM
The field flows from the "transformer" (being the secondary circuit coiled by a primary) to the stand-a-lone secondaries. Basically, the magnetic field in the secondary is made to flow within itself.
Please do me a big favor and try to rephrase this, it may help me to "visualize" what could be the benefit. If you don't mind... I struggle with this for a couple of days and I don't see it. A similar loop could have been to continue with G coils in the same direction (clock wise) and end in the same spot - the capacitor. It seems important and yet I don't get it.
Quote from: Charlie_V on April 20, 2007, 01:08:50 PM
The primaries are just injection points to couple the circuits. The fields are shown in a single instant. In the next instant, the fields would be reversed, all the North's becoming South's and vice versa.
Agree!
Thanks for your comments, b.
Thanks everyone,
With a lot of re-reading and asking some questions, things are starting to come together finally. It is great that we have a bunch of People that are going out of there way to help others. A tightly knitted group is what we are becoming, and that is good. Thanks for letting me catch up and hopefully I can also help others when the time comes.
Regards
Trump
Hello again
I have been reading the posts and patents and I think these circuits are not about gaining anything, but not losing what we put in. In teslas patent 4464666, the primaries E are transformer primaries for the secondaries F and G. Tesla states the purpose of this is to reduce the capacitance needed to establish a phase difference of 90 degrees between primary and secondary windings. For me this means when the primaries peak the secondaries are at zero potential and then when the secondaries peak the primaries are at zero potential. So in the last few months here I have been teaching myself to assume the opposite of what we do, to ignore our terminology, which is by no means easy. Maybe erfinders thoughts and others have finally broken me. At this point of confusion it seems logical that tesla would add energy where it would seem to do nothing, to have the primary peak at a point of neutrality a void in the center of the inductor or bloch wall in a magnet. I would do this only to ensure the secondaries drive the process, charging the capacitor in the process, 90 degrees later the Bemf or field reversal could charge the primary thus the source, Im just guessing here as usual.
I think maybe my perception of things has changed, Im starting to see a magnetic field as a solid, something immobile, not really a source of anything. It's everything else moving into it, everything around it in absolute chaos. This electricity thing is out of whack as well, all this terminology trying to define every aspect,every nuance of what seems to be motion, a chain of events , Im not sure why we have to make everything so complicated, who are we trying to impress?. Well Im starting to ramble, those are my 2 cents anyways.
Best of luck
...
I guess my last post was a little wordy (haha all my posts are :( ). What I meant was, coils G and F are connected such that they form one long wire. However, they are coiled in a way so the magnetic flux is contained within themselves. I think this is the "special" point Erfinder referred to, F and G are connected to make a single wire but there is a magnetic flux that is interchanged (looped) between them. Referring to my drawings, the flux loop is drawn in the first picture. The second picture shows the rotating field at the same instant of time as in the patent.
I am not sure if parasitic capacitance and self capacitance are the same thing. I usually hear of parasitic capacitance found from stray charge in circuits - I suppose self capacitance is the same... never really thought about that. Anyway, whatever it's called (self or parasitic), this would be important from the stand point of resonance, since it would determine the optimum driving frequency. I highly disagree with you as far as the speed. This motor should be able to operate at much higher frequencies than a few hertz. I would suspect a few hundred hertz unloaded (aka 10,000 RPMs or higher with permanent magnets attached to the rotor).
But I do fully agree with you as far as the placement of the secondary capacitor (H). Its purpose is to make the current in F and G 90 degrees out of phase with E. I'm just trying to view this from the point of power transfer and resonance.
<Added> I just wanted to say that I don't
think that the clockwise/counter clockwise direction is that important. It is how you coil the wires so the magnetic fields develop like Tesla drew in the patent. You could make the wires go completely clockwise if you wanted, you would just have to pay close attention to which way the coils were wound on the metal rods (A and B).
brnbrade,
I like you drawings, they are good. But what you have labeled as "secondarie" is really the primary (E). And your "primarie" coils are really the secondaries (F and G).
You know what, I over looked this! Has anyone else noticed how the secondaries (F) are wrapped around the primary (E)? The primary is at the bottom... how strange. Erfinder's circuit has the primary around the secondary, Tesla is doing the opposite. I wonder if it makes a difference?
Anyway, I'm off to bed. Later guys,
Charlie
Charlie_V
thank you for the patch.
I will redraw the graphs, before somebody gets confused.
Hi All,
I hope this post clears a few things up. I have attached a drawing which represents the electrical transformer as described in patent 593 138 "Electrical Transformer". So in patent 464666 electro magnetic motor there are "6" electrical transformers with two sections.
Refer to patent 593 138 electrical transformer, on the 2nd page of the text b/w 11-19.
He states that "In practice for apparatus designed for ordinary use the coil is preferably constructed....in two sections, so as to constitute really two secondaries".
So if one ignores the figure 3 diagram in patent 593 138 and think of it conceptually from the text then we have a primary and a secondary (represented by Pole A) on one coil and a second secondary on the other coil to the right (represented by pole B).
He mentions also in patent 464,666 line 95 "a current-impulse induced from the primary coil E imparts the same magnetism to the poles B as that produced in poles A by the primary impulse. This confirms this view point!
Also as previously stated in other posts the condenser (capacitor) is tuned to "so as to cause the currents to pass through it to differ from the primary currents by a quarter phase"(reference 464666 line 55-60). As I stated in my earlier posts the quarter phase represents the point of no attraction and no repulsion. i.e resonates with the void (neutral point) - the point of stillness.
So I will also highlight that the coils are highly likely configured in the next attachment which cant be confirmed as he conveniently neglects to tell us the configuration in most of his patents NSNSNSNSNSNS. Creating a neutral ring of coils. Mind you it would be much easier to replace these with magnets configured the same way (as described in my earlier posts)
Regards,
N.
Sorry please find attached a better picture of the coil arrangement
I redraw a pictures. ;D
(https://overunityarchives.com/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fimg410.imageshack.us%2Fimg410%2F1826%2Fnuss2wm4.jpg&hash=6f0599aa6093ac4f7c07304bb65de0bc2f110f6b) (http://imageshack.us)
QuoteAlso as previously stated in other posts the condenser (capacitor) is tuned to "so as to cause the currents to pass through it to differ from the primary currents by a quarter phase"(reference 464666 line 55-60). As I stated in my earlier posts the quarter phase represents the point of no attraction and no repulsion. i.e resonates with the void (neutral point) - the point of stillness.
nat1971a,
The part I bolded is also referred to reactive power - in electrical engineering terms. Pretty cool stuff if you ask me! I wasn't really paying close attention to patent 593,138, good correlation you found nat. But in patent 593,138, aren't the primaries wrapped around the secondaries? In 464,666 it is the secondary wrapped around the primary. I wonder if this makes a difference?
Good Job
brnbrade, I like those pictures. What program did you use? Paintshop?
Quote from: Charlie_V on April 21, 2007, 10:38:13 AM
QuoteAlso as previously stated in other posts the condenser (capacitor) is tuned to "so as to cause the currents to pass through it to differ from the primary currents by a quarter phase"(reference 464666 line 55-60). As I stated in my earlier posts the quarter phase represents the point of no attraction and no repulsion. i.e resonates with the void (neutral point) - the point of stillness.
nat1971a,
The part I bolded is also referred to reactive power - in electrical engineering terms. Pretty cool stuff if you ask me! I wasn't really paying close attention to patent 593,138, good correlation you found nat. But in patent 593,138, aren't the primaries wrapped around the secondaries? In 464,666 it is the secondary wrapped around the primary. I wonder if this makes a difference?
Good Job brnbrade, I like those pictures. What program did you use? Paintshop?
Charlie, nat,
As long the energy transfer is done by induction means, I don't think it makes any difference which coils is at "inside" or "outside". I consider coils nothing more than "
concentrators" of [electro]magnetic field. Much like magnifier glass. Now if you consider the windings of 2 coupled coils unwrapped to form 2 straight lines, these are still coupled and energy transfer still exist. In this last case, there is no coil "inside" nor "outside". One would argue this is not magnetic coupling, but rather capacitive. If you accept there is no electric current with its magnetic effect and instead there is only electromagnetic field, then how energy transfer is achieved is not relevant anymore. However this last statement has to be proved.
Another one: I find amazing how reactive power with its real/observable effects is based on "imaginary number" (i). Its is not a real number, doesn't give a direction or a measure of anything and yet it defines rotation/twist/torque moment.
And the last one (for now): I read about equivalence between rotor coils and magnets and I don't get it. Are the coils like in attached picture from pat# 416194? In other words, the North and South poles are radial or circular oriented? I've seen two posted pictures that seem to contradict each other.
Thanks.
From my old electronics communications book under transformers:
1. The source emf produces a primary current
2. The primary current produces counter emf in the primary
3. Primary current also produces an induced secondary emf
4. Secondary emf produce a secondary current. (through load)
5. Secondary current produces a counter emf in the secondary
6. Secondary current also produces a counter counter emf in the primary(opposite
to the original counter emf in the primary and in the same direction
as the source emf.
7. Counter counter emf partially cancels counter emf of primary
8. Cancellation of primary counter emf allows source emf to supply
more current through the primary
So if we set the secondary current 90 deg. off of the primary current,
the counter counter emf in the primary will be 90 deg. off of the source emf.
Does this produce it's own primary current and start a whole new process
in addition to the original source emf and do this over and over?
Jeff
I have no doubt all of you have seen this-
http://peswiki.com/index.php/Directory:Rotoverter:Replications:Hector:Original_Disclosure
The rotoverter uses a capacitor to produce 3 phase power from a single phase source,where tesla used a secondary transformer circuit and cap to produce a "shadow" phase. I say shadow phase because if the primary phase could be seen as an object blocking the "light" the secondary phase would be it's shadow. So, how many shadows could an object cast? It would depend on the sources wouldn't it? No, I don't think so, I could use one source producing multiple reflections with mirrors and cast as many shadows as I require from a single object. Now, we know the light is our source, we know the object is our primary phase, we know the shadow is our secondary phase coupled to the primary phase and using a capacitor we produce a phase shift(the shadow), the secondary phase is dependant on the primary but obviously does not draw from it. So now the most relavant question I have is what would constitute a mirror?
I cannot help but think that a transformer might constitute a mirror, as erfinder stated that teslas greatest discovery may have been the transformer. It is a reflection of the source, but not truly "the" source, even more so if the reflection produces a distorted image of the source, a transformation. This transformation may simply be "potential", as erfinder said "electricity is a high potential-high frequency field" and magnetism is static or bound somehow.
I think we have missed something on the most fundamental level of understanding, we see what we have been told, we see what we have been taught to see but we cannot see the reality of what is right in front of us.
Fundamentally, I have come to believe the magnetic field we supposedly create does not exist. The stator coils electric field orients the paramagnetic core, the atoms fields in the core align themselves with the external electric field. This is not a source of magnetism, but a sink, a cold immobile region with bound charges not "creating" an external field but having all external fields in the surrounding matter conform(align) to it's field. I base this of the fact that magnetism(ie superconductors) increases with a lack of temperature or cold and magnetism decreases with heat. A rapidly spinning disk in free space will produce magnetism. The faraday generator has proven that a magnetic field is static in space relative to the magnets movement, and the fact that a magnet will stick to a fridge forever dispite gravity. So the only forces producing magnetism are electrostatic in nature, electrostatic charges in matter bound in alignment by external forces. Electrostastic atomic forces are lossless systems, hence high potential electricity has less losses than high amperage electricity.
I think teslas patent used transfomer action to raise the potential to reduce losses, he then used "shadow" phases like the rotoverter to produce lossless rotating magnetic fields somehow de-coupled from the primary phase. I am missing something very important however, that is the frequency/potential relationship with matter. Matter has charges, charged fields and motion(vibration/resonance) and I just can't put the relationship in context yet.
Im sorry if this seems off topic, but there is something very interesting going on here I can't figure out yet.
Best of luck
Quote from: Charlie_V on April 21, 2007, 10:38:13 AM
Good Job brnbrade, I like those pictures. What program did you use? Paintshop?
Hi Charlie_V.
No. Photoshop.
I put layers and rebuild the paths with the tools.
Sorry my poor english.
Not expressing my thoughts correctly.
Hi All,
Charlie_V. - I dont think it would make any difference if the primary is wrapped around the secondary. It still achieves the same result.
Barbosi - the armature coil arrangement - this is the point where deductive reasoning comes in to play. Tesla's doesnt tell us the configuration of the armature coils and for good reason. It has become apparent that this is the heart and soul of the invention. And thus his most guarded secret. It has become obvious to me that in the patents we have been looking at he neglects to tells us the configuration of the magnets in patent 568176 and the coil configuration in 464666. But why? - thats what he is obscuring or hiding from everyone.
He states to us in patent 464,666 line 11-16 "The general object of my present invention is to secure artifically a difference of a quarter phase b/w the currents.....in which the action or operation is dependent upon the inductive influence upon a rotating armature of...magnets or coils...".
So in other words the quarter phase is to influence the armature coils or magnets. But why is he doing this? what is the relationship? Well I have deduced that the quarter phase (Reactive power - thanks Charlie_V) resonates to the neutral point (The Void). This was deduced by the following evidence.
*********************************************************
START OF PRIMARY EVIDENCE - as posted earlier:-p55 occult ether physics
?Thomsons system was later investigated by Bjerknes. He showed that when two spheres immersed in an incompressible fluid were pulsated, they exerted a mutual attraction, while if the phases differed by a half wave, the spheres repelled. At one quarter wave difference, there was no action. Where pulses were non-instantaneous at distances greater than a quarter wavelength, attractions and repulsations were reversed............The publishings of these researches and experiments in the physical journals of Europe were available to Nikola Tesla....Tesla could read and understand all these journals in their original languages."
The important point here is "at one quarter wave difference, there was no action."
So what does this mean? Well what does this represent? This represents the void!!!!!!!!!!!! ...the neutral point.......the point of no attraction and no repulsion.
This highlights that a quarter wave length resonates with the neutral point!!!!.
END OF PRIMARY EVIDENCE
********************************************************
So if we accept the fact that the quarter phase difference (reactive power) resonates with the neutral point. Then it doesnt take much to deduce that it resonates with the neutral point of the coils (as stated earlier magnets & coils have a N,S and a neutral point) OR the magnets (as he stated that the coils could be magnets.....and that the object of the invention was to secure a difference of a quarter phase). The only problem he doesnt tell us the configuration. So we will have to deduce what the configuration is. It is also possible that he hasnt drawn the coils exactly as they should be in an effort to obscure what he wanted patented as most inventors do. Otherwise the secret is out.
So I have deduced that the configuration is NSNSNSNSNSNS. As that appears to be the only configuration that would produce a neutral outcome (a neutral ring). One has to keep in mind that he did say the the armature coils could be replaced by magnets. So if it helps to think of the coils as magnets then that is what is required. As stated earlier I cant confirm this. One has to conclude it. So it remains unconfirmed but highly likely.
If this is the case why the difference b/w 6 coils and 4 magnets later on in patent 568,176. Who knows. But it seems obvious that the configuration of the 4 magnets (creates 8 neutral points) is a refinement on the configuration of 6 coils (creates 12 neutral points).
Regards,
N.
On the otherhand the coil arrangement could be
Not sure...anyway it seems obvious that he has chosen a configuration that produces neutral points
Hi there.
Well. + or - like this
1 - The Eddy currents induces the secondary.
2 - Secondarys looped in HV e HC.
3 - The devices basically is a transformer
Regards
Makes sense to me. I'm beginning to see the key in having this neutral point. There is a generator I'm building at present. I've figured out that the key element in my generator needs to be magnetically saturated to a point where the field does not radiate out yet outside magnetic fields will not effect it (a neutral point). If I can successfully rig this, my generator should operate the most efficiently.
I know this is a little off topic but it does fit within the "neutral point" discussion. I never really thought about reactive power in this way but your right. The power is nulled, which is why the average power is zero. It is very interesting to think about. I'm seeing it as the power is being shared between the load and source. Everything we use today only takes from the source, it doesn't share. Hehe, the world is always better when you share!
Ok, my turn....
I have been trying to keep up with everyone, not sure I am doing such a good job - so I made a series of diagrams that I think helps me express my point, and maybe will help some others visualize things in a new way...
I look at the system as a series of induced fields. The idea as stated in line 45 and follows (BTW the PDF I have is smuged in these lines, so I am deducing missing words).
"I have devised a means which renders practicable both the above described plans or methods, (those being 90? phase shift through a condensor compared to the source AC, and a means to make an affordable/practicle sized/cost condensor to do the above) and by which I am enabled to obtain an economical and efficient alternating-current motor, my invention consisting in placing a condenser in the secondary or induced circuit of the motor above described and raising the potential of the secondary currents to such a degree that the capacity of the condenser, which is in part dependent on the potential, need be quite small."
So to me, the idea he is trying to convey is how to make an economical 90? shift of phase? He states this is done by raising the potential, and thereby reducing the size and capacity of the condenser.
I see this happening in a few ways, but it is still murky, as I get lost in how the condenser works. In my illustrations I tried to maintain flow of thought by reducing North South - and used color coding for alternating polarities of field, since it is obvious that the fields change continually, simultaneously, and at different places in the circuit. Moreover, since he stated in lines 16-20 "(To artificially obtain quarter phase difference)...in which the action or operation is dependent upon the inductive influence upon a rotating armature of independent field magnets or coils exerted succsesively and not simultaneously." the armature can be either coils or magnets - it seems it doesn't much matter - as the field operating on them is doing the "magic". So in my illustration, I left the armature coils colored to represent alternating fields. I have a feeling there is something to do with the "dwell" time of the armature through the fields, but I can't get that far along yet.
Also, I took some inspiration from brnbrade's illustrations, as I think I see what he is getting at with his dashed lines. I see a 90? difference between the "intermediate" poles of the secondary ("G" circuit) and the "primary" poles ("F" circuit). I tried to illustrate this a bit more clearly, and I think it is awfully coincidental that the arrangement of the coils only works in one direction (per polarization - see the illustrations) and the same 90? phase shift "flowing through the condenser" (lines 28 & 29). I also illustrated only one set of 90? phases for clarity, but they can be mentally visualized throughout the remainder of the circuit.
Lastly, I made up some arbitrary movements of the armature. I don't have any idea how far the armature would move, I just took a random guess by using the "just eyeball it method". I hope this doesn't cause confusion by being way wrong.
Anyway, it would be best if someone could help complete the diagrams by explaining what happens to the circuit through the condesnor when the AC phase shifts 180? opposite. There has to be something going on with the F & G circuits when the condenser discharges - especially if they contain residual charge, or are being re-induced by the armature.
One more thing I forgot to mention, since the primaries ("E") are wound with coarse wire (line 79) and the Secondaries ("F" and "G") are wound with "long fine-wire coils" (line 82-83) it is apparent that we are stepping up the "potential" every time the primaries are energized. Moreover, it makes me wonder what happens to the core when the "G" circuit is energized, then energizes the "F" circuit and energizes the "E" coils. This is the same core running through all coils (primary and secondaries). It does remind me of Leedkalnins PMH. The only difference (aside from more poles) when the energy flows out the end of the core towards the armature, instead of having a soft iron core conecting all the "U" ends, it has an alternating magnetic field. It makes me wonder if the armature field is the same polarity as the core field, does the energy from the core flow into the armature - without a polarity change - and get "looped" in the armature windings and maintain the PMH integrity? Does this make the armature windings the equivalent of an electro-magnetic "keeper" that has the ability to change polarity on the fly without changing the polarity of the original core charge? Just pure speculation, but it does make me wonder what is going on between the armature and the core/coils.
:D ha ha
Demystified!
The tesla secrets were anything anything else less than high frequencies to create great static power!
Because?
Simple. Larger adhesion power and repulsion power.
Example: Try you to arrive close to a line of strength of high potency.!
Poor fellow, anger to fry and to be pulled with great strength.
The arrays of the reels are as a long one entrust coiled as only one.
Tesla was persisted in great potencies and frequencies.
He knew about that magnetic power.
It doesn't generate great currents, but he has the power of inducing them.
The arrays of the device is a transformer. That is:
With a little current 1/4 of the phase, it got a booster.
I know that I am annoying with that, more it excuses my terrible English.
I hope understand.
;)
What tesla probably thought!
The current model is to generate of the font the great potentials and flux.
Tesla knew that the fonts were big and inexhaustible.
Of the mother earth the more far away from the stars of the universe.
The grid of energy distribution today, requests an expensive structure and of great maintenance costs.
Tesla knew how to improve this.
That was ignored by the sands of the time.
The intellectual people of the time weren the theory of the electrons and they didn't know deeply
the magnetism observed by tesla.
Tesla knew of the magnetism of the magnetos and of the static of the high frequencies.
High frequencies that were able transmitted for electromagnetic waves and received by antennas.
Tesla wise to liberate the energy
No more for the moment.
Was forgetting.!
Really liberates the Free Energy.
Now my head this breeze for a new horizons.
Hi Gang,
www.tesla.org (http://www.tesla.org) not bad resource site
I would like to say, i agree with ERFinder, this group is awsome ... i specially feel privelaged to have been fortunate to be apart of this...
However, We seriously need to rewind abit as I fear we may have overlooked some key ingredients here and haved trickled into our own comfort (mainstream) zones ... We should be making this our own first ... Forgive this choppy order but you get the point and can look into yourselves...
please carefully consider the following ... Make it Your OWN!!! - get it yet? in recognition of ERFinders recent posts - he has stated the true defintions of what we are really looking at ... according to his information of what the effects truely are ... we get a whole new picture and friends - he has aleady told us what we are looking at here ... its time to stop ... review his posts
look at it again, this time according to what ERFINDER and TELSA have shown us thus far ... shall we? lets see what comes of this!?
QuoteThe energy of the future has a name... Magneto-Dielectric Energy! Where magnetism is static, and electricity is characterized as a high potential high frequency field, which moves inward (implosion) and outward (explosion) simultaneously! This action simulates the VOID, the zero point which mainstream science is desperately searching for. We will discuss this further after all the patents have been demystified.
Given:
Magnetism is static
electricity = high potential high frequency field; moves inward (implosion) and outward (explosion) simultaneously
Electricity simulates the Void - Zero Point
Find:
Magneto-Dielectric Energy
What is the definition of the energy of the future - Magneto-Dielectric Energy?
Magneto=Pulsing (expanding-contracting) ... (imploding-exploding)
Dielectric=Poor conductor ... stores electrostatic charge
Energy=kinetic work
Magneto-Dielectric Energy = Pulsing-Electrostatic Charged kinetic work...
QuoteWhat you call magnetism is in reality electricity! How? What? Impossible!!! I say again magnetism and electricity are one in the same! This would be common knowledge if scientists understood what a flux line is, and from what it extends!
I will explain this further on my new website; it is a subject in itself. Static electricity can be used! Not as a spark, as a stress field! A stress field is what is being formed in the motor of that patent! A Tesla coil secondary is the source of the field of stress in his words ?the working circuit?. The twelve secondary windings represent plates of a capacitor!!!!! A stress field is produced and produces rotary motion; the same system can be used to produce linear motion when arranged differently!! Ever wonder how Tesla disintegrated wires! If you can disintegrate matter, you can also build up matter?..man is any one listening?.. are you all really ready for this? Show me you are ready. Discuss the patent amongst yourselves.
Note he is asking if anyone is really listening ....
Given:
Magnetism=Electricity =Static electricity (electrostatics)
Electricity is electrostatic - not as a spark but as Stress Field
This is what is being formed in the motor of this patent 464.666
The secondary coil within the telsa coils is the source of the Stress fields (the working circuit)
The secondary coil within the telsa coil is electrostatic (electricity)
12 secondary coils represent plates in a capacitor!!!!
Stress Field is produced and produces rotary motion
Stress Field is produced and produces linear motion - if arranged differently
Find:
Flux Lines= What is and where from???
......
QuotePlease consider the following.... For the moment
It matters not if we are dealing with AC or DC.
It matters not if we are dealing with inductance or capacitance.
The void is irrelevant.
Without making it complicated ask yourselves what do we have!
Anwser
ELECTRICAL TRANSFORMER
Given:
AC/DC does not matter
Inductance and capacitance does not matter
The void is irrelevant
Find:
What do we have? - A Transformer
What does a transformer do?
.........
QuoteYou all have trained yourselves into thinking that the "Tesla Coil" is for producing sparks, and electromagnetic energy. Yes this is what it does, but this is not why it was designed, it is not it's only function!
...
Yes this is what it (telsa coil) does, but this is not why it was designed, it is not it's only function! You all really need to think that over! Everything Tesla constructed had a purpose, and the Tesla Coil was his greatest invention!!! What inspired this device? The truth will amaze you!!!
Given:
Telsa Coil - not inteded for sparks and magnetic fields - it is the effects
Find:
What does the Telsa coil do?
Well friends ... now what ... review the motor with the actual understanding from the compiled data above ... remember, no more mainstream terms at this time ... this is what i am doing and it was very odd at first, but now its starting to click ... give it a try ... i will post the compiled finds and givens when i have time and have made it my own ...
Sincerely,
Z
wow, we lost some posts.
anyway zacharim check out erfinders site and click vortex science most of the answers are there, I found my answer there as well. I also agree this group is awesome and it is a priviledge for me to have been a part of it.
Regards,
Mark
http://www.borderlands.com/dollardandtesla.htm
midnight_blue
I agree midnight blue, we did lose some postings. I am not sure if they were edited out or what happened. I went back a couple of times to see if some of the postings got out of sink or what happened. Midnight Blue did you see my response back to you on the Magnetic strength at the Equator posting?
Trump
Trump,
Yes I did, thanks. The answer to my question(s) was found at erfinders site link vortex science.
Regards,
Mark
midnight_blue
OK, I was not sure if the link that I sent would satisfy the question or not, but it did appear to be along that topic anyway. I am finding myself re-reading the patent 464,666 over a few more times. I look at some of the wording, like line ( 12 ) it says Artificially and also on line ( 19 ) it says Magnets OR coils. and then it says exerted successively and not simultaneously. Just some wording like that I go back over it and look at the options of the definitions. A lot of it is just common sence, but other wording make me read through it more to try and get the concept of it. I know that there has been some post on what I have just underlined, but I was not sure if everyone agreed on other postings or if some of the thoughts were still not really digested yet by everyone. One thing I have tried to do is to NOT read anymore into the patent then what is printed.
Hopefully we will be on to the next set of Patent's and again I hope that things will blend in more and we can get more out of it.
Regards
Trump
Well this can't be good, all my posts from yesterday are gone, vanished into thin air, and only my posts that I know of.
I was all over the net researching this technology and everything was starting to come together as far as what tesla may have been doing.
I had a feeling I should have copied and pasted it to a text file, damn you Harti.
Did anyone catch my posts yesterday?
allcanadian
If you can try and give me some knowledge of what you were explaining on some of your posts that you lost I may be able to help you. I saved some topics, but not the names, I think I may be able to get them back for you. If you had some drawings that would help also.The server was down yesterday for awhile as I did notice that, really folks this has happened before on another link of Overunity and a lot of posts were lost.
Trump
Yes. A lot of crude ideas were lost, including mines.
However, I was rambling on capacitance topic and I was trying to make a sense on what a capacitance is and why coils act as capacitors.
On the topic, today starting from "magneto-dielectric energy" the one pointed Erfinder (I hope I recall right the expression) I found the link I recently posted.
http://www.borderlands.com/dollardandtesla.htm
There is also mentioned a book by Steinmetz "Electric Discharges, Waves and Impulses".
This book is available for free download at: http://www.archive.org/details/elementarylectur00steirich
Maybe some readings from 1919 or so will give a sense on what man of that time were researching. It is clear to me a lot of info has been abandoned.
I have started to see some connections between the works of Tesla, Wilbert B. Smith, Dave Lowrance, and Kosol Ouch (William Hooper too.). Three-state resonance. Various coils and interactions with aluminum, copper, crustals, etc.
Universe is 12 dimensions - 3 sets of 4 - Tempic field (one domension - time) varies and creates a divergence (2 dimensions - electric) which curls (magnetic - three dimensions) - three fields perpenicular are to each other. Manipulation of these three allows manipulation of everything to some degree. Length of wire is critical when working with tempic field. Tempic is aslo called torsion and what I consider "potential". It's the primal field and exists without the other two. Ffree energy, levitation, transmutation, time travel, etc - it's all possible to some degree.
Anyway, I'm still gathering info and sorting it out...will be experimenting shortly.
P.S. Ran across some info that explained Erfinder's series connected coils - will find it again and post it. Made perfect sense when I read it.
I was sorry to see Barbosi and Allcanadian's posts gone - they both had some good info. The important thing is the thoughts were there - so they should resurface in due time.
I found a few interesting things quite by accident. I was looking at some videos on You Tube - Looooove you tube - can't get out of there for hours. Anyway, I made a few interesting discoveries. The first is this video:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=m8PAqu-HPuw
It is a series of still shots that show some Tesla Coil discharges. Of particular interest in this video, you can see in most frames that the electricity does come off the toroid ring in paired vortex spirals - much like a DNA helix. It is worth a look, as it is interesting to see it in action. Something that you can not see when it is in full motion.
Second was of a Toroid device by Steven Mark. As I see there are a few topics on this forum about the Steven Mark TPU, I know some of you are familiar with it. Aside from the interesting aspect of the device, I found something quite interesting:
http://www.thewaterengine.com/pdf/stevenmarktpu.pdf
On Page 10 of this PDF is the following quote:
"Now about the DC output with AC signal. There is a book about Nicola Tesla "The Man who Had lightning in his hand". I suggest that you find a copy of that book and read it. In that book it is related that Tesla states that you can have all kinds of electrons flowing through a wire traveling in different directions relating only to their potential power source. He even said that you could have different electron flows through a single wire completely separate from each other. I tried it and he is right!"
Of course this is a third-party quote, but it answered many of the problems I had in understanding the fields when the condenser discharges. I think this puts the mystery of the 90? phase shift one step closer to being understood. It got me thinking that the reason we perceive of electron flow (current, magnets, charge, energy etc) through a wire in one direction is we create devices that cause this to happen. But this is not to say that it is limited to flowing in only one direction. It is clear from much of what I have read, especially Leedskalnin, that when a charge/current/magnet/electric is induced in a coil, it begins at the center of the coil, and radiates out towards both ends of that coil simultaneously. Likewise, it stands to reason that two charges could be sent through a wire simultaneously in opposite directions. This would have some interesting effects if the two pulses were 90? out of phase from each other. Coincidentally, this appears to be almost (if not exactly) what is happening in this patent. I am not sure if both currents truly are 90? out of phase when the capacitor discharges, but they are at 90? angles in relation to the armature, thus their fields are intersecting at right angles. Despite this, within the "F" circuit (secondaries) they do approach each other from different directions simultaneously, in the same wire, in the same circuit (when the condenser discharges).
The part that is throwing me is that I have read that DC cannot pass through a capacitor, but AC can. I am not entirely sure how this is so, therefore, I do not fully understand the implications, nor the properties of how the capacitor works in regards to AC, and I may be misunderstanding something. My complete working knowledge of condenser's is in older combustion engine ignitions. These are primarily DC, and only fire when the points close. However, it causes me to think more on the concept that ERFINDER told us that the individual coils make up the 12 plates of a capacitor. I am beginning to see a resonance (simultaneous oscillation) developing in all three circuits, and making it hard to distinguish where the fields begin and the circuits stop. This further emphasizes the static field being moving, and the magnetic fields being static. And just when I was begining to realize there was no such thing as electricity - only magnetism...LOL
By the way, the book title in the quote above is wrong, it is "Lightning in his hand. A biography of Nikola Tesla (http://www.tfcbooks.com/mall/more/209lihh.htm)" by Inez Hunt and Wanetta W. Draper. (This site linked has it for $16.95, but is out of stock, Amazon has it for $200. There are some interesting library resources that show it available, but most are from university libraries, and the nearest to me is almost 2 hours away.) I am not sure if any of you own this book, or would have access to it in your local libraries, but if someone could confirm (or better yet) post the areas that this is referencing, it would be great. It may even be in other works, such as a patent or elsewhere.
Hello again everyone.
I would like to say I am not an electrical engineer nor do I have a electrical background. I have done electrical work in my house, small projects and I am not afraid to try anything.
I guess what I am saying I don't have by any means a full comprehension of mainstream electronics but know enough to do some damage.
With that here is what I see in patten 464666.
The circuit formed by coils E on poles A are charged by and outside source.This also sets the polarity on the A poles.
Next the E coils circuit charge the circuit formed by the F coils.
Next the F coils pass their high voltage(HV) to the circuit formed by the coils G on poles B, but before it can complete path it is, lets say paused by a 1/4 phase buy the condenser.
Next the circuit from coils G are charged with (HV) and thus setting the polarity on the poles B.
Since the 2 secondary circuits are (closed upon themselves) or connected the (HV) then travels back to the circuit F on poles A but again paused buy the condenser.
This back in forth pulsing fields then causes the amateurs to spin.
In a nut shell that's what I see.
Now lets say after the initial charge the outside source is cut will the two secondaries circuits continue to pulse the (HV) back and forth ?
Would this be acting like Ed Leedskalnins' Perpetual Motion Holder ?
Well I put this into motion in an animated gif so take a look see what you think.
It's late and I need to get some rest. :)
Cheers
am1ll3r
(https://overunityarchives.com/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fhome.comcast.net%2F%7Eamiller375%2Ftesla.gif&hash=a07ba2c532aa4b07ed8b67151c4fc161870f4fcd)
Quote from: Trump on April 23, 2007, 02:40:51 PM
allcanadian
If you can try and give me some knowledge of what you were explaining on some of your posts that you lost I may be able to help you. I saved some topics, but not the names, I think I may be able to get them back for you. If you had some drawings that would help also.The server was down yesterday for awhile as I did notice that, really folks this has happened before on another link of Overunity and a lot of posts were lost.
Trump
Trump,
If you can post the info after zepharim post #465 until the server when down, that would help many as there was alot of good info posted.
Thanks,
Mark
And all acting principle behind this is simple??!!??!!
Personally, I don't see anything simple here. Simple is when you look at it and see it. Nothing more.
I know, "take it easy", "relax", "deep breath", nothing works. I relaxed, I collapsed, I got an easy book, I got a nap, I got drunk, I got asleep again, etc, but I didn't get it.
I guess I'm going to have a time out and occasionally to read what others find and judge by the only measure of "simplicity". Not simple, cannot be true...
Best of luck people!
Hello everyone,
In the middle of the following page, I found the next quote:
http://www.angelfire.com/ak5/energy21/adamsmotor.htm (http://www.angelfire.com/ak5/energy21/adamsmotor.htm)
QuoteQ: Does this device have any similarity to Nikola Tesla's U.S. patent 568,176 that Bill has recently highlighted as a possible radiant energy device?
Maybe. This is something I have attempted to investigate recently. The Tesla unit relies on self oscillation within the core, as each pulse is delivered when the magnetic polarity in the core has only partially decayed from that established by the previous pulse. You therefore get a form of flux movement and 'free precharge,' to the main circuit. Hints of cold current are contained in the patent which talks of 'converting and supplying electrical energy in a form suited to the production of certain novel electrical phenomena' and more importantly 'around the break or point of interruption I place a condenser or condensers to store the energy of the discharge current, ' and a 'high electromotive force which is induced at each break of the main circuit furnishes the proper current for charging the condenser, which may therefore be small and inexpensive.' This is in line with the observed properties of the POD technology, which is also able to store large amounts of charge in capacitors much more quickly and reliably than conventional science teaches is possible. My current gut feeling is that Tesla's setup is basically the same thing, just much harder to tune. But since the Tesla patent hints that it may be possible to completely eliminate the magnets from the POD layout further decreasing costs, it is worth keeping in mind.
Then almost near the end of that same page, I found this quote:
QuoteAnd finally, Bill has recently published a most fascinating analysis, that suggest that Nikola Tesla's U.S. patent 568,176, is in a fact a cold current generation device. I have decided to omit it for space reasons, but this document contains sufficient insight into the physics of negative energy generation, for anyone with talent to properly interpret the schematics.
On that same page, regarding the Tesla Transformer, not to be confused with the Tesla Coil, the following was is quoted:
QuoteTesla Transformers are not magnetoelectric devices, they use radiant shockwaves, and produce pure voltage without current. No university High Frequency Coil must ever be called a "Tesla Coil", since the devices usually employed in demonstration halls are the direct result of apparatus perfected by Sir Oliver Lodge and not by Nikola Tesla. The Tesla Transformer is an impulse apparatus, and cannot be as easily constructed except by strict conformity with parameters which Tesla enunciated. Tesla Transformers produce extraordinary white impulse discharges of extreme length and pressure, which exceed the alternating violet spark displays of Lodge Coils. This is illustrated by noting the manner in which Tesla Transformers are actually constructed. While looking and seeming the same, each system actually performs very different functions. Lodge Coils are alternators. Tesla Transformers are unidirectional impulses. The most efficient Tesla Transformations were obtained only when the disruptive radiating wire line equaled the mass of the helical coil.
Regards,
Omar
Erfinder
Oh, yes.!
Chickens make eggs and eggs make more chickens.! :D
Who did appear first ? ::)
The magnetism or Electricity? Here is the controversy hahaha. :-\
Erfinder boy badly. :P
Please answer. ???
Quote from: Erfinder on April 24, 2007, 06:37:56 PM
I find myself laughing a lot lately.....I said that this is simple when you understand the fundamentals. This was not an exaggeration. The truth is here, some of you are beginning to see it.
Hello Erfinder,
I am glad the referenced quotes made you laugh! I knew they would spark some debate regarding the accuracy of the assertions. Even so, I felt there was a bit of truth behind them. Thankfully, it was you who replied!
Regards,
Omar
Hello all!!!
How is it that a magnetic field can be transformed in a field of high (electrostatic) potential in a transformer without himself to be electrostatic?
Being like this, I can affirm that: a transformer magnetic Iron works equal as a not magnetic iron.
Is the difference, is one transformed by the origin strength and other it already possesses his origin even?
ERFinder that would like that he answered me, please.!
How does a magnetic flow line produce electricity?
Doesn't produce anything. They are work in way the if they alternate in the streams A.C., and they are direct + and - polarized in D.C.
Magnetism and electricity are same thing. Or I am wrong.
What is the nature of the flow line?
AC. Pulsed Alternate etc... or A.D. static or polarized
So that to produce or to induce electric effects this should also be electric!
That made to remember of the pyramids of Egypt, with their sides of the faces gone back to the magnetic north pole of the earth.
They seem to be capturing a field that comes of there. I know, that is mysticism, more he reminded me something big.
Regards
Hey guys, man I have been busy with work lately. I got my own ideas on Tesla coils.
Quote"Tesla Transformers are not magneto-electric devices, they use radiant shock waves, and produce pure voltage without current."
It should read:
"The "Electrical Transformer" is not an electromagnetic device, it is a Magneto-Dielectric device, it produces radiant shock waves, which is current transformed into pure voltage!"
I don't think either is exactly true. I think its way easier than that. Heres how Tesla described his wireless power transmission:
"As I perfected my apparatus [Tesla coil], I saw clearly that I can recover, of that energy which goes in all directions, a large amount, for the simple reason that in the system I designed,
once that current got into the earth it had no chance of escaping, because my frequency was low; hence, the electromagnetic radiation was low. The earth is a vast body. The potential differences in the earth are small, radiation is very small. Therefore,
if I pass my current into the earth, the energy of the current is stored there as electromagnetic momentum of the vibrations and is not consumed until I put a receiver at a distance, when it will begin to draw the energy and will go to that point and nowhere else." Nikola Tesla (1916) pg.131 "Nikola Tesla on his works with Alternating Currents and Their Application to Wireless Telegraphy, Telephony, and Transmission of Power"
Now look at a Tesla coil. The maximum voltage is at the top. It is a quarter wave resonator! There is a voltage anti-node at the top (where the ball is) and a voltage node at the base. Where you have a voltage node you have a current anti-node. This means the maximum current is at the base. The base is connected to ground..... YOU HAVE MAXIMUM CURRENT INTO THE EARTH. Just like he says.
Now look at this website animation.
http://www.ycars.org/EFRA/Module%20C/tloc.gif
Turn that animation upside down. The "wire" with the pulse running on it is
the earth. The wire above that is
the ionosphere. The "current" source is your Tesla coil. There is NO radiant energy surge or hocus pocus in this device. It is a non-radiating antenna that transfers power using standard (well documented) wave reflections. A proper Tesla coil should NOT generate sparks - this was just for show, which Tesla admits was the only purpose.
The novel thing is that modern radio engineering calls these "wave reflections" useless and unwanted. Tesla found a way to use them, and boy did he use them. This is a much more efficient transmission of energy.
If you followed me this far. It is worth saying that Tesla discovered that when lightning strikes, it produces these same wave reflections in the earth (this is actually where he got the idea). A properly tuned magnifying transformer could actually collect these lightning reflections and use it to power devices - day and night.
You can't have voltage without current, but you can have them
out of phase. And that is the trick. Deriving real power from what is presently called, useless power.
Thats my take on things. As always I'm open to further learning.
QuoteYou can't have voltage without current
Hmmmm...depends on your definition of voltage and current. If voltage is
pressure, and current is
volume of flow, it seems you could, and do, have pressure without flow in static fields.
It seems this is in part what Erfinder is getting at with the magnetic currents being electrostatic fields. If a chicken produces chickens, voltage produces voltage, pressure produces pressure. In a transformer, isn't this all that is manipulated? The voltage is stepped up or down, and any corresponding current is adjusted as a by-product of being "along for the ride"? The volume of flow is "pinched" or "released" like in a garden hose versus a drain pipe. In either case water flowing is still water flowing. Chickens produce chickens, pressure produces pressure.
So if a magnetic field induces "voltage" into an ignition coil, is it just not accumulating that which it already is? As a magneto spins by the coil, due to the frequency (oscillation) of the changing magnetic poles (through the Bloch wall), the coil picks up those reversals in flux polarity - ergo, as erfinder also said, all DC is AC, else it doesn't move (induce) into a coil (it just sits in a static vessel (i.e. permanent magnet)) - which is the same as alternating "poles" or cycles of AC. It is only when the field enables a coil to do work that the perception of "voltage" is understood. It is only at that point do we have a viable "quantity" to measure - as we are comparing the distance we force it to move over a given path of a given diameter for a rate of time. When it just exists in a field, we don't have any way of measuring it's ability to do work - other then in potential difference. It is all just arbitrary forms of measurement. Just as we perceive time as the passing of NOW based on our memory, so is the flow of voltage only a measurement when we constrain it to a system we can understand.
On another note, I seem to have had my questions about the condenser answered. It may help put some things in perspective for others struggling with the condenser.
In detailing
high frequency, high potential AC, Tesla had this to say:
"I will now venture to make, in regard to the general manipulation of
induction coils, a few observations bearing upon points which have not
been fully appreciated in earlier experiments with such coils, and are even
now often overlooked.
The secondary of the coil possesses usually such a high self-induction that
the current through the wire is inappreciable, and may be so even when the
terminals are joined by a conductor of small resistance.
If capacity is
added to the terminals, the self-induction is counteracted, and a stronger
current is made to flow through the secondary, though its terminals are
insulated from each other. To one entirely unacquainted with the
properties of alternating currents nothing will look more puzzling. This
feature was illustrated in the experiment performed at the beginning with
the top plates of wire gauze (screen) attached to the terminals and the rubber plate.
When the plates of wire gauze were close together, and a small arc passed
between them,
the arc prevented a strong current from passing through the
secondary, because it did away with the capacity on the terminals; when
the rubber plate was inserted between, the capacity of the condenser
formed counteracted the self-induction of the secondary, a stronger current
passed now, the coil performed more work, and the discharge was by far
more powerful.
The first thing, then, in operating the induction coil is to combine capacity
with the secondary to overcome the self-induction. If the frequencies and
potentials are very high gaseous matter should be carefully kept away
from the charged surfaces. If Leyden jars are used, they should be
immersed in oil, as otherwise considerable dissipation may occur if the
jars are greatly strained. When high frequencies are used, it is of equal
importance to combine a condenser with the primary."
http://ia310937.us.archive.org/0/items/experimentswitha13476gut/13476-h/13476-h.htm
BTW, this is a lengthy, but excellent read. Some of it drags a bit in discussing the best method of creating high-frequency efficient light bulbs, but there is some good info in here. Moreover, I started to see a lot of correlation with the above information, and the continual talk of ERFINDER about dielectrics. It seems there is a lot of confusion with what we consider "resistance" and the ability to get more "flow". I am still sorting this out, so that is all I will say for now, but others with a better understanding might find it useful.
Hi,
Dielectric material has a property under applied radial electric field, that we call as electrostriction.
Electrostriction effect means, that there are quantum vibrations in a dielectric crystal medium. Those vibrations are quantum analoques to mechanical vibration, and are emitting waves that we call as phonons.
Phonons are bosons, posessing integer spin.Because of the integer spin, phonons plays important role in a nature, and are able to interact with all known forces, including gravity.
Also we can create a phonon maser system,with different wave functions and field pattern shapes to collect energy from the environment when a pulsed applied E-field causes stimulated phonon emission in a closed loop system.
We can create this radial E-field with some electronic devices, or with transformers.
Also, if we cut or cancel the magnetic field line with very fast switches, the magnetic energy turns back to radial E-field.
Esa
There is a field more primal than electricity. This field is known by a few names such as tempic, torsion, and time. This field is one-dimensional - like pressure. While this field can exist by itself, electricity can not exist without it, and magnetism not without electricity.
Manipulation of two, can change the third.
Hello everyone,
For the sake of keeping everyone on track, this was the last thing that Erfinder asked us to figure out:
Quote from: Erfinder on April 19, 2007, 02:46:01 AM
Good idea adding color to the figure! Unfortunately your image is missing a color! There are two secondary circuits! These two are connected in series! The intersection formed by these two circuits is extremely special! Why? Review it. Discuss it!
...
The energy of the future has a name... Magneto-Dielectric Energy! Where magnetism is static, and electricity is characterized as a high potential high frequency field, which moves inward (implosion) and outward (explosion) simultaneously! This action simulates the VOID, the zero point which mainstream science is desperately searching for. We will discuss this further after all the patents have been demystified.
