Overunity.com Archives

Solid States Devices => solid state devices => Topic started by: RYCOM COMPUTERS on November 07, 2008, 03:08:35 PM

Title: MIT vs. Steven Marks TPU.
Post by: RYCOM COMPUTERS on November 07, 2008, 03:08:35 PM
I been doing some research in the SM TPU. I am vary interested in the device. Today look at some other topics. I came across this web site. http://www.physorg.com/news100445957.html . Looking in to it a little I was thinking that if Steven Mark had done the same with the TPU but in a smaller scale.
Title: Re: MIT vs. Steven Marks TPU.
Post by: Spider on November 07, 2008, 03:48:05 PM
RC,

it all goes back to Tesla.

I think this website give a good explenation in understandable language.

http://www.meyl.eu/go/index.php?dir=50_Experimental&page=1&sublevel=0



Spider
Title: Re: MIT vs. Steven Marks TPU.
Post by: RYCOM COMPUTERS on November 07, 2008, 04:01:15 PM
Spider,

Thanks for the web site. I realize that it all goes back to Tesla.


RYCom Computers
Title: Re: MIT vs. Steven Marks TPU.
Post by: RYCOM COMPUTERS on November 07, 2008, 04:08:36 PM
I think there could be some similarities with what MIT did with the wireless power transfer. The TPU that SM used could have been only one part of the puzzle.


RYCom Computers
Title: Re: MIT vs. Steven Marks TPU.
Post by: innovation_station on November 07, 2008, 04:23:06 PM
indeed  ;D

it is g you know....


ist

now do tell me where this will go....
Title: Re: MIT vs. Steven Marks TPU.
Post by: RYCOM COMPUTERS on November 07, 2008, 05:36:06 PM
Well I am just thinking out loud if you will. As much I would love to see the TPU work, like the one im working on. I was thinking if by chance SM used the same wireless power technology.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_OlOexol5NI&feature=related

There is no reason why SM TPU could have been the receiver of the transmitter.




RYCom
Title: Re: MIT vs. Steven Marks TPU.
Post by: Mannix on November 07, 2008, 06:09:05 PM
I strongly urge any body to do this experiment...just so that they can see that what Steven did was nothing like this set up....

ITS NOT VERY DIFFICULT AT ALL.

I did this about 12  years ago before some actual clues were available.
This experiment is very basic and reveals nothing that is not already known with conventional theory.

Its sad to see such a high prifile organisation wuth such a rudimentary experiment( obviously designed to get funding for some convenience tech rubbish that we somehow cant do with out) Its a good story for those with no understanding but does it  belong under, or any where near  the heading of one of the greatest inventors of our time ?

This is firmly in the hands of those who are "hands" on as opposed to just heads on clickers.

ist will knock one of these up in a jiffy



Title: Re: MIT vs. Steven Marks TPU.
Post by: RYCOM COMPUTERS on November 07, 2008, 06:32:06 PM
I can’t wait to build this! In less IST bet me to it? Seems how from what I read he has built all most every thing.

So if you tell me (Mannix) that if I make a small coil like the one in the video to make it look like the TPU, and hide the other unit to transfer the wireless power. That it would not be feasible.


RYCOM COMPUTERS
Title: Re: MIT vs. Steven Marks TPU.
Post by: innovation_station on November 07, 2008, 06:43:17 PM
dont look like there is much to it ....

the kool thing is this ...

if you could design a device to power it  from a single pluse.... 

look for the g unit to do this ....  this is teslas coil amp  lol 

any how the rest will figure it out some time ...

g is his tpu...  and it powers this device and almost countless others ;)

ist

ill build it i need one any ways

manix you want to help ;)

BTW i must actually laugh at mit ......  they got IT ALL WRONG LOL!!   but i bet they know this already....lol

it is the maginifing transmitter ...  it is named  CORRECTLY

it but it is also a reciever...  hummmm.... 

well im a leave it there...

Title: Re: MIT vs. Steven Marks TPU.
Post by: RYCOM COMPUTERS on November 07, 2008, 06:49:09 PM
Thanks, IST  :)

Im just thinking of other ideas to make a TPU.



RYCom Computers
Title: Re: MIT vs. Steven Marks TPU.
Post by: kames on November 10, 2008, 08:55:02 PM
Quote from: RYCOM COMPUTERS on November 07, 2008, 06:32:06 PM
I can’t wait to build this! In less IST bet me to it? Seems how from what I read he has built all most every thing.

