I'm impressed by simple effective devices, and the FR2680613 patent from Michael Meyer and Yves Mace could be a fine example of simplicity, if it works. This patent has been noted once before in the Selfrunning cold electricity circuit from Dr.Stiffler thread. My main interest is in replicating the Barbat patent, but couldn't resist looking at this one as it also uses three coils to produce an effect :D
This should be a good replication project for those without years of knowledge and experience and access to $s and $s of equipment.
Generator of energy by resonant nuclear ferromagnetism, consisting of a "U"-shaped chassis made of mild steel containing a cylindrical bar made of ferromagnetic fuel rod on which at least 3 induction coils act. The first coil is an electromagnet, the second is a nuclear magnetic resonance actuator, the third recovering the induction energy present in the bar. Device intended particularly to supply commercially exploitable electrical energy.
http://jnaudin.free.fr/html/mmcgen.htm (http://jnaudin.free.fr/html/mmcgen.htm)
http://l2.espacenet.com/textdoc?DB=EPODOC&IDX=FR2680613&F=0&QPN=FR2680613 (http://l2.espacenet.com/textdoc?DB=EPODOC&IDX=FR2680613&F=0&QPN=FR2680613)
http://freenrg.info/TESLA/Tesla_Switch/D3.pdf (http://freenrg.info/TESLA/Tesla_Switch/D3.pdf) page 45-46
tak
Such a popular thread ;)
Anyways, here's a link with a French magazine article on Myer, French patent 2385255, and the Czech patent 284333.
http://www.rexresearch.com/meyernmr/meyer.htm (http://www.rexresearch.com/meyernmr/meyer.htm)
Translations/interpretations appreciated.
tak
I was curious enough to type the caption under this image from that page into http://translate.google.com and this is what it said. That little cirucit at least looks simple.
"To shake atoms and make them the energy they contain, forward, with a high frequency oscillator (about 173 kHz) a wave that is in resonance with the vibration of elecrtodes copper. This through a oscillating magnetic field spooling of the links has oscillator at around copper. A portion of the supply current is used to polarize the metal, which then return up to 30 times the energy consumed by the oscillator."
-Steve
http://rimstar.org
@SD
Thanks for this diagram. I wanted to put a better translation as follows;
Start
To shake atoms so they render the energy they contain, you must send via a high frequency oscillator (in the order of 173 kHz) a wave that is in resonance with the vibration of the copper electrodes. This is via an oscillating magnetic field thanks to the coil winding that is connected to the oscillator and that covers the copper. One part of the feed current is used to polarize the metal that restitutes (gives back) up to 30 times the energy consumed by the oscillator.
End
So in general, the oscillator is pulsing current onto the copper rod and there is another wire from the positive of the battery that goes through a diode and a resistor so only a small portion of the battery power is used to ensure the copper rod s polarized in a fixed manner to initiate a steady positive/negative output off the copper rod. If copper was magnetic, you could have used a magnet to do the same polarization, but since it is not, a small current on one side will do the same thing.
Interesting indeed.
Thanks again.
wattsup
Thanks wattsup.
If it does put out 30 time the input energy, and not just 30 times the current at 30 times lower voltage, then it really makes you wonder where the extra energy is coming from. Also, what would it mean to be in "resonance with the vibration of the copper electrodes"? Anyway, probably best to replicate as is and speculate later.
-Steve
http://rimstar.org
Good thread Tak!
So this device documented on Naudins site uses the same effect (NMR) as the device in the french article?:
(https://overunityarchives.com/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fjnaudin.free.fr%2Fimages%2Fmmcegen.gif&hash=eb308740a1c16a6510050f205ede3b882f5eaac4)
The french device mentions resonance at about 173kHz that sounds more like mechanical resonance than NMR or could it be a subharmonic?
I can do 173kHz now with my homebuilt sig-gen once I get the output FETs installed but I can't do 21MHz as in the three coil device until I do more work on my sig-gen.
The copper device and the Iron Isotope device work on different principals it seems. The copper device vibrates the copper atoms eiether atomically (atomic resonance) or the rod (mechanical resonance). Neither of these methods is used in the Iron Isotope.
The Iron Isotope device uses atomic resonance and a Very Strong magnetic field (.5 tesla strength) to create Atomic Decay of the iron isotope, to Change it from isotope 56 to 54 or something like that. Look up Iron isotope on Wikipedia. The iron Isotope device becomes Nuclear Particle radioactive!!! Dangerous! Don't built it without a lead shield or something of that nature!
-saintsnick
There does not seem to be any grounding in this circuit, no dead short condition so- I suppose it could potentially be very dangerous. I'm all for nuclear energy extraction when the radiation is thoroughly contained. When the elements become radioactive that's when people could be hurt. If your going to create the energy make sure it's being used properly instead of being spewed out in the form of radiation. Kind of like building a safe microwave- and becoming an environmentalist at the same time and if you do it right- it's not even nuclear decay in the traditional sense. :D I'd also like to say that if your sustaining partial resonance then the materials are going to burn up rather quickly.
According to Wikipedia:
Naturally occurring iron consists of four isotopes: 5.845% of radioactive 54Fe (half-life: >3.1×1022 years), 91.754% of stable 56Fe, 2.119% of stable 57Fe and 0.282% of stable 58Fe. 60Fe is an extinct radionuclide of long half-life (1.5 million years).
The Iron Isotope device changes Iron56 to Iron54. Since there is 91% Iron56 naturally occuring on earth, the iron rod in your machine will be only 9% spent, leaving 91% ready to convert.
I think the original patent says large amounts of energy are released, and since you can control the process by modulating the Mhz input, you can build a machine to last considerably longer at moderate power levels.
AND, when you're Iron Fuel Rod is spent in 7 months, Ohh well you'll have to purchace a new one for three dollars.
The real question IS :
How much Amperage does it take to create a 1 Tesla field strength electro-magnet?
-saintsnick
Quote from: Yucca on September 20, 2008, 06:04:23 PM
...
The french device mentions resonance at about 173kHz that sounds more like mechanical resonance than NMR or could it be a subharmonic?
...
It is a subharmonic. The article stipulates that there is a resonance of the copper atoms at the frequency of 172 753.867 Hz due to the induction field. The frequency must be extremely accurate because it must fit the exact much higher harmonic at which the atoms vibrate.
Note that "science et vie" is a popularization publication not very serious. "Renaud de la Taille" was an enthusiastic journalist but has not a solid scientifical background. The key questions are not asked: what is the frequency of the output current? Why is there this aberrant "polarization" circuit with a diode?... and so on...
I have read czech patent 284333. I dont understand french but from the first view i think its identical with french patent 2680613. Author of french and czech patent is the same - Michel Meyer only co-authors are different.
In the description its written that device is ecological and safe. No mention about radioactivity level (weird). Projected output power 50kW, iron rod lifetime 2400hours, time needed for start-up 15 min (after this time device is automatically disconnected from grid and uses part of its output power to feed itself).
Regarding radiocative materials i heard that the longer half-life means greater danger. Then half-life of 54Fe (3.1x10^22 years) should be very bad. But maybe this is not true because 3.1x10^22 is extremely large half-time (larger than cosmos age). If you read wikipedia article you find the note that 54Fe is stable (i.e. radioactive decay is very very slow maybe can be neglected, who knows).
Hi Jan,
The process involved may not be a radioactive one because a normal iron atom is supposed to be excited by the 21MHz energy (from an electric oscillator) and also a static magnetic field of about 0.5 Tesla is present, this is what happens I think.
Here are some more theory, see pages 18 and 19 in the pdf file
http://www.free-energy-info.co.uk/Chapter3.pdf Two neutrons are issued during the process when Fe56 changes to Fe54 and if this is what happens then neutrons are not radioactive particles, are they?
Naudin also mentions this process here: http://jnaudin.free.fr/html/mmcgen.htm
Unfortunately, there is no any test results available from any other experimenters. Maybe the Chech patent partners could be asked on some details...
rgds, Gyula
Quote from: jan.kolar on October 25, 2009, 01:32:24 PM
I have read czech patent 284333. I dont understand french but from the first view i think its identical with french patent 2680613. Author of french and czech patent is the same - Michel Meyer only co-authors are different.
In the description its written that device is ecological and safe. No mention about radioactivity level (weird). Projected output power 50kW, iron rod lifetime 2400hours, time needed for start-up 15 min (after this time device is automatically disconnected from grid and uses part of its output power to feed itself).
Regarding radiocative materials i heard that the longer half-life means greater danger. Then half-life of 54Fe (3.1x10^22 years) should be very bad. But maybe this is not true because 3.1x10^22 is extremely large half-time (larger than cosmos age). If you read wikipedia article you find the note that 54Fe is stable (i.e. radioactive decay is very very slow maybe can be neglected, who knows).
Hi Jan.
you have it backwards, the shorter half life means that the isotope decays faster and with more energy.
imagine 1lb of an isotope that has a half life of 1 second, this would be totally lethal if unprotected, some isotopes with 1 second half life are considered SF or Spontaneous fission and that is lethal itself, longer half lives are more stable.