It seems that the intersection between the two secondary circuits makes a void, and these secondary circuits compose a sort of capacitor. Exactly how this happens, I do not know.
Regards,
Omar
I think Tesla mastered these complex electrical systems with analogies and thought experiments. Everyone wants to complicate these patents and machines with complex terminology and fantasy particles and dimensions, Tesla was the master at reductionism, a trick I find very helpfull.
Here is an example-
Tesla uses the spring and mass arrangement to decribe LC oscillating circuits.
He states that if a mass on the end of a spring is moved initially, the mass will oscillate up and down with a known period of oscillation, the period is dampened and will eventually to come to rest.
He states that the pliability of the spring is equivalent to Capacity in an LC circuit.
He states that the mass or weight attached to the spring is equivalent to the Inductance of an LC circuit.
What Tesla also states is that he can change Capacity and Inductance of a circuit at will, which we have yet to understand.
So with the spring and mass analogy, changing Capacitance would constitute changing the hardness of the spring, changing Inductance would constitute changing the mass.
So, here is a thought experiment for you ;)
What if I softened the spring by heating it on the down stroke and cooled the spring contracting it on the upswing?
The frequency and power would increase, not dampen.
If the springs pliability(hardness) is equivalent to Capacity then a changing capacity would drive an oscillating circuit.
For years experimenters have been playing with changing inductance on the fly in an LC circuit, these are called "parametric oscillators".
I think Tesla was changing the Capacitance of the circuit on the fly with electrostatic forces, the only true forces.
Here's another simple thought experiment, we assume voltage is pressure and current is flow, the voltage pressure pushes the current flow through the circuit.We all know pressure produces heat and resistence to flow.
So what would happen if there was no pressure but only suction, a negative pressure(voltage) PULLING the flow along, and maybe this negative region could be one quarter wavelength ahead of the flow(current). Tesla makes more than enough reference to maximum voltage in one phase versus minimum voltage in the other phase to justify this line of thought.
So here is a problem, we make too many assumptions and when confronted with a problem we fabricate all sorts of fantastical, non-sensical realms, particles, and properties to explain what is in reality very simple- like nature.
Victor Schauberger said " Do the opposite of what we do today and you will be well on your way"
Think pull not push, cold not hot, suction not pressure.
I think Im getting close to nailing this , but first Teslas concepts need to be applied to his patents and erfinders machine. All this speculation is fine and dandy but we need to drag this into reality, to have a solid explanation of what is happening.
Tonight Im going to re-read teslas patents, If you read all the patents as a time line they have a defined direction he is heading, and he really does spell everything out if you pay attention to the basics. A few days ago I spent 7 hours a day over 3 days reading all his patents in detail and everthing was fresh in my mind and made perfect sense, then I posted what I found--- then it disappeared. So Im at square one again, such is life, hopefully I can post tonight on what I think tesla discovered.
QuoteEfinder wore: Magneto-Dielectric Energy! Where magnetism is static, and electricity is characterized as a high potential high frequency field, which moves inward (implosion) and outward (explosion) simultaneously!
This describes a longitudinal wave.
Eric dollard uses this term "Magneto-dielectric energy".
Here is Eric Dollard on the "Four Quadrant Theory of Electricity"
(from Functional Thinking)
E:If we take Tesla's three phase electricity, or rotating magnetic field, we find that it is based on the archetypal form known as the Solar cross or by various other names.
T: Mandalas, medicine wheels?
E: ...these are four quadrant types of forms, a balanced cross as opposed to an unbalanced cross.
T: This is where you get the Four quadrant Theory of Electricity?
E: Electricity has to be viewed from a four quadrant type of situation. The right angle plays an extremely fundamental role in electricity. It is generally a right angle phenomenon.
(from Tesla's Longitudinal Electricity video):
Tesla experimented with
impulse current and oscillating current.
our electricity is
direct current and alternating current.
The Four Quadrant Theory of Electricity is
IMPULSE CURRENT, OSCILLATING CURRENT, DIRECT CURRENT, ALTERNATING CURRENT.
alternating current + direct current are
transverse electromagneticimpulse and oscillating current are
longitudinal di-electricAbove taken from: http://peswiki.com/index.php/PowerPedia:Eric_Dollard
Oscillating current equates to longitudinal - (alternating current is transverse).
More from Eric Dollard:
http://www.borderlands.com/archives/arch/capacit.htm
http://www.borderlands.com/archives/arch/fallacy.htm
Wilbert B. Smith's book "The New Science" explains this all very well - including the four quadrant theory which he termed "quadrature". (He died of cancer before he finished it.)
http://www.rexresearch.com/smith/newsci~1.htm
Combine the above with Dave Lowrance's site ( http://magnetism.fateback.com/ )and you will see the universe in an entirely different way.
One last thing - information manifests itself differently to different people. Study and you may very well create devices that work the same as those of Tesla, Erfinder and others, but do not surprised if it does not make perfect sense to others.
The solid state Tesla pump DC
An device of the static corrent pump
(https://overunityarchives.com/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fimg62.imageshack.us%2Fimg62%2F397%2Ftsspdckb2.jpg&hash=4d40764c5d8731a0a02bc2b097f0b5f54d5a1353) (http://imageshack.us)
Hi All,
Where do I start......hmmm
For anyone wanting further reading I will list some references.
I think this will help in understanding what is going on. It has become apparent that the motor patents prior to 464,666 are pretty much based on the same concept. i.e to build a motor with a phase difference. So we should be able to get a better understanding of what he was doing by reading the prior motor patents. e.g.455067
He does appear to going into a little more detail in the other patents.
Also I was searching for an article called "rotazioni elettrodynamiche" by Ferraris G (because he came out with a similar motor to Tesla just a few years after Tesla did - i was wondering if he explained it better) but I havent been able to find the article. But it did lead me to a patent that lists all the references in the Tesla lectures (about the motor) for us. Convenient I must say.
http://www.freepatentsonline.com/20060238148.html
The references start in the patent at [0020] to [0029]
And they refer to the "Nikola Tesla, lectures, patents & articles" book.
Regards,
N.
Hi again,
In patent 455067 line85 he states
"Hence whatever tends to decrease the self induction and increase the current in the induced (secondary) circuit will other things being equal, increase the output and efficiency of the motor".
This is an important point as he highlights what he trying to do in the circuit. He continues on to say in patent 455067 line 37 " I increase the resistance in the circuit of the secondary and reduce as much as practicable its self induction" i.e smaller diameter wire or artifical resistance.
He also says "The condenser will overcome or counteract to a greater or less degree the effects of such induction" p455067 line 41.
Then "a capacitor stores energy in the form of an electrostatic field". Reference was from a third party.
And this connects with what Erfinder said about electrostatic fields being used in the circuit.
Regards,
N.
Also regarding closed coils
He describes them as "coils with their respective ends joined, so that each coil forms a separate closed circuit" patent 382279 line 57
also described as "coils closed upon themselves or connected in a closed series". line 19 455067
"closed coils represent an inductive resistance" p455067 line 72.
and finally describes how the coils are configured "the armature coils are wound or connected in such a manner that adjacent coils produce opposite poles" p455067 page 2 line 29
This confirms what I stated earlier about the coils configuration.
Regards,
N.
I think Tesla used ancient astrological technology to contract and then expand the quasi-dimensional hyper energetic radiant space surge impedance. Where by increasing the oscillations in a static-electric pulse, inducing a stationary magnetic flux on the coil and liberating the quantized energy states of the material. This produces a void in the radiant vortex that correlates with what Erfinder is saying.
I believe the compressing of the QDGERSSI (quasi-dimensional hyper energetic radiant space surge impedance), which we can assume is similar to pressure in a thermo-nuclear reactor core operating at 150 parsecs, also explains the longitudinal ether dilation as seen by both George Lopez and Ronald McDonald. This "pressure", if you will, is what generates both the aurora borealis, solar winds, and Rossy O'Donnell.
I think Erfinder, Grumpy, brnbrade, and nat1971a are correct when they talk about closed coils and the effects of short wave resonance in the mathematical Vedic manipulations of Jagadguru Swami Sri Bharati Krishna Tirthaji Maharaja.
So you see, this can only point to three things: the octave amplification of pure harmonic unity, space time curvature, and the operation of sun screens past SPF 15.
Maybe not............ :D
Yahoo Groups,
Has anyone else had any problems with the Yahoo Groups? I keep getting messages to Reactive the E-mail address. When that happens you don't get updated messages.
Information, there is so much information coming in and everyone is doing the most they can to keep on track and try and get everything they can out of the patent number one. Gee I wonder how long it will take to cover the next patent? Erfinder, I think you said it took you years to find out what you know now? I am sure you have fun with some of the statements we have, I hope you will have the patience to keep us on track and to not let us sink into the deep water and drowned. I know that you want us to learn and learn is what were trying to do. Seems it is like the Tesla coil as the knowledge is like the sparks coming off the coil as each spark is someone's thoughts and knowledge and its shooting out everywhere, but which spark is the one we should follow? I read and read and re-read the patent. and I try and stick to just the patent, so I will hopefully keep on track. Erfinder, Is there a better way for us to get the information you are wanting us to get? Hopefully we are gaining ground, but not sure if we are gaining one day and losing the next day?
Regards
Trump
Charlie_V, if you could just speak outside of mainstream jargon, I think we might be able to finally communicate....LOL
AS I see it, this is beginning to appear as strictly a mechanical method to change the phase 90? between the primary and secondary voltages. I am going to try to talk this through, I hope it makes sense.
If we assume that a transformer adjusts voltage, I think we should assume the capacitor adjusts current. In looking back to the quote I posted earlier:
Quote"The secondary of the coil possesses usually such a high self-induction that
the current through the wire is inappreciable, and may be so even when the
terminals are joined by a conductor of small resistance. If capacity is
added to the terminals, the self-induction is counteracted, and a stronger
current is made to flow through the secondary, though its terminals are
insulated from each other. To one entirely unacquainted with the
properties of alternating currents nothing will look more puzzling. This
feature was illustrated in the experiment performed at the beginning with
the top plates of wire gauze attached to the terminals and the rubber plate.
When the plates of wire gauze were close together, and a small arc passed
between them, the arc prevented a strong current from passing through the
secondary, because it did away with the capacity on the terminals; when
the rubber plate was inserted between, the capacity of the condenser
formed counteracted the self-induction of the secondary, a stronger current
passed now, the coil performed more work, and the discharge was by far
more powerful.
The first thing, then, in operating the induction coil is to combine capacity
with the secondary to overcome the self-induction."
Capacitance is a circuits ability to store energy. "Self inductance is defined as the induction of a voltage in a current-carrying wire when the current in the wire itself is changing." (Reference) (http://www.ndt-ed.org/EducationResources/CommunityCollege/EddyCurrents/Physics/selfinductance.htm). Tesla states above he could create a capacitor (condenser) just by inserting a rubber plate between the discharge of two wire screens. The reason being, it changed the amount of current that could flow between the two screens. How? By increased resistance. This dielectric rubber caused the voltage to flow back down to the energizing coil, because it was sensing a lower potential coming from the source, and the capacitor did its job - it flowed energy back to the coil. It then induced more voltage into the winding because the capacitance was removed from the terminal (of the secondary). This removed the self-inductive resistance, which somewhere was stated that it only saw the ohmic resistance of the coil. This has the net effect of MORE voltage being induced into the coil. When this happens, the coil itself begins to build up more capacitance, due to self induction again, until it is strong enough to build up enough current to pass through the dielectric (in this case, the rubber plate Tesla was holding between the two screens). In this manner, by increasing the resistance of the capacitor, you are able to manipulate the CURRENT flowing through the circuit. In so doing, since the CURRENT is just along for the ride, the voltage has to be increasing - in this case due to higher frequency of bouncing back and forth between the induction of the coil, and the dielectric of the capacitor.
So, back to patent 464,666
"Another well known method or plan of securing a difference of phase between the
energizing-currents of motors of this kind is to induce by the
currents in one circuit by those in the other circuit or circuits;..." (L34-38)
"...my invention consisting of placing a condenser in the secondary or induced circuit of the motor above described and
raising the potential of the secondary currents to such a degree that the
capacity which is in part
dependent on the potential need be quite small. The value of this condenser will be determined in a well understood manner with reference to self-induction and other conditions of the circuit, so as to cause the currents which pass through it to differ from the primary currents by a quarter-phase." (L49-61).
OK, maybe slight exaggeration in the highlighting of the term current, but I think it emphasizes the point. Can the current be raised by mechanical means (stronger capacitor) without affecting the voltage? I don't believe it can. The opposite appears to be true however, but irrelevant at this point.
Now, ERFINDER has told us that the 12 energizing coils are acting as the plates of a capacitor, and can be arranged in other ways for different work. Keeping in mind that Tesla showed how the increase of capacitance can cause a direct increase in discharge, and higher current to flow, it seems to be a simple calculated mechanical advantage step up to create the circuit to function 90? out of phase. This would be done by using the proper size capacitor, which would cause the two secondary circuits ("F" and "G") which are polarized out of phase from each other by the physical construction of the circuit to remove the capacitance from each other, and allow the energy to continue to build (through the capacitance of the individual energizing coils)until it reaches the appropriate level, then discharge through the capacitor at the proper 90? out of phase.
Of course, "determining in a well understood manner the value of this condenser" seems to be where a bit of the secret lies. Somehow, I have a feeling that harmonics discussion way back when might have something to do with it.
I am under the impression that Tesla is using a variable condenser in the patent to control the quarter phase but he doesnt specifically mention it in that patent. (works like a radio tuner)But does mention it in patent 568 178 p2 line 115
He also mentions in his lectures:
"One more to improve, the proper difference of phase is obtained b/w the primary & secondary currents by a condenser, self induction, resistance or equivalent windings"
Reference L-69 Nikola Tesla, lectures patents, articles book
i can be off track and wrong, but from what i understand Alternating Current can be transfered from very long distances without losing much energy. so this long distant wire has a huge magnetic field that feeds its source of energy. you just have to know how to tap into this long distant magnetic field wire and make it feed its source of energy.
If the four quadrant electrical theory holds true then we can have an AC or DC input in patent 464444 as Tesla stated, but we lack both an impulse and an oscillation. I don't believe the term oscillation is refering to alternating current. I think oscillation is refering to a compression wave like a sound wave. To get an impulse current followed by oscillation current I would think you would have to slam the incoming HV secondary wave into the incoming primary wave in the transformer coils, send the primary back to where it came from and the secondary would oscillate within the secondary circuit. So you never really have a primary current flow, it is always reflected back to source.
In teslas later work he always stated this impulse current or abrupt localized disturbances in the media was the source of his power.
I can't help but think that if self-induction is neutralized and we have an impulse into the electrostatic realm that this oscillation current is not bound to the same limitations as EM waves. I think it was Tesla and EV Gray who said that there "electricity" could do work and over 90% of the energy recovered. So this substantiates my thoughts that logically our circuits should not actually use energy, it is the fact that our circuits waste the greater majority of the the energy in use.
At one point I may have seen this energy in action, I had a six inch round coil made from 50 wraps of soft iron wire, onto one side of this coil I wound about 70 turns of light insulated copper transformer wire. I connected the ground to a 12v battery, then when I touched the positive connection to the coil wire there was a 2mm spark. This is nothing new, the fact that the 2mm spark was continuous was however. The 2mm spark would keep going for over two minutes until the wire started melting. Thats kind of funny isnt it, 20 years working with electronics and I can't explain what was happening in my simple little coil.
Here is my Layman's terms for what I think is going on in patent 464,666. You put the current 90 degrees out of phase between the primary and secondary. You make sure the self inductance of the secondary is neutralized by placing a "condenser" (capacitor) in the secondary circuit. This increases the current in the secondary. The current makes the rotor spin. Since the phase between the primary and secondary is 90 degrees, power used is returned. The device runs on unity.
Don't believe in lizard people.
Quote from: allcanadian on April 26, 2007, 05:08:43 AM
...
At one point I may have seen this energy in action, I had a six inch round coil made from 50 wraps of soft iron wire, onto one side of this coil I wound about 70 turns of light insulated copper transformer wire. I connected the ground to a 12v battery, then when I touched the positive connection to the coil wire there was a 2mm spark. This is nothing new, the fact that the 2mm spark was continuous was however. The 2mm spark would keep going for over two minutes until the wire started melting. Thats kind of funny isnt it, 20 years working with electronics and I can't explain what was happening in my simple little coil.
...
Sounds like you got a self-oscillation started. Was only the magnet wire coil connected to the battery or both coils?
I'd like to try this out.
I agree Charlie. Also, I think that the correct capacitor also makes the secondary resonant. If Erfinder?s secondary length of 144 inches @ 22.5 mm /inch is used, which is the harmonic of 432, which is the square root of the true speed of light, maybe it is resonant with the speed of light. ?? That?s what the edges of the DC pulse are approaching.
RE-EDITED: To maintain a dialog, debate, around the subject.
I think I have an advantage here being "electric machines" blind so I try to understand the works.
I hope it will help others who knows and might be temped to answer by reflex. So bear with me and curse if you like, but make me understand.
Please consider me -if you wish- the "dumb factor" in a brainstorming session.
Questions:
1. First I would like to see if this motor woks at all, without secondaries F & G. Mmm? I see how it would work with magnets instead of rotor coils D. North South alternating on circumference, and magnet's poles distributed radially (like in Bedini's window motor). But with present coils...?
Quote from: Charlie_V on April 26, 2007, 12:19:34 PM
... You put the current 90 degrees out of phase between the primary and secondary.
2. How exactly?
3. Is it important +90 or -90 degrees? Why?
Quote from: Charlie_V on April 26, 2007, 12:19:34 PM
... You make sure the self inductance of the secondary is neutralized by placing a "condenser" (capacitor) in the secondary circuit.
4. Why?
5. Is not affecting the main goal with 90 degree phase shift from primary? Why?
Quote from: Charlie_V on April 26, 2007, 12:19:34 PM
... This increases the current in the secondary.
6. If you answered "resonance" at question #4, then why current and not voltage?
Quote from: Charlie_V on April 26, 2007, 12:19:34 PM
... The current makes the rotor spin.
7. How?
Quote from: Charlie_V on April 26, 2007, 12:19:34 PM
... Since the phase between the primary and secondary is 90 degrees, power used is returned.
8. Why?
Quote from: Charlie_V on April 26, 2007, 12:19:34 PM
... The device runs on unity.
9. Why?
Quote from: Charlie_V on April 26, 2007, 12:19:34 PM
Don't believe in lizard people.
Anyone who can convince me without fancy names and theories will be filtered out as non lizard people. If you can, use the association of electricity with water flowing in pipes. Please assume you are a science teacher; can you explain this to a child?
Regards.
Quote from: bocas on April 26, 2007, 01:52:45 PM
... If Erfinder?s secondary length of 144 inches @ 22.5 mm /inch is used, which is the harmonic of 432, which is the square root of the true speed of light, maybe it is resonant with the speed of light. ?? ...
Another legitimate question (if you got that far):
432^2 = 186624 the "true light sped".
Is the 186624 miles/sec @ 22.5mm/inch too?
EDIT: I mean why don't we use the metric system, or call 1inch @ 22.5mm = 1 propagon and to others other names? Did ancients use other names for this? Why just don't adopt them?
Hi all,
I think Charlie_V's description is a good starting point. But I suspect a few things need to be added to it or expanded upon. e.g the relationship b/w the armature coils & the secondary closed circuit.
Regards,
N.
I suspect that because the armature coils are neutralised & the secondary (working circuit) is neutralised there is a transfer of neutralised current from the armature coil ,as well, to the secondary closed circuit that is neutralised.
Well thats my imagination at it again.......
Any comments ERFINDER?
Quote from: nat1971a on April 26, 2007, 06:56:12 PM
I suspect that because the armature coils are neutralised & the secondary (working circuit) is neutralised there is a transfer of neutralised current from the armature coil ,as well, to the secondary closed circuit that is neutralised.
Well thats my imagination at it again.......
Any comments ERFINDER?
So if you launch a neutralized chicken over the fence, it will make a neutralized chicken too. and later if you launch it back at the origin, this one will make a neutralised chicken again.
Come on people! just figure we are all sitting relaxed at the same table having a beer. This is how you talk?
I just admitted I'm dumb. I apologize if I offend anyone with my intellectual abilities, but please don't offend me making me feel more dumb than I really am.
I think the politically correctness is the problem here. Just express yourselves.
Quote... You put the current 90 degrees out of phase between the primary and secondary.
2. How exactly?
3. Is it important +90 or -90 degrees? Why?
A: You measure the inductance of the secondary coils (or calculate them with an induction formula). You then figure out how large your capacitor needs to be to cancel out this inductance (the formula to figure this out is [0 = (2Ãâ,¬f)?LC -1], where f is the frequency, L is the calculated inductance, and C is the capacitor value.)
On the primary side you will want to make sure that your frequency is the same as what you use for your secondary. There is actually a way of "tuning" the primary but I wouldn't worry about it for starters. Ideally you would want to tune the primary so that the phase was truly 90 degrees apart between the circuits. However, just tuning the secondary is good enough.
+ or - 90 degrees doesn't matter.
Quote... You make sure the self inductance of the secondary is neutralized by placing a "condenser" (capacitor) in the secondary circuit.
4. Why?
5. Is not affecting the main goal with 90 degree phase shift from primary? Why?
A: Secondary circuit is in resonance. The primary circuit should also be in resonance but the difference is that in the primary (assuming you tuned it) the resistance would be almost infinity (the formula for the primary is [infinity = 1/((2Ãâ,¬f)?LC -1))]. Primary has infinity resistance (all voltage) and secondary has zero resistance (all current) at resonance.
The resistance between the two circuits is mismatched. This means the power will be reflected (aka what you put into the system will be returned). I'm sure your wondering why. Imagine you are in a racket ball room. The front wall (where you hit the ball against) is usually really hard right? You smack the ball against the wall and the ball bounces back. Lets assume that the wall is made soft. Now when the ball hits the softened wall, it doesn't bounce back as much. The softer the wall is made the less the ball will bounce back. At some point, the ball will smack the wall and instantly drop to the ground. This is the point that maximum power was transfered from the ball to the wall. There will be no return.
This is the same as resistance in a circuit. If the resistance of one side of the circuit matches the resistance of the other side, the power can go through (i.e. the ball hitting the wall and dropping instantly to the ground). When the resistance is mismatched, you get reflections (the ball bouncing back after hitting the wall).
Quote... This increases the current in the secondary.
6. If you answered "resonance" at question #3, then why current and not voltage?
A: Zero resistance means large current, small voltage.
Quote... The current makes the rotor spin.
7. How?
A: Magnetic interaction between the secondary coils and the rotor. Basically magnetic induction.
Quote... Since the phase between the primary and secondary is 90 degrees, power used is returned.
8. Why?
A: Already answered.
Quote... The device runs on unity.
9. Why?
A: If the power you put into a system is returned, then no power was lost. Ideally, you have a unity motor.
QuoteDon't believe in lizard people.
A: Anyone who can convince me without fancy names and theories will be filtered out as non lizard people. If you can, use the association of electricity with water flowing in pipes. Please assume you are a science teacher; can you explain this to a child?
I hope my nothing I've said was too fancy - I don't want to be a lizard man.
Hi all
Look at this link. The good stuff. http://etc.usf.edu/clipart/20100/20156/sepexcdynamo_20156.htm
Have many concept used in these devices.
Very, very simple to building.
By ;)
Can I order another couple of jugs of beer for the table......
Sorry Barbosi I hope i didnt offend anyone....i am just putting my thoughts out there for everyone.....but one must ask the question why bother to have the armature at all and why rotate it. And why neutralise the armature coils.
Charlie_V
You are right on top of things, I like your reasoning and hopefully others do also. It is stuck in my mind on what Erfinder said loud and clear in his last message.
When you realize that we are using the currents manifested in the secondary windings only, this will mark the moment that you begun to change your thinking, and have received your first true taste of the force Tesla was working with. Erfinder
So the primary windings are not being used, but are a part of the switching, correct me Charlie if I am wrong on this part ,but they are still a part of the circuit and have a part to play in the 90 degree switching from the way I see it.
****Side Note****
In classical circuits a resistance is often used to slow down or use up some of the current flowing through a line. The same holds true here the only difference is that a capacitor plays the role of the resistance, and at the same time a filter! It is not about charging nor discharging the capacitor as there is no break point in the circuit! Erfinder
****
Again from Erfinder, the capacitor, NOT a variable capacitor, just tuned as I put it capacitor, to also FILTER as Erfinder puts for RESISTANCE. Nothing more.
Regards
Trump
Hi All,
I think I need another beer. Its been a long week researching this....
hmmm i shall try and explain what i suspect is happening with the rotation of the armature.
If we have a neutralised current (the neutralised armature coils) that is rotated fast as we have here in Tesla's patent. This then attracts the neutralised ether to it like a whirlpool would suck in all the water. This would compress the ether to a point where it must radiate it out. This radiated out neutralised current is transferred to the neutralised secondary via resonance.
Cheers,
N.
Quote from: nat1971a on April 26, 2007, 07:18:53 PM
Sorry Barbosi I hope i didnt offend anyone....
No offense taken, rather I hope not to offend anyone.
It's rather about having a relaxed conversation, stereotype free.
And now shooting back questions:
Quote from: Charlie_V on April 26, 2007, 07:04:34 PM
A: You measure the inductance of the secondary coils (or calculate them with an induction formula). You then figure out how large your capacitor needs to be to cancel out this inductance (the formula to figure this out is [0 = (2Ãâ,¬f)?LC -1], where f is the frequency, L is the calculated inductance, and C is the capacitor value.)
Are you sure this is not how you shift phase in a LC circuit between U and I?
Here we talk about 2 separate circuits one inductor and another one induced. How is that different?
Quote from: Charlie_V on April 26, 2007, 07:04:34 PM
On the primary side you will want to make sure that your frequency is the same as what you use for your secondary.
I would rather say the other way around. What is in primary is a given from the electric company.
Quote from: Charlie_V on April 26, 2007, 07:04:34 PM
+ or - 90 degrees doesn't matter.
I thought this is how you control the rotation sense.
Quote from: Charlie_V on April 26, 2007, 07:04:34 PM
A: Zero resistance means large current, small voltage.
This implies a series LC? How would you consider the secondaries and capacitor? parallel? series?
Related to how it spins:
Quote from: Charlie_V on April 26, 2007, 07:04:34 PM
A: Magnetic interaction between the secondary coils and the rotor. Basically magnetic induction.
A basic magnetic induction gives me a transformer. It should be something more to give me the push in the loose parts (rotor).
Quote... The device runs on unity.
9. Why?
Quote from: Charlie_V on April 26, 2007, 07:04:34 PM
A: If the power you put into a system is returned, then no power was lost. Ideally, you have a unity motor.
Here is what nat might have to say:
Quote from: nat1971a on April 26, 2007, 07:18:53 PM
.....but one must ask the question why bother to have the armature at all and why rotate it.
If I look more carefully to both statements, I would say this is over unity, not just unity.
Now... first step for [whatever] problem cure is to admit you have a problem.
It will come the state of denial. Now I see Erfinder is trying to keep us busy and not to look but religiously at his statements. And at Tesla too. I think he is a MIB. There is only one way to find the truth. Expose him or find what he is trying to show and if is right... then is not a MIB! He might be right. Or not.
Lets formulate simple questions which a simple mind can answer. Or if you ask me a question and I can shamelessly can answer it, then Erfinder may take us to the next level. Or postpone it... as a MIB I believe he is...
Have a good one and I hope you got my message: turn every rock, even you think you know the truth. Is taking too much already.
Peoples.
Those waves Sinusoidal 90? are used to push pull or to excite the powers.
As wet string and you pass the fingers to remove the liquid. That is important.
Waves of the strong sea play you for far.
They are as shock waves.
I didn't understand is: As H.V. Can he work in the place of inductive currents?
I see HV of the device as an pulsating of the high frequencies. He will reverberate as wave reflex!
With certainty it filters the waves and it impels again against.
Where does he work in that if the primary is power off?
I wait to have done understood inside of my thought.!
Regards
barbosi
Bold statements you are making? I guess what I see is someone trying to have us help ourselves to learn more about the Tesla Patent. Would it make any difference if his name was divulged or not, it would remain to be seen if he is here to help us or hinder us. I am one to believe he is here to help us. What do we have to lose? getting knowledge of Tesla's patents is not a bad thing. I could E-mail John Bedini who I know and ask him as he has umpteen years in this stuff, but what would that do for us other then have him give two cents in what the patent says? I know it is stressful trying to talk about this stuff every day and yet we seem to not get anyplace. There is not that much to the Patent and yet we all seem to weave off the topic from time to time , I know I do anyway. I did not see any guarantee of a pot of gold at the end of getting through the patents? Maybe someone can point out where he said that at the end of this you will all be able to build the "SG", If there is such a place please show me. meantime I am like you barbosi, nodding my head from time to time and trying to get the just of what is going on and hopefully gaining knowledge of this more every day. If everyone looks back to the first few postings on this site, they were working with some circuits and then all of the sudden they stopped shortly when Erfinder cam on as he said that people did not know the patent and everyone needs to study and learn before trying to build anything. I may be missing some things, but I have said it before I am here to learn and I feel my time is not wasted to try and learn. Yes maybe there could be another way to do this, but Erfinder can only answer that part.
Trump
One final remark, I'm tired already.
Is not about the phase between U and I.
Tesla said (page 1, line 34) "Another now well - known method ... securing a difference of phase between the energizing currents". So is about phase shift between "I" in both circuits. Also restated in page 2 Line 8 - 12.
So we got 2 circuits in a relationship of induction. The phase between currents in both circuits is secured with capacitor H. Not anything else.
I might be too tired but at this time, but I don't recall and I cannot find where it is said anything about resonance of secondaries circuit. Please let me know if I missed that, I'm afraid we just assumed this, because resonance is cool.
Regards.
Healthy skepticism is a good thing - but I ask you, if someone is already deluded about a subject, what is the point of trying to trip them up???? If they are already wandering around aimlessly in the dark, why bother turning out the lights??? If we were on a "right" track, and producing overunity devices, then I might be on-board with you about ERFINDER being a MIB. Of course, assuming someone is correct just because they say so is a bit naive. And to that point, I say use common sense. If things start to sound wrong, then it is up to the person making the claims why their interpretation is correct. It is then also up to the person reading to discern if they are being fed a load of B.S. For me, I don't think this bridge has come anywhere close to being crossed. I personally am beginning to see things in a light I have never imagined. Anyway, to each his own, and each person needs to form their own opinions. I do tend to agree that mainstream has limited answers, especially since they can't produce these devices - all they can do is tell why such things will NEVER work. As is the case with most things mainstream, if it is not handed down from those "creating" the stream - it is poo-pooed as incorrect hog-wash.
Anyway, back to the patent and topic at hand. I believe things are being overcomplicated. I do believe that things can be seen in a simplistic way. That understanding of all these things can come about by mere deduction and reasoning. I don't believe complex mathematical formulas have anything to do with this. As many of these concepts have been around and observed by the ancients, I think even simple observations can bring enlightenment.
I believe one of the points of frustration - at least for me - is that when I am ready to throw the book out, and wipe the slate clean, I have no reference to turn to to find out what a particular device is, or how it operates - especially from Tesla's point of view. If I look up how inductance or capacitance works, I get a mainstream point of view. From this perspective, I question if starting with a working complex circuit is truly the IDEAL starting point, as it requires application of a hypothesis to "make this your own". When we are told we are blinded my mainstream thinking, I am not sure where else to turn to to understand concepts about things I don't understand. Unless I can find a primer written by Tesla on basic electrical concepts, or deduce from his other writings why he believes something works as it does, I have no choice but to try to read and absorb as many of his works, opinions about his works, and commentaries as I can find, and hope that I can sift through the mess to figure out what his core beliefs are. This of course is hard work, and takes much effort. Some will ask if it is worth it. I guess that is for the individual to decide. The worst part, without extensive proof of experimentation, you will never know if you are correct.
As a whole, I believe our understanding has come a long way in 35+ pages of posts. There seems to be a general consensus of moving in the right direction. Of course it is frustrating, and the answers can't come fast enough, but I do believe ERFINDER is right on at least one point, if it were spoon fed to us, we would dismiss it with little to no thought. We could chalk it up to "just another opinion", find arguments to "prove" him wrong, and convince ourselves he is "just another nut-job". But if we teach ourselves how something operates, and especially if it is against mainstream teachings, then when questioned why we believe something is so "outrageous", we are forced to take a stand on our convictions of being correct, and will not let mainstream sway us to believe anything they tell us. It is easy to "re-convert" anyone, especially if they are working on hear-say. If they "know" they are right, at the core of their soul, they will fight to prove to themselves (if no others) that they are correct and mainstream is incorrect.
Anyway, I believe we are over-complicating things. I believe the basis of this circuit is quite simple. I believe Tesla was telling the truth when he said the key to obtaining a 90? phase shift is in placing the condenser in the induced secondary circuit (L24-29). I have a lot of beliefs about how this works. I am not sure if I am correct, nor am I sure if I can explain them correctly enough to get my thoughts across. I do know I have no understanding of how a condenser acts as a filter - this is one of those areas where I don't believe mainstream references will help. So how do I pose this as a question that won't be answered directly? I research and research some more, until I convince myself I have figured it out. Anyway, back to the fray....
OK,
Before I get shut, I have to warn you, I don't really think Erfinder is a MIB. You guys lets go for a little humor once in a while, shall we? Humor is something you cannot find in sitcoms, so stop watching them. Those are designed to brainwash.
If you weren't to angry you could read at the end of my *outrageous* post:
Quote
I hope you got my message: turn every rock, even you think you know the truth.
which I still believe in.
As Erfinder said, study and also ask smart questions to get smart answers.
All the best to everyone.
barbosi
Have a good night, hope tomorrow will bring a better day. Some humor is ok, it will kind of get your mind working a little. I wish there was a way to have all of us on the same page so we could all understand this patent and then go on to the next one.
Night All :o
Trump
barbosi,
These are great questions! This keeps me thinking. I've got some questions of my own, and I have some ideas to the solutions but I suppose time will answer them.
QuoteA: You measure the inductance of the secondary coils (or calculate them with an induction formula). You then figure out how large your capacitor needs to be to cancel out this inductance (the formula to figure this out is [0 = (2Ãâ,¬f)?LC -1], where f is the frequency, L is the calculated inductance, and C is the capacitor value.)
Are you sure this is not how you shift phase in a LC circuit between U and I?
A: Actually this is exactly how you shift phase in an LC circuit. But what must be understood is we have two circuits here - not one. This is the beauty and genius behind it.
It helps to remember that there are two forms of an LC circuit - parallel and series. A series circuit, when placed in resonance, has its resistance (which is actually called impedance) go to zero. A parallel circuit does the opposite, its impedance goes to infinity. From this point on, I'm going to call this resistance "impedance". Impedance is the same as resistance, however, resistance usually only refers to the material properties of the wire. Impedance is both the material properties and the "charging" resistance (which is what capacitance and inductance do).
If you work with only a single circuit, the best you can do is be at resonance. When you reach resonance, the voltage and current will be in phase and max power will be absorbed by your load. With a single circuit, you can't benefit from the 90 degree phase change because at 90 degree phase, your circuit is not at resonance.
This is where two circuits come in. One circuit is a parallel LC circuit. The other is a series LC circuit. They are coupled together magnetically. They both resonant at the same frequency but their impedances are VASTLY different! Here is the trick - something you cannot achieve in a single circuit alone. Power will not be absorbed, it will be reflected. Reflected power goes back to the load. So you get reflected power with the tremendous force of resonance.
QuoteOn the primary side you will want to make sure that your frequency is the same as what you use for your secondary.
I would rather say the other way around. What is in primary is a given from the electric company.
A: I guess what I meant was you want to make sure both circuits have the same resonant frequency. And no, the primary does not need to be from the electric company - it could be a battery, or generator.
Quote+ or - 90 degrees doesn't matter.
I thought this is how you control the rotation sense.
A: I don't think its variable. It should be fixed. So once you start the oscillations, the two circuits will either be +90 degrees out of phase, or -90 degrees out of phase, and will not change but stay which ever it was initially.
All this means is that when the current is flowing in the first circuit, there will be no current flowing in the second circuit - and vice versa. Positive or negative just means whichever comes first. I don't think that matters. Erfinder could probably elaborate more.
QuoteA: Zero resistance means large current, small voltage.
This implies a series LC? How would you consider the secondaries and capacitor? parallel? series?
Related to how it spins:
I'm calling the secondary circuit "series LC" because when you look at how the current flows, all of it goes through the coil and into the capacitor. Then from the capacitor, through the coil. In a parallel circuit, the current is shared between the capacitor and the coil - half going to the coil, half going to the capacitor.
Plus, if you do circuit analysis, you see that the secondary matches a series LC and not a parallel LC.
This doesn't really depend on how the rotor spins - but it is what makes the rotor spin.
QuoteA: Magnetic interaction between the secondary coils and the rotor. Basically magnetic induction.
A basic magnetic induction gives me a transformer. It should be something more to give me the push in the loose parts (rotor).
A: Basic magnetic induction will also give you a motor. This took me a long time before I could visualize it. But thats because it wasn't taught to me right. Take an aluminum ring (you can get them from the inside of a hard drive - it's what they use to space the discs apart). Get a strong rare earth magnet. Try moving the magnet inside the ring. You will feel a really strong force when you move the magnet close and pull it away. Why?
Why is because the ring is a closed loop - a short. Whatever voltage would normally develop is converted instantly to current which counter acts the movement of the magnet. If you cut the ring, you won't feel the force anymore, but you'll be able to measure a voltage at either end of the ring. Apply a voltage to the ends of the ring. You are basically making it a short again and you will be able to push or pull the magnet.
This is exactly what a transformer does. Only a transformer has two wires and no magnets. One coil pushes, the other pulls. They go back and forth, just like the magnet and ring did. A motor doesn't need a permanent magnet to make it rotate. A ring attached to the side of the rotor's shaft will push and pull against the coils causing it spin. However, a permanent magnet will make the rotor spin way easier.
You'll notice, if you do the aluminum ring experiment, that the ring doesn't really push and pull that hard against he magnet. Not as hard as another magnet of the same strength would. Thats why permanent magnets on a rotor is better.
Quote... The device runs on unity.
9. Why?
Thats a good question. If all your power that goes out comes back, then nothing is lost. If you put in and get the same thing back, thats unity. Heres where I have questions. How is Erfinder over coming wire resistance. Even if you match everything perfectly, there is a small amount of energy that is wasted in the wire. You can't change this. In order to have unity, you would have to compensate for this small amount of energy loss. How is this done?
I could understand this being a 99.999% motor but not a pure 100%. Perhaps this is where the equal masses and octave crap comes into play.
In short, thats a good question and I don't have the answer!
Quote.....but one must ask the question why bother to have the armature at all and why rotate it.
If I look more carefully to both statements, I would say this is over unity, not just unity.
If you can actually make a motor run and power other devices while at the same time not using any power..... that would be a most amazing achievement!
Barbaosi,
No offense, and no anger in your post. I saw the sarcasm. I was posting thoughts and comments that would help dismiss any ideas as such. For all sarcasm, there is a bit of truth underlying, else it is just non-sensical gibbering.
Anyway, keep on keeping on, I think we are on the right track....
Erfinder said:
Keep your questions simple and well thought out and the answer will be structured and organized....
****Side Note****
In classical circuits a resistance is often used to slow down or use up some of the current flowing through a line. The same holds true here the only difference is that a capacitor plays the role of the resistance, and at the same time a filter! It is not about charging nor discharging the capacitor as there is no break point in the circuit!
****
My simple organized question:
How does a condenser act as a filter, and what is it filtering?
I see some idea of an answer in brnbrade's answer, but the language barrier is a bit tough to overcome - but I appreciate the thoughts and attempts none-the-less. It seems if there is a resonance developed in the secondaries, this might be along the right paths.
Mainstream would tell us that a condenser is a series of plates (2 in its simplest) separated by a dielectric (insulator). The charge on one plate is opposite that of the other plate. The potential difference between the two causes the capacitance (ability to store energy) to store in the electrostatic field formed between the two plates. WE are also told it produces impedance to alternating current.
I tend to believe this is mostly correct. I believe it is this impedance that allows for the "tuning" of the circuit.
Moreover, if we view these 12 cores as being the plates of a condenser, then 6 have one charge, while the other 6 have opposite charges. The impedance between these 12 plates will cause the potential difference to be pretty great. The electrostatic field formed between these two plates (sets of 6 coils) must be accumulated in the armature (it would make it easier to understand if the armature was not spinning). But as the potential increases between these plates (both in the secondaries (F & G as well as the sets of 6 plates) it seems that the thought is it will eventually overcome that impedance, and create the phase shift when the potential is great enough.
But I don't know how that acts as a filter, nor do I know what it is filtering. Best guess is it is filtering the phase between the two circuits (F & G in the secondary condenser and between the 2 sets of 6 coils in the 12 plate condenser, and between the primary coil and secondary coils in the entire circuit).
However, since this is all based on mainstream thoughts, it makes me wonder if any of this is correct??
Well, I don't think you should throw everything you know out the window because someone says "I've got a motor that runs on unity and I'm going to give you a series of riddles and never really address how it works."
If I had such a device and I wanted to share it with everyone, I would explain in detail what was happening and how it worked. But thats just me. And I don't mean this offensively.
Mainstream is not the problem, it is 90% of the populations inability to think outside the box that is. I don't take any of the theories in my science books as fact. I read them, understand that many are based on experiments that are completely valid for the ends that they meet. Are there other ways of explaining these outcomes - absolutely. Do these experiments and theories explain everything - hell no! Can there be other experimental setups that would give completely different outcomes - YES. I am going to say that about 80% of mainstream is worth keeping, the other 20% you can flush. Law of conservation of energy - valid for closed systems, not valid at all for an open system. People are taught to think that apples are only good for apple sauce. They aren't wrong, apples are good for making apple sauce, but you can also make apple pies, apple turnovers, etc. Learn what you can about apples, then try to make other things besides apple sauce!
Back to the patent:
Although I feel that it is really the magnetic field moving the rotor, there is something called electrostatic induction. If you bring a positive charge next to something neutral, the neutral item will become negatively charged. You can make motors that spin using this principle. But I don't see where voltage would be when current is flowing in the coils. There should be very little voltage, only current. When voltage is in the secondary, it will be across the capacitor. I think we are ready for discussion with Erfinder....
@charlie_V
Im not sure how many of you own a buiseness, but most days I find myself watching employees screwing up and do nothing to correct them. Because if I do this they will never understand the logic I use to succeed. So I watch them fail, and try again and only when they have run out of options do I interviene, much like erfinder. I do this because a monkey can learn "conventional" skills, people who succeed learn problem solving skills, how to work through any problem using creative solutions.
Teslas patent 464444 may look easy it always does, but the solution is not a technology problem it is a perception problem. Your not going to solve this with conventional thinking, if you could we would all have one and that is logic you cannot dispute.
So what are we missing? Personally I like everything Maximumgravity has to say and his quotes from Tesla. I have learned more than a few things and gained some understanding from the direction these quotes have led me. So it is a matter of time, we pick away until we nail this.
F%#$ it people, I just couldn't sleep and when I checked back, you're active like never before.
I appreciate your efforts actually to put in words your doubts, ideas etc. but I'm up to answer the most important question I got this night (no offense for the other buddies but I have to read back tomorrow for more). At this time the winner is Charlie:
Quote
Although I feel that it is really the magnetic field moving the rotor, there is something called electrostatic induction.
Well my man, the simplest motor ever imagined is electrostatic. Little pieces of paper attracted by glass that was previously rubbed... remember?
Or to give you credit... magnet and iron.
It starts to have a proof that electrostatic, magnetic... pretty same thing. Maxwell said it somehow with his equations, where I personally appreciated most the graphs: two fields at 90 degrees with the property to [re]generate the opposite one with the only purpose being to propagate (perpetuate). (I will always hate those equations)
And @ allcanadian,
You are so true in this last post.
Quote
I have learned more than a few things and gained some understanding from the direction these quotes have led me.
All I'm trying to suggest all the time is: if you got inspired by some statement, share with the others. Even there is a language barrier, it worth it. That seed inspired you, might go and inspire others and idea evolves. If not, after a day or more, if not harvested, it might be lost not only for you but also for the others. Example? the last server blackout and few interesting ideas were lost. Myself I struggle to remember what I said, the reasoning as well.
Thanks for the ideas to everyone and I'll look and think over the other ideas tomorrow.
However Erfinder, don't be shy and if you feel like, send us some stuff other than encouragements.
Hi
2 links good
http://www.kz1300.com/ecklin/
http://www.mullerpower.com/index2.php
Here is something I found at http://www.tfcbooks.com/tesla/1892-02-03.htm that seems very relevant.
In a type of alternate current motor invented by me some years ago I produced rotation by inducing, by means of a single alternating current passed through a motor circuit, in the mass or other circuits of the motor, secondary currents, which, jointly with the primary or inducing current, created n moving field of force. A simple but crude form of such a motor is obtained by winding upon an iron core a primary, and close to it a secondary coil, joining the ends of the latter and placing a freely movable metal disc within the influence of the field produced by both. The iron core is employed for obvious reasons, but it is not essential to the operation. To improve the motor, the iron core is made to encircle the armature. Again to improve, the secondary coil is made to overlap partly the primary, so that it cannot free itself from a strong inductive action of the latter, repel its lines as it may. Once more to improve, the proper difference of phase is obtained between the primary and secondary currents by a condenser, self-induction, resistance or equivalent windings.
I had discovered, however, that rotation is produced by means of a single coil and cote; my explanation of the phenomenon, and leading thought in trying the experiment, being that there must be a true time lag in the magnetization of the core. I remember the pleasure I had when, in the writings of Professor Ayrton, which came later to my hand, I found the idea of the time lag advocated. Whether there is a true time lag, whether the retardation is due to eddy currents circulating in minute paths, must remain an open question, but the fact is that a coil wound upon an iron core and traversed by an alternating current creates a moving field of force, capable of setting an armature: in rotation- It is of some interest, in conjunction with the historical Arago experiment, to mention that in lag or phase motors I have produced rotation in the opposite direction to the moving field, which means that in that experiment the magnet may not rotate, or may even rotate in the opposite direction to the moving disc. Here, then, is a motor (diagrammatically illustrated in Fig. 17), comprising a coil and iron core, and a freely movable copper disc in proximity to the latter.