So if you tell me (Mannix) that if I make a small coil like the one in the video to make it look like the TPU, and hide the other unit to transfer the wireless power. That it would not be feasible.


RYCOM COMPUTERS


Exactly. If you build a coil, one like in the video, walk around the room and even outside the house with a coil in your hands it won’t be feasible to reproduce the amount of power that has been shown in the video.
Mannix is absolutely right. Try it before claiming it.

Kames.
Title: Re: MIT vs. Steven Marks TPU.
Post by: innovation_station on November 10, 2008, 09:09:43 PM
yes indeed doing it that way .... lol


put it all in 1 unit....    ;D

ist
Title: Re: MIT vs. Steven Marks TPU.
Post by: RYCOM COMPUTERS on November 12, 2008, 10:17:19 AM
Quote"Exactly. If you build a coil, one like in the video, walk around the room and even outside the house with a coil in your hands it won’t be feasible to reproduce the amount of power that has been shown in the video.
Mannix is absolutely right. Try it before claiming it."

Kames.

Funny thing is you say “walk around the room and even outside the house”. In all the videos I don’t see SM walk around the room with the TPU or even outside the house at that matter. Most of the shots I have seen all have been in line of sight or sitting on a table.

RYCom.

Quote
Title: Re: MIT vs. Steven Marks TPU.
Post by: west12 on November 12, 2008, 12:18:07 PM
Funny things or houdini magic tricks you can see here (22-25min) http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=167210479374903373&hl=en (http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=167210479374903373&hl=en)
W.
Title: Re: MIT vs. Steven Marks TPU.
Post by: kames on November 12, 2008, 02:04:11 PM
Quote from: RYCOM COMPUTERS on November 12, 2008, 10:17:19 AM
Funny thing is you say “walk around the room and even outside the house”. In all the videos I don’t see SM walk around the room with the TPU or even outside the house at that matter. Most of the shots I have seen all have been in line of sight or sitting on a table.

RYCom.




Those links and files or references were posted in this forum. I don’t know if they are posted on youtube or google. You have to go through the topics and/or check out the download section. I don’t think youtube or google have all the videos. The videos I have were all downloaded after somebody posted them in this forum. You can ask other people, I am sure they will confirm my words.

Kames.
Title: Re: MIT vs. Steven Marks TPU.
Post by: RYCOM COMPUTERS on November 12, 2008, 04:23:09 PM
THANKS FOR THE VIDEO!  :o 

Title: Re: MIT vs. Steven Marks TPU.
Post by: otto on November 13, 2008, 03:00:24 AM
Hello all,

I can confirm that a TPU is able to transmit wireless energy. Its not a problem. My TPU was connected to a 12V car battery and transmitted around 6V to my power supply so the voltage rised from 24V to over 30V. When I connected a little bulb to the power supply I could see when I tuned my TPU that the bulb changed the light intensity. This was a pure wireless transmission of energy!!

But the guys from MIT I think are joking with the world. A wireless power transmission at a distance of how much??

Come on.

If I would work a little bit harder Im sure that I would have better results then they have. And they have a lot of scientists, money, various profi equipment.....and Im alone, and without money.

They got a financial "injection" and I got a big nothing. As I always say, Im a little man from a little country and they are the "big players" with their big brains.

Otto

PS: of course Im sarcastic because they forgot a man: TESLA

Title: Re: MIT vs. Steven Marks TPU.
Post by: BEP on November 13, 2008, 07:08:38 AM
Quote from: Mannix on November 07, 2008, 06:09:05 PM
I strongly urge any body to do this experiment...just so that they can see that what Steven did was nothing like this set up....

ITS NOT VERY DIFFICULT AT ALL.

@Mannix,

Agreed, everyone SHOULD try the experiment. Once you get it going turn your receiver upside down. Guess what! The transferred power dies!

As long as MIT and Intel use magnetic coupling they will be limited to short distances and problems with multiple loads changing the overall system resonant frequency to multiple different frequencies.

I don't think Steven wasted any time on a transmitter. Why should he? The transmitted signal was already there. All he needed was a receiver.

I doubt MIT and Intel will get past the multi-load, distance, fading and redirection problems - even with all their brains and money. They'll never get past the frequency issue.

Intel should be ashamed calling their experimenter 'our own Nikola Tesla'. Just as well, they should be ashamed claiming it a new idea.
Title: Re: MIT vs. Steven Marks TPU.
Post by: alan on November 13, 2008, 07:44:24 AM
Quote from: otto on November 13, 2008, 03:00:24 AM
Hello all,

I can confirm that a TPU is able to transmit wireless energy. Its not a problem. My TPU was connected to a 12V car battery and transmitted around 6V to my power supply so the voltage rised from 24V to over 30V. When I connected a little bulb to the power supply I could see when I tuned my TPU that the bulb changed the light intensity. This was a pure wireless transmission of energy!!

