Ok fellas, Are you ready for the girls?
tesla if thee master of all men. His patents are interwoven to enlighten one another.
This pat tells us how to
1 Create a simple "source of high tension" with simple switching
2 Shows how to charge a cap with it by simple switching
3 And the cap being pulsed to the primary coil by again, a simple switch gives us the abrupt discharge ("sudden rush") to the primary coil.
And all at 12v in. , no spark gap, no spark quenching, no huge generator for source of high tension.
Now that answers Sooo many questions about a lot of things and presents us with a valuable use of low voltage input source to run directly to the goods.
that is a LOT just from 1 patent concerning all this stuff.
Gimme a Holla Delboy, holla holla holla holla holla, holla holla holla Dave Chapelle skit =]
Now for the final step, the amplifier
Will be back in a bit , Im looking for that now. and i think I know where it is..
Delboy, You Rock!
Magluvin Can you smell what the rock is cookin? i feel like a genius, but its just plagiarism. lol But I would fight all that deny these facts till the death here in thread. Copy it and store it all safe. this was a treasure of multitude dudes, multitude, magnitude, Magadude. =] Im excited!
Tesla Patent no. 609250
Electrical igniter for gas engines
I Magluvin here state that this patent By Nikola Tesla is a major keystone to understanding. It is the key to the door.
So now All i have to find is the knob! lol we are so close I can smell it! ;]
Magluvin
oh boy ;D
This has a big similarity to the ozone pat isn't it? ;D
BUT there is an ignition in the spark plug :-\
tsk! :-\ tsk! :-\ tsk! :-\
Yes, but isnt this way easier to comprehend miniaturizing and eliminating more complicated items?
magluvin
Quote from: Magluvin on March 01, 2010, 01:56:08 AM
Yes, but isnt this way easier to comprehend miniaturizing and eliminating more complicated items?
magluvin
well, your right there ;)
BUT ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D
there is still the best one
actually this is my first discovery, you try to read my first post in this forum.
http://www.overunity.com/index.php?topic=5975.0
they are not listening to me year 2008 ;D
To compliment my last post..
These ways show some things also that I just though of. We dont have to tune anything to a particular freq, if im right about where to look for the last piece of the puzzle. We can dictate that for any application. This also is a welcome piece of simplification. Would you not agree?
This has my mind going at full tilt.
Magluvin
Quote from: Tito L. Oracion on November 27, 2008, 04:10:01 AM
hi mr. stefan
my name is Tito L. Oracion
i discover the secret of sm, "its the igniter patent of nikola tesla"
please try to review it.
Tito, you dirty dog you!! Well then you are the man! You are a 2 year old man!!! lol i am laughing so hard at that last sentence. lololol
All your claims are vindicated. ;] You are and honest man, and proud to know ya. ;]
Well bang bang Teets
Magluvin
Quote from: Magluvin on March 01, 2010, 02:08:51 AM
Tito, you dirty dog you!! Well then you are the man! You are a 2 year old man!!! lol i am laughing so hard at that last sentence. lololol
All your claims are vindicated. ;] You are and honest man, and proud to know ya. ;]
Well bang bang Teets
Magluvin
hahahahahahaha
i told ya! ;D ;D ;D ;D lol
what do you think?
how long i got reach now hahahahaha. you just realized that today hahahahahhahhah lol.
there is still more better solution, i told you.
hey teets
But Its a great start for everyone, would you not say?
I have to look for this 1 item first and if Im correct, Grandma can build this thing with knitting needles and a soldering iron after a trip to radio shack.
let me check this out. be back in a bit. hold on, someones knocking on my door really loud. BAAHH hahahaha lol
Magluvin
Quote from: Magluvin on March 01, 2010, 02:23:59 AM
hey teets
But Its a great start for everyone, would you not say?
I have to look for this 1 item first and if Im correct, Grandma can build this thing with needles and a soldering iron after a trip to radio shack.
let me check this out. be back in a bit. hold on, someones knocking on my door really loud. BAAHH hahahaha lol
Magluvin
Yes! of course its a great start , at least now they will listen ;D
that is how i'm happy also when i discover that thing but i am more very happy last december 9, 2009 3:00am when i discover the ultimate one ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D
2 words for ya Teets, Coaxial Cable
magluvin keep it coming =]
Quote from: Magluvin on March 01, 2010, 02:43:05 AM
2 words for ya Teets, Coaxial Cable
magluvin keep it coming =]
oh! i don't know i'm not knowledgeable with this ::) ;D ;D ;D
bye i sleep now hahahahahhahahah lol ;D ;D ;D ;D
Lol you are a card Teets ;)
Ramset will be happy too
mags
Delboy I see ya there.
thanks for the hook up. ;D well apreciated
mags
Quote from: Magluvin on March 01, 2010, 02:55:43 AM
Lol you are a card Teets ;)
Ramset will be happy too
mags
oh boy delboy is now here, i can see his name, i think i have to escape now.
ramset let me here what i am missed with ya! lol ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D
Quote from: Tito L. Oracion on March 01, 2010, 02:01:16 AM
well, your right there ;)
BUT ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D
there is still the best one
actually this is my first discovery, you try to read my first post in this forum.
http://www.overunity.com/index.php?topic=5975.0
they are not listening to me year 2008 ;D
I read your posts in year 2008 and all I can say is that you missed the point. You used the transformer with core and you forget the input inductivity!
All you could do is to put the secondary of that transformer (220/24) as input inductivity and wound new one air core for output! That's the way it should be.
But again it's not the way to pick up energy from first step of amplification. It should be done in second stage, on one side of secondary should be connected secondary capacity and on the other should be connected receiver by adding one wire connected receiver like on picture.
delboy
I see the mercury(conducting liquid) contactor, electrical controllers, is this the best way to go?
seems unhealthy.
Thanks
Magsluvinit
Hi all;
I love your enthusiasm and all but before getting too carried away on tangents why do we not try to understand what Tito is saying here in the post he referred to first before going to other NT patents:
Quote from: Tito L. Oracion on December 01, 2008, 05:35:51 AM
Sir, please bear with my english, i`m not used to speak for it,
here is what i have done:
just make a little modification ofcourse, i`ve made three parallel coil to the one that become high voltage and put a 3 collector perpendicular to that high voltage and thats it just like a tranformer, it gives unlimited energy and it is very controllable, and by dumping the one collector to the capacitor it becomes self powered, just a matter of on and off relay or reed relay, dont forget to use zener diode at least 3v.
be very carefull, you can accidentally make an uncontrollable voltage that look like a tesla coil.
its fun but very dangerous. :o :o :o
try to make coil combination. there is a little secret here so you just try to discover it ,its very fun but dont forget the danger!!!!!!!!
I love everybody so be carefull anyone.
"if power comes from coil then of course you can power everything just it depends on the design"
do you know that we can also make an efficient electrolysis from this, belive me sir just make a try!!!!!!
Thank you,
Tito L. Oracion (Philippines)
I think he just gave us a big clue on how he discovered how to make it better (as in self runner) but for me it still has some unknowns like the configuration and values of the coils...I'm more of a visual type and can't seem to place the components in my mind....can anyone here transfer his quote into a schematic maybe?
Regards,
Paul
Mr Tito,
I owe you an apology!
please excuse me for not paying attention!
I should have seen it in your honest face.
See-> ;D
How could I have been so "Blind"?
Chet
Ps
and Mags
Quote;
We dont have to tune anything to a particular freq,
-------------------
Most definately a halla-freakin-luyah moment!=.]
[others of late have indicated the same]
some might be easier to work with and make more sense
but its not "the grain of sand at the beach"
Its all in the "technique"[the Romance]
I agree, Teets took a lot of abuse and kept on smiling. ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D
and laughing HAHAHAHAHAHA ;D
And hinting ;) ;) ;) ;) ;) ;) ;)
tito does deserve some respect. He is the man! And delboy, He is the boy!! lol
Mags
Goat, good find. But it is a little vague.
but it all adds to the whole and is now believed to be accurate.
mags
Quote from: delboy on March 01, 2010, 07:39:32 AM
I read your posts in year 2008 and all I can say is that you missed the point. You used the transformer with core and you forget the input inductivity!
All you could do is to put the secondary of that transformer (220/24) as input inductivity and wound new one air core for output! That's the way it should be.
But again it's not the way to pick up energy from first step of amplification. It should be done in second stage, on one side of secondary should be connected secondary capacity and on the other should be connected receiver by adding one wire connected receiver like on picture.
hi delivery boy ;D joke
Everything is possible cause i made it to work as you said it is not the way it should be right?, but you are correct in other way there are a lot of ways actually as long as you make it amplify energy its ok. :)
You almost and willing to answers everything and i salute you for that sir your great. ;)
actually this topic is my first discovery of free energy and it seems that many are contented, then i am happy for them too ok, hope they can scrutinized it safely and fun ;D
My latest discovery in this field just this December is a receiver of any electrical impulse of an unknown origin and that is what i am is amplifying and that is more better actually.
The floor is now yours
goodluck! ;D
God bless ;D
noicaro l. otit (see everything is possible) ;D ;D ;D
Quote from: Magluvin on March 01, 2010, 10:48:28 AM
I agree, Teets took a lot of abuse and kept on smiling. ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D
and laughing HAHAHAHAHAHA ;D
And hinting ;) ;) ;) ;) ;) ;) ;)
tito does deserve some respect. He is the man! And delboy, He is the boy!! lol
Mags
No! :o He is the MAGS ! ;D ;D ;D
Quote from: ramset on March 01, 2010, 10:06:40 AM
Mr Tito,
I owe you an apology!
please excuse me for not paying attention!
I should have seen it in your honest face.
See-> ;D
How could I have been so "Blind"?
Chet
Ps
and Mags
Quote;
We dont have to tune anything to a particular freq,
-------------------
Most definately a halla-freakin-luyah moment!=.]
[others of late have indicated the same]
some might be easier to work with and make more sense
but its not "the grain of sand at the beach"
Its all in the "technique"[the Romance]
ooooh, you make me cry :'(
i love you already oooooh :'(
hahahhahhahahhaahhaahhahahahhahhaha ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D
take care friend ;)
you #@$$%^*^&(&*(*() ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D
Where is forest is tarzan with him? hahahahahhah ;D ;D ;D ;D
hows the jungle? hahahhahahhahaha ;D ;D ;D ;D
Tito
I hope your gonna stick around!
I think we're gonna build stuff, Mags is out buying Duct tape, knitting needles and a few other goodies at "Rat Shack"
It is good to laugh buddy, And remember the offer to wash your car for the refrigerator
power secret still stands!
Chet
hahahahhahahha ;D ;D ;D
ok! within this month i 'll promise and take note of it SERIOUSLY.
I WILL GIVE TO ALL OF YOU FOR THE WORLD ONE OF MY PREVIOUS FREE ENERGY DESIGN OK?
IS THAT OK TO ALL OF YOU?
a combination of battery caps and coil, a very very simple what i always say.
FOR THE BENEFIT OF MANKIND!
AS long as you keep smiling and stick around buddy!
Chet
Hello here,
now i saw this new thread. You told and done it mag! :)
So, it all boils down with BEMF? Pulsing a coil of high inductunce and capturing the kick-back in low inductunce or just the opposite ??? confused ???
What about resonance? How this is connected with kapanadze technology?
@Tito,
The basic http://www.overunity.com/index.php?topic=5975.15 diagram is the proof of concept? I got it well?
one interesting thing i read in the 2008 thread and give me a laughter is the circuit http://books.google.com/books?id=0RmkmrFxHM0C&printsec=frontcover#v=onepage&q=&f=false
Actually i have made it a background picture in one of my folders and it has been suggested by King, extracted from an electrostatic patent. I have build it atcually to see if my Bedini SSG outputs more with that circuit, but no such luck.
By the way this circuit works well.
Quote from: Magluvin on March 01, 2010, 02:43:05 AM
2 words for ya Teets, Coaxial Cable
magluvin keep it coming =]
Why coaxial cable mags? It seems ideal for biffilar settings...
Standard ignition coil just overload the source! Tesla's design does not do that! You must understand this, it is very important.
Look at circuit. Controler have 2 things to do, make and break contact! That is why it should be as close to ideal switch as possible.
On make it discharges condenser to primary and you have HV oscillation in secondary and charges input inductivity (two currents flow) but here is the point „it doesn't have to go to max source current to give HV like in standard ignition coil“.
On break it discharges input inductivity and charges condenser.
Here is example.
When you calculate if we have switch running 100Hz and input inductivity have inductanse L=0,5H and resistance R=5 Ohms than it gives as standard RL circuit connected to battery. For that frequency it gives us Q=62. That means max voltage on capacitor will be 12*62=744 volts if baterry is 12V and resonance is maintained.
If switch is running 100Hz that means period ON is 5ms and also perion OFF is 5ms. For 5ms ON it gives that current will rise
i=(E/R)*(1-exp(-R*t/L)) where t=5ms
when we calculate it gives only 0,117 A
If we speed up controller for say now we have 200Hz swiching that gives more bigger Q=125 , more bigger voltage Uc=1500 and less current from source.
i=(E/R)*(1-exp(-R*t/L)) where t=2,5ms
when we calculate it gives only 0,059A
Now compare that current to todays standard ignition coil. That is why they did not understand what for is input inductivity, and todays design is that source is directly connected to primary (low resistance) and high peak of current flow from source.