To demonstrate a novel and interesting feature, I have, for a reason which I will explain, selected this type of motor. When the ends of the coil are connected to the terminals of an alternator the disc is set in rotation. But it is not this experiment, now well known, which I desire to perform. What I wish to show you is that this motor rotates with one single connection between it and the generator; that is to say, one terminal of the motor is connected to one terminal of the generator?in this case the secondary of a high-tension induction coil?the other terminals of motor and generator being insulated in space. To produce rotation it is generally (but not absolutely) necessary to connect the free end of the motor coil to an insulated body of some size. The experimenter's body is more than sufficient. If he touches the free terminal with an object held in the hand, a current passes through the coil and the copper disc is set in rotation. If an exhausted tube is put in series with the coil, the tube lights brilliantly, showing the passage of a strong current. Instead of the experimenter's body, a small metal sheet suspended on a cord may be used with the same result. In this case the plate acts as a condenser in series with the coil. It counteracts the self-induction of the latter and allows a strong current to pass. In such a combination, the greater the self-induction of the coil the smaller need be the plate, and this means that a lower frequency, or eventually a lower potential, is required to operate the motor. A single coil wound upon a core has a high self-induction; for this reason principally, this type of motor was chosen to perform the experiment. Were a secondary closed coil wound upon the core, it would tend to diminish the self-induction, and then it would be necessary to employ a much higher frequency and potential. Neither would be advisable, for a higher potential would endanger the insulation of the small primary coil, and a higher frequency would result in a materially diminished torque.
It should be remarked that when such a motor with a closed secondary is used, it is not at all easy to obtain rotation with excessive frequencies, as the secondary cuts off almost completely the lines of the primary?and this, of course, the more, the higher the frequency?and allows the passage of but a minute current. In such a case, unless the secondary is closed through a condenser, it is almost essential, in order to produce rotation, to make the primary and secondary coils overlap each other more or less.
But there is an additional feature of interest about this motor, namely, it is not necessary to have even a single connection between the motor and generator, except, perhaps, through the ground; for not only is an insulated plate capable of giving off energy into space, but it likewise capable of deriving it from an alternating electrostatic field, though in the latter case the available energy is much smaller. In this instance one of the motor terminals is connected to the insulated plate or body located within the alternating electrostatic field, and the other terminal preferably to the ground.
So if I understand correctly:
A Condenser provides resistance, and produces impedence to filter alternating electrostatic fields.
Now let me think on that today and see if I can figure out what that means....
If the primary coils are low impedence the secondaries would be high impedence because of the capacitor. But we have another capacitive coupling between the primary and secondary coils, that is the fact that the primary windings are insulated from the secondary windings, the insulation being the dielectric. Could Tesla have used a purpose built dielectric between the primary and secondary windings to enhance this effect, not shown in the patent but implied somehow?
I think Im going to retrace the circuit and only consider capacitive coupling of the circuit, So does the ordinary transformer use magnetic coupling or electrostatic coupling- or both?
What if we have had it wrong all along?
Im going to have to rethink this yet again, I feel the capacitive coupling aspect is the right direction at this point.
I just had a crazy thought, if the secondaries induce a high electrostatic potential in the primaries, acting like a capacitor-- then the source AC must also act as a capacitor because the generator has windings and capacitance. Can there be two currents flowing in the same supply wires-- together or in opposite directions?
I am finding it hard at this point to tell the difference between a magnetic field and an electrostatic one. The capacitive and electrostatic couplings couple every part of the electrical system as a whole. Damn this is going to take some time to work through this again.
THis is what I have been missing.
OMG people, this is what I've been saying the entire time. I don't understand why I explain this to you, and everyone ignores me. Then someone quotes Tesla saying the exact same thing I'm saying. Do you know the frustration!!!!???
QuoteHere is my Layman's terms for what I think is going on in patent 464,666. You put the current 90 degrees out of phase between the primary and secondary. You make sure the self inductance of the secondary is neutralized by placing a "condenser" (capacitor) in the secondary circuit. This increases the current in the secondary. The current makes the rotor spin. Since the phase between the primary and secondary is 90 degrees, power used is returned. The device runs on unity.
That is exactly what Tesla is talking about. You place resonance in the secondary circuit. "The capacitance is made to cancel the inductance and produces a large current" - THATS RESONANCE!!!!! Yes a suspended plate with the secondary terminal attached to the plate and the other side to the ground is the same thing as 2 independent metal plates in a standard capacitor. You don't even need a capacitor, just a body that holds charge. A person, at the right frequency, could act as the capacitor and cancel the self inductance!!! In the case of the suspended plate and the ground, you are making the earth the second plate. As long as the inductance is canceled by this capacitance YOU GET RESONANCE OF A SERIES LC CIRCUIT WHICH PRODUCES LARGE CURRENTS TO INDUCTIVELY DRIVE THE MOTOR!!!!!!!!
Sure there is an alternating electrostatic field between the capacitor connections. There is also an alternating magnetic field in the coils! This is NOT mainstream because a mainstream power engineer will tell you that coupling a parallel LC circuit to an series LC circuit is BAD. Mainstream engineering does not do this because they think that it causes a short. And for what a mainstream engineer is trying to do, this would be bad on the circuit elements. For what we are doing, this is putting a "bad" thing to very good use. Two sides of a coin people, two sides of a coin.
There is a third field - the torsion field and it does not follow the same rules of the electric or magnetic fields. For the torsion field - length of the conductor is critical - mass and position are critical. The three fields are 90 degrees to each other and manipulating two will result in a change in the third. The torsion field is one dimensional and primal to the electric and magnetic fields. It's possible to combine these fields in ways that fields of higher orders a created with different properties than the lower orders.
Sorry I can not explain it better than this atthis time.
Quote from: Maximumgravity1 on April 26, 2007, 10:30:05 PM
My simple organized question:
How does a condenser act as a filter, and what is it filtering?
Excellent question Maximumgravity1, this inspired the answer to another simple question I had. But first, the answer. Although is not a "chicken makes chicken" type of answer, this is pretty basic knowledge for people working in electric field particularly in analog electronics. I'll try my layman answer though.
A filter is a device capable to pass certain frequencies well, while attenuates (or reduces) others. The most common example is the equalizer used often in audio setups. Some computer based audio applications (real player, etc.) have one equalizer too. Is used to enhance the bass and/or diminish the treble, all according to your wish. However, filters are not limited to audio range of frequencies, it may go up or down many orders of magnitude (mHz - GHz) depending on application. I hope this answers the question "what is it filtering?".
The most common devices used to build a filter are:
- Inductance
- Capacitor
- Resistor
Depending on which components are used and how are connected, you may have Low-pass filters (permits passing low frequencies and cut-off the higher ones), High-pass filters (guess what those are doing) and Band-pass filter (exactly like in an equalizer, allow to pass just a limited band from the whole range of frequencies while blocking the others)
In other words a filter is a device with selective resistance (more correctly impedance) function of the frequency range being exposed to. For the "Pass" it has low resistance (ideally zero ohm). For the blocking region it has high resistance (ideally infinite).
An example of High-pass filter using a capacitor (answering the first part of your question) is in the picture attached. (Source: Wikipedia where you can go nuts with all kind of filters and explanations for further reading)
Now my question was: If Tesla loved so much high voltage AND high frequencies, I noticed it the patent where high voltage was, but where was the high frequency?
I guess the answer is (trough your question) by using a filter, in this case the capacitor H. I think Tesla used this capacitor also with the purpose to enhance high frequencies and cut-off the lower ones.
If you refer now to the second picture attached, the filter is a bit different but reflects the secondaries circuit coupled with a high-pass filter. The beauty is that alternatively, one set of coils (say F) act as "source" and the other (say G) as "load", then they switch the role (G = source, F= load).
I hope my explanation was simple enough.
This server is acting weird. Slow/sometimes no connection. Also with data base. I just posted an answer to Max and after submitting it, I notticed I got 4 hours of reply I didn't have in the first place.
:'(
So, as I see it, the inductor closes upon itself with the capacitor across it. This makes it resonant at some frequency determined by the inductance and capacitance and produces current flow and power. The higher the potential, the higher the power.
Ok, I'm catching up with you...
Although what I stated if my previous answer stands as a mainstream science, Erfinder showed me (using Maximumgravity1's words) in a different perspective the "condenser".
Quote from: Maximumgravity1 on April 26, 2007, 10:30:05 PM
My simple organized question:
How does a condenser act as a filter, and what is it filtering?
... We are also told it produces impedance to alternating current.
We are told capacitors, inductors and resistors are "passive" components.
It seems to me a capacitor which produces [adapt its self to] impedance function of the frequency of alternating current, is not that passive. If it doesn't exhibit intelligence, at least it has the memory to behave the same in similar conditions.
On a second thought, because of the intrinsic capacitance of secondaries, the equivalent circuit is shown in attached picture and the filter is band-pass.
As Charlie said, this circuit can be tuned to a resonant frequency (which one ?) with capacitor H.
Im starting to piece this together now, my problem is perception- main stream perception. I solve problems by hacking them to pieces, reordering them, examining them so I know what Im dealing with, only then can I understand the fundamental problem.
Conceptually we don't understand what we have- so here is my understanding.
Electrostatic forces-
In nanotechnology you can cut a piece of aluminum into small grains and it will still act like aluminum, powder it and it still acts like aluminum, powder it to the 3 to 4 nanometer range and it becomes more explosive that TNT.
Take 60Hz 120v electricity and cut it into smaller pieces, high frequency/high voltage current and it starts acting less like electricity as Tesla said more like a gas, because it approaches the level of what everything is made of, matter held together by electrostatic forces.
In this light we can say there is no such thing as capacitance, capacitance is a word, it describes the electrostatic stress fields in matter, in an object or between objects.
There is no such thing as inductance, inductance is a word, it describes the motion of electrostatic forces, moving things tend to remain moving as stationary things tend to remain stationary unless acted upon by external stress fields.
So now our calculations mean nothing, we are dealing with the fundamental components of matter, at which point we should understand we are dealing with stress fields(attraction and repulsion) and motion. Our machine, what it is made of (matter) is as important as what it does. Resonance could then be seen as a function of mass as much as it is of frequency. Hence erfinder stressing the importance of frequency as well as length and "mass" of the coils. So resonance is the vibrational motion of electrostatic stress fields in matter, which obviously can effect matter and possibly change matter.
Everything I supposedly knew and understood in LC circuits and simple transformers has changed now. There is much more happening here and we can change the way these machine are supposed to work as well.
Gadzooks this site is addicting - only a few momenst on my lunch break.
Barbosi, thanks for the explanation, it didn't entirely answer what is being filtered (at least in this circuit) but it did answer what a filters job is. My question would be, in regards to the circuit what frequencies are we filtering - where did they come from? WHy are we filtering them? 60Hz AC doesn't seem like high frequency to me...
In looking something up, I stumbled across this:
RESONANCE - A function on a filter in which a narrow band of frequencies (the resonant peak) becomes relatively more prominent. If the resonant peak is high enough, the filter will begin to oscillate, producing an audio output even in the absence of input. Filter resonance is also known as emphasis and Q. It is also referred to in some older instruments as regeneration or feedback, because feedback was used in the circuit to produce a resonant peak.
http://www.digitalhymnal.org/glossary_m-z.html#R
I know this is where Charlie will pipe up, as this seems to match his definition of resonance. I don't know if this has anything to do with 464,666 but it is interesting that the possibility of so much capacitance in this circuit, and so many different devices acting as capacitors, this could be an induced AC current without a direct source.
BTW, I think it was allcanadian who asked if multiple frequencies could be in the same line - I asked this same question a while back, and found a quote that I had linked. I couldn't find a direct source - only a third person retelling - but I believe it to be true.
I will post it again here.
http://www.thewaterengine.com/pdf/stevenmarktpu.pdf
On Page 10 of this PDF is the following quote:
"Now about the DC output with AC signal. There is a book about Nicola Tesla "The Man who Had lightning in his hand". I suggest that you find a copy of that book and read it. In that book it is related that Tesla states that you can have all kinds of electrons flowing through a wire traveling in different directions relating only to their potential power source. He even said that you could have different electron flows through a single wire completely separate from each other. I tried it and he is right!"
I don't think Tesla would have said anything about electrons - I believe this is this persons remembering of Tesla's comment - but I could be wrong. That is why I was looking for the original source of this book. But it leads me to believe the part about multiple flows in relation to their own potential power source.
Anyway, lunch is over, back to the grind....
"Mathieusche Funktion",Time-related,
a part of the parametric generator science,
( f.e. Prof. Ferdinand Cap publication ,Austria )
but also entrance to plasma-/quantum physics.
S
dL
Maximumgravit,
That quote you found is very very interesting. I didn't think that a circuit with very high Q would produce an audible sound even if it isn't plugged up. That is amazing, I wonder how high the Q has to be?
Audible noise means that something is physically vibrating. This might make sense why the masses have to be the same. You know, the Q of a circuit can be adjusted without adjusting the resonant frequency that its at. For a series LC circuit, all you do is increase inductance and reduce capacitance (making sure that you keep the same ratio so they remain at the same resonant frequency).
Server,
Looks like the server is starting to mess up again. I will start to back up some messages so if it craps out on us again we will not lose the messages. I am not sure what is going on with this server. I will get a hold of Stephen and ask him what is going on. to bad we could not have this on the Google forum, they seem to be a lot more stable. OK I just backed up pages 50 to 55. We sure don't want to lose the messages like we did in the past.
Trump
Quote from: allcanadian on April 27, 2007, 02:44:18 PM
...
In this light we can say there is no such thing as capacitance, capacitance is a word, it describes the electrostatic stress fields in matter, in an object or between objects.
There is no such thing as inductance, inductance is a word, it describes the motion of electrostatic forces, moving things tend to remain moving as stationary things tend to remain stationary unless acted upon by external stress fields.
...
From "The Science of Oneness" - Chapter 5.4.2:
(http://www.divinecosmos.com/index.php?option=com_content&task=category§ionid=6&id=19&Itemid=36)
Quote
Michael Faraday was the first to determine that magnetic fields were continually rotating ? and in scientific terms this means that magnetism is a dynamic field. However, he also discovered that:
The electric fields do not move at all; they require the dynamic movement of the magnetic wave to propel themselves forward.
The scientific term that was chosen to describe something that does not move is static, so the electric field was called an electrostatic field.
This can be visualized in a very simple way. If you think about an object that floats on the surface of the ocean, it is only the movement of the wind and water that would cause it to move forward ? and the behavior of the electric field is very similar. If you only looked at the electric part of this waveform by itself, there would be no directional movement within it. If you ask an engineer why the magnetic field is dynamic and the electric field is static, you will probably get ?That?s just the way it is? as your answer. And yet, this is of very obvious importance, as the electromagnetic waveform is the primary means by which energy travels in our universe.
So electrostatic field has the power and magnetic field has the motion. Electromagnetic field is the power in motion or electrostatic force surfing on magnetic waves. I think Grumpy will have a comment at this point saying the motion is not coming from magnetic field but rather from "torsion" or "tempic" field. We'll see...
Also remember Tesla's words:
Quote
"It is well known that an electric circuit compacts itself like a spring with a weight attached to it. Such a spring vibrates at a definite rate, which is determined by two quantities, the pliability of the spring and the mass of the weight. Similarly an electric circuit vibrates, and its vibration, too, is dependent on two quantities, designated as electrostatic capacity and inductance. The capacity of the electric circuit corresponds to the pliability of the spring and the inductance to the mass of the weight."
It looks to me the other way around:
- mass (aka inductance, aka magnetism) suggests the power (?)
- pliability (aka capacity, aka electrostatic field) suggests the motion (?)
And here I'm stuck!
This last thing about the mass, reminds me about a question I addressed in all those lost postings: Erfinder said related to his device something about mass of primary being equal to mass of secondary coils. Could this be the reason of transferring the whole "mass" of power from primary to secondary?
hello all,
I have been doing some calculations from Quote from erfinder in ? Reply #67 on: February 15, 2007, 02:31:48 PM
185000 miles per second (speed of traversing currents) / 925 (frequency of circuit) = 200 miles (length of stationary wave) X ? = 50 miles (length of secondary coil)
Play around with this formula until you have a secondary length of 144 inches. 144 inches should be based on a 22.5 mm inch.
144 inches = 0.227272727 miles (repeating sequences like these are important)
First 144/5280 = .0272727 must be a typo there. Anyway to arrive at this the frequency is greater than 185000
185000/185000 = 1 X 1/4 = .25
185000/2000000=.0925 X 1/4 = .023125 so just slightly less than 2,000,000 this right??
I can not come to this frequency for the life of me. Could be I'm getting extremely tired. And on some things(size of coils, number of turns, etc. I used what I thought to be accurate. Anyone worked on this get a better answer ? I come up with 4521.6 hertz.
Posting some formulas for you...
Ohm's Laws
V = I x R = P / I = SQRT(P x R)
I = V / R = SQRT(P / R) = P / V
R = V / I = P / (I^2) = V^2 / P
P = I x V = I^2 x R = V^2 / R
Where:
V = Voltage in Volts
I = Current in Amps
R = Resistance in Ohms
P = Power in Watts
Resonate Frequency
Fo = 1 / (2 x pi x SQRT(L x C))
Where:
Fo = Resonant frequency in Hertz
pi = 3.14159...
SQRT = Square root function
L = Inductance in Henries
C = Capacitance in Farads
Reactance
Xl = 2 x pi x F x L
Xc = 1 / (2 x pi x F x C)
Where:
Xl = Inductive reactance in Ohms
Xc = Capacitive reactance in Ohms
pi = 3.14159...
F = Frequency in Hertz
L = Inductance in Henries
C = Capacitance in Farads
RMS
Vpeak = Vrms x SQRT(2) For sine waves only
Where:
Vpeak = Peak voltage in volts
Vrms = RMS voltage in Volts RMS
SQRT = Square root function
Energy
E = 1/2 x C x V^2 = 1/2 x L x I^2
Where:
E = Energy in Joules
L = Inductance in Henries
C = Capacitance in Farads
V = Voltage in Volts
I = Current in Amps
Power
P = E / t
Where:
P = Power in Watts
E = Energy in Joules
t = Time in Seconds
Helical Coil
Lh = (N x R)^2 / (9 x R + 10 x H)
Where:
Lh = Inductance in micro-Heneries
N = number of turns
R = Radius in inches
H = Height in inches
Flat spiral
Lf = (N x R)^2 / (8 x R + 11 x W)
Where:
Lf = Inductance in micro-Heneries
N = number of turns
R = Average radius in inches
W = Width in inches
Conical Primary
L1 = (N x R)^2 / (9 x R + 10 x H)
L2 = (N x R)^2 / (8 x R + 11 x W)
Lc = SQRT(((L1 x sin(x))^2 + (L2 x cos(x))^2) / (sin(x)+cos(x)))
Where:
Lc = Inductance in Microhenries
L1 = helix factor
L2 = spiral factor
SQRT = Square root function
N = number of turns
R = average radius of coil in inches
H = effective height of the coil in inches
W = effective width of the coil in inches
X = rise angle of the coil in degrees
Resonant Primary Capacitance
Cltr = I / (2 x pi x Fl x V)
Where:
Cltr = Resonant capacitor value in Farads
I = NST rate current in Amps
pi = 3.14159...
Fl = AC line frequency in Hertz
V = NST rated voltage in Volts
Static Gap Primary LTR Capacitance
Cres = I / (4 x Fl x V)
Where:
Cres = Resonant capacitor value in Farads
I = NST rate current in Amps
Fl = AC line frequency in Hertz
V = NST rated voltage in Volts
Sync Gap Primary LTR Capacitance
Cltr = 0.83 x I / (BPS x V)
Where:
Cltr = The LTR cap size in Farads
I = The NST rated current in Amps
V = The NST rated voltage in Volts
BPS = The break rate (120 or 100 BPS)
Top Voltage
Vt = Vf x SQRT(Ls / (2 x Lp))
Where:
Vt = Peak top voltage in Volts
Vf = gap firing voltage in Volts
SQRT = Square root function
Ls = Secondary inductance in Heneries
Lp = Primary inductance in Heneries
PFC Capacitors
Cpfc = Vo x Io / (2 x pi x Fl x Vi^2)
Where:
Cpfc = Power factor correction capacitance in Farads
Vo = NST output voltage in Volts
Io = NST output current in Amps
pi = 3.14159...
Fl = AC line freqeuncy in Hertz
Vi = NST input voltage in Volts
Power-BPS
P = BPS x 1/2 x Cp x Vf^2
Where:
P = Coil power in Watts
BPS = Breaks per second
Cp = Primary capacitance in Farads
Vf = Gap firing Voltage
Transformers
Vi x Ii = Vo x Io
Where:
Vi = Input voltage in Volts
Ii = Input current in Amps
Vo = Output voltage in Volts
Io = Output current in Amps
Primary Peak Current
IPpeak = Vf / SQRT(Lp / Cp)
Where:
IPpeak = Peak primary loop current Amps
Vf = Firing Voltage in Volts
SQRT = Square root function
Lp = Primary inductance in Heneries
Cp = Primary capacitance in Farads
Surge Impedance
Zs = SQRT(Lp / Cp)
Where:
Zs = Surge impedance in Ohms
SQRT = Square root function
Lp = Primary inductance in Heneries
Cp = Primary capacitance in Farads
Secondary "Q" Factor
Q = 2 x pi x Fo x Ls / Rac
Where:
Q = "Q" factor
Fo = Fundamental frequency in Hertz
Ls = Secondary inductance in Heneries
Rac = Secondary "AC" resitance in Ohms
Freau Spark Length Formula
L = 1.7 x SQRT (P)
L = Maximum spark length in Inches
barbosiQuoteIf you ask an engineer why the magnetic field is dynamic and the electric field is static, you will probably get ?That?s just the way it is? as your answer.
Hehehe, yea thats probably what you would get! But I wouldn't say that if you asked me.
QuoteThe capacity of the electric circuit corresponds to the pliability of the spring and the inductance to the mass of the weight."
It looks to me the other way around:
- mass (aka inductance, aka magnetism) suggests the power (?)
- pliability (aka capacity, aka electrostatic field) suggests the motion (?)
Tesla has it right. Its easiest to imagine the spring first. What does a spring do? It holds potential energy. You squeeze it down and it holds the energy in tension (a static force). Static energy is potential. So capacitance is the static energy of the electrical system.
Inductance is equal to mass. In a mechanical system, a mass put into motion holds kinetic energy (its moving and doesn't want to stop). If you get a truck rolling and try to stop it, its pretty hard to stop. Likewise, the inductor stores the kinetic energy of the circuit. When current is all of a sudden stopped, the inductor will try to keep it going, like the truck does.
I would like to note that this idea of the inductor as a kinetic energy storer is one of my own concoctions. Modern physics says that inductors (and permanent magnets) store potential energy - I think this is so so wrong! Magnetic fields are the kinetic energy of the universe.
Static fields produce the motion, the motion produces the static fields (the two snakes eating each other).
Now I've been thinking, if two objects are the same mass, then if they were made to vibrate each other, they would each have to generate the same amount of force (they are balanced so to speak). IF it really is true that a circuit with high Q produces audible sounds without an input voltage, then I think this is where the extra energy would come from to overcome wire resistance. Having the masses balanced would make sure there was no extra strain on either of the coils when one of them was physically moving. I'm just thinking out loud, what do you guys think?
midnight_blueIf I remember right, the secondary is composed of four coils. Does each coil have to match the quarter wavelength? Or do all four of them combined need to be a quarter wavelength? I would think all four together should, but I don't know. This is important for frequency calculating.
Heres another thing, if we are going to start worrying about the rate that the current flows in the secondary, then my earlier statements about calculating L and then matching C won't work. This is because I was assuming that the length of the secondary (all the coils combined) was short enough (or the frequency was slow enough) so that you can neglect the time (time it takes the current to traverse the circuit) and use lump circuit elements (which is what typical values of capacitors and inductors are).
If the wire length is important, which I suppose it is since Erfinder made it a point to make those calculations, then we need to use something else - distributed circuit elements. This gets complicated and I'm not really sure how you make the calculations. The easiest way to solve the problem is the old fashioned way. Make the frequency calculation (using Tesla's formula [wavelength = velocity/frequency]), build the circuit according to that, and apply the calculated frequency (with a function generator hooked to the primary coils) and start adjusting it down till you get the max voltage at the capacitor terminals. When you reach the true quarter wavelength, the secondary coils will act like a quarter wave resonator - the resonant frequency for these is a little different than what you would calculate from a series LC circuit.
Basically whatever your calculated frequency is in Tesla's formula (assuming you use the speed of light as your velocity) the REAL frequency will be lower because current does not travel at the speed of light in a wire - it goes a little slower, around 10% slower - so multiplying your frequency by 0.9 would give you a more accurate value. But its better to just set it up and measure. This is why Tesla says, "this estimate being based on the velocity of propagation of the disturbance through the coil itself and the circuit with which it is designed to be used." Otherwise, he would of instructed to just use the speed of light all the time.
The goal is still the same though, keep the impedance of the secondary low, and the impedance of the primary high. Drive the secondary circuit with voltage (from the primary) and let the current developed in the secondary move the motor - still 90 degrees apart.
Sorry, this might be too much all at once... I always get a little carried away :(
Hello,
Here is something that bothers me and I cannot find an answer.
In attached figure (modified from a brnbrade picture - thanks) with some references added. It's all about the coils F6 and G6 with their connection in the "sweet spot".
I included also for both coils the terminals 1 and 2 for each.
Question 1: Who can tel me why coil G6 has the polarity N' and not S'. Please consider terminals F6-1 and G6-1 which normally should produce the same pole polarity. Is it intended the potentials at the capacitor's terminals to be 180 degree?
Question 2: Is a re-run question. Please note coils F are connected in clock-wise direction, while after the "sweet spot" coils G go back (counter clock-wise). Why Do you think Tesla did it this way? He simply could after the "sweet spot" to go to the next clock wise available G coil and go, and go up to the last one, which would be connected to capacitor. I see a sort of symmetry around the "sweet spot" which I could consider it the "Void". I "see" a sort of vortex with the big opening of the funnel at the capacitor H and the minimum at the sweet spot. Is more like a feeling which I'm not very good at explaining. Maybe I could inspire someone who could make more sense than I do.
Thanks.
Gahhhh... I lost my post....I don't have time to retype it. In short, the answer to
QuoteQuestion 1: Who can tel me why coil G6 has the polarity N' and not S'
Is found in Lines 90-99 of the patent. The windings of poles B are wound in such a direction as to induce the same magnetism as that from the primary. Also, your diagram is labeled as E6, but I think that is the same coil we are talking about. It is getting its polarity from the primary N in the counter-clockwise direction. I can't quite understand your numbering system, so I am not going to attempt to state which number it would be. It is the one in the 8 o'clock position.
As for why did he reverse the winding direction instead of continuing along, I think it is because ERFINDER has told us that these 12 coils are the 12 plates of a capacitor. If I understand correctly, a capacitor needs opposite charges on the plates to function correctly. If Tesla continued around the circle clockwise, he would have the same charges on those coils I am re-referencing my diagram, as it makes it easier for me to see - hopefully it will help others as well.
(https://overunityarchives.com/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.overunity.com%2Findex.php%3Faction%3Ddlattach%3Btopic%3D133.0%3Battach%3D8454&hash=8164a3db9433a0715e5048a13076ae4e29d5680d)
The question I am forced to ask is why then do we need the capacitor? Couldn't the same action have been accomplished with two closed loop circuits? What is the condenser resiting? Which alternating electrostatic fields is it impeding? What exactly is it filtering?
charlie_v,
Hehe, ohhh k, I'm still mulling that over. gotta like it, gotta like it alot.
Quote from: Maximumgravity1 on April 28, 2007, 10:13:34 AM
The question I am forced to ask is why then do we need the capacitor? Couldn't the same action have been accomplished with two closed loop circuits? What is the condenser resiting? Which alternating electrostatic fields is it impeding? What exactly is it filtering?
I believe barbosi answered this, anyway...
Capacitors pass AC much better than DC. Capacitors are arranged as a highpass filter placed in series with the
primary. At 60 Hz, this is nearly an open circuit(blocking). At 1 megahertz, though, the capacitor puts very little reactance into the circuit(filtering).
__1__
Xc = 2 Ãâ,¬ fc
where Xc is capacitive reactance, f is frequency, c is capacitance. So as frequency increases, Xc gets smaller
Maximumgravity,
I'm sorry I don't buy this and I'll try to explain why. I think here is the key of the working mechanism. I reposted and corrected the drawing there was a typo, instead of E6, you should read G6. Also I added reference F1 and G1.
You should also consider (imaginary - not in the drawing) the primary and the voltage at connection to AC supply. Lets say left connection is "Null" or "Ground" and the right connection goes to the hot wire.
So a max voltage in primary E1 (not shown) will induce a max voltage in F1. Similarly, will have an "induced Null" at F6-1 (surprised this is the sweet spot?) If you think, what is after the "sweet spot" (voltage in G coil circuit) it looks like the "ghost" or simulated situation of what we have in F circuit. Going up to capacitor H, We'll have the double voltage of what we induced. Kind of differential mode, the potentials at the capacitor connections are always the same as value but with a different sign (180 degrees shift)...
Because is the "ghost" we have North as shown on coil G6...
I'm not sure if the same could be if after "sweet spot" we had to go the same direction with the coils (clock-wise).
This was the reason of my association with a vortex. At capacitor two opposed potentials and at the "sweet spot" is the bottom of the funnel.
I struggle also with what kind of wire length... for a quarter wave length... is looks more like a half...
Anyway, this is still a fuzzy picture and this is the reason to ask you all if you find a logic in what I see too.
If I knew the answers, I would have just stated to you and look for answering your questions.
Bye.
PS: Later added arguments.
a. Think you didn't have G coils at all, what to do with terminal F6-1 was pretty simple but no gain here. You have REAL induced fields and that's it.
b. Now if you have the G coils, there is the opportunity to build and run a ghost. Ghost fields, imaginary fields. Remember complex numbers? imaginary = i? i gives you 90 degrees? torque?
If it was me I would have to choose solution a. (not to mention in fact that the first impulse would have been "no coils F" at all).
But Tesla have seen the advantage to build that ghost...
Don't ignore the primary coils, what is their individual contribution to their relative secondaries... What is "pumped" in coils F, is "sucked" in coils G.
Using Maximumgravity1's drawing, now this is going to sound really simple, but it looks to me that the coils are making 6 pseudo bar magnets whose ends are facing inward (with alternating polarity).
Let me try to draw this, I'll use Maximum's drawing.
Charlie,
This is when at primary you have +Vmax reference left hand connection.
Still got at least 2 to cover:
- 0V
- -Vmax
How it will slide? An expert in animation would be handy...
[EDIT]: This shows also it works with quarter wavelength/F coils and quarter wavelength/G coils and.
Quote from: Erfinder on April 28, 2007, 12:35:59 PM
LOL ???
Mainstream :-X
Gotta love it........ :-\
Regards
Refreshing... thanks.
I believe that each inductor is 1/2 of a cycle or wave. Where F and G come together is a maximum pressure or voltage point.
Where the capacitor connects is the same. According to Walter Russell there are
seven tones in an octave. I think that these tones are tuned with the capacitor.
Each tone is a resonant frequency with a different phase relationship along the inductor.
Each position is a different pressure point along the cycle or wave.
In the patent we are tuning the secondary to the primary. What if we want to tune the primary to the secondary? What if the secondary is an element? Just throwing my thoughts out there.
I'm confused, what is everyone confused about? Are you having a hard time seeing how the magnetic fields of the coils interact with the rotor?
Erfinder, explain what you think is mainstream?
I have some questions for you actually.
1.) Is each individual coil (the secondary 144 inch coils) suppose to be 1/4 wavelength or is all 4 together suppose to make a 1/4 wavelength?
2.) I've seen you say that each coil makes a plate of a capacitor. Do you mean that each transformer (primary wrapped around a secondary) will produce a voltage during their coupling that will add like charged capacitors do in series?
3.) You seem to ignore magnetic fields, why?
Hi All,
Please find below some references & thoughts from a non mainstream view.
Reference The Physics of the primary state of matter - C Davson
P70
Nature?.functions vacuum on vacuum, or stressfield on stressfield ? the crossing of the energies ? and that this is the only method nature has of producing any form of force or energy, or transformation of same to another condition.
So vacuum is a stressfield occasioned by two components which operate inwards, where the form permits- that is, when it is spherical ? towards a centre, but always inwards. P58
Glowing magnetism is densified vacuum or the fundamental electro-magnetic force functioning as radiation or as a stressfield.
Vacuum is really the mother of magnetism p57 Glowing magnetism is the true vacuum.
The ether is a static potential composed of two components which, when polarized, form a force of attraction; magnetism?.thus the ether is magnetism in the latent state; when polarized, the hydrogen component is magnetism in the glowing state, or glowing magnetism. This is the fundamental force.p56
The sun was formed by compression or densification of the ether on a point of inequality, in other words, a force of suction, and thereby exerts attraction upon the ether owing to the potential difference between the two; the ether is thus drawn in, catalysed and forced out again as radiant energy. The sun is therefore a suction and force pump;?two likes in unlike condition is the greatest force which can exist in nature. P54-55
P62
Let it be clearly understood that in the primary physics the atmosphere is not the air, but a stressfield ? the earths stressfield is the earths atmosphere, likewise with every heavenly body......
there are more references on stressfields to look at than I have presented here.........
In summary there are two perspectives that can be applied to Tesla?s patent. Either vacuum on vacuum or stressfield on stressfield. I prefer vacuum on vacuum as I understand this well. It appears Erfinder prefers stressfield on stressfield.
So I shall start with a quote from barbosi------------
What is "pumped" in coils F, is "sucked" in coils G.
And a quote from myself---------
If we have a neutralised current (the neutralised armature coils) that is rotated fast as we have here in Tesla's patent. This then attracts (sucks) the neutralised ether to it like a whirlpool would suck in all the water. This would compress the ether to a point where it must radiate it out. This radiated out neutralised current is transferred to the neutralised secondary via resonance (another vacuum that sucks & pumps) .
So if you put these two statements together you have a vacuum on vacuum.
Regards,
N.
To quote charlie_v - "Holy crap balls."
I couldn't sleep, this was keeping my mind occupied. So.... erfinder is this correct? Is this what you seek from us?
Hot and Cold, ELECTRIC EFFECTS, Electrostatic. Can it be this little transformer motor is producing the thing we all know as LIGHTNING? Is this Teslas perfection of it? And faster than the speed of LIGHT, based on erfinders formula.
185000/2000000=.0925 X 1/4 = .023125 so just slightly less than 2,000,000 this right??
Regards,
Mark
QuoteJust try thinking for yourself! I believe I have said on more than one occasion that it is advisable to put everything you think you know on the sidelines, as it will not help you at present, it will only hinder your comprehending the new information. Later when you comprehend, and have transformed this new information into knowledge, you can refer back to that which mainstream has given you!
Mainstream is nothing more that the source of information we collectively call knowledge. What we call knowledge is not knowledge it is information! Knowledge reveals cause, describes cause, explains cause! At present we don't know the cause of ANYTHING! We are masters of effect only!!!
Ha! Couldn't have said that better, indeed all we are, are the masters of cause and effect.
QuoteI have some questions for you actually.
1.) Is each individual coil (the secondary 144 inch coils) suppose to be 1/4 wavelength or is all 4 together suppose to make a 1/4 wavelength?
I thought that it was clear that our focus is the first patent? What does this have to do with the patent?
Well, this would actually apply to the patent as well. Since each coil can be represented in the same way (not forgetting the capacitor). And would help with optimum performance of the secondary. So you think you could answer this - pretty please <puppy dog face>?
Quote2.) I've seen you say that each coil makes a plate of a capacitor. Do you mean that each transformer (primary wrapped around a secondary) will produce a voltage during their coupling that will add like charged capacitors do in series?
You have been taught that the secondary currents are good for nothing other than sparks...this is the biggest lie you have ever been sold!
Concentrating on what I have bolded, I assume you mean the secondary currents as being the current developed in the secondary? The circuits that we are looking at, the methods that it appears to me, we are trying to apply, I had an idea of using when I first started reading about Tesla and his books.
At the time I was in a power electronics class. The professor was actually talking about "RLC filters" and "transformers" and how you convert low frequency currents to high frequency to reduce component sizes, using resonance to allow max power through - BLAH BLAH. I drew a schematic of Tesla's magnifying transformer (using mainstream terms this is a parallel RLC circuit coupled to a series RLC circuit). I didn't tell him what it was for, I just showed it to him and asked what would this do. He laughed and said never do that, that is a bad thing, that creates a short. So, not only was I told it was good for nothing, I was told NEVER do it!!
QuoteI will not waste our time trying to explain to you why, others have done a good job of this already, you just have to know where to look, and most importantly know what to look for! I realize that I still haven't answered your question! So try this on for size. The secondary windings are extensions of the capacitor plates!!! lol....
AND
QuoteElectricity on the other hand moves in two directions simultaneously! These two opposite directions are opposite to one another meaning they travel 180 degrees from the neutral point dividing them! One direction is the direction of compression, and the other is the direction of expansion. What must be visualized is that these two can move in the same forward direction and still be moving in opposite directions! How? Dual Vortex!!!
Hahaha, no you answered the question - in the first quote. I see now what this is doing, although I have for some time. You are not viewing the coils and capacitor as a separate entity, you see them as THE SAME element. What I haven't thought about is your view point - I see it now (at least I think I do ha). I never really thought about it in this "light" (yea it was a corny joke).
The magnetic fields are stationary (this doesn't mean they don't oscillate). You make the magnetic field "fixed" so to speak (which I never thought about but it is), and you focus on the electrostatic oscillation in the secondary. Yes I see, the coils in this case become capacitor plates - very interesting notion. The current in the secondary circuit is tremendously huge - its designed to be.
This capacitor plate can then be viewed as almost like a slinky. Slinkies expand and contract. As part of the overall secondary circuit is Contracted, there is an expansion part. It goes back and forth expanding and contracting, the duel vortex that you talk about - I'm not seeing it as a whirl pool though, I'm seeing it as a slinky. Let me redraw this!
Charlie
Again what you are saying makes sence. What would determine the size of a capacitor, or would the secondary cols and the whole circuit need to be calculated out prior to the capacitor being sized? Trying to stay main stream, just the new way of looking at this. makes me wonder how the whole puzzle comes together.
Trump
Hi All,
I need to rephrase my earlier statement slightly......
In summary there are two perspectives that can be applied to Tesla?s patent. Either vacuum on vacuum or stressfield on stressfield. I prefer vacuum on vacuum as I understand this well. It appears Erfinder prefers stressfield on stressfield.
So I shall start with a quote from barbosi------------
What is "pumped" in coils F, is "sucked" in coils G.
And a quote from myself---------
If we have a neutralised current (the neutralised armature coils) that is rotated fast as we have here in Tesla's patent. This then attracts (sucks) the neutralised ether in like a whirlpool would suck in all the water. This would compress the ether to a point where it must radiate (pumps) it out (expansion). This radiated out polarised current is transferred to the secondary (another vacuum that sucks & pumps) .
So if you put these two statements together you have a vacuum on vacuum.
Regards,
N.
Hi nat1971a
Great explanation! This much more in the path certain of the things.
Two questions that I still don't understand.
Are The vacuum formed in the equator lines of the coils? Which the lines flow between rotor and the secondary?
Regards
Hi brnbrade ,
I shall try to explain as best I can. It is hard to think of things conceptually then explain it in relation to the patent. But I will try my best. So here goes....
The vacuum is created in the armature by its rotation.
The other vacumm is created by the combination of all the secondary coils as a whole unit by their very rough circular shape & velocity. i.e the closed secondary circuit. One must understand that it doesnt have to be a perfect circle to induce a vacuum or a whirlpool as I have described as an analogy. I believe in nature they are more elliptical in shape.
Regards,
N.
Hi,
I've been fellowing this thread sence it started and its really great whats going on here.
At the risk of sounding like a nut, this is what I see.
When I look at this patent I see the armature as the earth with its fields and I see the coils as whats going on in the atmoshere.
Hope this helps
Thanks for your time.
Hello all,
This is the reference I was looking for yesterday but could not locate it until now. I had posted the link last week but post was lost when the server crashed.
Mr. Nikola Tesla has announced that as the result of experiments conducted at Shoreham, Long Island, he has perfected a new system of wireless telegraphy and telephony in which the principles of transmission are the direct opposite of Hertzian wave transmission. In the latter, he says, the transmission is effected by rays akin to light, which pass through the air and cannot be transmitted through the ground, while in the former the Hertz waves are practically suppressed and the entire energy of the current is transmitted through the ground exactly as though a big wire. Mr. Tesla adds that in his experiments in Colorado it was shown that a very powerful current developed by the transmitter traversed the entire globe and returned to its origin in an interval of 84 one-thousandths of a second, this journey of 24,000 miles being effected almost without loss of energy.
This equates to = 285,714.28 miles/sec or roughly 1.5 X speed of light.
Source: http://www.tfcbooks.com/tesla/1909-12-24.htm
didn't mean to distract from the task at hand re: 1st patent
Hello again,
I have gone back on al the post from erfinder and read the patents again.
here are the quotes from Erfinder: in bold text
Concentrate on Field stress
Fields produce currents
induction with out magnetic field, dielectric stress maybe
it concentrate fields and conduct fields
EMF is going against the current BEMF is going with it
BEMF is not resisted it is assisted
In the NEW STANDARD we find that fields can produce motion with out force when we design our machine to follow the field flow back to the void (in this case the cap and source power)(the BEMF field)(this would mean that the BEMF field move faster then the EMF field)
The fields are not 90 degrees out of phase in the conventional sense (The fields upon each other are 90 out of phase for example take two bar magnets and line one up to north and south now move the second one with its north to the neutral of the first one.
EMF =Paramagnetisim=pos
BEMF=diamagnetisem=neg
N<-P<-P Positive charge attracts positive charge and expels negative discharge
N<-N->P Negative discharge repels both negative discharge and positive charge
So if magnetic fields are 90 degree out of phase we have a stress field if we would see this as a capacitor the air between the magnets or plates is the dielectricum, dielectric stress
only a little force would be needed to start the process of rotation each time the rotating neg is in line with the void we would have the maximum BEMF
Because the BEMF go's faster the rotation will speed up in order to control the speed at the so called sweet spot we would have to increase resistance the part is not drawn as this is showing only the principle.(see patent 568,178 fig. 3)
nobody is wondering why this was drawn this way, it would be easy to draw a straight line to the coils.
the field in the rotor will go back and forward spilling BEMF in to the stationary coils the BEMF from both are conducting
regarding to what tesla said about close upon each other he could also mean that their is no air between the two coils
see his patent no 557,671 line 20
It has heretofore been shown by me that the efficiency and practicability of such devices are very greatly enhanced by the exclusion of air or gas from the dielectric separating the conductor or remote proportions of the same conductor
Erfinder said the sun is cold
their for only the air is warm air in the device would make it heat up and it would lose its efficiency
I am sorry for my English and it also hard to follow at some time sins English is not my mother language
but I will give my best
regards
I told you all there is more to this then any of you have ever imagined, but before we can take a walk on the wild side and begin to experience truth, you must change your thinking! Erfinder.
Ok, so we need to change our thinking, It seems that everyone has talked this patent to death. What else can we do to change our thinking of how to evaluate the Patent? Is the rational being used off track for this Patent? Is it the idea that we need to realize why things happen in this patent and not how they happen?
Trump
Hello ErFinder,
Nikola Tesla was good enough,
but without the help from Karl Steinmetz: industrial never accepted !
It seems,for me, that Franco Jakelj developed this "unvollendete" work to
a practical machine !
Sincerely
de Lan?a
Hello all,
I suggest we break the patent down by key sections until we have covered the entire patent. Now granted alot of it has been discussed, but we need to be as one. Therefore we should discuss each section until we all can confirm as 1 answer. And by the way Mainstream to the back burner. Any one object? Or see a need for a different approach?
Regards,
midnight blue
Ok, made it back from out of town this weekend. I started working on my latest diagrams below when ERFINDER posted. I need to think on his comments some more, so I may revise these as I think about it, but for now let me post what I have.
I went ahead and completed my steps in my original drawing, and have the fields fully energized in both phases of AC current. But this got me thinking, there is something more going on, as the in-between steps are missing. See the first two sequences below.
If we break this unit apart - and for the time being, forget the armature - as I believe in the end we will discover its primary purpose is to rotate - thus making the "MOTOR part" of this apparatus. There may be a few surprises in store, but for now - lets forget it.
So as ERFINDER previously stated, we could arrange these coils in a linear fashion. So this is what I did. I think it might remove some of the confusion, as the circuit now appears a bit more straight forward. See "Straight Fields1.jpg" below.
So now, I have a feeling about this, and I believe brnbrade and allcanadian are skirting around this issue, and it seems to be prevalent in many other writings, as well as about the only thing we haven't laid out in plain terms - so let me try to talk through this:
If we take for a given that a single wire can have multiple charges, fields, potentials, flows - whatever - in it at the same time, and relative only to their own originating source, then we should assume that all these capacitive actions are going to be cumulative, and dwell in the coils simultaneously - due to overlap until their individual "oscillations" diminish, or until a strong enough force overcomes the first to remove it, or render it inconsequential.
So, if we assume that the primary E induces a charge into F, we will have a continual oscillation between flows of the AC through the primary, and ultimately an identical flow through the secondary. The animation below titled "Series Animation1.gif" would be what we would see in the secondaries upon each oscillation of the AC current.
Now, what is not pictured, is sort of eluded to in ERFINDERS last posting (as I understand it). That would be as soon as the primary field collapses, and ultimately the secondary, the core (presumably the "conductor" in erfinders post) "re-energizes" the secondary in step-up fashion, and as seen as the high potential electrostatic field with alternate polarity from what it first was. I can't get verification on this, and maybe missing something, but I believe that polarity is strength ed by the equally high electrostatic potential in the condenser, as the condenser is now "balancing" the secondary.