But the guys from MIT I think are joking with the world. A wireless power transmission at a distance of how much??

Come on.

If I would work a little bit harder Im sure that I would have better results then they have. And they have a lot of scientists, money, various profi equipment.....and Im alone, and without money.

They got a financial "injection" and I got a big nothing. As I always say, Im a little man from a little country and they are the "big players" with their big brains.

Otto

PS: of course Im sarcastic because they forgot a man: TESLA


But is the wireless energy anything different than (harmful) high power RF ?
Title: Re: MIT vs. Steven Marks TPU.
Post by: alan on November 13, 2008, 07:49:31 AM
Quote from: RYCOM COMPUTERS on November 07, 2008, 03:08:35 PM
I been doing some research in the SM TPU. I am vary interested in the device. Today look at some other topics. I came across this web site. http://www.physorg.com/news100445957.html . Looking in to it a little I was thinking that if Steven Mark had done the same with the TPU but in a smaller scale.
"Instead of irradiating the environment with electromagnetic waves, it fills the space around it with a non-radiative magnetic field oscillating at MHz frequencies"
So no RF or EM @ MIT, just B fields.
With a longitudinal component?
Title: Re: MIT vs. Steven Marks TPU.
Post by: BEP on November 13, 2008, 07:54:50 AM
And what happens when you place a conductor in a changing magnetic field?

IMO:
At the frequencies they use think of it as using a giant cell phone. Sure, they aren't using cell phone frequencies but the frequencies are not what our bodies can accept. I think there will be energy transfer to our bodies as well.

Longitudinal? No doubt.
Title: Re: MIT vs. Steven Marks TPU.
Post by: alan on November 13, 2008, 08:21:47 AM
"No doubt, yes", or "no doubt, no"?
Non radiating mag fields, is that another word for scalar B?

I think it can be compared to tesla's wireless energy through the earth, but only using magnetic fields. The devices need to be tuned to the frequency, but what about things with a harmonic or aliasing resonant frequency, those also will (partially) resonate.
Title: Re: MIT vs. Steven Marks TPU.
Post by: BEP on November 13, 2008, 08:39:53 AM
No doubt yes.

I think they have it wrong. The radiation should be in the form of pressure waves.
Yes, the receiver must be resonant to the pressure wave. If I'm correct we are talking about a very narrow tuning range.
Agreed, power transfer should be almost zero for untuned circuits.

Harmonic, subharmonic and aliased should also receive. My concern is the possibility of anharmonic results.
Title: Re: MIT vs. Steven Marks TPU.
Post by: alan on November 13, 2008, 09:11:05 AM
anharmonics, like those of harddisks :)

I find this mag. pressure or scalar wave hypothesis very interesting, but know too little of it, only that it is like sound in a medium or pressure waves in water.
Got more info?
Title: Re: MIT vs. Steven Marks TPU.
Post by: BEP on November 13, 2008, 09:22:17 AM
Pressure waves....  Just think of it like sound waves. The oddities are source to receiver distance and matching resonance is key. Unlike transverse amps and volts stay together (no leading/lagging) so power only appears while in the peak.

Use HF/VHF and those nodes are narrow.

Plenty of stuff on the web. Most of what I know comes from my bench.
Title: Re: MIT vs. Steven Marks TPU.
Post by: alan on November 13, 2008, 09:32:50 AM
You got Posts: 666  ;D

But the existence of such waves imply the existence of a medium, like....the ether?
What are your findings from the bench? Have you seen scalarwave effects?

Many scientists regard this as pseudoscience, but many of these people are too much in love with what they've learned to disregard it as incomplete, I guess.
Title: Re: MIT vs. Steven Marks TPU.
Post by: innovation_station on November 13, 2008, 09:56:33 AM
Quote from: west12 on November 12, 2008, 12:18:07 PM
Funny things or houdini magic tricks you can see here (22-25min) http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=167210479374903373&hl=en (http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=167210479374903373&hl=en)
W.

got a ?

on the way back into the house in that in that vid....  lol   what does michel look at?....  with the cam....   not an antenna.... :D

ist

if it is ... it sure explaines a lot lol.....
Title: Re: MIT vs. Steven Marks TPU.
Post by: RYCOM COMPUTERS on November 13, 2008, 10:19:43 AM
IN THE VIDEO


00:08:27:20 â€" 00:08:37:07  Why does he not pick up the last two lights?

