Good day folks. Here is a video where I talk more About Nathan Stubblefield. Just thought I'd share here as it is very interesting information!
https://youtu.be/8NUmPO6JMWY
I explain how his early 1900s wireless system could have worked using Maxwell's original extended equations.
It's my conclusion that such system could possibly not have worked without taking into the consideration Maxwell's original equations. Such as displacement current and its coupling with changing magnetic fields. This action plays a significant role in the transmission through changing magnetic fields.
His device worked even after the batteries became corroded and shorted out with no more power DC. However it was documented, His wireless system still worked fine.
There are other phenomena at play here that goes beyond traditional electromagnetic fields. One such example is torsion fields. These fields can be accounted for in the mathematical framework of Maxwell's extended equations. Specifically through the curve factor. A modification to Maxwell's equations that accounts for the curvature of space-time and could allow for torsion fields.
I do thank you for bringing up this subject. It activated many of feelings in me some are quite positive and some of it are quite critical.
Video started good but the comment ending it with torsion fields belongs to
popular mostly in Russia wacky and/or odd, nonsensical absurd.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Torsion_field (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Torsion_field)
________________________________________________
conspiracy theory:
In the video at 0:44 conspiracy theory is unfounded . - The education of
Nathan Beverly Stubblefield[1] (November 22, 1860 – March 28, 1928) ended when he was 14.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nathan_Stubblefield (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nathan_Stubblefield)
Maxwell equations:
Based on Wikipedia https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nathan_Stubblefield (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nathan_Stubblefield)
Maxwell with his equations was unlikely popular in between a farmers there.
language used:
during entire video despite good American English the young gentleman is using quite unorthodox,
(- other than traditionally, accepted) technical language describing quite basic phenomena,
characteristic to a freshman . So yes - he may have great future sometime in the future or not.
But I do thank him very much for his courage of writing a book at this stage.
Wireless communication Patent :
U.S. Patent 350,299 belongs to A. E. DOLBEAR. MODE OF ELECTRIC COMMUNICATION,
Patented Oct. 5, 1886 and not to NATHAN B. STUBBLEFIELD.
https://patents.google.com/patent/US350299 (https://patents.google.com/patent/US350299)
US 600457A Electrical Battery belongs to NATHAN B. STUBBLEFIELD.
https://patents.google.com/patent/US600457 (https://patents.google.com/patent/US600457)
No patent related to wireless communication was found by me that belongs to NATHAN B. STUBBLEFIELD
Please correct me if I'm wrong.
So by that all conclusions from Wikipedia are "episodic"- "anecdotal" - to be gentle.
The same happens to public contributors and me too, when there is no suitable record present.
Analysis of circuit presented on the video:
The (small)schematic on the left hand side bottom - looks like two loops coupled in the near field .
But if in Far Field than it is Tx / Rx pair suitable for wireless communication.
The DC from Battery is changed to AC with biased DC due to mechanical vibration causing modulation in the microphone and electromagnetic wave is transmitted.
Than Rx is able to receive it at the distance few km or more depends on Frequency , impedance matching, and power .
And yes- it could be earth battery or telluric current it will still power the device.
in minute 7:29 (https://youtu.be/8NUmPO6JMWY?t=449)of the video "Torsion field" nonsense becomes annoying .
in minute 8:14 I gave up not able to stay the nonsense.
Wesley
LOL
If you would have watched the video in full. I describe how these systems can work. But knowing you stopped watching midway. Not much I can do about the information you missed as I was elaborating my point. To sum it up:
Maxwell's equations provide a foundation for understanding electromagnetic phenomena, and incorporating the curl factor can open up possibilities for exploring torsion, scalar, and spin fields. While these ideas may not yet have widespread acceptance in mainstream science, it's important to approach them with an open mind and continue to investigate and experiment.
As long as the principles of scientific inquiry and rigor are followed, there is always potential for new discoveries and advancements. So it's important to encourage and support continued exploration and experimentation, even if some ideas may seem unconventional.
If you want to know what equations I base myself on. It's all in my ebook that you can download from my youtube.
Yes you are right. Maxwell was contemplating Ether/eather too.
It was crazy time where lucky in 1905 Einstein was lucky only because other guy - Russian (at that point from not yet Communist Russia)
Nikolay Umov made a mistake but he was close, very close.
https://www.scirp.org/Journal/PaperInformation.aspx?PaperID=83561 (https://www.scirp.org/Journal/PaperInformation.aspx?PaperID=83561)
note: this article from above may be partially misleading - as I simply didn't analyze it yet -if it was made by Russian propaganda or not.
sorry for that
Wesley
Joel
Thanks for sharing your work , I suppose any repeatable "gain" anomaly would be
Amazing ..( if more out than in )
Here a repost from an open source researcher who follows physics discussions outside
The box
Quote
I highly encourage anyone to watch Distinti's semi recent work.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gZRDSy88SN4 (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gZRDSy88SN4)
He goes over all of this, where mass and gravity pop out of the equation because of a very simple fact, two spinning charged particles when disturbed create a reaction force which we call mass (inertia to be exact. He provides all the derivations and it's all simple math, no higher special dimensions and wacky mathematics needed.
His work on the standard model is even more cool but currently on Patreon only. When a simple model and equation leads to explaining the masses and magnetic moments of fundamental particles without resorting to a blackboard full of equations then you have something truly noteworthy at hand. And if you think this is doing pseudo isomorphic science where you're not adding any new knowledge or data to the pool, well here is an example: he can predict the magnetic moment of the Tau particle which is a yet unknown experimental value. This alone should trigger people to look further into this especially people at CERN.