The net result is pictured in the second animation (Seres Animation2.gif). After thinking through ERFINDER'S post a bit, it would seem to me that since the secondaries are now energized with the opposite polarity, this would be the same polarity that will be induced through the primary. This should add to the "A-core" secondaries, and reverse the "B-core" secondaries. This seems to have a "kicker" or "booster" effect on the potential in the "A" secondaries. This potential will be continually oscillating through the capacitor, the core, and the primary, and continually manifesting itself as radiant energy (or radiant electrostatic charge), but should continue to build and boost the potential until the dielectric is over come in the condenser.
midnight_blue[/
I think your suggestion is good, I think we started out to break the patent down, but did we really go from the start, or did some of us just take it for granted what some of the wording meant. Working on key points is also a good idea if that will work. It seems that what one person may feel it is a no brainier, but it may not mean the same to someone else. Again you are right Midnight Blue, we need to be main stream and together on everything. We need to all be on the same track and talk it out. I don't mind Erfinder chewing on me, heck as long as we can work as a group and stay on track it should work. I think what Erfinder is saying is that all of us are not thinking the same and understanding the same.
Regards,
Erfinder, I have a question.
This unidirectional radiation you speak of, does this have a name in mainstream or is this something that mainstream does not know about?
Typically, in present understanding, when the primary magnetic field collapses, the secondary will see an increasing magnetic field. Likewise, when the primary is increasing, the secondary is decreasing.
Could you elaborate a little more on this unidirectional radiation? It has peeked my interest!
Thanks,
Charlie
Hi Erfinder
You mentioned that a magneto is an electrostatic element. Which is the strength that pushes the individual magnets outside of the magneto?
Does the flow run of the south pole for the north or of the mid for the sides? Magnetism would be the source then of that everything, best saying a vacuum.
Vacuous, it would be a strength that sucks the positive things and it repels the negatives. Or it would be the opposite of that.!!
That vacuous one would be the main grid contained in every infinite of the universe. That duality + and - in the magneto it would be the Electrostatic and the vacuum the painting screen.
Each individual magnet that flows of that magneto would be the brushes where I drawing my powers.
Example: To alter the south stream and later the north in a rocking frequency would have an alternating current.
And does a direct continue strength how it would be then?
Thinking like this, could say that to infinite forms of composing a power.
Excuse my questions, but this painting in my mental screen, this wanting to flow of the magnetos.
I wanting incorporate Leonnardo D'vinc that exists in me.
regards
QuoteWell the capacitor stores electrostatic charge as a stress potential in it's dielectric material, and the secondary windings radiate electrostatic charge!
Finally getting to the beginning - the basics. I still have a hard time understanding how trying to evaluate a completed patent is the beginning, but I will continue to roll with it....
I think some definitions (or concepts of understanding) are needed to form a unified foundation. I will lay out my thoughts of these definitions, but they are by no means definitive. Think of these as a starting point to be modified.
Electrostatic Charge - The flow that emanates from an electrostatic field. This is the "force", the "pressure", the "velocity".
Electrostatic Field - Mainstream defines this as basically, electricity at rest - not moving. This is kind of an oxymoron, as electricity (flow of energy) is never really at rest. So I think the idea of force, pressure or velocity flowing (possibly oscillating) in a condensed area is probably sufficient.
Stress Potential - "Stress" - An applied force or system of forces that tends to strain or deform a body. The "Stress Potential" appears to be the quantitative measurement of electricity to effect physical matter. This is not through discharge, burn, or release of energy, but the innate ability of Mind to vibrate aetherically. Maybe too deep, but I am not sure how else to think of this. Any suggestions on this definition???
High Potential Electrostatic field - If Electrostatic Field is "force, pressure or velocity flowing in a condensed area", isn't this the act of "doing"? How does this field manifest potential? Do we assume it is a high force, pressure or velocity? Do we assume it is a build up of that force, pressure or velocity, waiting for an opportunity to move from its current "condensed area"?
Magnetic Field - ??? Anyone???? The closest I could come is "A detected force that exists around a magnet or electrical field". In this sense it is clear how the magnetic field is static - it doesn't move - it is bound to an object. It also does not seem to have varying forms of potential - it just "is". It can be weaker or stronger, but it doesn't seem to have the ability to provide "more pressure" then what already exists.
So basically, the capacitor (condenser) stores the flow of force in the form of the ability to effect physical matter in its dielectric material, while the secondary coils give off (radiate) the flow of force.
QuoteHmmmm.....interesting....is there anything else? Yes! The capacitor and the secondary windings are to be seen as one unit, one system! The coupling of the secondary windings with capacitor produces a special capacitor! It should be understood that when the magnetic field of the primary collapses, a unidirectional (direct current in the form of a penetrating radiation) radiation is emitted from the conductor, this radiation is absorbed by the secondary and manifests as a high potential electrostatic field. What should be noted is that the polarity of the the secondary windings alternate! This is important as it shows us how a unidirectional (direct current) electrostatic field potential is transformed into an alternating one!!!
In reading through his several hundred times, it appears conductor is probably in reference to the primary coil wire. So why does the magnetic field's collapse, produce a "penetrating radiation"? Presumably this "penetrating radiation" is a radiant form of energy that overcomes self-inductance (or is the very cause for self-inductance), and manifests itself as a DC energization of the coil. But why does it do this?
Now, what can we do with this above information? How do we apply this info in the patent, and more importantly, what can we learn about the nature of electricity with this info?
I just don't see how something oscillating is producing a DC radiation - unless he's calling the magnetic field a DC radiation.... I feel so blind :( I'd like to learn more about it though!
Oh by the way Maximumgravity1, awesome animations. What your saying makes sense too. As for a definition for a magnetic field, I got my own but no one likes it. I call it kinetic energy, a motion field - always present when things are moving.
Charlie_V
I hope we will all learn together Charlie, I think that's what Erfinder wants also. I think just by sticking together and going through this patent like Midnight Blue stated will workout for the best, so we can all learn together. You may be way ahead of some of us in the knowledge Charlie, but we all need to understand things. Seems Erfinder comes up and adds some items to get us back on track.
Regards
"Maximumgravity1"
To animation of the "Maximumgravity1" would be already enough to generate a lot of alternate electric power.
(https://overunityarchives.com/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.overunity.com%2Findex.php%3Faction%3Ddlattach%3Btopic%3D133.0%3Battach%3D8631&hash=f185dcba972be733bf15381c7324b98b30847c7b)
Only to put coils among the alternating ones.
More believes that ERFINDER wants teach more. he wants to explain the grounds.
I learned very here, more than in High School.
Thanks!!
Here's another way to look at Maximumgravity1's diagram.
From Steinmetz's Lecture on "Electric Discharges, Waves and Impulses, and other Transients" Thanks Barbosi .
The magnetic field of the circuit is proportional to the current (i) with a proportionality factor of, L, which is called the inductance of the circuit. Magnetic field = Li
The Dielectric field is proportional to the voltage with a proportionality factor, C, which is called the Capacity of the circuit.
The magnetic field represents stored energy. To produce it, power, must therefore be supplied by the circuit. Since power is current times voltage, p = ei.
The dielectric field represents stored energy. To produce it, power, must therefore be supplied by the circuit. Since power is current times voltage, p = ie.
Oh Boy , have we been on the wrong track, I imagine erfinder has been getting quite a chuckle out of this from day one. We have read so much into this it's become a monster, jumping to conclusions from the beginning. So I will start with our first mistake.
1) This motor can run on AC or DC.
Yes it can, but not as depicted in the patent, everyone has assumed the input was AC or DC converted to AC. We then started on an endless rant into phase relationships, capacitance, reactance ect... . What we missed was the simple fact that erfinders machine uses an impulsive DC input. Tesla was working with impulse DC inputs, so why would we automatically assume this is AC. I believe the input here was meant to be a timed DC impulse current, switched DC or rectified AC, which clarifies a lot of things.
2)If statement (1) is correct then this motor patent 464444 is nothing more than the equivalent of EV gray's conversion element, that is a simple means to transform DC current into pure electrostatic potential. EV gray used an single electrostatic impulse to fire his motor coils, Tesla used a secondary circuit with a capacitor to transform the single electrostatic impulse into an "alternating electrostatic" impulse or AC.
Thats it, thats all there is.
Tesla used a single DC impulse through the primary coils to produce alternating electrostatic potential (high voltage/high frequency) in the secondaries, the secondaries being the driving force.
Here is what erfinder said to finally clarify this.
The capacitor and the secondary windings are to be seen as one unit, one system! The coupling of the secondary windings with capacitor produces a special capacitor! It should be understood that when the magnetic field of the primary collapses, a unidirectional (direct current in the form of a penetrating radiation) radiation is emitted from the conductor, this radiation is absorbed by the secondary and manifests as a high potential electrostatic field. What should be noted is that the polarity of the the secondary windings alternate! This is important as it shows us how a unidirectional (direct current) electrostatic field potential is transformed into an alternating one!!!
I attached a picture of the mystery circuit we are having so much trouble with, this could be seen as one stator from the motor patent. The red primary is switched DC or an "impulse current" this produces a large Bemf or electrical cavitation when the magnetic field collapses, a means to an end. The Bemf produces a large electrostatic potential on the blue secondary which starts alternating polarity because of the capacitor in series. You simply add more primaries and secondaries to produce the motor shown in patent 464444. The function of the primary and secondary coil orientations does nothing more than any other AC motor, that is to produce a rotating electrostatic field. I think the capacitor and secondary coil capacitance form the basis for the high frequency oscillations in the secondary system as well.
So we have somehow jumped to so many conclusions that a simple motor has taken on a life of it's own. My turning point was from midnight_blues post on a link to the magneto-dielectric wave, which led me to the four qudrant electrical theory. This four quadrant theory explains everthing, we should be using impulse-oscillation current and not just AC-DC.
What has not been mentioned directly, and is impotant I believe is the oscillations in the secondaries. Erfinder said "It should be understood that when the magnetic field of the primary collapses, a unidirectional (direct current in the form of a penetrating radiation) radiation is emitted from the conductor, this radiation is absorbed by the secondary and manifests as a high potential electrostatic field."
While erfinder mentions that the electrostatic potential in the secondaries "alternates", that is alternates polarities, I think there may also be high frequency oscillations between the coil capacitance and the capacitor, these being very different than conventional AC. I may be reading more into this than I should but Tesla made some reference to this.
Only a few moments for lunch, I will read through this again later, but off the cuff....
"The general object of my present invention is to secure artificially a difference of a quarterof phase between the currents in the two energizing-circuits of an alternating-current electro-magnetic motor of that general class invented by me..." (L11-16)
So although what you may be true, the assumption to use AC was established by Tesla.
@maximumgravity1
That is my point exactly, when tesla says "alternating-current electro-magnetic motor ", he means the current is alternating or changing polarity.
So we all assume he uses a sinusodal wave input, but I can use a short duration DC impulse at the input and still alternate it's polarity, so it is still "alternating current". In the secondaries as well, If I have an oscillating electrostatic current that changes polarity at any given interval, is it not "alternating" current"?
Here's an even better one, If I were to input a single short duration positive impulse from my source into the primary, and the secondary electrostatic current alternated through one cycle returning a negative charging impulse to the source, is this not an "alternating current".
It's all about perspective and assumptions--- we assume too much, we presume to understand a motor no one has.
In Tesla's patent 512340 you can see how tesla removed the capacitor from the inductors.
Hi it's barbosi here, I've messet up with my account few days ago and it seems Stefan didn't read emails I've sent to help me restore my old account. Until then...
I agree with the AC over impulses debate as I expressing my concern in a previous comment. It's Tesla using in his patent the term "impulse" - lines 94 and 97.
Also in a previous comment that vanished with that server failure, I was commenting about the coils sen as capacitors. At that time I said, and I hope I recall in the same terms, that "capacitance is the property of a body to hold charge". It was as a reflection upon some reading at that time. Thus, a Tesla coil could be seen as capacitance, [generating and] holding electrostatic charge.
About the circuit:
I see now how we over-complicated a simple design (simple as layout, not as idea).
Coils E, F and G make all together a transformer (with 2 secondaries). In fact being said each E coil with its secondary is a Tesla coil, what is still different from what we know? The secondary connections are not tied to ground and to that "ball". They are tied in series to accumulate electrostatic charge. Adding electrostatic field. Now one connection, with the HV (that one with the ball) is connected to capacitor. The other one, Instead to be connected to ground is used as the "sweet spot". Because the coils F and G are alternated and considering the winding direction, it is generated the second electrostatic charge but with different direction of the field. All referenced to the sweet spot. All charges from the coils G are added as field and applied to the other terminal of capacitor.
It all makes more sense if the whole thing is fed with impulses at the primary.
The equivalent circuit is as bellow, showing the Tesla coil building charge into capacitor. Charlie's representation with capacitors (in a previous post) has the advantage to show (mainstream format) how charge is added up to capacitor.
However, there is something I'd like to reconsider from my previous postings. If there is a void, that has to be in capacitor.
I could say also the whole secondary circuit is a capacitor , but I have trouble to explain its terminals and how occurs the charge exchange.
After reading allcanadian's earlier post, it does seem that Erfinder was talking about an impulse current. However, a DC impulse IS alternating current. Its the same thing, whether it goes from positive 100 volts to zero, or if it goes from positive 50 to negative 50, they are all the same.
The only part of this entire thing that I see is different (from what is normally done) is the fact that the secondary resistance (impedance) is made to NOT match the primary. I think this is where some of the good stuff comes.
Getting back to impulses, what could this achieve? Have you guys ever heard of a "water hammer"? It's a mechanical effect where you get water in a pipe running then you shut a valve real fast. It produces a really large force against the valve like a hammer. You can build long lasting water pumps using this effect. Interestingly enough, I have never heard of an electrical analog to this. But I'm sure that if you got a large electrical current flowing in a wire then broke the connection, you could get something very similar. Perhaps this is where the other half of the goodness comes from?
I'm trying to keep things real simple right now, I have a head ache lol.
@allcanadian
I am not sure i get it. If it is DC pulsed, or AC, does it matter what its source is? Isn't the end result still an alternating current? I mean by definition, alternating current is just that - current whose polarity continualy changes. I think this is the same thing Charlie is saying - I am not sure wether sinusidol, +100V or -50V means anything - other then oscilating polarities. ALthough, I think I am with you on the remainder of the post - as I believe ERFINDER also told us it is a transforme too...
I was looking at the circuit below and had another crazy though that's been kicking around in me noggin for a while.
It is well known that capacitors and inductors don't dissipate energy in AC systems only resistance. So in AC systems we are left with voltage drops and lagging current dragging down the source AC so it has to do work. Charlie_V and Grumpy had mentioned reactance and phase angle which I had to brush up on again, but this is mainstream thinking, surely someone would have thought of this before? So I had to ask a simple question- How does an AC motor "use" power? Inductors and capacitors don't use power, there reactive, it's the voltage drop and lagging current.
So really if we want our motor to do no work on the source of the AC current or get more work we need an increasing voltage and leading current in the motor-- so it's a generator kind of.
Remember VS "do the opposite of what we do today"
So I want the AC generator running at 60Hz @ 120volts but the connected motor running at 125volts with a leading current relative to the generator lets say 62Hz, simple huh?
Here's where my crazy thought came into play, based on what erfinder said.
It should be understood that when the magnetic field of the primary collapses, a unidirectional (direct current in the form of a penetrating radiation) radiation is emitted from the conductor, this radiation is absorbed by the secondary and manifests as a high potential electrostatic field
This radiation or Bemf sounds alot like Teslas radiant energy or cold electricity, and it just so happens this "radiant" energy travels at 1.5 times the speed of light.
So lets go to the diagram below supplied by samebarbosi and see what happens now. If the primary coils E are supplied with a short duration DC impulse the Bemf from this impulse will induce a high voltage "radiant" spike in coils F. Because G is a coil having inductance the spike will charge the capacitor H first, this charge will then oscillate between the capacitor and coils producing an electrostatic alternating current, we know this much. What I haven't heard is the fact that the current traveling in secondary circuit(FGH) is travelling faster than in the primary coils(E). The primary is at the speed of light the secondary at 1.5 times the speed of light. So when the secondary circuit goes to induce a voltage back in the primary because the current is alternating back and forth, the primary would see the secondary current as moving faster--hence the secondary has a leading current relative to the primary and a higher voltage . It all hinges on the fact that we "assume" everything is moving at the same speed, when it is apparently not. The DC source to the primaries E gives 1 unit of energy to the secondaries FGH and expects to get 1 unit back, but it gets 1.5 units back instead, this energy gain or the capacity to do work is then based on the operating frequency to some extent because every oscillation results in a small gain. Which is in line with another thought I had a year ago, that if any part of a system produced more energy than what we wrongly call "unity" and the output was routed back to the input we would have a system of ever increasing energy density, this density limited only by the physical capacity of the system to store energy between cycles. So we would run the machine up until our target voltage and current values were met then start pulling excess energy out of the system.
Damn this may work.
Hello Charlie_V,
http://v3.espacenet.com/textdoc?DB=EPODOC&IDX=GB352453&F=0
this represent your "never heard" analogon !
It is known and in use as hydraulik ram pump !
You need an e-pump analogon ?
The obove is an amplifier:
search for Joseph C. Yater !
f.e.: http://v3.espacenet.com/textdoc?DB=EPODOC&IDX=US5623119&F=0
S
dL
Quote from: Charlie_V on April 30, 2007, 06:01:36 PM
... Have you guys ever heard of a "water hammer"? It's a mechanical effect where you get water in a pipe running then you shut a valve real fast. It produces a really large force against the valve like a hammer. You can build long lasting water pumps using this effect. Interestingly enough, I have never heard of an electrical analog to this. But I'm sure that if you got a large electrical current flowing in a wire then broke the connection, you could get something very similar. Perhaps this is where the other half of the goodness comes from?
...
This thing was discussed in early posts (of Erfinder). The water hammer equivalent is BEMF. I recall because myself I had trouble understanding this and water hammer analogy did it.
But that is still under the presumption of pulsed current in primary, not alternating sine wave.
It makes a lot of sense with pulsing technique.
@maximumgravity1
I am not sure wether sinusidol, +100V or -50V means anything - other then oscilating polarities.
I think it may mean everthing, can you get severe water hammer with a slow sloshing motion in a pipe like a sine wave motion? probably not
So let's take this analogy to extremes, what if I induced the muther of all water hammers, so much that the water flashed to steam and expanded at the rate of 1500/1. Here we would have a transformation, the water has turned to steam which is not water, nor does it act like water. Big difference.
So what about the opposite? Get some water moving at mach 3 and close the source valve not the outlet, you get massive suction a cold expansion and vaporized water in a near gas like state because it has pulled itself apart. This vapor is not liquid water, nor does it act like liquid water.
Hey, I think I may have solved another question from the statement above.
massive suction=Bemf
cold expansion= cold electricity ---expansion= radiated energy
vaporized water in gas like state= electrostatic radiant energy
"because it has pulled itself apart"= matter to energy transformation?
The same goes for alternating current, we need a sharp powerful impulse to produce a large disturbance in the media. It's about transformation and the power to manifest it.
Quote from: allcanadian on April 30, 2007, 07:58:32 PM
... Get some water moving at mach 3 and close the source valve not the outlet, you get massive suction a cold expansion and vaporized water in a near gas like state because it has pulled itself apart. This vapor is not liquid water, nor does it act like liquid water.
Hey, I think I may have solved another question from the statement above.
massive suction=Bemf
cold expansion= cold electricity ---expansion= radiated energy
vaporized water in gas like state= electrostatic radiant energy
"because it has pulled itself apart"= matter to energy transformation?
...
I find this interesting. I've put in bold what I've never thought before. I was thinking about water hammer as BEMF (but upstream the valve). I think you are right, especially if you have a whole mass of water after the valve (downstream). Never thought about that suction. Not sure if we can call that BEMF, but that's a big suction. Can we compare the magnitude of both Compression vs. Suction?
PS: Erfinder said not long time ago:
Quote
Your discussions have not brought any of the hidden truths of this patent to light, this means your thinking has not changed! It has remained the same from the beginning until now!
I was wandering the same as didn't see any idea I could lay on the paper.
Now I wander again: since I found things I never thought before, how many are still undisclosed yet to discover. I also hope we are not on a false lead; it makes too much sense... it would be such a shame.
I was thinking about that water hammer stuff and I came to a conclusion. All a water hammer does is convert DC water flow into AC water flow. If the water flow was already AC, we wouldn't need the water hammer, we would already have it!
I see a lot of posts that talk about radiant energy. Just remember, by definition, "radiant" energy is a term that defines all electromagnetic radiation. Light is radiant, radio waves are radiant, gamma rays are radiant - anything that radiates is radiant. But, this idea of back EMF being a suction.... now that is something! I never really thought of it in this way.. very cool!
I had a thought, when a fan is blowing, you have an area of high pressure and an area of low pressure. A jet engine works the same way, the turbines create a large high pressure behind and a low pressure in front - the plane moves toward the area of low pressure. In the secondary, when the capacitor has a high "pressure" across it, the coils have a "low pressure", low pressure is Back EMF. This alternates, so there is a point when the capacitor has low pressure, the coils will have high pressure. When there is low pressure in the coils, the rotor will turn - the suction is doing the work so to speak. When there is high pressure in the coils, the rotor wouldn't normally move except for whatever momentum was imparted to it during the low pressure cycle.
Normal motors are not made to run in this fashion. They are made to run when there is high pressure in the coils. They run on the expansion, not the contraction. I hope my thinking is getting closer.
By the way, please look at my re-draw of barbosi's circuit diagram. I think you guys are overlooking how the G coils are also coupled to the F coils. This isn't a direct coupling like E and F, but they are wound on the same core and their windings are made so that the magnetic field flows from F to G/G to F.
Quote from: Charlie_V on April 30, 2007, 11:06:09 PM
...I see a lot of posts that talk about radiant energy. Just remember, by definition, "radiant" energy is a term that defines all electromagnetic radiation. Light is radiant, radio waves are radiant, gamma rays are radiant - anything that radiates is radiant. ...
Suposition: quote in red. We are not sure about light, gamma reminds me about radioactivity being named after some weird noise detected on radio in proximity of the substance, and I didn't hear anything about heat.
Acceptable (at least for me): quote in bold.
I'm glad you find that suction concept cool too. Well done allcanadian.
Heat is infrared light. Actually there are two forms of heat. Infrared and atoms colliding. The temperature in rooms and outside is from atoms colliding. However, the sun heats this with its infrared light. Gamma rays are the same thing as IR and visible, even UV. But they are going at a very high oscillating frequency. Yes, I believe the sun runs cold - remember sun spots are black, not white.
I dunno, you guys don't normally like my explanations, but light, and radiation in general, is not what this motor uses. Radiation is the expansion force, our motor is running off suction.
Hahaha, I love this explanation, it makes a lot of sense to me. Unfortunately, someone will come on tomorrow and show me I'm wrong about it.... oh well I'll enjoy while it lasts lol!
I get my explanations from so many sources it's not even funny, the suction analogy is pure Victor Schauberger. I have been looking for a good analogy to describe the electrical equivalent for a while, I can't believe it just popped into my head today. As well it is well known that most documented OU devices run cold, how can machines doing work have all there components run cold?
Compression/contraction and pressure produce heat, evaporation/expansion and suction produce cold. So I equate what is happening in the secondaries during a Bemf spike as electricity being torn apart under a massive suction, transformed into radiating electrostatic potential.
The radiant energy in question here is Teslas radiant energy, it is not EM radiation, Tesla was very specific in the fact that his radiant waves could easily penetrate copper and iron barriers which EM cannot. I finally got the answer on radiant energy last week. It is created by impulse current and travels as a longitudinal oscillating wave. Oscillating is not alternating, an oscillating wave is a compression/expansion like a sound wave in air, where alternating waves are like ocean waves.
What is interesting is that these waves travel 1.5 times the speed of light, so any calculations or meters are basically useless, everything we know is tied to the speed of light which means we don't know much .
I hope erfinder pipes in soon so I can figure out if Im blowing hot air or not. I think Im getting warm, the answers I found finally make more sense.
Hi All,
Sounds like we are talking about scalar waves. Heres a picture of them from
Meyl - Scalar waves p470. It is interesting to compare this diagram with one from Vicktor Schaubergers "The double spiral longitudal vortex." Reference p181 The living Energies. They look the same to me.
Cheers
N.
For incompressible fluids the longitudinal wave is manifested exactly as the water in pipes -> water hammer.
As for the rupture caused by sudden suction, decompression, I think the term is cavitation.
As I final thought, speaking about the structural modifications occurring in mater fabric, going down to atomic level, is it not what scientists today call fusion and fission? And all together in the past was called alchemy?
I need to ponder now about how this applies to our motor.
Hello again Charlie_V,
a comment between the difference of IR-lightwaves and heat :
http://www.astrofoil.net/astrofoil.insulation.r-values.html
The question is : consequence of receptor vibration,or receptor oszilation ?
S
dL
Back to subject, the same mechanism of induction from primary to secondary, works from secondary to D coils (rotor).
Just a rough idea, if the system (rotor & stator) is in balance (field potential and mechanical), it tends to remain in balance. However if the high potential is start flowing around the rotor, the potential balance is disturbed thus the rotor will search to reach back the balance status.
In standard motors, the rotor spins because the coils of the stator are driving it. There is only a single circuit in a normal motor. The stator coils and (optionally) a capacitor. Our motor has two circuits - that is the big difference, and an important one.
Our Motor (464,444):
The first circuit (primary) is a small mass and a stiff spring. The second circuit (secondary) is a large mass with a loose spring. The primary's spring is attached to the large mass of the secondary. They are both tuned to have the same resonant frequency. You start tapping the primary, which has very little momentum (because the mass is so small), and at first nothing happens in the secondary. When you reach the resonant frequency the secondary will start oscillating. At resonance, when the spring in the primary is being compressed, the spring in the secondary is being expanded (stretched). This causes the masses to oscillate out of sync with each other. They will also achieve the greatest distance from one another in one instance, and be the closest in the other. The secondary circuit has a HUGE momentum because the mass is so large. That mass is used to drive a nail with very little effort - our little taps do not need much force! This nail is the rotor.
Standard Motor:
There is only one circuit, the primary. The primary is made of a small mass and a stiff spring. We are using this small mass to drive the nail. The best we can do is when the mass and spring are in resonance. So we tap the mass at that frequency - the resonant frequency. If we want to drive the nail harder, we have to tap harder.
I hope you see the difference now between the standard (mainstream approach) and the Tesla approach. A caution, in our motor, it is possible to operate it in a standard motor fashion. There will be three frequencies of optimum operation. The first frequency (the best one) is what we are trying to do - the Tesla approach. The other two cause the spring of the secondary to compress at the same time as the spring in the primary. This makes both masses move together in sync. When the masses move together, there is no point in having the secondary because the large mass will not move very far - it will not have a large momentum anymore. It's momentum will match that of the primary. To increase the force in this case, you have to tap harder.
Of these three frequencies. You will find the best one (the Tesla operating frequency) between the other two. It is the middle. There will be a lower, standard operating frequency, and a higher. Stay in the middle... in the "neutral" point. Because as Erfinder would say, this spot represents the void. Hahaha!
Alright, after reading through the last three pages three times, it is finally begining to make some sense.
Can someone define:
EMF & BEMF in modern and Tesla terms.
I know we discused this before, but it might help to take a fresh-approach look at it.
BTW Charlie - you finally wrote something I could understand on first read through - with the exception of the Rosie O'Donnel post, of course - LOL BUt I do have a question, if the rotor starts to move when the coil is in "suction" or "low pressure" what exactly is happening? Since the rotor coils are not powered, nor are they drawing from a potential (that we know of) how are low pressure secondaries causing the rotor to turn? What is causing the rotor to turn? Is it the pull from the primary (or the capacitor in our case) through the scondaries?
EDIT: As a side note, before any more confusion spreads from allcanadian's original typo - this is patent 464,666 - not 464,444. Might cause someone just surfing through some confusion.
Last thought before lunch is over....
Quote from: allcanadianOscillating is not alternating, an oscillating wave is a compression/expansion like a sound wave in air, where alternating waves are like ocean waves.
explains....
Quote from: ErfinderElectricity on the other hand moves in two directions simultaneously! These two opposite directions are opposite to one another meaning they travel 180 degrees from the neutral point dividing them! One direction is the direction of compression, and the other is the direction of expansion. What must be visualized is that these two can move in the same forward direction and still be moving in opposite directions! How? Dual Vortex!!! One small vortex moving in one direction through a larger moving in the opposite direction, the larger is expelled from the smaller!!!
Hi All,
I thought I would mention a reference in regards to longitudal waves reaching a speed of 1.6 x the speed of light.
Reference Meyl - Scalar Waves. Page 203
"Tesla further had proven with this technology the mentioned proof concerning the
existence of longitudinal electromagnetic waves.......... Important is also the measurement of the velocity of propagation, and that isn't constant from the start for a wave, which oscillates in the direction of propagation. From the research of earthquakes we know, that the longitudinal waves are faster than the as well occurring transverse waves.....Tesla calculates for his wave a speed 1.6 times the speed of light assuming the polar radius of the earth to be 6363 km."
Cheers
N.
Hum,
Need to take in some of this again. Thanks Charlie for confusing me again, Kidding OK ! I like the fact that you explain things in detail. The spring and the primary and secondary and the tuning. I guess the tuning is something that I need to get clarified, as this has been a topic before and was not really clarified, maybe the tuning is set up when the coils are wound? To me the tuning must have something to do with the capacitor resistance?
PS: Charlie, just a side question, are you making a motor? if so what is it? hope it is ok to ask?
Trump
I think electrostatic waves moving at 1.6 times the speed of light drives this device, imagine teslas spring and mass analogy. The weight moves down 1 unit (speed of light) but moves up 1.6 units (electrostatic wave speed), so we can gain 0.5 units per cycle only because the EM going in comes out as something else, a transformation
As erfinder said, understand this first, then build. Which is a good point, all your calculations and tuning are useless if the secondaries act nothing like we know of.
I have considered something else after Charlie_V mentioned heat as atomic collisions.
Victor scauberger said suction flows are cold ordered flows, and it is not well known but victors machines are driven by electrostatic forces. Everyone on the net assumed the obvious, vortex mechanical compression, which is not even remotely close to what victor does. His machines are made of diamagnetic materials,copper-aluminum-gold catalysts, the positive inducing a cold ordered negative electrostatic charge. The vortex ensures an ordered unhindered flow. Victor also said, no device can perform work without a temperature gradient, and he tells us how to do it , all of his machines have an internal suction or vacuum from inlet to outlet, there is no pressure only suction, unhindered acceleration in a vacuum.
So if EM energy and heat are lossy systems always losing energy to the environment, because they are chaotic unordered flows.
longitudinal electrostatic (radiant) waves and cold pull energy in from the environment, because they are ordered flows.
There are many references stating that heat is the lowest form of energy as well, making cold a higher form of energy. So this could mean EM waves are a lower form or quality of energy that a higher state radiant wave. This is opposite to the mainstream view which is no surprise to me, and it may relate to entropy. This IS the second law of thermodynamics, that energy is always radiating away from any system.
So this machine and others defy entropy by always using ordered cold flows to draw its energy inward, reverse entropy.
Still trying to put all this together and guessing.
I need some input here guys, everytime you comment I seem to stumble onto something new.
I think we are running away from simplicity again.
All that comes to my mind is Ed Leedskalnin's graphic representation of magnetic currents: one flowing in one direction, the other in the opposite direction, both screw like.
It resembles with that vortex in vortex movement Erfinder was describing. Why was he talking about this again? I start to lose memory... This also means this information is not part of me yet.
Leedskalnin... Erfinder... opposite direction, both screw like... vortex in vortex...
Gentlemen,
I tried to conclude what we got so far and guess what I found?
I found we got distracted again. We got momentum but I think we didn't score.
First, based on the figure bellow, we can notice primary doesn't have a ground. So the differential input, as presented, IS alternating around to a "Neutral" point. The essential characteristic is the shape: pulse, not sine wave. In this case we have two collapses per cycle, not just one.
The collapse of fields with polarities shown in black will give the polarities of BEMF:
1. Red front --> Red Polarity of BEMF
2. Blue front -- > Blue polarity of BEMF
Those will induce alternatively High Potentials in coils F, etc. Where is that pressure and suction again? How fields flow? How many they are?
WoW!
I just found a website called vortexscience, this is awesome stuff.
Here is the link we are looking for, it is magnetism and electrostatic in the same instance, pulsing a magnetic field-rotating magnetic fields...
Damn you samebarbosi, now Im on a whole new course, I'll have to start over.
I like this explanation on the web site, it puts everthing in context, I hope they add more to it soon.
Thanx for keeping me on track
I think Erfinder pointed to Vortex Science website.
I've been thinking about when we can graduate to next level. So I think the answer depends on making our own the message behind each quote. What can we conclude from each statement.
1.
Let A B represent the poles of an alternating current motor, of which C is the armature wound with coils D, closed upon themselves, as is now the general practice in motors of this kind.
[Edit]
- Presenting the setup
- Current is alternating, not necessarily sine wave
- coils D, closed upon themselves: I don't know what to get from here more than they are in a loop.
2.
The poles A, which alternate with poles B, are wound with coils of ordinary or coarse wire E in such direction as to make them alternate north and south polarity, as indicated in the diagram by the characters N S.
3.
Over these coils or in other inductive relation to the same are wound long fine-wire coils F F and in the same direction throughout as the coils E. These coils are secondaries, in which currents of very high potential are induced.
4.
I prefer to connect all the coils E in one series and all the secondaries F in another.
5.
On the intermediate poles B are wound fine-wire energizing-coils G, which are connected in series with one another and also with the series of secondary coils F, the direction of winding being such that a current-impulse induced from the primary coils E imparts the same magnetism to the poles B as that produced in poles A by the primary impulse. This condition is indicated by the characters N' S'.
[Edit]
- Step up transformer/Tesla coils {3} with secondaries F connected in series, to cumulate the charge to high potentials {4}. ................... loosing freakin' focus.
6.
In the circuit formed by the two sets of coils F and G is introduced a condenser H; otherwise the said circuit is closed upon itself while the free ends of the circuit of the coils E are connected to a source of alternating current.
7.
As the condenser capacity which is needed in particular motor of this kind is dependent upon the rate of alternation or the potential, or both, its size or cost, as before explained may be brought within economical limits for use with the ordinary circuit currents if the potential of the secondary circuit in the motor be sufficiently high. By giving to the condenser the proper values any desired difference of phase between primary and secondary energizing-circuits may be obtained.
Seven questions with [minimum] seven answers. I think was kind from Erfinder to let us know at least when we can see the light of the end of the tunnel leading to the next stage.
I have to review them myself and see where we got answers and what remains uncovered.
Reassessment time!
[Edit]: Work in progress. If / while you still remember, please let me know and I'll add to the summary. Thanks.
Hi All,
Erfinder appears to be highlighting that the dielectric material as being the conductor of electrostatic charge in the secondary windings...anyway thats the way I read into it.
"Well the capacitor stores electrostatic charge as a stress potential in it's dielectric material, and the secondary windings radiate electrostatic charge! Hmmmm.....interesting"
Cheers
N.
Quote from: nat1971a on May 02, 2007, 12:13:28 AM
Hi All,
Erfinder appears to be highlighting that the dielectric material as being the conductor of electrostatic charge in the secondary windings...anyway thats the way I read into it.
Erfinder said:
take note of the secondary windings. At the same time look at the capacitor! What do they have in common? Hmmm, (simple obvious observation) could it be that they both interact with electrostatic fields! (starting role playing...teacher student) Interesting.... Question: How do they interact with electrostatic fields? Answer: Well the capacitor stores electrostatic charge as a stress potential in it's dielectric material, and the secondary windings radiate electrostatic charge!
and I think I explained: Secondaries are secondaries Tesla coils connected in series to cumulate/add the [electrostatic] charge. That high potential charge is stored in capacitor's dielectric.
Erfinder said that this creates a "special capacitor". This is a capacitor that radiates it's own electrostatic charge.
If you know how the capacitor got charged in the first place, you have to go to next step, the primary field collapses again. This time in opposite direction (opposite polarity). Thus the capacitor will be "forced" to store the new build-up electrostatic charge, this time with opposite polarity. How: Secondaries will pump (compress) the new charge in the plates while the previous [already stored] charge will be sucked towards the other plates. This is how I see the double vortex, one from "explosion" other from "implosion".
In conclusion, from momentarily build-up electrostatic charge, by changing the pulse polarity in primary (field collapse), we end with a rhythmic interchange of fields in secondary. Somehow it resembles to a magnet bar which rhythmically changes its poles (but if you don't see it this way, forget it).
Now even in conventional science, if you have alternating current in a coil... do you have anything radiating from that coil?
If you don't look for deep encrypted mechanisms, it's really simple.
Barbosi:
The same thing happens at the ?sweet spot?. Everything stops and there is a sudden change of direction only this happens at a high frequency. Now we are throwing off electrostatic charges at a high frequency or rate. Kind of like a mini sun
would do.
Well I guess we pissed him off to the point of no return. I for one wish to continue on this endeavor. I know we are not dense, but lack the creative mind to perceive things differently light. Having said that remember Magnetics and Coils...Magnetics and Coils.Lets start and figure out how magnets actually work. Some posts back erfinder posed several questions related to this topic but was never fully answered. I'm at the work puter and all my notes are at home. But the magnetism page at vortex science holds the key to understanding how magnets work. I need to read it a couple more times, I'm still missing something.
Oh and for what it is worth in Tesla autobiography he states in 1892 while reading the bible, specifically the book of Revelations he found the key he was looking for, I will post that and its link later. Anyway I have read it 10 times and could not determine what he was referring to.
erfinder, I hope will our continued efforts and promise of hope to be on the same page that you will reconsider your decision. You have truly been an inspiration to me.
***Edit -- Per wattsup I had inverted the date 1892. Thanks for catching that wattsup.
Regards,
midnight
@all
I have been following this thread from the beginning but going back and forth from one page to another to recheck information from ERfinder was getting more and more of a hassle. As these threads get longer and longer, information gets lost in the shuffle of all the other posts.
So I put all of ERfinder's posts in a pdf file so people can refer to it more directly. The posts are titled by the page they are on this thread so you can look up any relevant conversations before his post. Funny thing, the file size is only 1.08meg and any time I try to put it on the site, the system says it has altready been posted. If anyone can receive this file and post it, please let me know were to send it.
Here is a summary of main construction details as I could figure out till now. If there are any mistakes, please advise and I will correct them.
Ring OD: 6" based on 22.5 mm inch (are you sure of this or is it simply 6")
Ring ID: 2" based on same (same question as above)
Ring Material: Laminated metal (someone will have to cut this)
Core (1) Solid Aluminum
Flux (4) Neo Magnets comprising a circle
Primary (2): Same weight of wire as Sec. but larger AW.
Secondary (4) 144" @22.4mm/inch = 127.56" length
Windings (6) All in the same direction.
Commutator: 24 poles
Commutator Points (2): at 180 degrees
Rotation: CW or CCW
Revolutions: 135 rpm
Capacitor: with a few pf @ 1- 4Kv. (What does few mean?)
Two Questions:
Most modern circuit diagrams show the positive flowing out of the battery and the negavite flowing into the battery. But in reality, isn't this backwards. When the rotary switch is open, when I look at his motor design, should I see the negative battery flowing into the 4 sec's, around the primaries (which are reversed polarity), through the cap then to the positive of the battery. Or do we look at this with the current diagramatic mentality. When Telsa did his patents, was he taking for granted that, then, everyone new the negavitve goes out, the positive goes in. Maybe sounds simplistic, but from one way to the other, the function of this motor it totally different.
Can anyone give me the easiest way to make the laminated ring as this seems to be the hardest part to make.
@midnight_blue
is that 1982 or 1882?
I'll try to post the pdf file here.
It is becoming clear that EVERYTHING must be questioned. Our understanding of how the circuit works, the individual components, in itself, seems to be off track. The emphasis early on was on the fields - and how fields at 90? can perform work. In re-reading the first few pages of wattsup's PDF, it is clear that Erfinders device is exactly the same as the 464666 patent - the only difference is the number of coils.
In short, the reason we are not making any progress is we are not changing our thinking (obviosuly) but what does this mean exactly? It means we are trying to force mainstream understanding to explain what is happening, only talking in circles around it. In short, the way I see it, the entire book needs to be thrown out, and reunderstood from the ground up. We have been told repeatedly that we need to do the opposite of what we have been doing. We need to use current opposite of how we use it today. How do we do that?
To start with - how do we use it today?I don't know for sure, but I see our focus being on what happens within the coil, the wire, the capacitor etc. I think our focus needs to open up, and zoom out a bit. The only way we can look at the action at the detailed level we have been, is through theoretical guess work based on mainstream teachings. Since nobody can see "electrons", we have to assume what they have taught us is factual. In order to get away from those teachings, I think it is important to not just think outside the box, but think outside the entire building.
The good news is I see everyone actively trying to change their perspectives. The desire is there, we just aren't making much succesful progress. It is hard to hit a target that we can't identify. Maybe the first thing would be to identify exactly what it is this motor is doing.
In short, we are not identifying the CONCEPTS of patent 464666, we are analyzing how the circuit works. How can we analyze that which we do not understand? We may understand it in our own worlds, but we don't understand it in Tesla's world. As erfinder repeatedly stated -
WHY did Tesla do what he did ??????? The answer is not in mainstream - it is not "in" us - we haven't made this patent our own - we have kept it at arms length through mainstream teachings.
Quote from: erfinderThe circuit was drawn the way it was so that it could be seen how one part of the system is related and interdependent on another. What should be observed is how the fields are built up and how they collapse, and where they go when they do! !!!Collapse!!! This circuit is of a motor, the rotary switch should be mounted on the same shaft as the magnet ring. The magnet ring is a mystery in itself, as their is no magnetic field being radiated from it .
Just look at the drawing, trace with your finger how the current flows through the circuit. It should be seen immediately that current is not allowed to travel through the whole circuit. This is where things get exciting. Just look at the drawing!!!
Quote from: erfinderI have not been able to locate where Tesla made the statement about the weights of his primaries and secondary coils, but the following quotes are very important to understanding my diagram and the patents which I suggested.
512,340 - Coils for Electro Magnets
?I have found that in every coil there exists a certain relation between its self-induction and capacity that permits a current of a given frequency and potential to pass through it with no other opposition than that of ohmic resistance, or in other words, as if it possessed no self-induction. This is due to the mutual relations existing between the special character of the current and the self-induction and the capacity of the coil, the latter quality being capable of neutralizing the self-induction for that frequency. It is well known that the higher the frequency
or potential difference of the current the smaller the capacity required to counteract the self-induction; hence in any coil, however small the capacity, it may be sufficient for the purpose stated if the proper conditions in other respects be secured.?
593,138 - Electrical Transformer
?If the rate at which a current traverses the circuit, including the coil, be one hundred and eighty-five thousand miles per second, then a frequency of nine hundred and twenty-five per second would maintain nine hundred and twenty-five stationary waves in a circuit one hundred and eighty-five thousand miles long, and each wave would be two hundred miles in length. For such a frequency I should use a secondary fifty miles in length, so that at one terminal the potential would be zero and at the other maximum."
Quote from: erfinderThe first thing that must be realized is that Tesla wasn't using current like we use it today. He was doing the exact opposite of what we are doing today, and because of this he was able to develop a completely different science, a completely different system which the powers that be are using right now, right in our face, no need to hide the truth from the masses since they consider us as lacking in the comprehension department, totally incapable of understanding the simplicity of this technology. They have us focusing on currents, when the true miracle workers are the fields which produce them!!! AWSOME!!!!!
Overunity has no grounds in nature. If an example of it cannot be found in nature then chances are we?re wasting our time looking for it. Our thinking and disregard for nature has gotten us in a lot of trouble, and we will find out how much here shortly! What are electricity, electrostatics, gravity, and magnetism? What do they all have in common? Nature uses these four how she sees fit, and in so doing operates unity. Why haven?t we learned from her example?
Now on to the good stuff!!!
It is known that Tesla used single turn primaries, and a secondary with very few turns. These dimensions imply high frequencies !
This should give us a clue - Erfinders device is a motor - he even told us - that means that his "armature" will spin too. He is using the option of magnets as opposed to coils.
Quote Tesla:
One day, as I was roaming the mountains, I sought shelter from an approaching storm. The sky became overhung with heavy clouds, but somehow the rain was delayed until, all of a sudden, there was a lightening flash and a few moments after, a deluge. This observation set me thinking. It was manifest that the two phenomena were closely related, as cause and effect, and a little reflection led me to the conclusion that the electrical energy involved in the precipitation of the water was inconsiderable, the function of the lightening being much like that of a sensitive trigger. Here was a stupendous possibility of achievement. If we could produce electric effects of the required quality, this whole planet and the conditions of existence on it could be transformed. The sun raises the water of the oceans and winds drive it to distant regions where it remains in a state of most delicate balance. If it were in our power to upset it when and wherever desired, this might life sustaining stream could be at will controlled. We could irrigate arid deserts, create lakes and rivers, and provide motive power in unlimited amounts. This would be the most efficient way of harnessing the sun to the uses of man. The consummation depended on our ability to develop electric forces of the order of those in nature.
It seemed a hopeless undertaking, but I made up my mind to try it and immediately on my return to the United States in the summer of 1892, after a short visit to my friends in Watford, England; work was begun which was to me all the more attractive, because a means of the same kind was necessary for the successful transmission of energy without wires. At this time I made a further careful study of the Bible, and discovered the key in Revelation. The first gratifying result was obtained in the spring of the succeeding year, when I reaching a tension of about 100,000,000 volts?one hundred million volts -- with my conical coil, which I figured was the voltage of a flash of lightening. Steady progress was made until the destruction of my laboratory by fire, in 1895, as may be judged from an article by T.C. Martin which appeared in the April number of the Century Magazine. This calamity set me back in many ways and most of that year had to be devoted to planning and reconstruction. However, as soon as circumstances permitted, I returned to the task.