Gamma ray and or Neutron emitters are lethal especially whether they are short lived or not but still follow this rule.. Alpha or Beta are a bit safer but respect is still in order.
about 54Fe:
26-Fe-54
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Atomic Mass: 53.9396148 ± 0.0000014 amu
Excess Mass: -56248.410 ± 1.328 keV
Binding Energy: 471758.653 ± 1.330 keV
Beta Decay Energy: B- -8243.079 ± 0.221 keV
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Atomic Percent Abundance: 5.845% 35
Spin: 0+
Stable Isotope
Possible parent nuclides:
Beta from Mn-54
Electron capture from Co-54
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Total Cross Section
at 0.0253 eV = 2.649 b
Maxwell avg. at 0.0253 eV = 2.404 b
at 14 MeV = 2.498 b
Fission spectrum avg. = 3.658 b
g-factor = 1.0243
Elastic Scattering Cross Section
at 0.0253 eV = 492.9 mb
Maxwell avg. at 0.0253 eV = 492.9 mb
at 14 MeV = 1.080 b
Fission spectrum avg. = 3.235 b
g-factor = 1.1284
Total Inelastic Cross Section
at 14 MeV = 481.5 mb
Fission spectrum avg. = 335.9 mb
(n,2n) Cross Section
at 14 MeV = 1.203 mb
Fission spectrum avg. = 1.032 micro barn
(n,na) Cross Section
at 14 MeV = 120.8 micro barn
Fission spectrum avg. = 0.1892 micro barn
(n,np) Cross Section
at 14 MeV = 490.6 mb
Fission spectrum avg. = 138.0 micro barn
Radiative Capture Cross Section
at 0.0253 eV = 2.156 b
Maxwell avg. at 0.0253 eV = 1.911 b
Resonance integral = 1.323 b
at 14 MeV = 136.1 micro barn
Fission spectrum avg. = 6.069 mb
g-factor = 1.0003
(n,p) Cross Section
at 14 MeV = 361.0 mb
Fission spectrum avg. = 80.71 mb
(n,alpha) Cross Section
at 0.0253 eV = 1.237800e-19 b
Maxwell avg. at 0.0253 eV = 2.476090e-19 b
Resonance integral = 68.03 mb
at 14 MeV = 83.17 mb
Fission spectrum avg. = 864.7 micro barn
g-factor = 2.2572
Jerry
Quote from: Yucca on September 20, 2008, 06:04:23 PM
Good thread Tak!
So this device documented on Naudins site uses the same effect (NMR) as the device in the french article?:
(https://overunityarchives.com/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fjnaudin.free.fr%2Fimages%2Fmmcegen.gif&hash=eb308740a1c16a6510050f205ede3b882f5eaac4)
The french device mentions resonance at about 173kHz that sounds more like mechanical resonance than NMR or could it be a subharmonic?
I can do 173kHz now with my homebuilt sig-gen once I get the output FETs installed but I can't do 21MHz as in the three coil device until I do more work on my sig-gen.
According to the article "Science et Vie" nr.700 March 1976 (in french)
http://www.rexresearch.com/meyernmr/meyer.htm ,
the frequency must be very precise: 172,753.867 hz.
The oscillator must maintain this frequency with the stability of the nine digits. It seems it is a key point. Even a quartz oscillator would not be enough. Such an oscillator should be derived from an atomic clock (maybe one transmitted by radio, we can get several such signals in Europe in the VLF band).
I must add that I am very skeptic and suspect measurement errors. Ordinary amp- and voltmeters are easily distorted by HF signals, and here HF currents from the coils can pass to the copper by capacitive effects.
Quote from: onthecuttingedge2005 on October 27, 2009, 12:19:54 AM
Hi Jan.
you have it backwards, the shorter half life means that the isotope decays faster and with more energy.
imagine 1lb of an isotope that has a half life of 1 second, this would be totally lethal if unprotected, some isotopes with 1 second half life are considered SF or Spontaneous fission and that is lethal itself, longer half lives are more stable.
Gamma ray and or Neutron emitters are lethal especially whether they are short lived or not but still follow this rule.. Alpha or Beta are a bit safer but respect is still in order.
Maybe energy is greater but only for short time-span i think energy is following exponencial curve-decay. Take for example uranium 235 that is used in nuclear power plants. I dont know details of radioactive decay-chain but if half-time of uranium or its byproducts would be short (for example few seconds or less) then radioactive waste would not be problem. But i point out that i am not expert on nuclear physics.
Quote from: gyulasun on October 26, 2009, 07:22:11 PM
Unfortunately, there is no any test results available from any other experimenters. Maybe the Chech patent partners could be asked on some details...
http://isdv.upv.cz/portal/pls/portal/portlets.pts.det?xprim=186605&lan=en
As you can see patent 284333 is already expired in czech republic (probably in year 2008). Standard period for invention protection is 10 years. If inventor does not prolong this period then patent is no longer valid.
Patent holders besides Michel Meyer are Simona Pustejovska, Jaroslav Holy and Jana Mickova, all from Novy Jicin, CZ. I havent found any contact on them but my guess is that they were only translators. This idea is supported by fact that Simona Pustejovska published in year 2000 bachelor work with title "Podoba a fungovani francouzskych regionu" which means "State and functioning of french regions". She has been studying on Charles University in Prague, Faculty of social sciences. It can be some another Simona Pustejovska however.
Patent representative was Ing. Iva Rylkova, i found email contact on her and wrote her what she remembers from Meyer invention. She was working in patent office in Ostrava. Her job was to help inventors to apply for patent (bureaucracy). But i havent found her in actual business register of Czech republic so maybe email address is old.
Do you know something more about "nuclear magnetic resonance"?
Iva Rylkova replied me that she has no active contact to any of the inventors. Maybe if some of you live in French near Asnieres s/Oise could contact inventor. His first patent FR 2385255 is from year 1978 so if he lives is probably above fifty years old. Main problem is if he would permit to open-source his invention. Maybe that his french patents 2,385,255 & 2,680,613 are too expired. Unfortunately i dont understant french, can someone of you see website of french patent office (http://www.inpi.fr/) for this information?
92-U-235
( U-235 is also called actinouranium )
U-235(n,f) is standard for neutron cross section below 20 MeV.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Atomic Mass: 235.0439231 ± 0.0000021 amu
Excess Mass: 40914.062 ± 1.970 keV
Binding Energy: 1783870.285 ± 1.996 keV
Beta Decay Energy: B- -123.716 ± 0.869 keV
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Atomic Percent Abundance: 0.720% 1
Spin: 7/2-
Half life: 703.8E+6 Y ( 0.0710 % )
Mode of decay: Alpha to Th-231
Decay energy: 4.679 MeV
Mode of decay: SF
Branch ratio: 7.0E-9
Mode of decay: NEC
Branch ratio: 8E-10
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Meta state at 0.000 Mev
Spin: 1/2+
Half life: 25 M
Mode of decay: IT
Possible parent nuclides:
Beta from Pa-235
Electron capture from Np-235
Alpha from Pu-239
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Total Cross Section
at 0.0253 eV = 698.2 b
Maxwell avg. at 0.0253 eV = 608.4 b
at 14 MeV = 5.865 b
Fission spectrum avg. = 7.705 b
g-factor = 0.9833
Elastic Scattering Cross Section
at 0.0253 eV = 15.04 b
Maxwell avg. at 0.0253 eV = 14.95 b
at 14 MeV = 2.871 b
Fission spectrum avg. = 4.566 b
g-factor = 1.1215
Total Inelastic Cross Section
at 14 MeV = 350.3 mb
Fission spectrum avg. = 1.804 b
(n,2n) Cross Section
at 14 MeV = 542.9 mb
Fission spectrum avg. = 11.56 mb
(n,3n) Cross Section
at 14 MeV = 41.79 mb
Fission spectrum avg. = 7.074 micro barn
Total Fission Cross Section
at 0.0253 eV = 584.4 b
Maxwell avg. at 0.0253 eV = 506.8 b
Resonance integral = 278.1 b
at 14 MeV = 2.056 b
Fission spectrum avg. = 1.235 b
g-factor = 0.9786
(n,4n) Cross Section
Fission spectrum avg. = 0.008408 micro barn
Radiative Capture Cross Section
at 0.0253 eV = 98.81 b
Maxwell avg. at 0.0253 eV = 86.67 b
Resonance integral = 133.0 b
at 14 MeV = 0.1607 micro barn
Fission spectrum avg. = 89.07 mb
g-factor = 0.9898
Quote from: jan.kolar on October 27, 2009, 05:51:31 AM
Do you know something more about "nuclear magnetic resonance"?
Hi Jan,
Thanks for your excellent "detective" work on the Chech patent, and it sounds reasonable the Chech "inventors" may have been translators. It is a pity that the patent representative cannot help either.
Unfortunately I do not speak French either and hopefully some French members here may locate Meyer in France, it would a great help to learn some insider info...
In the meantime I understood that neutron particles have surely a bad effect on living tissues sorry that I wrote the process is not harmful.
Re on your question of the nuclear magnetic resonance, now I know it only from wikipedia google searches, that is all.
