Overunity.com Archives

Erfinder once said: "Study comes first and then construction! How can you build what you don't understand?".

I was going back through Steven Marks statements and the following got me thinking again. No one has a definitive answer for what the kick is.

SM: I told you that the simplest form of over unity is a piece of wire and a voltage source. Anyone can actually connect it and measure. See for yourself the kick. NO coil no xmrs, just a kick. That should tell you learned gentleman that there exists a form of energy convertible and useable which is directly related to a simple piece of wire and instantaneous electron flow.

The following is my effort to understand the kick using a straight piece of wire.

Charge on a capacitor, in coulombs:
q=cv = 470uf ? 37.8V = 17.7660 coulombs

Energy Stored in a capacitor in joules:
E=1/2CV2 = 1/(2 ? 470uF ? 37.82) = 744.54K joules

470uF capacitor charges to 37.8V and discharges in 32us
Calculated current:
i = Q/T = C ? ΔV/Δt = (470uF ? 37.8V)/20us = 888.30 amps

Total Wire Length:  62 inches of #18 stranded wire.
Discharge Path Resistance (wire+resistor+relays): 0.13Ω

Dale LVR-2 Power Wirewound Resistor 2 watts 0.02ohms 1%

I do not have the math skills to calculate the energy under the kick in the last two scope shots. If someone could do that it might make an interesting comparison.

I removed the 0.01Ω resistor and attached the scope probes to the terminal block on the relay board where the 62 inch wire connects to the relays.

this must be an L-C Resonating Coil !
nothings else.
it is "kick" on vial the switching relais.
you can also use other parts to switch simply way.

with voltages in 1Kv are , you can use "spark-gags"
likeTesla.

Pese

Pese,

I am only attempting to do the basic test here as SM states.

SM: I told you that the simplest form of over unity is a piece of wire and a voltage source. Anyone can actually connect it and measure. See for yourself the kick. NO coil no xmrs, just a kick.

-Duff

Hello all,

@duff

see at the ECD pdf, my first tests.

Otto

Duff,

I commend you for doing your homework. You have taken a first step, which most have not.

What were you expecting or hoping to see with this test and measurement? I am not trying to be facetious with this question.

May I suggest that you did not see anything unusual because you were measuring strictly voltage. Think about the current in the wire and the resulting (potential) mechanical aspects of this experiment.

One word of advice: DO NOT USE WIREWOUND RESISTORS WITH SWITCHING CIRCUITS IF YOU ARE EXPECTING PURELY RESISTIVE EFFECTS!

Wire wound resistors and fast rising/falling edges do not mix well. It's good that you eliminated the resistor in your last tests. It is interesting to note that there was very little (if any) inductive kickback using the copper wire, but the iron wire did in fact show some. I'm not suggesting iron wire was used in the TPU, just that it is an interesting difference considering the resistances were almost equal.

.

.

Quote from: otto on October 31, 2007, 07:00:45 AM
Hello all,

@duff

see at the ECD pdf, my first tests.

Otto

SM : "NO coil no xmrs, just a kick."  I believe I see a coil in your first test so it does not qualify.

Again, people fail to actually listen to what SM said and make up their own rules as if they know better.  It took them about a year to try and use tubes and it'll probably take them another year to test SM's most basic claim.  They're going backwards and wasting time.  If you people believe that SM is communicating with you, why not listen to EXACTLY what he's saying?  Arrogance?  Laziness?  Both?

I commend you Otto for what you're doing but there is a general lack of rigor I'm seeing on this board and I suspect that it's what stopping any of you from succeeding in reproducing SM's work (if it's real?).

Duff, keep up your rigor and doing the basics!  You'll get further sooner than those working on this for almost a year if you ask the basic questions and fully answer them.

I just think it's funny how practically ALL of the people I see here are building a "TPU" but have ALL failed to prove SM's most basic statement from what I've seen.  That one can get OU from a single wire.  I tell you what, none of them will get anywhere until they've done this most basic of proof.  SM couldn't do it if he didn't and they can't either.

It's like they're trying to build a computer but know nothing about a transistor or logic gates.  Good luck.

Duff "I do not have the math skills to calculate the energy under the kick in the last two scope shots. If someone could do that it might make an interesting comparison."

-----

I would like to make a suggestion to you and to all wannabe SM types.  Learn to measure energy.  Focus on developing tools, buying tools or whatever to accurately measure energy in your circuits.  Else you can prove nothing.  All I see are sloppy attempts to measure energy and it will lead you astray.

Duff, the energy as SM said is very small.  Perhaps TOO small for you to measure with your equipment or setup.  So I'll ask you, how do you measure things that are very small??

Well, how do you measure the weight of a grain of sand if all you have is a pound scale?  Well, you take a bunch of sand and you weigh a few pounds as exactly as you can and then you divide that by the number of sand grains. 

Does that give you any ideas?  Instead of trying to measure the supposed extra energy in one "sand grain", get more "sand grains".

SM said there is OU in a wire and a Voltage source.  If it's true (which we don't know since no one here has proven it as SM claimed), then we can assume from what he's told us, that it occurs when the current starts and/or stops (from the Tesla story).  So if you make a lot of starts and stops, you will get more OU in that wire for your set Voltage source, maybe enough to measure if you have the proper methodology.

I suggest you increase the resistance on your R (to increase the measurement time) and start/stop the voltage from your capacitor as many times as you can until the capacitor totally discharges.  Then try and measure if there is any increase in ENERGY versus the energy from a straight Capacitor discharge.

Measure:

1) Energy from a total discharge with no on/off cycles.  This is the energy in the cap

2) Energy from a total discharge with many on/off cycles.  This is the energy of the cap + any "extra" OU from each on/off cycle

Then compare these values.  Is SM telling the truth?  Is your setup correct?  Is there a better way to measure the values?  Is there a better experimental setup to use?

I also suggest you stick with the capacitor and make sure you have exactly the same Voltage each time you charge up your Cap.  This is good since the energy stored in a capacitor is fixed for a fixed voltage.  Unlike using a power supply, you don't know exactly what energy you're getting when you're using non DC power source.  Measuring non DC power is a lot more challenging than just using P=IV.

My other suggestion is to focus on making sure you have an accurate way to MEASURE the energy.  Don't calculate, measure.

I have not seen one setup that is using a proper power measurement technique!  For the sake of simplicity, how about just using a light bulb, a photo cell and simple circuit to add up the voltage over time?  It's not that hard but people just don't know what rigor means.  So sloppy!  How can you know anything when you can't even see what you're doing?  It's like building a house of cards in the dark.  TURN THE LIGHTS ON!

Rigor Duff, rigor.

I personally DO NOT believe SM.  No one else should either.

Until you can prove his most basic claim, that OU can be obtained from a SIMPLE wire and a Voltage source, it's all hearsay and rumors or at worse a BOLD face lie.  Video's can be faked.  People can be paid off to act or lie.  So called messages from SM could all be fake!  How do any of you know it's real?  Maybe it's all fake.  You weren't there.  You don't know the people that supposedly are in touch with SM.  I mean if it's really SM, why can't he just post here himself?  Why go through someone else?   That's fishy.

I tell you how, prove that OU can be had from a single wire and you will know the truth.

Or you could waste your life following a lie or if it is real, you're like those monkeys in a room trying to write a novel, you'll only get there by pure luck.  If you're that lucky, you'd be better off buying a lotto ticket.

Duff, people like you are the best hope of finding out the truth about SM or OU in general.  Keep it up.

Until I see some real data, this is all just a pipe dream.

Hi Duff,
many thanks for doing these great tests.

What is strange,
that  in iron wire pulse , the right part of
duff_20071030-5.jpg
there is this strange negative going pulse after 200 uSecs, just when the
voltage has reached zero volts.
Why is the voltage jumping there again ?
Makes no sense to me...

Is it just an artifact of the mechanical switch maybe or
what could it be ?

Also pretty interesting, that in the pure copper wire
you also have a spike there going up again after about 20 mikroseconds !?

Could this also be from the mechanical switch just conducting better at this timepoint
or is this the kick SM has meant ?

Please analyse these scopeshots more and let us know,
if they are dependable on the used mechanical switch.
I think, ifwe can find out the nature of these spike jumps
then we can come to a closer understanding of it all...

Many thanks.

Regards, Stefan.

.

did you all ever hear the wooomp  when you first turn on a tube amp???

hummm

ist

<removed>

.

Excelent to see someone doing these basic tests.

You should try some Aluminum wire as well. You can get cheap Al wire with an insulating andized coating as "Bonzi wire". See the links I have posted here http://www.overunity.com/index.php/topic,3544.new.html#new

cheers

mark.

Hi Duff,
very interesting your last scopeshots.

Hmm, I would say, as both of your scope channels
are in parallel just seperated by the 2 switches, that
we have here some kind of  bouncing artifact
with a damped LC circuit.
As the wire is also a very low inductance coil
it would have a damped oscillation with the capacitor.
But now you have to count in the the switch resistances and
the bouncing of the contact points, so
you see these strange pulses.
Maybe you also have a small  arc between the contact points.
so you have a small negative partial resistance, so it is no wonder
the waveform does not look like a damped sine wave, but an amplified
spike.

It would be really interesting to see, how it looks
with a MOSFET switch or a gas filled mechanical tube switch
or a old triode valve.

Many thanks.

Regards, Stefan.

P.S: Duff,
maybe you should also only use 1 toggle switch,
not 2, as this gets you more contact point bouncing...

In your circuit it would also work with just one toggle switch.

Regards, Stefan.

@duff

The effect you are seeing with iron wire is well known. This effect occurs in soft metals. I don?t remember how it is called and lazy to search for it. It is connected with hysteresis loop in soft metals. If you like, you can search for it.

Some time ago, I have posted a video with a test pulsing a piece of wire and showing an additional mechanical energy generated. You can read it here - http://www.overunity.com/index.php/topic,1872.msg32913.html#msg32913
Unfortunately there was not much attention to it. I have built 6 tpus with different configuration and probably another 100 small coil tests and finally came back to a simple wire test and still working on it.
Just a couple of days ago, I have finally come up with an idea of extracting electrical energy from my video test, if there is such, exposed as an electrical current. For now I am not going to post it here, sorry, maybe latter.

Kames.

@ duff

what might happin if you use the triode tube as an amp after you discharge the cap???

and amplifly the kick??? with the tube

hummm

ist

Quote from: kames on November 01, 2007, 10:09:17 PM
@duff

The effect you are seeing with iron wire is well known. This effect occurs in soft metals. I don?t remember how it is called and lazy to search for it. It is connected with hysteresis loop in soft metals. If you like, you can search for it.

Some time ago, I have posted a video with a test pulsing a piece of wire and showing an additional mechanical energy generated. You can read it here - http://www.overunity.com/index.php/topic,1872.msg32913.html#msg32913
Unfortunately there was not much attention to it. I have built 6 tpus with different configuration and probably another 100 small coil tests and finally came back to a simple wire test and still working on it.
Just a couple of days ago, I have finally come up with an idea of extracting electrical energy from my video test, if there is such, exposed as an electrical current. For now I am not going to post it here, sorry, maybe latter.

Kames.

Kames, I had a look at the video.

Seems the wire is attracted to the metal piece, cause the energized wire
produces a magnet field , so it is attracted by the iron metal sharper piece...

So just normal "electromagnet" to iron attraction..

Or did I miss something ?
Thanks.

.

Quote from: duff on November 02, 2007, 04:49:23 AM
@Mark
I ordered some of the Al wire with an insulating andized coating. It should be here early next week.
Do you think there is something siginificant about that type of wire?

Aluminium has some interesting paramagnetic properties that make it worth testing.

You really should add an Alnico magnet to the list. Alnico rods are availble from
http://www.magnetsource.com/Solutions_Pages/RODSalnico.html  and
http://www.allmagnetics.com/alnicorods.htm

I would suggest getting a 6" x 1/8" dia rod for testing. The readily availble grade is the cast  Alnico 5 -- this is what you want.

The mix of Al, Ni and Fe make this a candidate for interesting results.

cheers

mark.

@ mark

there many things that can make a nice or a great mix  :)

so the kick
i think the kick mainly happins inside of a transformer

no?

ist

Quote from: hartiberlin on November 02, 2007, 04:38:38 AM

Quote from: kames on November 01, 2007, 10:09:17 PM
@duff

The effect you are seeing with iron wire is well known. This effect occurs in soft metals. I don?t remember how it is called and lazy to search for it. It is connected with hysteresis loop in soft metals. If you like, you can search for it.

Some time ago, I have posted a video with a test pulsing a piece of wire and showing an additional mechanical energy generated. You can read it here - http://www.overunity.com/index.php/topic,1872.msg32913.html#msg32913
Unfortunately there was not much attention to it. I have built 6 tpus with different configuration and probably another 100 small coil tests and finally came back to a simple wire test and still working on it.
Just a couple of days ago, I have finally come up with an idea of extracting electrical energy from my video test, if there is such, exposed as an electrical current. For now I am not going to post it here, sorry, maybe latter.

Kames.

Kames, I had a look at the video.

Seems the wire is attracted to the metal piece, cause the energized wire
produces a magnet field , so it is attracted by the iron metal sharper piece...

So just normal "electromagnet" to iron attraction..

Or did I miss something ?
Thanks.

Hi Stefan,

Yes, you missed something. The sharper piece is not made of metal. The same happens if it is made of wood. And the wire is not moving in the direction like in electrical motors.

Kames.

@duff,

Yes and no. It was a test to see a behavior of the wire by sending a fast sendoff pulse/kick within the magnetic field. The same happens with attraction but much more difficult to test. I did perform other tests to find out if there was any current jump from the battery. Nothing was found, however, I haven?t heard any reasonable explanation from anybody about an additional mechanical movement of the wire. All the things that were said don?t have to do anything with the test at all.

Kames

Quote from: kames on November 02, 2007, 11:01:41 AM

Quote from: hartiberlin on November 02, 2007, 04:38:38 AM

Quote from: kames on November 01, 2007, 10:09:17 PM
@duff

The effect you are seeing with iron wire is well known. This effect occurs in soft metals. I don?t remember how it is called and lazy to search for it. It is connected with hysteresis loop in soft metals. If you like, you can search for it.

Some time ago, I have posted a video with a test pulsing a piece of wire and showing an additional mechanical energy generated. You can read it here - http://www.overunity.com/index.php/topic,1872.msg32913.html#msg32913
Unfortunately there was not much attention to it. I have built 6 tpus with different configuration and probably another 100 small coil tests and finally came back to a simple wire test and still working on it.
Just a couple of days ago, I have finally come up with an idea of extracting electrical energy from my video test, if there is such, exposed as an electrical current. For now I am not going to post it here, sorry, maybe latter.

Kames.

Kames, I had a look at the video.

Seems the wire is attracted to the metal piece, cause the energized wire
produces a magnet field , so it is attracted by the iron metal sharper piece...

So just normal "electromagnet" to iron attraction..

Or did I miss something ?
Thanks.