Source: http://www.lucidcafe.com/library/96jul/teslaauto05.html
Regards,
midnight
Dear all,
I still believe many overcomplicate simple things. Forget for a moment Erfinder's motor. Why do you think Erfinder had a fresh restart? Because noticing our reaction, he realized we needed to start with simple things. So he put his motor aside for a while and tried to make you see simple things. So those being part of you own, you'll see others. What are those siple things we should have identified so far?
- BEMF (that thing that kills our transistors when we switch off a coil - and [in response] we kill BEMF with a diode so we save the transistor)
- How electrostatic charge builds. The total charge = sum of each generated charge.
... and so on. I think many of us thought we are in the brink of most profound alchemy secret and couldn't see the forest for the trees.
Another distracting factor is for sure (more or less in all of us) the need for palpable results. Some of them to be transformed in a quick buck.
Staying to focus on the task is not good either. Myself I ignored Erfinder's advice: sit back, relax... and I've wasted lots of energy.
I'm convinced there are many old habits in my thinking. But the way I see now charging and discharging a capacitor it makes me feel good. I always hated explanations to a physical experiment using complicated formulas. How many of you can write now Maxwell's equations?
I hope somehow we'll be able to keep going. As Erfinder's said, we need to know what to look for as a start point.
? erfinder Reply #191 on: March 20, 2007, 08:43:52 PM
As I stated earlier there are many question erfinder posed without answers. Here are some regarding magnetism.
What causes the field lines of a permanent magnet to expand outward?
Why is the point of maximum expansion of the field lines at the equator?
How does the flux enter and exit the permanent magnet?
What is the difference between a man made permanent magnet and those constructed by nature?
What is the nature of a flux line?
If you can answer these questions right now you are one step closer to understanding some of the freaky stuff I have presented here. The majority of researchers here are as I was in my beginnings blinded by the quest for free energy.
I?ll take a stab at What is the nature of a flux line?
Is where magnetism changes to electricity in the flux lines wall. This wall has ionized charges on the outside and magnetism on the inside.
My opinion is this, think 2 springs, vortex shaped back to back. First contraction occurs squeezing the 2 springs together. Then when they have reached the point that they cannot be contracted further they expand creating the flux lines. As erfinder said this happens in one fluid motion.
Contraction = centripetal
Expansion = centrrifugal
The VOID!
Why do I think this is so important. The following should answer that question.
From http://www.vortexscience.com/magnetism.php
?Both the magnetic field and electricity are dynamic systems. But the electrostatic charge is a static system. When a dynamic system is saturated with a static system, extraordinary things happen.?
Regards,
Midnight
From http://www.vortexscience.com/magnetism.php
ââ,¬Å"Both the magnetic field and electricity are dynamic systems. But the electrostatic charge is a static system. When a dynamic system is saturated with a static system, extraordinary things happen.ââ,¬Â
This is what I have been trying to tell you for the last 8 posts!
I must not be making this clear enough, so I will start with something easy, so pay attention.
Victor schaubergers technology IS electrostatic, He uses a vortex to spin a column of geospheric media(water and air). What are you and everyone else missing about his machines? He uses diamagnetic catalysts(copper) to negatively supercharge the moving air/water with negative electrostatic charge------- the opposite of what we do today-------not positive but negative. He stated he could produce an electrostatic field of 2 Million volts from one drop of water!
So here we have a dynamic system (tripolar masses having magnetic fields) moving at an ever increasing speed in the vortex and saturated in negative electrostatic charge, producing a huge diamagnetic field.
The magic is MOVING A STATIC FIELD! an electrostatic field that's it.
-Move a magnetic field (pulse) it with a changing electrostatic field.
-Have a media(air/water) staurated in electrostatic charges move.
-Accelerate an electric EM field by having the electrostatic move intermitently.
@allcanadian,
I have been following your posts with great interest. It was not I that flamed your ideas, on the contrary, I happen to agree with most of what you say. I know you had stated the link previously as I had also. But this link is on erfinders web page. One which he wants us to study. Though I have a much better understanding of magnetism after reading that page, I still have some questions, and thought that collectively as a group we discuss it here. Some have already dismissed your posts as too complex and we need to keep it simple, I for one am searching for truths. If the debate happens that this indeed is the wrong path then so be it, we move on to the next subject. If its of any consolation I believe you are on the right track. I meant no offense to you. I was paying attention ;-)
Regards,
Midnight
I will just assume everyone knows what BEMF is (if not google for it, wiki for it...).
This occurs when in primaries field collapses.
Apply this principle to a Tesla coil. What a Tesla coil produces? Electrostatic charge. With no load is there any discharge (sparks = discharge, waste, we don't want waste, so you say no)? Could this then be represented as a capacitor?
Many secondaries of Tesla coils (say... 6) having each its charge when you put them in series, how much charge do you have from all?
Looking at the patent drawing for the G coils consider them for a moment the second secondaries of each Tesla coil. Do they have their own charge? what sign compared to the previous one? You put together those secondaries with the "sweet spot", then whatever remains connect to capacitor. What will be the charge of capacitor?
This was phase one.
Phase two. The field in primaries collapses again and the same happens but with different sign. The HV charge stored previously in capacitor has to be replaced with the new one (with different sign again).
Now comes into play the vortex scenario. Just figure how one charge will be pumped to its plate, while the old one is sucked to the other plate. All this in the same pipe. See it? Now use decent words such as explosion, implosion etc. and you're done. At least for now.
Phase three: go to phase two...
This is the big picture I see. Other details related to Erfinder's questions and statements, if you want answers, just think. With this simple principle you can judge by yourself.
As I said, my mistake was to think to all previous posts but it was enough to trust Erfinder and to focus only to 646666.
I hope it helps. No more spoon feeding >:(
Barbosi:
In phase 1 there are six charged inductors in series, connected to each side of the capacitor on one end and the "sweet spot" on the other. The voltage potential on each inductor adds like batteries in series. If each inductor has 500 volts across it there will be 3000 volts on each side of the capacitor which puts 6000 volts across it.
If it helps you, yes, then forget.
But rather think in terms of charge, potential, ELECTROSTATIC.
Voltage is defined as difference between two potentials. When you put a voltmeter you create current flow, thus discharge.
"puts 6000 volts across it" => would be like 6000V potential pressure / stress
It will help to think ELECTROSTATIC. As someone said, think the other way arround.
I still think this is too complicated. I think we are still missing the point. I am beginning to see something coming through all the past posts. I am having a hard time putting my finger on it, and hope others will take the time to read through the attached file I include in this post. I think it will begin to clarify a few things.
The key to this entire thread, Erfinder's device, the Tesla 464666 patent, Tesla's logic - EVERYTHING - revolves around the interactions of the fields. I think at this point we do not have a clear understanding of what a field is, nor what exactly it does. I see many of the explanations - and tangents that we went down - were inspired as attempts to get us to understand what this field is. We are still looking too microscopically - I believe we need to be more macroscopic. To parlay into simpler terms, we need to think in broad abstracts - keep things at the conceptual level - of the whole unit. The individual components have their own deeper meanings, and that I believe is where Erfinder was trying to get us to - but we can't get past the basics.
I am starting to further understand that anything we try to explain in mainstream terms will not really help us - AT ALL !! !! !! !!
The file I have attached is a TEXT document of highlights out of the first 300 or so posts - most of them Erfinder's, most of them pertain to explanations of his device. However, that is irrelevant. The important thing is the message that starts to come through. There is a definite focus on the fields, and how they perform work, what they do when they collapse, and how they are created. It is becoming clear that our entire basis is wrong. Our entire understanding of fields do not apply nor help us in any way.
I started this thread as an attempt to put those quotes here for further open discussion, but they are too lengthy to post at one time. I will try to highlight some of the thoughts upon rereading this file, and hopefully add some of my thoughts to spark some discussion. It is clear in reviewing why Erfinder got frustrated and turned us toward other sources. We aren't n the same page. I don't think we are even in the same book.
As a side note, it appears the discussion about EMF and BEMF and the Water Hammer was beginning on the right track. However, it seems to have petered out quickly - I believe - because our understanding of (and interactions with) the fields are incorrect.
Anyway, this is my take, I hope someone shares the same views and we can begin a dialog on the right track. I am still organizing my thoughts, not really sure where to jump in. I am off to do some further reading - hopefully that will help.
Sorry to do this to you all, but I completed the entire thread to this point, and tried to continue the thought rolling through the more recent posts. The attached file is the complete summary to this point.
A few things are really starting to materialize for me. The collapse of the fields ties into the BEMF - which is where the magic is coming from. The BEMF tries to return to the void. In Erfinder's device in particularly, this is the reason for the arrangement of the magnets - the nodes - the voids.
Most all of his commentary pertains to fields - not individual charges. Thus, comments such as:
Quote"Positive charge attracts positive charge, and expels negative discharge.
Negative discharge repels both negative discharge and positive charge."
The Universal One
Positive Charge = Paramagnetism = EMF
Negative Discharge = Diamagnetism = BEMF
This attracting and repulsing is dealing with the fields - not the individual coils, or charges on the coils, or polarities. The fields themselves don't exist INSIDE the coils, or the cores or anywhere else. They reside in the same area, but the fields themselves are just that - fields. They radiate out past the wires. Thus, when we talk about reversing, collapsing, etc, the BEMF and EMF that can do the real work through the voids, are following the flow of the fields. I don't know if I am saying this right, but the fields do all the work. The "other half" of the story that mainstream is telling seems to be the "effects" of these fields in the conduits - nothing more. Therefore, focusing on these pieces, is of course going to be a dead end street. Somewhere quoted in all this is about referencing the fields from the fields perspective. The conduit just exists at a point in space - it doesn't matter to the field that the conduit is there. It will act as it will act - regardless if there is a wire there or not.
I now have many, many more questions. I do see the concept as the lines of flux being more of a measurement or indicator of the fields - more then anything else. I don't believe this is entirely correct, but I am beginning to understand why Erfinder stated that if asked, nature would not know what a line of flux is.
I am now more aware of what he means by magnetism belonging to the divine - the Still Magnetic Light. This is the nature of the Divine. This is the canvas - so to speak - of the Creator. This is the imovable - the foundation in his words. It has nothing to do with us - at least not at this point. Electricity, the oils and paints - they are ours to experience, and manipulate. Anything we see of them is all the same - all chickens... I am still having trouble wrapping my head around the concept of why what we perceive as magnetism appears to differ from electricity, but I believe I am headed in the right direction.
Lastly, when we begin to discuss diamagnetic verses paramagnetic materials - strictly in the sense of fields - things begin to take on a different meaning - at least my perspective is different. I am STILL pretty clueless as to what these can do for us, but I see that they have a different role when they are interacting with fields.
As for what all of this has to do with the patent, and the simplicity of the concept we are to get at - I am still trying to figure it out. I do see that the focus should be on exactly what these fields are doing when they collapse. What happens within the field when it is energized or collapses. How they add to each other when they change and return to their sources. I believe the Water Hammer analogy is on the right course - but in a broader sense - the coils and the cores really aren't involved - if that makes sense - they are the means to an end - for lack of better explanation. The field is working with or without the coil. What happens inside the coil is only our way of creating change in the field (or extracting change from the field). Ergo, what we understand as electricity really isn't important. We need to understand what electricity is doing to the field.
I still think we need a good solid foundation. I believe we are still going to be throwing darts at a non-target if we aren't careful. I think we can understand the fields effects - and their interactions - but it will be forging into unknown territory. IT will be difficult not to continue to interject what we "know" from mainstream teaching.
Anyway, getting late and I am starting to ramble. I hope others that see things more clearly then I do will begin to chime in and help provide a starting point.
Quote from: Maximumgravity1 on May 02, 2007, 11:56:16 PM
Sorry to do this to you all, but I completed the entire thread to this point, and tried to continue the thought rolling through the more recent posts.
...
With too much information, you may not be able to understand. As I see you hurt yourself, as frustration is growing.
I will try and recommend (again) to stay with patent 646666 only. When you will understand the mechanism, you may go forward.
Myself I need to understand what is diamagnetism (and so many other). I'm convinced that taking one step at the time I'll comprehend that too. For now I just love (Erfinder was right, I love it) the beauty of simplicity in 646666. I didn't find the key to the Heaven. But hey, this is just first step.
Try to understand schematic and the working on pat 646666 only. When you need, ask just one simple question (
related to 646666). Just one. Which do you consider is most important to you. I'm sure anyone who can answer it, will be happy to respond. Might be a situation nobody knows. That means we didn't pay enough attention and we missed something. Might be important for later study, so I'll think to find an answer.
Good luck!
@samebarbosi
Victor scauberger said his machines were negatively supercharged and produced diamagnetic fields. Let's look at the following statement.
Positive Charge = Paramagnetism = EMF
Negative Discharge = Diamagnetism = BEM
- Where in conventional machines do you see large potential negative discharges? nowhere
Diamagnetism must expel magnetic fields, an area having no magnetic fields present, but to a magnetic field what would a diamagnetic field look like?. A collapsing diamagnetic field would look like a hole in space, an area the magnetic field would rush into fill. So a Bemf can expel a magnetic field through it's diamagnetism.
Let's start by asking the right questions.
How could I accelerate a medium like in Victors machine without drag?
- I would create a vacuum so there is no turbulence-no drag like in outer space.
- I would negatively charge the media so it repels from the negatively charged machine walls and cools itself, this cooling creating a centripital contracting inward force- inward and forward.
- I would have this huge negative electrostatic field of millions of volts move or spin creating a diamagnetic field. This diamagnetic field would repel all magnetic fields, so my media could not interact with nor be hindered by the magnetic fields of other matter having magnetic fields.
- This negatively supercharged media when leaving this internal void would be attracted to all external positively charged media like air surrounding the machine, so the media is not pushed out of the machine it is pulled!
- Victor said the air/water leaving his machine did so at four times the speed of sound but made no noise, how could this be?
All of these thoughts can be applied to Tesla and erfinders machines, cause and effect, transformation. All we need to understand are fields and how they interact and motion.
So when the rotary switch is open, the primaries turn the rotor, then when the rotary switch closes, its shorts the primaires (and the cap) and BEMF goes backwards through the cap, and the cap discharges HV into the secondaries (and into the battery) to keep the rotor moving.
So from Erfinders latest clues, it appears that the potentials, or differences in potentials is a key. To parlay this into the 464,666 patent, this means that our coils are doing little more then creating those potential differences. We are stepping up the potential of the fields that the coils are creating. This much I see as "fact", the next part is supposition, thinking outloud.
My "guesswork" part of this is we are then "collapsing" (or changing polarity of, or "breaking connection with the source of") those fields - now with higher potential differences from what they started - and those fields become self perpetuating water hammers. The fields will continue to shift polarity and increase the frequency, as each successive shift adds BEMF, which adds to the "stream" (potential, force) and helps create a greater potential on the opposing coils (or condenser). When it gets back to the primary coil, when that field "collapses" the BEMF is forced down the primary leads as well, back towards the source. From this aspect, the BEMF is "feeding" the source - again with increased potential from what it began. As the source can't take more then it can store - it takes only what it can. Therefore, no overunity - but apparent unity seems to be achieved. The source can only take what it needs, the remainder of the BEMF should continue to flow towards alternating "voids" as it is seeking its own "level" - someplace it can deposit all of its self with equal or greater potential then itself. Since it is negative discharge - and repulses everything - it needs a positive charge which is greater then itself, to absorb it, and discharge a greater negative charge. This seems to be the function of the void.
So the real question, as per Barbosi's recommendation - the one simple question at this point - what happens to the field when the current alternates?
Here is another simple question:
"It is well known that the higher the frequency or potential difference of the current the smaller the capacity required to counteract the self-induction;"
Why??
THis almost seems counterintuitive. Higher frequency - doesn't this mean higher potential? Is there less self-inductance with higher potentials? Why would a greater difference equate to need for less capacitance??
When you get down to the nitty gritty - there are only the potentials and the differences between them.
Higher frequency implies a faster rate of change - not a higher potential.
Damn, why is erfinder always so right!
I think it's coming together now, erfinder said we should share our thoughts here in the forum and it seems everytime I do this, when I read my posts and the responses-- or lack of them, I see something new.
So let's take a fresh view at teslas patent.
We will use a single element of teslas motor below for reference.
We have a transformer- Primary E and secondary F
We have a secondary circuit- Primary/secondary transformer E/F, a capacitor and a secondary coil G.
On the surface most would see this as just another circuit, but now I see this as much more.
My new understanding is based on the last few pages of posts and Victor schaubergers machines.
EMF- electrical pressure, positive potential
BEMF- electrical vacuum, negative potential
Magnetism- static field, electrostatic pressure, positive potential
Diamagnetism- static field, magnetic vacuum, negative potential
So using this let's examine the circuit.
The primary E needs a sharp EMF pulse to produce a magnetic field and interact with the rotor, but it's primary purpose may be to have the magnetic field collapse producing a Bemf in the secondary transformer coil F. This High voltage(electrostatic negative potential) produces diamagnetism in the secondary coil F expelling the magnetic field and in the same instance it moves towards the capacitor charging it, this charging of the capacitor pushes the field from the opposite plate of the capacitor which travels to secondary coil G inducing a magnetic field in that coil.
So we have this electrostatic field in the secondary circuit moving back and forth, inducing magnetism in one coil and expelling magnetism in the other.
Now lets use the following statement all of us have read over and over to describe what may happen.
Quote
"Positive charge attracts positive charge, and expels negative discharge.
Negative discharge repels both negative discharge and positive charge."
The Universal One
Positive Charge = Paramagnetism = EMF
Negative Discharge = Diamagnetism = BEMF
"Positive charge attracts positive charge, and expels negative discharge"
A positive charge EMF attracts magnetism and expels diamagnetism.
Negative discharge repels both negative discharge and positive charge."
A negative discharge repels Diamagnetism and magnetism.
So if there is no diamagnetism and no magnetism what is there? nothing
So something weird is going on here, If a negative discharge Bemf voids the transformer coils then the secondary circuit may not alternate as we see it , but everything on one side of the secondary F, both (+) and (-) may be pushed in the opposite direction towards G like a compression wave.
This is still very confusing but I think it's moving in the right direction.
WOW! I just got this so it's an edit, here's the riddle?
What do you call a coil or inductor that has neither magnetism (+) charge nor diamagnetism (-)charge?
A Capacitor---- an empty capacitor.
Quote from: Maximumgravity1 on May 03, 2007, 02:06:07 PM
Here is another simple question:
"It is well known that the higher the frequency or potential difference of the current the smaller the capacity required to counteract the self-induction;"
Why??
Here Tesla referred to the external capacitance (H), not to capacitance intrinsic to his coils.
allcanadian,
Although you made your point throwing me in pondering mode, I feel I didn't chose my example right, as I see I'm not ready yet to comprehend naturally. I'm talking about diamagnetism.
I'll explain. As much as [I believe] I understand the working of BEMF, "diamagnetism = BEMF" is at this stage just Erfinder's statement, and without proper understanding I cannot make it my own yet.
Thanks for the examples from Schauberger, it makes much more sense now than before.
I was reviewing earlier postings and I found something...
Erfinder:
Quote
When you realize that we are using the currents manifested in the secondary windings only, this will mark the moment that you begun to change your thinking, and have received your first true taste of the force Tesla was working with.
Smashing! At least for me...
So until I'm not picturing this whole movie, I'll be rather silent. Or asking questions.
Such as:
After first BEMF we could remove the primery coils (if we could) and the process will continue indefinitely?
It looks like Leedskalnin's PMH. He applied DC to his coils (EMF), then removed the connection (BEMF), the the device was holding indefinitely.
PS: Second related question: And the rotor turns?
@samebarbosi
you said
I'll explain. As much as I understand the working of BEMF, "diamagnetism = BEMF" is at this stage just Erfinder's statement, and without proper understanding I cannot make it my own yet.
Let's look at this statement.
Positive Charge = Paramagnetism = EMF
Negative Discharge = Diamagnetism = BEMF
We know a positive charge or EMF from a battery when travelling through a coil of wire produces a magnetic field in an iron core(paramagnetism).
Now lets say we disconnected the battery wire very quickly, if you could look in the wire and see the electricity as maybe beach balls moving along in the wire, the sudden disconnection from the battery would be like a massive decompression in the wire so all the beach balls having internal pressure would explode. The beach balls or electricity on exploding become something else smaller in size, fragments, this is electrostatic charge. These electrostatic fragments because they are now negatively charged become diamagnetic, diamagnetic basically meaning to have no magnetism or repelling magnetism. Its not so much that something "IS" diamagnetic it's the fact that it is no longer paramagnetic. It's become the opposite.
Such as: after first BEMF we could remove the primery coils (if we could) and the process will continue indefinitely?
Looks like Leedskalnin's PMH.
If you removed the primary coils the secondary circuit would be a standard LC circuit, and would alternate like a dampened AC circuit, coming to rest very quickly, even more so because of phase lag interaction with the rotor.
Erfinder:
Quote
When you realize that we are using the currents manifested in the secondary windings only, this will mark the moment that you begun to change your thinking, and have received your first true taste of the force Tesla was working with.
Now this is interesting, basically my last post stated that the primary coil E does not drive the circuit ,nor does the source current.
The primary E provides a means to produce a BEMF in the secondary coil F. So in secondary coil F we have a EMF to initiate the process, the Bemf in the secondary F basically drives the magnetic field out of the coil (diamagnetism) and as far as the rest of the secondary circuit is concerned the coil F has just turned into a capacitor. It is important to remember that the secondary circuit is a closed loop and as such , Any current flowing in one part of the circuit flows in all parts of the circuit. So what happens when the secondary coil F disappears and becomes a capacitor? Im still working on this.
@allcanadian
Thanks for the answers and it looks like I didn't turn every rock.
Very graphic representation with the beach balls.
Now because I want to turn few rock I left behind...
Quote from: allcanadian on May 03, 2007, 04:54:13 PM
The beach balls or electricity on exploding become something else smaller in size, fragments, this is electrostatic charge. These electrostatic fragments because they are now negatively charged become diamagnetic, diamagnetic basically meaning to have no magnetism or repelling magnetism.
How do you know the fragments are negatively charged? (bold emphasis added)
Because is not pressure anymore and is suction instead?
I have more but might depend on your answer. You have this gift to answer to more than one question at the time. ;D
How do they get negatively charged? Hmm
I know Victor Schauberger produced negatively supercharged water by moving it past a positively charged catalyst like copper. Lord Kelvin used this in his water drop experiment, which V.S. found very interesting.. I think it's called electrostatic induction.
In Teslas machine we have a transformer and coils, I didn't mean for the beach ball analogy to be taken literally, but we could say we have an interface in this analogy.
That is the wire, positively charged on the outside with neutral fragments moving internally, the fact that the fragments move past a positively charged body is all that is needed for electrostatic induction. Lord kelvin and Victor Schauberger used a positively charged ring with air/water vapor moving through the charged ring to produce negative charge in the water by induction. It does not matter if the water is blown through the positive ring or sucked the induction still takes place, Victor used suction because it produced more beneficial effects down the line.
Sorry I just read your question again, I know the fragments are negatively charged because of the following statement.
Negative Discharge = Diamagnetism = BEMF
and the fact Victor Scauberger says in no uncertain terms his water has a negative potential.
A positive charge produces a magnetic field
A collapsing magnetic field produces a negative discharge
So I think part of the key must be speed of collapse and potential produced by it.
I know I have posted alot of stuff here, the point I would like everyone to keep in mind is that Im not the teacher here, erfinder is, Im the student. I read what is given, a direction I follow to succeed in understanding. What I post is my interpretation of what I have read- nothing more, I could be completely wrong and that is part of my means to succeed, the understanding that everything I believe may be wrong.
So I put my thoughts out there for you to criticize so we can all succeed.
Well as I said I have more than one question and all because we (or at least me) made a series of assumptions.
I don't mean I'm asking for straight answers, but rather I try to mark the unexplored areas where the conventional science filled the gap. So we made the assumptions.
As a start, one question is what is an electrostatic charge and how is getting charged? Even the answer with rubbing the ebony stick, blah, blah, that rubbing has the mechanical "rubbing valve" involved.
Later we assumed the step up transformer model and I realize I don't know how that charge gets multiplied.
And that is just the start.
I hope you get the message of my doubt.
Cheers.
@samebarbosi
Later we assumed the step up transformer model and I realize I don't know how that charge gets multiplied.
Your not the only one, I completely ignored the fact that every transformer section raises the voltage above the last section in series. So the maximum voltage in this machine could be massive, which is needed I think.
I think Im ready for some tinkering, Im going to build erfinders machine with no armature or rotor, out of some stripped transformers so I can get a hands on understanding as I go. Understand one part of this machine at a time, hopefully.
Don
For an answer to how a charge gets amplified in secondary, I think the answer is: "it doesn't get amplified".
Simply the vacuum created around the primary, is filled with charge. From where? don't know - void? Anyway, the bigger the capacitance of a coil, the bigger the charge, the higher the potential.
But this is just a guess. I'm going over 569176 and 593138 to seek answers.
As for what a charge is, I think this is going to be for later.
Quote"It is well known that the higher the frequency or potential difference of the current the smaller the capacity required to counteract the self-induction;"
QuoteHigher frequency implies a faster rate of change - not a higher potential.
This makes it even more confusing - why does a faster rate of change (frequency) need less capacitance (stored energy) to over come self-inductance?
I guess this is in-part the answer:
Self-inductance: The property of an electric circuit or component that caused an emf to be generated in it as a result of a change in the current flowing through the circuit.
Positive Charge = Paramagnetism = EMF
Positive charge attracts positive charge, and expells negative discharge.
So since positive charge attracts itself, and expels negative discharge, if the differences between the potentials are elevated, and the frequency (rate of change) is also increased, the faster the current changes, the more emf (pressure, force) is produced, as well as BEMF (negative, repulsion).
So is this also stating that a higher frequency causes a coil to act as its own capacitor? Could we get a high enough frequency to remove all self-inductance? What would this do for us? IT seems apparent that two coils could remove the need for a capacitor, as each would be removing the others self-inductance (assuming a high enough frequency).
Now I have to think on this, I lost my original thought....
Hum,
Seems a lot of people have left this forum and moved on. I guess if Erfinder has not responded back to the E-mail to move on I guess we don't move on until he is ready for us to move on. I had Internet connectivity issues today and some yesterday so I had better go back and read some of the post. At this time I hope the ones that are left and any new people who are on this site can put things together and categorize them to the patent and whip this puppy out . All those who moved on I bless them. It is not that anyone is dumb or can't learn, it is more of putting the words in the patent to break things down to a point of understanding, or that is my way of thinking of it anyway. I see the post of the Positive coils and Negative coils and the sweet spot and why they do as they do, I guess I should have posted all of my thoughts, but it would have been just a copy of what some of the other people posted, but it looks like I should have done it anyway. Again I only see a few people left so why not group up and list things in a category that relates to the patent and then everyone should be able to understand it and then everyone will move on. There may always be new people coming on board. All we can do is make everything clear and relate it to the topic and not just come up with something off the wall. We need to stay focused and that was hard to do before as so many people had there own way of thinking of what they thought was going on and left the others behind in a daze. All I am saying is to put the topic to each patent and explain it that way, then maybe Erfinder will understand that we are ready to move on, then it will be hard again as we will be trying to catch up with the rest again at the next level.
Let me know if you feel I am off track. I just would like to keep learning and not so much of the fact to know about magnetics and flux, but to relay it to the patent and then when we all understand the patent, maybe Erfinder will tell us what he had wanted us to learn and say we learned it.
Regards
Trump
Hi to all
This is getting some were.
Erfinder said in his post regarding Magneto-Dielectric-Energy:
Magneto= Pulsing (expanding-contracting....imploding-exploding)
dielectric= Poor conductor..... Stores electrostatic charge
Energie=kinetic work
magnetism= electricity= static electricity (electrostatics)
electricity= electrostatic not as spark but as Stress field
The secondairy coil is the source of the stress field (the working field)
stress Field is produced and produces rotary motion
so the secondary coils are the source of the stress field, the eletrostatic are the stress field and the dielectric stores electrostatic charge.
so if the coils are the plates of a capasitor then where is the dielectric witch stores the electrostatic charge?
if it would be the primary then this would explane the transfomer working in order to step up
erfinder told us that the source could only take as much BEMF back then it could store so if the source is filled up, the source and the secundary start to act as a capasitor where the primary becomes the dielectric. Would this be the Special capasitor Erfinder is refering to?becaus if the BEMF cant flow back thru the primary coils it would see it as a poor conductor and their for store it.
I think this might be a new look to it, just thinking out loud.
regards
satyoda
satyoda
Go back a few post's as what you are asking has already been clarified. I to must go back a few post's as so much has already been stated so there is no sence in trying to re-invent the wheel. We must all work together, talk things out and keep on track, main stream as we call it. and again please let's all relate things to the patent, like you have done satyoda You will find your question answered on the capacitor, not being a special one, but tuned to the coils.
Trump
Trump you said there is no use in re-inventing the wheel, but re-invent it we must. We have a wheel we all recognize in tesla's motor patent, but his works nothing like the one we know-- it has been re-invented by Tesla.
And Satyoda just gave us our answer!
Let's look at the answer he gave us.
so the secondary coils are the source of the stress field, the eletrostatic are the stress field and the dielectric stores electrostatic charge.
so if the coils are the plates of a capasitor then where is the dielectric witch stores the electrostatic charge?
Yes, where is the dielectric? There is none, which makes the secondary G coils a sort of antenna radiating electrostatic charge. Erfinder said the secondary circuit drives the machine by radiating a stress field.
if it would be the primary then this would explane the transfomer working in order to step up
erfinder told us that the source could only take as much BEMF back then it could store so if the source is filled up, the source and the secundary start to act as a capasitor where the primary becomes the dielectric. Would this be the Special capasitor Erfinder is refering to?becaus if the BEMF cant flow back thru the primary coils it would see it as a poor conductor and their for store it.
So if the secondary G coils are not our special capacitor erfinder mentioned then as satyoda says it must be the primary. And here we have a transformer made of the primary coils E and secondary coils F. We also have what amounts to two plates(the coils) seperated by a dielectric (the coils insulation)----A capacitor.
What ties this all together is what satyoda quoted erfinder as saying-"the source could only take as much Bemf as it could store".
So satyoda may be right, the source doesn't supply current only potential because that is all it can supply. Because between the source and the secondary circuit there is a capacitor the transformer. The secondary coil G is the antenna radiating the potential as a stress field. The capacitor H in the secondaries acts to ensure the electrosatatic charges alternate. Also if as erfinder said the Bemf charged the source then what happens when the Bemf is negative potential as it is?
What would happen is the negative Bemf potential would enter the positive terminal of the source charging it, because the source negative terminal would repel the negative Bemf. It's like a two wire circuit in one instance and Teslas single wire circuit in the next.
I like this theory- It may be the best yet because it's simple as erfinder said it was.
First, I'm back using my original account. Thanks to all trying to help me with suggestions, Stefan did it and I thank him too.
Erfinder,
Now I want to ask some clarifications, so we don't go further with misconceptions. Just paying attention to details, that's all.
Quote from: Erfinder on May 04, 2007, 03:14:53 AM
...
To recap, the currents flowing through a conductor (primary) represents positive charge. As long as the current is allowed to flow positive charge will dominate negative discharge!
The collapse of a magnetic field signals that we have transitioned from a condition where positive charge dominates to one where negative discharge dominates!
...
In the whole explanation you use the term current and suddenly you talk about the collapse of magnetic field. Should we understand "the collapse of current that is allowed to flow positive charge" (aka EMF, electric current - using today's terminology)?
Another question (this bothers me for quite a while):
Is about the word association, "Positive Charge"... why not "Negative Charge"? I know must be a reason for that, Someone chose these words for a good reaon. Can you point to some specific reading material please? (well, the same for Negative Discharge)
Thanks.
PS: Is this what Leedskalnin was talking about with north and south magnets, flowing screw like in opposite directions?
Quote from: Erfinder on May 04, 2007, 03:14:53 AM
The collapse of a magnetic field signals that we have transitioned from a condition where positive charge dominates to one where negative discharge dominates!
Fig 2 Negative Discharge coming soon!
Hello Erfinder,
Thank you for the drawing, this clears up a lot! I have been trying to figure this out by myself and I seem to be too slow in opening my mind to accept the truth. I haven't been collaborating much latelly, but I have been paying great attention to everyone.
I'm really looking forward to your negative discharge drawing.
Regards,
Omar
@erfinder
Ok Im guilty, sorry for the misquotes.
The problem I think we are having here is that we are given leads to follow, information but we have no foundation to build on. We tend to build things from the ground up, not the reverse. As such we look to multiple sources, from multiple points of view and it all gets confusing. We have been chasing our tails here and many people have just given up.
Your last post is exactly what was lacking I think, We need a solid foundation to build on, some point of reference we can always relate back to.
The following was posted a long time ago, and we (I) have yet to fully understand it.
Quote
"Positive charge attracts positive charge, and expels negative discharge.
Negative discharge repels both negative discharge and positive charge."
The Universal One
Positive Charge = Paramagnetism = EMF
Negative Discharge = Diamagnetism = BEMF
I think we should forget the machines and master this first, I think this is our foundation which will lead to an understanding of Teslas machines. I have a thousand theories on Teslas motor and have posted my best ones, but this is a guessing game at best. And the above statement can have a thousand meanings as well, so maybe we should try to find out which one is correct.
Im getting tired of guessing at this.
allcanadian
Good catch. My statement I was not correct, (to re-invent the wheel) in that respect, but your statement was true. In respect the wheel, "Patent" was never understood in that point of view, so your statement was true, we need to re-invent the wheel so to speak.
I feel that sometimes we have things explained to us, then later on it is explained to us in a different fashion with the intent of clarifying things, then at times it changes MY reasoning on what we thought in the first place, then I need to re-think things all over again.
Erfinder is correct, In a lot of cases people just want to know how the motor works, as Erfinder stated, BUT I need to know how it works in order to know why it works, it is not just one or the other to my opinion at lest.
Trump
So here is the topic at hand.
"Positive charge attracts positive charge, and expels negative discharge.
-the current flowing through the primary represent positive charge
-negative discharge is expeled but at the same time bound to positive charge
- In order that the positive charge can move it expels negative discharge, and tunnels through it!
- As long as the current is allowed to flow positive charge will dominate negative discharge!
- First it must be understood that the currents can manifest in two ways. 1. Positive charge dominating negative discharge, or 2. Negative discharge dominating positive charge.
-The collapse of a magnetic field signals that we have transitioned from a condition where positive charge dominates to one where negative discharge dominates!
This makes sense until I get to the part about---
Positive charge attracts positive charge
This is the opposite of what we understand, opposite charges should attract not like charges. Unless you put the "positive charge" into the context of a magnetic field, being attracted to another magnetic field, but the "other" magnetic field must be of an opposite polarity. This is my biggest problem right here, I imagine it's very easy for erfinder but Im just not getting this.
Now, I hope to have my time share on this... The space became crowdy.
Quote from: Erfinder on May 04, 2007, 12:18:26 PM
I have already said that that which we call magnetism is in reality the other half of electricity! When I say magnetic field collapse what I mean is positive charge has given the position of dominance to negative discharge!
And I have asked for clarifications because as I see, yourself use magnetic field in your posts. However, in one you said:
"You assume that magnetic fields exist! One day science.........."
It doesn't matter to me as long I understand what are you referring to. So from now, "magnetic field" it is, and we all should understand you definition.
As for the reading material, I meant "from what you have recommended already, where we can find related information?" It would keep the thread as clean as possible, without opinions and counter-opinions on the topic.
Regards.
Well, while I was typing this, I see everyone was posting - so I am going to throw it out anyway - maybe it will help clarify something for someone:
My take of a few things here. I think the key element is the text info posted in the picture.
QuotePositive charge (this is about fields not charges!) moves centripetally adding substance, increasing its charge, and density. Centripetal motion gives birth to centrifugal motion, negative discharge moves centrifugally! As the field moves forward it SEEMINGLY separates into two forces, the one moving through the other in a screw like fashion! In this figure positive charge dominates negative discharge. This is the nature of EMF! What we have up until this point called magnetism, or the magnetic field surrounding a current carrying conductor is in reality the second component of electricity! This diagram demonstrates the power of implosion, the compressing, condensing power of electricity!
Regarding Barbosi's question:
QuoteIs about the word association, "Positive Charge"... why not "Negative Charge"? I know must be a reason for that, Someone chose these words for a good reaon.
Here is my take - could be wrong, but I think this is beginning to help me see things properly.
Quote
"Positive charge attracts positive charge, and expels negative discharge.
Negative discharge repels both negative discharge and positive charge."
Positive charge, verses negative
DIScharge. Erfinder stated implicitly, this is the fields - not the charge of the currents - the "charge" of the fields (if it helps to think of it that way). I am not sure, but I think a negative field would be a paradox. What the field is taking in, it is expelling its opposite. I think the concept of negative and positive is just to help us understand opposites. It is something we are familiar with - but I don't think it is positive and negative in the conventional sense. I think this can be further clarified in understanding the concept of matter. If we assume that matter is just a build up of vibration (an extension of Mind), and where it "rolls in on itself" is the point matter begins, we see that all electrical flow is merely vibrational movement. In this case, it follows a set path. The build-up portion, the centripetal, the part that moves into itself and "gathers more of the same" (the male part) is the "positive" that we are discussing here. This is the part that attracts itself, and dispels its opposite. The opposite is that which tends to expand, tear down, the female etc. The positive is the pressure, the build up, the tightening of the spring. The negative is the relax, the return, the release of tension in the spring. Positive is the outflow away from Mind, to the point it materializes in a solidified form, Negative is the inflow back to Mind, the tear down of the material solidified form.
It seems to me, the part that we are not tapping, is this positive side. The part that it seems we only understand about is the negative. What mainstream views as electricity seems to be the positive, and magnetism would be the negative. It further seems that mainstream has the positive fixation (electron), and can only manipulate that portion - the portion that is the "effect" side of electricity. The "cause side" (the negative) seems relatively untapped, and seems to be the "cold" electricity. Most importantly, it seems mainstream insists on these being separated and split in order to function. I think the concept here is they work together, harmoniously, simultaneously.
Again, keeping in mind we are talking about fields, not individual charges. It seems to me that in order to get a field to "flow" (to move through a conduit) it must take on the nature of these explanations, and manifest itself as Erfinder has drawn. Of course, this is the field, not the flow, but it must move in similar fashion. I think this is evident in Leedkalnin's writings. I think he was seeing both sides of the spiral simultaneously, and believed they were two opposite elements, not opposite manifestations of the same.
EDIT - added an explanation to help prevent a misquote
EDIT2 - corrected polarities and male-femaleness as I had them backwards
I had another thought:
-The collapse of a magnetic field signals that we have transitioned from a condition where positive charge dominates to one where negative discharge dominates!
This explains why we see electricity and magnetism as opposites. While we are inducing current to a coil through a magnetic flux line, we are attracting positive to positive. When we cut that flux line, (collapse the magnetic field) we allow negative to dominate. This explains why we see the same coin from two seperate sides. This also explains why we are "bound" by the concept of "charged" particles. We are manifesting the same thing (ALL CHICKENS) in two seperate ways. We are only measuring each half of the flow at different times.
Have a drumstick, and your brain starts clicking.....I think I heard a click....LOL
I LOVE the chicken analogy......
Everyone,
Reading I found an apparent contradiction, which I want to make you aware of (emphasis added on all quotes).
Quote from: Erfinder on May 04, 2007, 12:18:26 PM
Positive Charge is associated with compression and implosion, Negative Discharge is associated with expansion, and explosion!!!
Then I taught: but Schauberger was working with implosion! Something's wrong here.
So keeping in mind that Negative Discharge = BEMF = explosion (expansion), I swept again through old messages and I found:
Quote from: Erfinder on February 27, 2007, 05:20:21 PM
...
BEMF is the the field returning to the source (IMPLOSION!!!). The source is the VOID!Flow returning to the source is not restricted, nor resisted it is assisted, and self organizing in it's effort to return. It is said that a magnetic fields collapse, but this has never been adquately explained. BEMF is explosive radiation, the result of rapidly cavitating a flowing field. Collapse in this since does not mean in on itself, but outward towards and into the void, as I said currents behave differently when they are pulsed, become familiar with this difference. Flux lines are curved, curvature ends in the Void.
...
I guess it will take a little while to chew this. I wouldn't be surprise to see some debate, in fact I'm curious to sign in.
Regards.
I think were off track again, I thought that was my job--confusing everyone.
We have-
Quote
"Positive charge attracts positive charge, and expels negative discharge.
Negative discharge repels both negative discharge and positive charge."
The Universal One
Positive Charge = Paramagnetism = EMF
Negative Discharge = Diamagnetism = BEMF
In erfinders diagram it is clear electrical current(Emf) is the positive charge and negative discharge is Bemf. Negative discharge is also the magnetic field surrounding the current or positive charge in the diagram.
That which we detect circulating a current carrying conductor (in this instance our primary winding) and call magnetism is not magnetism! It is negative discharge, it represents the expanded pole of electricity!
In this figure positive charge dominates negative discharge. This is the nature of EMF!
So here is my theory--
"Positive charge attracts positive charge, and expels negative discharge.
- Electric fields attract electric fields and expels magnetic fields.
-Think about a capacitor, it has electric fields in attraction but no magnetic field.
- a magnetic field can push an electric one in a spark gap, so the electric field expels the magnetic.
-A current carrying conductor has an electric field in which the magnetic field surrounds outside the conductor(expeled)moving in the opposite direction.
This statement may simply state that the electric field will attract another electric field but will always repel the magnetic one, it's opposite.
No allcanadian, was not your job to confuse and I don't think we are off track.
It's just another rock we past by, so I'll highlight differently.
Quote from: Erfinder on February 27, 2007, 05:20:21 PM
...
BEMF is the the field returning to the source (IMPLOSION!!!). The source is the VOID!Flow returning to the source is not restricted, nor resisted it is assisted, and self organizing in it's effort to return. It is said that a magnetic fields collapse, but this has never been adquately explained. BEMF is explosive radiation, the result of rapidly cavitating a flowing field. Collapse in this since does not mean in on itself, but outward towards and into the void, as I said currents behave differently when they are pulsed, become familiar with this difference. Flux lines are curved, curvature ends in the Void.
...
Don't you find odd that the explosion (BEMF) is the field returning to the source (IMPLOSION!!!)? Explosion? Implosion? Read again whole quote because we got explanation in the end: "Collapse in this since does not mean in on itself, but outward towards and into the void" This IS a real unexpected twist.
Doesn't sound like the source is everywhere? Like our reality is "nowhere" and an explosion occurring in "nowhere" will expand to "everywhere" to the source (the void)?
Oh, forget it... just someone explain please where is "in" and where is "out" because without understanding I cannot memorize this.
Cheers.
@barbosi
Your right, how do we keep missing this stuff? good work
I found some stuff by walter russel that explains where were at as well.
* Positive electricity is the generative electricity.
Positive electricity is that state of motion in which electricity dominates magnetism.
Positive electricity is that state of motion in which centripetal force dominates centrifugal force.
* Negative electricity is the radiative energy.
Negative electricity is that state of motion in which magnetism dominates electricity.
Negative electricity is that state of motion in which centrifugal forcer dominates centripetal force.
* Electricity and magnetism exist as separate appearances only when opposed. In non-opposition they disappear, they become one.
* Electricity and magnetism are not two separate forces, nor are they two separate substances. They are merely two different dimensions of motion. They belong solely to motion and not to substance.
* Neither are positive and negative electricity two kinds of electricity. Positive and negative electricity are but two differing potential?s of the same force which must move in opposite directions.
Sorry for jumping in here guys, I only read the first page of this thread, and would like to comment on the original file presented here named "Free_Energy_Plans.pdf".
I believe I may have an explanation for the apparent "free energy" obtained from the capacitor/motor experiment in this document. It's actually quite simple, but perhaps not so obvious.
Bottom line is, there is no free energy in this circuit, but there is "lost energy", and degrees thereof.
So we have two caps, one discharged into the other through a DC motor. There is an apparent 50% "gain" in motor run time when powering the motor via the 3 separate discharges compared to the single discharge from one cap.
Actually, there is only an energy loss when running the motor off the single cap, and this loss is more extreme versus the 3 separate discharge scenario.
Here's why. The DC motor consists of a coil with a relatively high resistance of 1k or so. Power is dissipated (lost) in this DC resistance, and the amount of power lost is proportional to V^2. It doesn't matter what the resistance is really, it's still proportional to V-squared.
In the first scenario, the motor is powered from say 10V on the cap. The cap is 10V, and GND is 0V. That's a 10V potential difference.
In the second scenario, the motor is powered 2 times from a potential difference of 5V, and one time from a potential difference of approximately 5V or so (one cap discharging from 10V to 5V, while the other charges from 0V to 5V).
Because of the square function of power loss wrt voltage, the first scenario dissipates (loses) 4 times the power in heat compared to any of the other 3 discharges.
So in conclusion, I will say that by using a DC motor with 1/4 the DC coil resistance, but the same inductance, and powering from a single cap charged to 10V, the run time will be 50% greater as well, compared to the original motor.
There is no ou here, it is simply seeing the results of one motor being more efficient than the other, OR driving the same motor in a more efficient manner compared to the other.
Darren
WOW now Im starting to understand how erfinder feels!
z_p_e you may as well be speaking japanese, I feel like I have come a million miles from where your at, and I have barely moved an inch.
You may want to read the rest of this thread.
AllCanadian,
I have read the bulk of posts here, and clearly the topic has shifted to something quite different from the original file and concept I commented on above. Perhaps you could go back and read this original document if you have forgotten. I have not seen (and still not seen one in this thread) an explanation offered for the apparent "gain" described in this original document, so I offered one.
One last comment: The Tesla patent being referred to here (464666) and used as the basis for Erfinder's device, appears as though it is being mis-interpreted. Tesla's motor is driven by sinusoidal AC, not pulses. Tesla found an ingenious way of developing a 90? phase shift from a single phase source, using a relatively small value, high voltage capacitor, all for the purpose of creating the required RMF.
