From a thread I posted elsewhere (http://www.overunity.com/index.php?topic=4299.msg199128#msg199128) (http://www.overunity.com/index.php?topic=4299.msg199128#msg199128):
Quote from: kmarinas86 on August 29, 2009, 10:56:46 AM
It is clear from the operation of capacitors that a displacement current creates a magnetic field with the same polarity as current going the same direction.
When displacement current forms, a curl of the B-field is generated to which the magnetic moments of copper (a diamagnetic material) attempts to cancels out. Because such a B-field can be made of such a magnitude to domineer over the magnetic dipole moments among neighboring copper atoms, the subatomic particles of those copper atoms will attempt to align their magnetic moment dipole axes in helical configurations in contrast to their typical random configurations. The change of configuration actually consumes potential energy by the formation of "paratoroidic (magnetic) moments" of copper (an as-yet-unconfirmed paramagnetic analogue of the experimentally validated "ferrotordic (magnetic) moment").
See timeline on verification of ferrotorodicity: http://www.google.com/search?hl=en&client=firefox-a&rls=org.mozilla%3Aen-US%3Aofficial&hs=Hek&tbo=1&tbs=tl%3A1&q=ferrotoroidicity&aq=f&oq=&aqi=
By keeping the impedance of the back-spike larger (i.e. voltage higher and its current lower) than in the initial pulse, copper's reaction to the voltage back-spike can provide the same polarity of magnetic field as current going forwards. The back-voltage does dissipate after a while, and you are right when you say that, "This oscillation seems related to the length of the conductor and maybe other factors like self-inductance, self capacitance, insulation, wire diameter, etc."
So where does the energy come from to restore the potential energy lost via alignment of the paratoroidic (magnetic) moments? Certain frequencies of electromagnetic radiation get absorbed by the (PARAtoroidic) arrangements of magnetic moments in the copper atoms, in effect, restoring their potential energy. When some of the moments fall out of alignment, others will follow suit.
I do not see this a violation of any laws of thermodynamics. The 2nd law in particular says nothing about any "impossibility" of zones of decreasing entropy, nor is it disproven by the existence of self-organizing structures. Don't get me started on the 1st law, that is simply fact because we can always define a potential energy in reference to new energies discovered. And the 3rd law is about absolute zero....
The generation of frost in some failed operations of the Steven Mark TPU device can be explained by generation of excess magnetic fields. If you remember the fact that temperature is dependent on motion, it is clear that atoms locked in position as a result of mutual magnetic inductance have a lower temperature; this is obviously not the same as keeping a macroscopic object still! At some point, this temperature change can spur surrounding photons to make up the difference, restoring the atoms into their natural, random configuration.
Wish I could understand and do something with it , kinda like the Bruce_TPU posts ...
Got any designs , schematics ?
http://www.disclose.tv/viewvideo/29990/Dr__Steven_Greer_The_Promise_of_New_Energy/
Quote from: dankie on September 16, 2009, 06:08:56 PM
Wish I could understand and do something with it , kinda like the Bruce_TPU posts ...
Got any designs , schematics ?
The simplest case is the following:
+ _____________wire_____________mechanical switch_____________ -
Instructions:
When the switch is open, the voltage of the back-spike should be maximized while the current of the back-spike minimized. This means:
* The current should not have enough time during the pulse of the back-spike to respond fully to the voltage.
* The L/R constant of the wire should be high enough relative to the time of the pulse of the back-spike. That is what keeps the current low.
The anomalous output will be in the form of magnetic potential energy. The means of this are as follows:
* The back-spike produces an emf opposing the voltage source.
* The displacement current produced by this emf produces a B-field of opposite rotation around the wire as compared to current traveling from + to -.
* COPPER IS DIAMAGNETIC: It will act against the B-field of the back spike and produce its own B-field of opposite polarity. Copper, as any other diamagnetic material, has magnetic dipole moments among its subatomic particles. It is the alignment of these, to some noticeable degree, which uses potential energy.
* ENOUGH COPPER IS NEEDED: It is necessary to surpass the potential energy in the B-field of the backspike.
