here will be a gentleman's rules Terms of service investigation into the claims [ 'supported claims"]
of member Synchro 1
I leave the floor to Synchro ...
Quote from: ramset on April 08, 2017, 03:31:33 PM
here will be a gentleman's rules Terms of service investigation into the claims [ 'supported claims"]
of member Synchro 1
I leave the floor to Synchro ...
@ramset,
You're a complete backside!
Keep it clean guys.
TM
Time to enforce the TOS!
well
since Synchro has chosen the Low road
I have chosen to attempt to understand his claim
since soo many readers here [myself included]
don't understand the claim?
Allen has been "flagged" in the past for poor conduct, I never had much to do with him
and always tried to share his thoughts with experimenters here [specifically member Luc[Gotoluc]
when he was working on Floor's work....
I also never asked for him to be "flagged "
here is his most recent thought on his claim from energetic forum
I will post the link here to energetic thread
http://www.energeticforum.com/renewable-energy/20714-magnetic-field-bifilar-pancake-coil.html
Bifilar Coil for Electro-Magnets
-Allen
Quote-------------------------------------------------------------------------------
These two videos share a basic underlying principle; The bifilar and single wire nail core solenoid coils in the first video were both "Shock Pulsed" before the wire ends were attached to the battery electrodes. We can see how the solenoid coils were pulsed in the 48 Hex nut locking video that follows:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9mxtwS2OsaA
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YeJ5wHBpaf4
We know that the serial bifilar coil can cancel self inductance, and also that the single wire is not an inductor.
end quote
I honestly don't know if Synchro will contribute here
but understanding this claim would be good for the community.
respectfully
Chet K
here is one unanswered question from Synchro
Which way does current flow in a Ruhmkopff Secondary Coil when the current's interrupted in the primary and can you define "Negative Current"?
Quote from: ramset on April 09, 2017, 12:11:29 PM
here is one unanswered question from Synchro
Which way does current flow in a Ruhmkopff Secondary Coil when the current's interrupted in the primary and can you define "Negative Current"?
That strawman "question" has been asked and answered, several times already, and the answer is fully contained in Faraday's Law of Induction and Lenz's Law:
http://hyperphysics.phy-astr.gsu.edu/hbase/electric/farlaw.html (http://hyperphysics.phy-astr.gsu.edu/hbase/electric/farlaw.html)
And current is the flow of charge. Whether you want to call it "negative" or "positive" depends entirely on your reference point and your conventions. In England people drive cars on the left side of the road from the perspective of the driver looking forward. This is a convention. If a passenger is facing rearwards, the car is driving on the right side of the road from the passenger's perspective. This is a reference point. "Conventional" current direction is a result of a "guess" made by Benjamin Franklin, before it was understood that the electron is actually the carrier of what we call (reference point) the unit _negative_ charge, and it is this negative charge that flows in metal wires in an electric circuit. So we are stuck with Franklin's convention, or guess, that current flows from the Positive pole of a battery to the Negative pole, when in fact we now know that _charge_ actually flows the other way, from the pole or position that has an excess of negative charge, to the place or pole which has an excess of positive charge (which is really a _shortage_ of negative charge in almost every case.) Convention and reference point.
Faraday's law tells us that when a magnetic field is CHANGING over time ... this is what is meant by the differential d(B)/dt ... there will be an EMF (voltage) induced in conductors within that changing field that is proportional to the rate of change (the slope d(B)/dt) and Lenz's law tells us that the polarity of this EMF will be in the direction to oppose that change (the minus sign of the equation -E=d(B)/dt.)
In systems like electrolysis or electrophoresis or battery chemistry, charge can be transferred by ions (charged partial molecules) which can travel in opposite directions across a potential (voltage) gradient, with positively charged ions going one way and negatively charged ions going the other way simultaneously. Convention and reference point.
So in the strawman _secondary_ coil subjected to the pulsations of a _primary_ coil, or even when a _single coil_ is subjected to an alternately growing and falling magnetic field ---- that is, the SIGN of the slope d(B)/dt changes from negative to positive and back as B grows and shrinks -- the induced EMF also reverses SIGN back and forth, indicating an alternating current response. This however is different from the case where a steady state current through a coil (dB/dt = 0, no change in magnetic field, horizontal or zero slope) is interrupted (B is falling so d(B)/dt has negative slope), which as we have seen in demonstrations over and over, causes a reversal of the _sign_ of the EMF (voltage) produced in accord with Faraday's Law and Lenz's Law, which causes the current to continue to flow in the _same direction_ as before.