I truly believe his work will become the foundation of future scientific progress when mainstream physics catches on and stops beating their dead horse. I truly believe the only reason why distinti is still rambling on to his small community and making small progress is because of his personality. He makes a lot of fun of physicists which makes things difficult when you want smart and respected people in the community to have a look at your work in a respectful manner. But then again, history tells us it's always the young/new generation that made the biggest impact in science not the old established thinking. Niels Bohr was only 28 when he wrote on the quantization of the electrons energy level. Einstein himself was only 26 and 36 when he published his most impactful papers.
Yet today these papers are seen as gospel and nothing critical can be said of them without being ridiculed as a heretic or nutjob.[/size]
End quote
Quote from: ramset on April 10, 2023, 11:17:01 AM
Quote
I highly encourage anyone to watch Distinti's semi recent work.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gZRDSy88SN4 (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gZRDSy88SN4)
// This alone should trigger people to look further into this especially people at CERN.//
Can you introduce the name of the commenter/supporter and his association if possible?
We often use known to us phenomena like :
if it looks
like a
duck and
walks like a
duck, it
is a
duckto explain something else - but duck belongs to classical mechanics.
more of it is here: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Duck_test (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Duck_test)
Space Time Curvature visualized with use of trampoline is not explained, but only presented so you can "see" that what is invisible.
That is why Bohr atom was compared to solar system in ~ 1913. It was no television there yet.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mXxsT1ut35Q (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mXxsT1ut35Q)
why-is-the-bohr-model-compared-to-the-solar-system (https://www.skystreamenergy.com/why-is-the-bohr-model-compared-to-the-solar-system/#:~:text=The%20Bohr%20model%20of%20the%20atom%20is%20likened,model%20to%20explain%20the%20atom%E2%80%99s%20structure%20and%20behavior.)
This was so convenient,
that till today it is often used with note that it really is not like that!!!!rubber sheet analogy - it have mislead many peoples as it is only analogy and nothing more than that.
There is no physical fabric of spacetime - it doesn't exist - instead it is just our form of explanation of mechanisms
that need to be quickly understood by some average human animal, while others don't give a damn about it.
https://physics.stackexchange.com/questions/309369/the-fabric-of-space-time (https://physics.stackexchange.com/questions/309369/the-fabric-of-space-time)
In minute 1:07 (https://youtu.be/gZRDSy88SN4?t=67)the author makes assumption that may be right in the field of classical mechanics
but can't be applied to quantum mechanics.
mentioned by him Ladder_paradox : https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ladder_paradox (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ladder_paradox)
in 1:57 (https://youtu.be/gZRDSy88SN4?t=120) he makes another mistake light as electromagnetic phenomena has no mass and its only
interaction with matter is collision where photon deposits its energy to a mass converting it to heat.
by the way- Length Contraction formula https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Length_contraction (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Length_contraction)
was not stolen by Relativity - it was adopted and applied as an leftover of what was right
in outdated model in physics. - like screw from the old wall that belongs to you, that you replaced with new one .
__________________________________________________
When we go along the nonsense:Fluid dynamics and vortex are classical physics phenomena but
in 5:24 (https://youtu.be/gZRDSy88SN4?t=324) he uses it to reincarnate Ether/eather telling us in 5:47 (https://youtu.be/gZRDSy88SN4?t=347) that eather is consumed by matter in vortex.
We can't check it out as properties of eather are unknown and there is no conversion table available.
by analogy we may say that imperial system is old and we replace it with much better metric system
- however the conversion table still exist and both can coexist as well.
Based on today's models he is wrong in almost every statement he makes in that video -
6:21 (https://youtu.be/gZRDSy88SN4?t=380) we are told that: "every particle of matter is a stable nuclear reactor and
we need to save human race." Gushhhhhhhhhhhh... if it is stable than no worry ..... "
it's fine" or "it's all right". "no problem"
"calm down". "Don't panic..."
Stable Particle is not a nuclear reactor is not even an isotope - that can't even explode... period!!!
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nuclear_reaction (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nuclear_reaction)
Nature likes balance so even isotopes get into balance after they throw not needed .. out..
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Isotope (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Isotope)
http://large.stanford.edu/courses/2018/ph241/dull2/ (http://large.stanford.edu/courses/2018/ph241/dull2/)
I'll save space in this forum not going to more of it.
opinion expressed is my own Wesley
For all curious about phenomena around us:
1.
overunity doesn't exist
2. the maximum you can get at the output of any device is underunity.
It means if you deliver to the device or circuit 1W you will get <1W at output.
3. that is why
Perpetual motion is a nonsense.
4.
anti-gravity doesn't exist.
5. Energy or e.g electrical energy can't be produced or created nor destroyed -energy can only change its form.
It means amount of energy in the universe doesn't change. It is constant.
Term energy production means only that energy changes its from to the one convenient to us.
6
Quantum physics is probably the most precise scientific discipline ever devised by humankind.
https://theconversation.com/seven-common-myths-about-quantum-physics-115029 (https://theconversation.com/seven-common-myths-about-quantum-physics-115029)
7.
Radioactivity is not dangerous at all if we think that the gasoline in our car tank is safe.
In reality basic knowledge about the both- is like knowing how to use your kitchen knife safely .
8.
Classical physics doesn't explain quantum physics
https://iopscience.iop.org/book/mono/978-0-7503-1206-6/chapter/bk978-0-7503-1206-6ch1 (https://iopscience.iop.org/book/mono/978-0-7503-1206-6/chapter/bk978-0-7503-1206-6ch1)
Great paper is here for you to read:
Quote2.Quantum physics is the revolution that overthrew classical physics. Describing the
difference between them is like describing the difference between the Bolsheviks and the Tsars.