* COPPER WILL USE ITS POTENTIAL ENERGY AND OBTAIN A NEW EQUILIBRIUM: The only way out of this equilibrium is to absorb energy, just as energy is needed to separate two magnets.
* COPPER WILL ABSORB ENERGY FROM PHOTONS TO ESTABLISH THE ORIGINAL POTENTIAL: Just as what occurs when one removes neodymium magnet over an aluminum plate, the alignment of the copper atoms is lost WHEN there is a decline of the B-field within the material. The removal of the magnet from the aluminum plate does not demagnetize the aluminum plate, but rather it is the heat that absorbed by the material that dis-aligns the magnetic moments in aluminum plate, which in turn demagnetizes it.
* MUTUAL INDUCTANCE IS NECESSARY TO EXTEND THE LIFE OF THE MAGNETIC FIELD: It increases the amount of energy in photons necessary to dis-align the atoms in the copper wire.
* COPPER WILL BE COLDER AS IT USES THIS POTENTIAL ENERGY: As long as magnetic dipole moments of the subatomic particles of copper are locked in the formations which produce the circular magnetic field, they will have lower temperature.
In the TPU device, the control coils are what utilize this form of energy. The magnetic field generated by the control coils is parallel to the collector coils. The electrons absorb this energy in the process and will tend to move in spirals in the wire. Thus, magnetic potential energy is stored between the spiraling electrons in the wire and this allows sound-like waves of potential energy to transfer between electrons in ways not corresponding directly to their speed down the wire.
"Cold current" may be caused by novel magnetic subatomic interaction
by Kmarinas86
It's very interesting and quite possible I think, but to let others understand you need to describe it in steps , each one on separate picture.
Later you can explain resonance in quite similar way because it is proven that odd harmonics take energy from stationary magnetic field, in our case from Earth magnetosphere.
Quote from: forest on September 24, 2009, 05:42:16 AM
It's very interesting and quite possible I think, but to let others understand you need to describe it in steps , each one on separate picture.
Later you can explain resonance in quite similar way because it is proven that odd harmonics take energy from stationary magnetic field, in our case from Earth magnetosphere.
yes
could you explain with more detail
Quote from: forest on September 24, 2009, 05:42:16 AM
It's very interesting and quite possible I think, but to let others understand you need to describe it in steps , each one on separate picture.
Picture and Microsoft Word File Attached.
Copper Potential Energy Quantum.doc
Copper Potential Energy Quantum.png
Quote from: forest on September 24, 2009, 05:42:16 AMLater you can explain resonance in quite similar way because it is proven that odd harmonics take energy from stationary magnetic field, in our case from Earth magnetosphere.
I think the reason why odd harmonics are special in these alleged OU devices is not because they are harmonicsî ºit is because when they are put together they form electrical signals that produce more reactive power. Superimposing sine waves in this case are only a means to that end, that is, to generate waves where voltage can lead the current, and vise-versa. In the system I described, which claims that there is alignment of subatomic magnetic moments, voltage must be set up to lead the current to an extraordinary degree. This can be done by using a spark gap or some other method such as the implementation of odd harmonics.
I believe that the Steven Mark TPU device causes electrons in the collector coils to heat up accelerating them into two opposite directions, according to the orientation of each electron's magnetic dipole moment with respect to the magnetic field polarity of the control coils. This creates a pressure disturbance that is more along the length of the collector coil than in any other direction. However, because of the firing of control coil segments in quadrature fashion, some of these electrons will be pulled in the direction of the firing sequence, while the electrons being pushed the opposite direction will be accelerated for a brief period and will thus have a lower duty cycle. This will in fact create a net directional movement of electrons.