Why do you think engineers and circuit designers put a so-called "flyback" diode across a relay coil, "negatively biased" with respect to the DC current used to actuate the coil? In which direction does current flow through this diode when the current to the coil is interrupted? In my demonstrations I use the LED as the "flyback diode" to show clearly and unambiguously in which direction the current flows when the magnetic field is decreasing due to the supply current being interrupted.
You can find literally thousands of illustrations of this if you bother to look. And flyback diodes are used in many devices we all probably use every day, to give that current some place to go so that the EMF (voltage) induced by the collapsing field doesn't rise to the point of damaging some component.
I completed my measurements on Tesla's bifilar coil for electro-magnets and posted my final conclusions on "evostars" thread at Energetic Forum as Allen Burgess.
And how do you explain the results of my two LED demonstrations? And how do you explain the ubiquitous use of flyback diodes as shown in the above diagram (and thousands more on google images)?
Current flowing in both directions at the same time in a wire? Then why don't both LEDs light up at the same time? You are doubling down on a losing hand.
QuoteWe know that the serial bifilar coil can cancel self inductance, and also that the single wire is not an inductor.
YOU may "know" that but your "knowledge" is wrong.
http://www.consultrsr.net/resources/eis/induct5.htm
QuoteEven a single, straight piece of wire has some inductance!
We generally associate inductance with a loop or coil of wire. However, even a straight piece of wire, or your electrode, has some self-inductance. This can be important if you are dealing with low impedances (< 1 ohm) at high frequencies (> 10kHz).
[/left]
and many many other references and calculators can be found.
Here is another claim of the member Synchro1:
Quote from: synchro1 on April 06, 2017, 07:51:25 PM
@evostars,
Discharging a capacitor is like decanting water from a five gallon jug; Slow starting, followed by a strong gush at .67, tapering off to a slow flow: Charging exactly the reverse, max charge rate at .33 capacity:
(emphasis mine)
with which he posted this _correct_ graph which immediately refutes his own claim:
Here's another claim, just made today.
Quote from: synchro1 on April 09, 2017, 02:43:57 PM
@Tinman,
Current reverses direction and travels in the same direction at the same time like the 60 Hz A.C. current in our overhead transmission lines; Like boarding a bus and moving toward the rear while the bus is accelerating forward. It may appear to a stationary observer that the bus passenger is standing still.
(emphasis mine)
So why don't both LEDs flash in my Coil Current Direction (2) demonstration?
And I'll bet that a lot of power distribution system engineers would be very surprised to hear that electrical current in wires flows in two opposite directions at the same time.
Of course if some solid experimental proof exists of this claim...................... we all would like to know about it.
Quote from: TinselKoala on April 09, 2017, 05:24:04 PM
Here's another claim, just made today.
(emphasis mine)
So why don't both LEDs flash in my Coil Current Direction (2) demonstration?
And I'll bet that a lot of power distribution system engineers would be very surprised to hear that electrical current in wires flows in two opposite directions at the same time.
Of course if some solid experimental proof exists of this claim...................... we all would like to know about it.
Ha, Ha! you do know some of these people are anly ten years old ;) yeah!
How about doing a test on fly back while your on the subject, find out the min/ max pulse width for maximum BEMF in voltage or energy return, in other words is it possible to get a 'gain or not' ?
:D Well, the answer to the first part is right there in Faraday's Law of Induction.
-E=d(B)/dt
So to maximize E, you want to maximize the change in B and/or minimize the change in time. This means it isn't the pulse _width_ that is most important for high EMF, but rather the pulse rise and fall times for a given current in the pulse. High currents coming on and going off in the minimum amount of time. The pulse _width_ will then be important (in the form of frequency and duty cycle of pulsation) to allow the RLC bits enough time to charge/discharge to the required degree before the next pulse comes along. A well-designed Tesla Coil of modern form does all this explicitly, and it is the reason why Tesla spent so much time on spark gaps of various kinds.
Is it possible to get a "gain" or not? Well that all depends on what you mean by "gain". Certainly you can push the EMF or BEMF to ridiculously high voltages by using fast rise/fall times. By the right combination of frequency and VRSWR (voltage rise by standing wave resonance) can you entrain extra energy from "somewhere" (environment, space, vacuum, water, ten-year-olds, etc)... well, that's the 64 dollar question, isn't it. ???
(But I wouldn't put my money on the ten-year-olds.) ;)
Quote from: TinselKoala on April 10, 2017, 05:52:42 AM
:D Well, the answer to the first part is right there in Faraday's Law of Induction.