Current in input inductivity is not step rising, as soon as controller break it is disharged in capacitor in form of HV, and process starts again.
We only have to choose proper input inductivity and primary capacity so that when controller runs resonance is achieved. That is beauty of Tesla design!
NO OVERLOAD ON SOURCE AND YET YOU HAVE HV/HF.
delboy
Seems like we are talking about two different things
1. A set of contacts points[switch].
2. A spark gap [way to maintain pressure /control other aspects of the circuit]?
Well you are saying a spark gap is a "big" mistake for #2 .
Seems like you have accomplished something special,a lot of what you are saying 'Rings true".
So you are saying the supply doesn't "feel" the one wire "Tap"?
"If the supply doesn't "know" the tap is there,how can it ever be charged for withdrawal?"
Or is it more like the supply becomes so "huge" the withdrawals are a pittance?
You are doing this with 'Time" and "pressure" and Harvest[tap] ?
This is hard to get the brain around , I suppose that is why we don't have it yet?
Although it sounds like you do![and this guy-> ;D ]
Chet
Ps Tito says its easy once you Know how.
This part -> FOR THE BENEFIT OF MANKIND!<-
Is the best part ,and the "Only" reason I'm interested.
Hi all;
I've been looking at Tito's circuit that was mentioned earlier, I'd like to try it but I'm having difficulty in figuring out the values of the components and the way things are drawn and explained in the notes..any feedback would be greatly appreciated....the way it's written is that:
The relay acts as a vibrator switch
For every cut of the secondary coil the collapse produces high voltage
Reverse diode is used to direct the flow back to the battery
Like half wave battery charger
Caps and diodes to protect contacts
Primary of transformer is also used to charge the battery
Resitor...?
Transformer: 220V Secondary, 24V Primary
Questions and Comments:
Notes of drawing on transformer say "Transformer used in reverse"
Is what is pictured in the schematic and labeled as secondary the 24V side of the transformer or the other?
Where is the Reverse diode? If it's missing in the schematic would it go on the wire from the full bridge rectifier back to the battery?
If you had a 12V relay hooked as a vibrator and the contacts became stuck would placing a fuse on the line to the battery be good enough of a safeguard to prevent a short circuit?
What values of the components would be safe to use?
How big of a transformer do you need? One from a Microwave or larger?
Any comments and suggestions welcome.
Thanks
Hi Mags,
I have located and read Pat No. 609250.
Sadly, I am not seeing what is exciting you.
I admit that my understanding is not at all good, and I would appreciate some clue or hint as to the
goodness of this patent.
Kind Regards, Penno
Quote from: Goat on March 03, 2010, 03:30:00 PM
Hi all;
I've been looking at Tito's circuit that was mentioned earlier, I'd like to try it but I'm having difficulty in figuring out the values of the components and the way things are drawn and explained in the notes..any feedback would be greatly appreciated....the way it's written is that:
The relay acts as a vibrator switch
For every cut of the secondary coil the collapse produces high voltage
Reverse diode is used to direct the flow back to the battery
Like half wave battery charger
Caps and diodes to protect contacts
Primary of transformer is also used to charge the battery
Resitor...?
Transformer: 220V Secondary, 24V Primary
Questions and Comments:
Notes of drawing on transformer say "Transformer used in reverse"
Is what is pictured in the schematic and labeled as secondary the 24V side of the transformer or the other?
Where is the Reverse diode? If it's missing in the schematic would it go on the wire from the full bridge rectifier back to the battery?
If you had a 12V relay hooked as a vibrator and the contacts became stuck would placing a fuse on the line to the battery be good enough of a safeguard to prevent a short circuit?
What values of the components would be safe to use?
How big of a transformer do you need? One from a Microwave or larger?
Any comments and suggestions welcome.
Thanks
hi goat goodday ;D
many in youtube are doing it now
just forget my circuit ok?, what i really want to do is just something like this at that time ok: and that is a long time ago:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BJi4tSz8_j0&NR=1
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-wJqMDCsXus&feature=related
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_TjxV3c7pTo&feature=related
very simple and easy to do ok.
just want to add this is interesting!
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LmY3iAKJKXc&feature=related
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4-4cd7LEPfc&feature=related
this one will answer some of your question watch this is good:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=AUdrEhFxOM0
include this for quiet version
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=u82tBke0sp4&NR=1
sorry i'm tooooooo lazy ;D
otits ;D
Teets
Thanks for bringing the "movies"
Chet
Quote from: ramset on March 03, 2010, 10:47:56 PM
Teets
Thanks for bringing the "movies"
Chet
Thats nothing, and i'm not interested with those circuit anymore but they are great ok ;D
really gives free energy thats the important thing there ok? ;D
even though they are a little bit manual and noisy hahahahaha ;D
Hm....
Full loop. We returned to Bedini theories and Imhotep demos...
From my research and making of simple Adam motor with reed, Bedini's SSG and Imhotep relay charger, I have not be able to produce excess energy... No way. Actually losses were always as excpected.
How do they produce free energy? I have not met anyone in this or energetic forum that can claim those circuits can create excess energy. At best they create an electet effect to the batteries, appearing as charging good, after much conditioning, but always circuit stops no matter what.
@Tito,
Are those demonstartions of concept or you believe are sustainable OU devices? Perhaps with lower coil resistance and larger inductunces, as larger transformers and thicker cables, larger currents etc we can obtain better results?
Tito, a serious proof will excude any battery from design. At least at pickup stage. Batteries are a pain and a source of misleading facts.
How is supposed this amplification works? We charge an inductor and? Upon EMF abrupt stop, we harvest considerable EMF as voltage/current spike. In energy terms this is OU?
??? ??? ???
Quote from: baroutologos on March 04, 2010, 02:06:41 AM
Hm....
Full loop. We returned to Bedini theories and Imhotep demos...
From my research and making of simple Adam motor with reed, Bedini's SSG and Imhotep relay charger, I have not be able to produce excess energy... No way. Actually losses were always as excpected.
How is supposed this amplification works? We charge an inductor and? Upon EMF abrupt stop, we harvest considerable EMF as voltage/current spike. In energy terms this is OU?
:s :s
Don't mix Bedini here! Pickup BEMF PARALLEL from inductivity over DIODE to some battery is not the way to do that!
Ask Tesla how to do that! Capacity is parallel to switch and is charged by break of contact, that means on the END OF IMPULSE, not on the beggining like most of them do! When you charge capacity, then discharge it over primary, transfer to loose connected secondary and then mix diode, MOSFET , other capacity and whatever to power receiver or you can once more amplify by geting resonance in secondary and connecting one-wire receiver which will not disturb resonance!
Quote from: baroutologos on March 04, 2010, 02:06:41 AM
Hm....
Full loop. We returned to Bedini theories and Imhotep demos...
From my research and making of simple Adam motor with reed, Bedini's SSG and Imhotep relay charger, I have not be able to produce excess energy... No way. Actually losses were always as excpected.
How do they produce free energy? I have not met anyone in this or energetic forum that can claim those circuits can create excess energy. At best they create an electet effect to the batteries, appearing as charging good, after much conditioning, but always circuit stops no matter what.
@Tito,
Are those demonstartions of concept or you believe are sustainable OU devices? Perhaps with lower coil resistance and larger inductunces, as larger transformers and thicker cables, larger currents etc we can obtain better results?
Tito, a serious proof will excude any battery from design. At least at pickup stage. Batteries are a pain and a source of misleading facts.
How is supposed this amplification works? We charge an inductor and? Upon abrupt stop, we harvest considerable as voltage/current spike. In energy terms this is OU?
??? ??? ???
Hi bar
actually they are talking about the collapsing magnetic field in those demos, and tesla discovered that, there is a slight increase in the collapsing magnetic field, you know this is actually the secret, all you need to know is how will you make the slight increase be more increase, and that were amplification works. 8)
no sir! batteries are good and reliable to use, you must just know how to make the dipole always alive. don't kill the dipole. bearden.
don't worry i'm searching on my old computer, i will give my design of not killing the dipole i promise you that sir!
i actually made an improvement in beardens design of not killing the dipole just be patient ok? ;D
Their designs are really free energy but they are not teaching the slight secret free energy technique. that is the reason why you cannot get free energy but they can. ;D
don' t worry i am now beginning to releasing some of my real and simple free energy designs ok?.
Hello... Teacher!
I am conducting, as we speak, resonance experiments based on Don Smith concepts etc. I am finding out, the hard way, that although Q values etc are good and nice, i cannot achieve considerable resonance if the inductunce is not large enough. At least now.
Also the very Q formula is based upon inductunce. So it all boils down to inductunce used per cycle, as if in every cycle the inductunce adds something to amplification ?..
It has not been long time ago, that i stareted a thread in energetic forum, declaring that we finally need guidance and proposed an e-learning suggestion. Perhaps you, can fulfil this task Tito.
Please, do not let us down :)
...
ps: Using my Kacher, pulsed by a fully adjustable 555timer, i can achieve resonance of the drum coil. By the way, resonance at best is still weak. The indicating bulb, is per Tesla specs, a single loop at the back of the coil, showing how strong resonance is.
Quote from: baroutologos on March 04, 2010, 03:46:43 AM
Hello... Teacher!
I am conducting, as we speak, resonance experiments based on Don Smith concepts etc. I am finding out, the hard way, that although Q values etc are good and nice, i cannot achieve considerable resonance if the inductunce is not large enough. At least now.
Also the very Q formula is based upon inductunce. So it all boils down to inductunce used per cycle, as if in every cycle the inductunce adds something to amplification ?..
It has not been long time ago, that i stareted a thread in energetic forum, declaring that we finally need guidance and proposed an e-learning suggestion. Perhaps you, can fulfil this task Tito.
Please, do not let us down :)
...
ps: Using my Kacher, pulsed by a fully adjustable 555timer, i can achieve resonance of the drum . By the way, resonance at best is still weak. The indicating bulb, is per Tesla specs, a single loop at the back of the , showing how strong resonance is.
Your punishing yourself hahahaha ;D ;D ;D
notice my post, save them they are truths. ;D
i have to escape for a moment bye something is tracing...
bye!!!!!
Can you be more specific tito?
Collapsing extra coils means?
eg You pulse an 10 turn coil and harvest in 5 x 10 turns coil or 1 of 50 turns coil?
@baroutologos,
I don't know if this can help you anything, I hope it will anyway:
Below is an excerpt from "Practical Transformer Handbook"
http://www.scribd.com/doc/9659415/Practical-Transformer-Handbook:
"Stepped-up high voltage from not so high turns ratio
An experimenter is interested in determining the approximate turns ratio of an automobile ignition coil. He impresses a small audio frequency sine wave on the primary terminals and uses an oscilloscope to measure the induced voltage in the secondary. As a result of this measurement technique, it is found that the voltage step-up is approximately 100. This does not appear reasonable because 100 times the 12 V of the automobile battery falls far short of the 15 000-30 000 V needed for firing spark plugs. What is the nature of the discrepancy?
Although not commonly referred to as a 'flyback' transformer, the ignition coil develops its high secondary voltage in a similar manner to the flyback transformer in a television set. In both instances, the primary winding requires a waveform with a very high rate of voltage or current change. Such a waveform induces a high voltage counter EMF in the primary and
it is this induced voltage which is stepped-up further in the secondary. Thus in an automobile ignition system, the abrupt cut-off of the applied 12 V induces a counter EMF in the primary with a peak amplitude of about 250-300 V. When this purposely-produced 'transient' is multiplied by a 100 to 1
step-up turns ratio, one obtains the 25 kVor so needed for reliable firing of the plugs.
This situation provides an interesting insight into the operation of all transformers regardless of impressed waveshape."
I think "the abrupt cut-off" is what you are looking for.
Quote from: Qwert on March 04, 2010, 09:44:27 AM
@baroutologos,
I don't know if this can help you anything, I hope it will anyway:
Below is an excerpt from "Practical Transformer Handbook"
http://www.scribd.com/doc/9659415/Practical-Transformer-Handbook:
"Stepped-up high voltage from not so high turns ratio
Although not commonly referred to as a 'flyback' transformer, the ignition coil develops its high secondary voltage in a similar manner to the flyback transformer in a television set. In both instances, the primary winding requires a waveform with a very high rate of voltage or current change. Such a waveform induces a high voltage counter EMF in the primary and
it is this induced voltage which is stepped-up further in the secondary. Thus in an automobile ignition system, the abrupt cut-off of the applied 12 V induces a counter EMF in the primary with a peak amplitude of about 250-300 V. When this purposely-produced 'transient' is multiplied by a 100 to 1 step-up turns ratio, one obtains the 25 kVor so needed for reliable firing of the plugs.
This situation provides an interesting insight into the operation of all transformers regardless of impressed waveshape."
I think "the abrupt cut-off" is what you are looking for.
Standard ignition coil is not like in Tesla design!
Standard ignition coil charges transformer primary to full current and than „the abrupt cut-off“ creates HV peak that is transfered to secondary! In standard ignition coil you have high current from source and look at capacity , it is short circuit after „the abrupt cut-off“ and that means that energy accumulated on capacitor is lost. Here capacitor plays really stupid play :D
At Tesla's design we have capacitor playing main part. It is charged from input coil when "the abrupt cut-off" happen and then he disharge this to primary and it is transfered to secondary. And no high current from source even at low frequency of switching just if you keep input inductivity high and resistance small, meaning Q factor must be high!