Hi Stefan,

Yes, you missed something. The sharper piece is not made of metal. The same happens if it is made of wood. And the wire is not moving in the direction like in electrical motors.

Kames.

Hmm,
strange, what material is the sharper piece made of ?

Maybe it is an effect of the magnet fields of the wires that hold
the swing ? Maybe the swing is just pushed only to one side,
cause the wires going to the swing repell ?

Or what are at the bottomof the sharper there ?
Are these diodes on a circuit board ?
Maybe they have some iron in there, so the
swing it attracted to this ??

If it is not magnetic attraction or
reppellation from the swing holder wires,
what is it then ?
How much current did you use to see this "pendulum" effect ?

Many thanks.

Quote from: hartiberlin on November 02, 2007, 02:57:26 PM

Quote from: kames on November 02, 2007, 11:01:41 AM

Quote from: hartiberlin on November 02, 2007, 04:38:38 AM

Quote from: kames on November 01, 2007, 10:09:17 PM
@duff

The effect you are seeing with iron wire is well known. This effect occurs in soft metals. I don?t remember how it is called and lazy to search for it. It is connected with hysteresis loop in soft metals. If you like, you can search for it.

Some time ago, I have posted a video with a test pulsing a piece of wire and showing an additional mechanical energy generated. You can read it here - http://www.overunity.com/index.php/topic,1872.msg32913.html#msg32913
Unfortunately there was not much attention to it. I have built 6 tpus with different configuration and probably another 100 small coil tests and finally came back to a simple wire test and still working on it.
Just a couple of days ago, I have finally come up with an idea of extracting electrical energy from my video test, if there is such, exposed as an electrical current. For now I am not going to post it here, sorry, maybe latter.

Kames.

Kames, I had a look at the video.

Seems the wire is attracted to the metal piece, cause the energized wire
produces a magnet field , so it is attracted by the iron metal sharper piece...

So just normal "electromagnet" to iron attraction..

Or did I miss something ?
Thanks.

Hi Stefan,

Yes, you missed something. The sharper piece is not made of metal. The same happens if it is made of wood. And the wire is not moving in the direction like in electrical motors.

Kames.

Hmm,
strange, what material is the sharper piece made of ?

Maybe it is an effect of the magnet fields of the wires that hold
the swing ? Maybe the swing is just pushed only to one side,
cause the wires going to the swing repell ?

Or what are at the bottomof the sharper there ?
Are these diodes on a circuit board ?
Maybe they have some iron in there, so the
swing it attracted to this ??

If it is not magnetic attraction or
reppellation from the swing holder wires,
what is it then ?
How much current did you use to see this "pendulum" effect ?

Many thanks.

Hi Stefan,

That stick is only for showing the difference between equilibrium point and max deviation of the wire and nothing else. It is only for visual effect, ie, to make it easy to see in the video. You can use a pencil instead. The stick is  made of some kind of stone and it doesn?t have any magnetic properties. I DID test it with a wooden stick as well, but the stick I showed in the video is just what I had in my hand during the video and nothing else. It is only to show the difference in distance, otherwise, it simply difficult to see in the video. I tested it with different level of current, from 1A to about 4A. The result was the same. The wires that hold the swing should even reduce the effect because they work as a little spring pushing the wire back, not forward. The point is that the wire moves beyond the point where it should stop after applying the electrical current. That is why I showed two points, a static one (equilibrium) and the farthest one (a stick point, front edge of the pulse, ie, when the current just starting to flow).
I don?t know the nature of the effect and have no explanation for it. The only thing I can say that there should not be such a situation when the wire moves beyond equilibrium point without some kind of force pushing it more then the current can provide in a static mode. It doesn?t really matter how the wire is located or made of or how the magnet is located. It is a very strange interaction between the magnet and the wire with a current pulse. The wire was too short and the deviation was too big to address it by some kind of influence of other objects around. The first test I did was on my bed, then on my table, then on the floor, all the same. I tried to make the wire much wider than the magnet, the result was the same.
I am investigating the ways to extract that force by electrical means and compare with the energy spent from the battery. I have no idea if that additional force can be extracted by electrical means. All my previous attempts didn?t find any simple way of doing it. I think I finally found the means to do it but this is not for posting for now. It might fail again.

Kames.

Hi Kames,
where is any magnet in this setup ?
In the swing ?
Did you wind the wire around the magnet ?


Please explain in detail.
Did the swing go more out when using more current ?
Then it is probably an effect of repelling the wires which hold
the swing.
As these wires are flexible and also carry a high current the magnet in the swing ?
will repell the holding wires, so the total swing goes out to one side....
Is this  correct ?

Hi Stefan,

Attaching high-resolution pictures. I hope it can clear up confusion.
In the drawing you can see the semantics of the assembly. It is like a swing. Don?t pay much attention to the 555 timer and resistors. That was the very first test and I didn?t record any video of it. You can use a manual switch and a different resistor. However, the result was the same. In my original video post I specified all the data, voltage, resistors?
In the picture, you can see the magnets and a sharper stick. A short thick horizontal piece of wire is suspended on relatively thin wire threads. Two vertical thick copper wires are used to supply a DC current pulse to the short horizontal piece of wire through two other vertical thin threads. Like a swing. When I turn on the current the horizontal piece of wire is repelled from the magnet farther than when it calms down, while the current is STILL flowing through the wire.
Don?t pay attention to the diodes you see. I just didn?t have anything more convenient to fix the wires on, which is why I used a circuit from another test to fix the wires on.

To answer you other questions.

>>>> Did the swing go more out when using more current ? >>>>
Yes. When the current is increased the wire is repelled farther from the magnets and the deviation is higher as well. This is nothing unusual. The difference between a point of equilibrium and a max deviation (in %) decreases with decreasing the current. Two vertical thin wire threads working as a little spring (and swing) can explain this.

>>>>> Then it is probably an effect of repelling the wires, which hold
the swing.>>>>
Not only. It is also happening in case of attraction. You can try it. When I change the direction of the current the wire sticks to the magnet and it is very difficult to find a point where the wire shows the same affect and still not reaching the magnet and doesn?t stick to it. It is simply a mechanical difficulty in my simple test.

>>>> As these wires are flexible and also carry a high current the magnet in the swing ? >>>>
Yes. Two vertical thin wires are flexible enough and still can easily carry current up to 5 A.

>>>> will repel the holding wires, so the total swing goes out to one side....>>>>
Yes.

Again. It doesn?t matter at all what wires are getting in more interaction with the magnet, vertical, horizontal or something else. The point is that the max distance of the swing from the magnet at the moment when the current just starts flowing SHOULD NEVER exceed the point where the swing stops (calms down) WHILE the current is STILL flowing.

Kames.

Quote from: kames on November 02, 2007, 10:33:33 PM


Again. It doesn?t matter at all what wires are getting in more interaction with the magnet, vertical, horizontal or something else. The point is that the max distance of the swing from the magnet at the moment when the current just starts flowing SHOULD NEVER exceed the point where the swing stops (calms down) WHILE the current is STILL flowing.

Kames.

Hi Kames, thanks for the info.
But I guess it is just the same as kicking a football away...
Asthe magnet already has its field always there and when you energize
the wire, the forces are very big and so the wirejust accelerates away and
flies off.
But it is a different distance, if both repell forces just sit there and repell
each other. That way the wire will not be so far away as there was no acceleration.

Pretty logical, or did I miss again something ?

Regards, Stefan.

Hi Stefan,

Yes, you did miss something again  ;) Neither of the piece of the physical matter, wire, football ball? can go beyond a point than a potential energy was put in. In my test it does. Potential energy is the current I put into the wire. Kinetic energy out is the physical movement of the wire. It moves beyond the point/level of the potential energy I put into it.

Note: the wire is connected in series with a resistor, which impedance is by several orders greater than the impedance of the wire itself. Think about it.

By the way. When I said that I think I found a way of measuring the energy by electrical means (not only physical movement) in my test, I just recalled what SM said:
??We are just talking about a straight piece of wire, some electrons and a method of measuring what comes out of it??

Kames.

Hmm,
I had another look again at your video.
Well I think these are 2 different things.

If the swing comes back on stays in the air at a distance ,
the gravity pull force and the magnetic repell force are just equal.
But this is at a lower height, than when the swing was accelerated
and went out...
I think you compare here "apples with oranges" as to speak so...
Surely if you kick the swing away, it will go further out than the above case,
when the gravity pull force and the magnetic repell force are just equal
and its stays elongated out..

Hi Stefan,

Did you know that you are picky?  ;D That is okay.
I am talking about 30% difference. You are talking about a few mm in height. I am saying that the current is still flowing through the wire. I am saying the same happens in attraction mode. The reaction of this little mechanical setup is billion times slower as much than the gravitational force. What you are saying is not explaining passing a point of equilibrium because of the difference in reaction between a mechanical system and a gravitation force, short vertical (and not elastic) vertical threads of the swing. What you saying was already discussed with my friend (professor in physics) before I posted it for the very first time. I did mention it before, did I?
I am sorry. Think again. I just don?t buy what you are saying.
By the way. In repelling mode, there is no acceleration, it is deceleration with initial potential energy put in, which is applied all the time along (which means I don?t kick my swing, I push it with strong start off and the constant force all the way decelerating because of the distance, do you see the difference?) and still bounds the swing to the magnetic field. Think about it too.

Kames.

.

Guys,

This is a very simple experiment!

The questions here indicate that the whole thing is being made out to be more complicated than it really is.

Watch the video! Watch it again and again until it "clicks". I watched it several times until I understood what was happening.

Did I mention WATCH THE VIDEO?

If not, watch the video ;)

Cheers.

Quote from: RobotHead on November 01, 2007, 05:08:23 AM
I personally DO NOT believe SM.  No one else should either.

Learning to differentiate between true and false is a basic skill that we all need to develop. Since you still haven't done so, it is imperative that you begin to work on it ASAP. The way to do it is up to you, but the bible is a great place to start.

Free energy is worthwile quest, but in the end, synergy with the universe is even more important.

Thanks to SM for introducing us to this amazing technology and for giving us the knowledge and understanding necessary to validate his claims and replicate his work. The only remaining question is: what do we do with it? The planet needs it badly, but its inhabitants may not be ready for it yet...

Regards,

Jacob

@all

There was a very good suggestion to put the magnet under the swing. I just did it. It seems the result is even better. I will try to record the video and post it today.

>>>>>> Removed in favor of this thread.


Kames.

@ Kames

My point was simply that anyone who watch the SM videos, read what he said, and still think that the guy is lying, need to go back to basics. SM is truthful and the TPU is for real.

Really, the most important question is not: how does it work? That question has been answered several times in the past. But rather: how should we handle this technology? What should we do with it?  Keep it secret? Reveal it to the world? Maybe there ought to be a thread about this...

Regards,

Jacob

P.S.: I also drink beer   ;)

Removed in favor of this thread.

@Kames

You are right: no working TPU has not been publicly disclosed. Neither has step by step instructions explaining exactly how to build the device been published yet.

What I am saying is that all the answers are already available. However they are being overlooked. For instance, SM once said about a post by Tao: "This guy has the secret." Therefore, this is a piece of the puzzle right there. And the others pieces can be all found amoung the thousands of posts and attachements that are available to everyone on this site. So maybe its time for some data mining...

Regards,

Jacob

Hi Guys,

Attaching the new video with a magnet under the swing. The distance between the idle point and the equilibrium point is 2.5cm/1.1 inch precisely. The max movement is 4.8cm/1.8 inch. The deviation is 4.8 ? 2.5 = 2.3 inch. Which means the deviation is about 52%. Compare it with the pervious result. This time the test is more like a normal electrical motor. All the rest is the same as in the original video, resistors, battery, and even home temperature? I do realize that in the video it is not that clear but I did try my best. I did record 3 videos, one is better than another for different views. I did try to move the magnet back and force relative to the swing, the result is the same.
Background music is Vanessa Mae, I just like it.

Kames.

Hi Kames,
what I see in the new video is nothing more than
like kicking a football away with your leg.

If you have your leg in front of you and the ball leans
against ist via gravity then  the ball is maybe only 50 cm away from your body,
but when the ball lays in front of you and you put your leg straight
in front of you with force you will kick the ball much further away....

Removed in favor of this thread

Quote from: hartiberlin on November 04, 2007, 06:35:19 PM
Hi Kames,
what I see in the new video is nothing more than
like kicking a football away with your leg.

If you have your leg in front of you and the ball leans
against ist via gravity then  the ball is maybe only 50 cm away from your body,
but when the ball lays in front of you and you put your leg straight
in front of you with force you will kick the ball much further away....

Hi Stefan,

You still don?t realize that you are talking about a ?short? kick. I am talking about the fast sent off and continuous force applied. That is a huge difference and has nothing to do with the ball you are talking about. I am really surprised how the obvious might so be obfuscated. I am sorry but I don?t see how to apply your thoughts to what I have shown at all. What I have shown and you said are two completely different things.

Regards,

Kames.

@All

Let me put it this way. This thread name is SINGLE WIRE TESTS. This is a beautiful name and should be followed by. No god, no bible, no lols, no spiritual energy, no exotic theories, no your private animated giffs taking a lot of cpu usage over nothing or any other crap, only practical tests and/or theories with open eyes, if you don?t want to lose people again with ?world wide politics?. I won?t be responding to any question that was already answered or shown as obvious. I respect my own time. Please open your eyes and watch again, read again and watch again. Anybody disagrees, fine, have you opinion.
When I said that I wouldn?t post the idea of the circuit for now is because if it is successful it might lead to the direct tpu implementation. I might have a complete failure with my further tests as it happened many times but I won?t rely on any stupid assumption asking people to follow me only because I have some ?overheating? and spiritual particles flying all around me. If I have any further good results or ideas, I might post it. I am not saying I won?t be participating in discussions, just won?t spend my time on any further negligence.

@duff,

I would encourage you to follow your tests. It doesn?t matter if the effect is well known or not. You never know what you can find out. I suggest, read as much as possible from this forum, especially some engineering reports. One of them has a clue (however, not the key).

Regards,

Kames.

Most people in these T.P.U. threads seem to have accepted as fact that an electrical kick is the starting point for understanding the T.P.U. I believe SM's kick is a mechanical kick and power is generated within the T.P.U. by the resonant vibration of hundreds or thousands of wires within an electrostatic or electromagnetic field. We are overly complicating something which is actually very simple.

@All

Just notice one more important piece of information in the second video. The wire is moving along the magnet, correct. At the same time the wire is attracted to the magnet, ie, the magnet is pulling the wire all the time down and a little back. That is how I have chosen the polarities of the magnet and current. In other words, the magnet is trying to prevent any deviation in a much stronger way than it was in the first video. However, the result is even better.

Regards,

Kames.

.

Hi Duff,
depends on how much current you draw on the MOSFET.
If you don?t use such a big capacitor and calculate in the voltage of the cap and the
energy in the first few mikroseconds with the On-Resistance of the
MOSFET and the wire you could see, how much current it will draw there.
You also need a very big current driver for a MOSFET to switch it
very fast as MOSFET gates could have capacitances in the several hundred pF to nF range !