Where do we even begin?
https://www.esalq.usp.br/lepse/imgs/conteudo_thumb/What-is-the-difference-between-classical-physics-and-quantum-physics.pdf (https://www.esalq.usp.br/lepse/imgs/conteudo_thumb/What-is-the-difference-between-classical-physics-and-quantum-physics.pdf)
9.
Ether/Eather doesn't exist
10.
Good and spirituality is not recognized by physics as physics exists and is functioning exactly the same with or without any knowledge about "
it."
It means that: physics rejects and ignores all that is non-physics related.
11.
We all are animals - humans belong to mammals.
12.
Free Energy means only Energy that is for Free. like an energy from sun, wind, heat as long as it is at no charge
and there is no tax on it. For example
air and
electromagnetic wave is for free, but using air to send electromagnetic wave is regulated and/or needs to be licensed
By FCC in USA.
13
Patents are not for free and they restrict your use of anything you didn't think as of yet, as possible, or didn't patent yet for 20 years in average.
I hope it helps.
Happy Passover, Easter, Ramadan (https://www.bing.com/ck/a?!&&p=a5875be1df0159cfJmltdHM9MTY4MTE3MTIwMCZpZ3VpZD0xNGEzMTFmOS1kZTBmLTZlYWEtMTliMS0wMzA5ZGY3NjZmYzgmaW5zaWQ9NTE3MA&ptn=3&hsh=3&fclid=14a311f9-de0f-6eaa-19b1-0309df766fc8&u=a1aHR0cHM6Ly93d3cuZHcuY29tL2VuL3Bhc3NvdmVyLWVhc3Rlci1yYW1hZGFuLTIwMjItZmFsbC1zaW11bHRhbmVvdXNseS9hLTYxNDc4OTM1&ntb=1)
To all of you :)
Wesley
Quote from: stivep on April 11, 2023, 12:58:51 PM
3. that is why Perpetual motion is a nonsense.
4. anti-gravity doesn't exist.
The invisibility cap exists.
I want an invisibility hat.
Quote from: kolbacict on April 11, 2023, 01:22:38 PM
The invisibility cap exists. I want an invisibility hat.
Yes invisibility technology exists. So you can be completely invisible from a certain angle in ideal case of it.
https://www.wired.com/story/vollebak-invisibility-cloak/ (https://www.wired.com/story/vollebak-invisibility-cloak/)
But I do suggest your seasonal or permanent emigration- you have so close to the Free World.
Wesley
I want to clarify that my devices and concepts do not violate the laws of thermodynamics or claim to achieve such. Rather, it utilizes multiple energy sources and manipulations in a clever way. In the case of energy generation such as what this user suggests here, A bit sidetracked from my original topic. ... Multiple energy systems are used to increase the efficiency of energy conversion and transduction, resulting in a greater electrical energy output than what is put into the system as electrical energy alone. This approach is based on well-established principles of physics and engineering and does not involve any kind of perpetual motion or "free energy" I would appreciate it if you could take the time to understand my device and its workings before making any unfounded claims or assumptions.
Quote from: stivep on April 11, 2023, 12:58:51 PM
For all curious about phenomena around us:
1. overunity doesn't exist
2. the maximum you can get at the output of any device is underunity.
It means if you deliver to the device or circuit 1W you will get <1W at output.
3. that is why Perpetual motion is a nonsense.
4. anti-gravity doesn't exist.
5. Energy or e.g electrical energy can't be produced or created nor destroyed -energy can only change its form.
It means amount of energy in the universe doesn't change. It is constant.
Term energy production means only that energy changes its from to the one convenient to us.
6 Quantum physics is probably the most precise scientific discipline ever devised by humankind.
https://theconversation.com/seven-common-myths-about-quantum-physics-115029 (https://theconversation.com/seven-common-myths-about-quantum-physics-115029)
7. Radioactivity is not dangerous at all if we think that the gasoline in our car tank is safe.
In reality basic knowledge about the both- is like knowing how to use your kitchen knife safely .
8. Classical physics doesn't explain quantum physics
https://iopscience.iop.org/book/mono/978-0-7503-1206-6/chapter/bk978-0-7503-1206-6ch1 (https://iopscience.iop.org/book/mono/978-0-7503-1206-6/chapter/bk978-0-7503-1206-6ch1)
Great paper is here for you to read:
https://www.esalq.usp.br/lepse/imgs/conteudo_thumb/What-is-the-difference-between-classical-physics-and-quantum-physics.pdf (https://www.esalq.usp.br/lepse/imgs/conteudo_thumb/What-is-the-difference-between-classical-physics-and-quantum-physics.pdf)
9. Ether/Eather doesn't exist
10. Good and spirituality is not recognized by physics as physics exists and is functioning exactly the same with or without any knowledge about "it."
It means that: physics rejects and ignores all that is non-physics related.
11. We all are animals - humans belong to mammals.
12. Free Energy means only Energy that is for Free. like an energy from sun, wind, heat as long as it is at no charge
and there is no tax on it. For example air and electromagnetic wave is for free, but using air to send electromagnetic wave is regulated and/or needs to be licensed
By FCC in USA.
13 Patents are not for free and they restrict your use of anything you didn't think as of yet, as possible, or didn't patent yet for 20 years in average.
I hope it helps.