@ Tito...thanks, I've tried the Imhotep design and other variants but always found them to be defective as the 30 mA drain was never replenished except for a surface charge or fluff voltage and the battery always goes down eventually so no OU there only discharge...I haven't seen or heard anyone claiming OU on that type of setup yet so I'll wait for your solution on how NOT to kill the dipole.....
@ delboy
How do we use the igniter circuits to achieve OU?
I know you've mentioned the 1 wire transfer but how would you do this on these types of circuit to either run something or feedback to the source for a self runner?
Do you have an idea as how to use this circuit and not kill the dipole?
Thanks
@delboy and definetly Tito
I think it's time to release the ou info you claim to have or at the very least show us some of your ou setups/rigs!!!
:P
@ all
Assuming the interrupt switch is of negligible draw.
How do we use HV #1 and HV #2 ?
Is it one wire to the receiver or is it 2 wire to the next stage of the circuit?
How do we NOT kill the dipole on this part of the circuit?
Sooo.........
The "class" awaits master Teecho -> ;D<- [aka Teets]
A handsome fellow , very white teeth ^ [I think he uses "whitener"]
Hopefully the "class" will behave while Master Teecho gets his lesson together.
I hear he can be "lazy"[he said so],I personally won't care if he Snores during class
as long as we get something to "study".
Chet
Summary as I see this topic :
Everybody think that Tesla igniter is for creating HV without consuming much current from primary.
Am I correct ? Yep it's small step forward.
Any other concepts ?
I think it's amplification of power we should see here.Hmm...
We should see something like : put small 1.5 battery as power source and after a while get kW from the output.
@goat and @forest
This is Tesla design. Look at picture. SW1 and SW2 are switches for operating receiver. SW1 can be any Fast recovary diode fo example BY-329 and SW2 can be Thyristor or Triac which will periodicaly discharge condenser to receiver. Capacity on receiver should be bigger, for example 100uF/400V.
Two spheres are secondary capacity neccesary for resonant effect in secondary! But design of secondary should be like Tesla said, length of secondary quater of wave, spiral form to secure minimal parasitic capacity and resistance low as posible for securing high Q factor.
For example , if you want 300 V/m on 50kHz then length of secundary should be 1500m and voltage on secondary should be 450kV. If you take that Q factor of secondary is Q=500 then primary have to give to secondary only 900V. If you are using 12V baterry then you must have 900/12=75 Q factor of input inductivity :D Taking losses in count you will take Q=100 ;)
Problem here is to hit the resonance in secondary because of very small bandwidth = 50kHz/500 =100Hz (for example). I must be inside this bandwidth 50000+/-100 Hz if I want at least half of available power!
On one receiver you would pick up 300V on 1 meter length and charge condenser, then discharge it on receiver. If frequency of discharge is 100Hz then power delivered to receiver will be P=900W There can be more than 2 receivers ;) You calculate is it OU if I input only 1kW for operating circuit controller!
Hi delboy,
thinking a-la-Tesla is always challenging and may lead to amazing devices. Your personal extrapolation on how to make use of the Tesla's electrical Igniter pat. make sense to me.
I am currently working on TMTs even if scaled down in size as I am working at 4-6 MHz range, nevertheless with only 15Vpp @ 4.5MHz 200mW of power (just lab's function generator output) I obtain about 4KV on Tx sphere. In my case of course this is pure RF NOT PULSED BUT CONTINOUS. I receive that electrostatic signal with standard Tesla TMT receiver.
Your idea to put the Rx in series with Tx's secondary to sphere connection could work but perhaps only within a pulsed system like the one described in your example. If I could help I would suggest that the switches SW1, SW2 made of MOSFET low Ron and of appropriate Vds. The problem there is that you must operate said switches in a proper sequence that could be like:
- first close SW1 for a proper time in order to full charge the cap
- then open SW1 so isolate the input from the output
- then close SW2 in order to discharge the cap into your load
- repeat the cycle with an appropriate pace
In said case you should have plenty of flexibility in varying the pace rate and the ON duration of the pulses in order to suit properly your load.
Think that in this case you deal with potential only and finally you are trading off voltage for current hence the higher the voltage the better. It is obvious that in order to optimize it you have to know exactly how TESLA SOLVED THE PROBLEM.....just read the 'Colorado spring notes".
Finally I have some reservation about the possibility to get 'power multiplication' via multiple receivers: at least in my case it proved impossible.....but who knows?
ronotte
One tonne of theories equals a gram of experimenting..
@ baroutologos
Hope you don't mind one more theory, I'd like to start experimenting with the igniter and was wondering if you could suggest some values for the coil and capacitor to use in the first part of the circuit.
I'd like to try the following to see if pulsing SW1 then SW2 would charge a battery, there are probably many chargers based on filling a cap then discharging into a battery but I never seen one based on the NT type like the following, maybe someone already tried this and I missed it.....
To ronotte.
As I understand Dels plan it is strictly working on impulses and the receivers are connected paralel on the receiver so one connection is at the point of a high preasure of the stationary wave and the other at the point of the low preasure. That is the reason for fine tunning.
Hey Fellas
The internet was down for a few days. Sucks.
But i did do some experimenting.
In the igniter setup, I used a relay controlled by 555 timer, a 120v/12v transformer to substitute the primary/secondary on the switch side of the cap, a large fine wire coil for the large inductor and a 22uf 100v cap and a 12v bat.
This is just preliminary experiments of the circuit as a whole to get and experienced understanding of its workings. No ou as far as I see here, or as far as things sit at the moment, but the concept works.
The primary inline with the contactor/switch/relay in the drawing , I used the secondary 12v side of the transformer and the 120v is used as an output, to what ever, Ill say in a minute. So as in the drawing, the lower no. of windings is inline with the switch. Got it? =]
The rest is easy to understand as in what and where.
So in the end, I was able to run a phone charger on the 120v side of the transformer. It would cut out here n there but it does work. I have a lot to check out before I can state any qualified results. Im going to do a new variation on the relay due to the freq of the one Im using is a bit bouncy near the freq I want.
So all in all, when the switch is closed, the large inductor(low ohm) is charged up with field, and the current from the bat is very low while doing so. When the switch is opened, the large inductor dumps high voltage into the cap, so that when the switch closes again, the cap is dumped into the transformer which gives me output to run my phone charger. Not perfect yet, but it does show the possibilities of the circuit so far.
My work area is a shambles. My bread board has burns in it. Just wires, transformers, caps, diodes, etc. everywhere at a hands reach. lol
As soon as I clean up I will do a vid to show. =]
I also tried Titos pulsed transformer with the relay,cap and diode. It has some good qualities, but at very unstable relay pulsings. The tiny caps work well with it, but again, I have to try some other switching methods. But it has my interest. In the unstable spiky freq, the output is very strong, but not stable and it wreck havoc on the contacts. So there is something going on there.
Project Igniter Has begun. =]
Mags
One more thing, in case any of you try my setup. It seems the bigger, as in power capability, transformer, the better the output. Remember, the battery only sees the large inductor as a load, so no matter how big the transformer, the input current will stay the same, as long as the freq of switching and the large inductor remain the same. If the large inductor is say 100ohm, the transformer coil in series is negligible in input variances.
So the large inductor gets the cap up to a couple hundred volts that is pulsed to the transformer in dc impulses. So the output on the transformer can be a couple thousand volts, as in sparks will jump a mm or 2 on the 120v side output. But the phone chargers we have today use ac/dc converters that one of the first components the 120v wall current sees is a bridge then a 450v cap. Well that cap takes that couple thousand volts can sorts it out to a working voltage, and not enough yet as the charger cuts out quite a bit, also due to unstable running at a wanted freq. I find above 60hz, up to maybe 200hz max for different transformers. My largest one is from an older ups un-interuptable power supply. Its heavy and the "normal" secondaries(12 side) is .2ohm vs a smaller on from a .5a 12v plug in supply, the secondary is 17ohm, yet the input current will remain the same with either transformer in the igniter circuit. There will be some change as you change caps for different transformers and the difference in transformer circuit primary depending on size.
Neat stuff. And the experience is good.
Mags
Hey Mags ;)
I told you it will be good experience.
It would be better if the switch is one with 2 brushes and roller with conducting and isolation parts rottating high speed. That would solve regulation problem as we could regulate speed of DC motor running roller.
And you could use another secondary from some transformator as large inductor. Problem here is regulation and hiting the resonance. If you could measure inductivity of your large inductor and it's resistance then by taking value of capacity you can calculate max Q factor in resonance Q=(1/R)*(sqrt(L/C))
To measure inductivity use U/I method, put your large inductivity in series with bulb let say 100W just to protect it from current oveload, and measure current and drop voltage on it. When you get this you can calculate impedance Z=U/I and you have measured resistance R, meaning you can calculate inductivity as L=(sqrt(Z^2-R^2))/(2*pi*f)
When you know value of L for example L=0,5H then put appropriate capacity let say 4,7 uF to get resonant frequency on 103Hz.
Why is the problem regulation???
Because it is resonant circuit. You have bandwidth! If you calculated Q factor for example Q=100 and you are expecting resonance for example on 100Hz that means my bandwidth is only ∆f=f/Q =1Hz meaning you must be inside this bandwidth 100±1 Hz if you want at least half of available power! That's why relay are bad , they are not used for fast switching.
I think we should analyse Tito first schematic, maybe we could recreate it.I have the feeling that I did something similar in the past but didn't knew how to extract power from it.
I would start with dead battery - some with internal shortcircuit but able to be charged to 12V. I have such one and it behaves like a giant capacitor. You can charge it really fast (in few minutes) or just 12 hours with 4amp - no matter because the behaviour is the same : it can develop lots of amps for a very short period of time then it become dead completely.For example using 55W bulb it can shine it to full brightness for a 5-10 seconds then it become dimmer and dimmer and finally after a minute it goes down to barely red filament. After disconnecting load it tends to rise voltage up to 10 v and after a few minutes you can again light 55W bulb but not to full brightness.
So my first advice is to use such dead battery as in Tito schematic - it may work like a capacitor.
Do you realized that relay is a micro Tesla coil ?!!!
Hey Delboy and Forest
Yes it is a good thing to experiment with this. I kike the fact that there isnt extremely high voltage and it is simple to try it out. The rotating switch will be the next step, I see where if we dont have consistent switching, the magic can be missed.
I have a 12v battery that sits at about 6v but seems to rise really quick to a charge of 13v, bur even after hours, the charge fades quich when the charger is removed. Its just a bad battery with sulfated plates. So there is little area for the charge to build, and it acts like a small battery.
Mags
delboy,Tito and Mag and others I have two questions , they can sound strange and offtopic but are important trust me.
I ask here because I'm not experienced in physics or electronics.
First question is about capacitor. Let's see : if I take 0,1uF/400V capacitor good for high frequency circuits polyester type and join both terminals with a fast diode for 400V what I obtain ? Is that now polarized capacitor like electrolytic one and can be charged only using DC and used only in DC related circuits ?
Second question is about core saturation.I hope there are topics in electronic knowledge related to core saturation which I can use to compute properties of current in coil and time required to saturate given core.Help me please find those information and equations.
Quote from: forest on March 07, 2010, 06:03:37 PM
...
if I take 0,1uF/400V capacitor good for high frequency circuits polyester type and join both terminals with a fast diode for 400V what I obtain ? Is that now polarized capacitor like electrolytic one and can be charged only using DC and used only in DC related circuits ?
Yes, but not only in DC or DC related circuits but in pulsed circuits where the polarity of the pulse mainly have a single polarity and little opposite polarity (on opposite I mean the polarity where the parallel diode would conduct (would become forward biased) and would clamp that polarity to its forward voltage level, say .7V).
For AC waveforms with zero crossings like a normal sinusoidal voltage your cap + diode combination would short circuit that half wave of the AC wave which would forward bias the diode, the other half of of the AC wave can charge up the cap to its peak amplitude. Remember: when the diode conducts in its forward direction, a huge current can go through on it and this current is only limited by the AC voltage source inner resistance or impedance and whatever component(s) are in series with the AC source towards the diode.
I am not sure what exactly you mean on computing current properties in saturated inductors?
rgds, Gyula
I begun sto study Tito's suggested patents starting with 568.178 one. Similar in concept to the Ozone patent.
The basic principle of operation as Tesla notes, is charging a high self indcution coil, then upon circuit break, coil collapses in a capacitor, bringing it to high voltage, then upon circuit reconnect, capacitor discharges in a LOW induction coil, which have a recepient secondary coil which depends on our goal.
I liked this patent's full features of control as, adjustbale high self-induction (or adjustable L/R ratio) for regulating power strength of apparatus (same with a rehostat) thus adjusting motor speed, adjustable commutator's brushes, adjustable primary inductunce and secondary. All adjustable.
Whereas, adjustable primary's LpCp or secondary's LsCs parameters are for attaining best resonance match, the adjustable motor speed and brushes are for propar pulse phasing!
I explain. In the energetic forum
http://www.energeticforum.com/renewable-energy/5186-patent-462-418-method-apparatus-electrical-conversion-distribution.html#post87846 and
http://www.energeticforum.com/renewable-energy/5186-patent-462-418-method-apparatus-electrical-conversion-distribution.html#post87878
I am comparing my experimental results between a Kacher or Solid State Tesla coil and a traditional shock-excitation Tesla coil.