Good luck.

Regards, Stefan.

P.S: Kames,I still think you are kicking away your wire from the permanent magnet.
If you turn your field on and let it on, this is just a kick to accelerate the wire away
in the first few milliseconds, until a contanst force willjust repell it...

.

Quote from: hartiberlin on November 05, 2007, 03:40:15 PM
P.S: Kames,I still think you are kicking away your wire from the permanent magnet.
If you turn your field on and let it on, this is just a kick to accelerate the wire away
in the first few milliseconds, until a contanst force willjust repell it...

Hi Stefan,

Hopefully no more gods at least in one thread.
Obviously, when the wire is idling and then starts moving there is acceleration. However, you forgot about a resistor. I did say that a resistor multiple orders exceeds impedance of the wire. What happens with the voltage on the wire only and with the current through the circuit? There is a ?kick? in voltage on the wire. There is NO KICK (except for time == 0 and current ALSO == 0, what kind of kick is it??? ) in the current if the resistor exceeds the impedance of the wire by at least 2x3.14159268 (still remember this number). If you look at the oscilloscope, the current is rising smoothly, without any picks, such as ringing. The acceleration you are talking about would be the second differential of the current, not voltage. The very (smaller part) beginning of the current curve will show a positive acceleration. The second half of the curve, while the current is still rising, will show a negative acceleration. The rest of the curve has only negative or zero acceleration. Doesn?t look like there is a space for the kick. Even so, if there were a kick, the kick is a potential energy applied at time == 0. The mechanical movement is the real energy. How does hell in the world the potential energy result in the additional mechanical movement without seeing energy spent (like a current ?kick?) from the battery?
Let?s say you are right. What/who did spend energy on the additional movement? Don?t forget, the difference is huge and nothing on the oscilloscope.

Regards,

Kames.

Hi Stefan,

To my post above. Jumping a little ahead. I do have two theories for now. One of them is directly connected with what SM said.

Quote
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!

Another one was a question in my exam in the university. ?Under what conditions the electron can have a negative mass??
Note: not weight, not charge, not speed but mass. The electron mass can vary.

Both ideas are extremely speculative and that is why I am not discussing them.

Regards,

Kames.

PS: I guess I said more than I wanted for now.

Quote from: kames on November 04, 2007, 06:35:39 PM

Hi Jacob,

Talking about the current stopping before it reaches the end of the wire is not a secret at all. Good luck to implement it. It is not the only and the major condition Tesla was talking about. Tao, in my opinion, as far from the truth as anybody else. Believe it or not I have read and reading every single post in this forum and aware of every single thought or attachment in this forum.

Kames.

Kames,

If you read those posts, and I have no reason to doubt that you really did, then you have to read them again. Because stopping the current flow before it reaches the end is not what the "secret" was about. 

Of course it's ok to doubt that Tao is far off, but that is exactly where it will lead you: far off. Because his theory is extremely close to reality. It's just that it is missing a vital ingredient. As far as I can remember, SM only mentionned twice that someone was right on, and the first time he used this expression is when Tao explained his theory.

And you can also hold the belief that everybody else is "far off", but I assure you that  some people on this forum know very well how the TPU operates, and how to build one.

The fact that you are experimenting with a single wire to find out what the kick is about is great. That is indeed the starting point. However, there are 2 problems with your experiments. First, the kick happens much to quickly for the kind of setup you have. Secondly, the kick has already been recorded on scope and published on this site in a pdf document. Incredibly enough, it went totally unnoticed.

I told you: data mining is the way to go. All the answers are here already. Along with some far off theories...

Regards,

Jacob

Quote from: kames on November 05, 2007, 08:49:38 PM
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!

When you electrostatically induce a current in a wire, it can flow in both directions away from the middle of the wire.  This was first analyzed in long telegraph lines by J. J. Carty and William Thomson (Lord Kelvin) and shown to be an ES phenomenon and not EM.  This effect also is attributed to unusual propagation delays.  This led to development of the "twisted pair" to eliminate the ES problem.  So, twisted pair wire for a TPU probably doesn't work well.

By the way, Dolbear's electrostatic telephone is pretty cool and worth a look.

Quote from: jacob on November 06, 2007, 09:25:44 AM
If you read those posts, and I have no reason to doubt that you really did, then you have to read them again. Because stopping the current flow before it reaches the end is not what the "secret" was about. 

Tao has mentioned that he believes the reference by SM to the "secret" was the reference to "capacitor discharge" rather than stopping current.

Quote from: jacob on November 06, 2007, 09:25:44 AM
And you can also hold the belief that everybody else is "far off", but I assure you that  some people on this forum know very well how the TPU operates, and how to build one.

How very intuitive of you, Jacob.

Quote from: Grumpy on November 06, 2007, 09:44:38 AM

Tao has mentioned that he believes the reference by SM to the "secret" was the reference to "capacitor discharge" rather than stopping current.

Yes, that's more like it.

Jacob

The "capacitor discharge" is also correlated to SM's references to "shock waves", faster than light electrons, etc.

I beleive SM is alluding to the very interesting "thing" that screams down the wire ahead of electromagnetic energy.  I think somone once referred to this "thing" as a "true electric current".

Removed in favor of this thread.

Hi Grumpy,

Discharging a capacitor is an excellent and forgotten by many idea. My video was actually only a starting point. There is a big difference in the way I am planning to discharge it. That is actually was my point and if successful, I am planning to post something about it. If not, I guess I will go and read some other posts, as Jacob advised  ;D.

Kames.


PS: Oops, forgot to mention. My new circuit is not only different in the way I discharge it. It is also different in the way I can measure the energy exchange, much more important. Anyway, I will see what happens with it.

just thought i would share this

i currently beleave there 4 or 5 diffrent tpu's but only 1 perfected patented unit  lol

ist

Quote from: kames on November 06, 2007, 11:54:04 AM
@Jacob,

If you are so sure, don?t say anything, just go ahead and build it. Unfortunately, I disagree with what you are saying and I hate when people are coming to the forum with thoughts like you posted. There are better places for it.

By the way, I have recorded kicks on the scope much more than was posted in this forum.

Kames.

Kames,

Just to make sure that there is no misunderstanding, which thoughts are you referring to?

Jacob

Removed in favor of this thread.

Quote from: kames on November 06, 2007, 11:45:40 PM

@Jacob,

I am referring to god and bible, I guess.

I don't know why you have a problem with the Creator and His Word, but you are the worse off. Better come to terms with Him while you can. Although you probably have some time left because you seem to be young and inexperienced.

Quote

... Seriously, I am referring to:

?Because his theory is extremely close to reality?

It makes me laugh

Kames, you can laugh if you want to, but I am not the one who said it. It's SM who did.

Quote

I am referring to:

?but I assure you that  some people on this forum know very well how the TPU operates, and how to build one.

What a nonsense. I know about ........ stuff more than you think I do.

I did not comment about your level of knowledge Kames. Similarly, it would be extremely unwise on your part to comment on the expertise of others. 

Quote

I am referring to:

?All the answers are here already..

What a nonsense.

Really? Well, let's have it your way.

Quote

I am referring to:
?The only remaining question is: what do we do with it? The planet needs it badly, but its inhabitants may not be ready for it yet?

What a nonsense. Find another thread for such a post.

I am referring to:

?Really, the most important question is not: how does it work? That question has been answered several times in the past. But rather: how should we handle this technology? What should we do with it?  Keep it secret? Reveal it to the world? Maybe there ought to be a thread about this...

What a nonsense. Find another thread for such a post.

Yes, there ought to be a thread for this, because it's a very important question. When you see what some people are capable of, or merely how badly some can react to trivial events, the thought of granting them access to unlimited energy can send shivers down the spine. On the other hand, the use of oil is destroying the planet.  Plus, so many poor people could greatly benefit from this technology. Not to mention of course that free energy is a gift from God to us ( I knew you'd like this one).

Quote

I am referring to:

What I am saying is that all the answers are already available. However they are being overlooked. For instance, SM once said about a post by Tao: "This guy has the secret." Therefore, this is a piece of the puzzle right there.

What a nonsense. If you so sure about it break this puzzle, I will waste my time on another SM?s puzzle.

Kames, this puzzle HAS been solved. Which is no reason for you to waste your time on anything. Time is precious, so use it wisely.

Quote

Honestly, Jacob, nothing personal against you and your posts. I like this thread to be what it has to be and see people not leaving again like it happened before. You should find another thread and maybe even a forum for such postings.
If you want to be the last in this garbage post, go ahead and post again. I am done with you and I don?t want to spoil this thread anymore and I won?t respond again if you don?t have anything more meaningful, even if it is wrong.

PS: I will remove my answers to Jacob?s posts in a few days. THIS IS NOT SUPPOSED TO BE HERE.

Kames.

Don't worry, I was just passing by. Remember that you draw me into this. I only wanted to comment on Robothead's post which said that he didn't believe SM and that no one should. You see, no one here should discredit SM who has proven many times over that he doesn't seek his own interests but rather the interests of all mankind, and who has taken great risks to share this technology with the world. Anyone who wants to discredit SM is either unable to recognize the truth or willingly trying to mislead people.

Regards,

Jacob


P.S.: By the way, regarding capacitor discharge, this is just part of what has been said. There is much more to it. Maybe you should take a look...

Quote from: jacob on November 07, 2007, 09:29:40 AM
P.S.: By the way, regarding capacitor discharge, this is just part of what has been said. There is much more to it. Maybe you should take a look...

Help him see, Jacob.

Grumpy


P.S.  God is all things - good and evil.

Removed in favor of this thread

I don't know about everyone else, but I am tired of people saying "the answer is right in front of you" and implying that they know how things work, but never showing anything tangible - no working device - no experiments to illustrate the underlying principles.

If free energy is "God's Gift" then who has the right to pass judgment on people and determine who gets the information?


P.S.
According the Helmhotz's theory of electricity, a longitudinal electric wave will propagate at infinite velocity through a dielectric that is magnetic - sounds like ferrite foam (which is used as an RF absorber) could be interesting.

P.P.S.  ...or magnetic varnish (ferrite filled). http://www.mutr.co.uk/catalog/product_info.php?products_id=1303

Magnetic magnet wire?

haha well nobody needs to show anything.
it's a long road, and if you want to see the light, JUST BUILD THE THING.
those who are getting tired are probably waiting for someone who will present all the awnsers in a nice document with pictures.
it ain't gonna happen it is not the nature of the beast.

PS: the awnsers are in front of you ;D
just read the old literature, the awnsers for future questions are in the past.
it has always been that way.

M.

Give me a freakin' break...

I'm not looking for all the answers in a nice document and I have said the same things that you are now saying.  I no longer agree with this approach because it is self-limitting.

self-limiting?

i'd say it's ment to be   :)

What would you then agree with?

Quote from: -[marco]- on November 07, 2007, 02:43:11 PM
self-limiting?

i'd say it's ment to be   :)

What would you then agree with?

Yes.  That would be the intent.  When we look in the mirror, it's our own faces that we see.

Anyway, there was a bit more to SM's comments about Tao having the "secret":

QuoteThe only part he doesn't have any idea about is that by starting the oscillation you cause the
current to flow in the collector which causes the magnification of the process within the collector
which will ultimately produce the greater voltage and power in usable amounts during operation.

So, asking ourselves what the Hell an "oscillation" is and we find from Tesla, Steinmetz, Magnussun, and Dollard that an "oscillation" is a "standing wave".  I have heard that "motional standing waves" exist, but have yet to create one.

Now there is another way to look at this, along the lines if Thomson's and Helmholtz's sqeezing analogies:

If a current in a wire is the result of a "compression of the ether", or space, around the wire, then a few wires wrapped around a conductor, driven in such a way as to compress the ether around the wire would create a flow of current in the wire, provided the wire is part of a closed conductive loop.  This induced compression of ether around the wire would simulate the compression created when a direct current were applied form a battery or similar source.

The typical Hertzian, electromagnetic field of Transverse Waves is the gross by-product of a much more powerful, but hidden, energy envelope which is manifested as Longitudinal Standing Waves in a scalar nodal matrix, not propagated in the up and down, ocean wave fashion of Transverse Waves.  (excerpt from http://peswiki.com/index.php/PowerPedia:Eric_Dollard )

How about natural amplification?

http://209.85.165.104/search?q=cache:CX3W3uSkBYMJ:www.borderlands.com/newstuff/research/ground-myst.htm+dollard+standing+waves&hl=en&ct=clnk&cd=9&gl=us

Attached is Dollards Research Notes in PDF.

 ;)


so this is the way :o 8) :o it seams


a challange, prove it wrong lol!!

the ride starts today     are you ready?

G'day all,

For once I find myself in total agreement with Erfinder. It was Ernst Chladni who first described these phenomena in a book published in 1787.

This work was later taken up by Keely and just recently by Dr. Hans Jenny who coined the word Cymatics for the study of these phenomena.

For a quick introduction into the subject look at my website http://keelytech.com/cymatics.html

Here are some images. The first is of typical Chladni figures.

(https://overunityarchives.com/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fkeelytech.com%2Fchladni1.gif&hash=c8ff21bbe37f6c2c0c8d7ab50dbe2ecd7cf6eb40)

The next three are photographs taken by Hans Jenny

(https://overunityarchives.com/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fkeelytech.com%2Fcymatics1.gif&hash=fb34b1af28f1c48bd58dfaae704403a800ae3aa8)

(https://overunityarchives.com/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fkeelytech.com%2Fcymatics2.gif&hash=76caa8ac58a15ccc447600bbc4d780557967f09d)

(https://overunityarchives.com/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fkeelytech.com%2Fcymatics3.gif&hash=3220206b24123af7801219fb526785814dc9e103)


Hope you find it helpful as well as beautiful in its symmetry and arrangement.

Hans von Lieven

Oh no!!

Our waves are wrong  :o we are going the wrong way.... ::)
My my my

Again what Erfinder says is correct.

Much of our misunderstanding of waves is based on how we measure these things today. This is where in my view science has taken a wrong turn.

In the old days these phenomena were investigated with devices like manometric flames, vibration microscopes, sensitive flames, resonators and so forth. By necessity these devices operate in a three dimensional space and the observations made by Chladni, Lissajous, Keely, Helmholtz, Fourier and so on were based on wave propagation in a three dimensional continuum.

We no longer do this. We use oscilloscopes to study waves, totally forgetting that we are looking at a two dimensional ANALOGY of the phenomenon.

An oscilloscope trace, as useful as it is, gives us the characteristics of ONE VECTOR ONLY of a wave.

There is much more to waves than an oscilloscope trace can reveal. The sooner we realise this the better off we will all be.

Hans von Lieven

yup...

Very nice guys. Finally, Finally some real thinking going on here. Its been a good day!

Grumpy, Erfinder, Hans, Your all geniuses! Now if we could get Dollards .02 in these pages it would be a history makeing day.