Again, sorry for the intrusion...graciously bowing out now. :)
Darren
:)
Trump,
At this point we have only what is happening in a conductor connected to a battery.
If you want to understand, read Leedskalnin's experiments with a battery and a copper wire put in top of a wooden box. It demonstrates the screw like motion and bidirectional movement of "North" and "South" "magnets".
I older posts I've attached also few pictures.
We're waiting for explanations on BEMF also. It looks to be similar process, but I wouldn't miss first hand details.
allcanadian, what is the Russell's book you found your quotes?
In relation to the "paradox" I mentioned in the post at the top of the page, I recall another one related to the magnets (emphasis added):
Quote from: Erfinder on March 23, 2007, 02:42:06 PM
...
Let the truth be told, there is only one substance. That substance is Mind. Within Mind exists all knowledge and power. Mind is Still Magnetic Light. All idea in Mind is complete in it's entirety, it is however without form. Mind has but one desire and this desire is to create bodies for it's ideas. It is enabled to do this through thinking. The thinking process of Mind is a dual process, Concentration, and Decentration. Concentration represents a seeming moving away from ones center in Mind. Decentration represents a relaxing from thinking and return to ones center in Mind, this process is expressed electrically. ...
Now when I read this again I don't find anything wrong, but at that time Concentration seamed to be focused on the Mind, and so on. I've sent a PM to Erfinder and with his permission I'll quote from his answer (again emphasis added):
Quote
Mind is Perfect Stillness, centering all creation simultaneously. Our individual Minds are one with the Universal Mind! When one concentrates this simulates moving away from ones shared centering position in the Universal Mind, as idea originates in Mind and we want to manifest idea here, we think the idea into existence on our plane, by concentrating on the idea. Decentration is an acknowledgement on the part of the concentrating individual that the idea originates in Mind and not in thinking, and in order that one can truly appreciate the idea, one must discontinue thinking and return to stillness, because in perfect stillness idea originates.
Contraction towards the center simulates moving away from ones center. You should ask contracting what from what? The answer would be a seeming condensing of Mind substance! The static condition of Mind allows Mind to exist everywhere simultaneously, centering everything. When we concentrate we loose our awareness of our surroundings, our awareness of the whole of creation and are enabled to focus on that which we are concentrating, decentration brings us back to the whole picture.
Decentration is just as powerful as concentration, it is a lost art. Our whole lives we are told to think and concentrate on our ideas as if they originated through our thinking, and were never taught how to decentrate back to the source of the idea in order that we could receive higher inspiration.
As many will find this a bit confusing and maybe out of the topic, please consider it just a memo note at this time and while we continue on more earthly topics, it may be handy later to read back and understand.
Next rock......
QuoteAs many will find this a bit confusing and maybe out of the topic, please consider it just a memo note at this time and while we continue on more earthly topics, it may be handy later to read back and understand.
LOL - this is more "earthly" then many may realize. Point understood and taken, but this is the foundation that is missing - or at least misunderstood. It isn't just philosophical ramblings. It is the base layer for the formation of matter. The understanding of how matter "flows" and the understanding of why electricity is what it is and does what it does. Of course, some can choose not to believe it, but then, believing in mainstream is a pretty dead-end road - litterally. Moreover, belief has no effects on the outcome of reality. It will continue to be what it is regardless of anyones perception. Science is the study of that which is observable. That doesn't mean that is all there is to the story. No one has ever observed a multi-trillion dollar deficit - it doesn't mean it doesn't exist.
:)
I would agree with trump, z_p_e if you have ever had the feeling you are missing something in EM theory, and could never put your finger on it, this is it.
@barbosi
I have read online text from walter russells books at the following links.
www.frank.germano.com/walter_russell.htm
www.hiddenmysteries.org/mysteries/whatsthis/light.html
www.universal-tao.com/article/secret.htm
I went through erfinders reading list and found whatever links I could on the net, the article "space and the hydrogen age" by walter russell at frank germano's site is very good. In order to make any sense of this you have to understand the context of the information given by the author, and read it until you do. Im not sure I could ever thank erfinder enough for showing me the way, I have been looking for this my whole life. This life you and I lead, what we see and think has never made sense to me, there was always something missing. Every explanation I have been given by science seemed to be a half-assed attempt I could always tear down in minutes.
So I think my journey has just begun, this patent 464666 is just a motor, what I have learned in the process is priceless.
I will try and put what I have come to understand in the context of this patent, but as I said all of this is new to me so it could take some time for it to sink in.
Quote from: allcanadian on May 05, 2007, 04:26:43 PM
I would agree with trump, z_p_e if you have ever had the feeling you are missing something in EM theory, and could never put your finger on it, this is it.
@barbosi
I have read online text from walter russells books at the following links.
www.frank.germano.com/walter_russell.htm
www.hiddenmysteries.org/mysteries/whatsthis/light.html
www.universal-tao.com/article/secret.htm
I went through erfinders reading list and found whatever links I could on the net, the article "space and the hydrogen age" by walter russell at frank germano's site is very good. In order to make any sense of this you have to understand the context of the information given by the author, and read it until you do. Im not sure I could ever thank erfinder enough for showing me the way, I have been looking for this my whole life. This life you and I lead, what we see and think has never made sense to me, there was always something missing. Every explanation I have been given by science seemed to be a half-assed attempt I could always tear down in minutes.
So I think my journey has just begun, this patent 464666 is just a motor, what I have learned in the process is priceless.
I will try and put what I have come to understand in the context of this patent, but as I said all of this is new to me so it could take some time for it to sink in.
http://web.archive.org/web/20060205124606/http://universal-tao.com/ 2006
http://web.archive.org/web/20050130155608/http://universal-tao.com/ 2005
http://www.universal-tao.com/article/secret.htm
Taos Homepage not more working.
Here you find aigain the older homepages
Pese
http://ch.to/FE
Quote from: allcanadian on May 05, 2007, 04:26:43 PM
I would agree with trump, z_p_e if you have ever had the feeling you are missing something in EM theory, and could never put your finger on it, this is it.
It's ironic that you would comment that
I am missing something about EM theory, when everything
except EM theory is being discussed in this thread.
;)
Everyone may already have them ,but if not here are the links to get them.
http://www.keelynet.com/tesla/00685957.pdf
http://www.keelynet.com/tesla/00685958.pdf
Trump
z_p_e,
Again, no disrespect and if you feel offended by my words, please take my apologies along with them.
The whole point is most of us know pretty much about nowadays EM. The only difference is we feel frustrated not having desired results with all this "knowledge". For this very reason we try to understand what might be behind Tesla's patents. If any of us on this forum would know how to build a free energy device, probably this forum wouldn't exist anymore.
The only "peculiarity" of this thread is that many of its posters don't believe in poking the chance with the stick to have a working device. And if chance is so generous, are you sure you can duplicate it?
All the best and if you feel you may benefit from this thread, I second the invitation at least to peep. Or if you can, to help.
:) :)
@allcanadian
"So I think my journey has just begun, this patent 464666 is just a motor, what I have learned in the process is priceless."
Very well stated. I couldn't agree more.
EDIT: The link posted for The Secret of Light - is missing an "L" (html - not htm)
http://www.universal-tao.com/article/secret.html
Edit2: After reading Trump's post, I realized that i didn't make allcanadians original quote very clear.
:)
Well this is interesting.
I looked at patent 685957 and remembered I had built this circuit and experimented with it last year. I see now that I had no understanding of oscillations or energy flow when experimenting.
The patent 568176 looks very interesting and if you look at the time line of his patents here You can imagine Tesla stumbling on to weird effects in his circuits then building other machines to enhance this effect and track it's origin.
I had actually designed and started to build a circuit very similar to Teslas 568167 patent, my circuit replaced the inductor of a buck-booster(DC-DC switch mode converter) with a DC motor. My logic was that we don't actually "use" energy in our circuits we just waste all of it. My question was and still is "How can an inductor not use power but a stator armature can-they are one and the same?"So my DC current would drive a motor(inductor) like one of Teslas choking-coils, then a capacitor would store the Bemf high voltage and route it back to source. So it's pretty wild that I was so close to teslas circuit a year ago, but I had no idea of the bigger picture involved. I had impulse current but no oscillations nor high voltage secondaries. Last year feels like 20 years ago when I think about how far I have come and how far I have to go.
Anyways we should see the huge similarities between Teslas patent 568176 and patent 464666, he is moving in a specific direction with every patent.
I have also built Teslas patent 512340, his bifilar "pancake" coil. This is no ordinary coil, I built two coils using the same amount of wire, one an ordinary air core coil, the other like Teslas patent. Teslas coil was generating a huge amount of hash on my scope compared to the ordinary coil, and it should be noted that the magnetic field around this coil is not like an ordinary coil. I had mentioned many times on the net to people that a normal bifilar wound coil acts nothing like Teslas flat bifilar wound coil.
Well this post is getting long, Im still trying to put walter russells thoughts into context with teslas, I think this is very important to understand the bigger picture first, then expand on this.
Quote from: allcanadian on May 06, 2007, 09:34:46 AM
My question was and still is "How can an inductor not use power but a stator armature can-they are one and the same?
There
is one slight difference...the stator coil version will have voltage induced in it simultaneous with applied pulsing through it. There can be bucking or adding fields and voltages in the coil depending on configuration. If the fields and voltages are configured to buck, this may account for the power loss you are experiencing and/or thinking about.
At any rate, real inductors consume real power, but what did you mean exactly? There are AC and DC winding resistance losses, and also core losses if there is one. See the following for an excellent brief tutorial on inductor power losses: http://powerelectronics.com/mag/504PET20.pdf
Quote
I have also built Teslas patent 512340, his bifilar "pancake" coil. This is no ordinary coil, I built two coils using the same amount of wire, one an ordinary air core coil, the other like Teslas patent. Teslas coil was generating a huge amount of hash on my scope compared to the ordinary coil,
This is interesting. What do you mean by "hash"? Something you observed from the coil just sitting on the bench, or whilst being pulsed?
Quote
and it should be noted that the magnetic field around this coil is not like an ordinary coil.
There should be little if any magnetic field detected with this coil. If the wires are twisted before winding, there will be even less detectable field.
Quote
I had mentioned many times on the net to people that a normal bifilar wound coil acts nothing like Teslas flat bifilar wound coil.
Depends what you mean by "normal bifilar". Bifilar simply means two wires wound together simultaneously. How they are connected afterwards determines what you will get from it. Tesla's bifilar pancake coil is simply a very narrow but fat solenoidal coil wound and connected in series (opposing) bifilar.
Darren
The only thing I see in both patents, 685957 and 685958 is that the top armature of capacitor C (T) is exposed to a "positive charge" (ex. 685958 - par. 100):
Quote
As the rays or supposed streams of matter generally convey a positive charge to first condenser-terminal...
Then this voltage cumulated in capacitor is "chopped" with device "d". Is this how Tesla generates BEMF from radiant energy (solar rays)?
It looks pretty obvious in fig.2 from pat 685958.
allcanadian, if you still got your setup, this your chance to power your fridge. Modify it as per fig.2 - pat 685958, and put a hamster to run inside the wheel t'.
EDIT: On a second thought, if that "positive charge" is allowed to pass through rotary switch (ON) and "p" to ground, then when the switch goes OFF, the capacitor gets charged by BEMF... Painful to have such simple circuit and not to be sure how it works.
I am still reading through this and digesting it all. However, it is apparent that in the 685957 and 685958 patents, the electricity flowing from the sun to the earth indicates that we are back to the Chickens analogy. The positive and negative charges are opposite sides of the same coin. That is the reason we can get electricity to flow through the circuit. That is the reason charge will store in the condenser. The sun and earth are the opposite manifestations of each other. One is the radiative, the other is the generative, one the expansion, the other the compression. It is also becoming apparent, one can be used as the anode, the other as the cathode.
As for the remainder of Erfinder's post, of how all these patents tie in together, I am still not sure. The nature of the choking coil is the one that is baffling me. I see the mainstream definition of a choking coil is a coil of low resistance and high inductance used in electrical circuits to pass direct current and attenuate alternating current. I see some connections here in thinking that the primary is the source of radiant energy (DC) and the secondary is acting as the plate "P" in the patents. I also see that 512340 patent is causing the secondary (in our other patents) to act as the "B" conductor in 512340. This implies to me a step-up in energy, plus with the choking coil having high inductance, the ability to use lower potentials can be stepped up to higher potentials in a singular unit, while providing more "bang for the buck" upon field collapse. Still sorting it out, but this is the blur of thoughts I am starting to see. As always, I could be way wrong. I just need to talk through my thoughts to help organize them and see if anyone can fill in where I am falling short.
The underlying thread I am taking from all of these is self-inductance, capacitance and collapsing/changing of fields. It seems we need to establish a good foundation in how all these interact, and what they do in circuits to truly unlock Tesla's thoughts.
It should be noted that Teslas patents are like block diagrams, they give a general outline of the device, but there is nothing simple about them.
The only thing that I suggest you take note of is that Tesla is simply showing us how he is charging a capacitor with what he is calling radiant energy! Look no further than that, this is all that I want you all to consider!!!
This is the very heart of the matter, in the patents and from articles I think Tesla believed he was harnessing energy from space, only later did he understand he was harnessing the power of transformation. That is to create the conditions for something to turn something into it's opposite, this opposite returning to it's source unhindered. The opposite just refers to the dominant field (-) not (+).
He is showing us how to charge a capacitor the right way. You don't use postive current to charge a capacitor, you use a negative discharge, in this way you can use a smaller capacitor. This capacitor and the primary coil oscillate with high potential/high frequency current, the secondary coils raise the potential to make it more efficient.
The energy oscillating in his circuits needed to be high so using the simple formula P= V x A, we can say it would be much more efficient to use the highest potential attainable to reduce the amperage flowing for any given power level.
We have yet to understand how nature moves energy so efficiently, erfinder has given us part of the answer.
I should clarify my point further, Would it be more efficient to power an electromagnet with 6000 volts or 12 volts, the same energy flowing as dictated by P= V x A?.
I past again through 685958, and Tesla is saing clearly:
1. For the armature of capacitor going aerial:
Quote
As the rays or supposed streams of matter generally convey a positive charge to first condenser-terminal...
2. For the armature going to the ground:
Quote
I usually connect the second terminal to the ground, this being the most convenient way of obtaining negative electricity, dispersing with the necessity of providing an artificial source.
In my humble opinion, dispersing = expansion and explosion.
A quick remainder from Erfinder:
Quote
Positive Charge is associated with compression and implosion, Negative Discharge is associated with expansion, and explosion!!!
What Is the preferred method of charging a capacitor?
On armature (aerial) exposed to positive charge and the other (ground) to negative discharge.
What do you think?
PS: Where a lightning occurs? In a "capacitor" with ruptured dielectric?
Hi All,
"Positive charge attracts positive charge and expels negative discharge."
If I understand this statement correctly it can be rephrased as follows:-
positive charge implodes upon itself (implosion) and expels negative discharge by the process of (explosion).
Cheers
N.
I will be looking at the patents more as soon as I can. I may need to go out of town for a couple of days, but I will try and read some on the patents. Seems that Tesla normally uses Positive for Ground and not negative.
Trump
In re-reading a few things, and possibly due to the late hour, I think the obvious slipped by. What are the clues to his "preferred" method of charge?
Patent 685658
"My own experiments and observations, however, lead me to conclusions more in accord with the theory heretofore advanced by me that sources of radiant energy throw off with great velocity minute particles of matter which are strongly electrified, and therefore capable of charging an electrical conductor, or even if not so may at any rate discharge an electrified conductor either by carrying off bodily its charge or otherwise." (Pg1 L24-34)
"It is clear from what has been stated above that if the terminal T' is connected to a plate supplying positive instead of negative electricity the rays should convey negative electricity to the plate. The source S may be any form of Roentgen or Lenard tube; but it is obvious from the theory of action that in order to be very effective the electrical impulses exiting it should be wholly or at least preponderatingly of one sign." (Pg3 L10-19)
"...consists of charging one of the armatures of a condenser by rays or radiations, and the other by independent means..." This last one is repeated in various ways through all 6 summaries.
I think it is clear that the charges don't matter, as this is the only patent that we have read that mentions the charges. Secondly, it is clear that the charges can be alternated depending on the charge of the "independent means" that the opposite armature is connected to.
So it seems one of the preferred ways of charging capacitors is through different sources or circuits.
However, I am still trying to figure out exactly what this means and why it is so:
"You don't use postive current to charge a capacitor, you use a negative discharge, in this way you can use a smaller capacitor."
I was reading through patent 568176 for the third time and picked up this statement.
"the secondary L of which constitutes the source of current of high frequency which may be applied to many useful purposes, as for electric illumination, the operation of the Crookes tubes or the production of high vacua."
Now this is interesting, "the production of high vacua" especially considering the following statement from Walter Russell-- "Positive electricity is accountable for the solids and negative electricity is accountable for the space. All matter comes out of space by the action of positive electricity and is returned to space by the action of negative electricity."
And here is a statement from Victor Schauberger "Started by an impulse-giving motor, the implosion machine sucks in the surrounding air and water masses and reverses their polarity through a tangental, predominantly radial to axial, in-winding motion. In this way the diamagnetic, negative pressure comes into being."
So here we have three men, some consider the greatest minds of the last century, all of them producing unexplainable machines. All of them state in no uncertain terms that these effects are due to negative potentials, negative potentials that can also produce
astronomical vacuums. I don't think you need to be the sharpest crayon in the box to figure this out, but apparently science has not.
So here is my question of the day---
We have the following statements.
"Positive charge attracts positive charge and expels negative discharge."
"negative discharge repels both negative discharge and positive charge"
So if negative discharge(Bemf) repels both negative discharge and positive charge what is left?
barbosi
Your statement in the EDIT section does make sence.
EDIT: On a second thought, if that "positive charge" is allowed to pass through rotary switch (ON) and "p" to ground, then when the switch goes OFF, the capacitor gets charged by BEMF... Painful to have such simple circuit and not to be sure how it works.
We must remember that the BEMF is playing a big role in this circuit and really all of Tesla's circuits. This is an AC circuit and thus the flow is two ways and that is mainly what we see here. Not sure on the Switch, but the capacitor is loading that way due to the pulses in the circuit. I will try and explain more of why I am saying this. I am trying to find out right now If I need leave tonight for my trip or tomorrow night.
Trump
Well, I was looking to Erfinder's circuit and it looks like [fig.2 circuit pat.685958 and] capacitor is charged with void. Vacua if you want.
When switch is ON, no EMF (DC) is permitted to be stored in capacitor:
1. Erfinder's drawing: we have + on both armatures.
2. Fig.2 pat.685958, EMF flows through primary P which puts on short the capacitor.
Instead it stores only BEMF.
EDIT: The same in patents 568176, 568177, 568178, 568179. In 464666 the capacitor is in secondary circuit, so it has no EMF again, only BEMF.
Yoohoo! did I get a smiley face as prize?
allcanadian, you really need to look for your old setup to give it a try. A push button and a fast finger will do it. :)
In my last post vacua or vacuum was refering to the fact that a Bemf or negative discharge may render space(expansion) as the dominant force over matter(contraction), less matter means more space--- more space means a greater physical vacuum. Like outer space, no air present.
@barbosi
allcanadian, you really need to look for your old setup to give it a try. A push button and a fast finger will do it.
I have been experimenting for years, basically to prove what I read as fact. The one lesson I have learned, is what erfinder said, you cannot successfully build something you do not fully understand. You could be "guessing" for years, so I want to understand this first before I lift a finger. I have been reading more of walter russells work and it seems more sensible than anything I have ever read in the science journals. As I said the correlations between the work of tesla, schauberger and russell is impossible to ignore.
The whole trick is to do the opposite way you have been thought.
What is a capacitor good for? To store charge/energy? put a battery at its plates and it holds it?
Yes.
How about to suck charge/energy from where is none? Is this the opposite way?
Now: In every patent there is a tiny EMF flowing in the coil (in parallel with capacitor). You abruptly cut that flow and you got BEMF in quantities depending only on the storage device you have (capacitor). You put switch ON again, EMF will attract EMF and repel BEMF. so EMF again. Cut => BEMF. Compression, depression...
allcanadian, if you still remember details of your setup, please give some details; it was exactly fig.2-685958? We may analyze the setup and how did the experiment failed. I'm not saying I have the ultimate truth, but it may help to understand.
One other thing I have noticed, but I think someone else mentioned this. The capacitor seems to be being charged by inductance. In most instances, it seems to be in parallel as well. As Erfinder pointed out previously, Tesla refers to the secondary as the "working circuit". I believe this is to denote the primary circuit, and the main power (if any) is to be a separate function from the secondaries. I think the reason being because the electricity is manifesting in a different way in the secondary. In most of Tesla's patents, it seems to be manifesting in the higher potentials - more "stressed" toward one inclination then another.
One thing that is confusing me as of late, as I am having a hard time thinking of electricity in plus and minus. As I begin to scratch the surface into Russell's work, it becomes clear that all electricity interactions are either manifested as Positive (compressive, inward, etc) dominant, or Negative (radial, outward, centrifugal) dominant. The underlying theme is there is no distinction or separation of "current" - it is all the same thing - just "manifested" in different forms - stronger dominance then the other. It just depends on the nature of its flow - what work it is performing at the moment. But electricity or magnetism - no matter what our perception, is flowing exactly the same way, functioning the same way, and doing the same thing in a circuit. The only distinguishing characteristic is which one is dominant at that particular time.
Moreover, it is hard to see any of the BEMF, EMF, Current, Voltage etc as separate manifestations - they are all just CHARACTERISTICS of electricity and electrical flow. Therefore, the more we talk about positive and negative, the more it seems there really is no distinction - they are just opposites - just like "in" is opposite of "out", "up" is opposite of "down", "far" is opposite of "near". To describe something as more "up" then something else is only a point of perspective. Thus, negative potentials, negative fields, negative charges just don't seem to make any sense. Everything has to be positive - at least in the cumulative sense. Even space - vacuaa - is not a void - not a negative - it is as allcanadian described - just "less" matter - or "more" space. More of a particular manifestation of one condition over another.
Therefore, when discussing electrical flow, Positive indicates that the electrical flow is more cumulative, generative, compressive, inward, then an opposing condition. As such, when we talk about BEMF and EMF we are talking about flows that are more compressive. spiraling in on itself (electrical like) verses ones that are more radiative, spiraling outward (magnetic like). Depending on the current situation in the circuit, one is predisposed to be more dominant then the other, but is subject to change and reverse instantly.
Maybe I am rambling, but these concepts seem to be prevalent in many of the others works we have been reading about - like allcanadian mentioned. Keeley especially seems to share many of these traits, and to some extent Schauberger. Anyway, whats my point?? It seems we need to keep these things at the front of our mind when discussing what is happening in these circuits. If we migrate away from these concepts and back towards the mainstream view, I think we are drifting away from understanding what is happening. If we aren't able to describe what is happening from this perspective, we may not be thinking along the correct lines.
At least that is my take
Quote from: Maximumgravity1 on May 07, 2007, 08:17:51 PM
... The capacitor seems to be being charged by inductance...
Here is the catch I see:
The capacitor is being "discharged" by inductance. By "discharge" I mean sucked the heck out of it.
Hey guys, been gone for a few days helping my wife with her art show. I didn't feel like reading everyones postings since most seem to be arguments. I did however, read what Erfinder has posted.
I really think new names need to be given to the "positive charge" and "negative discharge" terms. This is rather confusing, atleast to me. Only through reading the explanations do I see what is being talked about - mostly.
I definitely think that Tesla found a way to use high voltage/high frequency (different from how we use it today), and I can somewhat see what Erfinder is talking about - though, I need to think about it more (that positive charge/negative discharge stuff is a brain full). But I think - from the Tesla literature I've read - that you don't absolutely need a spark gap or rotary switch for this effect to work. He only used those when he didn't have stable, high frequency dynamos. The spark gaps are only used to produce the proper oscillations in the circuits.
Its like the water hammer valves. Water in our pipes flows DC. The water hammer valves convert things from DC to AC. If your water flow was already AC, you wouldn't need the valves.
Charlie_V
Welcome back Charlie :o. Hope you did not mean that the postings were arguments, maybe just discussions. I need to take off in the morning and head for Florida to deliver a Motorcycle for my friend, I will take the patents with me to read over them again. When we all agree in what this capacitor charge is all about I think it will help everyone understand most of Tesla's patents as he uses the capacitor in a lot of the patents.
Trump
QuoteWater hammer (or, more generally, fluid hammer) is a pressure surge or wave caused by the kinetic energy of a fluid in motion when it is forced to stop or change direction suddenly. It depends on the fluid compressibility where there are sudden changes in pressure. For example, if a valve is closed suddenly at an end of a pipeline system a water hammer wave propagates in the pipe. Moving water in a pipe has kinetic energy proportional to the mass of the water in a given volume times the square of the velocity of the water.
Wikipedia's definition of a water hammer. Water is considered incompressible. Tesla refers to electricity as an incompressible fluid. Perhaps there is something to this.
Mass is associated with kinetic energy. Tesla said that an inductor was the equivalent to the mass (in his spring analogy). Thus, the secondary, being composed of a coil of very large inductance (very large mass), is set by the oscillations of the primary to produce a very large movement. When this movement is suddenly changed (as such when the current in the primary changes direction or is broken) this produces a very large force (aka electrostatic charge).
There are many ways to describe why the size of the capacitor shrinks as the frequency increases. Lets assume that the inductance is left constant. It is easy to see that a large mass can achieve the same distance in its vibrational movement if the spring attached to it is made more loose as the frequency is increased.
So lets assume a large mass is attached to a slightly stiff spring. At resonance, the spring will be moving a total distance of X (the total difference between left and right maximums). As we increase the frequency and leave the spring's stiffness fixed, we see the distance of X reduces. In order to regain the original value of X, we need to decrease the stiffness of the spring (making it more loose).
Why is it so important that we keep the distance between maximum points the same? We want to achieve the largest momentum (the greatest kinetic energy) in our secondary. If we made the spring too loose or too stiff (with our fixed mass at a particular frequency), then the distance the mass travels would be reduced and thus we would be losing our momentum. Instead, we would be storing some of it in the spring. We don't want to store it in the spring, we want to store it in the movement of the mass - this is our goal, I'm pretty sure.
By having a large momentum, when the movement of the mass changes, it will produce a huge force. We want a strong water hammer, not a wimpy one!
I'm just using logic here. But I'm not exactly sure how this "water hammer" can be used to increase the energy in the system.... UNLESS!!!?? If we had a source of momentum that could not be diminished - except through the slow decay of time. This source would also need two poles.
If the inductor is like a mass, then a permanent magnet is an equivalent of a mass in motion. A very large mass in motion - yet this mass is not changing directions, so no "water hammer" effect can be produced. Interesting enough, a permanent magnet also has two directions. It is a DC flow with half the movement in one direction (a circular motion) and the other half in the opposite circular direction (like two spinning, interlocked gears).
Now if we used our moving mass to interact with the spinning gears, we could get a boost to the movement in both directions. Assuming that our gears are attached at the center by a pivot point (or axial), as the mass moves past them, it gains a boost from their DC flow while causing the entire gear system to rotate. I've tried to illustrate this in my attached drawing.
If there is any other way to boost the momentum of our mass, let me know Erfinder.
Regards,
Charlie
Charlie_V:
"I really think new names need to be given to the "positive charge" and "negative discharge" terms."
Look at "positive charge" as electricity and "negative discharge" as magnetism. That is from Walter Russell.
Tesla's preferred BEMF circuit.
Motor M has its own inductance, so the power supply A and B doesn't get short circuit.
Edit: Added second picture.
Nice picture barbosi,
I'm not sure which polarity terminal A or B is (I suppose it doesn't really matter), but notice how during one cycle (when the switch is opened) the capacitor is charging, and in the next cycle (when the switch closes) the capacitor discharges through the coil and does not return to A. Very interesting how the circuit is incomplete.
Erfinder's circuit does the same thing, only he uses the secondary to drive the motor M instead of florescent bulbs. I like it!
If you follow my previous posts, I explained, Tesla is using mainly BEMF (much powerful) instead of EMF. Thus he obtains a higher potential in secondary. The mechanism is suction instead of compression.
I don't see how Back EMF would be any stronger than EMF. At most they would be equal to each other. In standard devices, the EMF is typically stronger than the Back EMF. If you make the load of a normal generator very large, then there is a very large Back EMF. This is why its harder to rotate a heavily loaded generator - which is how those bicycle machines at the gym work. Yet, this large Back Torque (Back EMF) is still not as big as the original EMF.
I'll have to think about how this setup makes the Back EMF larger than the input. Yes if you could do this then maybe you would get unity? But as of this minute, I don't see how the Back EMF is.... oh wait.... Hey, if the current in the secondary circuit is much larger than the current in the primary (which it would be), then the back EMF from the secondary would be much larger.
Hrmm, that still wouldn't explain it because in a standard transformer, the primary side can have 120V with 2A and the secondary can have 2V with 120A. The Back EMF in the secondary, in this case, would be larger than the primary. But wait a sec, in this standard example, the windings on the primary would be much larger than the windings of the secondary. In Tesla's setup its the reverse! The Tesla secondary has many more windings AND has much larger current flowing in it. Maybe this is the key. I'll have to think about it some more.
bocas, I believe that is correct. 2 fields.
Lets see if I have this right.
emf = compression, implosion, paramagnetic, positive, centripetal
bemf = expansion, explosion, diamagnetic, negative discharge, centrifugal
If not correct or am missing any let me know.
The length of the secondary coil B or of each secondary coil when two are used, as in Fig. 3, is, as before stated, approximately one-quarter of the wave length of the electrical disturbance in the secondary circuit, based on the velocity of propagation of the electrical disturbance through the coil itself and the circuit with which it is designed to be used ? that is to say, if the rate at which a current traverses the circuit, including the coil, be one hundred and eighty-five thousand miles per second, then a frequency of nine hundred and twenty-five per second would maintain nine hundred and twenty-five stationary waves in a circuit one hundred and eighty-five thousand miles long, and each wave length would be two hundred miles in length. For such a frequency I should use a secondary fifty miles in length, so that at one terminal the potential would be zero and at the other maximum.
One thing bothers me about this and perhaps it is because I cannot imagine 50 miles of wire and my focus is on that. Could some kind sole post a more realistic example. Thanks in advance.
ps. Charlie good to see you back.
Regards,
Mark
Midnight_blue:
Also, emf = electricity
bemf=magnetism
Quote from: midnight_blueCould some kind sole post a more realistic example.
You can increase the frequency by multiples of 925 and keep the basic formula within proportion. Doubling the frequncy to 1850, only requires 25 miles of secondary. However, keeping the circuit proportionate on a realistic scale is a good begining. Not too many circuits are 185,000 miles long. This is about 7 times around the earth. Coincidentally, this is almost the equivalent of increasing the frequency 27 times. I think this is just illustrative of how the formula works. However, in talking about it, it is sort of bizaare the scale that he used to illustrate his point. It makes me wonder why he chose these numbers, and if there is some significance to scaling down the circuit length....hmmm..gonna have to play with some numbers now.
However, I think it is more illustrative of the point, that the speed of electricity can propegate through the circuit many times faster then the speed of light. I believe he only used this approximation (185,000) to show the NEED to increase that speed through the circuit - or more importantly, what can be accomplished when that speed is increased. Hmmmm....this also provides some interesting food for thought.
I hate to go offtopic and into mainstream thought but if you look at the circuit you should notice that the primary is a DC-DC converter(buck booster). When the switch is closed the first large inductance is charged as well the cap and transformer, the cap charges to source voltage. The first primary coil recieves a majority of the current and has a large magnetic field, exactly what is needed because when the switch is opened, the large inductance finding opposion from the cap raises its voltage until such time as current starts to flow. Like an opening switch, the current will raise it's voltage until it can jump the gap of the switch, Bemf. So this primary is a DC-DC converter,my favorite circuit, with a second small inductance in the transformer to allow current to pass with little opposition as the voltage is higher, it could be thousands of volts depending on the inductance of the first coil. This high voltage spike is again stepped up by the transformer to the secondary circuit.
What's intersesting is that the secondary circuit has an inductance which will give it's own Bemf , and we have a capacitor--a capacitor charged to high voltage--much higher that the source. The Bemf from the secondary charges the transformer primary, which just happens to be in series with the cap, so we have a Bemf and a high voltage on the cap in series pushing back to the source charging it before the switch closes again. The only requirement for current flow is a potential difference, the source is at a lower voltage than the cap and primary transformer in series.
What comes out of the source goes back in at a higher voltage, same energy--different voltage.
this is nice.
Quote from: barbosi on May 05, 2007, 09:45:20 PM
z_p_e,
All the best and if you feel you may benefit from this thread, I second the invitation at least to peep. Or if you can, to help.
Well, it would seem help is not really welcome/wanted here as my last post in response to allcanadian's went ignored. Not a big deal to me however, I have a sufficient amount on my plate already. Just thought I would try to contribute here and there.
Tesla's 00568176 does look interesting, and I may comment on this as well. Harvey Norris and Bill Alek have both analysed/commented on this patent, has anyone looked to see what they had to say about it?
Darren
In case anyone is interested, I've attached Harvey's and Bill's analyses/comments here on Tesla's 00568176 patent.
I'm not saying that they are right or wrong, nor that it will necessarily help with this thread.
Darren
zpe sorry about the nonresponse, Its been crazy here the last few days.
What questions are you refering to?
Quote from: allcanadian on May 09, 2007, 11:12:18 AM
zpe sorry about the nonresponse, Its been crazy here the last few days.
What questions are you refering to?
The post is here:
http://www.overunity.com/index.php/topic,133.msg30665.html#msg30665
Quote from: z_p_e on May 06, 2007, 11:01:41 AM
There should be little if any magnetic field detected with this coil. If the wires are twisted before winding, there will be even less detectable field.
512340 doesn't use twisted wires, And this is for a very good reason. Tesla offers also few rough calculations. By reading the patent you'll understand why he did it this way.
@zpe
What i meant by "hash" is multiple frequencies at various magnitudes, I tested the tesla pancake coil attached to the scope, attached to teslas circuit in patent 685957, attached to the scope and induced from an external coil and in an LC circuit. I would always get more "hash" at higher frequencies with teslas coil versus a regular air core bifilar coil.
The right hand rule appies to the magnetic field, the wires are in series not twisted so the induced voltage per wrap is lower, but overall induction high. The capacitance of the coil in the context operated reduces the self-induction.
What is normally ignored in coils is the field shape, If you look at the terrible image I attached you can see how at the very center of the coil the magnetic field almost chokes itself. It is forced to move through the very small area of the center---or start cutting the conductors near the center,now imagine what might happen at any given rate of oscillation?. Normal coils do not do this, as well the time function is competely ignored. Things don't happen instantly it takes time, where does the field collapse start? What is it's direction? where does it move to/from? We don't ask the right questions, we assume too much.
I always ask "why" something happens first, this answers all my questions concerning "how" something happens.
Quote from: z_p_e on May 09, 2007, 10:29:46 AM
Well, it would seem help is not really welcome/wanted here as my last post in response to allcanadian's went ignored. Not a big deal to me however, I have a sufficient amount on my plate already. Just thought I would try to contribute here and there.
Tesla's 00568176 does look interesting, and I may comment on this as well. Harvey Norris and Bill Alek have both analysed/commented on this patent, has anyone looked to see what they had to say about it?
Hello Darren,
Your help is indeed very much welcomed and wanted. I appreciate your input. I visit and comment on this thread as frequently as possible, but I am also deep into other subjects which take my time. Please contribute whenever you feel like it. The important thing is to maintain the path Erfinder's has set for us.
Regarding Tesla's patent #00568176, I have previously posted on this thread a link with Harvey Norris and Bill Alek's comments. I don't recall what comments were made, but you can look up my previous posts and check it out from there, it was not long ago I posted this.
Regards,
Omar
Here is something from russell I find interesting.
Electricity is the strain or tension set up by the two opposing desires of universal Mind thinking: the de sire for balanced action and the desire for rest. This electric universe is a complexity of strains caused by the interaction of these two opposing, interchanging electric desires. All matter is electric. All matter is conditioned into greater or lesser strains according to the intensity of desire, which is the cause of all electric strain to which it is subjected. The farther removed from rest the greater the strain or tension. That which we call high electric potential is merely great strain to maintain a condition, which is far from the condition of rest. The familiar return ball with which a child plays is a good example of electric strain. When the ball is thrown from the hand, the elastic gradually tightens to increase the tension of resistance to strain generated in the elastic. The strain continues to intensify until the ball comes to rest. When the ball returns, the strain gradually lessens until the ball again comes to rest in the child's hand. When that happens, the strain and tension have been voided. Tension has not BECOME rest, it has ceased to be.
This seems to be an important reacuring theme , two opposite potentials do not neutralize each other, they cease to be!
Electrical tensions exist only between unbalanced electrical matters in motion, which is separated from other electrical matter in motion. Wherever there is a condition of rest, electricity ceases to be. Electricity is, therefore, a dual force, which seemingly unbalances a condition of rest by dividing it into two opposite conditions and setting them in seeming motion. Interchange between the two opposites of motion voids the unbalanced condition at the end of each cycle of electric expression. As rest cannot be unbalanced save by illusion, electricity, which causes that illusion, has no existence.
My mistake guys. For some reason I remembered the coil in Tesla's patent as being connected non-inductively.
Ok you guys are starting to scare me, nobody is criticizing or even commenting on my crackpot ideas. Usually at least one person will start to tear down another persons theory. Is anyone left ---
@allcanadian,
Keep it up with the "crackpot ideas" as that is what we are after as mainstream has come up with nothing except higher & higher electricity bills. We must continue to think out of the square (no mainstream).
I think these references are really good. And gives us an idea of how this may be working conceptually.
Cheers
N.
Hi All,
My intention isnt to offend anyone by my comments about mainstream either. Its just that "we" need to progress & understand and do it as fast as possible
Best Regards,
Nat
@allcanadian,
I'm still here also, and as I stated previously, I read your posts with great interest. It does make sense that at some point there would be nothing, or cease to be. Whether it is right or wrong is yet to be determined.
Regards,
Mark
Edit: PS - Anyone have a clue on what is an imaginary magnetic fieldis?
Edit: PS - Anyone have a clue on what is an imaginary magnetic fieldis?
Maybe that the magnetic field around a conductor is the negative component of positive current, equal but opposite?
imaginary magnetic field . Read at http://www.themeasuringsystemofthegods.com/index.html - Telsa Complex Field Generator Patent 568,176, the image was poor quality so I transferred it to microsoft word. Anyway I'll upload here. See what you think, seems to describe what you have discussed from my interpretation is after the VOID and this imaginary magnetic field is when the HV comes into play.
Regards,
Mark
Hi All,
For those who want some further reading material (as if we dont have enough as it is)
Electrical Oscillators A-78 (Electrical Experimenter July 1919)
From the book Nikola Tesla, lectures patents & articles.
He advises
- what the essential parts are
- describes the process
- describes the materials used
- Refers to the patents that we are looking at
etc
Cheers
Nat
Interesting this topic about mainstream, I was reading some info on Viktor Schauberger over the last few days, and found a rather appropriate set of quote, I figure I better post them before allcanadian does, as I had started to post those Walter Russel quotes previously, but got sidetracked on another tangent....LOL
http://www.frank.germano.com/viktorschauberger_b.htm
"Our direct mental approach towards the understanding and investigation of natural phenomena (our present materialistic and scientifically ingrained view that only the physically palpable and measurable represents the true reality), has lead to greater and greater confusion and the need to elaborate more and more complex theories to explain the various functions of the physical world. Our great omission has been our total disregard and our failure to come to grips in depth with the more ephemeral, unseen, yet fundamental energetic causalities. Like the negative mentioned in the quotation above, these energies manifest themselves only indirectly, the physical constructs of the outer physical world being a positive reflection of their respective functions. What we perceive as the foundation of physical reality - a reality to which we have ascribed laws - is therefore only half of the truth, for in their dynamic these formative magnitudes conform to a sublime inner law of energetic reciprocities:
"Nature is not served by rigid laws, but by rhythmical, reciprocal processes. Nature uses none of the preconditions of the chemist or the physicist for the purposes of evolution. Nature excludes all fire, on principle, for purposes of growth; therefore all contemporary machines are unnatural and constructed according to false premises. Nature avails herself of the biodynamic form of motion through which the biological prerequisite for the emergence of life is provided. Its purpose is to ur-procreate 'higher' conditions of matter out of the originally inferior raw materials, which afford the evolutionally older, or the numerically greater rising generation, the possibility of a constant capacity to evolve, for without any growing and increasing reserves of energy there would be no evolution or development. This results first and foremost in the collapse of the so-called Law of the Conservation of Energy, and in further consequence the Law of Gravity, and all other dogmatic lose any rational or practical basis."
In Viktor's view Western science and education generally left much to be desired. Our civilization suffered from a myopic compartmentalization of the mind, which prevented a detached overview, a synthesis of what was observed:
"Today's science thinks too primitively; indeed it could be said that its thinking is an octave too low. It has still not ventured far enough into the realm of energy, and its attitude has remained development was necessary, for how else should a misguided humanity perceive the true interdependencies?"
"Without doubt, therefore, there is a definite intention to teach young people upside-down methods of working with which they have to miss-earn their daily bread. That is to say, instead of moving forwards, they go backwards all the more rapidly in step with the improvements in the contrary methods of motion. For only thus can today's teaching principles flourish."
Midnight,
I am not sure, is it possible you uploaded the wrong file, or am I misreading something. The file you have attached seems to be one of the files out of Z_P_E's zip file??!??!! Moreover, I don't know if I am looking in the same place you are reading at the measuringsystemofthegods.com where the imaginary magnetic field is discussed. Again, possible misreading on my part, just trying to get some clarification.
Hello everyone,
I found this page on "The Bipolar-Vortex Generator/Thruster":
http://jnaudin.free.fr/html/dvtgv1.htm (http://jnaudin.free.fr/html/dvtgv1.htm)
The attached photo could demonstrate how the magnetic field moves around the void.
Regards,
Omar
Quote from: Maximumgravity1 on May 09, 2007, 10:20:13 PM
Midnight,
I am not sure, is it possible you uploaded the wrong file, or am I misreading something. The file you have attached seems to be one of the files out of Z_P_E's zip file??!??!! Moreover, I don't know if I am looking in the same place you are reading at the measuringsystemofthegods.com where the imaginary magnetic field is discussed. Again, possible misreading on my part, just trying to get some clarification.
@maximum,
it is the golden rule for nature, here is the link
http://www.themeasuringsystemofthegods.com/page5.html
Regards,
Mark
Maximumgravity, good post, If you want to really understand Victor Schaubergers work get the book " energy evolution" by Callum Coats, I paid $26 at amazon.com.
This book is just unbelieveable, but I had to read it 3 times to finally get it. You have to put his terminology in the right context, for example he is always using the term "UR" meaning natural or naturalesque, like nature. If you define the meaning of his words before hand his message is very clear.
Like I said before, Tesla, Schauberger and Russell, they all describe the same thing, they all knew what we do not. But the times they are changing. I think all of us here are just starting to get a glimpse of what we have been missing and the possiblities of what could be done.
I think Walter Russell is more indepth than the others, He defines the actual process involved and gives real world examples to prove his point. So I think I accidentally followed the right progression of knowledge, that is reading Tesla which led me to Schauberger, giving me the knowledge to understand the huge works of Russell.
Don't misunderstand me though, I barely understand any of this, It is overwhelming, I understand a few of the general concepts.
What I do know, is that we are on the right track, we just have to put all the pieces of the puzzle together and accept what we see.
PS-- Good catch on that link midnight_blue, that website has some pretty good info
I think our biggest obstacle here is that we have started in the middle and not at the beginning of undertanding. We see technology men have devloped over years and years, years of thinking, reflection, analysing and experimenting, we have not seen the basis nor the foundation, we have nothing to build on. We are trying to build a house in mid-air, 50 feet off the ground.
So Im going to throw out some thoughts I have come to understand which have helped me along the way.
Perception and illusion
Imagine your a farmer at kittyhawk watching the wright brothers trying to make an airplane fly. As the farmer, back then I would find this crazy, I would imagine the wright brother flapping there arms and jumping trying to "catch" the air, I could see them grasping at the air trying to pull themselves upward, I would think they must be stupid somehow, don't they understand?. And the scientists, some nobel prize winners, would write in the newspaper I read that the wright brothers are crazy, they have proven by calculation that it cannot be done. But the wright brothers see the fast moving air over there wings as a substance as dense as water, even faster and this "air" becomes as hard as concrete, there wings could lift thousands of pounds.
So how is it that 99% of the people on this planet could be so absolutely delusional to this "fact"?
How is it that 99% of the smartest people would see this "fact" as not only impossible, but a complete waste of time, why bother?
This is the illusion, we have a limited perception and our senses are limited to the narrow confines of a small band of EM radiation. Our reality, the only one we know could be smoke and mirrors. The question I had to ask is , how would I know?, take the previous example of the farmer watching the wright brothers, How would he know?
How could the scientists not know? they are no better than the farmer!
Walter Russells article "the secret of light" gave me some very good clues. I see him describing the universe as being filled with cold magnetism. Matter simulates rest through fast violent motion, it is (+) high potential, condensed radiation of space, contraction of space is gravity. Space is radiated matter, dropping to a lower potential (-) through expansion to a lower pressure. Matter radiates becoming space, space condenses becoming matter. What we call matter is a condition of pressure and electrical stress.
All of Walter Russells thoughts describe what we know and see, but from a completely different perspective. And the problem is we don't know, we see at 24 frames per second ,reality happens at the speed of light.
So I think we need to understand that our reality, like the farmers could be flawed, we may see matter and space in the same light as the farmer saw air.
If we want to understand this technology we need to understand the most basic concepts of space and matter from someone who has succeeded in mastering it, not mainstream who believe it could never be done.
@Allcanadian
I am in 100% agreement with you, nor could I have stated any of what you said any better. I have been considering getting that particular book about Schauberger. Good catch on the "UR" meaning. I meant to define it in a parenthesis as "primaly procreate" when I posted the quote, but forgot to include that.