Thanks, Gyula
There are two things noteworthy on Meyer invention:
1. Direct conversion between nuclear energy and electrical energy. Nuclear power plants are using substantially more complicate system (nuclear energy -> heat -> mechanical energy -> electrical energy)
2. Controlling of radioactive processes by aplied electro-magnetic fields. I have found another patents referenced from FR2,680,613 (on espacenet.com) that claim to be using this core principle:
a) GB 763,062. UTILIZING ENERGY OF RADIOACTIVE SUBSTANCES. COLMAN, H. V., and GILLESPIE, R. W. D. SEDDON-. Sept. 22, 1954 [June 22, 1953], No. 17167/53. Drawings to Specification. Class 39(4). A mixture of salts of cadmium, phosphorus and cobalt is subjected to high frequency electromagnetic waves so as to become radioactive and release electrical energy. The mixture is contained in a quartz tube and protection from the gamma, alpha and beta rays is given by lead shielding. The electrical output, stated to be D.C. is taken directly from the ends of the quartz tube.
b) EP 0243149 (1987-10-28) from Brown Paul M [US], Nucell Inc [US]. APPARATUS FOR DIRECT CONVERSION OF RADIOACTIVE DECAY ENERGY TO ELECTRICAL ENERGY. A nuclear battery in which the energy imparted to radioactive decay products during the spontaneous disintegrations of radioactive material is utilized to sustain and amplify the oscillations in a high-Q LC tank circuit is provided. The circuit inductance comprises a coil wound on a core composed of radioactive nuclides connected in series with the primary winding of a power transformer. The core is fabricated from a mixture of three radioactive materials which decay primarily by alpha emission and provides a greater flux of radioactive decay products than the equivalent amount of a single radioactive nuclide.
c) EP 0099946 (1984-02-08) from Reiss Howard R. [US], University Patents Inc [US]. METHOD AND APARATUS FOR INDUCED NUCLEAR BETA DECAY. Certain nuclear beta decay transitions, normally inhibited by angular momentum or parity considerations can be induced to occur by the application of an electromagnetic field. The energy released by these induced nuclear transitions is useful for the controlled production of power. These induced beta decay transitions are also useful to reduce the halflives of long-lived fission product wastes from nuclear fission power plants. Theoretical results are given for induced beta decay halflives as a function of the intensity of the applied field. The nuclides that can be treated in this way are all those found in Nature which are potentially useful energy sources, as well as <9><0>Sr and <1><3><7>Cs-- the most radioactive of fission wastes.; It is shown that electromagnetic fields of the type and intensity required to achieve useful power production and/or fission waste disposal can be produced in a practical way.
-------------
There seems that NMR is quite mastered by conventional science but only in passive way (for example to analyze structure of matter in computer tomography).
Quote from: jan.kolar on October 27, 2009, 05:51:31 AM
http://isdv.upv.cz/portal/pls/portal/portlets.pts.det?xprim=186605&lan=en
As you can see patent 284333 is already expired in czech republic (probably in year 2008). Standard period for invention protection is 10 years. If inventor does not prolong this period then patent is no longer valid.
Patent holders besides Michel Meyer are Simona Pustejovska, Jaroslav Holy and Jana Mickova, all from Novy Jicin, CZ. I havent found any contact on them but my guess is that they were only translators. This idea is supported by fact that Simona Pustejovska published in year 2000 bachelor work with title "Podoba a fungovani francouzskych regionu" which means "State and functioning of french regions". She has been studying on Charles University in Prague, Faculty of social sciences. It can be some another Simona Pustejovska however.
Patent representative was Ing. Iva Rylkova, i found email contact on her and wrote her what she remembers from Meyer invention. She was working in patent office in Ostrava. Her job was to help inventors to apply for patent (bureaucracy). But i havent found her in actual business register of Czech republic so maybe email address is old.
Do you know something more about "nuclear magnetic resonance"?
Hi Jan,
there were some attempts in former Czechoslovakia to confirm Meyer's work as far as I know. But it's so difficult to get any information - maybe you have seen this picture?
Hi All,
I'd checked their patents database and it don't find both patents, that means they are not in force!.
Of course if You want to be absolutely sure You have to pay 6,5 euro for official paper about patent status.
Kolec
Hello all - a very interesting topic !
Just my 2 penneth worth...
Last summer (2009), I was performing some modifications to my latest plasma speaker system.
The system runs at approx 100Khz, 30V Sq. AC with a low duty cycle / M-S ratio of <10%
In testing, I noticed the cable connecting the controller PCB output to the transformer was becoming exceptionally hot, to the degree that the insulation was starting to become soft and melt.
The input power, 30V DC @ 2A (60W) to the controller, was consistent with previous 'runs', the ONLY difference being the length of the cable used on this particular occasion.....
The unit performed exactly as in previous tests, with the same power consumption & same plasma output. NO RF was picked up around the cable, which I guess rules-out inductive heating.
It was only when I stumbled across Michel Meyer's work, that I noticed a correlation.
For what it's worth, the cable length used was 55.5cm, composed of twin, 80 x 0.18 CU wire.
When changing the interconnect to a different length, the cable runs stone-cold, with exactly the same power consumption and plasma output as before.
Please note, there is no tuned circuit involved, so this cannot be a factor in the heating.
Some of my videos of the project are here, including a TV job :
http://www.youtube.com/user/timetec
It would be interesting to hear any thoughts on this very strange phenomenon.
Cheers from England, Richard ;)
Quote from: timetec on January 27, 2010, 05:17:00 PM
Hello all - a very interesting topic !
Just my 2 penneth worth...
Last summer (2009), I was performing some modifications to my latest plasma speaker system.
The system runs at approx 100Khz, 30V Sq. AC with a low duty cycle / M-S ratio of <10%
In testing, I noticed the cable connecting the controller PCB output to the transformer was becoming exceptionally hot, to the degree that the insulation was starting to become soft and melt.
The input power, 30V DC @ 2A (60W) to the controller, was consistent with previous 'runs', the ONLY difference being the length of the cable used on this particular occasion.....
The unit performed exactly as in previous tests, with the same power consumption & same plasma output. NO RF was picked up around the cable, which I guess rules-out inductive heating.
It was only when I stumbled across Michel Meyer's work, that I noticed a correlation.
For what it's worth, the cable length used was 55.5cm, composed of twin, 80 x 0.18 CU wire.
When changing the interconnect to a different length, the cable runs stone-cold, with exactly the same power consumption and plasma output as before.
Please note, there is no tuned circuit involved, so this cannot be a factor in the heating.
Some of my videos of the project are here, including a TV job :
http://www.youtube.com/user/timetec
It would be interesting to hear any thoughts on this very strange phenomenon.
Cheers from England, Richard ;)
hi timetec.
i just wanted to say when i first saw your plasma speaker a year and a half ago, your beautiful build inspired me to build one of my own. thanks.
i have not noticed the phenom you mentioned, i might have to dig it out and play with some wire lengths... i am using a single 555 circuit, single fet.
thompson twins... great choice!
Hi - thanks, good to hear you had a go at constructing one yourself :)
I can only concluded that something is happening within the copper cable itself...
No extra power input / no extra power output, but excessive heating of the cable between the source and load.
I tried using a primary only at the time (with no HV winding) - just the same heating effect - very odd.
The problem is actually metering the cable - a standard AC clamp-meter will not to give a reliable current reading at >100Khz AC especially with such a short M-S ratio.
Quote from: wattsup on September 20, 2008, 09:36:23 AM
@SD
Thanks for this diagram. I wanted to put a better translation as follows;
Start
To shake atoms so they render the energy they contain, you must send via a high frequency oscillator (in the order of 173 kHz) a wave that is in resonance with the vibration of the copper electrodes ie electrons. This is via an oscillating magnetic field thanks to the coil winding that is connected to the oscillator and that covers the copper. One part of the feed current is used to polarize the metal that restitutes (gives back) up to 30 times the energy consumed by the oscillator.
End
So in general, the oscillator is pulsing current onto the copper rod and there is another wire from the positive of the battery that goes through a diode and a resistor so only a small portion of the battery power is used to ensure the copper rod s polarized in a fixed manner to initiate a steady positive/negative output off the copper rod. If copper was magnetic, you could have used a magnet to do the same polarization, but since it is not, a small current on one side will do the same thing.
Interesting indeed.
Thanks again.
wattsup
Hello all,
I am new here, congrats all for the great site!
Let's say i'm interested in the device of Meyer, that being main reason for which i signed up.
I think "electrodes" is just a misspell for "electrons", not a big deal!
In the French paper the author says the coil ENGULFS the copper core, not only "over" it. I thought that might be of interest.
All NMR devices use an external strong (so far 20T biggest i heard of) magnetic field to "polarize" the magnetic spins of the atoms, Meyer's device presented in the French paper was based on Copper which is nonmagnetic, a bit diamagnetic like superconductors, i might add! AC magnetic field WILL REPEL COPPER AND ALUMINIUM, very interesting too! The repelling force is 4x greater than the attraction force. Polarization obtained by connecting the + of the source through a diode on the copper core, i think that is really very smart. Also Meyer didn't make any direct reference to copper rod in his patent which is about iron core transmutation from FE56-FE54. Maybe anyone around here can think of what transmutation copper is having in that experiment from the French paper. My bet would be 65Cu-63Cu, both stable, both same nuclear spin. Problem is 65Cu is 30%, not so easy to find. It's just an opinion, but i wouldn't mess with 63Cu to 61Cu!
Quote from: saintsnick on January 13, 2009, 09:47:02 AM
The copper device and the Iron Isotope device work on different principals it seems. The copper device vibrates the copper atoms eiether atomically (atomic resonance) or the rod (mechanical resonance). Neither of these methods is used in the Iron Isotope.
The Iron Isotope device uses atomic resonance and a Very Strong magnetic field (.5 tesla strength) to create Atomic Decay of the iron isotope, to Change it from isotope 56 to 54 or something like that. Look up Iron isotope on Wikipedia. The iron Isotope device becomes Nuclear Particle radioactive!!! Dangerous! Don't built it without a lead shield or something of that nature!