00:22:47:12- 00:23:35:14   The camera guy never looks behind him, and then they walk out side, but keep in mind where there heading. Across the street which is still In Line Of Sight.

Some one please look at this and tell me what you think?

RYCom Computers
Title: Re: MIT vs. Steven Marks TPU.
Post by: RYCOM COMPUTERS on November 13, 2008, 10:23:58 AM
Oh and What is that device at 00:24:09:24  Could it be?  ;)

RYCom Computers
Title: Re: MIT vs. Steven Marks TPU.
Post by: RYCOM COMPUTERS on November 13, 2008, 10:37:37 AM
In his talking of the TPU at 00:34:51:29 -00:35:12:00  The audio cuts out. (Can some one say Edited.)  ::)


RYCom Computers
Title: Re: MIT vs. Steven Marks TPU.
Post by: RYCOM COMPUTERS on November 13, 2008, 11:15:01 AM
Two more things he talks about frequency sensitive 00:32:52:19 and Battery obsolete 00:34:14:05. In this link it talks about both. http://www.physorg.com/news100445957.html

RYCom Computers
Title: Re: MIT vs. Steven Marks TPU.
Post by: BEP on November 13, 2008, 04:53:31 PM
Quote from: alan on November 13, 2008, 09:32:50 AM
You got Posts: 666  ;D

But the existence of such waves imply the existence of a medium, like....the ether?
What are your findings from the bench? Have you seen scalarwave effects?

Many scientists regard this as pseudoscience, but many of these people are too much in love with what they've learned to disregard it as incomplete, I guess.

I avoid magic words as they draw flies like dung. Pseudoscience is only that which has not been explained properly. I look for explanations that make sense.

Ether? Can you show me anything or anyplace that has absolutely no charge and no mass? Don't bother with descriptions of atomic particles or the supposed space between them. The jury is still out on those.

The vacuum of space is also up for grabs right now according to reports from NASA and the French.
So is there anything else that may qualify as absolute nothingness?
And what is zero potential? Zero in relation to what?

Have I seen the effects? You could say that. I can say my neighbors have seen the effects. Since then they found out what caused the damaged so I avoid high power  :)
Title: Re: MIT vs. Steven Marks TPU.
Post by: BEP on November 13, 2008, 05:04:12 PM
Quote from: RYCOM COMPUTERS on November 13, 2008, 10:19:43 AM
IN THE VIDEO


00:08:27:20 â€" 00:08:37:07  Why does he not pick up the last two lights?

00:22:47:12- 00:23:35:14   The camera guy never looks behind him, and then they walk out side, but keep in mind where there heading. Across the street which is still In Line Of Sight.

Some one please look at this and tell me what you think?

RYCom Computers


Many of the folks here made great efforts to figure how these things can be faked. There were some good tries. It is still very possible they were all faked. It is up to you to decide what to do with the information.

Editing? Probably. I have for a few different reasons. Why not S.M.?

Still in LOS? I thought the same but plotted the layout the best I could. RF LOS is not there. It doesn't matter anyway. If he was faking by using RF transmission behind his back he would need enough power to set his shirt on fire. If it was induction coupling where is the unshielded 15 ton transformer that would take?
If there was a power transmitter behind a wall - well - at that time that invention would be just as impossible as the TPU.

You should search the old TPU threads for the word 'fake'. You should find answers or opinions on anything you can think of.

Title: Re: MIT vs. Steven Marks TPU.
Post by: BEP on November 13, 2008, 05:08:53 PM
Oh!

I still find it funny when these institutions venture into the realm that used to cause witch burning.

They light a light bulb over a short distance! Whoop De Doo!

I had a HAM show me how to do that when I was a kid. We used it to tune driven elements on huge Yagis and Log Periodic antennae. So three feet doesn't impress me.
Title: Re: MIT vs. Steven Marks TPU.
Post by: HeairBear on November 13, 2008, 08:28:21 PM
Wasn't the guy on mythbusters who helped build their so called Bedini motor from MIT? How do you fuck up a Bedini if your an MIT grad? I'm a high school dropout and I did it on my first try! Maybe being stupid and uneducated isn't so bad after all. Am I too stupid to know what the rules and limitations are and that gives me the edge over MIT students?
Title: Re: MIT vs. Steven Marks TPU.
Post by: giantkiller on November 13, 2008, 09:45:15 PM
Quote from: HeairBear on November 13, 2008, 08:28:21 PM
Wasn't the guy on mythbusters who helped build their so called Bedini motor from MIT? How do you fuck up a Bedini if your an MIT grad? I'm a high school dropout and I did it on my first try! Maybe being stupid and uneducated isn't so bad after all. Am I too stupid to know what the rules and limitations are and that gives me the edge over MIT students?