-E=d(B)/dt
So to maximize E, you want to maximize the change in B and/or minimize the change in time. This means it isn't the pulse _width_ that is most important for high EMF, but rather the pulse rise and fall times for a given current in the pulse. High currents coming on and going off in the minimum amount of time. The pulse _width_ will then be important (in the form of frequency and duty cycle of pulsation) to allow the RLC bits enough time to charge/discharge to the required degree before the next pulse comes along. A well-designed Tesla Coil of modern form does all this explicitly, and it is the reason why Tesla spent so much time on spark gaps of various kinds.
Is it possible to get a "gain" or not? Well that all depends on what you mean by "gain". Certainly you can push the EMF or BEMF to ridiculously high voltages by using fast rise/fall times. By the right combination of frequency and VRSWR (voltage rise by standing wave resonance) can you entrain extra energy from "somewhere" (environment, space, vacuum, water, ten-year-olds, etc)... well, that's the 64 dollar question, isn't it. ???
(But I wouldn't put my money on the ten-year-olds.) ;)
Hi, Mr Tinsel, i'm aware of the characteristics you mention above but I do so hate reinventing the wheel so to speak, you must have noticed some of Nelson's experiments he calls 'electron traps' I would have thought you might have some 'light' to through on this subject, with your background as we are still learning.
Regards AG
AlienGrey
sir,
not trying to speak for TinselKoala here, this Topic "Nelson circuit"[or other name ??] will be opened soon [with Nelson's permission [already approved]]
and some have asked Tinsel for a build up of this circuit ,for discussion here so as to learn
what is possible there [others will be building too]
it will be a moderated topic [been much disrespect of Topics lately Stefan will be fixing that soon ].
respectfully
Chet K
Quote from: ramset on April 10, 2017, 09:44:55 AM
AlienGrey
sir,
not trying to speak for TinselKoala here, this Topic "Nelson circuit"[or other name ??] will be opened soon [with Nelson's permission [already approved]]
and some have asked Tinsel for a build up of this circuit ,for discussion here so as to learn
what is possible there [others will be building too]
it will be a moderated topic [been much disrespect of Topics lately Stefan will be fixing that soon ].
respectfully
Chet K
Thanks for the information young Ramset, I have done some tests already myself but found it difficult tracing Nelsons circuit in his videos on several of his projects, with no avail, even after chatting to Nelson himself, of course, there are so many variables like rewinding MOT' and Earth loops to water supply Earths ect, and of course different metals in the windings, Anyway when might I ask is this learning curve about to happen, any ideas ? note Tesla does appear to like the use or iron in his projects, i don't know the truth on this being a sauce of free electrons or not.
Regards AG
Well, unlike some other people posting on this forum (without presenting a lick of proof) I do not pretend to "know" how to achieve OU performance in an electrical circuit. Yet!
However I suspect that IF it can be done, it will involve stressing space with extremely high voltage gradients and very fast transitions. See the papers published in mainstream physics journals by Hal Puthoff and Michael Ibison for some hints and some justification for my "guesses" in this matter. Polarizing the vacuum, changing the refractive index of space itself, tapping the real ZPE (not some bogus dreamlike fiction of what ZPE is), entraining environmental energy (as Tesla said "tapping the wheelworks of Nature) ... these are things that will require not only careful and knowledgeable construction of apparatus but also a solid grounding in actual physics. And maybe these things are simply beyond the reach of hopeful amateurs like us, or maybe not. Only careful and knowledgeable experimentation, along with hard criticism when stuff that is simply wrong is tossed about, will have any chance of finding out.
When people here repeat silly conjectures that are easily proven wrong, or buy into bogus models of physical reality that in fact do not represent actual reality, that does a real disservice to everyone who is honestly experimenting along these lines. Censorship does not help when it is not based in reality. It is important to discuss even the false claims, by showing them to be false so that others do not make the same errors. Claims without evidence, or blindly falling into hopeful belief of fairy tales or money-grubbing YouTubers, can be dismissed as the fictions they are.
Quote from: TinselKoala on April 10, 2017, 02:20:45 PM
Well, unlike some other people posting on this forum (without presenting a lick of proof) I do not pretend to "know" how to achieve OU performance in an electrical circuit. Yet!
However I suspect that IF it can be done, it will involve stressing space with extremely high voltage gradients and very fast transitions. See the papers published in mainstream physics journals by Hal Puthoff and Michael Ibison for some hints and some justification for my "guesses" in this matter. Polarizing the vacuum, changing the refractive index of space itself, tapping the real ZPE (not some bogus dreamlike fiction of what ZPE is), entraining environmental energy (as Tesla said "tapping the wheelworks of Nature) ... these are things that will require not only careful and knowledgeable construction of apparatus but also a solid grounding in actual physics. And maybe these things are simply beyond the reach of hopeful amateurs like us, or maybe not. Only careful and knowledgeable experimentation, along with hard criticism when stuff that is simply wrong is tossed about, will have any chance of finding out.