-saintsnick
Both use NMR, obvious the Copper bar is "magnetized" by polarsiation. The iron bar can be magnetized by a Ne permanent magnet (for which 1.5 Tesla is comon, so 0.5 even lower). About "nuclear particle radioactive" i am not sure so i checked, that's what i found out:
it seems Fe54 is NATURALLY occuring under 6%, it is radioactive BUT considered STABLE (with 300x10 pwr20 halflife) here is what i found on American Elements (one can even buy it online from them!!!):
Iron 54 Metal (Iron-54) is a stable (non-radioactive because of long halflife) isotope of Iron. See below table for ENSDF Citation and Half Life. It is both naturally occurring and produced by fission. Iron 54 Metal is one of over 250 stable Metallic isotopes produced by American Elements for biological and biomedical labeling, as target materials and other applications. Iron Metal 54 additionally has special application in the research to develop successful interventions for anemia, conditions for effective iron absorption and excretion, metabolic tracer studies to identify genetic iron control mechanisms, and energy expenditure studies. Iron Metal is also available in ultra high purity and as nanoparticles. For thin film applications it is available as rod, pellets, pieces, granules and sputtering targets and as either an ingot or powder. Iron Metal 54 isotopic material is generally immediately available. Additional technical, research and safety (MSDS) information is available as is a Reference Calculator for converting relevant units of measurement.I am just a humble electro eng.,nuclear power is totally out of my calender, but i saw some posts here, with some questionable opinions about it and i wanted it sorted out, sorry for the long post! Mainline:
Fe54 IS SAFE!
Quote from: exnihiloest on January 15, 2009, 04:03:39 AM
It is a subharmonic. The article stipulates that there is a resonance of the copper atoms at the frequency of 172 753.867 Hz due to the induction field. The frequency must be extremely accurate because it must fit the exact much higher harmonic at which the atoms vibrate.
Note that "science et vie" is a popularization publication not very serious. "Renaud de la Taille" was an enthusiastic journalist but has not a solid scientifical background. The key questions are not asked: what is the frequency of the output current? Why is there this aberrant "polarization" circuit with a diode?... and so on...
The "aberant" polarization with a diode is simply because
output current is AC at 100-1000Hz (according to the paper :) ), u dont want your input source shorted, do you?
This topic should NOT die, please notice that this simple device was in range of replication by equipment standards around when Tesla was very active in his experiments and even earlier by natural means. NMR (Nuclear Magnetic Resonance) seems to be key to mutation of perhaps ALL elements and can be coaxed from many stable isotope. We don't have to be using HF when the harmonics will do and this also points to a way in which nature is doing it. There must be a connection with the natural frequency of the planet or solar system moving our elements from decay to decay until they are cold and their total energy is exhausted (which is what we call the black particle just before rebirth into pure energy again).
Edited (Why can't I ever get it right the first time, lol)
Planetary Harmonics & Neuro-biological Resonances (http://www.lunarplanner.com/Harmonics/planetary-harmonics.html) see how musical notes are even colors!
I agree this topic needs to be checked out further and it just occurred to me that getting fairly high power at this frequency is not that difficult if you have an old HAM radio HF transmitter. Easy to do 21 Mhz with one and just use an audio sig gen for input to the transmitter for a sine wave or square wave if that's what is needed. That will be way cheaper than a signal generator that can hit 21 Mhz as ones that go that high tend to be very expensive. This sounds like a fairly easy project waiting to happen ;) Does anyone have any thoughts on how much DC voltage and current might be needed for the 1/2 Tesla ?
For Iron Fe57 the NMR at 2.3488T is 3.231Mhz (H1 100Mhz)
To get the NMR frequency for other T you just divide.
So for 0.5T the NMR would be 3.231/(2.3488/.5)= 3.21231/4.6976 = 0.68383395 Mhz or 683.83395 khz.
Because the NMR frequency drops proportional to the magnetic field strength,
different parts of the iron will be exposed to different magnetic field strengths.
So as long as the frequency is close, a part of the iron should be exposed to just the right frequency
for the amount of magnetic flux.
The trick is to get as much of the iron exposed to just the right magnetic field strength needed.
Maybe that is the reason for using an electromagnet instead of a PM.
The coil spreads the field out across a larger surface area. Also increasing the current will increase field strength for tuning.
Maybe use 2 doughnut shaped magnetron magnets with a spiral coil pinned between them,
and then find the right NMR for their magnetic field strength.
But that would mean tuning the frequency, so a crystal signal wouldn't work.
Unless you had a fine adjustment to move the magnets back and forth for tuning.
All in all the device may work when properly tuned, but not keep working for extended time
because of getting out of adjustment to easily.
AbbaRue, Thanks for you input and calcs on that. Perhaps a sweep signal generator that sweeps up and down a range would help keep it running.
A rough interprestation of the French patent. I'll try to clean it up a bit later as this was an OCR of an image of the text which was then translated with Google (and if you know how OCR works on images of text you know it doesn't always get things right - in this case I think some numbers got put in places where it failed to recognize text correctly):
EDIT: Cleaned up as much as I can:
Text from Cover page in patent: (54 - I think this #54 is an irrelevant number not talking about isotope - just a reference number) Activator for isotopic mutation.
(57 - irrelevant number) Power generator by nuclear resonant ferromagnetism consisting of a frame-shaped "U" mild steel containing a cylindrical bar of ferromagnetic fuel acted upon by at least 3 induction coils. The first is an electromagnet coil, the
second activator is a nuclear magnetic resonance, the third induction recovering energy present in the bar.
Device specifically designed to provide a commercially viable electric power and to make changes of isotopes.
FR2680613
page - 1 - DESCRIPTION
The present invention relates to a device for generating energy by nuclear resonant ferromagnetism.
Nuclear power is traditionally produced by fission or 'fusing atoms while the magnetic fluxes are in turn traditionally
obtained by induction caused by the movement of electrons.
The present invention uses a physical phenomenon that we have identified and we will call "Isotopic Mutation".
Description of the physical principle applied to the iron isotope 56:
The iron isotope 56 contains 26 protons, 26 electrons and 30 neutrons,
its total mass is 56.52 MeV, its actual weight being 55.80 MeV. The difference between the total mass and the actual
mass is 0.72 MeV which corresponds to a cohesive energy per nucleon of 0.012857 Mev.
If additional energy is introduced of 105 eV iron core isotope 56, that will have an energy level of cohesion per nucleon
of 0.012962 corresponding to the iron isotope Mev 54. The instability created by this energy input is a specific
radioactivity that will transfer the isotope 56 iron isotope 54 with a release of 2 neutrons which transform in 9 minutes in
Hydrogen by natural radioactivity.
This process will generate a gain of energy of 20,000 ev since the default mass of iron resulting 54 is only 0.70 MeV
instead of 0.72 MeV for iron isotope 56.
To make the iron core isotope 56 energy required to effect the isotopic mutation, we use the principle of reso-nance
nuclear magnetic.
The 26 protons in the iron isotope 56 are at the origin of magnetic moment that nuclear gyroscopic
motion moved by a dependent of the actual mass of the iron core. The loss of mass caused by the phenomenon of
mutation will alter the isotopic gyroscopic moment and the energy return of by increasing the rotation speed. The
physical phenomenon of isotopic mutation described above is applicable to all
of Mandeleiev body of the table.
page -2
The device of the invention is shown schematically in Figure 1 attached.
It consists of a metal piece of mild steel (1) in the form of "U" and a cylindrical bar (2) iron isotope 56 supporting the
different-5 annuities coils (3,4 and 5).
The first coil (3) is a magnetic field generator
A power of 0.5 Tesla to the orientation of the nuclear spins of the iron atoms 56.
- The second coil (4) is traversed by a sine wave of 21 MHz frequency of 10 to the -4 Tesla power which is an
activator of Nuclear Magnetic Resonance observer permitting rotation of 180 ° of the nuclear spins of the iron atoms.
- The third coil (5) constitutes a transformer primary, which collects the induction energy present in all points of the
bar created by changing the isotope of iron atoms in iron 56 54.
The recovered energy can then be transformed in a form commercially exploitable (110-220-380 voltage V and
frequency 50 to 400 Hz).
The basic application that results is the creation of autonomous electrical generator. The particularity of this new
generator is that it uses a bar ferromagnetic metal as fuel giving it considerable autonomy and a very low cost of
ownership. This electrical or magnetic energy can also be used in all systems such as inverters, motors and engines.
The second application is the resulting transformation of isotope using the same principle described in figure 1 as with
magnetic core (2) to transform the metal and adjusting the setting values of the various components to match the
mutation achieve.
2680613
page 3 - CLAIM
1) flow generating device magneto-nuclear characterized in that it comprises a metal frame in the form of "U" (1), a
ferromagnetic metal bar (2) representing the magnetic core of the induction coils (3,4 and 5).
2) Device according to claim N ° 1, characterized in that the first coil (3) is an electromagnet, the second coil (4) is an
activator for the sine wave nuclear magnetic resonance of the magnetic core and the third coil (5) is the transducing
element of internal flows of nuclear origin which recovers energy in all points of the bar (2).
3) Device according to claim # 2 characterized in that internal flows of nuclear origin allow to obtain a magnetic or
electrical energy commercially exploitable.
4) Device according to claim 1 and N ° 2 characterized in that the change of the adjustment parameters of the coils
and the magnetic core thereof would enable the system to make changes to other isotopes of elements Table of
Mandeleiev.
Quote from: e2matrix on December 02, 2011, 06:46:38 PM
I agree this topic needs to be checked out further and it just occurred to me that getting fairly high power at this frequency is not that difficult if you have an old HAM radio HF transmitter. Easy to do 21 Mhz with one and just use an audio sig gen for input to the transmitter for a sine wave or square wave if that's what is needed. That will be way cheaper than a signal generator that can hit 21 Mhz as ones that go that high tend to be very expensive. This sounds like a fairly easy project waiting to happen ;) Does anyone have any thoughts on how much DC voltage and current might be needed for the 1/2 Tesla ?
Assuming my math is anywhere near correct... :-) Remeber... the first coil is DC, not AC.