Happy Passover, Easter, Ramadan (https://www.bing.com/ck/a?!&&p=a5875be1df0159cfJmltdHM9MTY4MTE3MTIwMCZpZ3VpZD0xNGEzMTFmOS1kZTBmLTZlYWEtMTliMS0wMzA5ZGY3NjZmYzgmaW5zaWQ9NTE3MA&ptn=3&hsh=3&fclid=14a311f9-de0f-6eaa-19b1-0309df766fc8&u=a1aHR0cHM6Ly93d3cuZHcuY29tL2VuL3Bhc3NvdmVyLWVhc3Rlci1yYW1hZGFuLTIwMjItZmFsbC1zaW11bHRhbmVvdXNseS9hLTYxNDc4OTM1&ntb=1)
To all of you :)
Wesley
I made intentional misleading statement in point 12 in hope someone will correct me ,but nobody did.
Quote
12. Free Energy means only Energy that is for Free. like an energy from sun, wind, heat as long as it is at no charge
and there is no tax on it. For example air and electromagnetic wave is for free, but using air to send electromagnetic wave is regulated and/or needs to be licensed
By FCC in USA.
The correct wording is:
Free Energy means only Energy that is for Free. like an energy from sun, wind, heat as long as it is at no charge
and there is no tax on it. For example
air and
electromagnetic wave is for free, however sending electromagnetic wave is regulated and/or needs to be licensed
By FCC in USA. Electromagnetic wave as quantum physics phenomena doesn't need Air nor any other medium to travel.
Wesley
Quote from: joellagace on April 11, 2023, 02:32:21 PM
Multiple energy systems are used to increase the efficiency of energy conversion and transduction, resulting in a greater electrical energy output than what is put into the system
I'm not sure if I understood your comment correctly .
No method can deliver more energy at output than delivered at input.
it means - there is no way to gain energy at output you can only lose.
But if you don't have to pay for the energy at input than you don't care much what is the efficiency of your energy conversion apparatus
unless some competition of yours can sale that energy at output of their device cheaper.
Niagara Falls hydroelectric station is an example of no need to pay for energy at input.
All energy at output is at ZERO COST means
Free Energy, because the cost of operation is lower than gain from sale.
The energy of flowing water there is greater than energy produced by the turbines so there is lose of energy net.
But owners of Niagara Falls don't see any losses in their pockets.
Think about it.No losses, no maintenance cost, no labor cost, as all of that is paid by customer of yours and pure gain is left in your pocket 24/7
Wesley
Quote from: stivep on April 11, 2023, 03:59:45 PM
"No method can deliver more energy at output than delivered at input."
Wesley
Wesley,
Are you completely and totally sure of your statement above? Are you sure that you and others you follow, have tried every combination of topologies that exist in conventional electromagnetics?
Just curious!!
Regards,
Pm
stivep
Quote2. the maximum you can get at the output of any device is underunity.
It means if you deliver to the device or circuit 1W you will get <1W at output.
This is incorrect and the Conservation of Energy (COE) demands energy cannot be created (over-unity) or destroyed (under-unity) for obvious reasons. If any material thing or circuit was under-unity it would represent an energy sink relative to the surrounding energy. Energy would keep flowing into the imaginary energy sink forcing the surrounding space to become overunity violating the COE.
This is why energy cannot be created or destroyed only transformed. We cannot get something from nothing nor can we force something into nothing because conceptually they represent the same thing.
Quote3. that is why Perpetual motion is a nonsense.
This is also incorrect for similar reasons. Motion relates to kinetic energy and is subject to the same rules defined by the conservation of energy.
For example, suppose we could remove all apparent motion from an object. The atoms/particles/sub-atomic particles which make up the object are still in perpetual motion because matter cannot be created/destroyed nor the energy associated with it. The energy must always exist as either the motion of the particles or the motion of EM fields transferring energy between particles.
In effect, the universe is like a giant vacuum tube where all particles are constantly in motion and transferring EM wave energy between themselves. The obvious question is, if motion is not perpetual then where did all the energy go?. So a particle slowed down or sped up representing a change in kinetic energy, where did the energy go?. You see, your reasoning fails under even the most basic scrutiny.
AC
stivep
QuoteNo method can deliver more energy at output than delivered at input.
A heat pump can deliver/move four times more heat energy than is input or COP>4. You may want to have a talk with your refrigerator because it seems to know something you do not.
Quoteit means - there is no way to gain energy at output you can only lose.
No, energy cannot be created or destroyed and it is always conserved. We cannot lose or gain energy, only transform or move it.
AC
Quote from: onepower on April 11, 2023, 05:43:18 PM
stivep
This is incorrect and the Conservation of Energy (COE) demands energy cannot be created (over-unity) or destroyed (under-unity) for obvious reasons. If any material thing or circuit was under-unity it would represent an energy sink relative to the surrounding energy. Energy would keep flowing into the imaginary energy sink forcing the surrounding space to become overunity violating the COE.
This is why energy cannot be created or destroyed only transformed. We cannot get something from nothing nor can we force something into nothing because conceptually they represent the same thing.
This is also incorrect for similar reasons. Motion relates to kinetic energy and is subject to the same rules defined by the conservation of energy.
For example, suppose we could remove all apparent motion from an object. The atoms/particles/sub-atomic particles which make up the object are still in perpetual motion because matter cannot be created/destroyed nor the energy associated with it. The energy must always exist as either the motion of the particles or the motion of EM fields transferring energy between particles.