I too am begining to see the entirety of our mechanistic existence as ass-backwards. I think erfinder stated it quite succintly when he said mainstream science is incomplete - not necassarily wrong. I am begining to also see that we are enslaved to mainstream because we chose to be (as a collective group - by decisions made in years past). We believe what they spoon feed us as "fact" - unerringly, and without question - sadly, because that is how we have been taught to "learn". I see so many practical applications for Schauberger's knowledge, it would radically change the planet if we would just change our perception about what water is, how it flows, that it is alive, and that it is the life source for EVERYTHING. This would lead to changes in the way we treat, funnel, channel and toxify water. These changes alone would most likely have global impacts that would restore the planet to its intended condition in very short order.
As a side note, I got to take an hour for lunch yesterday, and sit by a river, and observe nature - as Shaurberger and Erfinder both suggested. It was amazing. In an hour, I was able to observationally prove most of Schaubergers thoughts about vortex movement of water. I was also able to add to that understanding, and understood the meaning of "path of least resistance". In a winding river, it was quite astonishing, not what I had envisioned. The least resistive path is also the fastest way to move water from point A to point B. In reading about Tesla and Schaubergers pumps and motors, it became clear EXACTLY what they meant by simulating nature. Centripetal force is a three dimensional force, and it behaves three-dimensionally. Because of this, centiripetal motion is the dominate motion - the dominating force. With our efforts to forever push, prod, and expand natural forces, it is no wonder why our machinery is so inefficeint. I also began to see why vortexes have limited to no friction. It became clear in just observing the eddy currents.
Anyway, it was one of the most productive hours I have spent in a long while - plus with a picture perfect day, 70? shaded sun, a nice cool river breeze blowing in my face, it was hard to believe an hour could pass so quickly. I am done with my ramblings, it is however, quite an eye-opening journey this is turning into !!
I had to go out of State for a couple of days. I need to go back and read some of the postings that were made while I was gone. Welcome back midnight_blue.
Trump
@maximumgravity1
I grew up on a farm one mile from a river, I would spend maybe 20 or more hours a week on the river fishing, boating etc.. all summer. As adults I understand we don't have time and we lose something in the process. Most people I know are oblivious to nature, they walk through it like it's not even there. As such we don't notice the damage we cause, I know everything is not alright, it's a disaster what has happened in the last 10 years, just as Victor S told us 80 years ago.
Anyways , I was looking over Teslas circuit, patent 586176. There seems to be reason to believe that a negative discharge will lead to a positive charge. Not the other way around, the negative discharge in the primary leads to a positive charging in the secondary.The secondary then alternates to a discharge in the primary, the primary then charges the source. There is this rythmic cycle that happens but I can't quite nail the whole sequence down yet.
QuoteThe question I had to ask is , how would I know?, take the previous example of the farmer watching the wright brothers, How would he know?
How could the scientists not know? they are no better than the farmer!
I disagree with this statement completely, "scientists" are some of the most idiotic buffoons you would ever meet - I know, I work with them. Physicists are the worst - they know everything and are so quick to let you know it. Chemists are almost as bad, but where a physicist will take the time to ridicule you, the chemist will just act all snotty and be a complete ass - they are too good for the likes of you.
Regarding this quote, the farmer would probably know more about what the Wright brothers were doing, than the wright brothers themselves. Hell, the farmer probably already mastered flight and was using it to irrigate his farm! Every farmer I've ever met - the real farmer, not the farm hands - was more sharp and creative than any scientist I've met. In fact, my wife's distant cousin had supplied his house with running water using the water hammer effect, lifting the water over 100 feet vertical to the hill where his house was. He also had a wind powered generator he built himself - completely, designing the dynamo and everything - which also ran to his house. He did all of this in the 1920's without power tools, all by hand.
I don't know why farmers get stereo typed as stupid and uneducated. I suppose this thinking fits into the whole
QuoteOur reality, the only one we know could be smoke and mirrors.
category.
Hehehe, I didn't mean any hostilities in that post. After re-reading it, it did seem too angry. So I meant no offense to you allcanadian, just gotta represent to all them farmers out there... yo yo.
Ha anyway, I spent a good deal of time yesterday thinking, and I'm a tad drained at the moment. It occurred to me some time back that everything we use today is about pumping in as much energy as possible.
Take standard electric generators. All the energy you put in goes into changing the fields. All it takes to create electricity is to have a changing magnetic field. Take a permanent magnet. Its DC, make it AC and put a coil near it and you get electricity. Think about it, how many ways are there to make a permanent magnet AC? I can think of two - move the magnet, or heat it up. Oh yea, you can move the coil too, bah thats just the same as moving the magnet. These two solutions just don't cut it for me. There has to be more.
All you need to do is find ways to produce large effects with small ones. This Tesla motor for example. Although we aren't exactly sure how it works, we are all in agreement that it is taking a small effect and making it bigger. I suppose Tesla wouldn't have called it a magnifying transformer for nothing.
If you ask me, and no one really does haha, I feel this motor is converting a feeble magnetic field to a large one. Call it negative discharge if you want - since apparently this is another term for magnetic fields - but whatever you want to call it, its gunna be huge in the secondary. The secondary is going to be mostly all current with lots of coils. Huge current and lots of coils means LARGE magnetic field. When a large magnetic field collapses, it produces a huge voltage (electrostatic if you want). I really don't know why people try to make a case that voltage and static electricity are different, they aren't. High voltages are static, electrostatic. I guess this doesn't really help the understanding, but I suppose everyone's quest is different.
At this moment of time, I'm not really too interesting in knowing why something happens, just knowing how is all I want. Get it up, get it working, get 'er done. You can do alot more with why, but I always approach something with "how" then later, once it's working start asking "why".
I think our main problem lately has been things are getting too mystical/complicated. Radiant energy, three dimensional vortexes, mind power, leprechauns, George Lucas. For now, lets stick with what's comfortable: current, voltage, magnetic, and electrostatic fields. If these are too "mainstream" for Erfinder, well then damn it, explain to us what it really is - without riddles, in simple terms... showing examples. I'm not MacGyver, I can't make a boat from some string, a toothpick, and bird droppings.
Adding to that, we definitely won't get anywhere with the "electricity is all an illusion and doesn't exist." Ha, something's there, go pee on the light socket and tell me its just an illusion!
@Allcanadian,
Ironically, I grew up with a stream in my backyard. I spent countless hours as a kid lying on the dock staring into the water, and imagining the clouds reflections were actually great deep canyons miles below the surface of the water. I watched ice flows gorge the banks in the spring, and fed every type of waterfowl imaginable. I fished, I boated, I rafted, I swam - more hours then I can remember. The irony is - it's all about perspective.
@Charlie
At this moment of time, I'm not really too interesting in knowing why something happens, just knowing how is all I want. Get it up, get it working, get 'er done. You can do a lot more with why, but I always approach something with "how" then later, once it's working start asking "why".
I think our main problem lately has been things are getting too mystical/complicated. Radiant energy, three dimensional vortexes, mind power, leprechauns, George Lucas. For now, lets stick with what's comfortable: current, voltage, magnetic, and electrostatic fields. If these are too "mainstream" for Erfinder, well then damn it, explain to us what it really is - without riddles, in simple terms... showing examples. I'm not MacGyver, I can't make a boat from some string, a toothpick, and bird droppings.
Well, different strokes for different folks. I understand people digest and absorb things differently, but I disagree with a lot of what you posted here. This is a very myopic point of view. If all we want to know is "how" then it will cost you $3.14/gallon today, and going up steadily, to find out. If "why" is not important now, then will it matter when there are no natural resources left? Don't get me wrong - I am about as "un-green" as they come. I don't hug trees, I don't think hemp is useful for anything, and I am not entirely sure granola is truly edible. I do hunt, and I do enjoy spending time in the woods and in nature at large, but if we don't concern ourselves with "why" and leave it up to those people that are charging us for "how" then at the rate we are going, it won't matter much past our own generations. There is no point in worrying about our kids, nor their future, as it won't be worth worrying about. Everyone will be standing around with head in hands wondering "how could this happen"?
To requote Viktor Schaubergers succinct statement:
"For a person who lives 100 years in the future, the present comes as no surprise."
Comfort doesn't change anything. Mainstream is missing the boat. As for being explained directly, it doesn't help you learn - it is nothing more then "just another "a-hole's" opinion - we all got 'em, we all need 'em, what do you do with another one??" A paradigm shift cannot occur based on third party say-so. it has to be understood by the masses.
Again, to each his own, but I do believe there is method in the madness, and mysticism is not so mystical to those that know how it works. Imagine inducing voltage and charging a Leyden jar in front of kings and statesmen 1000 years ago. How mystical would your knowledge be? You could start a cult and have people worshiping you. But is it mysticism?? No, it is just someone who understands "why"...
@Charlie
I take no offence in anything you have said, I spent most of my life on the farm, you know you can take the boy off the farm but not the farm out of the boy.
You sound like a can do kind of guy and thats a good thing, thought without action won't accomplish much.
For myself, after reading schauberger and Walters work I understand the terminology they use is part of what it represents. I think I would do the same, trying to mix their concepts and terminology with mainstream would be a lesson in confusion and confusion is something I know very well. As well, I think the bigger the mix of backgrounds the better off we will be, we need every perspective we can get.
Hi to all
I woul recoment to read the book
MAGNETIC CURRENT
By EDWARD LEEDSKALNIN
Read the atached book!
This is a copy from keely net
Edward is speaking of what is happening when the current is cut of and also his testing with a coil moving from east to west in a U bar. A
As I revered in a former posting we should be thinking 90 degree shift from magnetic fields.
He is also talking about the air around the wire ,and many more
Please read it and the light will go on
Regards,
You know if you can buy the book, in book form? I think I saw on TV that they sell it at coral castle. I've never been there though - maybe someday.
QuoteImagine inducing voltage and charging a Leyden jar in front of kings and statesmen 1000 years ago. How mystical would your knowledge be? You could start a cult and have people worshiping you. But is it mysticism?? No, it is just someone who understands "why"...
Brahahaha! What a lovely idea - couldn't be any worse than Scientology! Plus, don't cults get tax breaks?
Just wanted to add, as far as Erfinder's idea, has anyone built it yet? All we've done is talk, I'm sure building it would really answer a lot of questions. You know, I think I have everything needed except for the core that the coils are wound on, the capacitor, and battery. Any ideas on where I could find something to make a core? Maybe like some thick steel rods welded or pressed to an old car wheel rim - thats too much work though. Hrmm, the bottom of a swivel chair might be easier. Neither of those would be laminated, but for proof of principle, I don't think lamination is critical - so you'll get slightly more eddy current loss, meh. I'm still not too sure how this device gets around losses to begin with - Erfinder never really talks about how he does that.
The only problem with me building it is that I'm currently working on my own generator, among other things. I really don't have the time for it. Do any of you guys have the time? If so, slap that baby together!
Coral Castle sells all of Leedskalnin's books as a single volume. It is supposed to retain all the original publishing info, including pictures, margins, cover art, etc. This info is from an email I posted to them a few weeks ago. $15.95 - that is a hard deal to pass up.
https://www.coralcastle.com/detail.asp?ProductID=13
I was gone for a couple of days. I went back a few post's and tried to see if the question from Erfinder had been completely answered or not. The statement,
"685,957 Apparatus For the Utilization Of Radiant Energy
685,958 Method Of Utilizing Radiant Energy
The only thing that I suggest you take note of is that Tesla is simply showing us how he is charging a capacitor with what he is calling radiant energy! Look no further than that, this is all that I want you all to consider!!!
After you have digested what was just said you should ask yourself the following question. Did Tesla reveal to us in any of his other patents his "preferred" method of charging capacitors? YES!!! But before I get to that I want you to consider the following quote:
Taken from "Secrets Of Cold War Technology" ISBN: 0-932813-80-1
Quote:
"But while endeavouring toward his own means for identifying electrical waves, Tesla was blessed with an accidental observation which forever changed the course of his experimental investigations. Indeed, it was an accident which forever changed the course of his life and destiny. In his own attempts to achieve where he felt Hertz had failed, Tesla developed a powerful method by which he hoped to generate and detect real electromagnetic waves. Part of this apparatus required the implementation of a very powerful capacitor bank. This capacitor ?battery? was charged to very high voltages, and subsequently discharged through short copper bus-bars. The explosive bursts thus obtained produced several coincident phenomena which deeply impressed Tesla, far exceeding the power of any electrical display he had ever seen. These proved to hold and essential secret which he was determined to uncover.?
End Quote"
There has been a lot of good information listed, but I guess I did not read between the lines and see the exact answer to Erfinders questions? If the answers are there, please direct me, I would like to catch up and grasp the knowledge of how the capacitor was charged with radient energy.
Looks like Erfinder has not been on in a couple of days. If the answer to his question was stated it would seem that he would have posted some words to either agree with the posted statement or mentioned that the posting was not correct.
I do see where some good reading material mentioned, does anyone see this capacitor charging system mentioned in one of the books in which were mentioned to other to read?
Maybe a good idea to get some parts together and try to simulate this Patent. Not sure what it would cost? Maybe the ones who almost built it before could change there design and be able to get this puppy built?
Trump
@maximumgravity1
There is no point in worrying about our kids, nor their future, as it won't be worth worrying about. Everyone will be standing around with head in hands wondering "how could this happen"?
You have that exactly right, It has to come to catastrophic consequenses before sombody says "how could this happen". You and I know how it happened, and the half-wit buisiness people and oil company execs will say "what the hell- nobody said it would be like this, this bad" but they know they are the cause and the money they made will be worthless, it will not buy them out of the hell they have created.
So I have a hard time feeling sorry for people who won't help themselves or cannot understand cause and effect.
You could say the problem out there has happened here in this thread, the initial hope and inspiration has turned to senseless idle chit-chat. Where are the questions?
Well I have a question, Tell me why an electric motor uses power?
Tell me exactly why a motor supposedly "consumes" power, and I will tell you why it is impossible.
Hi to all,
Quote Erfinder:
The only thing that I suggest you take note of is that Tesla is simply showing us how he is charging a capacitor with what he is calling radiant energy! Look no further than that, this is all that I want you all to consider!!!
In the DVD of The Free Energy Secrets of Cold Electricity Peter Lindemann is speaking about the fact what is happening when the switch is closed he describes it this way -----a slap with the hand on water-----.
for me is was a slap in my face
So here is my conclusion
If its done slowly you will feel almost no resistance, but at high velocity the water splashes away.
when the current starts to flow it will hit the closing material at high velocity bursting vaporizing (explosion) the material which generated the blue light.
at first the current is facing an enormous resistance and then it starts to flow.
but if it has this effect when a current starts, it also must have a similar reversed effect when the current stops. no resistance and implosion.
this would mean coil or wire with no resistance and in a suction state atracting energy, BEMF,electrostatics, radiant energy, magnecitys or what ever somebody calls it
The explosion only is at the beginning of the wire or coil but the suction is over the hole wire length.
this suction energy is stored in the capacitor.
If this is done with the right frequency only a litle would go out the source but the amount of suction energy will be bigger than the input.
As if it transformed current in to BEMF
the flow of the current must stop before it make a short in the circuit
their for the length of the wire and the speed of the current flow must be in relation to the switching frequency.
but in the motor we are not switching but revering the poles of the coils on the weak metal
for the field this would be the same as switching
in this article MAGNETIC CURRENT By EDWARD LEEDSKALNIN
He is talking about the same effect when his so called magnecitys stop to flow, the wire atracts.
Erfinder is right with his statement "You don't know what electricity is" Because we only observe what we can see or measure but we don't know the cause of it.
So what is current?
first we must figure out what is current in order to understand
Common sience: the amount off electrons flowing
But every buddy who nows more then us, say their are no electrons
Erfinder: They have us focusing on currents, when the true miracle workers are the fields which produce them.
So it seams that Edward talking about North an south pole particles would make more sense
mainstream tells us there can not be only a North or South pole (Mono Pole)
But the way I see it only Edwards explanation could explane if a magnet is broken in two pieces why it would behave as two separate magnets.
So if we would state that current is the amount of north poles flowing whirling thru a wire but stay mostly in the wire because the air has to mutch resistance and if the wire would be straight most of the North pole would reach the South pole and simultaneously we would have a reversed flow from South to North.
Now if the same wire would be wound like a coil some of the North and South pole will be thrown of the wire because of the centrifugal motion. if in the coil is a metal the free North and South poles will enter the metal an their for the metal acts as a magnet
Centrifugal gives birth to Centripetal
The North and South poles will be concentrated in the center of the coil
Now if we look at all of this it would make sense that electricity as we see it is in fact the same as magnetic field and the flux lines as we would like to call it are in fact the mono poles flowing and the mono poles flowing is electricity and the amount of them the current.
So moving these mono poles connecting them to other poles will start the movement when we throw the switch on and open it fast we are connecting poles and if we are reversing magnetic fields we are doing the same.
I got one question for Erfinder how do I relate this to the potential?
well I might be wrong some where so please correct me as I want to understand
regards,
satyoda
Nice post Satyoda, we need to stay on track
Your post is what I was getting at in mine, where is the energy going?
erfinder said what we see as magnetism is the expanded pole of electricity.
So Im thinking the Bemf is a radiation, an expansion radiated outward, and in nature you cannot have one without an opposite. Expansion--Contraction, a rythmic exchange. So if the Bemf is an expansion--Where is the contraction?
I do not think a motor uses energy, what we see as current is flowing energy, a two way process. we see this current flowing and driving a motor and somehow being "consumed" when in fact it cannot. what we cannot concieve is that we have a few options here, we could power a motor with DC and send the output to a lower potential source like a battery, charging it in the process. Or we could transform the outgoing current in to something different, convert it to a Bemf.
If you guys picked up on what I called a buck booster or DC-DC converter or switch mode converter, it has many names but is the same circuit. This circuit raises the voltage(potential) based on the switching speed, it is a Bemf that raises the potential.Why couldn't the inductor in the buckbooster be a motor? and why couldn't the higher potential output be stored in a capacitor until it's sent back to the same source only a half cycle later. It's all about the cycle, contraction--Expansion, Your circuit is "breathing" you should see it as breathing, inhale--- you have charged your system, Exhale--- your system has returned its energy to the source. Forget mainstream, forget the calculations, see your circuit as breathing, a cyclic interchange.
Trump,
Read this,
http://www.rialian.com/rnboyd/tesla.htm
or this
http://www.hbci.com/~wenonah/new/tesla.htm
Regards,
Mark
In my last post I forgot to say, Nature is our master--always has been, always will be. And then I was thinking about the breathing cycle---and then It hit me!
We have an electric motor, Russell and schauberger told us how it operates and we have seen it a thousand times.
It is rain.
Water is evaporated by positive charge(sunlight)-Emf
Water vapor is radiated, expanded upward and outward(a negative discharge)Bemf
Water vapor condenses in clouds(like attracts like) A condenser-a capacitor
Water falls as rain back to it's source(through gravity)Potential difference
Ahhhhhhh! This is it, our DC source is Water, how could we miss this , It is right in our faces, we are in it, it is over us- around us and we can't see it.
This is going to work,Im sure of it.
Let's look at this,conventional motors only use one aspect of this cycle,positive charge, thats it , no wonder they are so useless. Now take a fresh look at Teslas patents useing the analogy above and you will see what we have been missing. It was always there, right in front of us!
We could use a 12v battery, bump the voltage to 24v and send it back.
I see my excessive slowness has once again beaten me to the punch in that you all replied since I began typing - but it is done now, and I am not deleting it !! LOL
Quote from: allcanadianWell I have a question, Tell me why an electric motor uses power?
Hmmm...great question. My initial thoughts are that it doesn't really use power - it wastes it. By this I mean, there is no mechanism in place to return the current to its source, nor to make it more "usable". This sort of goes along with Erfinder's comments about the true miracle being in the fields. We are breaking the fields potential, extracting power from the positive - the centripetal - then instead of providing means for the field to re-expand and flow back again - or return to the source, we just let it dissipate - or remain accumulated as a giant potential. We erroneously call the motion we extract "consumption of power", and see the potential build up as wasted in magnetism - something we must fight to overcome - to re-induce more electricity. We see the part we use as being "converted" to kinetic energy, and assume it is all used up, not taking into consideration we have all that magnetic potential just sitting waiting for a place to flow.
Wow - how inefficient?!?! Now, if someone could just invent a way to use that potential......
Hmmm....me thinks we are on the right track.....
@satyoda,
I think Leedskalnin was looking at both sides of the electric flow - only assuming they were individual entities - not part of the same field. I believe when he defines his north and south magnets, he is describing the simultaneous effects of positive and negative flows of the electric field. I believe the centrifugal action he describes is the negative - return-to-the-void flow - the magnetic. The electric current - which he describes as individual magnetics - is the positive, the electric, the centripetal. Both are the flow of the field - just manifesting themselves in different ways. I think you will find what you are looking for. In Leedskalnin's case, he was looking for the magnetic - the negative - and that is what he found. In mainstream's case, they are looking for electricity - the positive - and that is what they find and manipulate. I think the key is we need to look at them both the same way, and manipulate them as a single unit - and realize we can extract what we need, when we need it, to perform the appropriate work at particular points in the circuit - or at particular points in time.
I think in this light, it makes sense of why Erfinder's device uses the voided magnetic ring. There is a huge potential of "Negatives" just circulating in that disk. How we tap it and extract it is still a mystery to me - but I know the clues he gave us are that it lies in the only way we can influence it, through BEMF.
I am sorry to be repetitive, but I was back through some posts about Erfinder's device, and since these are the areas we are talking about, I had to bring them to light once again.
QuoteThe circuit is designed to concentrate fields, conduct fields, and causes the fields to preform work on the voided magnet ring as they pass through the circuit.
The arrangement of secondary windings produce a field which is more electrostatic than magnetic, this field resonates with, and adds to the field of the primary. When the fields of the primary and secondary collapse they return to the source, the secondary returns to the battery, and primary to the HV capacitor.
P.S. All currents alternate, even DC! You should think of DC as Extreme high frequency AC. DC currents must alternate or there would be no motion, the currents would not flow!!! Its all about fields.
Quote
Reason why the number of magnets is important...
Each segment centers a field which extends from the Bloch wall. The Bloch wall the point of stillness, the point where the Creator centers the created, the point between the two poles. Here it can be said that the potentials at the poles represent the total power of the neutral point, that the poles represent the neutral point divided, the neutral point, where one becomes two, and two become three. The neutral and the two extended poles.
Each segment thus has it's own potential (both the potential and frequency of what we falsely call magnetism is extremely high). If people knew how to construct circuits which functioned on the principles of induction versus conduction, from this one change an entirely new way of doing things would be born. Connecting the magnets in series is like connecting batteries in series. More batteries results in more current in the circuit, the same holds true for the magnet segments, as the two are mirrors of one another, just instead of conducting currents you are inducing fields. Through the ring we connect to the wheel work of nature!!!
Here is a universal truth, when it's meaning is understood.
"Positive charge attracts positive charge and expels negative discharge. Negative discharge repels both negative discharge and positive charge."
The Universal One
There is a current flowing within the magnet ring, a magnetic current. The ring is mounted on an aluminium core. Aluminium is paramagnetic. Paramagnetism draws paramagnetism to itself and expels diamagnetism!!!!!! Aluminium in comparison to iron doesn't concentrate the paramagnetic field. In the aluminium the field sloshes back and forth spilling diamagnetism into the circuit.
QuoteThis circuit was designed to demonstrate the following basics, as these basics form a quarter of the foundation needed to understand this technology:
1. How EMF is transformed into BEMF, how these two are the one and the same and how they differ.
2. How a battery functions in this circuit as if it is a capacitor.
3. The nature of paramagnetism, and diamagnetism.
4. How differences in potential are the cause of motion. (EDIT: I think this one is for Allcanadaian's question about how a motor uses power.)
The field of the magnet ring is contained within the ring, moving at almost an instant velocity radially within the material in two directions simultaneously, however the North to South direction is dominate. This field can only be influenced by BACK EMF.
Since the field of the ring is moving at almost an infinite velocity, the wheel can be made rotate at an almost infinite velocity, construction methods being the only limiting factor
There is a machine which does not have moving parts which produces BEMF from EMF, using only magnets and coils. But what does this benefit anyone if no one knows why it functions.
Positive Charge = Paramagnetism = EMF
Negative Discharge = Diamagnetism = BEMF
"Positive charge attracts positive charge, and expels negative discharge. Negative discharge repels both negative discharge and positive charge."
How many different ways can we word this???
EMF attracts EMF, and Expels BEMF. BEMF repels both BEMF and EMF.Paramagnetism attracts paramagnetism, and expels diamagnetism. Diamagnetism repels both diamagnetism and paramagnetism.Paramagnetism attracts EMF, and expels BEMF. Diamagnetism repels both BEMF and EMF.
EMF attracts paramagnetism, and expels diamagnetism. BEMF repels both diamagnetism and paramagnetism.
etc, etc, etc. I think it makes it clear by key use of particular words - expel and repel - that we are talking about the same entity - ALL THE TIME. One can only be its opposite when it is dominating the other. The field is either electrostatic dominate, or magnetic dominate. At all times it is both, but at one time it only exhibits dominance of one over the other. The only way the field "goes away" is when it is voided. Its opposite has to cancel it out at equal frequency and magnitude. It does make me wonder how that applies to Erfinder's voided magnetic ring....hmm.....
Man ,my head is just spinning with this rain analogy.
So if this is true we are swimming in condensing energy and radiating energy, there must be a mechanism to harness it. Like Teslas "means for harnessing radiant energy" ,Duh- How can I be so blind. We have everything we need, we need to put in the right context, and ditch the mainstream hogwash.
WoooHooo were moving now!
Hmmm...you got me thinking. But I am wondering if it truly is water, or is it the aether, orgone, etc that so many others have spoken of? Even Walter Russell makes comment about space not being a vaccum, but just "negative" matter (sorry paraphrasing). Without such devices, sunlight could not radiate, nor could it travel in waves. The "particles" of sunlight only bounce up and down riding the apex and troughs of the waves through space. Only once it reaches the atmosphere does light begin to resonate and take on the characteristics of simulated light, and heat that we are familiar with.
However, this does not imply that what you are stating is wrong, I just wonder if it is truly water that is referenced. I believe it is energy, basically "matter" energy to be specific. The opposing manifestations of it can be dominate like electricity and magnetism. More "matter-dominate" verses more "space-dominate". I believe I took some notes from the "Secret of Light" link you had posted on the Taoism site. Going to check on those and post back shortly.
Good going Allcanadaian, I think this is definately heading somewhere positive.
midnight_blue
Thanks for those links. I will read every word and then try to apply it to the patents we are studying for the charging of the capacitor.
Trump
@maximumgravity
Water is just an analogy I was using, It's not water that Tesla was trying to harness, it was radiant energy, key word "radiant"-to radiate-expand.
What type or "condition" of energy gravitates toward our planet everyday?
EM waves or light
Whatever gravitates must radiate- that is the natural cycle of the universe. So what is it that is "radiating" expanding outward from our planet then?
Im guessing EM waves as infrared waves, what in the frequency of infrared waves versus visible light and infrared. There must be a potential difference a change in frequency I think what
I see so many cyles here--
Daytime= gravitating energy
Nighttime= radiating energy
Maximumgravity we are so on this it's not even funny, we are on the same page and were speedreading.
I am getting my authors and references confused at this point, but I believe it was Schauberger (might have been Russell) that stated that very thing. The Day, the sun side of the planet, is used to charge up all life. It's sun energy is used to create, to live, to generate, to produce. At night, when there is no sun, things unwind, rest, return to the outward expanding state. There was a comment about even the animals follow this cycle, but this wasn't entirely true, as there are many nocturnal animals. However, I believe it would be construed that even during the day, those animals are recharging, and spending their "day-charge" at night time. The statement was in short, without the sun, there would be no life. Life cannot transpire without the sun.
This all sounds quite basic, but in reference to the suns radiative energy, the building up of matter, this took on a slightly different connotation, considering at night, everything "decays" - it expands back to nothing. If this condition prevailed, it would radiate everything away into the vastness of space.
I re-read through the posts a few times, I am not sure why I thought you were talking about water. Brain fart I suppose. Anyway, I clearly understand what you are talking about. I believe in another conversation a few pages back, I was hit with a similar realization, and that was when I noted that the sun and earth act as cathode and anode. What one is radiating, the other is receiving. In reviewing my notes on Russell, it really makes me believe that a sun and a planet are just opposites of each other - inside out configurations of the same matter, if you will.
I think this paragraph of Walter Russell helps to explain it:
"Opposite Conditions Born Each Other
Matter and space likewise are mates. Each has become what each is by opposing the other to attain the appearance of separateness. Then each interchanges with each by breathing into and out of each other until space disintegrates matter and becomes what the other was. Space disintegrates suns and earths by the way of equators and generates them by the way of poles. Heat generated by cold by the way of poles is radiated by the way of equators. Suns thus turn inside out. Cold bores black holes right through their poles and great suns become rings, like those in Lira and other ring nebulae, which are plentiful in the heavens. All matter is generated by the degeneration of its opposite. Likewise all generated matter is sequentially degenerated by the generation of its opposite. Compression in matter is balanced by an equal evacuation in space. An equal opposite must balance every unbalanced condition in Nature. All borrowings from the bank of Nature are debited with an amount equal to the credit extended just as money borrowed from man's bank is debited and credited."
When he states that "suns thus turn inside out", I take this to mean "rotate in a convection like pattern". Since (as far as we know) they are mostly gaseous, the convection of heat energy through a gas ball would be through its center (axially) from the poles, then radiate out the middle. Hence the formation of rings. In opposite manner, the planets would absorb radiant energy - at their poles - and radiate out their energy also at their equator - as is the nature of space's disintegrative nature of matter. However, the difference with the earth having a crust and "solid" core of molten liquid, the convection of heat runs along its crust, and congregates at the equator. This seems to be a very good explanation of currents, prevailing winds, and other anomolies we take for granted as "standards". This energy would pick up colder polar air (air with less energy vibration) and carry it to the equator. These are basically the "eddy currents" of our atmosphere. Even though we attribute much of this to mere rotation, I believe Schauberger's comments about water currents, flow and movement being attributable to heat flow in water is where we see the "potentials" in our atmosphere turn into "flow". The rotation of the planet most likely just keeps things moving along in a standard plane and direction.
This I believe finally answers one of Erfinder's question's about why lines of flux are greatest at a magnets equator - in a planet, it is the outflow - away from the planet, back to the source (the sun). The planet takes in its energy at the poles, compresses it toward the middle, until it can't compress anymore, then out it comes at the equator. In another place, he talks about the rings of Saturn being examples of this (I believe - would have to re-read it to be certain it is the same cause). Anyway, off topic and idle chit-chat I suppose, but boy, it sure does answer a lot of questions...
Thinking about ERfinders' circuit "correction_image_2.jpg" (page 15), I was wondering how to do this same circuit without actually making the core and rotor, etc.
So I took out and old .5pf 2000vdc cap, a 12vdc 7 amp battery, four identical primary 110vac to whatever single or dual secondary transformers, one on/off push switch and made the following set-up.
If anyone else can try this, I am getting some wierd reading on the voltmeter. In fact, voltage is going up even with the circuit left open.
I have a TV in the same room and when I push the switch, I am getting major static on the TV screen. If fact, the same static is also seen in the upstairs TV. Never seen that before. Something is definitely going on.
Just thought I'd shoot it out there.
A little more food for thought.
We live between a very big two plate capacitor. The Earth and the Ionosphere. The Ionosphere is negatively charged by the particles from the Sun. The Earth is neutral charged. The voltage difference is several million volt. Between an antenna and ground
there is always a negative charge. The higher the antenna, the higher the voltage.
So, if you put up a antenna and put a high voltage capacitor between the antenna and ground, the capacitor will charge up to high voltage. When the voltage is high enough you can use a spark gap (very close gap) and discharge that capacitor into a transformer that has a lot of turns at the capacitor side and few turns on the other side. On the output of the transformer you put a diode bridge. The diode bridge is connected to a lead acid battery. The battery will charge.
PS: wattsup Nice posting, hopefully some people will mimic what you have going so we can start to see how this stuff really works. I have a couple of transformers, but they are kind of big mothers out of a microwave ,that may not be good for this test. Maybe something from Radio Shack may be better, would you recommend getting about 4 or 6 of them to try?
OH, has anyone seen Erfinder? have not seen him on in awhile?
Trump
I
I made a mistake. The secondary side is identified as primary and vis-versa. Here is the corrected one.
@Trump
Actually, I am using 4 different transformers, all in the 110 vac input with varying AC outputs. One is even a toroid (transformer #1). I just grabbed whatever I had. Notice that trans #1 and #3 don't have the primary connected. This set-up actually reproduces the circuit without the rotor. Also the center of each secondary is not connected so you are using the full secondary windings. I think the best choice of transformer would be any unit having the same input and output voltages. That way the coil weight would have to be closly weighted. Please note that this set-up is not reproducing ERfinders' weight ratio between the primary (large wire by weight) and secondary length. Also it is not making the 3240 iterations per minute. But this could be done electronically. Just to test.
Hello
From the moment our jouney began I had a nagging question I just could not let go, one we have all seen. And seems very relevant.
"Positive charge attracts positive charge, and expels negative discharge. Negative discharge repels both negative discharge and positive charge."
Positive Charge = Paramagnetism = EMF
Negative Discharge = Diamagnetism = BEMF
Positive charge attracts positive charge(like attracts like) , this must be true or no matter would gravitate towards other matter, forming elements. "and expels negative discharge"--charging and discharging are opposite conditions and must repel, this seems obvious.
But here is something different-
"Negative discharge repels both negative discharge and positive charge."
A negative discharge must repel a negative discharge because a discharge can be seen as an action, charge- discharge(one cycle), in order to discharge something it must first be charged, there can be no discharge-discharge.
Negative discharge repels positive charge, again like attracts like, charging and discharging are opposite conditions(actions) and must repel.
Now here is where it gets really cool-
We have a battery(12v car battery), we have always assumed the positive flows to the negative and is neutralized. I have come to see this as all backwards, and it makes no sense. Like attracts like!
If positive charge leaves the battery, and never becomes a negative discharge(Bemf)it's opposite, then it would seem that the positive charge should return to the battery and void itself, not neutralize but cease to be. So we have to keep recharging the source, over and over. But what if a negative discharge was applied to the battery, a discharging action leads to a charging action leading to a discharging action in a cyclical nature. So the positive charge source never voids itself it cycles back and forth--charge--discharge--charge--discharge, like a capacitor using potential difference not current. In this case we would have alternating potentials which may not void. Like ringing a bell in a vacuum, it goes on and on, just because you can't hear it doesn't mean it's not happening.
What Im saying is that a negative discharge on the negative terminal seems no different that a charging action on the positive terminal. And all these motors appear to use a DC source Hmmm
Quote from: Erfinder on May 14, 2007, 02:35:40 AM
Hello,
I am here, I have not commented because I am not impressed! What happened to the patents, I was under the impression that they were the subject matter. Focus, and discipline of self....If you want truth, you have to control yourselves, stick to the patents. I told you all if you cannot comprehend those basic patents, you cannot move forward with this technology. I cannot, nor will I teach Tesla's technology, only he can do that!!! If I understand them, and did so of my own power, you can do the same!
PATENTS!!! In your philosophical discussions, please try not to forget the PATENTS!!!
Regards
Hello Erfinder,
I could not agree more. It is very easy to go in tangents and get lost. I do it all the time.
I printed the four Tesla patents and I carry them everywhere I go. Everytime I have the chance, I read them and try to understand them. This way at least, even if I do not have a computer near me, I can study the patents.
I got my patents from Pat2Pdf.org as the resolution of the PDF is better than using the Keely website PDFs. I have not explored the possibility of printing the pages directly from the TIFF viewer required by the US Patents website, but I estimate that the resolution should be similar than the Pat2Pdf.org website.
Regards,
Omar
If an Electro current starts to flow and we assume that the positive charge comes from one of the pole A of the battery
and the negative discharge from the other pole B.
Then the then the negative discharge of pole B would repel negative discharge and the positive charge.
The positive charge will go to pole A because it is positive charge.
the negative discharge repels and expels.
so here we have a bigger negative discharge than a positive charge because repelling and expelling some how magnifying the negative discharge
if we are switching the current as a tested it I can see on a Scoop meter a negative spike from 800 volt and a positive of 300 volt at 50 Hz
going up to 400 HZ negative and positive become equal 300 volt AC if I increase the frequency pos and negative cycle stay the same but they are dropping in voltage
the power supply was a 12 volt battery 1.2 ah an the setup like Wattsup with a 8.2 NF 2000Volt and 4 transformers 220 / 8 volt
switching with a function generator and a BU808 from a television set. (square wave)
I know this test is off topic but seeing what is happening on the scoop meter could help us understand what is happening.
Regards,
Satyoda
Quote from: Erfinder on May 14, 2007, 03:56:22 PM
Hello,
For the life of me I cannot understand why many of you believe that you need to experiment in order to verify what Tesla was doing. Do you think for a second that you can top or replicate his experiments he conducted in Colorado? I find this funny, because many of you think that you can! If you really want to experiment, you need to begin where he left off in Colorado, or your experiments are in vain! He did all the experimenting for us! Many of you experiment and in so doing cheat, as you don't even limit yourselves to what Tesla had to work with! You go straight the integrated circuits, and miss the whole object, as you are distracted by the thoughts of which components you should use, and the measurements on your testing and analyzing equipment! If just one of you read the patents, just sat reading them, and imagined that Tesla himself was reading them to you, you then may understand where I am coming from. The majority of you reading these patents want a machine that produces your idea of free energy. Your idea of free energy has no foundation on which to be built! Tesla's does! He is still trying to teach us the truth though his patents!
Is anyone listening?
Hello Erfinder,
I will make a list of components from the four Tesla patents you mentioned. Maybe this way it would be easier for us to limit ourselves to what Tesla had to work with.
Would it also be recommended that we get a copy of Tesla's Colorado Springs notes?
Regards,
Omar
There is a global block to understanding that we are all subject to currently. This block varies between individuals. Interestingly, each individual is able to function well and survive, but taken as a whole, understanding of true fundamentals and advancement as a whole is blocked very effectively.
My suggestion is that this device be built together - like ants. Divide it up and each build a portion and Erfinder will assemble explaining as he goes and sending images and such. I say that he builds it because he is the only one that knows how. If someone just doesn't "get it" then they can still use their hands to build a portion. A machinest may not be able to wire a machine but he can sure make shafts and rotors. Once complete, you will have circumvented the block.
Throwing theories back and forth and endless discussion can not compare to building something together. With the aid of a guide (Erfinder) you can build something that you do not understand and gain an understanding of it as you go.
So, cut that crap and get started.
I for one am listening. I hope all others do the same, guys Tesla discovered this phenomenon by accident, and was luckily not to have been killed in the process. He realized safety concerns and his subsequent patents were primarily to make the phenomena more effective and safer. Four improvements were 1.) Air Gap, 2.) Adjustable primary 3.) Adjustable condensor in primary and 4.) Adjustable capacitance and induction. Well I was going to ramble on more but will leave it for the time being.
Regards
Mark
QuoteMy suggestion is that this device be built together - like ants. Divide it up and each build a portion...
Why am I reminded of MIR and Skylab with this suggestion?? I understand your thoughts Grumpy, and I can't say they are wrong, but I think the point isn't about building - it is about understanding. Even Erfinder himself stated this was just a "concept" machine - to teach fundamental principals. If we collectively get a working assembly, and half the builders don't understand what is going on, isn't that worse then if everyone just copied a working schematic, got a functioning device, and still had no clue of what they built?? How are we gaining any ground if people build what they don't understand, then see their part in a working device that they still don't understand? If they built the entire thing, wouldn't that be better to observe then a piece of the device that they still don't understand?
It may come across as useless theories and endless discussion, but I agree with Erfinder's premise - how can you build what you do not understand? More importantly, how can you build other, bigger, better devices on these principles, if you don't understand why your device works? Building a copy of the device is not hard. He has given enough info to get a complete working model up and running. He gave magnet diameter, capacitor size, secondary length, and we know equal weight of the primaries....what is left to discover from the recipe list? How is knowing what is in the chocolate cake going to help you make steak tartar? If you don't know why you put the cake in the oven, how are you ever going to introduce the concept of flamb??
I don't see it this way, I think the key is to understand first, then progress. Many may find it is not worth building this machine once they see why it does what it does - it may prove to be exactly what Erfinder says - just a concept teaching device.....
However, I think there is some merit in each person discussing and explaining the parts they do understand (from Tesla's perspective), until we all arrive at a better understanding of how the device as a whole (as well as others not yet put on paper) works.
Hi
Sorry but I got carried away
now somthing that makes sense
If two sources move with equal velocities away from their common center, then their interference pattern looks like electrical and magnetic lines of force:
http://www.keelynet.com/spider/b-115e.htm
see spider
Studying different cases of motion, interesting shapes of interference patterns were found. As, for example, if two coherent sources fly nearby to each other, then interference whirls arise:
see spider 1
the Rhythmodynamics
regards,
satyoda,
I've noticed these things from the electric fan in my bed room, very cool.
Now about Tesla, this is how the damn thing works. The primary circuit is operated at some frequency. The secondary resonates at that same frequency but is 90 degrees out of phase with the primary. The secondary produces a HUGE magnetic field, the primary is mostly voltage. When the magnetic field of the secondary changes polarity, it produces a very large voltage across the capacitor. The capacitor in the secondary is used for nothing more than canceling the inductance so that the secondary oscillates in resonance. The huge magnetic field of the secondary drives the rotor. This is a completely different technique of driving a motor than in standard engineering.
OH I'm sorry, were these terms too mainstream? Ok, lets just rename everything to something not mainstream. Then it will be all better. Lets call the magnetic field of the secondary "negative discharge" and call the primary "positive charge". While we're at it, lets call the magnetic linkage between the two circuits "radiant energy". Lets go even further by calling the negative discharge a double vortex.
Yes thats it.
Now we can call the circulating motion of the positive charge centripetal. So naturally the negative discharge will yield a centrifugal motion. Wow, how un-mainstream this is sounding now - its so great, I feel I'm really getting somewhere. I don't like the term "resonance" so lets just call that oscillation. Throw in a little water hammer, douse that down with elf urine, add a little dragon shit
And there we go!
we have a completely new way of describing how this motor works that is totally un-mainstream, yet is saying the exact damn thing that I said earlier. Only in the first case everyone understood what I said, and in the second no one did.
I know how this motor works. I want to see how the resistance in the wires is overcome. I want to see how the equal mass ratios add to the output, I want to see how an operating frequency of sqrt(c) effects the performance. I don't need fancy new names for things, I need answers!
ADDING - is there a frustration face?... Darn, there isn't... I'll have to go with angry face >:( >:( >:(
Quote from: Charlie_V on May 14, 2007, 08:19:23 PM
I know how this motor works. I want to see how the resistance in the wires is overcome. I want to see how the equal mass ratios add to the output, I want to see how an operating frequency of sqrt(c) effects the performance. I don't need fancy new names for things, I need answers!
ADDING - is there a frustration face?... Darn, there isn't... I'll have to go with angry face >:( >:( >:(
Charlie,
The resistance is the whole key, the impulsed high voltage dc does not conduct through the wire,
but rather over the conductor, until it discharges at the end point, where greatly magnified voltages are obtained.
Regards,
Mark
Quotethe impulsed high voltage dc does not conduct through the wire,
but rather over the conductor, until it discharges at the end point, where greatly magnified voltages are obtained.
The only time electricity is not fully conducted through the wire is when it is extremely high frequency. In this case the resistance actually increases since the current moves along the outside surface, where the cross sectional area of the wire is very small. Electricity flowing through a small area means high resistance.
This motor does not use that high a frequency so this would not be a problem. Magnified voltages are the product of the resonance itself - this is not a classic transformer (V1/V2 does not equal N1/N2). If there is some form of resistance negating being achieved from the impulse I have never heard/seen it and would like how this happens. With all the research that was/is done with impulse circuits, I would think someone would of taken note of an effect like this. Hehe, there would be no need for super conductors if this was the case.
What impulses can do is produce magnetic fields of unearthly proportions. I read an experiment some time back where they were creating magnetic fields of over 13 Teslas from impulses. In Erfinder's terms, this would be a negative discharge of huge proportions. I have suspected for some time that unity might be reached if the magnetic field of the secondary was large enough. I mentioned this but Erfinder said I was wrong. So putting it in his terms, the negative discharge of the secondary can be made larger than the positive charge of the primary, through the impulse, such that there is a greater suction, over coming the loss due to resistance. Tesla referred to this "negative discharge" or secondary magnetic field as having great momentum. The key to all this being that the two circuits are 90 degrees apart so the energy placed in the system is returned.
Although I have been saying this pretty much from the beginning, and told I was wrong every time. In each one of Erfinder's posts it seems to me he is explaining what I am talking about but using different words..... Oh the frustration. I don't mind being wrong, but when I am told I'm wrong and then watch someone say exactly what I just said but in a different way, just drives me nuts. Tell me where I'm wrong (and it is not the mainstream terminology, because Tesla used these terms - he didn't invent his own). This goes for everyone on this forum, Erfinder. Just don't say "oh your wrong, I am so unimpressed" explain where we are wrong - stop beating around the bush! Your the one who
claims to have figured this out....
Good night for now,
Charlie
Charlie,
I do not have all the answers and like allcanadian I'm not the sharpest crayon in the box. The reason I believe erfinder has us taking this path is to fully understand first. In my humble opinion this is probably the greatest discovery of all time. We must not let history repeat itself. By this I mean, Tesla had given the information to the greatest engineers of his time however they were unable to duplicate the effects and thus criticized him and that was the end of this phenomena.
If they had understood it, then it would be mainstream today.
You are a very intelligent person, and I in no intentions mean this in a bad way, but I wonder if you have the desire, the motivation to dig deep and find the true answers. I have learned much in the last few weeks and the 2 links I had posted to Trump were the best I have read to date. I have not found all the answers but I am still searching.
If you read those sites I think perhaps many questions will be answered.
I have also found that erfinder gives us subtle hints, just follow those to get your answers.