When people here repeat silly conjectures that are easily proven wrong, or buy into bogus models of physical reality that in fact do not represent actual reality, that does a real disservice to everyone who is honestly experimenting along these lines. Censorship does not help when it is not based in reality. It is important to discuss even the false claims, by showing them to be false so that others do not make the same errors. Claims without evidence, or blindly falling into hopeful belief of fairy tales or money-grubbing YouTubers, can be dismissed as the fictions they are.
Dear TinselKoala.
You have a ROFL....
I have one of these....
IMO it will be when, not if.
Cheers Graham.
How about coil shorting multiple times when it is almost saturated by magnetic field ? ::)
Quote from: forest on April 10, 2017, 03:42:30 PM
How about coil shorting multiple times when it is almost saturated by magnetic field ? ::)
Try it and see. Nobody (not even Big Oil or the MiBs) is stopping you.
Quote from: TinselKoala on April 10, 2017, 02:20:45 PM
Well, unlike some other people posting on this forum (without presenting a lick of proof) I do not pretend to "know" how to achieve OU performance in an electrical circuit. Yet!
However I suspect that IF it can be done, it will involve stressing space with extremely high voltage gradients and very fast transitions. See the papers published in mainstream physics journals by Hal Puthoff and Michael Ibison for some hints and some justification for my "guesses" in this matter. Polarizing the vacuum, changing the refractive index of space itself, tapping the real ZPE (not some bogus dreamlike fiction of what ZPE is), entraining environmental energy (as Tesla said "tapping the wheelworks of Nature) ... these are things that will require not only careful and knowledgeable construction of apparatus but also a solid grounding in actual physics. And maybe these things are simply beyond the reach of hopeful amateurs like us, or maybe not. Only careful and knowledgeable experimentation, along with hard criticism when stuff that is simply wrong is tossed about, will have any chance of finding out.
When people here repeat silly conjectures that are easily proven wrong, or buy into bogus models of physical reality that in fact do not represent actual reality, that does a real disservice to everyone who is honestly experimenting along these lines. Censorship does not help when it is not based in reality. It is important to discuss even the false claims, by showing them to be false so that others do not make the same errors. Claims without evidence, or blindly falling into hopeful belief of fairy tales or money-grubbing YouTubers, can be dismissed as the fictions they are.
So how come Henry Moray managed it? And so did Tesla extract energy from an iron core and early morse code telex transmissions, and why did Gray at Oxford university need to 'doctor' Maxwell's calculations and even Albert Einstein said he found gross errors in Greys doctored publication of Maxwell's publication. ect extra.
They still do it today like the fake news you get on TV like Guys in white hats picking up dead kids from a nerve gas attack, everyone knows Syrian nevre gas is a killer on contact! so are they special or is it a lie.
Regards AG
Regards AG
I just want to repeat a passage from Tesla's patent 512340:
Quotel have found that in every coil there exists a certain relation between its self-induction and capacity that permits a current of given frequency and potential to pass through it with no other opposition than that of ohmic resistance, or, in other words, as though 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 capacity of the coil, the latter quantity being just 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.
(emphasis mine)
The "proper conditions in other respects" refers to the current and the frequency of oscillation. In ANY and EVERY coil. In the patented winding, the interturn capacitance is increased and so, for a given current, a lower frequency of oscillation is required for this "neutralization of self-inductance" to occur. Also, due to the increased capacitance, the TBF coil's "LC" characteristics mean that the resonant frequency is lower than that of a comparable coil with single winding (which has lower distributed capacitance and hence a higher resonant frequency) when no external capacitors are connected. Some early texts refer to this _capacitance_ which is able, at a particular frequency, to "neutralize self inductance" as a "negative inductance". In ANY and EVERY coil, TBF or monofilar, just at different frequencies.