According to my hypotheses, the air at some further distance from the TPU will be colder, but closer to the TPU device it will be noticeably hot. Thus, the phenomenon of cold current/cold electricity/radiant energy used by the device is obscured as a result of the formation of "a queue of heat convection". This "queue of heat convection" is the plague of these devices, which even Steven Mark couldn't solve. The "queue of heat convection" is the heat emitted by the TPU device which was previously absorbed by the control coils of the device through the process of cold current/cold electricity/radiant energy, which is then remitted by the heat losses in the collector coils and can be redelivered to the control coils via air convection currents. However, removing the air convection currents does not save the Steven Mark TPU from meltdown because the electrons going in opposite direction to the firing sequence may still contribute to the heat inside the coil, power which does nothing to help increase total power output. Given the way the Steven Mark TPU is built, heat generated in the collector coils can conduct back into the control coils, disrupting the control coil firings' ability to maintain the phenomenon of cold current/cold electricity/radiant energy, which must be remedied by a control circuit. However, the heat remains built up, and it is eventually too much to bear for the control coils. The TPU device will never get off the ground as long as these "queues of heat convection" build up too much under load. Thermal insulation between the control coils and collectors coils will be needed to some extent to prevent this from occurring. Refrigeration is also an option to consider, but that is probably more expensive and inefficient.
I do not believe the performance of the Steven Mark device is dependent directly on the magnetic field of the earth. There may be correlations between the magnetic field of the earth and the temperature in the laboratory, since they are both affected by what is going on in the sun.
Water is a great converter of infrared energy into thermal energy. Cold current is cold because it feels cold. The human being radiates energy in the infrared spectrum. This conversion of potential energy stored in the water of our bodies is sensed by the brain and we feel cold. Around high potential electric fields cold current insues. A condition exists whereby there is increased radiation of infrared photons towards the high potential electric field. This is not free energy it is conversion of thermal energy into electrical energy. I believe that a high potential field causes ionization of any neutral atoms present in the field. The energy required to ionize the neutral atoms needs to be input. A high potential pulse acts as a catalyst in the endothermic reaction. Once ionized the plasma formed displays a negatively charged face. By this I mean free electrons sheath the positive ions. The space where there was once randomized molecular vibrations and boatloads of thermal photons emitted and reabsorbed by the electrons of the matter contained within that space is now ordered. There is little or no radiation of any type from this cold space. Thermal photons caught in the matter now convert to plasma currents or kinetic energy of the electron sheath of the plasma. A stable plasma configuration can exist and we cant see it because there is no radiation from it. I think some people call them a black hole. Light doesnt escape because it is converted into the mhd currents within the plasma mattter. The electrons absorb photons but are accelerated. There is no synchrotron or thermal radiation because there is no deacceleration of the currents. Just acceleration. Enough acceleration and density and the plasma can begin to pinch the positively charged cores so that they fuse. The conversion of mass to energy results in excess thermal energy in the core of the plasma. This is absorbed by the sheaths to some extent but begins to create chaos in the sheath currents. Currents begin to deaccelerate collisions transfer of momentum and the plasma begins to glow. The big ones even explode now and again and a whole new galaxy perhaps an inflating universe is formed.
The directions of the magnetic fields in the above diagrams are depicted backwards. In the attached image is a comprehensive array of rules that apply to both "conventional current" (consisting of + charges) and "electron current" (consisting of - charges).
There are two ideas in the previous post that will lead to confusion.
1. There is only a right hand rule, there is no left hand rule. It doesn't matter if it's conventional current or electron current, you still point your thumb in the direction of the conventional current to see the direction for the magnetic field lines.
2. The fingers don't represent the "circular orientation of the north pole." That's a concept that doesn't make sense, there is no orientation for a north pole or a south pole when you look at the magnetic field around a wire. The magnetic field around a wire is the classic example illustrating how there is no true north pole or south pole. There are just magnetic field lines that have a direction and travel in closed loops.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fleming's_left-hand_rule_for_motors (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fleming's_left-hand_rule_for_motors)
http://worldwide.espacenet.com/publicationDetails/biblio?DB=EPODOC&II=28&ND=3&adjacent=true&locale=en_EP&FT=D&date=19920507&CC=DE&NR=4035445A1&KC=A1 (http://worldwide.espacenet.com/publicationDetails/biblio?DB=EPODOC&II=28&ND=3&adjacent=true&locale=en_EP&FT=D&date=19920507&CC=DE&NR=4035445A1&KC=A1)
Sincerely
CdL
It makes sence that there would be a left hand and right hand ruel,as although one wire may be of a positive potential,its a mater of wether you are drawing from it,or sending power to it-so although positive,the current would be flowing in a different direction,depending on circumstance.