The solid state, have a perfect resonance effect, smooth as i say and bring FL tubes to full brightness next to it (the proof). On the contrary my traditional spark-gap Tesla coil that pulses some 100 times/sec, has not any smooth resonance effect (fails to light a neon to a satisfactory brightness or a FL tube to any particular brightness) yet its sparks and general behaviour is vast more energetic than the solid state one.
I concluded in resonance grounds that the traditional spark-gaps sux, because they cannot guarantee us that they fire in exact same time intervals, thus one can be in contrast to another due to wrong phasing even though primary-secondary resonance's parameters are the same. I acknowledge in large Tesla coils that can light a FL to tens feets away, full brightness even thought they may appear perfect resonators in fact they may not be. A o-scope can tell as always about it.
Anyway, that was a observation of mine.
Btw i am far more interested at the moment in shock-pulsing than smooth resonance, because i see the far more energetic nature of shock excitation.
I was not useful lately so I found Tito first schematic and added polarity marks ;D
Keep going.
Polarity marks are of course based on diode direction :D
he he I have already about 10 relay circuits to test based on this Tito schematic :o :o
Maybe I catch the one and only ???
May I ask if diode and resistor goes always across capacitor terminals ? I'm preparing a common "blocks" to play with that around relay and I'd like to merge capacitor,resistor and diode as one "block".
Let's play! ;D ;D
Hey Forest
Are you going to try it? =] 1st suggestion will be to fuse 1 of the battery terminals. I burned my bread board a lil bit by thinking I was good. =]
But instead of a fuse, I used a light bulb. One that takes a bit of current to light, while cold is low ohms.
Then if there is a problem, the light lights up thus increasing the ohms of the bulb and limiting the current to the project. When it lights, you know something is up. =] And you dont have to replace the bulb.
Also, Radio Shack has a bundle of various disk caps for a couple bucks. These are what got me the highest output. Again it will depend on the transformer.
I think you will enjoy the experiment.
Any Questions, Ill be around. ;]
As for the diode and resistor, a couple posts before Tito posted the drawing, he said " dont forget to use zener diode, 3v min." I cannot say for sure that he meant that diode. And the resistor value is a guess also. i just used a silicon diode. No resistor. I need to get some zeners to try.
One thing for sure, that cap is not there for helping to save the contacts on the relay. ;) So maybe the zener/resistor does that job, and maybe it does other things.
Also before the drawing he said that he had 3 coils secondary and primary. Trifi ? Again Tito raps in riddles.
And the riddle that gets me the most is, he claimed that the secondary is "perpendicular to the primary. Well I have tried that in 5 different ways and a regular transformer worked the best. I havnt tried the bifi or trifi yet.
Im working on busting apart a glued at the mating points, ferrite transformer core, to get a good trifi winding on the plastic former that slides on the middle post of the core. Threading a trifi will be a mess without a lot of time spent to get the turns neat. And ferrite bead cores cause the windings to be separated some on the outside and bunched up on the inside. I prefer a real transformer model for this project.
I like Tito. But back then he seemed to be all about giving it to the people, but now he has a different view I suppose. Since this drawing has been brought up here, he hasnt been around.. Where ya at Teets? =]
Mags
well...I have already 12 different combinations of elements in circuits and still growing.... A lot of circuits to test... :o
Quote from: forest on March 08, 2010, 03:43:18 PM
I was not useful lately so I found Tito first schematic and added polarity marks ;D
Keep going.
Again you are missing the point! Here what are you missing:
-you don't have large input inductivity which will secure small current from source (you can use secondary of standard transformer)
-you don't have small primary indctivity which will enable :
1. large current from condenser to primary (do not use standard transformer with core, use air core transformer) and
2. high frequency 20 kHz < f < 100 kHz
and later discuss about design of secondary (spiral form, small resistance, high Q etc...)
I have read the suggested patents by Tito, namely
* 568,178, 568,179, 568,180 & 577,670, + 609,250 & 568,177
Apart from the obvious that Tesla wanted to achieve a sparkgap-less, noise free, relatively low voltage, smooth-resonators of high efficiency, the following motivate my curiosity.
I must say that all this study has been brought by Tito. Tito suggested those patents. The main difference of those patents from Tesla usual ones (apart from the smoothest resonance attained) is the utilization of High induction coils for effciently charging the discharging caps.
We all here seacrhing for free energy i guess. So according to teacher Tito, if the extra energy does not lie in the normal Tesla coil resonator of LpCp & LsCs, then it must lies in the inductive discharge into capacitors. (or else those patents have not special meaning. At least for me)
...
I proceed. In all those patents Tesla standardly uses high-self induction for storing a primary energy and then upon circuit break the inductive discharge channeled to cap(s), which in turn upon circuit resume the cap-stored energy is utilized in another coil.
Tesla used this concept by both utilizing DC primary source as well as AC.
1) Particularly in AC, he says it is of advantage to break the circuit at the top of the Voltage wave. (see pat 568,179, page 1, line 60).
I initially thought he interrupted the circuit at the top of current wave so as to store the inductor maximum energy. (since E=0.5*L*I^2) Nope he says, voltage wave. Note that top of voltage wave is not top in current wave in a curcuit containing inductunce.
2) I was stunned to read that Tesla described in Patent 568,180, page 2, line 40 that when operating in AC as a primary source is of advantage even at the peak of the wave, instead of 1 break, to have multiple makes & breaks and he used two discs one stationary and one rotating that each commutator segment was split to many individual ones. So at each AC voltage peak, many make-breaks were made.
I do not know, but according standard physics, even at the top of the Wave or at maximum EMF of the alternator, the "many makes and breaks" would not allow any considerable current to flow in the High-self inductunce coils and no particular energy could they release in return.
...
Bottom line, i got the impression that Tito wanted for me to know that using a considerable high-voltage (peak of wave) from the source, to charge a high-self inductunce for a minimum amount of time (say 1-10% of its L/R constant?) and then discharge it to a collector cap then we are to expect something unsual...
Quote from: delboy on March 09, 2010, 04:17:45 AM
Again you are missing the point! Here what are you missing:
-you don't have large input inductivity which will secure small current from source (you can use secondary of standard transformer)
-you don't have small primary indctivity which will enable :
1. large current from condenser to primary (do not use standard transformer with core, use air core transformer) and
2. high frequency 20 kHz < f < 100 kHz
and later discuss about design of secondary (spiral form, small resistance, high Q etc...)
I won't argue.Are we here to argue or to help each other ? Open relay and use your imagination then help me find how to recharge capacitor from coil.Hmm..maybe Tito put wrong description in schematic and diode and resistor are here to protect capacitor from overcharging....
I trust Tito and that means capacitor discharge is not going to the transformer at all (because that's how capacitor is placed in schematic). The main problem is in relay coil - it has to be placed somewhere along relay contacts to operate as vibrator. In the same time it has to recharge capacitor when disconnected from battery (as per Tesla patent).Still to many unknowns.I wish I could know where capacitor is discharged .... does it discharge across relay contacts alone or with relay coil in series to contacts ?
Btw I have some questions about coils. Look at the picture with coil and automated switch.When switch is open coil is saturated because of large current from battery.But what happen when switch is closed ? What is going on with magnetic field in coil ?
Quote from: baroutologos on March 09, 2010, 04:56:43 AM
I do not know, but according standard physics, even at the top of the Wave or at maximum EMF of the alternator, the "many makes and breaks" would not allow any considerable current to flow in the High-self inductunce coils and no particular energy could they release in return.
...
It's not something standard, and you are right, it's all about FIELD not CURRENT. Think about this, if you have switch that interrupts with speed 500Hz then you have only 1ms of time "Ton" for CURRENT but FIELD FROM SOURCE will reach end of wire even if it's 300km long ! FIELD FROM SOURCE travel speed of light, and will activate all electrons in wire, and when break happens FIELD collapse and all that electrons charge your capacitor. In our case length of wire will not be more than 200 meters or little more:D
Depending on how big capacity , then you choose speed to achieve resonance with input inductivity.
Tesla used switch speed even 5000 Hz but Tesla's switch could withstand 1000A with low losses;)
I mean on discharge current 1000A from condenser
By the way, in the suggested diagram by Tito, i think i have figured out what zener diode does :)
It blocks the common transformer action during the inductor charging, allowing only the flyback to commence to capacitor.
So, if primary connected to battery is 220volts, and secondary output is 24 volts or a ratio 220/24 = 9 approximately, when apply 12 volts to the primary, we should have a zener of at least 12/9 volts to exit circuit.
hence 3 volts zener :)
Quote from: baroutologos on March 09, 2010, 04:56:43 AM
I have read the suggested patents by Tito, namely
* 568,178, 568,179, 568,180 & 577,670, + 609,250 & 568,177
Apart from the obvious that Tesla wanted to achieve a sparkgap-less, noise free, relatively low voltage, smooth-resonators of high efficiency, the following motivate my curiosity.
I must say that all this study has been brought by Tito. Tito suggested those patents. The main difference of those patents from Tesla usual ones (apart from the smoothest resonance attained) is the utilization of High induction coils for effciently charging the discharging caps.
We all here seacrhing for free energy i guess. So according to teacher Tito, if the extra energy does not lie in the normal Tesla coil resonator of LpCp & LsCs, then it must lies in the inductive discharge into capacitors. (or else those patents have not special meaning. At least for me)
...
I proceed. In all those patents Tesla standardly uses high-self induction for storing a primary energy and then upon circuit break the inductive discharge channeled to cap(s), which in turn upon circuit resume the cap-stored energy is utilized in another coil.
Tesla used this concept by both utilizing DC primary source as well as AC.
1) Particularly in AC, he says it is of advantage to break the circuit at the top of the Voltage wave. (see pat 568,179, page 1, line 60).
I initially thought he interrupted the circuit at the top of current wave so as to store the inductor maximum energy. (since E=0.5*L*I^2) Nope he says, voltage wave. Note that top of voltage wave is not top in current wave in a curcuit containing inductunce.
2) I was stunned to read that Tesla described in Patent 568,180, page 2, line 40 that when operating in AC as a primary source is of advantage even at the peak of the wave, instead of 1 break, to have multiple makes & breaks and he used two discs one stationary and one rotating that each commutator segment was split to many individual ones. So at each AC voltage peak, many make-breaks were made.
I do not know, but according standard physics, even at the top of the Wave or at maximum EMF of the alternator, the "many makes and breaks" would not allow any considerable current to flow in the High-self inductunce coils and no particular energy could they release in return.
...
Bottom line, i got the impression that Tito wanted for me to know that using a considerable high-voltage (peak of wave) from the source, to charge a high-self inductunce for a minimum amount of time (say 1-10% of its L/R constant?) and then discharge it to a collector cap then we are to expect something unsual...
YES YES YES ! Houston we have the solution ! Finally delboy will be satisfied with DC being superior then AC in Tesla coil.
Why AC is not used in electromagnets ? That's why AC is useless in TC if you want OU.In AC there is no "free run", atoms are always in magnetic field oscillating back and forth 50 times per second.There is also hard to saturate core. Correct me if I'm wrong.
Why we call this device Tesla coil and not just Tesla transformer ? Because secondary is the CORE of coil.
Famous Tesla mass equivalence is the way to saturate secondary-core with magnetic field so every atom-magnet is properly oriented in field.
And of course I must add credit to Edison who was first to investigate this effect.
Forest
i would not apply the circuit with the switch "across" the coil, just the cap, with the coil in series with the cap and battery.
What Tito is doing here is when the switch is closed, the cap is not doing anything in the circuit. But, when opened, that empty cap charges super fast, especially when of small value, thus creating that impulse. A small cap charges very fast and in a very short time. Impulse.
It is different than the igniter pat as he said some small changes. In Titos version, the cap does not discharge into the coil, it just allows the charge in the coil to have a quick and short distance to go when the switch is opened. Impulse. And it seems to work well if it can be stable. You can put a magnet near the transformer and feel the little hammer shmackin. =]
I was in disbelief as to how Teets circuit pulsed 12v on the 220v side and was able to get a substantial voltage from the 24v side. But it does. The 12v, switched by relay, low freq above 60hz, is able to impulse the 220v side, which is much different than smooth ac from the wall.
But when fitted with those small caps across the contacts, the impulse is sharpened and the output is more than you will expect to be from thoughts of it alone. Its more than 24v.
All my transformers are 120v/12v other than my largest from the UPS which is 24v sec center tapped.
Logos
Im kind of getting your drift on the zener. Keep it coming. I had a thought that maybe it had an effect of keeping the current running through the coil between pulses, and as to why I had that thought, my mind works in mysterious ways. But your way of thought seems more realistic. =]
Delboy
I hear what you are saying, but are you suggesting that we built huge coils like Tesla or we wont be able to get the goods? Not many of us have a garage, much less a warehouse to build such a thing. We would like to work on small scale, also for cost of experimentation. I am not coming down on you. =] we appreciate the help tremendously. But I get the feeling you are saying we have to go huge for it to work.