                                            .02 .M.

I mentioned Dollard - even posted a PDF of his "Reasearch Notes".

Funny how when everyone get's on a roll - it just stops.

It ain't Beer-30 yet!

Edit:  What were we talkin' about? Mention of beer just blew me ot of the water...  ;D

I know ya did. I meant it as if we could have his input (Reral time).

Eric Dollard was last known to be living in the San Francisco Bay area, consulting for power companies.

He is listed in some public records in this area.  Search for "Eric P. Dollard".

We will have to procede without him...

Edit: maybe Eric will read this and throw us a bone or two...

The topic is  Understanding the wave. More accurately what we think a wave is. I call it the kinetic moment. That point in (time) Ware the wave is in a transition between one function and another. both equal, both opposite.all in tandom. in unison. The word "Time" of great importance here.

Easy Grumpy. Beer:30 is soon in your end of the sandbox. Try to stay on task.  ;) M.

Are you referring to the nasty kick (spike) when a standing wave switches to a travelling wave?

EDIT:
or flow backwards/forwards in time?  Dollard talks a lot about this.


EDIT:  throw me a freakin' life raft - I'm sinkin' fast!

well In a way yes. Because all things are inter connected. I suppose you could say that. But a wave as we think we understand it only behaves the way it does because we have tricked ourselves into believing that we fully understand it. we surely do not Fully. but were on the right track along the lines of the last few post. I really cant wait to hear the rest of it. Hell we might just have a holey cow moment. or at least a nice T-bone.

I dont post much But this stuff is good. And right on track with my own thinking. when its all put together the conclusions are far simpler than one might think. Why? well 1+1=2 but if you dont have an understanding of what 1 is your SOL in trying to find out what 2 is. or why the hell 2 1s make the whole.

I cant wait till the simple magnet and this line of thinking come together. Oh yeah. thats gonna be good.

Its my oppionion that everything from a DC or AC genny to a full blown 17'' SM TPU, MEG, Seral gen, and even newmans machine all are connected by the simple fact of the collapsing field. But just like 1+1 you cant even make a simple Genny unless you have a rudimentary understanding of the "Wave" and my old buddy Eddy Current.

G'day guys,

If you are looking for Dollard, perhaps Peter Lindemann would be able to help. The two seem to have done a lot of work together, chances are they stay in touch.

Just a thought

Hans von Lieven

as far as kicks go they dont mean a thing if they aint got that ring. The ringing is the wave as it's being disguessed here. Ive said it so many times i cant count em all. its not enough to have kicks. you need to have the right kind of kicks. the ringing after the kick is whats important here. otherwise you have a Tesla resonant rise toy or a step up tranny. make them ring you'll hear them sing. Another .02

@ Hans. a most excellent point made about scopes (i think it was Hans)

what were we building again? Oh.. ok wrong forum.. ;)

i'm just gonna listen for a while. Im content.

Perhaps the wrong forum but let's not quit as yet.

Moab, are you familiar with Keely's work from the mid to late 1800's? I think you could get a lot out of studying what he had to say. He worked primarily with acoustic vibrations. I have a website http://www.keelytech.com you mind find of help because a lot of this stuff is covered there.

Hans von Lieven

Quote from: hansvonlieven on November 07, 2007, 07:58:18 PM
Perhaps the wrong forum but let's not quit as yet.

Moab, are you familiar with Keely's work from the mid to late 1800's? I think you could get a lot out of studying what he had to say. He worked primarily with acoustic vibrations. I have a website http://www.keelytech.com you mind find of help because a lot of this stuff is covered there.

Hans von Lieven

Oh yes. keeley. shaweburger. Tesla, dollard. Rodin. (Dude put on a shirt, Yer scareing my dog) Its a never ending study and I read them often and learn more every time. Especially Viktor. Man, that kat had it goin on. I dont want to clutter the thread anymore than i alredy have. In student mode here. sorry guys. .M.

 ;D

such fun we have had here eh          life ..........   live  ......learn  .......   discover

i can not add a word

you guys are doing a fine job lol


my posts come to an end  as i have a great deal of work ahead  mostly reading lol!   

ist

This thread WAS about single wire tests.

The last 3 pages have been about everything else. I hope duff and kames have not been discouraged to continue posting.

Too late I see...duff has already deleted all his posts. Congrats guys!

yup...

I don't know what your gripe is z-p-e,

duff deleted his posts on November 6, Kames deleted his on November 6 and November 7 at 6.49 am

This discussion started with Erfinder on November 7 at 8.59 pm over a day after duff had deleted his posts. And duff was the one that started this thread. So how can THAT discussion be responsible for the deletions?

Make sure of your facts before you make accusations in future please.

Hans von Lieven

I am truly impressed with the resonancy and kickin' goin' on here.

--giantkiller.

Hans,

If you look, you'll see that the thread started going astray Nov 6, right around the time duff deleted his posts...see the correlation?

I did not imply that it was Erfinder's posts that started this. It would seem you read into that yourself. Perhaps you need to check the facts yourself.

I don't care anyways....it's all yours.....go for it

grumpman....good for you ;).

Hello all,

@Erfinder

thanks a lot for the standing waves. This is the reason we must in the 15" TPU TAP INTO the collector on the right points with our control coils.

Otto

it is just so funny how all the pecies fit and how this whole game un ravales

of course this has been the best journey any of us have ever taken well next to sm anyways

but

really the game has only just begun  ;) 

there is really no need for me to say anything

you all know all of my thoughts here are only theory as i have not even tryed to build a working unit lol

i dont have to try lol!!

i only must do  as do all of you altho i know most in here are finished

;D   congrats to all the hard workers  ;D

isteam!!

oh btw
i was so burnt form the last 4-5 days i just slept about 14 hours lol and i usually only get 5-6 hours

JUST BUILD IT  ~~IST~~            we all herd those words b4 lol 

so acerzw who are you anyways lol!! played easly dont fly wit me buddy lol

this aint about us  i think we all know that tho  :)

so now no i dont build right away
i assemble far more than a tpu lol

a team lol some of you know some of you know

lets go down the rabbit hole lol

Histeam  are you ready to go??

i will tell you this i sure am  so who wants a hover bubble lol

yup...

Hi, I'm pretty new around here but this thread has fascinated me greatly.  I'd like to put something out there, as it seems related to the evolution of this discussion.

First, the setup:

Obtain a coffee mug(or similarly proportioned cylindrical object with a handle sticking out) and set it flat on the table in front of you.  Using the handle, rotate it flat and note the effort it takes to overcome the Resistance of Friction at the mug/table interface.

Next, pick it up and set it down with a slight spin so that it initiates precessional oscillation, now quickly train your finger on the handle and adjust the speed of rotation.  Note that the effort it takes to accelerate correlates directly to the Amplitude and Frequency of the precessional oscillation.  Also note that the mug/table interface is now stationary, you are no longer fighting Friction in your effort to rotate the mug.  Resistance becomes a "virtualized" property of the oscillation parameters.


Ok, now for some "Lateral Thinking":  Room-Temperature Superconductor via Inductive Precession?

Kames not trying to be offensive but your test is nothing amazing. Simply put, its similar to compressing a spring and letting it go. The magnetic field has established before the wire has moved away and gives it an acceleration which overshoots the balance point naturally. I can't see anything other than this. Credit for trying though.

Quote from: flash on December 17, 2007, 06:20:53 AM
Kames not trying to be offensive but your test is nothing amazing. Simply put, its similar to compressing a spring and letting it go. The magnetic field has established before the wire has moved away and gives it an acceleration which overshoots the balance point naturally. I can't see anything other than this. Credit for trying though.

Hi Flash,

There is a difference when comparing with a spring. The force acting upon a spring when released is not constant. When the spring is released it moves only under internal forces and oscillates around an equilibrium point with equal amplitude/energy. In other words, if you look at the spring oscillation like a sine wave, the surface/integral under ?positive? waves (above zero) will be equal the surface/integral under ?negative? waves (below zero).
With my test, if you take an integral of all the oscillations from one side of the equilibrium point and compare them with another side, they are not equal even for a naked eye. Plus, the force acting upon a wire is very much constant compared with a spring. I don?t disconnect a battery, the power is applied all the time and the applied force is not internal, it is external. If it were a little doubtful with the first video because the applied force wasn?t constant because of the way the magnet was located, in the second video, the force is very much constant, ie, has very little deviation from the original value. Does the spring have the same?
I am not offended at all. I just don?t want to go into an arguing anymore. There is further development about this test. I just don?t want to post it here at least for now.

Thanks,

Kames.

I assume you are talking about the constant deviation once you have energised the circuit? I see this as a form of harmonic from the asynchronous oscillator you've setup with the 555 timer.

Not wanting to argue, but trying to see if there is more than what i initially saw.

Hi Flash,

I am sorry I didn?t post a reply right after I saw your question. Unfortunately, other things take precedence.

Quote
I assume you are talking about the constant deviation once you have energised the circuit?

I am not sure if I understand your question correctly. Correct me if I am wrong.
There are multiple ways to look at this test. I don?t really understand what you mean by constant deviation. It is unbalanced deviation around an equilibrium point. DC current in the wire is just a bias and should not create unbalanced movement/oscillation around the equilibrium point. Actually I managed to capture F(forward)EMF in this wire. It was unexpectedly high. The FEMF was going up to 18V. I cannot get the same with a standard coil. Does it have any meaning? I think it does. Try to create a substitution circuit for FEMF with momentary voltages/potentials, assuming that the internal impedance of the battery is very low or zero. It just won?t fit for FEMF. However, it does fit perfectly for BEMF, which is not a case in this test.

Quote
I see this as a form of harmonic from the asynchronous oscillator you've setup with the 555 timer.

Actually none of the videos have 555 timer in it. Initially it was tested with 555 timer but it is not in the videos. In the videos I use a manual switch. Obviously, there are a lot of high order harmonics in the fast send off pulse. But all of them should not exceed the initial energy put in or create unbalanced movement/oscillation by conventional meaning.

Thanks,

Kames.

simple experiments  :)
electronflow in diffrent directions in a single wire.
or coils (from diffrent materials)

M.

Fold a wire in half and the electrons flow the same direction. 

@ All

What I believe Marco is talking about is what BEP mentioned and I and Thaelin tested long ago, in a very different manner.

One wire. One signal, two distinct power sources.  Batteries are better.  The electrons flow with reference to only their own source and never know the other is on a passing train track. 

The ? mark is, what would be the volts and amps in such a case.  It would not be series, so what would the answer be?

What would happen if we did the same thing but turned it into a coil and used higher voltage?  That is what the next picture means.

1+1=2

I like the idea.  Someone should do the test and give the answer.   ;)

Cheers,
Bruce

Good morning gentlemen,

I did the single wire test last night, with a few deviations:  My 9Vs were nearly dead 2Vs and my bulbs were LEDs.

Both LEDs lit-up.  The voltage reading between the red clips was zero.

Then I switched the positions of the two red clips on the test wire, as shown below, and still the LEDs lit-up.  Now what is happening in the mid-section of the test wire?

Then, I moved the red clips all the way to the opposite ends of the wire, also shown below.  The LEDs still lit-up.

Should we think of the test wire as a two way street, or a common ground of the two batteries, or both?

We assume that the two currents do not cancel each other out because we see the bulbs (LEDs) glowing, but what of the magnetic fields?

If the current is flowing both ways in the test wire, what of the magnetic fields; do we also have two opposing magnetic fields around the test wire or do they cancel each other out?

Quote from: btentzer on January 19, 2008, 11:32:18 PM
What would happen if we did the same thing but turned it into a coil and used higher voltage?  That is what the next picture means.

1+1=2

I like the idea.  Someone should do the test and give the answer.   ;)

With those current directions 1+1=4, but only when they first meet. When you put in a third - where the ? is, then you may be thinking 3D. But use the KISS method. Start with one wire and one source first.

Test? No. If someone does they'll be stopping the current before it reaches the end of the wire - like Tesla did with his 'high frequency' helices.

@Rosphere

Two-way street? Maybe better as only a map or direction sign.

You measured zero volts in the middle because you had no reference point to either path.

Put a black from bat A along with a red from bat B together on one end and reverse on the other (with the loads connected).
The current from both bats is flowing the full length of the wire but opposite directions. If the wire explodes at 1.5 amps and each load is drawing 1 amp then why doesn't the wire explode? Better yet why does no current show at all in the middle?

the two battery experiment was just to show what i started with, and Rosphere got the same results as i did.
there is no current flowing in the middle because the circuits are not connected to each other with two wires or more.

the second experiment with the coil is more intresting.
Bruce is right about using high voltage.
in this one wire coil we can slap frequency's togheter like two transformers running slightly out of phase,or connected in reverse of one another, although it is not easy to tune the second generator reverse in sync with the first..,this means to use two seperate sources not one.
it vibrates too when the fields slap toghether, without using magnets..
i also varied the distance of the middle part of the coil, and later on i just ended with a coil with many wires on it so i could switch them.
and also i varied the metal of the coil as iron bailing wire treats the flux diffrent then copper.
then i turned the coil into a torroid etc.

these are verry simple experiments anyone can do, they only takes minutes and it's fun too.  :)
M.

Quote from: Rosphere on January 20, 2008, 10:00:29 AM
We assume that the two currents do not cancel each other out because we see the bulbs (LEDs) glowing, but what of the magnetic fields?

If the current is flowing both ways in the test wire, what of the magnetic fields; do we also have two opposing magnetic fields around the test wire or do they cancel each other out?

Hi Mike,

When I tested the "same signal, each opposing, two different sources, same wire", using a two frequency gen's, back in my thread, I used a magnet to test for a magnetic field.  It was huge, compared to one signal.  I posted all about it, but no one followed up on it.

Also, Thaelin, did similar experiments and saw 150 volt spikes, and ran a small motor using the same technique.  Very astounding stuff. 

@ All

I think anyone serious about working on the TPU should consider investing in an accurate gauss meter.  IMHO.  It would assist in so many ways, testing for field cancellation, strong magnetic fields, different magnetic field strengths associated with different frequencies (my theory.).

Cheers,

Bruce

Hi Bruce,

Can you please post a link to your ""same signal, each opposing, two different sources, same wire", using a two frequency gen's" experiment post?  I do not recall ever seeing that one, and it sounds interesting.  Maybe for some reason others didn't see it either and therefore it was overlooked?

Thanks! ;D

Eldarion

Quote from: eldarion on January 21, 2008, 01:21:58 AM
Hi Bruce,

Can you please post a link to your ""same signal, each opposing, two different sources, same wire", using a two frequency gen's" experiment post?  I do not recall ever seeing that one, and it sounds interesting.  Maybe for some reason others didn't see it either and therefore it was overlooked?