And as the above link show's-the motor and generator.
CdL:
Yes, you can always find a string of text if you do a search that makes it sound like you are making a point. Do you see anything in the graphic in reply #10 about motors and generators? The answer is you don't.
The discussion is about the magnetic field in a wire, and in that context there is only a right hand rule.
MileHigh
Thanks a lot for the link about the #1,3,7,8,10 context !
I thought that the Fleming -Left-hand-rule would be a geral rule,
valid for wire,circuit,transformer :
http://www.google.de/search?q=left+hand+rule+in+a+wire&sa=X&tbm=isch&tbo=u&source=univ&ei=eeApUruGCYmf7AaE1IDADQ&ved=0CDcQsAQ&biw=800&bih=418 (http://www.google.de/search?q=left+hand+rule+in+a+wire&sa=X&tbm=isch&tbo=u&source=univ&ei=eeApUruGCYmf7AaE1IDADQ&ved=0CDcQsAQ&biw=800&bih=418)
http://www.greenwood.wa.edu.au/resources/Physics%203B%20WestOne/content/004_em_fields_force/images/pic046.gif (http://www.greenwood.wa.edu.au/resources/Physics%203B%20WestOne/content/004_em_fields_force/images/pic046.gif)
http://www.magnet.fsu.edu/education/tutorials/java/handrules/ (http://www.magnet.fsu.edu/education/tutorials/java/handrules/)
What do you think is wrong with this rule ?http://www4.ncsu.edu/~rwchabay/emimovies/ (http://www4.ncsu.edu/~rwchabay/emimovies/)
Sincerely
CdL
I believe spin has a lot to do with this.
Current-induced spin polarization ....
http://arxiv.org/abs/0802.0366v3
I would think that the temperature of a conductor carrying a current would be determined by the ratio of unbound electrons to bound electrons. Your coldest currents would occur in a confined electron gas. Even then this gas will become heated as electrons changing velocity will produce synchrotron radiation, which will irradiate the gas, and increase the random motion of the electrons within the gas.
seme interested video by I.Moroz is here....and can confirm some working model by the order: www.altechlaboratory.com
video: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=r4cbrjGJAOQ&list=UUVesA155Der2tRd5vpyYdJw
Quote from: MileHigh on September 06, 2013, 01:51:16 AM
There are two ideas in the previous post that will lead to confusion.
1. There is only a right hand rule, there is no left hand rule. It doesn't matter if it's conventional current or electron current, you still point your thumb in the direction of the conventional current to see the direction for the magnetic field lines.
Of course, convention says point your thumb in the direction of conventional current. The point is that you can think of electron current this way, but doing so requires you to use the left hand. I like to think of the
actual particle which moves in the wire (the negatively charged electron current), so I like using a "left-hand rule" for this.
Quote from: MileHigh on September 06, 2013, 01:51:16 AM2. The fingers don't represent the "circular orientation of the north pole." That's a concept that doesn't make sense, there is no orientation for a north pole or a south pole when you look at the magnetic field around a wire. The magnetic field around a wire is the classic example illustrating how there is no true north pole or south pole. There are just magnetic field lines that have a direction and travel in closed loops.
Yes, there is
no literal "north" or "south" position of the magnetic field around the wire, but there is
a "north" or "south" direction of the magnetic field around the wire, which can be verified by a compass. You can assume that a pole refers to a position on a magnet, or you can assume pole refers to direction. Since the arrowhead is placed at the north end of a magnet, the arrowhead of a vector indicates the "direction of the magnetic field", which inside the magnet runs from the south to the north pole, and outside the magnet it runs from just outside the north pole to just outside the south pole. We can assume the local arrowheads are "inside virtual point magnets" distributed throughout space. The orientation of the "north pole" therefore means orientation of these "virtual point magnets" that make up the vector field representation of the magnetic field.