In effect, the universe is like a giant vacuum tube where all particles are constantly in motion and transferring EM wave energy between themselves. The obvious question is, if motion is not perpetual then where did all the energy go?. So a particle slowed down or sped up representing a change in kinetic energy, where did the energy go?. You see, your reasoning fails under even the most basic scrutiny.
AC
Good point .
Very much thank you : - wording
under-unity - is an unfortunate form of misrepresentation.
the right form of expression is:
less than unity. <1
good approach to over-unity is here:
https://en.wiktionary.org/wiki/over-unity (https://en.wiktionary.org/wiki/over-unity)
Quoteover- (https://en.wiktionary.org/wiki/over-#English) + unity (https://en.wiktionary.org/wiki/unity#English) ("the number "1""), referring to the fact that an over-unity device should produce more kinetic energy than whatever potential it receives as input.
Coined to avoid patent rules that prevent impossible technologies such as perpetual motion machines being patented.
Why do subatomic particles
seem to have perpetual motion?
is explained here:
https://poe.com/continue_chat?context_aid=1477743640574830&reply=&scroll_to=top (https://poe.com/continue_chat?context_aid=1477743640574830&reply=&scroll_to=top)
more of it is here:
https://www.quora.com/Why-do-subatomic-particles-seem-to-have-perpetual-motion (https://www.quora.com/Why-do-subatomic-particles-seem-to-have-perpetual-motion)
-it is an outdated model of Bohr Atom with is "planetary structure" that is to be blamed for this
confusion. But we still use it just for easiness of an explanation popular especially in education of young children in EU.
Wesley
Quote from: onepower on April 11, 2023, 05:54:04 PM
A heat pump can deliver/move four times more heat energy than is input or COP>4. You may want to have a talk with your refrigerator because it seems to know something you do not.
AC
For a refrigerator, the focus is on removing heat from a specific area.
For a heat pump, the focus is on dumping heat to a specific area.
total equation of net energy use makes you pay for use of your refrigerator with no gain present.
please specify how do you understand the principal difference between a heat pump and a refrigerator so I can respond to your question better. :)
Why there was nobody including you looping this COP>4. back so you could become respected
new Kapanadze?-you may also use help from this article: https://physics.stackexchange.com/questions/344747/heat-pump-is-a-refrigerator (https://physics.stackexchange.com/questions/344747/heat-pump-is-a-refrigerator)
Wesley
Completely off topic this one. :o Good thing he said he would not participate and leave room for others. :P
Quote from: stivep on April 10, 2023, 02:00:03 PM
I'll save space in this forum not going to more of it.
opinion expressed is my own
Wesley
Quote from: partzman on April 11, 2023, 05:37:54 PM
QuoteWesley: "No method can deliver more energy at output than delivered at input."
Are you completely and totally sure of your statement above?
Just curious!! Regards,
Pm
That postulate was first proposed by
Gabrielle Émilie Le Tonnelier de Breteuil, Marquise du Châtelet in 17 December 1706 – 10 September 1749)
Mechanical equivalent of heat was proposed in 1798, by Count Rumford (Benjamin Thompson (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Benjamin_Thompson))
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Conservation_of_energy
The laws of thermodynamics history goes back to Sadi Carnot (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nicolas_L%C3%A9onard_Sadi_Carnot) in 1824
Yes According to modern physics as of today nothing changed since ~1900 in this area.
Wesley
Quote from: joellagace on April 11, 2023, 08:49:05 PM
Completely off topic this one.
Dear friends : I'm only responding the the comments here :)
Legal standpoint on perpetual motion machines was formulated by:
Christopher Wadlow.
Professor. Emeritus Professor, School of Lawhere:
https://academic.oup.com/jiplp/article/2/3/136/2358262 (https://academic.oup.com/jiplp/article/2/3/136/2358262)
Very interesting lecture.____________________________________________________
Please note that Law or Patent Law is not and doesn't represent physics laws. It only
controls and regulates - humanity approach to mechanisms of economics in this area ( my opinion)
Can a Patent Violate the Laws of Chemistry and Physics? (https://www.bing.com/ck/a?!&&p=ce345868278e3af3JmltdHM9MTY4MTE3MTIwMCZpZ3VpZD0xNGEzMTFmOS1kZTBmLTZlYWEtMTliMS0wMzA5ZGY3NjZmYzgmaW5zaWQ9NTE2Nw&ptn=3&hsh=3&fclid=14a311f9-de0f-6eaa-19b1-0309df766fc8&u=a1aHR0cHM6Ly93d3cudGhlaXBsYXdibG9nLmNvbS8yMDIxLzA1L2FydGljbGVzL2lwL2Nhbi1hLXBhdGVudC12aW9sYXRlLXRoZS1sYXdzLW9mLWNoZW1pc3RyeS1hbmQtcGh5c2ljcy8&ntb=1)
The answer is NO!!!!
Wesley
Let me try and get this back on topic. Here is another video I talk about more details of using displacement induction communications and how to put it into application.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4EBExi2wv8k
Using the Earth frequencies, such as the Schumann resonance, and modulating a small DC current in the closed loop, we can create a very low bandwidth signal that carries information, such as voice or data. The modulation of the DC current in the closed loop causes a displacement current in the surrounding medium, which in this case is the Earth or the conductive soil in the Earth Battery. This displacement current creates a modulated electric field that can be detected by a receiver antenna at some distance away. The receiver antenna can be designed to resonate at the same frequency as the transmitter antenna, allowing it to pick up the modulated electric field signal, and the modulated DC current can be decoded to retrieve the original information signal. We can do the same with any galvanic cell such as a potato battery to demonstrate a much weaker transmitter.