Absolutely, Sir! The genius knows when not to join the others who jump off the bridge.
Wait! It doesn't take a genius? Then hows come so many are a jumpin? Baa-aaa-aaa...

--giantkiller.
Title: Re: MIT vs. Steven Marks TPU.
Post by: alan on November 14, 2008, 10:54:38 AM
Quote from: BEP on November 13, 2008, 04:53:31 PM
I avoid magic words as they draw flies like dung. Pseudoscience is only that which has not been explained properly. I look for explanations that make sense.

Ether? Can you show me anything or anyplace that has absolutely no charge and no mass? Don't bother with descriptions of atomic particles or the supposed space between them. The jury is still out on those.

The vacuum of space is also up for grabs right now according to reports from NASA and the French.
So is there anything else that may qualify as absolute nothingness?
And what is zero potential? Zero in relation to what?

Have I seen the effects? You could say that. I can say my neighbors have seen the effects. Since then they found out what caused the damaged so I avoid high power  :)
I know 1 place which sometimes is void of all charge, but I need a neuroscientist or brainsurgeon to be sure.  ;)

"The vacuum of space is also up for grabs right now according to reports from NASA and the French."
Got any reading material of those? Don't know exactly what to google for.
Title: Re: MIT vs. Steven Marks TPU.
Post by: alan on November 14, 2008, 10:57:57 AM
Quote from: HeairBear on November 13, 2008, 08:28:21 PM
Wasn't the guy on mythbusters who helped build their so called Bedini motor from MIT? How do you fuck up a Bedini if your an MIT grad? I'm a high school dropout and I did it on my first try! Maybe being stupid and uneducated isn't so bad after all. Am I too stupid to know what the rules and limitations are and that gives me the edge over MIT students?
If the stationary coils were High-voltage coils and they had put magnets on the wheel, then it would resemble the Peripeteia more that the Bedini motor.
Title: Re: MIT vs. Steven Marks TPU.
Post by: innovation_station on November 14, 2008, 11:17:27 AM
Quote from: alan on November 14, 2008, 10:57:57 AM
If the stationary coils were High-voltage coils and they had put magnets on the wheel, then it would resemble the Peripeteia more that the Bedini motor.

i dont know about that .....


thane is only converting the hemf to magnetic and redirrecting the free magnetics to the rotor of the inducton motor thus causeing acceleration ......  insted of slowing shit down as we currently do!!!

bedini gets it electric you  do with it what you wish....  if you want acceleration ....  do it ...  if you it to self run do it...  if you want a battery charger do it .... 

im sure you get the idea...

ist
Title: Re: MIT vs. Steven Marks TPU.
Post by: alan on November 14, 2008, 11:55:44 AM
Quote from: innovation_station on November 14, 2008, 11:17:27 AM
i dont know about that .....


thane is only converting the hemf to magnetic and redirrecting the free magnetics to the rotor of the inducton motor thus causeing acceleration ......  insted of slowing shit down as we currently do!!!

bedini gets it electric you  do with it what you wish....  if you want acceleration ....  do it ...  if you it to self run do it...  if you want a battery charger do it .... 

im sure you get the idea...

ist
And, afaik, the redirection occurs by converting the emf in the coil to capacitance (not magnetic field).
At TDC the capacitance is discharged to current, and the induced opposing magnetic field is released at TDC, so repelling the magnets at TDC instead of before.
Or.. the released magnetic field only cancels out the attracting induced mag. field after TDC.
(but I'm going too offtopic now)
Title: Re: MIT vs. Steven Marks TPU.
Post by: innovation_station on November 14, 2008, 12:45:05 PM
the colapse of the induced magnetic feild in the SHORTED OUT WIND of the bifillar coil causes the acceleration because the re or hemf is converted to electric and back to magnetics but in the coil thus the fe is used ...

agin i dont think any of my explanations are compleatly finished....  or correct as of yet...


ist
Title: Re: MIT vs. Steven Marks TPU.
Post by: alan on November 14, 2008, 01:20:17 PM
I think you're correct, except for the bifilar. He doesn't use that..
Actually, FE isn't demonstrated yet in his motor, only acceleration  with input decrease, guess it is compensated with a decrease in torque, which is not tested.