Thanks! ;D

Eldarion

Hi Eldarion,

This is the first post I made talking about same signals:
http://www.overunity.com/index.php/topic,2300.msg35958.html#msg35958

My Quote from BEP here:
http://www.overunity.com/index.php/topic,2300.msg36406.html#msg36406

Thaelin's Information here:
http://www.overunity.com/index.php/topic,2300.msg36492.html#msg36492

Another post about same signals here:
http://www.overunity.com/index.php/topic,2300.msg36894.html#msg36894
http://www.overunity.com/index.php/topic,2300.msg36917.html#msg36917

My experiment, here:
http://www.overunity.com/index.php/topic,2300.msg36995.html#msg36995

Thanks Bruce!

I think I'll go ahead and try it out--at least I can provide a confirmation of something unusual, or maybe even some more detail with my 500MHz  scope. ;)

Eldarion

G'day all,

Perhaps a little off the subject, but on reading your experiments I had an idea which I think is worth following up.

Instead of using a single wire if you used two electrodes immersed in an electrolyte instead you might be able to observe phenomena that could give you a clearer idea what you are dealing with. What would happen here? Would you get oxygen and hydrogen bubbles on BOTH electrodes or what? What happens if you pulse the current and so forth.

I will be trying this as soon as I have a chance.

What do you think?

Hans von Lieven

Hi Hans,  :)
You have a short circuit going there!!
Take a close look, and dont try that with car battery's  ;D

If you move some points of connection and use high frequency/voltage alternating current it would be also an intresting experiment.
There are always two things on my mind, one of them is Marks Tpu and the other is Hydrogen On Demand.
I keep thinking more about Marks Tpu because it runs without water.
Maybe it's  time for me to start playing with fluid too.....

M.

Bruce,

I have a few more questions for you, if you don't mind:
1. Were these two homebrew square wave generators synchronized in any way?  I am assuming that they were not,  which opens up some interesting possibilities.
2. Were they current-limited in any way (resistors, tiny output driver MOSFETs, etc)?  I just want to rule out the possibility of 750mV, 10-amp surges causing the effect. ;)
3. Closely related to #2, what was the approximate resistance of the coil secondary for DC?  High (above 5-10 ohms)?  Or did it appear more like a dead short?
4. Were the square waves unidirectional or bidirectional?  I.E. did the pulses from one square wave generator by itself go both positive and negative or just positive, with respect to zero volts (ground)?
5. And finally, was the output stage of each square wave generator push-pull or some other configuration?

Thanks!

Eldarion

EDIT: If you could tell me the model number of the signal generator kit you used I could probably answer a lot of those questions on my own... :)

Quote from: eldarion on January 21, 2008, 05:27:48 PM
Bruce,

I have a few more questions for you, if you don't mind:
1. Were these two homebrew square wave generators synchronized in any way?  I am assuming that they were not,  which opens up some interesting possibilities.
2. Were they current-limited in any way (resistors, tiny output driver MOSFETs, etc)?  I just want to rule out the possibility of 750mV, 10-amp surges causing the effect. ;)
3. Closely related to #2, what was the approximate resistance of the coil secondary for DC?  High (above 5-10 ohms)?  Or did it appear more like a dead short?
4. Were the square waves unidirectional or bidirectional?  I.E. did the pulses from one square wave generator by itself go both positive and negative or just positive, with respect to zero volts (ground)?
5. And finally, was the output stage of each square wave generator push-pull or some other configuration?

Thanks!

Eldarion

EDIT: If you could tell me the model number of the signal generator kit you used I could probably answer a lot of those questions on my own... :)

Hi Eldarion,

It has been a long time ago, but I will give it a stab.

They were not synchronized.  We used my partners scope to find the frequency of each gen, getting them as close as possible, and then put it on both ends of the coil.

Yes they were all current limited for circuit protection.  My partner built the three of them (he has three) from kits.  I will have to find out what type, or he can post it here. 

For question three, I am not sure.  I posted on brnbrade's original thread, before his claim of OU as I attempted to replicate his first description.  On that post, I say how many turns of what size wire for the secondary.  I can't recall right now, but if you find that post, it perhaps would be simple math to determine the resistance based on wire size and length.

Question 4, if I recall, all square waves were positive only.  As shown in the scope picture.

Question 5, I do not know.  I will find out the make of the kit and perhaps that will help. 

I am sorry I can't be of more help.   ;)

Cheers,

Bruce

Heres something interesting I found and have not seen or missed because it was not listed as we know it and maybe you have seen this .           http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=PTmJpPRprlg&feature=related  .       

Quote from: -[marco]- on January 21, 2008, 04:37:10 PM
Hi Hans,  :)
You have a short circuit going there!!
Take a close look, and dont try that with car battery's  ;D

If you move some points of connection and use high frequency/voltage alternating current it would be also an intresting experiment.
There are always two things on my mind, one of them is Marks Tpu and the other is Hydrogen On Demand.
I keep thinking more about Marks Tpu because it runs without water.
Maybe it's  time for me to start playing with fluid too.....

M.

Sorry mate,

I should have drawn the LED's in. I thought everybody would get the idea without them. Mind you , the electrolyte will probably act as enough of a load.

My apologies, I'll fix it.

Hans von Lieven

@Hans

I think Marco is right in more than one way.

Even with the tank emptied you have connected the two batteries directly to each other. You could still put LEDs in to stop this.

Anyway, I see your point and the idea seems valid but I have one question that bugs me every time I read a 'disassociation' thread. Why do people put electrolyte in the water? And why are they trying to make the water more conductive?
That seems to me to be the exact opposite of what is needed. Your trying to split the molecules not make them dance.

Sorry, that belongs on some other thread.

Quote from: btentzer on January 21, 2008, 06:41:47 PM

Yes they were all current limited for circuit protection.  My partner built the three of them (he has three) from kits.  I will have to find out what type, or he can post it here. 

The function generators used were Canakit CK307.  Here is a link to them, but this supplier was very slow in shipping them.
http://www.gibsonteched.com/ck307.html

Kent

OK fixed it

Hans von Lieven

Hi All,

Just wound a tapped coil to play with. Will also make one with some iron wire to see if there are any interesting differences.

God Bless,
Jason O

Hi jason
that looks suspicious and awesome!  :)
how many sources are you planning to use?
also tubes or transistors?
i am intrested in your test results.

@ Hans von Lieven

if you want the experiment to be the equivilant of the one wire experiment, the electrodes should have more then one (spaced) "tap points" on them and this means current is flowing in both directions in the same electrode...

the setup as you draw it is not really similar as all the wires are connected to the same points on top of the electrodes.

Marco.

Quote from: Jdo300 on January 22, 2008, 04:31:33 AM
Hi All,

Just wound a tapped coil to play with. Will also make one with some iron wire to see if there are any interesting differences.

God Bless,
Jason O

G'day Marko,

The electrodes in this set up simply act as terminal posts. The idea is for the electrolyte to become the equivalent of your single wire.

Hans von Lieven

Quote from: hansvonlieven on January 22, 2008, 03:27:57 PM
G'day Marko,

The electrodes in this set up simply act as terminal posts. The idea is for the electrolyte to become the equivalent of your single wire.

Hans von Lieven

Hi Hans
the single wire experiment was about one wire with 4 connections.
in one end of the wire the electrons are running from left to right and in the other end (area) of the same wire the electrons are running in opposite direction,from right to left.

the two seperate flows do not cross each other.
if they would cross it will result in the classical series or paralell switched circuitry as we know it today.

in your setup the both sources are connected to each other on two the same poles.
in the single wire experiment the two circuits use one area of the same wire without affecting each other.
they simply "share" some of the same wire without them being closed looped to each other.

Marco.

I see Marko,

We are talking here at crossed purposes. There were two experiments by Rosphere, The first one is the one you are talking about where each circuit had its own section of the single wire.

In the second experiment he used the whole wire for both circuits. This is the one that fascinates me, because I think this area has never been fully investigated, simply because early experimenters had no access to diodes or LED's.

In my view some really interesting new phenomena will crop up.

This is the experiment I am referring to:

(https://overunityarchives.com/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.overunity.com%2Findex.php%3Faction%3Ddlattach%3Btopic%3D3547.0%3Battach%3D16650%3Bimage&hash=e591273da8f142e7419cd974dc8f068cc00afdbc)

Hans von Lieven

ah , i see
now i understand.
the lightbulbs in the experiment were 12 volt halogen bulbs not LED's.
but there are many things to try  :)
in the experiment Rosphere showed, the wire in between virtually not exists.
but i can be wrong, if we do not keep on trying things, we will never find new phenomena.
so all i have to say is....fire up the jars  ;D

M.

Quote from: hansvonlieven on January 22, 2008, 03:57:51 PM
In the second experiment he used the whole wire for both circuits. This is the one that fascinates me, because I think this area has never been fully investigated, simply because early experimenters had no access to diodes or LED's.

In my view some really interesting new phenomena will crop up.

I used what I had on hand; substituting LEDs for bulbs, (and weak 9Vs.)  So, there is an additional diode effect that marco did not intend in his circuit that, perhaps, allowed me to use the whole wire length.  I sure would appreciate it if someone, with 9V rated bulbs and fresh batteries, could retry this.

Quote from: -[marco]- on January 22, 2008, 04:11:33 PM
in the experiment Rosphere showed, the wire in between virtually not exists.

Yep.  I called it a, "common ground."

Yet, when you think about current flow in the way that we have all been formally taught and trace the two paths in your mind, you must conclude that I have doubled the 'bandwidth' of my single wire.  :D

Further, we are taught in school that 'electrons' flow one way while 'electron holes' flow in the opposite direction.  So, there are actually four streams passing through the single wire.

Oh, I forgot to post my results of a further test of this experiment.  The single wire appears to generate no magnetic field.  (But I think I need to redo this test because I used stronger batteries and no LEDs or bulbs.)

---

EDIT: I redid this test exactly as before.  Then I removed the 'wire' and the LEDs still glowed.  Well, no 5h!+; it is just a one loop circuit with two batteries and two diodes.  Ugh, I felt like removing all of my posts from this topic so as not to confuse or excite anyone else. :-[

Then, I replaced the 'wire' and noticed the following:  Since no two used 9Vs are the same, one of the LED's was glowing slightly brighter than the other.  I replaced the 'wire' and the opposite LED glowed brighter.  I repeated this several times and it happened every time.  So, there may still something going on here.  I am not sure what.  So, I will leave my posts intact.

Quote from: Rosphere on January 22, 2008, 06:50:52 PM
I replaced the 'wire' and the opposite LED glowed brighter.  I repeated this several times and it happened every time. 

When the unexpected LED was brighter did you see if that magnetic field was weaker or gone?

If there is current flow there must be a magnetic field, right?

Quote from: Rosphere on January 22, 2008, 06:50:52 PM

Oh, I forgot to post my results of a further test of this experiment.  The single wire appears to generate no magnetic field.  (But I think I need to redo this test because I used stronger batteries and no LEDs or bulbs.)

G'day Rosphere,

This is exactly what I would have suspected.

By having two opposing currents going down the same wire you have effectively created bi-filar behaviour in a single conductor.

This needs a lot of further investigation, what you have discovered here is not in the standard textbooks. I think it has implications right down the line.

At the risk of making a complete and utter goose of myself I would say that you have created something akin to what Keely calls a "Neutral Centre". This neutral centre, according to Keely, is the key to limitless energy.

This research you guys are doing transcends by a long shot the parameters of this thread. I leave it up to you to follow up or to relegate this thing to a new thread.

I am happy to start one if you wish, my personal feeling is to keep it here.

Hans von Lieven

You know, I was thinking about all of the SM clues, about rotation.  We know there is a gyroscopic effect caused by rotation in two directions.  For some time, we thought perhaps the top and bottom are pulsed in one direction and the middle pulsed in the other.  We even looked at video, where SM motions both directions in one of the tapes.

BUT... what if, SM discovered that the way to "disable the EFFECTS of the flux, so that now the electrons float freely" was as simple as sending the identical frequencies in opposite directions?  One power source sends them all clockwise and another oscillator and power source (two batteries) sends identical signals counterclockwise?  This would give you the counter rotating fields, and (perhaps, needs more testing) this is how SM disabled the effects of the flux?

Cheers,

Bruce

It is in the books but it is part of that one-size-fits-all EM theory that we all suffer from.

The U.S. National Electric Code allows for the use of a much smaller neutral point in three phase systems. Why ? - because a balanced load causes lower amperage in the neutral than the phases. Sometimes it is not even there. The single phase loads are there. Where did the amps go? Everybody does it but noone asks.

The answer is usually a busy depiction of vector phase relationships. I say, OK. Now why am I seeing 65 VDC between the generator shaft and ground? The generator is polyphase AC. The answer is - fix that! that can cause problems.

I think if you displace/remove/compress - whatever - the magnetic field the dielectric field fills in the void. Radiant energy is DC (avoiding the fact that DC doesn't really exist). It either radiates or it doesn't.

So that one little wire test is key to understanding cancellation of fields, the DC portion, increase is speed and possibly rotation of fields and gain?

BEP

Quote from: -[marco]- on January 22, 2008, 03:17:03 PM
Hi jason
that looks suspicious and awesome!  :)
how many sources are you planning to use?
also tubes or transistors?
i am intrested in your test results.

Hi Marco,

I am going to wind the iron coil and then wait for a bit. Yes I will be driving with tubes because Steven was trying to get us to see some thing about tubes that we all have been ignoring. I have a set of 12J5 triodes that I am going to build a three-channel amplifier with to pulse the stew out of this coil when it's finished. But for now, I'm waiting for some tube sockets to come in :).

God Bless,
Jason O

Quote from: btentzer on January 23, 2008, 07:16:42 AM

BUT... what if, SM discovered that the way to "disable the EFFECTS of the flux, so that now the electrons float freely" was as simple as sending the identical frequencies in opposite directions?  One power source sends them all clockwise and another oscillator and power source (two batteries) sends identical signals counterclockwise?  This would give you the counter rotating fields, and (perhaps, needs more testing) this is how SM disabled the effects of the flux?

Cheers,

Bruce

I think you are on the right track with your thinking Bruce,

Have another look at Mark Snoswell's animation of the behaviour in a bifilar coil  http://www.overunity.com/index.php/topic,2764.90.html

posts 92, 95 and 96.

As Rosphere has shown there is bifilar behaviour in a single wire with opposing currents. What if you send the same opposing pulses down a bifilar coil? Would the effect be cumulative? Is that how you create the vortex? And what if the bifilar coil was constructed with one iron wire and one copper wire as in the Stubblefield coil? Fascinating questions.

Only experiment will show.

Hans von Lieven

Quote from: btentzer on January 23, 2008, 07:16:42 AM

Might relate I donno.
http://www.geocities.com/nayado/

I did the crossed current test last night, two batteries with lamps and positive connections cross on the single conductor, this just defies all rational explanation. I have no idea  ??? I mean absolutely nothing comes to mind to explain this ---- good job guys. :)
I tried sending inductive discharges across the current and still ---- Nada, zero interaction ???