QuoteBy keeping the impedance of the back-spike larger (i.e. voltage higher and its current lower) than in the initial pulse, copper's reaction to the voltage back-spike can provide the same polarity of magnetic field as current going forwards. ... So where does the energy come from to restore the potential energy lost via alignment of the paratoroidic (magnetic) moments? Certain frequencies of electromagnetic radiation get absorbed by the (PARAtoroidic) arrangements of magnetic moments in the copper atoms, in effect, restoring their potential energy. When some of the moments fall out of alignment, others will follow suit.
@Kmarinas86
Would this "keeping of the impedance of the back-spike larger" be made possible with
- a secondary consisting of a series-wound bifilar coil, where mutually cancelling magnetic fields would be accompanied by higher voltage
- a shorted coil of high inductance?
Bob
or
QuoteBy keeping the impedance of the back-spike larger (i.e. voltage higher and its current lower) than in the initial pulse, copper's reaction to the voltage back-spike can provide the same polarity of magnetic field as current going forwards. ... So where does the energy come from to restore the potential energy lost via alignment of the paratoroidic (magnetic) moments? Certain frequencies of electromagnetic radiation get absorbed by the (PARAtoroidic) arrangements of magnetic moments in the copper atoms, in effect, restoring their potential energy. When some of the moments fall out of alignment, others will follow suit.
One way to do this would be to send a pulse backwards through a step-down transformer.
Bob
Quote from: Bob Smith on July 29, 2014, 11:41:02 AM
@Kmarinas86
Would this "keeping of the impedance of the back-spike larger" be made possible with
- a secondary consisting of a series-wound bifilar coil, where mutually cancelling magnetic fields would be accompanied by higher voltage
- a shorted coil of high inductance?
Bob
or
Both.
Example:
Current flowing in opposite directions through bifilar windings creates a cancelling magnetic field outside the winding, but between the windings, which consist of very narrow spaces, the magnetic fields will actually add, not subtract.
The opposite is true when you pass current in through bifilar windings in the same direction. The field adds outside the windings, but between them they subtract.
So imagine if you had two pairs of bifilar, for a total of four conductors. Let's say you hook three of the conductors in series with each other in a closed loop. Then you have one remaining conductor, and you feed power to it.
Let's say you open the switch. When that field collapses, it induces an EMF into the three conductors in series, and it tries to replicate the magnetic flux that is being lost by the fourth conductor. It will try to generate the same amp turns as before. Then lets say you feed that current backwards into the fourth conductor. The current in the fourth conductor will now be traveling in the opposite direction that it was earlier.
Note that two windings (conductors) will add to each other's external field, while the other two windings (conductors) will cancel each others external field. The converse is true for their internal fields. The result is that we now have a magnetic field both between and outside the windings, whereas before it was only outside.
Now let's say you disconnect the three conductors from the fourth and you maintain both as closed loops. Now hook up the battery to the fourth winding again as before and repeat the process. Every time you open the circuit (pulse DC), you discharge this magnetic flux to the other windings, you can feed back some of that power to the batteries.
Note that the fourth conductor will have one-third the resistance of the first three conductors in series, but it will have less than one third the inductance (in fact, about one-ninth of it). As this means that it's L/R constant is (1/9)/(1/3) = 1/3 as much, it takes 1/3rd the time for the current in the fourth winding to reach its maximum current. As the maximum current in the fourth winding is 3 times more for the same voltage than with the three conductors in question, its current rises 9 times faster, with 1/3 as many turns. So it generates amp-turns 3 times faster.
Again, once you break the circuit, it doesn't take long for these amp turns to discharge into the three series windings. The current in the three series windings is not drawn from the battery, and yet it is still capable of doing work just as it would if it were drawn from the battery.