Also, we are looking for more useful output and no lightning bolts jumping off of the equipment. ;D
If you can throw some tips toward those goals, that would be a great help. ;)
I am now hearing you on the air core transformer also. I had been thinking about that and the best way to go about it without getting too large and some criteria that would need to be followed. Like, should the secondary be inside of the primary, or does that not make a difference? Should there be spacing between turns of each coil, or can they be wound tight? And if so, how do we know what spacing to use? And is it that having a core material, ferrite, etc. , is it problematic?
Thanks for your time Delboy, your a good boy. =]
Mags
I'm looking at ozone patent and I must say , I'm confused.Isn't DC commutator also a second circuit interrupter here ? In that case part of energy of down coil of motor armature may discharge back to power source terminal B due to commutator action. The second (upper) coil always discharges to capacitor on magnetic field collapse.
Am I correct ?
I conducted some fast experiments with my 555 timer fully adjustable from 200Khz to 1Khz driving my Kacher or a transistor NPN style that in turned pulsed a transformer. (solid state interrupter)
I took my isolation transformer, (220volt input primary to 15v / 25v secondary output center tapped). I begun pulsing the 220volt side. Output was collected by applying to the 15volt isolated secondary and arrange a FWBR, that in the latter was connected across a 10K uF, 25volt electolytic cap, that i had also attached as a load an indicating bulb 0.5amps @12 volts. :)
Results were poor. I must say that there are a lot sweet spots, and those are especially noted when the transformer "squeals" or hums intensely.
Most experimenting was conducted without a zener diode because the small ones i have in hand burnt. (db3 diacs actually)
Without a zener, and in that configuration (note the capacitor is just for smoothing and flyback collection, not for voltage boost) experimental results were poor ranging from 10-70% efficiency. by the way, i do not think that zener will dramatically improved (if any) my results.
I do not know, the same line of experimenting i have done in the past with always frustrating results. Perhaps Tito should give guidelines on that and specifics...
Hey logos
One problem i see is the transistor switching. A physical contact seems to work much better in creating as pure of an impulse as possible.
I use mosfet switching for stuff but it does not do the dew. The relay does the Mountain Dew Dance. =]
Try that and compare.
I admit that there is the possibility that normal transformers may be an issue here. It is just a quick substitute for trying things before building an air core transformer.
I have to go to work, but I will try a vid tonight to show what I have done.
And another interesting thing I tried is using a strobe tube and circuit as an impulse device.
Cut one of the end leads of the strobe tube and insert the transformer there. The impulses are impressive. =]
i didnt have an adjustable strobe other than changing the 400v cap on the board to smaller values to speed it up.
Your light bulb may blow with this setup. And the magnet near the transformer gives a very sharp thump.
Putting various caps across the coil( primary or secondary) inserted into the strobe circuit provides some interesting effects and applying different loads and caps to the output of the transformer change the way things happen on the input side also.
Be careful of that strobe voltage. =]
Just another experiment, but all these things under the belt are good experience.
And actually, if the air core transformer is the key ingredient here, the strobe would be my choice for working with here. I think Walmart has them with and adjustment for freq of strobing.
Logos, I think you will agree with me here if you give it a go. ;] I tried to put the output to the input and with this setup I got the best results. My strobe is of the small 12v variety from auto parts stores in the accessory lighting section. Mine is older than what is available today, but the same effects can be had.
magluvin
Quote from: Magluvin on March 09, 2010, 11:53:19 AM
...
One problem i see is the transistor switching. A physical contact seems to work much better in creating as pure of an impulse as possible.
I use mosfet switching for stuff but it does not do the dew. The relay does the Mountain Dew Dance. =]
Try that and compare.
...
Sure, but inductive kicks from coil and other current causes relay
contacts to arc, essentially combusting (oxidizing) platinum and damaging
them over time. Under the presence of a magnetic field this could cause
MHD MagnetoHydroDynamic energy generation - Do you really want to
generate power in a little Internal Combustion Engine burning platinum
metal? To each his own, but transistors are better in that they don't
arc. Try to suppress the arc in the contacts...I'll bet that doesn't won't
work efficiently either. It's trying to tell you something - It's a fueled,
not an overunity process. Also, you can reduce transistor insertion
impendace to .01 ohms using special mosfets but without the arc...
:S:MarkSCoffman
Hey Ms
I understand that I can even put the transistors in parallel to lower that on resistance even more.
But the strobe tube is a very interesting spark gap and seems to be non destructive to itself, for at least as long as I ran it.
We are just getting some things going in this thread, some projects, just to simply get some experience with it all. We can talk about it forever, but till we try, we know nothing.
I am in favor of semiconductors for how and what they can do. But first things first.
I use an IRF44z mosfet in some of my experiments and it is still kickin. No blow.
But the contact switching is producing better results at this time to try things. =]
Mags
One more thing to add to that, in the igniter setup, the contacts have very little problems as compared to Titos setup.
Mags
I know that some are going to come here and say this and that and even argue about what is going on here. Don let that disturb any progress along the way. At least we have a few here willing to explore the possibilities of what Tesla had in mind. I have seen no projects going on till now, just talk an argument.
So just stay focused and try some new things with each experiment along the way. We should be able to come up with something, if we really believe what Tesla had going really works. We are getting to some nitty gritty stuff that will tell a lot.
Mags
Quote from: Magluvin on March 09, 2010, 10:17:46 AM
Delboy
I hear what you are saying, but are you suggesting that we built huge coils like Tesla or we wont be able to get the goods? Not many of us have a garage, much less a warehouse to build such a thing. We would like to work on small scale, also for cost of experimentation. I am not coming down on you. =] we appreciate the help tremendously. But I get the feeling you are saying we have to go huge for it to work.
Also, we are looking for more useful output and no lightning bolts jumping off of the equipment. ;D
If you can throw some tips toward those goals, that would be a great help. ;)
I am now hearing you on the air core transformer also. I had been thinking about that and the best way to go about it without getting too large and some criteria that would need to be followed. Like, should the secondary be inside of the primary, or does that not make a difference? Should there be spacing between turns of each coil, or can they be wound tight? And if so, how do we know what spacing to use? And is it that having a core material, ferrite, etc. , is it problematic?
You asked so many questions so here is what I can give answer...
About huge coils, I meant on air core for output of this device but later it can be used as design rule for input inductivity.
What I meant about input inductivity, you can go in 2 directions.
1. If you use inductivity with laminated core material (Fe) then you must stay on low frequency of switching (f<200Hz) and then you will have compact form of inductivity having only several hundret turns of wire. Frequency is low because of core losses which are square dependent on frequency!
2. If you use air core input inductivity then you must use coil wound on large drum from 0,5 to 1 meter having at least 500 turns to have big inductivity :D That will be expensive because used length of wire, but it is not limited in switching and no core losses
Now something about output of this device. Primary should be small inductivity because we want high frequency and high current to secure transfer of energy to coupled part of secondary for the next Q-amplification in second-ary stage ;)
For example, if primary capacity is C=2,2uF and primary inductivity is one turn of wire(cable) diameter of 1 meter that gives Lp=3uH and alltogether gives resonant frequency of about 62 kHz. If input inductivity is for example L=0,5H that gives resonant frequency 151 Hz but only because I neglect value of Lp comparing to L.
High current is where comes to problem with switch. Here is example. If primary capacitor is charged to 200 V and then discharged to primary let's calculate start peak of current.
First we will calculate impedance Zc=sqrt(Lp/Cp)=sqrt(3/2,2)=1,16 â,,¦ and that will give max current Imax=200/1,16 = 172 A but this is true only if switch contact resistance in state ON is neglect. In reality this is place where losses play main part, because any active resistance R will bring to fast damped wave, and we want oscillations to continue as long as possible.
Yes, secondary should be inside primary, like in all Tesla's transmitters and wound clockwise, looking from topview. Primary should be close to secondary as possible, and It will be enough for example only 5 milimeters spacing between primary and secondary, if secondary is grounded! Turns in secondary should be tight with minimal spacing. This depends on max expected voltage on secondary. For example , if we expect 200kV and we have 50 turns that gives 4kV per turn, it will be enough that spacing is only 2 mm.
About core material in output stage, hmmmm very problematic, because this is place where design is to go to very wide air core transformer and frequency should be very high that means we want small primary inductivity meaning no magnetic core material (no losses related to core)
I want you guys to remind (I believe you have seen this already) Bruce TPU's observation/solution for a "sudden stop" (switch?):
http://www.overunity.com/index.php?topic=2300.msg221623#msg221623
Q
Thanks Delboy ;]
I Was looking toward trying to make mini setups. More like ones that could be individualized for things such as ev's and computer ps, etc. The big ones are cool too. I just had some visions of small.
I suppose air core of the small type would be way high in freq. I was looking to stay a bit lower on the radar, of which would be good for all.
But I will keep playing around with it. It is neat stuff.
Thanks for the answers to all the questions. Sorry for so many. ;]
Mags
Hey mag,
Lately i have tried various things to test various concepts, yet all end up to predicatble failures. i am not concerned much about that. the only big concern i have is that in all experimenting history of mine had not any incidence that bears any actual promise.
I think i am losing my faith, since the only thing all expermenters here have is only faith... Anyway i have spent large sums of money (5000 USD last 1 1/4 year) to gather materials so as to experiment (in a noob setup) with almost any popular theory...
I think i will take a rest for a while. I will resume building as soon as Tito posts some diagrams for the ultimate goal.
I just hope he is not a hoax also.
Salutes for now
All
I can feel the frustration here!Myself included.
Keep the "Faith".
Everyday it seems a "New" technology is popping up its head,
This was NEVER the case before. Now we have all manner of devices and techs ,it has become almost a familiar experience to read of some "brake through" here or there that will change our world.
My point is They're [big oil etc.] not looking here, the rest of the world has them crappin in their pants.
Silicon Valley has "HUNDREDS" of start ups looking for ways to "Tap" these techs.[tap our pockets is more like it]
Its time to "play" the Cats away.[as in "gone for good"]
Tito,delboy what do you have fellas?.
Lets do this.
delboy do you have a picture of one of your air cores?.
Remember "Teecho" you promised to throw a "crumb"
for the weary and "The World"!
Chet
I agree with Ram. It does feel like something is going to pop. Many are close or already there(tito).
It is just a matter of a little time. So stay tuned Logos. If I were to calculate the amount of time I have spent on this stuff just in the last couple years, I am way beyond 5 g's way beyond. Even though my cash investment may only be less than half of what you quoted.
I hit many low spot along the way. Funny thing is, the next day Im back at it.
Mags
Quote from: Magluvin on March 10, 2010, 10:47:03 AM
Many are close or already there (TITO)...It is just a matter of a little time.
Tito has NOTHING! How many times do you PEOPLE fall for the same con "I GOT IT FIGURED OUT, BUT I CAN'T TELL YOU".
Who gives a damn about saving the WORLD, you can't even save yourself.
- Schpankme
Let's get an understanding of our roles. I'm the life guard and your the drowning man. Listen to me and I'll get you to safety; fight me and I'll slap you around.
Shhhpankums.
Quote:
fight me and I'll slap you around
----------------
Lets make it a steel cage match!!
out side!!!
I'll show you some "Overunity"[fold you up a little bit]
;D
Chet
Wow Shpankins, is this the way all your posts go? Ill have a look see.
Mags
Shpanknic
Are you into ev's and hho?
Mags
I analysed those Tesla patent and ..do you see there is no diode there ? ;D ;D ;D
I mean coil is dumping energy into capacitor when disconnected from power source using only CORRECT PHASE of current. That's why circuit controller must be perfect and harmonic perfection is REQUIRED.
When capacitor is charged by coil serial LC resonant circuit is formed.When coil is energized, capacitor discharge into low induction coil and it's parallel LC circuit.
They can't be working on the same frequency but harmonic is still required.
Ooops..I think I got it ... because capacitor discharge is really fast but series LC circuit with high self-induction coil is slower frequency,at least circuit breaker must work with synchronism with series resonant circuit or higher harmonic of it maybe. The most important factor is to let coil discharge into capacitor but forbid to oscillate between capacitor and coil (this of high self induction). Relay is quite good for that purpose ! Please analyse relay operation for yourself.
Quote from: Magluvin on March 10, 2010, 03:00:20 PM
Are you into ev's and hho?
EV's = yes
HHO = no
Solar = yes
Steam = yes
NiFe Batteries = yes
Bio-diesel = yes
- Schpankme
Shpanks
I have an 85 Fiero Gt all ready for conversion. Motor, and all that does not need to be there are out.
Cant wait to gitter dun. Im going with the automatic tranny. It is a bit less eff. but I am disconnecting the down shift cable and it will run through 1st and 2nd really quick then to 3rd. I have an 87 gt also, but it is staying v6 w/nitrous. =]
Forest
There is a Tesla Pat on getting dc from ac. I will look at that also. What you are saying makes sense. If there are no diodes then the speed of the break will have to be in phase with the charging of the cap and disconnecting before the cap reverses flow back into the inductor. Good thoughts. =]
The igniter circuit has to deal with a broader band of freq due to engine rpm changes. So it is not so critical.
Mags
Quote from: Schpankme on March 10, 2010, 02:23:09 PM
Tito has NOTHING! How many times do you PEOPLE fall for the same con "I GOT IT FIGURED OUT, BUT I CAN'T TELL YOU".
Who gives a damn about saving the WORLD, you can't even save yourself.
- Schpankme
Let's get an understanding of our roles. I'm the life guard and your the drowning man. Listen to me and I'll get you to safety; fight me and I'll slap you around.