Tonight Im going to probe this setup with a compass to see what the hell the B field might be doing, then maybe try Hans setup. This just ain't right-----

G'day all,

On this one I need help from you electronics guys. I am only a humble mechanical engineer and though I can read and understand circuit diagrams I don't know enough to design a circuit. What I am trying to do is feed complex pulses (a la Keely) in opposing directions through anything from a single wire to coils to electrodes in an electrolyte to study the effects.

I intend to use my computer as the frequency generator, I have the necessary programmes.

I intend to optically isolate the test rig from the computer using optocouplers. You can see in the attached diagram what I have in mind.

What I need is a circuit that drives the LED's with my audio output. How do I go about this. Any suggestion gratefully received.

Obviously in my proposed setup anything you wish can be connected to the terminals A and B.

Hans von Lieven

Info that may be of additional interest:

Replace that 1 wire with a low ohm resistor.
Connect equal resistors across each LED to bring the load up.
If there are amps going through the 1-wire resistor then it would radiate heat, but it doesn't.

If your loads are almost perfectly balanced and both high enough to pronounce the effect you should sense a temperature change in that 1-wire resistor.

I'll not yank your chains on this but balance is the key word here.

Quote from: BEP on January 22, 2008, 09:05:47 PM

Quote from: Rosphere on January 22, 2008, 06:50:52 PM
I replaced the 'wire' and the opposite LED glowed brighter.  I repeated this several times and it happened every time.

When the unexpected LED was brighter did you see if that magnetic field was weaker or gone?

If there is current flow there must be a magnetic field, right?

Sorry, BEP, I used a small compass to detect the magnetic fields in a similar experiment with no LEDs.  When the LED's were in use my small compass would not budge either way.  I suspect that the current was too weak after passing through the LED's.   :(

Quote from: duff on October 31, 2007, 03:42:00 AM
Erfinder once said: "Study comes first and then construction! How can you build what you don't understand?".

I was going back through Steven Marks statements and the following got me thinking again. No one has a definitive answer for what the kick is.

SM: I told you that the simplest form of over unity is a piece of wire and a voltage source. Anyone can actually connect it and measure. See for yourself the kick. NO coil no xmrs, just a kick. That should tell you learned gentleman that there exists a form of energy convertible and useable which is directly related to a simple piece of wire and instantaneous electron flow.

The following is my effort to understand the kick using a straight piece of wire.

A possible solution to the kick.

Multiplication of power = multiplication of motion = high voltage.

All circuits contain both induction and capacitance. even a straight wire.  When power is first applied, maximum resistance is found in high induction circuits, which still have some capacitance. The capacitance absorbs the current, and expels it back into the inductance. the first action is energy stuffed into an extreemly small capacitance. Tesla followers should note this. Notice that the kick, is "electrostatic" in nature according to everybodies observations. Think about this, and you will know exactly what the kick is. Also, one might try to apply Bernulli's principle to this problem (really weird I know, but after all this is fluid dynamics at its best.), the higher the inductance, the higher the kick.....why? what does high inductance represent in the face of change?

Also, why has nobody taken a look at the force between charges recently? force decreases with the square of the distance, what doe this imply? A linear increase in voltage = a non linear, (squared) function??? HELLO!!!

Avramenko, Tesla, Frolov = one wire = super conduction at room temp.

this one is gold: EMF reproduces itself through induction, and dissipates itself through condution. How can we induct power instead of conducting it?

Quote from: Rosphere on January 24, 2008, 05:48:15 PM

Sorry, BEP, I used a small compass to detect the magnetic fields in a similar experiment with no LEDs.  When the LED's were in use my small compass would not budge either way.  I suspect that the current was too weak after passing through the LED's.   :(

I should have assumed that. Sorry. Yes the LEDs would not provide enough current and mag field to deflect a compass.
If you have enough battery power left you could up the amps with additional resistors and probably make a detectable mag field. I would try each lamp circuit separate first then have both on and check.

Hello All,
I don't know where else to post this so here it is.

I replicated Marco's 1st experiment a and b .

I used 2 batteries each made up of 2 AAA NiMH batteries recently recharged (around 2.65vdc each ) The lights I used were red LED's.

I burned out a LED very quickly last night so began again more cautiously today.
Part a was easy after I got the new led ready. Very quickly I checked it all out and both lights went on but they were flickery. (The flickery part could be because the contacts were made using twisted wires and clips) I checked the voltage in the middle section (the part with the ?) and got 0.010-0.012vdc (Each battery by itself looked about right but I forgot to record it - sorry)

Part b When the thing was full on the voltage from end to end was 0.010vdc-0.012vdc just like the middle section of the a part. Each battery and its loop showed voltage of 0.234vdc. The batteries got really hot really fast so I pulled the batteries off. Then I rechecked the batteries separately and each battery is exactly 2.61vdc. (I didn't think to record what each battery was before the test see above-sorry. )

jeanna

@Jeanna

If the circuit was right then the polarity of one of your battery sets was wrong. It sounds like each battery was trying to eat the other's tail  :)

LEDs typically don't like voltages as high as 2.6. You'll have to look at the package they came in for their voltages. Usually you must add a resistor in series.

Quote from: BEP on January 24, 2008, 06:07:48 PM
@Jeanna

If the circuit was right then the polarity of one of your battery sets was wrong. It sounds like each battery was trying to eat the other's tail  :)

LEDs typically don't like voltages as high as 2.6. You'll have to look at the package they came in for their voltages. Usually you must add a resistor in series.

Thanks, BEP
This is from Rosphere's post the pic is called firstexperiment-bjpeg maybe on page 8 or 9 where the batteries are mirror to each other but the ends of each battery driven circuit is out on the ends of that straight wire. I think the heat in the batteries (very hot) might be coming from too quickly "recharging" the battery or maybe just like a shorted battery.- except the voltage didn't drain out.

I was avoiding using a resistor only because SM said that some kind of resistor screwed up the works, so I took my chances (If I hadn't JUST recharged them they would have been  been OK.)

This single wire deal is such an interesting thing.

jeanna

This is YOUR description of it:

Quote
Put a black from bat A along with a red from bat B together on one end and reverse on the other (with the loads connected).
The current from both bats is flowing the full length of the wire but opposite directions. If the wire explodes at 1.5 amps and each load is drawing 1 amp then why doesn't the wire explode? Better yet why does no current show at all in the middle?

I just did it and registered the voltages at those various points.
The wire didn't get as hot as the battery. I checked after my hand got burned. The wire wasn't hot (yet).

OK, I hate to spoil everyone's fun, but can someone who has run one of these tests cut the single wire in the middle?  I suspect that it will make no difference in the load LED brightness or resistor amperage; there is another DC path that does not include the wire.

That being said, I still have no explanation for Bruce's odd effects with the pulsed single wire tests.  (Actually, I do have an idea, but still need to test it, as well as confirming Bruce's results in the first place)

Thanks!

Eldarion

Quote from: eldarion on January 24, 2008, 07:22:50 PM
OK, I hate to spoil everyone's fun, but can someone who has run one of these tests cut the single wire in the middle?  I suspect that it will make no difference in the load LED brightness or resistor amperage; there is another DC path that does not include the wire.

Thanks!

Eldarion

I probably blew another fuse. I get zero amps, but

the voltage on this circuit is:

+ to - 2.38vdc one way and
2.43vdc the other and
+ to + 0.01vdc and
- to - 0.00vdc

hmm

jeanna
now to find a fuse???

Quote from: eldarion on January 24, 2008, 07:22:50 PM
OK, I hate to spoil everyone's fun, but can someone who has run one of these tests cut the single wire in the middle?  I suspect that it will make no difference in the load LED brightness or resistor amperage; there is another DC path that does not include the wire.

That being said, I still have no explanation for Bruce's odd effects with the pulsed single wire tests.  (Actually, I do have an idea, but still need to test it, as well as confirming Bruce's results in the first place)

Thanks!

Eldarion

Hi Eldarion,

If you could confirm Rosphere's experiment as well.  The question in my mind is this, "Does sending like signals, different power sources, disable the flux or make it stronger?"

"If those two identical signals/different sources are out of phase 90 degrees, what does this do with respect to the flux, etc.?  What about 120 degrees out of phase?" 

I am sure you will see something.

@ Marco
The suspense is getting to me.  So what did you see when you tested opposing signals/different sources in your coil?  I want to ask you, since no one else has.  Also thanks for again bringing this to the forefront. 

Cheers,

Bruce

LOL :D
Cut the wire in the middle ---- it's a series connection between the two batteries

Quote from: Freezer on January 24, 2008, 03:21:41 PM
Might relate I donno.
http://www.geocities.com/nayado/

Don't know either, but it's a mighty interesting link, especially the sub-links... 8)

Quote from: M@rcel on January 25, 2008, 11:22:08 AM

Quote from: Freezer on January 24, 2008, 03:21:41 PM
Might relate I donno.
http://www.geocities.com/nayado/

Don't know either, but it's a mighty interesting link, especially the sub-links... 8)

Agree. Sure would like to know where those sub-links are though.
Being that it was released in 1999 - I haven't seen this before.

Take care.

nap

oops yes sorry about that. I mixed a few things up. The sublinks I meant are on an entirely different page:
http://www.aspden.org.uk/3.html

now, what did Tesla say about Leyden jars?

Quote from: M@rcel on January 25, 2008, 12:55:51 PM


now, what did Tesla say about Leyden jars?

Nice article, thanks M@rcel.
I think it is that famous pic of Tesla sitting reading something with lightning blazing over his head that shows a large box of (a bank of) leyden style capacitors. Anyway they are caps and I always assumed they were leyden jars. Ben Franklin used them in many of his experiments... etc.

jeanna

Quote from: allcanadian on January 25, 2008, 10:54:47 AM
LOL :D
Cut the wire in the middle ---- it's a series connection between the two batteries

If you cut the wire, yes.

However, with the wire in place it may well be a different picture. My suggested experiment with the electrodes in the electrolyte should show if there is any activity along this path. It either forms bubbles on the electrodes or it doesn't.

I shall run this experiment as planned the minute I get a chance, which will be in the next few days.

Hans von Lieven

Quote from: jeanna on January 25, 2008, 02:14:25 PM

Quote from: M@rcel on January 25, 2008, 12:55:51 PM


now, what did Tesla say about Leyden jars?

Nice article, thanks M@rcel.
I think it is that famous pic of Tesla sitting reading something with lightning blazing over his head that shows a large box of (a bank of) leyden style capacitors. Anyway they are caps and I always assumed they were leyden jars. Ben Franklin used them in many of his experiments... etc.

jeanna

No, I believe it was in some interview Tesla gave. Afaik he said something like that capacitors were extraordinary and that he liked the Leyden jars best. I wonder if that is because they are cilindrical. What would sphere caps do? I've seen quite a few patents using spherical capacitors.

A Van de Graaf generator is a kind of spherical capacitor.

(https://overunityarchives.com/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fcontent.answers.com%2Fmain%2Fcontent%2Fwp%2Fen-commons%2Fthumb%2F7%2F74%2F300px-Van_de_graaf_generator.svg.png&hash=0fc2a9e93e01bd789ad27631e617ad9fa6e8e387)

Hans von Lieven

Quote from: hansvonlieven on January 25, 2008, 04:11:32 PM
A Van de Graaf generator is a kind of spherical capacitor.

yes, but I meant two spheres, one inside the other. btw what would be an easy and good way to create cilindrical or spherical caps?

@all

I need to find the document but i remember something very similar to this concept they were calling it a 3rd kind of electricity, I don't agree with there nomenclature. Anyways it was a electrolysis setup and this mysterious 3rd current or whatever they want to call it showed up between the neutral plates between the electrodes. The load they ran off of it supposedly didn't load or affect the psu controlling the electrolysis, no change in amps or volts on the driven electrodes when a suitable load was applied to the neutral ones.  Sorry if this is no help i will keep searching through my backups.
                                                                                                          Joe

Quote from: M@rcel on January 25, 2008, 04:30:57 PM

Quote from: hansvonlieven on January 25, 2008, 04:11:32 PM
A Van de Graaf generator is a kind of spherical capacitor.

yes, but I meant two spheres, one inside the other. btw what would be an easy and good way to create cilindrical or spherical caps?

Make a sphere of a dielectric, coat it with conductive paint, electroplate, coat it with insulating lacquer, apply conductive paint, electroplate......and so on

The problem is drilling a hole and connect every second layer to one terminal and every other layer to a different terminal

Hans von Lieven

wow, sounds difficult. Perhaps it's better to start cylindrical. Could I just take some drinking glass with copper-foil inside and out and solder wires to this? Or am I thinking too simplistic?
Maybe cylinidrical (instead of spherical) is what we need anyway:

Quote from http://www.aspden.org.uk/2.htm
==========================
I now ask you to keep in mind my reference to a radial electric field as I mention each of them below and do realize that electrical structures of cylindrical form are a key feature.
==========================

That makes a Leyden jar M@rcel,

Aluminium kitchen foil will do just as well and is easier to procure.

Hans von Lieven

Quote from: armagdn03 on January 24, 2008, 05:53:02 PM

A possible solution to the kick.

Multiplication of power = multiplication of motion = high voltage.

All circuits contain both induction and capacitance. even a straight wire.  When power is first applied, maximum resistance is found in high induction circuits, which still have some capacitance. The capacitance absorbs the current, and expels it back into the inductance. the first action is energy stuffed into an extreemly small capacitance. Tesla followers should note this. Notice that the kick, is "electrostatic" in nature according to everybodies observations. Think about this, and you will know exactly what the kick is. Also, one might try to apply Bernulli's principle to this problem (really weird I know, but after all this is fluid dynamics at its best.), the higher the inductance, the higher the kick.....why? what does high inductance represent in the face of change?

Also, why has nobody taken a look at the force between charges recently? force decreases with the square of the distance, what doe this imply? A linear increase in voltage = a non linear, (squared) function??? HELLO!!!

Avramenko, Tesla, Frolov = one wire = super conduction at room temp.

this one is gold: EMF reproduces itself through induction, and dissipates itself through condution. How can we induct power instead of conducting it?

In the lines of the above reasoning an interesting paper that takes a half an hour to read ( and may be many more to understand  ... ) but may be very beneficial for understanding coil interaction with incoming electromagnetic waves. An exerb from the paper:
"The capacitive reactance of a tuning capacitor balanced the inductive reactance of the antenna coil, and positive feedback ("regeneration" or--reaction") was added to introduce negative resistance, which offset the real positive wire resistance of the coil. The result was a parallel resonant antenna coil circuit with an extremely small impedance at the resonant frequency. The mechanism by which such an antenna attains exceptional ,sensitivity is generally not understood or appreciated. The low circuit impedance permitted a large circulating current to flow when the cod was excited by an incoming signal field. This, large current caused the generation of a dipole electromagnetic field. The dipole field, in turn. interacted with the incident plane wave field in such a way that energy was funneled from a relatively large area of the wave front into the antenna coil."

Note that this paper can not be accessed freely on NASA website ( just says that is not available ... ) I bump in to it in one search in google :)  and it here it is bunched together with other things, it starts form page 62. The paper was first published: J F Sutton and GC. Spaniol, in Proceedings of the Inter_mtional Tesla 5ociety (IEEE) (Colorado Springs,
Colorado. 1988).