B = NIu / L
or
NI = BL / u
Where:
B = magnetic field in Tesla
N = number of turns of wire
I = current (amps)
u = permeability of the core
L = length of magnetic field
Items that are missing and assumptions I made:
+ No dimensions given. Assuming deivce is 6" (inches) high by 9" wide (by 4" deep, but that doesn't come into play) (or a magnetic path, L, of approximately 26" or 0.6604m)
+ No specifics on material other than "soft iron". Best value I've found on the 'Net for permeability is relative permeability = about 5000 for "soft iron"
u0 = permeability of air = 4 PI (10^-7)
uR = relative permeability = u / u0
Therefore:
uR(soft iron) = u(soft iron) / u0
u(soft iron) = uR(soft iron) * u0 = 5000 * 4 PI (10^-7) = about 0.006283
So...
NI = 0.5T * 0.6604m / 0.006283 = about 52.555
So that leaves you with essentially a ratio. Your turns of wire multiplied by the DC current you're feeding it totals about 52.5.
Or:
+ 1 Amp, 52.5 turns
+ 0.5 A, 105 turns
+ 0.25 A, 211 turns (for more precision)
+ 2 A, 26.25 turns
...and so on.
I'd originally done the same calculations for the 10 milli-Tesla @ 21 MHz coil, but then realized that the 21 MHz is well above the iron bar's "flat" permeability graph. Looking for approximations now of the permeability of the iron at 21 MHz, but it's looking like it's very poor.
[Edit]
Okay, it looks like there isn't any information on this freely available. Formulas that contain symbols without explanations, links to abstracts that you need to be a member of a society to read, references to other "well known" (but not well documented) formulas, etc.
Imperical testing will probably be the only solution in this case, unless someone reading this happens to have a doctorate in electromagnetics?
What I did find, however, was that it looks like the permeability of some (if not all) ferromagnetic materials levels off again after a certain frequency, then drops again at a higher frequency, so it may not be quite as poor as I first suspected.
electro1574, Thanks for all your help and calcs. I gave this a quick and dirty try recently with no real indication of any power out but it was probably seriously flawed in many ways. Now that I've got some numbers I'll probably have another go at it. I was not able to do any tuning in my first attempt without concern of damaging the transmitter so I've also got that to work out. Thanks again for the help.
Good luck e2matrix. Given lack of information, I'm moving onto something else (and probably just as annoying :-) .
Hi all :)
So it appears my team stumbled upon same effect as it continues from pre-2nd world war experiments with material isotope conversion to lower one.. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=W-c5zSviuXk (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=W-c5zSviuXk)
And that is mentioned also in http://jnaudin.free.fr/html/mmcgen.htm (http://jnaudin.free.fr/html/mmcgen.htm)
Also it is all over in http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Energy_Catalyzer (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Energy_Catalyzer) and in http://www.e-catworld.com/ (http://www.e-catworld.com/)
Just I need to warn you about safety because people nearby seem to get same effects as irradiation: headache for 1 week and even vomiting if they are close enough... http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Acute_radiation_syndrome
As http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Neutron (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Neutron) says, the free neutron beta decay is 15 minutes and that is where possible beta radiation comes from device.
Circular Polarization and Nonreciprocal Propagation in Magnetic Media:
http://www.ll.mit.edu/publications/journal/pdf/vol15_no2/15_2-10.pdf
Quote from: T-1000 on May 01, 2012, 05:15:29 PM
Hi all :)
So it appears my team stumbled upon same effect as it continues from pre-2nd world war experiments with material isotope conversion to lower one.. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=W-c5zSviuXk (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=W-c5zSviuXk)
And that is mentioned also in http://jnaudin.free.fr/html/mmcgen.htm (http://jnaudin.free.fr/html/mmcgen.htm)
Also it is all over in http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Energy_Catalyzer (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Energy_Catalyzer) and in http://www.e-catworld.com/ (http://www.e-catworld.com/)
Just I need to warn you about safety because people nearby seem to get same effects as irradiation: headache for 1 week and even vomiting if they are close enough... http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Acute_radiation_syndrome
As http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Neutron (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Neutron) says, the free neutron beta decay is 15 minutes and that is where possible beta radiation comes from device.
Hi T-1000, Thanks for the info. What frequency were you using for ferrite resonance? Was this part of the Kapanadze experiments?
Not too worried about radiation as I've got multiple quality radiation detectors that cover beta, gamma and other harmful sources. This experiment is mostly on hold now anyway as too many other priorities.
Quote from: e2matrix on May 02, 2012, 07:57:54 PM
Hi T-1000, Thanks for the info. What frequency were you using for ferrite resonance? Was this part of the Kapanadze experiments?
Not too worried about radiation as I've got multiple quality radiation detectors that cover beta, gamma and other harmful sources. This experiment is mostly on hold now anyway as too many other priorities.
We had reonance about 1,3 Mhz on copper plates and resonant harmonic frequency about 300Khz on 50T coil while we were feeding magnetizing 50Hz frequency on 15T coil. The ferrite core was black color and most comon in exUSSR.
Most common ferrite cores you can find are gray color and their resonant frequency is much higher (up to 25-30 Mhz).
With the TV yoke core I have wound, I get a primary resonance just under 3MHz. Still too high for my equipment. :-\
Quote from: ZeroFossilFuel on May 03, 2012, 07:52:55 PM
With the TV yoke core I have wound, I get a primary resonance just under 3MHz. Still too high for my equipment. :-\
Do you think it's the LC resonance or NMR resonance?
BTW: At how many turns and what value of the perpendicular B-field does this occur?
Quote from: T-1000 on May 03, 2012, 06:25:56 AM
We had reonance about 1,3 Mhz on copper plates and resonant harmonic frequency about 300Khz on 50T coil while we were feeding magnetizing 50Hz frequency on 15T coil. The ferrite core was black color and most comon in exUSSR.
Most common ferrite cores you can find are gray color and their resonant frequency is much higher (up to 25-30 Mhz).
Hi T-1000 ,
Today I second time begin turn my yoke device .
Here I want to sent to you characteristics scope curves
of old russian ferrite .
In signal was square pulse , 9.404V amplitude , 44% duty cycle .
Scope was connected via antenuator 1-100 .
Interesting that highest amplitude was at 7mHz frequency . Output was
pure sine wave .
At 1.66mHz and 533 mHz there are some peaks but output signals were not
pure sine wave .
May be better is to tune yoke device to another frequencies that Aidas did before ?
Regards
Quote from: Osiakosia on September 28, 2012, 03:49:01 PM
Today I second time begin turn my yoke device .
Here I want to sent to you characteristics scope curves
of old russian ferrite .
In signal was square pulse , 9.404V amplitude , 44% duty cycle .
Scope was connected via antenuator 1-100 .
Interesting that highest amplitude was at 7mHz frequency . Output was pure sine wave .
At 1.66mHz and 533 mHz there are some peaks but output signals were not pure sine wave .
May be better is to tune yoke device to another frequencies that Aidas did before ?
Nice to see you here again.
To stimulate NMR, the 2 magnetic fields
must be perpendicular to each other in space.
One of those
perpendicular fields can be constant and the other must be pulsating... or if both
perpendicular fields are pulsating, then they should be
phase-shifted 90 degrees out of phase.
The phase shift can be produced by two generators ...or one generator feeding unequal inductances or capacitances.
The latter happens because in any inductor, the current is phase-shifted and lags behind the generator output (and if there is any capacitance then the current gets ahead of the generator). "ELI the ICE man."
I am not clear how you arranged the windings on your Yoke core this time.
Where did you feed your signals and where did you measure?
P.S.
It's possible to stimulate with an electric field too, but had not mentioned it because the Yoke device does not have any open capacitive plates for the application of electric fields, e.g. the copper plates are looped and closed.
BTW: Are you using a 1-turn copper braid or a 1-turn copper foil ?
Quote from: verpies on October 05, 2012, 03:07:44 AM
Nice to see you here again.
To stimulate NMR, the 2 magnetic fields must be perpendicular to each other.
One of those perpendicular fields can be constant and the other must be pulsating... or if both perpendicular fields are pulsating, then they should be phase-shifted 90 degrees out of phase.
The phase shift can be produced by two generators ...or one generator feeding unequal inductances or capacitances.
The latter happens because in any inductor, the current is phase-shifted and lags behind the generator output (and if there is any capacitance then the current gets ahead of the generator). "ELI the ICE man."
I am not clear how you arranged the windings on your Yoke core this time.
Where did you feed your signals and where did you measure?
P.S.
It's possible to stimulate with an electric field too, but had not mentioned it because the Yoke device does not have any open capacitive plates for the application of electric fields, e.g. the copper plates are looped and closed.
BTW: Are you using a 1-turn copper braid or a 1-turn copper foil ?
Yes, the 90 degree fields is a key to transmutation and OU devices utilizing this principle.
It is great to see more ppl understanding process... :)
Quote from: T-1000 on October 05, 2012, 03:48:31 AM
Yes, the 90 degree fields is a key to transmutation and OU devices utilizing this principle.
It is great to see more ppl understanding process... :)
Do you think that the transmutation in Yoke device happens in the copper strips or in the ferrite core?
Also, what can you write about the phase-shifts of currents in Yoke windings?
Quote from: verpies on October 05, 2012, 04:23:28 AM
Do you think that the transmutation in Yoke device happens in the copper strips or in the ferrite core?
Also, what can you write about the phase-shifts of currents in Yoke windings?
The core material changes because of entire resonant frequencies set is aimed to it.
The 15T winding is your large rotating magnet and 50T winding is your small magnetic force on core's frequency and this force makes 90 degree vibrations we need. Also copper plates are on that angle as LC resonant tank circuit.