The information is carried by modulating the amplitude, frequency, or phase of the signal.
The fluctuations of the DC component superimposed on the small AC signal allow for the coding of information. In traditional methods, we are limited by the bandwidth of the AC source signal, but in this method, we can transmit high-bandwidth information using a narrow-bandwidth source signal. The use of the DC component allows for the modulation of the AC signal and the encoding of information onto it, which can then be transmitted.
In order to properly receive and decode the information being transmitted through the earth using the Stubblefield method, the receiving circuit must also include the same DC bias setup as the transmitting circuit. This is because the information being transmitted is not solely contained in the AC signal, but also in the fluctuations of the DC bias that are superimposed on the AC signal. Therefore, the receiving circuit needs to be able to extract both the AC and DC components of the signal in order to properly decode the transmitted information.
To take advantage of the Stubblefield method in a solid-state transmitter, one approach could be to use a high-frequency oscillator circuit that is designed to resonate with the natural frequency of the Earth. This oscillator could be designed to produce a very low-power AC signal, which could be used to modulate a DC carrier signal generated by the transmitter.
The AC and DC components could be combined in a way that produces a modulated RF signal that is transmitted through an antenna. The Earth would act as a waveguide, allowing the RF signal to propagate over long distances with minimal attenuation.
For using the earth as a waveguide, you would not need any special power. The power used would be the same as that used in a conventional transmitter. The key is to use the earth as a low-loss medium to propagate the signal over long distances, instead of using the air as in conventional radio communications.
The range of a radio transmission using the Earth as a waveguide depends on many factors, including the power of the transmitter, the frequency used, the quality of the ground connection, and the terrain between the transmitter and receiver. In theory, the range could be much greater than that of traditional radio communication, potentially reaching hundreds or even thousands of miles.
In theory, it is also possible to modulate a high-power RF signal using these methods, but it would likely be illegal and potentially dangerous. Additionally, hijacking a commercial radio transmitter in this way could cause interference with other broadcasts and violate FCC regulations. It is not recommended to attempt this method without proper authorization and knowledge of radio broadcasting regulations. With that said. If someone tunes in to the carrier wave using a normal radio, they will not be able to hear the extra information that is being transmitted through the use of the loop and dc bias setup. This is because the normal radio is not designed to pick up and decode the information that is being modulated onto the carrier wave using the special setup.
This method could potentially allow for secret messages to be transmitted. However, it would require careful tuning and matching to avoid interference.
A potential advantage of this method. You could essentially "piggyback" on an existing high-power RF signal to transmit your own information without having to invest in your own high-power transmitter. However, it's important to note that using someone else's RF signal without their permission could be illegal and is generally not considered ethical behavior.
The key is to have the right setup, proper tuning and biasing of the coils and loops, to extract and modulate the information onto the existing carrier wave. This method can be very useful for emergency communication or for secret messages, as it may not be easily detectable by others who are not aware of the specific setup.
The principles and methods we have discussed are based on established theories and experiments in the field of electromagnetics and radio communication. While these methods may not be widely used or accepted in mainstream communication, they are based on sound principles and have been demonstrated to work in various experiments and demonstrations.
The passive setup modifies the properties of the carrier wave through the process of modulation, which essentially superimposes the information signal onto the carrier wave. This modifies the amplitude, frequency, or phase of the carrier wave in accordance with the information signal, and enables the transmission of the modulated signal over a distance using the carrier wave as a waveguide.
In addition, as the carrier wave propagates through space, it interacts with the environment, such as the earth's surface or the atmosphere, and can be reflected or refracted, which also contributes to the modification of the carrier wave. However, in the case of passive transmission using displacement induction methods, the modification of the carrier wave is primarily achieved through modulation.
Quote from: joellagace on April 11, 2023, 09:42:58 PM
Let me try and get this back on topic. Here is another video I talk about more details of using displacement induction communications and how to put it into application.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4EBExi2wv8k (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4EBExi2wv8k)
I only watched the video till 2:47 minute as I was preoccupied with other duties.
Yes it works . the concept is valid.The terminology and explanation of processes is partially incorrect.
e.g : You are not shorting anything there. !!
In Near Field coupling you are 100% successful in transferring AC part of the signal to the loop of Rx.
Wesley
LOL glad you liked it. I also think something else around here is "shorted" :o
I think I know my circuit diagram 8) Thanks.
Quote from: stivep on April 11, 2023, 09:50:27 PM
I only watched the video till 2:47 minute as I was preoccupied with other duties.
Yes it works . the concept is valid.
The terminology and explanation of processes is partially incorrect.
e.g : You are not shorting anything there. !!
In Near Field coupling you are 100% successful in transferring AC part of the signal to the loop of Rx.
Wesley
Quote from: joellagace on April 11, 2023, 10:39:14 PM
I think I know my circuit diagram 8) Thanks.
Nope . You shorting nothing there.
Impedance is present in AC and you have AC with DC offset.
We may also argue that for example DC solenoid of DC powered relay is not shorting DC battery and so on.
Don't have time for it today it is 11PM here.
Wesley
Your interlocutor is correct in saying that a DC solenoid or DC powered relay does not short the DC battery. This is because these devices have a resistance (or impedance) that limits the current flow, and they are designed to work with DC power sources.
However, in my loop configuration using earth batteries with no resistor in line, the situation is different. You are essentially connecting the positive and negative terminals of the battery together through a loop of wire. This creates a short circuit, which means that the current can flow freely without any resistance.