Any reasonable man has its doubts, especially in this para-scientific field of research, that gathers all shorts of people as lunatic, fanatic, dellusional etc...
From my not so little experience, i can safely conclude that there is not any free energy around, not even hints, at least with the popular theories i can replicate. But my measure is not myself only.
I see some excellent experimenters also, with far more years in the field than me that eventually they cannot light a single flash lamp.
But why are we keep searching?
...............................................
Many people here are not accepting long enstablished theories as facts (including me) as the energy conservation axiom in the strict sense without seeing for themselves.
What we all collectively here have found out is that this axiom holds good in any respect.
Of course many rumors, books and videos claim otherwise, but those can easily be deceivng and further the deception being enhanced by our desire those to be true.
..........
Those Being said, i am not excuding the cheerful possibility that indeed FE exists with modest means available but failed to be brought to mass replication due to a natural supression and man's greed.
This task is to be undertaken by men like Tito promised. If again this proved to be nothing, then case closed for me regarding the free-energy part.
After all, having spent all this time, all those resources and nartured hopes, it surely takes COURAGE to believe in your own eyes and finally make up your mind and admit that FE as popularly believed is a non-reality and move on experimenting to other domains of life.
Salutes
hi everyone goodday ;D
i'm so sorry for the delays, i've been very bc in my projects and my mother is having a dialysis so i cannot able to dance here with you and i'm hiding cause i felt some threat and danger ;D
didn't get anything yet? i thought you got it already ;D
don't lose hope ok.
actually i change my desicion.
i want you guys to send you your email address the name i'm going to list ok
a) Magluvin
b) Ramset
c) Forest
d) Bartologous i have it already ok
my promise will not change ok just give me time ok.
i'm going to give you my improve bearden tech, this is one of my favorite free energy ok.
forget the igniter in some other time i will give you my ozone version of free energy.
something to think:
if you discharge a capacitor in a very thick mag wire of course it will give you a very strong magnetic field isn't it and if you can make the coil be part of the caps then it is more advantage cause its action is very fast ok 8)
this is what i am is going to give you.
i'm having problem in making the drawing schematic to present to you ok be patient children >:( ;D ha ha ha.
i missed all of you friend ;D
please don't asked me my latest discovery, cause i will give that to my children ok pleeeeease ;D
here is my email address titoracionpogi@yahoo.com
when i send you this, please do not just give it right away to useless and bad people. >:( ;D
i'm becoming handsome and handsome take a look ;D
otits L. Noicaro ;D
Quote from: baroutologos on March 10, 2010, 06:51:38 PM
Any reasonable man has its doubts, especially in this para-scientific field of research, that gathers all shorts of people as lunatic, fanatic, dellusional etc...
From my not so little experience, i can safely conclude that there is not any free energy around, not even hints, at least with the popular theories i can replicate. But my measure is not myself only.
I see some excellent experimenters also, with far more years in the field than me that eventually they cannot light a single flash lamp.
But why are we keep searching?
...............................................
Many people here are not accepting long enstablished theories as facts (including me) as the energy conservation axiom in the strict sense without seeing for themselves.
What we all collectively here have found out is that this axiom holds good in any respect.
Of course many rumors, books and videos claim otherwise, but those can easily be deceivng and further the deception being enhanced by our desire those to be true.
..........
Those Being said, i am not excuding the cheerful possibility that indeed FE exists with modest means available but failed to be brought to mass replication due to a natural supression and man's greed.
This task is to be undertaken by men like Tito promised. If again this proved to be nothing, then case closed for me regarding the free-energy part.
After all, having spent all this time, all those resources and nartured hopes, it surely takes COURAGE to believe in your own eyes and finally make up your mind and admit that FE as popularly believed is a non-reality and move on experimenting to other domains of life.
Salutes
hi bar
energy is free and it is true, it is free by nature even the hydro electric plant is free we are just being charge by this company in other way we are just going to modify the driving force to make it simplified ok. the water drives the turbine to rotate, so we change water to on and off to make a fluctuating force which is very essential for transferring energy to other metal near to it ok.
I have come to a dead-end Teacher Tito.
I need some enlightment.
Quote from: baroutologos on March 10, 2010, 07:41:38 PM
I have come to a dead-end Teacher Tito.
I need some enlightment.
don't loose hope ok! i am serious, just be patient, i want it working when i send it to you and to our comrads ok! :)
That's a promise sir!
I hope by the end of this month to be able to get a feeling of it.
Salutes
goodbye for now ok
but don't worry!
I SHALL RETURN !!! ;D
I will do it as simple as can be ok promise ! :)
Tito
Did you get a haircut?
You do look extra handsome this evening [thats what my wife said]
Thank you for being a man of your word!
I will post your picture in my house!
See-> ;D<-
To long for secrets I must share with good or bad [let the big guy upstairs worry about good or bad I have done bad things too [maybe once]
If you don't want to tell me its OK just so I know you told a couple good guys.
Please stick around here, It wouldn't be the same without you.
Chet
Teets ;D
Very photo genic. Always looks young. =]
How are ya? Been worried for ya.
I have coils and batteries and electronics all over my living room. Been going nuts with this igniter. lol
It is a neat project and educational. ;]
Mags
i have to go now ok. ;D
When I first started posting to Teets, I had just read some of his posts for a bit before I replied. I felt like he was teasin. But as I got to know him, I began more to believe him. He has contributed a lot of things, though indirectly, I believe he was being forthcoming.
Mags
@ Bart
I feel your pain...I've been where you have been many times but I keep coming back...hope I guess is what keeps us trying...meanwhile I'm still stuck at the same old problem...all roads seem to lead to resonance and HV BEMF but how to extract it without killing the dipole...still looking for answers without getting too complicated...hopefully Tito will enlighten you in the right direction...best of luck
Hey Goat
Have you tried it with an air core transformer? I have tried it with regular and the output is good, just not enough to replace what was used. Delboy says that it is my transformers that are a problem. Im working on a couple air core designs that I want to give a go. we will see. =]
In this circuit, I dont see that resonance is a tuned thing. Think about it, a gas engine will be changing rpm, thus the speed of the timing will change also. That is why I felt strongly about this. Now if we were able to store the output, can that be converted to a viable power that can run things or even recharge its own battery? Thats the way I see it.
Mags
Hey Mags
Unfortunately I've been away from my shop for months now so I haven't tried the core-less coils yet but I'm still following you and everyone's progress...that's why I've been on the sidelines thinking over the different ideas presented...I'm not always an armchair warrior though...once I'm back home in my shop I'll try to build different projects to test out different ideas but I've never found any OU just a lot of batteries that end up needing a regular recharge....I've had some unusual effects like recharging my camera batteries once where they lasted a long time in the camera but eventually dying and become un-rechargeable...I've also seen this when using pulse charged regular lead acid batteries....go figure...
But I'm curious about the 1 wire method that Delboy talked about...but instead of going to a second receiver I was thinking of the following (see pic below)....I've done and recorded this behavior awhile back either here or on the energetic forum where I had used the Avramenko type setup on the end of the wire coming off an ignition coil which functioned to seperate the 1 wire HV into + and - voltage...might be worth looking into since I'm not advanced enough in electronics to build a transmitter and reciever...besides I like to keep things as simple as possible :)
Thanks and keep up the good work...
Paul
I agree Goat, I love simple
What delboy is saying is, you get the setup going at a freq of resonance, and if you have another separate resonant coil/cap, it will resonate by only 1 wire between the 2. This way we are not killing the oscillations of the original resonator. And we can put as many separate resonators connected by 1 wire, to the original circuit without actually drawing from it. The same with rf. Many receivers without causing the transmitter to loose power output.
I need to try some of these things myself to get it right in my head with the resonance and how to draw power from the separate resonators.
So if this is true, if we can get power from 1 separate resonator that is even 50% of the source resonators input, then if we have 4 separate resonators running 1 wire, the total of the 4 resonators power will be 200% output as compared to the source input. Thats where the freebe comes from. =]
Lol Im just figuring this stuff out now. Sound great doesnt it? Im slow at some things, but once I get it, it sticks. ;]
It is just the drawing from the separate resonators that I am thinking about at the moment. That is why I speculated 50% from each separate resonator, just as a guess. Cuz as we draw from them, we are killing their resonance as we do. If it is only 10%, then we need 20 receivers, 1 wire, to get 200% out as in.
Make sense? =]
Mags
Oh your redraw is good. Put the rectified output to a cap and then convert that as necessary. If the input is low as said as compared to the output, then the conversion can be done in a normal dc/dc fashion to bring it down to the input voltage level, that should be capable of more than what is used at the source input. I hope. =]
Mags
Read this http://www.rexresearch.com/mckie/mckie.htm carefully.
This guy replicated Tesla circuit from one of patents ( I can't find the exact number but it was a patent Tito mentioned probably with two tank circuits, when one capacitor is discharging the second inductor is charged)
So all we need is to build such circuit with load as a part of it (but here probably resistive load would be the best) .
Don't loose hope. I see at least 3-4 possible ways to achieve overunity and that without counting permanent magnets.
Those Tesla patents are one of such. They implemented what Tesla saw in childhood - snowball effect.
They are EXACT implementation of pendulum with special method of working.Pendulum which is powered by feeble impulses in phase AND additionally on each cycle it GROWS like snowball. Like a child on swing who eats hamburgers he he. Imagine that !
See ? Nature is our best teacher. Swing,snowball, also whip. Who can tell me what would be the implementation of whip in electric circuit ?
Hey Forest
I just looked at that link. Man it is going to take a bit to get that setup all together the way its presented. So much mumbo jumbo all over the circuit. Looks interesting though, good find. It will take me a bit of time to redraw the circuit without all the crazy stuff. And exact pt's list is a study.
But to see an electronic version is refreshing. =]
Very cool forest. ;]
Mags
@ Mags & Forest
I was searching for self induction coils and I came across a Nikola Tesla lecture book which had diagrams resembling the igniter type and also a double tank circuit so I thought of posting the link and one of the diagrams in the hopes someone might get inspired by it....very interesting reading and not very expensive book at $12.95....
http://www.tfcbooks.com/mall/more/351ntl.htm
Thanks,
Paul
http://www.themeasuringsystemofthegods.com/magnetic%20amplifiers.pdf
Quote from: forest on March 08, 2010, 03:43:18 PM
I was not useful lately so I found Tito first schematic and added polarity marks ;D
Keep going.
With respect to Reply #62, A thought experiment...?
Replace the transformer with a set of 10 each 1:1 counter-wound toroids having the 12v sides in parallel and the opposite side coils in series to a set of 12v batteries in series. There are a wide variety of types of variable frequency signal generators available to drive the system.
--Lee
@ Qwert
Excellent find...how do we tie in your finding of magnetic amplifiers into this thread? I've seen this before but how does it integrate??
Thanks,
Paul
I was doing some research and I think I found a picture of Tito and his coils.
Mags
My My
Teets looks like he had some work done.
Almost like "debonair"!
And he's workin so hard!!
Chet
Teets is working with flapjack coils too.
He is a genius =]
mags
WOW!
Who's that handsome fellow?
Quote from: forest on March 11, 2010, 07:13:27 AM
Those Tesla patents are one of such. They implemented what Tesla saw in childhood - snowball effect.
They are EXACT implementation of pendulum with special method of working.Pendulum which is powered by feeble impulses in phase AND additionally on each cycle it GROWS like snowball. Like a child on swing who eats hamburgers he he. Imagine that !
See ? Nature is our best teacher. Swing,snowball, also whip. Who can tell me what would be the implementation of whip in electric circuit ?
You just gave explanation how resonant effect works in RLC circuit. Just Tesla made it open RLC and added one-wire receivers. Tesla made Tesla Coil like generator of reactive power and in receiver he just coverted it (picked up longitudinaly or transversaly) in any desirable form.
Quote from: Magluvin on March 10, 2010, 08:42:04 PM
Delboy says that it is my transformers that are a problem. Im working on a couple air core designs that I want to give a go. we will see. =]
In this circuit, I dont see that resonance is a tuned thing. Think about it, a gas engine will be changing rpm, thus the speed of the timing will change also. That is why I felt strongly about this. Now if we were able to store the output, can that be converted to a viable power that can run things or even recharge its own battery? Thats the way I see it.
Mags
For patent 609250 as electrical igniter for gas engines it doesn't have to be resonance to give spark on output. The point is that it will not draw huge current from source and you will stil have HV on output.
But I was not talking about making igniter, but TeslaCoil. Princips are same, just in Tesla Coil you have to regulate to achive resonant effect for max output. And YES, problem will be in both cases if your output transformer is one with core, because you will have large primary inductanse and oscillations will be slow (low volts/meter). Primary is only few turns of thicker copper wire or copper tube!
You want high inductanse with laminated core (for example 0,5H) only on input to prevent large current from source!
You must understand why is somewhere needed large inductanse and why is somewhere needed small inductanse!
Quote from: Goat on March 12, 2010, 02:19:54 PM
I was searching for self induction coils and I came across a Nikola Tesla lecture book which had diagrams resembling the igniter type and also a double tank circuit so I thought of posting the link and one of the diagrams in the hopes someone might get inspired by it....