Quote from: verpies on October 05, 2012, 03:07:44 AM
Nice to see you here again.
I am not clear how you arranged the windings on your Yoke core this time.
Where did you feed your signals and where did you measure?
P.S.
It's possible to stimulate with an electric field too, but had not mentioned it because the Yoke device does not have any open capacitive plates for the application of electric fields, e.g. the copper plates are looped and closed.
BTW: Are you using a 1-turn copper braid or a 1-turn copper foil ?
The input signal I connected to U-shape turn . Output signal I have taked from 50 turn winding .
I have used 0.55 mm coper plates for U-shape turn .
Regards
Quote from: Osiakosia on October 05, 2012, 09:35:53 AM
The input signal I connected to the U-shape turn . I have taken the output signal from the 50 turn winding.
What about the 15turn winding ?
As far as I remeber, STAAAR's team Yoke device had 3 windings (including the U-shaped turn).
@T-1000
Wasn't your U-shaped copper tape looped over point B ?
Different shape of the winding affects the field shape near its end, doesn't it?
Quote from: verpies on October 05, 2012, 11:09:16 AM
@T-1000
Wasn't your U-shaped copper tape looped over point B ?
Different shape of the winding affects the field shape near its end, doesn't it?
Two coper plates are connected over the top of the core ( point A ) .
I did not connected its over pot B , couse in this situation I will not be able to
firmly attach second part of core with bifiliar winding .
I think I will try to connect this two plates by the thin copper strip ( over point B ) . Will see any difference .
P.S In yoke video the two parts of aluminium plates were simply connected by one piece of wire .
Regards
Quote from: verpies on October 05, 2012, 11:01:14 AM
What about the 15turn winding ?
As far as I remeber, STAAAR's team Yoke device had 3 windings (including the U-shaped turn).
I make photo after removing 15 turns winding .
Regards
Quote from: Osiakosia on October 05, 2012, 02:48:55 PM
I made the photo after removing 15 turns winding .
I asked because you did not mention applying any waveforms to the 15T winding - not because of the photo.
Aren't you driving the 15T winding at all?
Quote from: verpies on October 05, 2012, 07:08:36 PM
I asked because you did not mention applying any waveforms to the 15T winding - not because of the photo.
Aren't you driving the 15T winding at all?
Not yet . unfortunately . :(
At first I want to catch this 6 KW output like in yoke device video . But unsuccessfully . But there is on hope .
The resonant frequencys of my device are aproximately the same .
In the begining of next week I wil receive new DCO and will try to apply all frequencies to device - 50 hz to
15 turn , 312 khz to 50 turn and capacitors to U-shape turn for obtain ferrite core resonance frequency .
Regards
Quote from: Osiakosia on October 06, 2012, 02:18:10 PM
Not yet . unfortunately . :(
At first I want to catch this 6 KW output like in yoke device video . But unsuccessfully . But there is on hope .
The resonant frequencys of my device are aproximately the same .
In the begining of next week I wil receive new DCO and will try to apply all frequencies to device - 50 hz to
15 turn , 312 khz to 50 turn and capacitors to U-shape turn for obtain ferrite core resonance frequency .
Why not apply the 50Hz signal to the 15T winding from a step-down transformer powered by your house's power grid?
It so happens that you have a 230VAC perfect sine wave at 50Hz where you live.
The Yoke device does not have a chance of working without these two stimulating input signals.
P.S.
I think that this 50Hz input signal should be PDC (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pulsating_DC), created by a small amplitude 50Hz AC sine wave (or triangle wave) riding on top of larger DC (AC+DC addition) in such a manner that the PDC (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pulsating_DC) current never reverses, e.g. AC+DC>0.
Such PDC (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pulsating_DC) can be created by connecting the DC and AC sources in series.
The AC amplitude or at least the DC level should be adjustable.
That is only my opinion, though.
Quote from: verpies on October 05, 2012, 11:09:16 AM
@T-1000
Wasn't your U-shaped copper tape looped over point B ?
Different shape of the winding affects the field shape near its end, doesn't it?
Yes, it was, from both sides and shorted in one end. Also the copper strip was covering 1/4 of ferrite, it was on yoke bottom ring.
It comes down straight to magnetism geometry and force vectors. When properly aligned they work for you and when not - against you :)
P,S> Only recently we discovered the core is magnetized when we got other cores from some old russian tv sets. So ferrite core seems is made from hard ferrite - http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ferrite_(magnet)#Hard_ferrites
Quote from: T-1000 on October 07, 2012, 08:42:58 AM
Yes, it was, from both sides and shorted in one end. Also the copper strip was covering 1/4 of ferrite, it was on yoke bottom ring.
It comes down straight to magnetism geometry and force vectors. When properly aligned they work for you and when not - against you :)
P,S> Only recently we discovered the core is magnetized when we got other cores from some old russian tv sets. So ferrite core seems is made from hard ferrite - http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ferrite_(magnet)#Hard_ferrites (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ferrite_(magnet)#Hard_ferrites)
Are this working yoke device ?
I see only 37 turns over U-shape turn . Where is 15 turn winding ?
Quote from: Osiakosia on October 07, 2012, 01:38:55 PM
Are this working yoke device ?
I see only 37 turns over U-shape turn . Where is 15 turn winding ?
The working one is there - http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=W-c5zSviuXk
Quote from: T-1000 on October 07, 2012, 02:41:15 PM
The working one is there -
Please find interesting article about ferrite core works with ortogonal windings .
Unfortunately to others forum users this article in russian language .
http://lamm3.narod.ru/dop3.htm (http://lamm3.narod.ru/dop3.htm)
Thanks. It does look like an interesting article. Does anyone know a good translator? The google one only translates half of the document.
Try this:
http://www.online-translator.com/site_translation.aspx
Quote from: MasterPlaster on October 07, 2012, 04:05:15 PM
Thanks. It does look like an interesting article. Does anyone know a good translator? The google one only translates half of the document.
I've found that if you keep reloading the doc in the google translate page it eventually gets the whole doc. It may take 3 or 4 times (or more if it's a very large page) to get the whole thing.
Everything you want to know about NMR is in these 10 videos on the tube... All 3 coils are explained and he tells a lot about getting all the vectors to align up and spin together..
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7aRKAXD4dAg (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7aRKAXD4dAg)
Here is a patent that looks like what you guys are working on....
http://www.freepatentsonline.com/4590427.pdf
I have been led to believe that NMR is not active in Fe56 because it has a spin of 0 not to mention that Fe54 also has a spin of 0. Therefor transmutation of iron 56 to 54 via NMR cannot work. So if this device does work its transmuting through a different process; and that different process is not Electron paramagnetic resonance.
I know that the copper device sheading electrons was said to have a working or activating frequency of 172,753.867Hz. Using a known NMRF of copper and the magnetic strength setting I found that Cu63 would need a 153 gauss magnetic field and Cu65 would need a 142 gauss magnetic field; all way under .5 Tesla. Now what if the oscillator is providing both magnetic field and nuclear resonant frequency at the same time? Maybe the reason the frequency is so specific is not due to being harmonic of NMR but that the target magnetic field only exists for a fraction of time. Maybe Meyer did this to make it more efficient to stimulate the copper. If he used an extra magnetic field he would draw more power and he would have to adjust his frequency to compensate for the additive magnetic field of the oscillator for points in time.
CTI,
there is no mention of the core-material used in the Meyer-Mace-device.
If NMR should have any effect then certain elements must be present:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gKkcdfSdt5Q&feature=c4-overview&list=UU1ZrGlkxBvG9WOwIs2eApLA (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gKkcdfSdt5Q&feature=c4-overview&list=UU1ZrGlkxBvG9WOwIs2eApLA)
Watch this closely.
In the russian yoke-experiment some time ago they found that the russian tv-yoke was magnetized and this indicates "hard-ferrite"-material which is used for permanent-magnets. So cobalt59 might be the key.
Regards
Kator01
Kator01,
I agree the Meyer core material of his iron transmutation generator must use an activator of non-zero spin material(s) such as cobalt59 if NMR is involved. I have had a tube monitor deflection cores and power supply toroid's measured with an XRF and they show some cobalt and other non-spin elements.
In the Colman device the elements that are NMR active are Co59, Cu63, Cu65, and P31. However we know that the NMR frequencies of those elements are all below 202.404 MHz for a 11.744T magnetic field. So with an activation frequency of around 300Mhz a static magnetic field would have to be around 17 Tesla. I don't think that is in the realm of replicate at home, but then like I said in my previous post there must be another process of NMR activation. If you look at the Colman device the magnetic field is in oscillation in the order of around 300MHz it's not static as well as the addition of an electric field influence to the material. It could be possible elements are activated in an order by given amount of time and by the variation in magnetic and electric fields that allow the activation of all those elements. I will note in both the Colman and Meyer device setup show not only magnetic influence but electric field interaction.
Michel Meyer
The polarizer that's attached to the + of the battery in the French magazine article.
Czech patent 284,333: {figure 1-figure4}, point 4 and 12.
Harold Victor Colman & Ronald Gillespie
European patent GB763062: {figure1-figure3} point 16, 15, with (19 and 18) or 27.
I think it's a mixture of both magnetic and electric fields that allow these devices to activate and work.
In our TV delfection yoke Lithuanian experiment it was not so strong 50Hz magnetic field circulating over 15 turns from 9V 1A transformer.
To cause mechanical resonance (consider that on atom spins levels) it takes very weak force to accumulate energy to the level where atom energy is released on its breakdown. If you could harness energy of atoms directly, 1g of matter would give much more energy than any todays nuclear plant could give in form of electricity...