While it is true that there is an AC component to the current in the loop due to the modulation, the DC bias is still present and will be affected by the short circuit. This can cause the battery to discharge quickly and can even damage it if the current is too high. I do mention this in my video and surprise surprise recommend having a resistor in line with it help with that issue.
I know my circuit 8)
Quote from: stivep on April 11, 2023, 11:02:03 PM
Nope . You shorting nothing there.
Impedance is present in AC and you have AC with DC offset.
We may also argue that for example DC solenoid of DC powered relay is not shorting DC battery and so on.
Don't have time for it today it is 11PM here.
Wesley
I must disagree.
At first your battery is not needed. - means DC offset .
second the AC power from the transformer must be quite significant and greater than that from your battery.
To transform anything you need to power your microphone.
You may simply take potato out and close the circuit.
AC from modulation transformer will be present in L1 than it will transform to L2.
However there would be no short as than you dealing with AC only and each transformer winding has its own impedance.
In situation with potato you also not shorting anything. The DC power from your potato is omittable . ( try to measure resistance of a potato too for fun)
https://www.bing.com/ck/a
(https://www.bing.com/ck/a?!&&p=77a9b3ae3657440bJmltdHM9MTY4MTI1NzYwMCZpZ3VpZD0xNGEzMTFmOS1kZTBmLTZlYWEtMTliMS0wMzA5ZGY3NjZmYzgmaW5zaWQ9NTE5Nw&ptn=3&hsh=3&fclid=14a311f9-de0f-6eaa-19b1-0309df766fc8&u=a1aHR0cHM6Ly93d3cuc2NpZW5jZWJ1ZGRpZXMub3JnL3NjaWVuY2UtZmFpci1wcm9qZWN0cy9wcm9qZWN0LWlkZWFzL0VuZXJneV9wMDEwL2VuZXJneS1wb3dlci9wb3RhdG8tYmF0dGVyeQ&ntb=1) The presence of second transformer L1/L2 doesn't give you any gain at all but losses only.
Introduction of a resistor in that loop is even worse .
Just connect your modulating transformer directly to the antenna that can be also open circuit and from the other side connect your microphone with power supply.
one side of the output winding, connect to random length of wire and second side of winding connect to the ground
Wesley
Hey everyone,
I've been having a discussion with a fellow forum member about the use of loop antennas with earth batteries and whether or not there is a DC shorting issue. I wanted to share my thoughts on the matter.
First off, I want to clarify that when I talk about a DC short, I'm referring to the situation where the positive and negative terminals of a battery are connected directly with a low-resistance wire or circuit, bypassing any load or device that would provide resistance. In this scenario, the battery can discharge quickly and potentially be damaged due to the unrestricted current flow.
Now, my fellow forum member has been arguing that there is no DC short when using a loop antenna with earth batteries, even without a resistor in the circuit. They've brought up the example of using a potato battery and closing the circuit with a transformer, saying that there would be no short because the DC power from the potato is negligible and the transformer winding has its own impedance.
However, this is not an accurate comparison to the use of earth batteries with a loop antenna. In the case of the loop antenna, the battery is a significant power source, and the loop wire creates a low-resistance path for the current to flow through, resulting in a DC short.
My fellow forum member has also insinuated that the inductances of the transformer on the other side would prevent the short circuit from occurring, but this is not correct. While it is true that the transformer winding has its own impedance, it does not prevent the battery from discharging quickly due to the low resistance of the loop wire.
While it is possible to use a loop antenna with earth batteries for signal reception, it is important to include a resistor in the circuit to limit the current flow and prevent damage to the batteries. Without a resistor, the loop wire creates a low-resistance path that results in a DC short and can cause the battery to discharge quickly. 8)
My friend I do thank you for your passion and that is great.
although it is kindergarten for me.- As much as I would love to help you I don't have much time for it.
You ask me if it would work and I said Yes.
The simplest Tx is jut spark between two wires.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Spark-gap_transmitter (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Spark-gap_transmitter)
The first practical spark gap transmitters and receivers for radiotelegraphy communication
were developed by Guglielmo Marconi around 1896.
I have some time free from work to respond and I love electromagnetics so I may comment something
in this area.
Wesley
What will happen if we have taken galvanic element having voltage 0.1v(may be potato :D ) and loaded by tunnel diode? In that place its current-voltage characteristic, which has a negative differential resistance .
Thank you for taking the time to respond to my previous message. While I appreciate your expertise in the field, I must admit that I am confused by some of the points you have made.
In particular, I have been trying to understand your assertion that a loop configuration using earth batteries with no resistor in line does not create a short circuit. As I understand it, connecting the positive and negative terminals of a battery together without any resistance does create a short circuit, which can cause the battery to discharge quickly and even become damaged.
I have tried to explain this concept in more detail in my previous messages, but it seems that you are still convinced otherwise. If you could please provide more information or evidence to support your claim, I would be happy to consider it.
Furthermore, I must express my disappointment at the tone of your message. I am here to learn and expand my knowledge, and I believe that we can have a productive and respectful discussion despite any differences in understanding. It is not constructive to dismiss someone as a lost cause or an amateur.
Quote from: kolbacict on April 12, 2023, 02:33:24 PM
What will happen if we have taken galvanic element having voltage 0.1v(may be potato :D ) and loaded by tunnel diode? In that place its current-voltage characteristic, which has a negative differential resistance .
Here is.1W at 10 OHm curve.