Now here is the very interesting part. Let's say you have a motor and you want to reverse this field every half rotation in order to power a large bar magnet during both halves of a rotation. This time you do something different. You now want to feed back all the magnetic flux that you induced into the three windings into fourth conductor and then cut off all current flow in those three conductors. You can hook up a capacitor across the three conductors to insure that most of the magnetic flux gets there. At this point immense current should be flowing through the fourth winding if you close it quickly enough after briefly hooking it to the first three windings. Then you want to hook up the battery to this already existing current. The difference is this time you have much more initial current at the beginning in the second half-cycle than you had in the previous. Each time you do repeat this process, you will be able to increase the initial current of each half-cycle to a magnitude greater, and greater. Before you know it you are switching currents at slew rates (A/s) greater that what the inductive time constant L/R predicts is possible. This corresponds to greater reactive power that what should theoretically happen.
Inductive reactive power feeds stored energy in the magnetic field. That energy does work on a magnet which then rotates to induce back-emf. However, consider the back-emf that is induced the three windings does not act against the battery, as it is simply a closed circuit of three wires in series which stores some magnetic with every pulse of the fourth conductor. So you have a magnetic field than when acted against does not limit the power delivered by the batteries (except for the emf it induces in the fourth winding). When you hook up these three wires in series with the fourth conductor, hooking it up backwards, the back-emf that you induced adds power to the fourth winding in the same direction that the battery does during that half-cycle. You want to discharge energy in these three windings into the fourth winding several times per half cycle. You want to completely do so at the end of each cycle, but in the reverse direction, to start the next half cycle, beginning with from the int( I' dt ) achieved from the previous cycle, instead of starting from I=0 again like you would if you simply used ordinary brush switching.
You want to be sure that you energize the fourth conductor enough prior to the moment where the magnet induces back-emf the greatest, to ensure that more amp turns get generated in the fourth conductor first before enough emf is induced in the three conductor winding group to exceed this. So when you open the circuit between pulses in a given half-cycle, the back-emf of the collapsing field of the fourth winding, which first generated the current in the three series windings opposes (negates to some degree) the back-emf of the rotating magnet which responds to the magnetic field. If you switch off the fourth conductor, you force this current to "teleport" to the three series conductors (due to the tendency to preserve magnetic fields / magnetic flux / amp turns) despite the back-emf of the collapsing coil and the rotating magnet being opposites (rivals) of each other. So current is maintained better during switching, while at the same time we are able to reverse it quicker than normal. If you imagine flow of power as a vector, you could say that instead of alternating the magnitude and direction of a current sinusodially over the cycles, we are only alternating the direction, while the magnitude builds up with each cycle.
Most importantly, much of the reversal of the current is done via magnetic induction into the other conductor and back in the opposite direction instead of directly reversing the applied electric field to the same conductor as typical of AC power. So it is a very different process! Therefore, in a sense the inductive reactance increases because of greater resistance to changes in the current (the magnitude component), as when if you increase current at a constant rate, the stored energy goes by the square of time, and thus if you induce (the catalytic input) power at a constant rate, then instead, the current should increase with the square root of time (or number of half-cycles / half-rotations passed).
Of course, one would have to generalize inductive reactance for arbitrary waveforms due to imperfection of the "sinusoid" due to pulsing, geometry, current reversals, etc..
Kmarinas86,
Thanks for the detailed response. If I understand correctly, you have a closed loop series-wound trifilar coil alongside a shorted single strand coil.
You DC pulse the shorted single coil, inducing bemf into the trifi, and send the mag flux from the trifi back to the single stranded coil.
If you do this pulsing in rapid succession, say with a jfet, are you not going to get a flux buildup in the single coil resulting in a standing wave?
QuoteLet's say you have a motor and you want to reverse this field every half rotation in order to power a large bar magnet during both halves of a rotation. This time you do something different. You now want to feed back all the magnetic flux that you induced into the three windings into fourth conductor and then cut off all current flow in those three conductors. YouYou can hook up a capacitor across the three conductors to insure that most of the magnetic flux gets there. At this point immense current should be flowing through the fourth winding if you close it quickly enough after briefly hooking it to the first three windings.
Okay, you've placed a cap in parallel with the trifilar coil. But now it seems you've changed the coil arrangement. In the first instance, the shorted single stranded coil and the closed loop trifi were separate and "communicating" by induction. Now you're allowing the single coil to briefly make contact with the trifi to capture the trifi's bemf? Or are we still operating on induction?