Hope this knowledge will help for the common good.

sas

The way they talk about gravity... this paper is creepy.. :-\

Hi All,
Today I started to try to put together the formulas for electricity including voltage, amperage and magnetism. The only formulas of these things seem to be corralled together into separate topics and never interweave. Capacitance and voltage suffer the same kind of separation. As I did this, and I am just beginning, I remembered a picture of iron - the ultimate electromagnet.

Same subject - different angle:
About 10 years ago I bought a used book called pyramid power by G.Patrick Flanagan (copywrite 1973). It happened to have the paper cover still intact. I have never seen a picture like this cover anywhere and I wonder how many others ever have. It is a picture of a few iron atoms taken by the radiation microscope. It shows that they take on a toroid shape and they are connected together by what looks like a 3 stranded ribbon wire. Check out the angles too.

I think anyone thinking about the TPU probably wants to see this picture.

jeanna

I moved the picture(s) to a new thread

please go to "Examples of TPU in Nature"

http://www.overunity.com/index.php/topic,3996.new.html#new (http://www.overunity.com/index.php/topic,3996.new.html#new)

Thank you,
jeanna

@jeanna

Since the picture file you posted has small in the title, do you have a higher resolution version you could post?

A

Quote from: acerzw on January 26, 2008, 10:25:35 PM
@jeanna

Since the picture file you posted has small in the title, do you have a higher resolution version you could post?

A

Yes, acerzw
This is a jpg, however. If it is a problem I can repost something else.
jeanna
I am going to move these to a new thread (first time :D )

Again, please see:

http://www.overunity.com/index.php/topic,3996.new.html#new (http://www.overunity.com/index.php/topic,3996.new.html#new)

Thank you
jeanna

Getting back to our discussion of the one wire experiment.   ;)

Sitting back, looking anew at one of the SM clues, and thinking about the "two frequencies (signals) separate power sources, traveling together in a wire."  Up to now, we have started to discuss "opposing" signals, which is what I believe SM meant when he talked about "connected in reverse of one another."  But, he also mentions "slightly out of phase" with one another.  Then you have some kicks!  Thaelin saw this, much more than I did, with 250 volt spikes, using only two frequency generators.

SM's Clue, I have highlighted the relevant part, IMHO:

I originally got the idea from electron circuits which use vacuum rectifiers like the 5U4 GB or 5AR4 etc.
The plate has a high voltage potential with lots of useable power available.
You cant get to it or use it for anything without applying a heating voltage to the cathode or what is the cathode potential of the tube.
So, you put in a small voltage of 5 volts AC 60 Hz which heats up the cathode and welcomes the electron stream from the plate.
Or actually the other way around, but not important for this example of my thoughts.
Now the high voltage power goes through the cathode and travels through the coils of the 5 volt transformer along with the 5 volt AC.
If the plate voltage is not rectified then it is AC with a potential 60 Hz frequency.
That combines with the 5 volt 60 Hz in the coil of the htr transformer and generally amounts to nothing. In fact the power of the 5 volt transformer amounts to nothing.
It is an insignificant power supply except when the two transformers get slightly out of phase with each other, or when they are connected in reverse of one another.
Then you can measure all kinds of things going on.
You can generate all kinds of hash and multiple frequencies, and I do mean all kinds.
What I measured during this process was very interesting.
All these frequencies occasionally met at the same time with a much larger kick at the output.

So, when doing the "reverse/opposing of one another" experiment, using IDENTICAL frequency, but one is "slightly out of phase" of the other, look for POWER SPIKES>Kicks

Please take note, that SM give us the frequency of both of the signals in this story.  He says, "...If the plate voltage is not rectified then it is AC with a potential 60 Hz frequency."  (First frequency is 60 Hz from the tube plate, not rectified.) 

Then, he says, "That combines with the 5 volt 60 Hz in the coil of the htr transformer..." (Second frequency, identical, in "reverse/opposing", "slightly out of phase".)

Lastly, the point is that the signals are identical, except for some key things.  Different sources (power supply/battery) and they are in "reverse/opposing", and they are "slightly out of phase" of one another.

I now firmly believe (IMHO) that SM drove the collectors as follows. 
FIRST Battery As Source 1:
F1 in first collector 
F2 in second collector
F3 in third collector

SECOND Battery As Source 2:
F1 in first collector, traveling in the opposite direction, identical signal as above, just slightly out of phase.
F2 in second collector, traveling in the opposite direction, identical signal as above, just slightly out of phase.
F3 in third collector, traveling in the opposite direction, identical signal as above, just slightly out of phase.

*Note:  Can you picture for a moment, how this could begin to "feed itself" and why SM would say, "because the signal source also becomes the feed for the power source and has the natural tendency to run with gain."

I think this is a major, missing part of our testing.   :(  Let's change that.

Cheers,

Bruce


Edit:
I also want to remind all, of another quote by SM of Tesla:
"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!"

Well Well...like the pic.....
Here is some of mine...NOW ON THE NEW TPU IN NATURE THREAD.....but they are not atoms...much bigger...can see them with the eye  :o
I used a $10 buck plastic microscope to see..
There is alot more to see than shown in the pics...The detail is much better with the eye.
I just put my digital camera to the scope eyepiece and took the pics...ameture... ;D
Scotty

@ Scotty, Jeanna and Acer

PLEASE start a new thread for your pictures and discussion.  This thread is for one wire experiments.

@ Scotty
Some of us have only dial up and large photo's only clog the thread for many of us.

Thank you in advance for your understanding!

Cheers,

Bruce

Good morning All,

Some one wire experiments, that need to be run.  Including one of Marco's that still has not been tested.

ALSO, I have made a flow chart circuit for the 3 stack tpu.  Just an idea to test, for those who have wound theirs already.

My Litz has come in.  675 strands, individually insulated.  Very small wire. 

Cheers,

Bruce

My apologies, Bruce,
It is the reason the first one was a little gif.
I did think people doing this should see a picture taken from nature that I have never seen anywhere else.
jeanna

Hi all....
These kicks you all talk about are so easy to explain.
It has nothing to do with electrons!!
It has nothing to do with collapsing fields.
It has to do with angular displacement.
It has to do with the capacitance of a wire.
Push a coil with a light bulb connected through a U shaped magnet....do it slowly and you will have no light....now do it quickly and you will have light.
This shows that the TIME is important.
When you approached the U magnet with the coil...the U magnet was loosing its strength...but when the coil breaks away from the U magnet..the U magnet is recharged from the air or the Earth's magnetic field....ready for the next start....
Your a/c power lines are similar....during the time of no pressure the wires are slightly charged in a capacitive way from the Earth...it is one of the reasons a/c can run so far....
In the a/c the pressure is rising and falling steadily so things remain fairly stable....but as Henry Moray says...."When you put a substance under pressure and then set it free"....the scene is much different....angular displacement towards capacitive state occurs instantly......but during that small amount of TIME there is alot going on in the wire.
It is the reason your CEMF is at a higher voltage.
It is the reason for all the wonderful effects of Tesla coils and disruptive discharges.
As the coil approaches the center of the U magnet...the running current stops..no pressure....but the coil wire and core are full of magnetic lines of force...at the max limit in fact.....ALL THE FLUX IS DIRECTED ACCROSS THE WIRES.....
We want the force to run along the wires....not accross them.
As soon as the coil moves away from the U magnet center, the current reverses until all the flux in the core is pushed into the wires.
----------------------------------------------
By the way...for those who are experimenting....do not overlook those pictures i loaded...
The forms in those pics of mine are what you use to start your car everyday.....without those forms...you would have no electricity......
Read about magnetic currents....then you will know what electricity is......then you will know what my pics are......they are more interesting than anyone can see.... ;)
People aks for hi res...then complain about it....  funny place  ???
Scotty.

Good morning All,

Three of the "proper" frequencies will never be enough.  They must be "driven" with a triode tube, (to start with.  It is more than just the speed of the tube, it has to do with the harmonics naturally on the output of the triodes signal.)  head long at one another.  A separate battery (power supply) for each, slightly out of phase.  Identical signals.  I would test with the infamous 245 Khz.  One of SM's given frequencies and the frequency at which lightning is formed.

The following is a repost from June 22, 2007 of two experiments mentioned by Thaelin. My comments are in (^)

Experiment #1
If you want to see this in real time, take two signal gens positive leads only. One small hobby motor and wire it to both gens. Now set the frequency's low but slightly off each other (slightly out of phase) and watch the motor rev up and down as the frequencies counter act each other.

Experiment #2
I have a bifilar coil from other things wound with a lot of wire. I put a small ninety degree coil through the center and hooked up two signals. Well not much. then I moved one of the signals to the output end and the scope went nuts.(identical signals opposing one another, different power supply's, slightly out of phase.)   Good way to see it too.

Link:  http://www.overunity.com/index.php/topic,2300.msg36492.html#msg36492

Cheers,

Bruce

Quote from: Bruce_TPU on January 28, 2008, 07:29:44 AM
Good morning All,

Three of the "proper" frequencies will never be enough.  They must be "driven" with a triode tube, (to start with.  It is more than just the speed of the tube, it has to do with the harmonics naturally on the output of the triodes signal.)  head long at one another.  A separate battery (power supply) for each, slightly out of phase.  Identical signals.  I would test with the infamous 245 Khz.  One of SM's given frequencies and the frequency at which lightning is formed.

This is interesting Bruce,

245 KHz is the 16th octave harmonic of the Schumann frequency if you accept this at approx 7.48 Hz. It is also very close to Keely's scale of B-flat depending on which concert pitch you use (we do not know which concert pitch Keely used as A=440 as an accepted standard is of much more recent origin)

You mention several frequencies given by SM, would you please so kind as to let me have them, I would like to analyse this further.

Hans von Lieven

Hi Hans,
245 Khz and 35.705 Khz.  35.705 is the frequency of the northern lights, if I recall.

Cheers,

Bruce

Thanks Bruce,

I have to think about this one for a while, I cannot readily think where this one might fit in the scheme of things.

Hans von Lieven

@hansvonlieven

Idea only....

7.whatever was his target at one point.
35.705 was a low as he could make it go so he left it there (larger - higher Q coil)
245 was a maximum of the lower Q higher freq coil

We all know what the 7.? is. 245 would be the series resonance of the altitude of the ionoshpere during the day. Since this altitude changes drastically as day changes to night and back the lower end of the range for that coil would be around 160. Lightning burst have a spectral spike at many places but the two largest are at 1.7kHz and 175kHz (on average going by data collected by other hobbyists and whistler signals I have seen.)

So the thing probably needs to be a variable tuning device to cover changes in ionospheric layer altitude. Since the ionosphere is well known to be the location of most charged particles it seems plausible.

If the above is the way our Earth works then it appears to me that SM was trying to copy that function on a smaller scale.

Just my 213 cents worth (U.S. dollar is pretty much worthless right now  ;D

You have a valid argument there BEP,

If SM was indeed trying to establish resonance on some harmonic with the Schumann resonance, there would have to be some sort of a sensing and feedback mechanism (not unlike a servo mechanism) to make this possible.

Food for thought, Thank you

Hans von Lieven.

Evening All,

Here are two more experiment ideas surrounding our discussion of "identical signals, separate power sources, opposing one another, slightly out of phase, (245 Khz suggested)

I only have one more experiment to consider at this time, but will post it at a later date. 

A friend of mine hopes to do some experiments along these lines this weekend.  Marco has seen it.  Thaelin has seen something odd.  I have seen something odd.  It fits all of the SM clues.

I think it may be the "circuit potential" we have for so long looked for.  But experimentation will tell.  Some of you have the equipment and are well qualified to carry out a few tests. 

Some are buying VHF triodes.  An easy oscillator tube circuit would be handy right about now.

Marco saw wires vibrate.  I saw a very strong magnetic field and RF interference at very low current.  Thaelin saw huge kicks using only frequency gens.

If this is not it, we should experiment, once and for all, and clear the air, so we can move on to other ideas.  IMHO   ;) 

I think someone will see something.  ;D

Cheers All,

Bruce

Bruce,

I want to duplicate the experiment with the coil that you and Thaelin saw. Could you post a diagram just for that including where the ground lines for the function generators go? If it is just the picture from your first diagram, do the grounds from the two separate sources connect to each other, or is this some kind of one-wire setup? What frequencies did you use, and were they sine waves or square waves? Also, could you post some information about the coil that you were posting (type of wire, rough number of turns, etc). I'll try and duplicate the experiment.

God Bless,
Jason O

Hello Everyone,

I just came across an interesting tidbit of information about phase inversion (which Steven talked about). I think I see why it is important to have two signals running against each other in the same wire! Look at this article about audio amps:

http://www.tubecad.com/june99/page10.html

God Bless,
Jason O

Hello Jason,

Here are the details of my experiment and also the coil http://www.overunity.com/index.php/topic,2300.msg36995.html#msg36995

But, before you wind that coil, I am convinced you will see this on any coil.  So I would strongly suggest using one of your existing coils first, before putting the effort into winding this one. 

The key is to make sure that each frequency gen has a different power source, that the signals are identical, no deviation, and that they are slightly out of phase of one another.  60 volts or more would be best, if you are set up for that.

I hope that helps. 

Cheers my friend,

Bruce

Jason,

Any common point between the two sources is slf defeating - ground or otherwise.

The more sure way to see this effect is to have two separate FET drivers circuits, each with its own battery suppy (not power supply) and opto or otherwise isolated inputs. Then you could use a two channel freek genny.

The best way to see the result is not with a scope probe but with a magnetic pickup like a coil or Hall Effect probe - better yet a secondary coil off the tested primary. The phase offset can be zero initially - this will cause the collision in the center of the coil (if all else is perfect). A phase inversion (in classical AC terms) will cause cancellation of the voltage.
Two Pulses (DC) of the same frequency hitting the opposite ends of the coil at the same time should meet in the middle. The potential should not be cancelled - only the magnetic field as the two magnetic fields are inverted polarity to one another.
A phase difference with only two signals will only cause the collision point to move on a solenoid coil. Now do the same on a toroidal coil and you have a cat chasing its tail.

Hi BEP,

Ahhh that makes perfect sense there. Now the only thing I'm wondering is weather it works better with coils a many turns or few turns. When I think about what is happening here, I am tempted to say that it would be a longitudinal wave traveling, and therefore a few loose windings with some spacing would be good, but then again, I'm also thinking about the idea of building up a large magnetic field, (or canceling it all together) which could go either way... What are your thoughts on this?

God Bless,
Jason O

The more turns you have the more pronounced the effect should be - up to a point.. I would keep the turn spacing at least 2.5 times the diameter of the conductor center to center between turns. The reason for this distance: It is a good approximation and an attempt to keep the turns far enough apart to keep them out of the near-field of each other. Of course, increasing the current enough will override this distance.

Short, sharp pulses are best. Probably longitudinal because the effect is seen first on the meeting of the waves.