Vertical 8mA per horizontal 50mV
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tunnel_diode#/media/File:I-V_curve_of_10mA_germanium_tunnel_diode..jpg
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tunnel_diode#Reverse_bias_operation
Wesley
Quote from: joellagace on April 12, 2023, 02:48:26 PM
connecting the positive and negative terminals of a battery together without any resistance does create a short circuit,
The answer:
QuoteSome of the energy given by the potato cell is used up in the cell itself through having to push the electrons through the system; this is called internal resistance.
add on the top of it resistance of two windings the modulation transformer and the L1/L2 transformer.
To have effective signal out you need to deliver from the microphone into modulating transformer primary winding
48V for standard condenser microphone and
~12V for standard dynamic microphone.( varies)
while your power from potato cell is around :
The potato doesn't actually produce any electricity. Rather, it's the metals inserted into the potato slowly dissolving and releasing electrons.
A single potato battery only produces
about half a volt.at 0.01A in average.
this value becomes insignificant at presence of AC there and it dissipates along windings.
how-much-electricity-can-a-potato-generate. (https://reimaginingeducation.org/how-much-electricity-can-a-potato-generate/#:~:text=The%20potato%20doesn%E2%80%99t%20actually%20produce%20any%20electricity.%20Rather%2C,single%20LED%2C%20much%20less%20an%20entire%20light%20bulb.)
The circuit in that video will see the DC offset level at the noise level.
our potato will become part of the AC circuit between two transformers and its desired DC function is no longer important.
That is why I have ask you in previous comment to measure resistance of potato.
For example:
QuoteA transformer that steps the impedance up by a factor of somewhere between 10 and 100 and the voltage by a
factor of somewhere between say 3 and 10 (Impedance transformation is always the square of the voltage transformation
in a transformer) is almost mandatory with these and often built in.
In the simple language because you didn't specify power delivered by modulating signal I said that circuit will work.
Think about 1000 dollar transfer in AC while DC offset is 2 cents.
https://electronics.stackexchange.com/questions/371081/what-types-of-signals-can-a-dynamic-microphone-generate (https://electronics.stackexchange.com/questions/371081/what-types-of-signals-can-a-dynamic-microphone-generate)
How many potatoes does it take to light an LED?
QuoteIf you have an LED, 2 potatoes should be enough to light it. You can also use a voltmeter/multimeter
to measure the voltage passing through.
Wesley
Thank you for sharing the additional information. I appreciate your efforts to clarify the issue of short circuits and their relation to earth batteries. However, I feel that the discussion shifted away from the original topic and onto unrelated matters, such as microphones, general voltage rules, ohm's law basics etc...
I would like to respectfully suggest that we return to the original focus on the loop configuration using earth batteries, as this is the topic that I am most interested in. While I understand that there may be other related concepts and ideas worth exploring, I believe that we can have a more productive conversation if we stay on topic.
I am happy to engage in further discussion and share my own insights and knowledge, but I would appreciate it if we could stay focused on the specific issue at hand. Thank you again for your time and input.
My fried It didn't shift at all.
You by yourself placed on your schematic wording "input Audio" !!!
You need microphone to create AC that can be transformed by your transformer.
And than you need impedance match between transformer and your microphone as a source of
AC. Transformer can't transform DC.!! -and to have any AC left so the second transformer can transform something
whatever is left there - so you need impedance matching between the two transformers as well.
And than you need impedance matching between output of second transformer and your antenna.
I'm sorry but I thought that this is understood.
It is also worth to mention that 1 loop of copper wire at 1m diameter and 1cm thick is short circuit for DC but it can have
significant impedance to AC. frequency sensitive)
The standard for antenna and transmission line is 50 OHm
https://ham.stackexchange.com/questions/11753/design-and-impedance-matching-for-simple-resonant-loop-antenna-2-ghz
Wesley
Sir, simply screaming louder and louder calling an apple "banana" is not going to change the basic fundamental fact. I addressed your points earlier in the post. My points are indeed valid. I'm sorry about that. Instead of rambling, Please move on or provide relevant information to my post.
Thank you 8)
Sorry it looks like we have problem in communication .
I kindly suggest to ask others for help
That's enough of potato battery for now.
I'm mostly in particle physics but antennas, transmission lines , modulation , Tx/Rx
propagation, energy transfer was for the past several years major task in one of my labs.
I wish you the best.
Wesley
As I mentioned earlier I addressed your issues in past replies, pardon the expression but I have to say. I'm not going to repeat myself in a "loop" here and play part of your silly little game :o
I know i'm correct. Science is on my side here. And I will use your expression by stating people here know my methods and devices are not a bunch of "crab" as you would describe it.
You seem specifically fascinated with microphones and audio amps. From what I can tell in some of your repetitive replies. If you want. I can provide you some great Wiki links, That explain the inner workings of such devices. Perhaps once you learn about something interesting in such systems, Perhaps You can start your own post in some forum and discuss the workings of such systems all day and night with your fellow peers.
It's great that your into particle physics, If I were you, I'd stick to particle physics, Because I really think basic electronics is really just not made for you. What I address here is grade 9 level kind of stuff in relation to "DC short" However you want to warp that... Have at it buddy!
Kind regards!
Dear joellagace.
How if you right and good and sparkling and enlightening... you have great potential, and nothing you said was crab or crap.
How if I was wrong, And now all of the members know that .
How much did you gain by that?
:)
https://overunity.com/19254/audio-amplifier-as-a-power-generator-instruction/msg576106/#msg576106
impedance matching transformer.
https://ia804701.us.archive.org/17/items/AntennaHandbook/_____practical_antenna_handbook_fourth_edition_carr.pdf (https://ia804701.us.archive.org/17/items/AntennaHandbook/_____practical_antenna_handbook_fourth_edition_carr.pdf)
Wesley