QuoteThen you want to hook up the battery to this already existing current. The difference is this time you have much more initial current at the beginning in the second half-cycle than you had in the previous. Each time you do repeat this process, you will be able to increase the initial current of each half-cycle to a magnitude greater, and greater. Before you know it you are switching currents at slew rates (A/s) greater that what the inductive time constant L/R predicts is possible. This corresponds to greater reactive power that what should theoretically happen.
I understand this. How do you prevent too much power from getting back to the battery? Would you use a zener diode?
QuoteInductive reactive power feeds stored energy in the magnetic field. That energy does work on a magnet which then rotates to induce back-emf. However, consider the back-emf that is induced the three windings does not act against the battery, as it is simply a closed circuit of three wires in series which stores some magnetic with every pulse of the fourth conductor. So you have a magnetic field than when acted against does not limit the power delivered by the batteries (except for the emf it induces in the fourth winding). When you hook up these three wires in series with the fourth conductor, hooking it up backwards, the back-emf that you induced adds power to the fourth winding in the same direction that the battery does during that half-cycle. You want to discharge energy in these three windings into the fourth winding several times per half cycle. You want to completely do so at the end of each cycle, but in the reverse direction, to start the next half cycle, beginning with from the int( I' dt ) achieved from the previous cycle, instead of starting from I=0 again like you would if you simply used ordinary brush switching.
You want to be sure that you energize the fourth conductor enough prior to the moment where the magnet induces back-emf the greatest, to ensure that more amp turns get generated in the fourth conductor first before enough emf is induced in the three conductor winding group to exceed this. So when you open the circuit between pulses in a given half-cycle, the back-emf of the collapsing field of the fourth winding, which first generated the current in the three series windings opposes (negates to some degree) the back-emf of the rotating magnet which responds to the magnetic field. If you switch off the fourth conductor, you force this current to "teleport" to the three series conductors (due to the tendency to preserve magnetic fields / magnetic flux / amp turns) despite the back-emf of the collapsing coil and the rotating magnet being opposites (rivals) of each other. So current is maintained better during switching, while at the same time we are able to reverse it quicker than normal. If you imagine flow of power as a vector, you could say that instead of alternating the magnitude and direction of a current sinusodially over the cycles, we are only alternating the direction, while the magnitude builds up with each cycle. Most importantly, much of the reversal of the current is done via magnetic induction into the other conductor and back in the opposite direction instead of directly reversing the applied electric field to the same conductor as typical of AC power. So it is a very different process! Therefore, in a sense the inductive reactance increases because of greater resistance to changes in the current (the magnitude component), as when if you increase current at a constant rate, the stored energy goes by the square of time, and thus if you induce (the catalytic input) power at a constant rate, then instead, the current should increase with the square root of time (or number of half-cycles / half-rotations passed).
Now here's where I'm not completely clear. You are hypothetically using this coil config to power a motor with reactive power buildup in the single stranded coil?
I've seen a lot of toroids in computer power supplies that have three or four sets of windings. You'd think that you could hook three windings up in series as closed loop (with your parallel cap), and keep the fourth free as a shorted single-strand. You'd also have the toroid to store some of your flux.
Am I understanding you correctly? It's a very interesting proposition, and seems logical.
Bob
Kmarinas86,
What if you were to put your shorted primary on the armature of a motor (as the primary winding). Would you be able to wind a series-wound bifilar secondary over top of it to pick up the cemf? And if so, would you be able to harness its voltage?
Bob
http://www.teslauniverse.com/nikola-tesla-patents-555,190-alternating-motor
Maybe that will help answer your question Bob.
Meow
Quote from: Bob Smith on August 01, 2014, 09:11:24 AM
Kmarinas86,
What if you were to put your shorted primary on the armature of a motor (as the primary winding). Would you be able to wind a series-wound bifilar secondary over top of it to pick up the cemf? And if so, would you be able to harness its voltage?