I agree (at this point in time - anyway) that it requires both the magnetic field and electric field (RF) cause the material or compounds neclui to become unstable, (as stated in the Colman Patent). At first reading I got the impression that the coils which produced the magnetic field (in the Colman Device) was only used as a governer to control the rate of alpha and beta emissions (as indicated in the patent) which may be the case, once the reaction is started, - but - after learning only enough to be dangerous about NMR, I believe (at this point in time, anyway) that the magnetic field may be necessary to start the reaction. The Colman patent indicates (by the design of the magnetic coils (15) pole pieces (14)) that there is a concentration of the magnetic field at several points along the tube (13) containing the reactive compound (located between the zink and copper pouder). If I had to guess, I would say that at each one of the strongest magnetic points of the pole pieces (14) is where the reactive compound (in the glass tube (13) is located. The patent talks about multipal cells (each cell consisting of (copper powder - reactive compound - zink powder). It seems likely to me that the highest comcentration of the magnetic field would be at these locations. By using the multipal cells, it may be easier to obtain a stronger magnetic field (at multipal pin - point concentration points) rather then by using a single larger magnetic field. The patent drawing shows the pole piece (14) having two points of magnetic concentration points, indicating to me that colman used more than one point, but could be any number over and above what is indicated in the drawing, which is typical of patents.
Seems like this is yet another project that fell asleep.
Which is sad since it may have the potential to deliver some kilowatts out of a shoebox size device, like for 2400 hours.
Just a few things I want to add here. FE 54 is normally harmless, but the teaction will release free neutrons. Depending on the amount of exposure, these can be harmfull, see wikipedia, neutron. Lead shielding was mentioned, but that does not stop neutrons.
Water will do so. So this reactor needs to be in inside a water tank, eg. in a sealed box under water, or behind 6 walls containing water. Even concrete may shield rather well, as it contains crystal water.
However, when neutrons collide with matter with a certain speed, they may also cause beta and gamma radiation. So an additional Lead shield may be good.
Furthermore, it was mentioned that the frequency of 21mhz must be matched precisely. I think that is wrong. In NMR nuclear magnet resonance, the resonamce can be achieved by any frequence, if the magnetic field has the right strength. For instance with the earths magnetic field, resonance can be achieved with a few kilohertz. Of cource, the resulting "echo" from the matter of interest will be significantly smaller.
So, we can assume that we can tune to resonance by using a fixed frequency and a variable magnetic field, which is much easier. Also, we can try to use eg. a CB radio transmitter at 27MHz and then simply increase the DC power in the electromagnet coil. (just take care not to fry your radio by antenna specs that are wrong)
We can also use permanent magnets at the iron bars ends to first lower the power consumption and second replace the U shaped fluxpath.
However, in NMR a homogenous magnetic field is usually important. That may be difficult or impossible with PMs and simple Coils. But such a homogenous field is not absolutely required, it only optimizes the results esp. in applications like magnet resonance imaging MRI. What is important in the end of the day is, we have to somehow add a 105 Ev to the nucleus of the FE 56, this will kick its butt as much that it will break up and thereby release 20'000Ev, so the COP is about 200x, when we ignore the isotopic transition as a circumstance.
BTW. in NMR devices the coils are not arranged beside eachother, but inside oneanother: Right on the core there is a fine coil for the HF input oscillation wave, eg. 1000T. Then follows a special coil to cause a gradiation of the field, this one is not really of interest for us. Then follows the static Polarization coil, for the dc magnet.
Yet, NMR does not extract energy, but simply switches off the modulation coil frequently and then uses it to read the data the coil "sends back". Whether we use a third coil to extract the energy, as seen in the patent drawings, or not, we have to think about the implications of those probably to be expected several kilowatts, suddently appearing in all coils. We may have to disconnect the other two coils frequently. Which is where the question arises, why the output should be 400hz, as the patent states.
Anyway, interesting project. BTW halflife of neutrons is about 15 minutes, take care.
BR
We are missing simple way to detect neutron radiation. Without it it's quite risky.
It isn't really radiation, it's a particle that has a certain speed. There is a certain amount in nature, background neutrons. What is important is to know that water stops it, certainly a wall of several centimeters. It is temarkable that nobody mentioned water until now. That was indeed dangerous.
I suspect in LENR we have similar sideeffects, but barely notice it due to the water in which the plasma takes place.
One needs to know what he's doing, this is not kids stuff (I just remember that tube vid by a kid, doing fusion in his room, whispering, so mom doesn't notice anything ^^)
I think it's save in Protium / tap water, although not in pure Deuterium or Tritium :). Nevertheless need to have an eye on beta and gamma radiation due to Bremsstrahlung (brake radiation) sideeffects etc of colliding particles.
But I guess a couple of cheapo fishsticks can be way more dangerous these days. greetings from fukushima...
In that report they gathered 24'000 kilowatthours with one iron bar... that's about 5000$ in nuclear electricity around here.
BR
I perfectly knew that water will stop it for a little time, then it will be ionized and beta radiation occur. I planned to test it with a water container having some photo-paper in black envelope floating in water. All that is too tedious to be done in home. I hope so that this effect of Fe transmutation is not common one , especially with ferrite treated by high magnetic field pulses. I hope so.
I guess that would be known. It is an anomaly that appeared in NMR tests, with nuclear resonance. Normally you don't have a static, biased B Field, but the AC or Modulation only, right?
What do you mean, water stops neutrons only for a short time? The Neutrons decay in like 15 Minutes. Whether the water becomes radioactive, and how much, must be tested. It will however still stop the neutrons. If the fishes turn upside down then you shouldnt drink it , sure... What you can do: Use a video camera, close to the reactor. When the picture gets snowy then you know what's going on. You can also use a small fotovoltaic cell, covered with black paper. when you still get a voltage from that, it's radiation. You can also cover the camera lense. If you still get snow, then no good... like the footage from tschernobyl...
BR
One reason why I probably won't try this is, somewhere they mention it takes 15 minutes for the reaction to start, so it may be rather "longtermish" to seek for resonance, unless you really try it with 21 mhz and 0.4T...
BR
Moved from Dally thread:
Quote from: Void on February 03, 2016, 01:09:26 PM
Hi T-1000. Thanks for the info. For now, my focus is on trying to replicate as reasonably close as I can your Lithuania experiment setup in which you guys
made use of the ferrite yoke core. I have a yoke core of what appears to be about the same size, although I can't say if the material composition
is close or the same as the yoke core you guys used. I have previously posted the markings on my yoke core.
Yes, I saw Wesley's warning that some participants suffered some ill effects and that this setup might possibly generate radiation.
If I start to see any unusual effects such as over unity with this setup, I may possibly invest in a small portable geiger counter to measure
radiation levels. However, for now my focus will be on just trying to replicate the setup you guys used.
I have a few questions on the yoke core experiment setup, if you have a few minutes at some point.
1)
Were you able to see the over unity effect with no high voltage spark gap discharges applied to the horizontal
winding wrap of copper strap around one half of the yoke core? My understanding is that you were able to see
the over unity effect without these HV discharges applied, but at lower power levels. Just want to confirm this point.
We simulated spark gap signal without high voltage. The copper strip had freewheeling LC circuit on the core
Quote from: Void on February 03, 2016, 01:09:26 PM
2)
Should I place the horizontal copper strap wrap underneath the two vertically wound primary windings, or underneath
the output vertically wound bifilar winding?
Please see http://overunity.com/4333/meyer-mace-isotopic-nmr-generator/msg339192/#msg339192 (http://overunity.com/4333/meyer-mace-isotopic-nmr-generator/msg339192/#msg339192)
Quote from: Void on February 03, 2016, 01:09:26 PM
3)
Were you able to see the over unity effect with no earth ground connection to any of the windings or light bulb load?
Were you able to see the overunity effect with no scope probe leads connected to any of the windings?
Just want to understand if an earth ground connection might have been a factor when you were seeing over unity.
We always used ground connection as I remember. That was 5 years ago already.
The scope probes was not required after tuning.
Quote from: Void on February 03, 2016, 01:09:26 PM
4)
I think I know the answer to this, but I just want to make sure I am clear about this.
Is the output bifilar winding connected with the two bifilar winding sections connected such that their
inductance is additive (non-cancelling) or were the two halves connected with the winding inductances cancelling?
The schematic says 150 turns. Does this mean the total turns of both bifilar windings included together?
It was simple bifilar coil , no cw-ccw windings.
Quote from: Void on February 03, 2016, 01:09:26 PM
5)
The schematic posted by Wesley shows capacitors were connected in parallel to the output bifilar windings.
What total capacitance value was used when you were seeing overunity, and what was the intended purpose for these capacitors?
Was the total capacitance value chosen for resonance with the output windings at some particular frequency? If so, what frequency were
you aiming for as the resonance frequency?
The capacitor in parallel helped to tune maximum output. The memory is blurry about capacitance values.
And as I mentioned in http://overunity.com/12736/kapanadze-cousin-dally-free-energy/msg473042/#msg473042 (http://overunity.com/12736/kapanadze-cousin-dally-free-energy/msg473042/#msg473042)
the common materials in yoke core and other NMR places was Cobalt and Barium.
For the assembly the effect was partialy replicated by ZeroFossilFuel - http://alt-nrg.org/Kapanadze.html
Quote from: T-1000 on February 04, 2016, 02:34:06 PM
Moved from Dally thread:
We simulated spark gap signal without high voltage. The copper strip had freewheeling LC circuit on the corePlease see http://overunity.com/4333/meyer-mace-isotopic-nmr-generator/msg339192/#msg339192 (http://overunity.com/4333/meyer-mace-isotopic-nmr-generator/msg339192/#msg339192)We always used ground connection as I remember. That was 5 years ago already.