Here they are again if you missed them
http://www.hbci.com/~wenonah/new/tesla.htm
http://www.rialian.com/rnboyd/tesla.htm
Regards,
Mark
QuoteYou are a very intelligent person
Ha, no I'm pretty much an idiot. I just try to focus my idiocy in specific directions. :D
Charlie_V and to all
What wee see in the spiders is that the field of resonance with in a normal magnet
If their is no disturbance of the vortex like in the first picture.
But in the second picture we see a DNA like spiral from the void to east and west and also the spiraling ray from the void in al directions
This is what is happening when the magnet ring voids, as Erfinder draw the ring with The arrows around it.
I had the picture in my mind of DNA like spirals coming out of the voids but I though well this can?t be
But every night when I got in to bed I saw this picture Then I draw a vortex with the DNA spirals coming out of the void and going to east and west I didn?t want to post it because i could not find any thing related to this until I Saw the spider pictures on Keelynet Now I am sure this is the Key
The cavitating is the cause of the effect seen in spider 2 picture
Positive Charge = Paramagnetism = EMF
Negative Discharge = Diamagnetism = BEMF
Quote erfinder:
BEMF is the the field returning to the source (IMPLOSION!!!). The source is the VOID!Flow returning to the source is not restricted, nor resisted it is assisted, and self organizing in it's effort to return. It is said that a magnetic fields collapse, but this has never been adequately explained. BEMF is explosive radiation, the result of rapidly cavitating a flowing field. Collapse in this since does not mean in on itself, but outward towards and into the void, as I said currents behave differently when they are pulsed, become familiar with this difference. Flux lines are curved, curvature ends in the Void.
Centripetal motion (EMF) gives birth to centrifugal (BEMF)! BEMF is Centrifugal, you cannot have centrifugal motion without centripetal. If you do come up with a way you will be the first! Instead of trying to get BEMF alone we should concentrate on the relationship EMF has to BEMF, and how they are used to produce implosion.
No we have to translate it to the patens then we know
I am not the teacher but just starting to understand.
Regards
Satyoda
Makes sense to me. I wonder what Erfinder thinks of it?
nice piture
http://www.keelynet.com/unclass/hardy1.htm
For curious people and memo to myself:
http://www.electrotherapymuseum.com/TeslaArchive/index.htm
I made the calculations Tesla suggests in patent 512340 and I found something unexpected.
I recommend you all do the same and compare the energy between the two coils.
Same voltage, same length of wire, different results.
Cool barbosi!
Post what you did. I'll try to look at it and make the same calculations, unfortunately I'm a little tired tonight - might do it tomorrow.
Patent 593,138 Electric Transformer - November 2, 1897
Cone-shaped secondaries to focus the impulses, these brought white-fire discharges, an aetheric nature, a cooling effect. The secondary was wound over the cone and then the primary at its base. Both the primary and secondary are grounded. Definitely these were very safe but also as these new "Impulse Transformers" greatly magnified power supplied to them, also the radiant electric effects were equally magnified.
Regards,
Mark
After re-reading patent 593,138 it occurs to me that really the whole point of this was to see induction coils in a whole new light. Typically we think of an induction coil like in standard transformers - magnetically linking two circuits by the basic (V1/V2 = N1/N2) ratio.
These coils do not operate like that. Since they are based on the velocity of the currents inside them, they produce a small voltage between each winding. When you add up all the windings you get a pretty large voltage. So each winding of the coil is like a tiny charged capacitor. When you add up all the capacitors in series, you get a large voltage between the terminals. Very cool stuff.
i just built one of the bifilar coils to erfinders spec.
in standard form i get a 20 v pk to pk back emf spike
in the bifilar form i get 40 v pk to pk.
the magnetic field seems to be the same for each type.
the bifilar has both primary and secondary wound in bifilar form.
the magnetic field can be just felt at about 3mm from the iron core.
.
louis,
What are you talking about?
:-[
.
.
;)
.
Hello N.,nat1791a,,
I thought that the land-mile has got the lenght of 1680 meters,
so the 50 miles would be 84000 meters !
Am I wrong ?
Sincerely
dL
p.s.: are all this coil-devices Radon/Thoron receiver and 2-e-converter ?
:P
Hahahaha, patent 787412 is exactly what I was talking about when I said Tesla used reflected waves. His transmission system uses standing waves my friends, not radiant energy. There is nowhere in this patent where he describes radiant energy - he infact says NOT to use radiant waves (radio waves). The part where he says the waves produced are not Hertzian or electromagnetic, during his time this is what they called radiation (radiant waves - radio).
In 1905, the concept of electricity traveling in a wire was WAY different from electricity traveling in the air (radio is a classic example of radiation). Today, we classify all electric waves as electromagnetic (whether they are in a wire or transmitting through space). So this doesn't hold the same meaning as it did back then, and would make some confused thinking Tesla is using some special, never before seen electric wave. He is using standard electromagnetic, transverse waves (just like those from a local power company) but he is reflecting them, using the earth as the wire they are reflected on.
The odd multiples Tesla talks about is slightly misleading as well. His secondary is a quarter wave resonant cavity. So odd multiples keep it in resonance, these are 1/4λ, 3/4λ, 5/4λ, 7/4λ, 9/4λ, etc. (where λ is the wavelength). The misleading part is that, if you designed the secondary to have a length of 1/4λ and then started using the different harmonics, you could very possibly get voltage maxima's in the middle of the wire. Without having the ball on top to suppress sparks, you could get large arcs blasting from different points along the secondary's wire, which would damage the insulation and possibly hurt someone. If you don't understand any of this, please look up standing waves and quarter wave resonantors at these two sites:
http://www.glenbrook.k12.il.us/gbssci/phys/Class/waves/u10l4b.html
http://www.cord.edu/dept/physics/p128/lecture99_35.html
Yes, Tesla "charges his capacitor" (referring to patent 464666) very differently than you normally would. That is because this charging is a product of an overlooked resonance in which you are not trying to transmit power from one circuit to the other, but to reflect that power, and in the process make the secondary circuit "ring". Think of it as those pendulum toys where one pendulum swings down and hits a second one. The first one stops while the second one swings out and comes back and hits the first one. And they repeat in that manner. That is how the Tesla primary and secondary work. In normal circuits, they place both pendulums swinging together.
How Tesla generates the standing waves is from his transmitter which is basically two LC circuits tuned to have the same resonant frequency but be 90 degrees out of phase. Just like in all his other patents. Whatever you want to call it, there is something very special about this and unfortunately at the present time it is rather overlooked. I think Erfinder is pointing out the right things but he has a very unusual way of describing it, almost a philosophy oppose to a science. I look forward to hearing more of his ideas/thoughts/descriptions.
.
Hello all,
sorry for jumping into this forum. Im from the TPU forum.
We are using the tesla patent 390721 for a rotational magnetic field. Have 4 control coils wound over a collector coil and use 3 oscillators to have pulses on our control coils.....
Sounds familiar????
Otto
Hi Otto!
When do you think we can have a peek at your 6" TPU? I think you probably are one of the furthest along the TPU path!
Regards
ChrisC
Hello all,
@ChrisC
you will now wonder or laugh but Im looking how to use my VOIDS and my nodes!!!Veeeery important in my TPU.
I can only hope the people see what a genius man Erfinder is!!!!
Otto
.
Hello all,
@Mark,
Im only a coil builder. First I wind my coils and THEN Im curious and want to know how they work together or not. I WANT TO SEE!!! This is my point. And when I see it then I hopefully can explain.
The point in our work is to forget what we have learned in school. Im a electronics guy but when Im working on my TPU I forget the learned stuff and concentrate myself to a totally new "science" that has to be discovered.
Its frustrating that I have to reread 81 pages of this topic here but the good one is that Im only reading Erfinders posts.
I see soooo much matching points between the posts of Erfinder and my TPU....
all his posts could very easy be on the SMs devices.
Otto
otto:
It's good to see you on this forum. I put my TPU on hold after following Erfinder's posts. I have learned a lot here and am ready to begin work on it soon. I only follow your posts and Erfinder's. Many thanks to both of you....Jeff
.
Hello all,
guys, FORGET ME!!!!! ERFINDER is my and your favorite.
Hear what this good guy says to you. Study the f..g Tesla patents!!! Just take your time and reed slowly. I had to do this with his 390721 patent until I saw whats going on in this patent.
Again, I have the 2nd time rereaded his posts and will do this every day next week. Looking at the Tesla patents, learning.....yes, there is soooo much to learn, especially for a electronics guy as Im.
And you know what?? With Erfinders posts I will be much better in understanding how a TPU works.
The point with Teslas patents are IMPULSES.
There was a post from Erfinder, something about HV. With such a high voltage Im lighting a 60W bulb!!!! And some people would say there is no energy in such a HV!!! HA! Accidently I touched such a wire from my TPU: better not to say my reaction &%$#/
In this moment my TPU is more and more "opening" a way to the universum. Should I say it in this way???Hmmmm.
Ok, in another way: I have a tornado of over 50cm or much more over my TPU. I have measured it.
Otto
Hello All:
Thanks Otto for pointing out Erfinder's discovery of the way of the 'Impulses'.
For the many of us who are 'lost' in this maze of threads, these pointers are really welcomed. OK, now I will also be joining the Erfinder fan club (and Otto's & others too)!
Chris
QuoteI will not argue what Tesla was doing and not doing, as the proof is in the patents
Patent 787,412
Line 11
"It is known since a long time that electric currents may be
propagated through the earth, and this knowledge has been utilized in many ways in the transmission of signals and the operation of a variety of receiving devices remote from the source of energy,
mainly with the object of dispensing with a return conducting-wire. It is also known that electrical disturbances may be transmitted through portions of the earth by
grounding only one of the poles of the source [1], which I have devised for the purposes of transmitting through the natural media intelligible signals or
power and which are now familiar; but all experiments and observations heretofore made have tended to confirm the opinion held by the majority of scientific men that the earth, owing to its immense extent, although possessing conducting properties, does not behave in the manner of the conductor of limited dimensions with respect to the disturbances produced, but, on the contrary, much like a vast reservoir or ocean, which while it may be locally disturbed by a commotion of some kind remains unresponsive and quiescent in a large part or as a whole. Still another fact now of common knowledge is that when electrical waves or oscillations are impressed upon such a conducting-path as a metallic wire
reflection takes place under certain conditions from the
ends of the wire, and in consequence of the
interference of the impressed and reflected oscillations the phenomenon of
"stationary waves" with maxima and minima in definite fixed positions is produced. In any case the existence of these waves indicates that some of the outgoing waves have reached the boundaries of the conducting-path and have been
reflected from the same. Now I have discovered that notwithstanding its vast dimensions and contrary to all observations heretofore made
the terrestrial globe may in a large part or as a whole behave toward disturbances impressed upon it in the same manner as a conductor of limited size, this fact being demonstrated by novel phenomena, which I shall hereinafter describe."
[1] Tesla is talking about his Tesla coil. In the secondary, one end is grounded.
The proof is definitely in the patents - believe who you're going to believe.......
deleted,,, charge on
Here is my take on Tesla's patents:
Pat. 568,176 - The apparatus, as will now be seen, comprises, as essential elements, choking
coils, a circuit controller, means for rotating the same, a condenser, and a transformer.
A choking coil in order to give to the circuit a high self-induction.
A circuit controller that may be operated to make and break.
A condenser to store the energy of the discharge-current.
A primary in series with condenser.
by the above arrangement the current of high electromotive force
which is induced at each break of the main circuit furnishes the
proper current for charging the condenser.
Pat. 568,178 - The energy of the direct-current supply is
periodically directed into and stored in a
circuit of relatively high self-induction, and in such form is
employed to charge a condenser,
which in turn, is caused to discharge through a circuit of low
self-induction
When the conditions are such that the general law of harmonic
vibrations is followed, the circuits are said to be in resonance
To accomplish this, the number of impulses of current directed
into the charging-circuit per unit time is made equal to the period
of the charging-circuit itself, or, to a harmonic thereof,
and the same relations are maintained between the charging and
discharge circuit.
When the circuit controller closes(makes), the choking coil charges up and the capacitor discharges.
When the circuit controller opens(breaks), the capacitor charges.
When the circuit controller closes and the choking coil is charging, it should then open at the peak
of charge and do this at the period of the resonance of the discharge circuit.
Comments?
Makes sense bocas. That way current isn't really allowed to flow (in the conventional sense) since all the movement is going towards charging the coils/capacitor.
What I mean is, if you left the switch closed for too long, eventually the voltage across the coil would drop. If you switch it when the voltage across the coil is maximum (which would be at the very instant in time that the switch was closed), current will not flow. The impulse of the switch makes sure that voltage is maintained across the choking coil but that no current is allowed to flow.
Maybe this is the radiant energy that Erfinder is talking about. The ability to maintain moving charges without developing a conventional current - modern terminology calls this reactive power, but what do I know - I'm just a man with no pants.
Charlie:
If you look at Tesla drawings, when the switch is closed the Choking coil is the only thing across the current source, or I always think of it as the battery. If the switch is left on, the current will just max out at whatever the resistance in the circuit lets it. What is necessary to know is what frequency do you want to work at and design around that. Erfinder has done that in his design.
dedited out
Thanks God!!!
I was bleeding here...
Can we move on now?
I'm ready! :D
.
Now i know i said i would not post here anymore, but i just can't help it...
Erfinder says
BEMF is the the field returning to the source (IMPLOSION!!!). The source is the VOID!Flow returning to the source is not restricted, nor resisted it is assisted, and self organizing in it's effort to return. It is said that a magnetic fields collapse, but this has never been adequately explained. BEMF is explosive radiation, the result of rapidly cavitating a flowing field. Collapse in this since does not mean in on itself, but outward towards and into the void, as I said currents behave differently when they are pulsed, become familiar with this difference. Flux lines are curved, curvature ends in the Void.
Centripetal motion (EMF) gives birth to centrifugal (BEMF)! BEMF is Centrifugal, you cannot have centrifugal motion without centripetal. If you do come up with a way you will be the first! Instead of trying to get BEMF alone we should concentrate on the relationship EMF has to BEMF, and how they are used to produce implosion.
-------------------------------------------------
If Erfinder would accept that there are 2 individual magnetic currents running against each other in a right hand twisting motion then he would have a better description of what the charges (magnets) are doing in the coil wire....
So many big words...why all the confusion?
Here is what Tesla did.........
"Counsel
You say the energy was 1,000 times greater. Do you mean that the voltage was increased, or the current, or both?
Tesla
Yes [both]. To be more explicit, I take a very large self-inductance and a comparatively small capacity, which I have constructed in a certain way so that the electricity cannot leak out. I thus obtain a low frequency; but, as you know, the electromagnetic radiation is proportionate to the square root of the capacity divided by the self-induction. I do not permit the energy to go out; I accumulate in that circuit a tremendous energy. When the high potential is attained, if I want to give off electromagnetic waves, I do so, but I prefer to reduce those waves in quantity and pass a current into the earth, because electromagnetic wave energy is not recoverable while that [earth] current is entirely recoverable, being the energy stored in an elastic system."....
"Power is our mainstay, the primary source of our many-sided energies. With sufficient power at our disposal we can satisfy most of our wants and offer a guaranty for safe and comfortable existence to all, except perhaps to those who are the greatest criminals of all - the voluntarily idle."
Nikola Tesla.
--------------------------------------
Ed.L "..........they are the N and S pole magnets, which are coming out of a transformer's secondary winding's ends, one half giong up in the air and the other half in the ground in increasing and decreasing numbers. The numbers are regulated by the transmitting tube and the speed by the voltage."......"The magnets are not running up to the ionosphere and back again, but run horizontallt until they are lost...."
-------------------
BEMF is the product of the motion of the individual N and S pole magnets and the speed and direction and position they are in relative to the conductor atoms and each other.......It is quite simple really ;)
I can make 2 permanent magnets with a single uncoiled copper wire, and the poles in the magnets will be opposite each other at the same end...
Now make a coil with iron core and put a steel tube over the coil.....where the coil core end is north....the tube end is south pole.
Ed.L "This magnet making with a single wire, it demonstrates how all magnets are made"......
"In the Northern hemisphere the North pole magnets are going down, and the South pole magnets are going up"....
--------------------------
Scotty......
Leedskalnin.com
.
@barbosi
Not so fast! I broke my pencil.
@ERfinder and all
I understand about EMF, BEMF, Cap charge and discharge, induction, implosion, explosion, even whirling, etc., but, can anyone please answer any of these questions. Maybe Grade 1 level but hey.
In all the Tesla patents that have been discussed, Tesla never indicated a positive or negative terminal.
As an example, in patent 568177, page 1 of text, line 73, he states as follows;
"In the present instance one terminal, as B, is connected to one of the binding posts, from which the circuit IS LED THROUGH ONE FIELD-COIL, D, the brushes and commutator E the other field-coil, F, etc."
"The other terminal, as A, connects with a second brush, K, bearing on the controller, so that the current which passes through and operates the motor is periodically interrupted".
Here again he never really says which direction the current potential from pole A passes through the device.
So my fundamental question is how do you know which is + or -. Tesla obvisously wanted his rotor in 568177 to turn a specific way in order to move the air flow through the ozone chamber. But from his design, you don't know the motor winding directions, etc.
My second question would be, in Teslas' day did they consider that current flowed from the negative to the positive or from positive to negative? Or both????
I know this may sound very basic, but I can't help asking myself why ERfinder put a + and a - sign on his highlight of the 568177 patent. Why??
Another question. if Tesla used the Earth as a medium to store energy, he obviously expected to draw power from there also. But general thinking would have it that we only draw power from the positive and we charge to the positive and we usually kill the negative. What if both polarities had a two way function (2+2-), and we've only been using a three way function (2+1-).
Case in point. ERfinder says look to nature. A lightning bolt never strikes the Earth. As it comes down, a plume of lighting rises upwards to meet the descending bolt. Now why would the negative rise to meet the positive. So what happens when a cap discharges. Does the negative move forward into the secondaries to meet the discharge at the primaries?
What I am confused about in fact is that to understand ERfinders teaching, we have to shake the old way of thinking. So what if that starts with how we understand current potential.
What if there was what I am thinking to call Full DC;
FAR = Full amperage rating
CD = Cap discharge
FI = Field implosion
Battery function
Positive terminal - charge at 20% of FAR by CD - power output at 80% of FAR.
Negative terminal - charge at 80% of FAR by FI - power output at 20% of FAR
Of course this could also be Full B%#@ S*&?. Just thinking out of the box. But I really need to resolve this question before I can move forward.
.
Well there's still the pdf I posted on page 63 but it was not updated till the present. You should get a copy in case he asks Stephan to remove it also.
Plus here is his last post with the drawing that I had saved to study.
QUOTE
Hello,
Before you all take that trip away from the subject at hand, here I go again.
Referring to patent 568,177, the simplest of the three patents focusing on Fig. 1
Take note that these three components are connected together! I have high lightened the components I am specifically referring to. F, M and L.
The importance of this is when the field of the motor coil F collapses a discharge current is produced by motor coil F, this discharge current is of a high potential, and raises the potential of the primary M, and the plate of capacitor L to the same potential as that of the motor coil F! This is how Tesla used the discharge current to charge his capacitor!
Regards
Grin Who is really ready?
UNQUOTE
Whatever the reason he may have, this is major uncool to have removed all his posts. Must have taken him hours. Was this a scam? Another SM saga? No, can't be. Maybe he jumped into his time-machine and went back to 1888. Maybe he was bullshitting us all along. Or maybe the MIB payed him a visit to make sure he does not spill the beans. Or maybe he realized he is just as lost as us. These are all valid questions.
Anyways, here's an update on the set-up I indicated on page 77. Well the system has been on since then and with the switch left open, doing nothing, the battery started at 9.34 vdc and is now 11.25 vdc. So there is definitely a charging effect with the switch simply left open. Very interesting indeed. I make no apologies. Even Tesla experimented on a hunch. Now I'll just work to tweak it to increase the charging effect. I will start a new thread on it.
But, I really would have liked to have an answer to my last post. So can anyone explain to me why he put a + and a - where he did?
.
Mr Erfinder or Admin:
Please don't remove Erfinder's teachingfs! I just found this forum and thread a few days ago and looking forward to studying the truths! PLEASE....
Regards
ChrisC
WOW what a great disappointment ...all of erfinders posts gone. :-\
I have been following this almost from the start. Although I have not posted very often I truly was into learning this technology and hoping someday spreading the information.
I think in this day and age where earth is in desperate need of help this information can not be suppressed for another 100 years.
Anyway I hope this is not the end of this discussion?
Here is a link to erfinders posts up until the Tesla patents became the primary topic.
http://docs.google.com/View?docID=dg764fg_1hrmr3w&revision=_latest (http://docs.google.com/View?docID=dg764fg_1hrmr3w&revision=_latest)
I wish i had a copy of the rest :(
am1ll3r
.
Hi to all
it seems that the ones that are still here didn't pass the test from Erfinder
indeed I am thinking an octave to low
al do the answer was already given by Barbosi we did not see it
I was blinded and only translated the posts from Erfinder in to Dutch I read the post again and translate in order to find the way were we left of and I must regret to say that I am guilty.
by following links I drifted away.
good luck to them who passed and many thanks to Erfinder.
what happened
im in a different time zone, so seem to have missed the climax.
I am not gone, I have just been quietly reading since nothing I say ever passes the tests haha. Can I get a "here" from any of the other guys, barbosi, bocas, allcanadian, etc? Are you guys secretly learning Erfinder's teachings from passing his test or still standing around like the rest of us?
Personally, I think all this was hot air from the beginning. If Tesla produced "free energy" it was from the standing waves that lightning produces when it strikes the earth. However, I do feel there is something important from driving a motor with reactive power. Anyways, lunch is over.
Later,
Charlie
@charlie_V
But then, maybe Erfinder did teach something conventional teachers failed to grasp? Maybe he'll teach them to others who really want to learn....At least, I want to learn if he is willing to teach!
Regards
Chris
do you know what happened ?
i thought from erfinders post where he coloured in the ozone pataent that
it was going on to the next stage. and then everything was gone.
@ Chris c
Yes you are right Erfinder tried to tell us but we didn?t see it as we are blinded by main stream but what he started will not pass away because I have been triggered and I just can not give it a rest I will continue reading the books he recommended and some day we will meet again.
@ Charlie v
I am sorry to see you react this way I thought we were here to learn and not to reject anybody?s quotes If you start to tell somebody about this phenomena they will say its not possible than what do you do?
arguing is a waste of energy their for you walk off and just let it be
Erfinder has left us much to think about as did Tesla and all the others
Regards,
satyoda
I'm not rejecting anyone's quotes. I'm not sure Erfinder wants to teach anything. As a matter of fact, I think I remember him saying something about how he couldn't teach it, only Tesla could through his writings. Unfortunately for me, I think I will need Erfinder's teaching to understand where he is coming from.
My second pass time is researching Tesla's works. However, I haven't done a full patent search yet. I need to get more books but money is tight right now. I only read what was published from Tesla himself, not the information given from websites. From what I've read, it all can be explained with terminology that science has given us, but Tesla does not use it in the conventional sense. It has taken me almost two years to finally figure out how his magnifying transformer works. I'm still a little unsure about the details, but for the most part it makes perfect sense. It is the exact opposite of a radio antenna haha.
Right away when I saw patent 464,666 and read the line about placing the two circuits 90 degrees out of phase, I knew exactly what he was trying to do. I had a similar idea but was ridiculed when I proposed my thoughts to my boss. I still think this is a very interesting notion. Modern science/engineering focuses on keeping everything "equal" so that energy is transmitted with a specific ratio - I feel the 90 degrees out of phase is a much better method. I feel that Erfinder has taken this to a much higher level, and possibly added some to it (referring to the octave harmonics and mass equivalents). I hope one day Erfinder will explain these things, until then I'm going to sit back and listen intently.
Hello all,
maybe you know, Im from the TPU topic.
Some of you could say what Im doing here. Once I sayd that your motor is almost the same as my TPU is.
Here some facts:
1. you have primary and secondary windings - TPU has the same
2. you have a Aluminum core - TPU has it but the people dont know it
3. you have a rotating field - TPU too
4. Erfinder said 144" for the secondary winding - I tried it
5. Im using almost the same connections as the motor - or the same??? must see
6. we have 4 coils in the TPU
.
.
.
I think thats enough for the moment. With 144" secondary windings I connected 2 60W bulbs in paralel. When I disconnect 1 bulb my analog instruments shows me that my TPU does NOT react. The current from my power supply is the same. Again, connecting my 2nd bulb, the instruments doesnt react.
Of course, this afternoon I tried with only 1 such a coil and tomorrow I will built another 3 coils and then work with 4 coils. Im really curious what will happen.
Otto
Hello all:
@Charlie_V:
You may have your doubts against Erfinder's experiment, just reading enough of his 'hints' is convincing enough to know he's telling the truth. Whilst his terminology and terms used may be downright confusing at times, nonetheless he is more than believable when it gets down to specifics. Anyway, I think its wrong for you to call him "blowing smoke"! You might have ticked him off and finally lost your chance of learning from him!
@Otto:
Congratulations again for making the two 60W bulb connections! I am a little confused. When you said "when I disconnect one bulb the instruments does not react" ... did you mean the instrument current reading does not change? I would imagined so if the power was a result of coupling from magnetic resonance effects?
BTW, is your set-up now powered by the same structure or are the signal inputs fed by the external power supply? It looks like you're really close. Love to see a picture of your new device soon!
Regards
Chris
Hello all,
something should be clear: Steven Mark used some of Teslas patents in his TPU.
@chrisC
As I said before, Erfinders 144" coil works great. The amperage didnt change.
Im feeding 12V from my power supply to 1 end of my primary and the other end is pulsed with 3 frequencies.
The picture you can see on the german topic.
A new picture...hmmmm every minute there are changes. Just look how the motor is connected but without a cap. Maybe the cap is for the TPU nessesary, I dont know in this moment.
What I know is that I dont need caps in my coils because there is already a capacitance in this coils.
Hmmmm...my memory is not so good but it looks like my TPU is exactly connected like the motor.
If I remember there was something about nodes. In the TPU topic we say "tappings" or "tap points".
You cant imagine how important this nodes are.
Why should I NOT use a cap as shown in your motor picture???
Why not "hide" 4 magnets in my TPU.....
As you see I have a lot of "problems", ha,ha.
Otto
I just looked at Erfinder's motor again. His motor is just like the last Tesla Patent that he highlighted.
The 4 secondaries in his motor are the (field windings) choking coils. When the switch
is closed, the current ramps up. When the switch is opened, the
discharge current from the secondaries charges the capacitor.
Also, when the switch is closed, the LC circuit oscillates as the
secondaries build a charge. Timing is everything.
i have built the ozone patent circuit,or be it an aproximation of it. and i find that i
observe the same output as in the link below across the capacitor.
http://magnetism.fateback.com/Overunity.htm
but i get no detectable magnetic field whatsoever.
the output is approx 800v pk to pk and decays over about 6 milli seconds.
and that uses erfinders 144 inches.
with no magnetic field, i cant see how it could turn the motor.
but i will keep messing around with it.
( even though i dont know what i am doing erfinder )
@Louis
What frequency does your LC oscillate at and at what rate are you pulsing the circuit?
I haven't built anything yet, but would like to get as much info as I can to back up my understanding of how I think the circuit works.
@bocas
i will get as much detail together as i can for you, and post it later
For those of who don't follow other threads on this forum here is a translation done by Gustav22.
http://www.overunity.com/index.php/topic,2235.msg32290.html#msg32290
Thanks Gustav22 and Otto
louis,
How are you determining that there is no magnetic field? Do you have a Gauss meter to measure the field in the vicinity of the coils? I assure you there should be a magnetic field if there is moving charge. However, depending on the frequency, the field may be very fast and very large in the secondary. If there really is no field, then this is a very interesting find!
There is no magnetic field, but I bet there is a tempic field.
Do you feel a sense of "pressure" with your hand?
to detect magnetic field i use a very small neo magnet, can usually feel magentic field.
circuit description.
12 battery ( + )connected to a huge coil ( simulating motor windings )
which is 740 metres of size 30 awg enamelled copper wire.
coil resistance is 259.2 ohms.
other end of huge coil connects to com terminal of relay.
n/o connection of relay connects to ground ( - ) of battery.
connect also com of relay contact to primary of erfinders coil,
other end of primary goes to 1 nano farad capacitor ( 15 kv )
farnell part no 969-7470, other end of cap goes to n/o contact of relay.
relay driven by 556 timer set at 45.454545 cycles per sec.
primary of erfinders coil ( bifilar wound) 22swg copper enamelled wire
46 cm long. secondary of erfinders coil is 3240 mm of the 30 awg wire.
resistance of secondary is 1.075 ohm, resistance of primary is 0.1 ohm.
get approx 100 turns on my former for the primary. approx 10 turns for secoondary.
any how heres some pictures i just took,
this is a picture of the pulses at 5ms per div and 50v div on the scope
heres another, the thing wont sit still long enough to get accurate measurements,
plus it seems to have other waveforms superimposed on it.
this what happens if you reduce the timebase to like 200 micro seconds on the scope
it paints some wierd coralcastlecode type pictures
this is a better picture its on 200 us per div and 50v div.
heres another picture, - sorry to bore you all with this, but you did ask.
I'll be more specific:
Place your open hand - either one - next to the coils while you are pulsing them - do you feel a sensation of pressure on the your palm?
Got a small neon bulb handy?
can you post a quick sketch of your coil setup - I need a visual...
Those pulses you show look like a ringing, but it looks like you are getting partial standing wave patterns from all the weird stuff too - so the nodes of the standing waves are moving along the wire, they aren't quite stationary). Depending on the frequency, and from the pictures it looks to be a high frequency, your little neo magnetic would not "see" the magnetic field.
There is usually a reaction time it takes to move a magnet in/near a coil. A good example, if you take a normal coil and hook it to a function generator. Starting off at a low frequency (1Hz or something) you'll be able to move that little magnet really easy. As you start increasing the frequency, you'll see the magnet move more and more. Then at around 100Hz (it could be lower than this, it really depends on a bunch of things like the magnet's mass, current in the coil, etc.) you'll start to see the magnet's movement slow down. At some point you won't see any movement yet you'll hear a noise (the noise usually happens around 200-300Hz, depending on how good your ears are). Past 16kHz, you won't hear anything anymore. My point is though, past a certain frequency, you won't see the magnet moving no matter how large the magnetic field is. You'll need a very fast gauss meter or maybe another coil, to pick up on the magnetic field produced from your wire - gauss meters are expensive and usually slow, I'd try a pickup coil.
@grumpy
didnt feel anything,will find myself a neon lamp. how do you test with a neon lamp, and what am i looking for?
attached is circuit diagram.
converted jpg format :
@louis
When you say
"relay driven by 556 timer set at 45.454545 cycles per sec."
If you mean by cycle as an on and a off, try 27 cycles.
If you mean by cycle as an on or a off, try 54 cycles.
That's what Erfinders circuit does.
135 rpm x 24 poles = 3240 per minute
3240 / 60 = 54 full cycles per second
The secondary is 127.56" wound over a laminated soft iron core. The Primary has a lenght to equal the weight of the secondary. Much shorter. Thicker. Faster.
Erfinders circuit is not the same as the ozone device although some similarities. The ozone device thrives on spark generation because the pri/sec are connected to distanced poles to create an arc. Erfinders has two pri/secs plus two sec coils all in series and it thrives on collapsing the field. The two pri/sec make two ignition coils in series. The secondaries act more like capacitors as well as inductors as well as regulators. The design is to make only the field that you can absorb. You are not trying to make a world record. Just enough to be able to take it back, hence no loss.
When you connect batteries in series, you get higher voltage at the same current. Same thing happens with the secondaries, higher voltage same current so the coils don't burn out. This mean the primaries have 4 times more potential to charge the secondaries. If you are only doing this with one primary and one secondary, you are not really doing the same thing at all and cannot expect to generate the same field.
@gezin
Your circuit seems wrong. That first coil off the positive is killing the system.
Something to think about...
If the sun dissapeared, light would stop in about 7 minutes, electric current would stop in about 7.1 minutes, but the Earth orbit would stop immediately and we'd already be on our way to oblivion at more than 67,000 mph. The whole solar system would start immediately to vere off. Now how much faster than the speed of electricity is that. We don't know. But whatever it's speed, that's what you are working with, the magnetic field. The fastest thing known to man. So when you stop a current, before the current actually stops, the field is already out and there makes a void.
Anothe point...
Take a battery and put your voltage meter on the terminals. You read the voltage. Now short the battery momentarily and look at the voltage. It will drop down to zero. So why cut the current completely when you can just short it and do the same thing while still remaining online. AHA!! Remember the field is maybe hundreds of thousands of times faster than the current.
Neon bulb - just read somewhere that they can detect scalar fields - not sure how.
So, your circuit energizes the primary through the relay coil and then shorts it and the relay. Dumps the back emf to ground.
If you connect the primary separate from the relay coil you can use the relay as an oscillator (use NO and NC contacts).
@grumpy.
the relay is used only for its contacts, which are the equivalent of the brushes K and G in the tesla patent 568,177.
asuuming relay contacts are made ( short circuit)
then current flows from battery terminal + through big coil and then through relay contacts to battery - terminal.
building up magnetic field in the big coil.
after a while relay contacts open, interupting power through big coil.
field collapses and the ( back emf spike ) has nowhere to go except through primary and capacitor. thus charging the cap with the big back emf.
the primary is essentially a short length of copper wire, and if you view it as such at this moment then the cap is where it will go.
i think this is what erfinder was pointing out about how tesla charges capacitors.
then whole process repeats, a while later when contacts close again.
my 556 timer and the relay contacts are equivalent of teslas circuit controller parts G,H,K
my big coil is equivalent of teslas motor windings D,F.
Hi all. :D
More discovered of ERFINDER.! It this disappeared.
Discovering more on tesla well clear so that let us can in moving them ahead.
I say: Tesla used high voltage in all its devices because?
Simple, to create electrecity a tension is basic.
It is the force that moves electric chains. A potential difference allows a flow. As in loading them of capacitors of tesla.
It made a polarization of loads to create a tension.
This tension allows to open the pipes current to flow it as in the water pipes.
This can be newness for did not you, more in such a way in a common magneto as in one cell, the basic one to create and to flow one current is to create a potential (tension).
This exactly a potential difference.
In the waves sine it is only possible with mechanical turn where they reach a minimum and a maximum between North Pole and south.
In cells is possible differences between used metals and acid the reactive elements type. Also for the capacitive elements as capacitors. As leiden Jar. Static power system. Oh!! :o
http://regards
593,138 - Electrical Transformer
?If the rate at which a current traverses the circuit, including the coil, be one hundred and eighty-five thousand
miles per second, then a frequency of nine hundred and twenty-five per second would maintain nine hundred
and twenty-five stationary waves in a circuit one hundred and eighty-five thousand miles long, and each wave
would be two hundred miles in length. For such a frequency I should use a secondary fifty miles in length, so
that at one terminal the potential would be zero and at the other maximum."
I thought I would work this formula backwards from Erfinder's secondary length of 144 inches. This is what I
came up with.
144 inches = 1/4 wavelength
144 inches = 12 feet
12 feet * 4 = full wavelength
48 feet / 1 mile(5280 feet) = .00909090909
186624 / .00909090909 = 20,528,640 Hz
This is what I believe the LC circuit of the primary should resonate at for Erfinder's ckt.
Thoughts on this?
You are missing that the 144 inch is based on a 22.5mm scale. A normal inch is 25.4mm, so an inch in 22.5mm scale is 0.88582 normal inches. Your coils should be 127.559 normal inches long. So the frequency you get is 23,174,553.6Hz, or 23.175MHz. And actually, this frequency might not be fully correct because EM waves do not travel at the speed of light on a wire, they are slower.
Thats why Tesla says "Let the length be based on the the rate at which a current traverses the circuit". So if you designed a coil based on these parameters, the frequency would probably be a little lower. Typically, they travel about 10% slower on a wire, so take the speed of light and multiply it by 0.9 and you'll get a closer frequency you'll need to operate at (which is 20,857,098.24Hz) for a 127.559" long coil. But I really don't think the length of these coils matter, as long as you match the masses between the primary and secondary - I think that is the trick, not the length.
All you want to do is produce a maximum voltage at the terminal of each coil. So that when you series the coils, you get a stacked voltage (like four batteries placed in series). You'll get the maximum voltage stored in your capacitor that way. When his switch opens, the secondaries will ring at the high frequency 20Mhz, the capacitor will receive the largest amount of charge. When the switch closes, energy is returned to the battery and capacitor. By converting the energy from the battery into a high charge, you assure a low loss due to resistance yet still produce a magnetic field large enough to drive the switch, (I'm not sure if this is a classic generator type magnetic field interaction or if it is closer to a homopolar generator - since the switch is a conducting part of the circuit with a permanent magnetic field). The equal mass of the coils, I think, produces some sort of mechanical vibration which aids resonance. Thats my take.
edited out
if i wanted to try and work at understanding what erfinder2 is talking about, i would be consulting at least these.
Nikola Tesla: Chapter 1 of Gerry Vassilatos book "Secrets of Cold War Technology"
Walter Russell: Home Study Course.. the universal one
Viktor Schauberger: Our Senseless Toil / what can be gleaned from other peoples translations of schauberger's material
but the list he provided is much better :)
http://www.overunity.com/index.php/topic,133.msg24602.html#msg24602 (http://www.overunity.com/index.php/topic,133.msg24602.html#msg24602)
Quote from: Grumpy on February 28, 2007, 10:41:01 AM
Reviewing the works of the following will assist us in the endeavor:
Nikola Tesla
(Self explanatory) Erfinder listed 4 patents to study which were posted earlier in this thread.
Victor Schauberger
I have the following book: "Living Energies: Exposition of Concepts Viktor Schauberger" by Callum Coats
Karl Schappeller (also spelled Carl) See attached file (in German) and link below (English):
Cyril Davson's Book on Karl Schappeller "The Physics of the Primary State of Matter"
http://panacea-bocaf.org/files/patrickkelly/Davson.pdf (this is a 46 meg file!!!)
Walter Russell
I have "The Secret of Light" and "A New Concept of the Universe".
Quote from: nat1971a on March 21, 2007, 06:23:10 PM
3. Reference "The physics of the primary state of matter" Schappeller
p146 " The essential condition is that every magnet must consist of 3 parts: two poles and a neutral."
p147 "the magnets are set in opposing pairs N + S (plus and a minus) and the neutral is the central core of air space or neutralised interpolar energy. And this neutrality or impolarity is the real source of the electric current".
looking at these, and the leedskalnin description of positive electricity and negative electricity, and there being the neutral zero point.. this all reminds me very much of the bloch wall.
(https://overunityarchives.com/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.dprins.demon.nl%2Fconvergence%2Fimages%2FImage88.jpeg&hash=444b7836eebdcf9bb0f6c8231850761830945b74)
now, heres my question. how does the bloch wall relate to the halbach array? how do these both relate to the tesla patents, and erfinder's disclosure?
Hi all
I have innovations.!
I Replication Daniel McFarland's patents using the concepts administered here and worked well.
overcame the expected.
Sorry I not to have pictures to illustrate the experiences.
For the initial kicks of power I used a battery of 12v 7A of motorcycle.
The exciting is a coil electro-magnet. chickens make more chickens ;D. It?s real
Regards
@brnbrade
Can you give us the patent number you've replicated please?
Sorry I am not familar with Daniel McFarland's patents.
Thank you.
ChrisC
Hi Chris,
You can read about Daniel McFarland's patent here:
http://www.overunity.com/index.php/topic,712.msg17173.html#msg17173
and some more here: http://my.voyager.net/~jrrandall/CookCoil.htm
Gyula
ERfinder referenced this book (among others): The Secret of Light by Walter Russell
Here are two quotes from the book:
Page 110
"Man's power lies in giving. He must learn to give as Nature gives."
"Man will forever war with man until he learns to give his all with the full expectation of equal receiving, and never taking that which is not given as an earned reward for his giving."
In this spirit.....here is a copy of the ERfinder posts. Hope it helps.
Kent
this is slightly of subject but
QuoteOne other interesting consequence is that the large corporations who had rejected his initial approaches in such a knee-jerk fashion, conducted internal inquests to find out what had gone wrong, both with their own research and with their dealings with the outside world.
On the face of it, it was perfectly understandable that Ward's claims should be ignored since he was merely an amateur, with no scientific training and no track record in research.
ICI's own paints laboratory held an internal audit and what they found puts this claim in an entirely different light. For the audit showed that the most scientifically qualified of its research chemists had contributed to the least number of patents, and the fewer scientific qualifications the staff possessed, the greater the number of patents they had contributed to. In the most striking case of all, the person who had contributed to most ICI's patents had no scientific qualifications at all.
It seems that Maurice Ward's greatest strength as a researcher was that he had not been taught how to think.
In the light of examples such as this, the phrase 'Alternative Science' seems less a contradiction in terms and more a harbinger of something that professional science is likely to see more and more of in future.
its here http://www.alternativescience.com/flame-proof.htm
maybe there is hope !
@louis
Thanks for posting. Yes, I did remember seeing this on Dateline, I believe, several years ago. What happened to this remarkable finding? Is it patented or is it a tradesecret? Do you know?
Thanks
ChrisC
Hello
My replication, about my point of view of the invention.
.
hey google this 'witricity'
finally nikola's dream is becoming a reality. :)
Seems this link is now dead. Erfinder does not seem to be coming back on here, good luck to everyone.
Trump
.
A excellent website, which has been updated...
http://www.themeasuringsystemofthegods.com/index.html
Dirt
...
Peace :)
http://amasci.com/freenrg/tors/spin1.html
Erfinder:
Are you back in town? Great! Want to teach us more?
Thanks
chrisC
Quote from: Erfinder on July 04, 2007, 03:14:49 AM
;D
Nice one Grumpy
Just trying to open a lot of eyes to the big world out there.
Use of zinc or steel to delay propagation is interesting.
Glad you liked it.
Keep up your work.
Natures beauty is unsurpassed by the creations of mankind.
One in a million can see them. One in a billion will embrace them.
Best wishes to you, Erfinder.
Hi all:
Last time I was in here was around message 260 and thought Erfinder had vacated. Nice to see he is still around. I stated then that this was surely something that needed to be studied in dept. That panned out true. Just spent the last two days catching up. I would like to know if anyone here has been fruitful in finding the magnets for this? I have a way to make the metal form but sure cant figure out where to come up with the mags. My shop here has no clue for me. Help needed.
I will have to find the magnets before I will shell out the $200 for the core materials to be made.
thanks
sugra
If you go back to around page 8 or 10 or somewhere around there, you will see that I mentioned that you could make your own magnets by using iron or other magnetic powder, mixed with adhesive or epoxy, cured in a mold of the desired shape, all while in a magnetic field.
One of the reasons that Erfinder left is that no one can think for themselves - just parasites in a box.
Is that what I am? :'(
Quote from: sugra on July 10, 2007, 03:13:32 PM
Is that what I am? :'(
That is for you to decide.Don't get hung up over little details of construction. If you understand the concepts behind the device then you can change it's design to suit what you have available.
For the magnets in question, you could buy four horseshoe magnets and cut the ends off to achieve 90 degree sections. There, you know how to make the magnets.
Will you dare ask how to cut them?
Cut them close to shape with a fine toothed hacksaw and then use a file or sandpaper to finish them to correct size. Seal ends with thin coat of glue or paint. Particle will stick to the file - use tape to remove.
The magnetic field enclosed in the magnet ring can also be created with a toroidal coil. Use four segments to simulate four separate magnets. Ah, but this would require slip rings to rotate and remain powered. No worries - Erfinder posted a drawing of a solid state device - perhaps someone saved it.
QuoteNo worries - Erfinder posted a drawing of a solid state device - perhaps someone saved it.
http://docs.google.com/View?docID=dg764fg_1hrmr3w&revision=_latest
-am1ll3r
Quote from: Grumpy on July 10, 2007, 02:03:50 PM
If you go back to around page 8 or 10 or somewhere around there, you will see that I mentioned that you could make your own magnets by using iron or other magnetic powder, mixed with adhesive or epoxy, cured in a mold of the desired shape, all while in a magnetic field.
One of the reasons that Erfinder left is that no one can think for themselves - just parasites in a box.
Great.. Great
Mold magnetic powder rare earth :D
@Grump.
would this be?
Solid state version is also saved in this file that Sugra posted a while back.
http://www.overunity.com/index.php?topic=2235.msg33501#msg33501
(Erfinder.zip)
Yup, that would be me, the parasite. :-\ On a small note, you do have to use a ceramic saw to cut magnets with. Guess with Erfinder gone now I might as well follow so I wont be a deterent to the cause here.
bye!
I have got some projects in mind:
related this thread-object I recommend to visit the Patent-archiv and
to search for Pavel Imris,DE,Elektromotor !
One e-plant-EXPO-object more !
S
dL
p.s.: e-car,house-e-plant: 20 KW ,I decide that this will be sufficient !
Damn straight!
Hi all...I see there is a thread about Edward Leedskalnin now on OU.com.
I wonder if Erfinder might go and make some posts there.
http://www.overunity.com/index.php/topic,703.0/topicseen.html
In some of Erfinders old posts he mentioned that he understood clearly all about Ed Leedkalnin's work..so he should be able to add to the discussion there.
Scotty
Leedskalnin.com
Hi All,
i've read this and other threads where Erfinder force us toread Tesla's patents and many books and pointed that capturing
of Radiant Enegy is possible with high voltage and high frequency.
Next I found this:
http://www.themeasuringsystemofthegods.com/COLD%20ELECTRICITY1.pdf
Now U can get very condensed knowledge with many citation from Tesla and Ed Gray patents.
After lecture of above I understand we can get energy amplification (this way) only with very narrow (from several nanoseconds to say 100 microseconds) pulses (train of pulses) of very high voltage minimum few thousands volts.
Now I understud how very small and slow rotating Testatica can produce 3kW of energy.
We all should carefully read this work of Peter A. Lindemann (known from other free energy designs) , because it seems he is very close to the point!
Concernig above ALL low freqency designs with medium or even high voltage sources seems to be wasting of time and money, because they can't achieve significant OU.
Just have a look at many working not replication of MEG, TPU, HOPE etc.
Kolec