It's patent No. 577670. You can get Tesla patents on
www.pat2pdf.org (http://www.pat2pdf.org) just enter number of patent without free spaces
This patent is improvement for production of HV/HF because with one condenser there is period of rest, when receivers are cut off for supply for a half period of switching period.
As Tesla says in this patent "high frequency may be produced thereby continuosly or without period or rest"
This is the patent which Scott McKie replicated (PODMOD device link I posted).
Quote from: Goat on March 12, 2010, 02:19:54 PM
@ Mags & Forest
I was searching for self induction coils and I came across a Nikola Tesla lecture book which had diagrams resembling the igniter type and also a double tank circuit so I thought of posting the link and one of the diagrams in the hopes someone might get inspired by it....very interesting reading and not very expensive book at $12.95....
http://www.tfcbooks.com/mall/more/351ntl.htm
Thanks,
Paul
hey, all.
Actually what that book is refering to mr Goat, is Tesla's late patent of the "inductunce charging a cap" with consequent resonant action patent series (no. 577,670)
I have devised one traditional spark-gap Tesla coil lately, (check energetic forum http://www.energeticforum.com/renewable-energy/5186-patent-462-418-method-apparatus-electrical-conversion-distribution.html for report) and contrast it to my Solid State one (Kacher).
Ordinary Tesla coils of 100 or 120 breaks per sec does NOt have smooth resonance. Actually, it can be seen that with an o-scope. I exlain, upon every primary break, that happens in a small time period comparing with its charging time from the source, we have tremendous power "in an inconceivable small time, initiating results of huge power" or very very long sparks, yet the Secondary is inactive most of the time of vibrating at minute amplitube soon after each "bang".
In other words, it operates more or less as a tuned (for ringing) flyback transfomer. If you take into account the fact that the traditional spark-gap primary, DOES not guarentee every time will fire upon the same time interval hence cannot be absolute synergy bewteen every break..
This causes slight mis-phasing and true resonance cannot be achieved. Of course, rotary spark-gaps of constant speed solve at large this problem. After all, the very core of the those patents is a rotary switch of very fixed frequency. (that this is the core concept IMO of those Telsa patents series Tesla 568,178-568,180, 577,670)
So, by using a constant frequency switch and inductunce for charging a high voltage cap from low voltage, he could obtain smooth resonance and facilitate ease for HF HV currents making in a compact and simple apparatus to be used in a table.
Especially the 577,670 patent with the primary of two caps alternatively charging/discharging accomplishes this purpose attains Smooth resonance.
EDIT
I am curious, to see how the 577,670 arrangement as the picture of Goat has posted with the two secondaries is made and what its benefit. or in other words how a primary can oscillate two secondaries and yet being distinct form one to another? ???
Quote from: delboy on March 13, 2010, 02:13:33 AM
You just gave explanation how resonant effect works in RLC circuit. Just Tesla made it open RLC and added one-wire receivers. Tesla made Tesla Coil like generator of reactive power and in receiver he just coverted it (picked up longitudinaly or transversaly) in any desirable form.
He he , sometimes a small difference MAKES A BIG CHANGE! Looking at Podmod patent I must say that it can also work in closed loop system, in closed circuit. Open RLC just add another puzzle to the image - radiant energy radiation, collected into receivers. But I MUST say , with AC you have NO radiant.
I here I will told you what is wrong with RLC resonance as you described. There are two resonances!
One is when electric components values are rigid and resonant circuit is powered externally by interrupted power supply working in synchronism and phase with oscillations. No OU here.Common resonance.
Second is when electric components of circuit CHANGE CHARACTERISTICS in synchronism with oscillations.
This is OU ! HUGE !
Comparing to child on swing - first one is when you are standing behind and push swing in correct direction in correct moment. NO OU here.
Second one is when you are a child and sway your legs properly.OU is HERE !
Now return to the Tesla patents and see what is missing. Snow ball effect is missing. The output must be converted to normal electricity and put back to the input. Like in Tito schematic.
How is it possible ? . The actual process is described in Tesla article from 1900.
Quote from: Goat on March 12, 2010, 09:29:01 PM
@ Qwert
Excellent find...how do we tie in your finding of magnetic amplifiers into this thread? I've seen this before but how does it integrate??
Thanks,
Paul
You are right, it needs some experimentation. Here is another link, maybe closer to this thread:
http://www.stargazing.net/Astroman/Magnifier.html
Quote from: forest on March 13, 2010, 03:43:24 AM
I here I will told you what is wrong with RLC resonance as you described. There are two resonances!
One is when electric components values are rigid and resonant circuit is powered externally by interrupted power supply working in synchronism and phase with oscillations. No OU here.Common resonance.
Second is when electric components of circuit CHANGE CHARACTERISTICS in synchronism with oscillations.
This is OU ! HUGE !
Forest, i do not want to be pessimist, but where you substatiate the claim that parametric resonators are OU? As far i know they are not.
Actually, besides mysterious black-boxes, no-one has ever shown OU with plain resonance. We should think beyond resonance terms. Electrical resonance (plain or parametric) is a phenomenon employed daily, still no OU reported in any setup.
Or to put things in another perspective, its aburd people like Kapanadze to claim COPs of thousands, yet we all in our setups, to be constantly underunity. Not even a COP of 2 or 10!
Something other tricky is to be employed, counter intuitive and almost without any sense if OU is to be captured, hence "the secret" that few in the whole planet may possess.
The secret must lies into the "weird" or "twilight zone" of electricity and still further.
but I have told you..... output is feed back to input, it runs with gain.... the problem only is to stop it at required power level...
Forest
I know how to get OU!
This guy showed me how
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=eKPrGxB1Kzc
God uses all the same building blocks with all the same rules!
we have guys here getting OU every day "Guaranteed"[Wattsup put that in my head ,I agree]
Just not harvesting properly!
Chet
PS
Funny he does this in the sea
If we do it in "the sea of energy"
THE SAME THING HAS TO HAPPEN "its the law"
I don't make the rules!and I usually don't like them!
This is an exception.
BTW this isn't from handsome-> ;D<- [aka Teets]
Its just commonsense
Perhaps dead battery's harvest naturally ?
Tito will have to explain that.
To me the bottom line is "Harvesting"
Or keeping that HOLE open longer, thus creating more time to "harvest"
The bug shows you can cause an OU event with a baseball bat!
Quote from: ramset on March 13, 2010, 11:01:32 AM
Forest
I know how to get OU!
This guy showed me how
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=eKPrGxB1Kzc
God uses all the same building blocks with all the same rules!
we have guys here getting OU every day "Guaranteed"[Wattsup put that in my head ,I agree]
Just not harvesting properly!
Chet
PS
Funny he does this in the sea
If we do it in "the sea of energy"
THE SAME THING HAS TO HAPPEN "its the law"
I don't make the rules!and I usually don't like them!
This is an exception.
BTW this isn't from handsome-> ;D<- [aka Teets]
Its just commonsense
Perhaps dead battery's harvest naturally ?
Tito will have to explain that.
To me the bottom line is "Harvesting"
The bug shows you can cause an OU event with a baseball bat!
yep, I wasn't sure if I could say that , if it's safe to say that.... pistol shrimp is doing what we have to do - magnetic flux or shockwave, gotoluc found it too in his self-powering coil with magnets
Sharp impulses of unidirectional direction, abruptly stopped creating magnetic shockwave, just place around as many collectors as you wish to multiply power.
This is what I was talking - find electrical implementation of whip ! Nature is our best teacher !
If you stick with the ideas I presented you you will find OU :
snowball effect, child pendulum method of operation without external power, whip and pistol shrimp.
Now delboy, Chet - tell me what is the proper representation of whip in electric circuit ?
Forrest
I can not say "I am clueless"
But I can say I see it with my own eyes :o
A few cm off the tip of that bugs claw
How do you "break" something?
Mom told me I was a natural,Tesla Broke wires !
busting the bonds yields the goods.
If I was to ask how do you keep the window open that the shrimp makes?
Wouldn't the logical answer be, take away his pistol and give him a machine gun that never runs out of pulses?
The question is how to Harvest?
We Know how to open the window.
Chet
Quote from: forest on March 13, 2010, 12:08:07 PM
Now delboy, Chet - tell me what is the proper representation of whip in electric circuit ?
The quick discharge of a capacitor should do it. The problem is getting the capacitor charged back up to do it again. I think that this is what Tesla is doing in patent 577670. He is running 2 in parallel to effectively double the frequency of pulses. I could be wrong since I haven't read the patent yet, just looked at the drawing.
Hey all, wow. almost a whole page in one day. =]
Deboy good to see you are sticking around.
Have you seen the self oscillating coil thread that just started? My guess would be he is making the cores ability to change field harder for the pulses from the coil, by having the magnet influence the cores field potential continuously. The magnet tightens the strings on the core guitar. So this tension will have a resonant freq at which if we pulse the coil with small pulses, we should get ring around the rosy, and the capacitor will get a pocket full of posies. I think he is running at 21khz. But when he removes the battery from the cap, this makes the cap the source, but the cap's voltage climbs after removing the battery.
Just wanted to get your view on that and how it may compare to what we are looking for here. More out than you put in. Over all, that is the main goal of the majority on this site.
If what Luc has going is the real deal, just the experience of understanding it, will open doors to understanding in other things. We can make resonators and wind a no. of coils and yada yada yada, but to have a self runner sitting in front of you, imagine the ambition to expand on that seed.
The crazy thing is, you just need to tune the core tension, with a magnet. That is how the freq of operation will be determined, and of course by the size and type of core. Just plucking the flux guitar.
The magnet infused core thread is also the same thing. One reason I liked this igniter was the freq was what you wanted it to be when ever you wanted. I like freq that are not radio. No fcc crap to deal with.
But if this is a way to get a resonant device to at the least, run it self, Im taking the class this semester. =]
Mags
Im posting this on his thread also.
Mags
Shrimps and whips! ;D
Lets people get engineering and calculate some rough figures about Tesla's high inductunce. I have the question how much is the high inductunce anyway?
Let's take Tito's beloved patent 568,177 or ozone one.
I am going arbitrarily take the following figures
Motor RPM: 3000 or 50 turns/sec
Commutator makes/breaks: 4
Cap charges/discharges per sec: 200
resonant frequency: Because the L2 coil that must run on resonance for best results is a small coil (Fig2), i assume it will have a natural resonant frequency of some 600Khz. Using a Tesla coil calculator with the following data:
L2 coil diameter: 5 inch
Length: 10 inch
wire: 24awg
we have some 450 turns with an inductunce of 11m H with a natural freq of 600Khz
I proceed. if the primary is:
L1 diamter : 5 inch, 4 turns and 0.25 inch diameter will give some 5uH or less inductunce.
This will require a 14-15 nF capacitor to be charged 200 times per sec.
Again supposing that a resonable commutator voltage handling threshold 3Kv will require an amount of energy 0.07 Joules approx.
The inductor should provide that energy by being charged 1/400 per sec (approx. - if the commutator conducting surface of charging phase of is equal to discharging one and 4 in number)
....
I will take as a example my Permanent magnet Dc motor that has the following specs:
Inductunce: 50mH
resistance: 0.4 ohm
operating voltage: 24V
L/R: 0.125 sec or 125msec (that will permit a 66% of maximum DC current) 24/0.4*0.66 = 40amps aprox.
Assuming linearity of current vs time for shake of conveniece, we have 40 amps current at 125msec and 20* 2.5/125 = 0.8 amps at 2.5 msec time. inductor's energy equals 0.016 Joules.
Actually my little motor combined with the afore-mentioned cap the latter will be charged under ideal circumstances some 1500 volts rather than 3000 volts assumed per time.
After that charge, the discharge time follows and a tesla coil action is set-up.
The novel part in those patents is that the inductor is CHARGED during the CAP discharge cycle.
...
And that will be all of Baroutologos' calculations based on the Ozone patent :) :) :)
Now you tell me where the OU comes into the picture
Maybe Tito can shed some light on that.
He sent me a picture from his vacation.. Im sure he will help us when he gets back. =]
Mags
Hahahaa! Nice pic! Mag you really funny!
Im just relaxing a bit from experimenting. Letting some thing soak in. I get burned out for a couple days and back at it. But from what im seeing, invest in copper wire while ya can. lol Sounds crazy, but its gold later on.
Mags
Thanks for the tip mag! I think i am gonna buy Copper wire stocks! :):)
Actually having the wire in hand would be more trustworthy.
None of that Sell Mortimer Sell. That will put you in the poor house if you let someone else do it for you. ;]
Mags
Mags
You got a post card, I'm jealous!
Very Handsome family Tito has there!
Shouldn't the little girl be Green?
Well maybe just a relative!
You mention Gold I always wonder about gold plating a "Collector"
For added harvesting?
If you wanna try this PM me and I'll send you a "KIT"
Open also to any other serious experimenters here!
If nothing else we could gold plate one of Tito's teeth!
Chet
Quote from: baroutologos on March 13, 2010, 06:16:06 PM
Shrimps and whips! ;D
Lets people get engineering and calculate some rough figures about Tesla's high inductunce. I have the question how much is the high inductunce anyway?
resonant frequency: Because the L2 coil that must run on resonance for best results is a small coil (Fig2), i assume it will have a natural resonant frequency of some 600Khz. Using a Tesla coil calculator with the following data:
L2 coil diameter: 5 inch
Length: 10 inch
wire: 24awg
we have some 450 turns with an inductunce of 11m H with a natural freq of 600Khz
I proceed. if the primary is:
L1 diamter : 5 inch, 4 turns and 0.25 inch diameter will give some 5uH or less inductunce.