The scope probes was not required after tuning.It was simple bifilar coil , no cw-ccw windings.The capacitor in parallel helped to tune maximum output. The memory is blurry about capacitance values.
And as I mentioned in http://overunity.com/12736/kapanadze-cousin-dally-free-energy/msg473042/#msg473042 (http://overunity.com/12736/kapanadze-cousin-dally-free-energy/msg473042/#msg473042)
the common materials in yoke core and other NMR places was Cobalt and Barium.
For the assembly the effect was partialy replicated by ZeroFossilFuel - http://alt-nrg.org/Kapanadze.html
Thanks for the feedback T-1000!
I didn't see where ZeroFossilFuel posted about any results he had in his tests.
Do you recall what sort of results he saw?
Quote from: dieter on January 17, 2015, 07:34:41 AM
Seems like this is yet another project that fell asleep.
It has not. It just has moved to a different forum.
Quote from: dieter on January 17, 2015, 07:34:41 AM
Furthermore, it was mentioned that the frequency of 21MHz must be matched precisely. I think that is wrong. In NMR nuclear magnetic resonance, the resonance can be achieved by any frequency, if the magnetic field has the right strength. For instance with the earths magnetic field, resonance can be achieved with a few kilohertz.
Indeed, the NMR frequency of hydrogen, water and other paramagnetics increases linearly with magnetic flux density.
...but that is not true with bulk solid iron.
Iron's nuclear resonance frequency stays constant at 45.5MHz up to 0.6T and
decreases at higher magnetic flux densities.
See the graph below.
Quote from: Void on February 04, 2016, 04:01:15 PM
Thanks for the feedback T-1000!
I didn't see where ZeroFossilFuel posted about any results he had in his tests.
Do you recall what sort of results he saw?
http://overunity.com/7679/selfrunning-free-energy-devices-up-to-5-kw-from-tariel-kapanadze/msg317589/#msg317589
Quote from: T-1000 on February 04, 2016, 04:13:29 PM
http://overunity.com/7679/selfrunning-free-energy-devices-up-to-5-kw-from-tariel-kapanadze/msg317589/#msg317589
Hi T-1000. Ok, I see. :) You can actually get that sort of effect where spark gap discharges are freezing up
or otherwise messing up computers and various other types of electronics equipment all around the house,
which I believe is due to HV transients covering a wide frequency spectrum feeding back into the mains and traveling
around the mains wiring to various equipment in the house. Some equipment that is nearby and not mains connected
can also still be affected that way as well due to the strong radiated EM noise in the vicinity of the spark gap. I have
had this happening a few times several years ago when I was doing a lot of experiments with different spark gap circuits. :)
I don't think there is necessarily anything unusual with such an effect when sparkgaps are involved.
With transients from spark gap the usual standing wave/noise zone range is less than 10 meters. When you get "even prevented my daughter from streaming music to her laptop 50 meters away" it might been something on top of that. Also you can always ask himself about this event.
Cheers!
Quote from: T-1000 on February 04, 2016, 04:38:03 PM
With transients from spark gap the usual standing wave/noise zone range is less than 10 meters. When you get "even prevented my daughter from streaming music to her laptop 50 meters away" it might been something on top of that. Also you can always ask himself about this event.
Cheers!
Hi T-1000. As I mentioned in my previous reply, I have seen this same sort of effect where electronics
equipment all around the house, even at quite a distance, can be affected by spark gap discharges, especially
if HV wideband noise is feeding back into the mains wiring. Once that happens it can easily travel though the mains wiring
all around the house. I have seen these exact same sort of effects in the past when testing with spark gap circuits of
different types. Under some conditions it can be really bad. I have had computers freeze up or had USB connected devices
freeze up, etc., all at quite a distance away from where I was doing my testing. Spark gaps can generate some very strong
electrical and radiated EM noise all through the EM spectrum. :)
Hi T-1000, Verpies.
I have reviewed some more videos made by Wesley about the experiment
and tuning details, however I still have a couple more questions about this.
From comments made by Wesley, it looks like the 50 turns winding was being fed with
a waveform of some type in the range of 400 kHz to 600 kHz for some reason. Also it was mentioned by
Weslely that the 50 Hz waveform being fed to the 15 turns winding was a ramp waveform, but I could not find
any clarification on that either. Were the exact waveform types being used from each of the two
signal generators, and whether or not there was any DC offset applied to either waveform, and
the specific frequencies that were being used when the 150 Watt light was lighting up documented somewhere?
All the best...
Quote from: Void on February 05, 2016, 11:23:32 AM
From comments made by Wesley, it looks like the 50 turns winding was being fed with
a waveform of some type in the range of 400 kHz to 600 kHz for some reason.
This was most close resonant harmonics in kHz range to ferrite core resonant frequency. The 50T coil won't accept 1.3+MHz frequency. And that frequency also should add with low magnetization frequency of 50Hz so you get resonant sine wave inside of 50Hz carrier sine wave. The square signal duty cycle was <30% to simulate spikes.
Quote from: Void on February 05, 2016, 11:23:32 AM
Also it was mentioned by
Weslely that the 50 Hz waveform being fed to the 15 turns winding was a ramp waveform, but I could not find
any clarification on that either.
The the 1st source of 50Hz sine wave was used from 9V 1A mains transformer for tuning in beginning of tuning.
It is carrier wave and core magnetization required for NMR condition.
Quote from: T-1000 on February 05, 2016, 11:35:09 AM
This was most close resonant harmonics in kHz range to ferrite core resonant frequency. The 50T coil won't accept 1.3+MHz frequency. And that frequency also should add with low magnetization frequency of 50Hz so you get resonant sine wave inside of 50Hz carrier sine wave. The square signal duty cycle was <30% to simulate spikes.
The the 1st source of 50Hz sine wave was used from 9V 1A mains transformer for tuning in beginning of tuning.
It is carrier wave and core magnetization required for NMR condition.
Thanks T-1000. When you were lighting the 150 Watt light bulb in the video, were you using the signal generator
rather than the 9V 1A transformer to supply the 50 Hz waveform to the 15 turns winding?
P.S. The reason I want to be clear about this is because testing my ferrite yoke core with 32 windings on it, I
measure an inductance of 850 uH with both halves of the yoke core clamped tightly together, and quite
a bit lower inductance than that if there is a gap between the two yoke halves.
850 uH at 50 Hz is a reactance of only 0.27 ohms. This is with a 32 turn winding. At 15 turns, the reactance
of the winding would be about half of that. This looks like pretty much a short circuit to a signal generator set at 50 Hz
with an output impedance of 50 ohms. I understood from Wesley's videos that you guys were using two signal
generators only to drive the yoke core windings, but based on my tests, a 15 turn winding (on my OC-90 yoke core anyway)
will load a signal generator's output right down to almost zero volts due to the very low impedance of the 15 turn
winding at 50 Hz.
Quote from: Void on February 05, 2016, 11:23:32 AM
From comments made by Wesley, it looks like the 50 turns winding was being fed with
a waveform of some type in the range of 400 kHz to 600 kHz for some reason. Also it was mentioned by
Weslely that the 50 Hz waveform being fed to the 15 turns winding was a ramp waveform,
Yes, they tried sine, sawtooth and rectangular waveforms to see which one worked best. I think ramp was the best and rectangular was the worst. They also tried using a 1:25 transformer (1A) to better match to the low impedance of the yoke winding. I also remember a DC offset being tried, that was larger than the amplitude of the AC signal in order to make the signal unipolar (not reversing polarity). Tiger's latest experiment demonstrates that a permanent magnet can have the same effect as the DC bias.
Please keep in mind, that coils don't "care" about voltage - they "care" only about current in their windings.
Quote from: verpies on February 05, 2016, 05:07:14 PM
Yes, they tried sine, sawtooth and rectangular waveforms to see which one worked best. I think ramp was the best and rectangular was the worst. They also tried using a 1:25 transformer (1A) to better match to the low impedance of the yoke winding. I also remember a DC offset being tried, that was larger than the amplitude of the AC signal in order to make the signal unipolar (not reversing polarity). Tiger's latest experiment demonstrates that a permanent magnet can have the same effect as the DC bias.
Hi Verpies. Ok, thanks. I think I at least have the general idea now regarding the setup, even
if some specific details are not quite so clear. :)
Quote from: verpies on February 05, 2016, 05:07:14 PM
Please keep in mind, that coils don't "care" about voltage - they "care" only about current in their windings.
It would depend on what you are trying to do, but in this case it appears that a good
current into the 15 turns windings is possibly what is needed.
Quote from: T-1000 on February 05, 2016, 11:35:09 AM
This was most close resonant harmonics in kHz range to ferrite core resonant frequency. The 50T coil won't accept 1.3MHz frequency.
I'd like to point out that:
1.3MHz * 35 = 45.5MHz
650kHz * 70 = 45.5MHz
500kHz * 91 = 45.5MHz
Read
this (http://overunity.com/4333/meyer-mace-isotopic-nmr-generator/msg473172/#msg473172) if you missed why 45.5MHz is special.
Quote from: verpies on February 05, 2016, 08:09:53 PM
I'd like to point out that:
1.3MHz * 35 = 45.5MHz
650kHz * 70 = 45.5MHz
500kHz * 91 = 45.5MHz
Read this (http://overunity.com/4333/meyer-mace-isotopic-nmr-generator/msg473172/#msg473172) if you missed why 45.5MHz is special.
Hi Verpies. I have saved that graphic for Iron NMR.
It is something worth keeping in mind for sure.
Interesting topic... has anyone continued experimenting on this ?