Quote from: TinselKoala on April 10, 2017, 11:23:23 PM
I just want to repeat a passage from Tesla's patent 512340:
(emphasis mine)
However I suspect that IF it can be done, it will involve stressing space with extremely high voltage gradients and very fast transitions. See the papers published in mainstream physics journals by Hal Puthoff and Michael Ibison for some hints and some justification for my "guesses" in this matter. Polarizing the vacuum, changing the refractive index of space itself, tapping the real ZPE (not some bogus dreamlike fiction of what ZPE is), entraining environmental energy (as Tesla said "tapping the wheelworks of Nature) ... these are things that will require not only careful and knowledgeable construction of apparatus but also a solid grounding in actual physics. And maybe these things are simply beyond the reach of hopeful amateurs like us, or maybe not. Only careful and knowledgeable experimentation, along with hard criticism when stuff that is simply wrong is tossed about, will have any chance of finding out.
When people here repeat silly conjectures that are easily proven wrong, or buy into bogus models of physical reality that in fact do not represent actual reality, that does a real disservice to everyone who is honestly experimenting along these lines. Censorship does not help when it is not based in reality. It is important to discuss even the false claims, by showing them to be false so that others do not make the same errors. Claims without evidence, or blindly falling into hopeful belief of fairy tales or money-grubbing YouTubers, can be dismissed as the fictions they are.
So if there is no such thing as zero point energy where did Henry Moray get it from, and why is Never a Strate Answer so worried about Sun plasma attacks from the sun frying their warmongering space crap ;)? and where does the static electricity surrounding our planet come from, and isn't it the cosmic radiation from the sun's solar winds he was using by somehow turning into it ? which I'm not going into here, but by charging the local area of collection, he would be effectively raising the altitude of his collection dish and since everything is a frequency.
You can find all this information on the internet and the odd statements NASA blurt out and regret later on hence never a straight answer ;)
Regards AG
Where did I say there was "No such thing" as ZPE? Look up Hal Puthoff's papers. What I did say and mean is that most people in these forums who use the term "ZPE" don't know what they are talking about and are making up some fantasy thing they think is ZPE but isn't.
Where did Moray get his energy? I have some guesses about that, but they don't involve either real ZPE or the forum fictitious ZPE. :o
The threat to satellites, especially those in geosynchronous or geostationary orbits, from solar plasma discharges (more properly called Corona Mass Ejections, CME, or solar flares) is very real, because they are way up in space and are not protected by the Earth's atmosphere and magnetic field as much as we are here on the ground. However, should a big CME strike the Earth, it will still create havoc both with satellites and here on the ground, as enough energy will couple into the wires of the electric grid to blow out a bunch of stuff, including the hard-to-replace grid transformers. Had such a large CME / flare event happened during the Apollo moonwalk missions, the astronauts would have been toast.
None of this is "secret" so I don't know why you bring up the "Not So Amigos" .
Quote from: TinselKoala on April 11, 2017, 05:49:13 PM
Where did I say there was "No such thing" as ZPE? Look up Hal Puthoff's papers. What I did say and mean is that most people in these forums who use the term "ZPE" don't know what they are talking about and are making up some fantasy thing they think is ZPE but isn't.
Where did Moray get his energy? I have some guesses about that, but they don't involve either real ZPE or the forum fictitious ZPE. :o
The threat to satellites, especially those in geosynchronous or geostationary orbits, from solar plasma discharges (more properly called Corona Mass Ejections, CME, or solar flares) is very real, because they are way up in space and are not protected by the Earth's atmosphere and magnetic field as much as we are here on the ground. However, should a big CME strike the Earth, it will still create havoc both with satellites and here on the ground, as enough energy will couple into the wires of the electric grid to blow out a bunch of stuff, including the hard-to-replace grid transformers. Had such a large CME / flare event happened during the Apollo moonwalk missions, the astronauts would have been toast.
None of this is "secret" so I don't know why you bring up the "Not So Amigos" .
Thanks for defining an explanation you saved me the trouble although the Atmosphere and magnet field does not stop everything as we are actually bombarded with varying degrees of radiation and it's increasing as petrochemicals destroys our atmosphere and the earth's magnetic field is reported at an all time low ect
I thought an Amigo referred to a man friend so better to be 'not so amigo' as it were 8)
Regards AG
Quote from: TinselKoala on April 11, 2017, 05:49:13 PM
The threat to satellites, especially those in geosynchronous or geostationary orbits, from solar plasma discharges (more properly called Corona Mass Ejections, CME, or solar flares) is very real, because they are way up in space and are not protected by the Earth's atmosphere and magnetic field as much as we are here on the ground. However, should a big CME strike the Earth, it will still create havoc both with satellites and here on the ground, as enough energy will couple into the wires of the electric grid to blow out a bunch of stuff, including the hard-to-replace grid transformers. Had such a large CME / flare event happened during the Apollo moonwalk missions, the astronauts would have been toast.
Can't forget the infamous March 1989 geomagnetic storm!