I think the target should be
1. to weaken or eliminate the conventional inductive capabilities of the wire.
2. increase the speed of current flow via #1. Forget this for now. I would have to rant to explain.
3. introduce a third energy to stretch the math from squaring to cubing. (Waves are not flat as seen on a scope) Cubing may be too far a stretch but squaring is a minimum and enough.
This energy may be a third frequency that is soley there to create a standing wave (not moving) or a form of localized bias like a PM mag field created by another coil. At this point I don't believe a DC current bias will be of any use as that bias would be the same throughout the length of the mixing conductor or coil.

As for creating a standing wave in such a short piece of wire or coil - that is another argument. Basically if it works - it works. Go for parallel resonance NOT series resonance. I won't discuss this any on this thread. It is a waste of time.

I have a clear understanding of why and how this works and have eluded to it many times. However, others must perform the experiments and come to their own understanding.

909Hi all:
   Just have to jump in here on this. I did play quite a bit with the single wire thing. Went as far as to set up two wires in seperate directions running off the same freq gen. Therein you can find a potential across the two wires as well. I am still contemplating on how best to fit this in to the scheme of things.
   I will get out my flame suit now. The next statement will catch me hell for it but will have to speak it anyhow.

   Over the time I have been going back to the words spoken. What is seen as the collector by most just cant be. I have pondered it over and over. That "one" wire in the center to me would have to be the injected signal wire. The itermediate collectors would be the first set of 90 degree coils. The "output" coil has to be the outside coil. Just my take but still. A circuit potential does exist between the the 90 degree coils if you select the correct position for the two. Depending on which frequency is higher will dictate the direction of travel of the wave front as well.

Ok, let me have it.

thaelin

@Thaelin

I can agree with most of what you said.

In-fact for some time now I understand the 'collector' is what this group calls the 'TPU'. What is now called the collector - to me - is a continous loop of wire and has no mechanical breaks. It is more of a core than a coil.

I'll take some of the flames for you ;)

@Jdo300

I think cancellation of the magnetic field is needed. Making a bigger one is not very difficult ;D Why do something easy?

The hard part comes when everybody wants to know where to connect on a dognut but we'll stick with a simple coil or straight piece of wire for now.

I had to throw this out there in response to

BEP :)

"The hard part comes when everybody wants to know where to connect on a dognut but we'll stick with a simple coil or straight piece of wire for now"

I could be way off but i just wanted to post this again ..

@ Thaelin
This will help you out, my friend!
Sent to: tao on: June 28, 2006, 04:04:44 AM
Tao,By the way.. When Steven said that you have the secret he said in another mail among other things that you have the collector and control winding relationship the wrong way..Ie excitation into control... allows the collector the perform magnetic conversion.

Hello All,

In this last and final experiment idea that I will be posting for awhile, I combine a second theory, emailed to me by an experimenter who wishes to remain anonymous.  I have received permission from this individual to post this information and my experiment which incorporate both "it" and the opposing identical signals, different batteries, slightly out of phase. (245 Khz) 

This is my favorite experiment and I can envision it with the collector in a closed circle, with two taps, also.

Tao posted to SM long ago, quoting Tesla, about stopping the current.  This kick came out of the wires perpendicularly when this was done.

SM said, "Lindsay, this guy definitely has the secret.
I do not know if he will be able to duplicate power generation, but he does
have the secret.  Do you think he knows it? 

The only part he doesn't have any idea about is that by starting  the oscillation you cause the current to flow in the collector which causes the magnification of the process within the collector which will ultimately produce the greater voltage and power in usable amounts during operation.

The secret to stopping the current given by "nameless": (Edited by me)
I hooked up my bifilar control coil and terminated the other end in a matched resistor (to minimize  REFLECTIONS)    And when I do that, I get one way traveling pulses (let's say clockwise only viewed from the top) �.. and on the collector wire I see  �.DC.

Just build a simple MOSFET and Battery circuit, and pulse your MOSFET rapidly enough to create pulses that go down the line, and terminate your transmission line in it?s CHARACTERISTIC IMPEDANCE, (75ohms or 50 ohms whatever it is).  Your pulses then will not reflect and you will get a ONE WAY induction. This would be a very crude TPU setup, one that is not using RESONANCE just yet.   With RESONANCE we really have to be careful, we?re dealing with lots of current here.

*Me again   ;)
IMHO this needs to be accomplished in BOTH directions, TWO WAY induction!

Experiment Below:

First we send the pulses as fast send off as possible, as elegently said by Eldarion in my thread, today.

I would suggest using VHF triodes for your oscillators.  You need two separate ones to send IDENTICAL signals, slightly out of phase of one another, different batteries powering gens.. 

Next we stop the current from opposing signals, out of phase,  in opposite directions, quenching the reflection of each.  You must use CHARACTERISTIC IMPEDANCE.  You will need to research this exact resistor size, depending on your wire.  (Simply two resistors!) 

I suggest very good speaker wire for the control coils.  And Litz for the collector.  Lastly resonance.  (And two kill switches!)


Cheers,

Bruce

EDIT:
Square Wave or Sine Wave unknown.  My bet is on the sine wave.   ;)  Only experimentation will tell.

Amount of "Phase differential" between identical signals unknown.

Hello Everyone,

I just did some experiments over the weekend sending identical signals into opposing wires. But rather than talk about the tests I did, I just compiled a video demo and uploaded it to YouTube. I found a few interesting things from the tests. Here's the link:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=OqwPMAJsh3I

Let me know what you all think  :)

God Bless,
Jason O

Hi Jason,

A very good video, and a very good start indeed!   ;D

@ Jason AND All
I have a list of, "I wonder if's," to think and experiment with.

I wonder if:
Having much higher voltage as the input frequency will more than double the signal?

I wonder if:
Using one of the SM frequencies, that IMHO tap into huge magnetic waves, with the proper set up would make a difference?  (35.705 Khz & 245 Khz)

I wonder if:
The fact that the signal appears on each of the two conductors, running through the control coil.  What if you had 5 individually (thinner) insulated conductors?  Would the signal be of same amplitude on each?  Could they be wired in series for five times the voltage or wired in parallel for 5 times the current?  What if 105 strand LITZ was placed there?  Would each individual wire show the same amplitude?  Does everyone see where I am heading with this?

I wonder if:
The two conductor running between your coils as collector were wired in series with the control wires.  What would happen to the wave?

I wonder if:
You used sine wave rather than square for all of the above experiments, if there would be a difference?

I wonder if:
Using VHF triode tubes as oscillators would make a difference when redoing all of the above experiments? 

We could all "guess" at some of the answers for the above questions, but the truth is that we really do not know until we put it to the test.   ;D

Just a couple of my thoughts for the day, all.   ;)

Cheers,

Bruce

EDIT:
One more "I wonder if three signals going into the collector (see the 3 stack TPU) would combine to give even greater amplitude?  (F1+F2+F3)  All opposing, identical, slightly out of phase, different power supply's.

Does "opposing flux" fit in here somewhere?

http://www.rexresearch.com/markov/markov.htm

Quote from: M@rcel on February 05, 2008, 05:59:25 PM
Does "opposing flux" fit in here somewhere?

http://www.rexresearch.com/markov/markov.htm

I think so. Others may disagree. Big difference though. No iron cores are part of this discussion, as far as I know.

Quote from: BEP on February 05, 2008, 06:12:26 PM

Quote from: M@rcel on February 05, 2008, 05:59:25 PM
Does "opposing flux" fit in here somewhere?

http://www.rexresearch.com/markov/markov.htm

I think so. Others may disagree. Big difference though. No iron cores are part of this discussion, as far as I know.

Hi BEP,
You know, I have recently wondered if SM, in the TPU built with "baling wire", simply wrapped the iron wire, not to pulse, but to use as the iron in a transformer, and has other wires that can not be seen.  Perhaps like he said about hooking two transformers in reverse.  Opposing signals, sine or pulsed, what happens?   ;D 

I am thinking about Comsters Sim he posted.  I wonder if he has had time to do the experiment yet?

Comster's Post:
Hey guys
The highlights of transformers out of phase got me thinking so I drew something up in my simulator. Check out the reading on osc2 channel.
Gonna test this in the lab.

Warm regards,

Bruce

Hi Bruce,

I meant to ask a question about that simulation.  It looks like he has the two pulse sources, but what is that signal generator doing at the bottom of the schematic?  Is he feeding in another frequency?

Would be interesting to see...

Eldarion

Quote from: eldarion on February 05, 2008, 08:21:32 PM
Hi Bruce,

I meant to ask a question about that simulation.  It looks like he has the two pulse sources, but what is that signal generator doing at the bottom of the schematic?  Is he feeding in another frequency?

Would be interesting to see...

Eldarion

Hi Eldarion, 

I think it is an oscilloscope, showing the output   ;D (of Combined frequency's, identical, out of phase.)

Or I could be completely wrong, and he used another frequency there. 

@ cOmster
The answer is?? 

I've always thought about why SM would specifically use the term 'bailing wire' if there were not some transformer action going on there.  I believe that in the videos where there appears to be two rings placed vertically of one another that they are bother transformers.  The magnet is placed on one of these transformers only to cause a slight phase shift in the wave going through it.  SM eventually moved away from using a magnet to do this and that is why a magnet was no longer needed in the later devices.  It is this phase shift that by some means cause the two transformers to create the output seen.  Could the secondaries be connected to each other with diodes and the primaries be connected with diodes, and power taken off and put into each primary connected in series? The wave would travel opposite ways in each transformer slightly out of phase with itself and the diodes would keep the current flowing the correct way possibly.

@CodeWebs

Could be. That is as good a theory as any other I suppose.

Bruce,

That is an 'O' scope in the bottom. That SIM output is pretty bland compared to what should show.
That is usually the way SIMs go anyway. They don't usually consider the magnetic part of the circuit anymore than people do.

Which, in turn, leads me to the little double toroid picture in this link: http://science.blogdig.net/archives/articles/July2007/04/Free_energy_with_magnetic_reluctance.html

Relating to the frequencies SM specifically mentions, is it just a coincidence that the output is stated to contain a frequency of approximately 5kHz and the input frequencies are very close to 7 times and 49 times that (5kHz * 7 = 35kHz, 35kHz * 7 = 245kHz)? Also on a side note I was digging around and found a few pieces of information which stood out to me.


"Hedgehog

Hedgehog transformers are occasionally encountered in homemade 1920s radios. They are homemade audio interstage coupling transformers.

Enamelled copper wire is wound round the central half of the length of a bundle of insulated iron wire (eg florists' wire), to make the windings. The ends of the iron wires are then bent around the electrical winding to complete the magnetic circuit, and the whole is wrapped with tape or string to hold it together.

These were sometimes used when the cost of a ready made transformer could not be justified. Inductance tends to be on the low side, with consequent loss of bass. With the speakers of the day this was no bad thing."

relating to:

"'Interstage' and coupling transformers

A use for interstage transformers is in the case of push-pull amplifiers where an inverted signal is required. Here two secondary windings wired in opposite polarities may be used to drive the output devices. These phase splitting transformers are not much used today."

and finally to: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Superheterodyne_receiver

I'm sorry if this isn't of much use and you can ignore this post in that case, but it just seems to relate to a great deal of what SM said.

Hello All,

In my recent experiments lately, I have had to find a quick and easy way to wind spiral pancake coils. They work great as pickup and detector coils to measure magnetic effects in the TPU. Below I wrote up a how-to showing how to quickly ans simply wind really nice pancake coils for use in experiments. Please let me know what you think.

Enjoy!
Jason O

OL

Quote from: c0mster on February 09, 2008, 01:10:26 PM
About the Sim
It is 2 square wave generators, but as you can see they have diodes so a positive pulse  is going into each side of a 1 to 1 transformer opposite. As well each side of the transformer is set up as a tank ctc. The thing (OSC2)  hooked to the second transformer is an oscilloscope. I?ll attach a pic of the true reading on of one of the tank ctc on one side of the  transformer. I have completed the 2 drivers and ran my first test yesterday, it looks like the logic of the sim may be correct. I need to do some tuning of my coils to get the 2 waves to crash into each other properly. Notice in the pic how after the kick the amplitude rises. Also there is little current being used due to the tank. I?ll post more when I fine tune the tanks better. I replaced the oscilloscope with a ear piece and did some tweaking, what I herd was a beat frequency , an almost spinning sound, and at one point white noise. I only use batteries no mains connection 2 independent batteries, my scope runs on batteries. The drivers are 555 with mosfet. Also a pic of 1 driver. Consider transformer 2 pri as a single wire with crashing oscillations at each end.
C       

Awesome start cOmster.  I can't wait to see the next results.

The imagination starts to run wild when I think of three frequencies, in the same wire heading for each other!   ;D  Not to jump down the road too much...

@ All
Picture the making of "Three Sisters", each heading in opposing directions, slamming into each other.  It would make for one "Big Bertha" of a wave, IMHO.

Great work cOm,

Bruce

May I suggest a three phase WYE transformer as the 'single wire' and three feeders instead of two?

Best to complete what you had in-mind first though.

I can tell you what happens when you close a bus-tie breaker on two 3-phase generators that have opposite rotation. It is not a pretty story.

On the two signal approach from what I've seen one of two things will happen. More volts and almost no amps but there will be a magnetic field stronger than expected -or- More volts and normal amps out at either end but almost no magnetic field.
At this point I am thinking the difference is in the rotation but I never confirmed it as all I wanted was the latter.

Is this sound the cosmic rays Tesla was referring to? the cosmic wind vibrations that create the frequency that keeps the TPU gyro ing always feeling like heavy or not wanting to move directly but just kinda sluggish. Just a quick comment here. when i was typng this my thoughts went on to a

bicycle wheel.

have you ever spun a wheel and tried to hold it horizontal and move it perpendicular.  riding in the cosmic wind of life.

posted wrong place

or did I post in the wrong place? what my mind was relating to was the frequencies that you guys are experiencing, and work you all are doing is great work!

im still in a phase of thinking so, however i have built a hydro engine for better engine mileage anyways to the point.

if you have experienced the spinning wheel effect then this i feel is  frequencies that you are experiencing. you can even lose control of a spinning wheel. so if we can measure scientifically and get an understanding of the vibrational frequencies at hand

i think,

we can see frequencies oasis, mirages in the desert and what not

we can hear frequencies

we can feel the forces in the sense of the spinning wheel and i never flipped the wheel 180 either b/c it was virtually impossible from what i can remember, but would the wheel stop spinning?

and if all the frequencies are correct we can smell the results of frequencies in the form of explosion/implosion

here is an interesting site with some tools of the trade. keep on keepin on

http://www.lessemf.com/kits.html (http://www.lessemf.com/kits.html)

Continuation of the topic. Dynamic skin effect and transverse wavelength - https://gorchilin.com/articles/efficiency2/dynamic_skin_effect?lang=en (https://gorchilin.com/articles/efficiency2/dynamic_skin_effect?lang=en)