Bob
Quote from: Bob Smith on July 30, 2014, 10:00:28 AM
Kmarinas86,
Thanks for the detailed response. If I understand correctly, you have a closed loop series-wound trifilar coil alongside a shorted single strand coil.
You DC pulse the shorted single coil, inducing bemf into the trifi, and send the mag flux from the trifi back to the single stranded coil.
Yes.
Quote from: Bob Smith on July 30, 2014, 10:00:28 AMIf you do this pulsing in rapid succession, say with a jfet, are you not going to get a flux buildup in the single coil resulting in a standing wave? Okay, you've placed a cap in parallel with the trifilar coil. But now it seems you've changed the coil arrangement. In the first instance, the shorted single stranded coil and the closed loop trifi were separate and "communicating" by induction. Now you're allowing the single coil to briefly make contact with the trifi to capture the trifi's bemf? Or are we still operating on induction?
There is intermittent contact.
Quote from: Bob Smith on July 30, 2014, 10:00:28 AMI understand this. How do you prevent too much power from getting back to the battery? Would you use a zener diode?
Yes, just one of many options.
Quote from: Bob Smith on July 30, 2014, 10:00:28 AMNow here's where I'm not completely clear. You are hypothetically using this coil config to power a motor with reactive power buildup in the single stranded coil?
In this configuration, that's the idea.
However, one configuration I think is better is where you reverse the roles of the series-wound coil and the single-stranded coil from the aforementioned example. Essentially, in this other configuration, you pulse energy into the series-wound coil, which consists of a greater number of turns. You discharge the energy by induction into the single-stranded coil with a capacitor across the series-wound coil. This way the magnetic fields / magnetic flux / amp turns "teleports" to single-stranded coil. Now this time, do not discharge the single-stranded coil across the series-wound coil
until the end of each half cycle.
At the end of each half cycle, hook the coils in opposite directions, so that the current from the single-stranded coil is fed into to series-wound coil. Since the current into the series-wound coil runs the other direction and has more turns than the single-stranded coil, this should force the magnetic field to undergo an "inversion" (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=R_w4HYXuo9M (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=R_w4HYXuo9M)). The magnet field which was located outside the inter-winding spaces move to the inter-winding spaces, and subsequently it moves out of that space again, but facing the other direction.
The nice thing about this is that it happens fast, as the mutual inductance between the two windings is negative in that brief moment of contact, with the total inductance reduced, meaning that for the same voltage, the current changes are quicker. Also, instead of the current having to stop and reverse, it is simply being redirected, so the amplitude of the current from the previous cycle carries over to the next, and from the frame of reference of the moving charges, the amplitude function looks more like a staircase than a sinusoid. The combined higher switching frequency and head-start of the current should result in higher field frequency and amplitude in the frame of reference of the lab than what would be expected of the input power.
As before, you would have capacitors hooked up across each coil during the switching process to reduce "external" arcing, conserving energy.
Quote from: Bob Smith on July 30, 2014, 10:00:28 AMI've seen a lot of toroids in computer power supplies that have three or four sets of windings. You'd think that you could hook three windings up in series as closed loop (with your parallel cap), and keep the fourth free as a shorted single-strand. You'd also have the toroid to store some of your flux.
Am I understanding you correctly?
Yes.
Quote from: Bob Smith on July 30, 2014, 10:00:28 AMIt's a very interesting proposition, and seems logical.
Bob
Thanks for the detailed response to my queries, K.
I've been away all day and not had time to think on this. I've read it twice, but need to reflect. Sounds like you have a specific setup in mind, perhaps with windings that are out of phase with one another and switichable to get the effects you desire. Will have to read more and reflect on what you're saying.
Bob
Quote from: kmarinas86 on September 16, 2009, 03:30:38 PM
From a thread I posted elsewhere (http://www.overunity.com/4299/steven-markas-associate-jack-durban-comes-forward-with-more-info/msg199128/#msg199128) (http://www.overunity.com/4299/steven-markas-associate-jack-durban-comes-forward-with-more-info/msg199128/#msg199128):
yes tesla made a giant vacume cleaner. its called the ion generator by sharper image. it is his invention. pump up the voltages, and the room will get cold..