This will require a 14-15 nF capacitor to be charged 200 times per sec.
And that will be all of Baroutologos' calculations based on the Ozone patent :) :) :)
Now you tell me where the OU comes into the picture
High inductance for max 200 makes/breaks will be any value bigger than 200mH, for example you take 500mH (secondar from some transformator). Now combining that value with your 200 makes/breaks gives the value of primary condenser of 1uF to 2uF !
And why is your L2 so small? Try bigger diameter and lower frequency, for example 50 inch diameter and 100kHz !?
OU comes into the picture when you get enogh high V/m on output at not too high frequency! That way energy will not be radiated in space, and you can pick up with one-wire receiver as much as there is reactive energy ;)
This is interesting : http://www.youtube.com/user/Kywdo#p/u/20/vbHV_OCqNVs
Something irrelevant somewhat to this thread... but interesting to dell boy. :)
Today i was reviewing a book i purchased about Tesla and it suggested the patent 1,119,732 as the one used for energy transfer via electric ripples in earth at long distances plus some other arcane uses the author suggested :)
I printed that patent and studied with a new eye, after reading Colorado Spring notes.
I dare to say this patent, being of the last ones Tesla issued, includes the essence of Colorado Spring notes.
It has all the methodology.
*Tight inductive coupling between a large radius primary/secondary for increased efficiency,
*on top of that an almost unclouped and free oscillating coil (xtra coil may be said) that has .
*a hood for dealing with sparks,
*an elevated terminal (since Tesla discovered the one terminal capacitance of his coils is raised by 10% per foot)
*top terminal with the small hemispheres closely placed for increaseing one terminal capacitance.
Notein the final design, Tesla suggests a small radius xtra coil for free oscillations and a large radius secondary (tightly coupled with primary) for good efficiency i guess.
I have not seen anyone building such Tesla coil, even in miniaturization.
I guess i should give it a go ;)
@Tito,
I suppose you are finilizing the promised device... right?
Is this a WHIP ? ::)
I have a question. We all know what happen when capacitor discharge into low self-induction coil.
But what would happen if capacitor discharge into high -self-induction coil saturated by high amperage DC current ? And what would be if that discharge is unidirectional and without oscillations ?
Hey forest. Nice pic there. Actually i have done it poster on my room's wall :)
By the way, Tesla's patent of electrical conversion and distribution deals with thsese kind of issues, as discharging a condenser to various inductnce coils.
From my own experiments i have found out that if the condenser is charged in relatively low voltage and coil is high inductunce (e.g. the 220 volts of my transformer of 1,7 H) then the oscillations tend to be quite minimum till the power is dissipated to resistance.
If you apply a load to transformer's secondary, then it will behave as a good performance conversion unit (as Tesla patent claims) perhaps without any oscillation (i have not a scope i do not know for sure but more or less this is the case).
Now, if the applied voltage pressure to the cap is high and the coil low inductunce, the formulation of oscillations is inevitable, unless you apply high resistance to ring them down quickly. (that means loss)
If in that case apply a load to transformer second winding again, the outptu maybe poor due to high frequency of oscillations.
Actually in my experiments (see energetic forum my posts) for this case i used a high frequency toroid transformer and the high frequency oscillsations of the primary easily are passed as high frequency oscilations to secondary. ;)
...
Now i had the idea, since the energy stored in an inductor is proportional to the square of the current (not time current flows) that by charging a cap to high voltage will create in the conductor high current and consequently free energy...
All experimenting suggests that this not gonna happen :( The cap develops only such current density its energy in relation to inductor permits.
Sorry Guys, Ill be back on track in a day or so. Been working.
Mags
hi everyone good day :(
i don't know how to start it, but here is what happen yesterday as i am finalizing my work, my elder brother ask me what i am is doing, and i said to him that I'm trying to raise and beg some donations on some people in overunity.com and i am giving this free energy project to them. And here is what he said "What!, are you out of your mind! don't you know that oil companies are serious killers! what if you got killed?!, who will fed you children, me?! don't do that! and do not communicate to people you don't know again!".
Then he smash every thing and destroy all the info i made. i got mad at him but i made to think to his side and i felt that he is right, he is just very concern for my family.
And now, i am here and very ashamed to all of you, but i have to face it because i made a promise, and now i will accept anything you will say to me whether it is good or bad, and probably i expect more bad comment and that is okay i understand.
i really want to release my free energy to get some donation money cause my mother needs some money for her dialysis three times a week, but now i feel a lot of conflict, and now i decided to follow my brother first.
maybe this is really is my last post.
To all of you there I'm really really sorry, i don't expect this. :(
please continue, ZPE is true.
TIP1: Try to kick a bike just for every 3 seconds, and it will give you a lot of rotation and if you have a lot of magnet and coils of course it will give you an excess energy, all you need here is a timed kicker, and of course lubrication and weight plays a major role in this setup.
Tip2: discharge a fully charge capacitor in a very thick wire with tail, this will give you an excess energy and this is the secret!. tail = extra coil.
Goodbye friend, i will not anymore go back here.
and thank you very very much.
@ sir otto, when you say about the ceramic cap of 470pf, there i believe and convinced that you really know the secret. so long fell.
Hope you understand.
Goodbye and God bless
otits L. noicaro ;D
Hey Tito
no problem. I imagine it to be a tough call if I were in your situation.
Soo you didnt like the pi9ctures I made for you? =]
Take Care
Mags
@Tito
Quotei don't know how to start it, but here is what happen yesterday as i am finalizing my work, my elder brother ask me what i am is doing, and i said to him that I'm trying to raise and beg some donations on some people in overunity.com and i am giving this free energy project to them. And here is what he said "What!, are you out of your mind! don't you know that oil companies are serious killers! what if you got killed?!, who will fed you children, me?! don't do that! and do not communicate to people you don't know again!".
Then he smash every thing and destroy all the info i made. i got mad at him but i made to think to his side and i felt that he is right, he is just very concern for my family.
If there is one lesson I have learned it is that successful people do not ask anyone for permission to succeed, they do it in spite of this world full of people living in fear and that is why they are successful. I cannot speak for you or anyone else but I have made the personal choice not to have my life dominated by the fear of things I cannot control and I lead a much more fulfilling life because of it. In any case, I can only hope you will find your own way in your own time as we only get one chance at this life we have. As well I know there are people who are not afraid and they know this technology as we do --- and they will not be asking permission from anyone when it goes public.
Regards
AC
Hello all,
@Tito
if I helped you just 1% then Im happy because then I didnt waste my time here in this forum.
@All
maybe interesting, maybe not:
Imagine a trifilar coil
1. layer, 2. layer, 3. layer.
Each turn wound turn next to turn in the 1. layer
The 2. and 3. layer made in the same manner.
Layer over layer.
The DIFFERENCE of the wire lenght in the 1. layer and the 3. layer is
PHI = 1,6
As said, maybe interesting maybe not.
I love trifilar coils.
Otto
Why did i knew this? :P
Tito despite all the "tips" and inspiring words, you just add a brick to the "case against overunity".
Its ok, if it is not there , how anyone should expect to happen anyway? The secret has not been "shared" by gosus as Bedini, Bearden, Lindemman, Dollard etc in the field that claim they know.
The real surprise will be if you indeed shared it (in case it existed) and you actually make a diffrerence here.
Anyway,
Goodluck
By the way, since my nature tends to investigate the "hopeless" I would say the only Tito's contribution here was to stimulated us to read Colorado Springs notes for finding the secret.
(Note Tesla in his notes nowhere reports any setup with magnets. IMO magnets may bear some OU effect but very evry feeble. Tesla was always on big power)
So we are left with tip n2 "of a cap discharging to a primary and this have a "tail" or extra coil"
I know Tesla admited greatest invention was the magnifier transformer embodied in the patent 1,119,732. I am convinced that this holds a critical answer whether any "secret" exists.
BTW the magnifier transformer can be achieved with many ways. Another way to use a cap discharge to a heavy loop with a tail is directly from the Colorado Springs note the pic below.
In any case, i read the wikipedia that Tesla used to call it a "self regenarative" transformer. Perhaps this bears some significance.
Anyway, i am into it since in case you serious study Tesla, the footprints lead there.
I think we should start with small circuit , maybe we could use relay as Tito mentioned ?
How fast can relay oscillate ? That would be the basic limitation , so we have to choose capacitor to relay coil and find resonant frequency not too high.
Is 10khz reasonable ?
Hey Forest
I agree. And in Tip 2 tito says the extra coil is a tail, and by that he is saying if for example, if you have a coil of 100 turns, that you short the cap across some of those turns, say 5 turns or 50 turns, and supposedly you pickup from the ends of the coil. Like a center tapped transformer, but air cor I suppose. But it does add to the experiments we can do along the way. =]
What Titio doesnt understand, is if he gave it to one of us, and that person gave it to the rest of us, why would he be a target. He is not the one spreading it around any further. Its not like he opened a business and started selling kits, or went to a news station. That would be the worst thing to do.
But he has been back and forth with this and some people have a hard time dealing with this stuff. Some dont.
I am going to do some tests with a heavy ga coil and shave off a no of turns as to give me tap points and hit it with my strobe light. I got the strobe to do about 30pps using a .33uf cap instead of the 100uf that was on it.
So using the strobe tube as a spark gap to dump 300v to the taps on the coil 30pps then I will rectify the outer ends of the coil to a cap and see what we get.
I also am doing some self running coil experiments that I will show also.
Oh and Teets, If you did tell one of us more, Im sure they would not go around advertising that it was you. But it would be interesting to see it grow from the back ground. Like food in the garden, you can see a difference every day. =] And if it were out, it should be a tribute to Tesla's dream.
Mags
Oh Forest, I lost track, I dont thing a relay can comfortably do 10khz will have to try a reed relay.
Mags
Quote from: otto on March 19, 2010, 02:56:24 AM
Hello all,
@Tito
if I helped you just 1% then Im happy because then I didnt waste my time here in this forum.
@All
maybe interesting, maybe not:
Imagine a trifilar coil
1. layer, 2. layer, 3. layer.
Each turn wound turn next to turn in the 1. layer
The 2. and 3. layer made in the same manner.
Layer over layer.
The DIFFERENCE of the wire lenght in the 1. layer and the 3. layer is
PHI = 1,6
As said, maybe interesting maybe not.
I love trifilar coils.
Otto
ciao!
nice to see you again
maybe interesting maybe not
http://www.videolife.tk/video/mHyTOcfF99o/Extraordinary-Toroidal-Vortices.html
Hello all,
@wings
Im every day reading here what people are doing but Im not logged in because I dont have to say anything.
Can we open the "gate" to another world, to a world of free energy with coils wound in a PHI relation??
The link you showed doesnt work.
Otto
I see that many of videos previously recommended by Tito were removed from youtube ! How we can stored all Tito responses (save as much as possible recommended videos, too!) into one pdf file to not get lost in future ? Something similar to Steven Mark compilation ;D
Tito
Remember there is strength in numbers,The only thing we have to fear is fear itself!
I could hardly think of a bigger way to change this world for the better
than to contribute to this OU cause ,any way you can!
I hope you stick around Bud!
you sound quite perplexed!
I will put your picture on my fridge.
-> ;D<-
Chet
On to whom much is given much is required!
Those shoes you have on won't be easy to wear!
Chose your path with your heart!
Quote from: otto on March 19, 2010, 07:07:34 AM
Hello all,
@wings
Im every day reading here what people are doing but Im not logged in because I dont have to say anything.
Can we open the "gate" to another world, to a world of free energy with coils wound in a PHI relation??
The link you showed doesnt work.
Otto
this one
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mHyTOcfF99o
Hello all,
@wings
thanks.
the first few seconds of the video are very nice but..
Otto
Question : in what direction is wound coil in relay ? does it depend on producer ? There are two connectors : 85 and 86. In Imhotep radiant oscillator terminal 85 is used, why not 86 ?
I heard that radiant energy effect depends on coil direction.
Hey Forest
Im not sure. Can you post the imotep diagram?
Mags
http://www.scribd.com/doc/10319093/teslas-hv-impulse-lighting-methodsimhoteps-radiant-oscillator
@Guys
Nice try with Tito. Too bad but it is not the end.
@wings
Nice video thanks.
@otto
What do you mean, "very nice BUT".
Take a Rodin coil with OD 10" and ID 7", make another Rodin coil with OD 7" and ID 4" and make another Rodin coil with OD 4" and ID 1". Put them one inside the other and just energize or pulse the first big one, each of the others will be in the greatest position for the concentrated output. Simplified but the idea shown in the videos tells me this right away.
@baroutologos
Off topic. I posted a question on the Thane thread located here and one two posts after....
http://www.overunity.com/index.php?topic=7530.msg232864#msg232864
I would be very curious to know if you have every tried this.
Quote from: forest on March 19, 2010, 08:59:38 AM
http://www.scribd.com/A/10319093/teslas-hv-impulse-lighting-methodsimhoteps-radiant-oscillator
@all
Unfortunately, the borrowed computer I'm on loads and runs the scribd site, but the page of the book on the site is blank.
The following does have a schematic incorporated into the video running presentation:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=59d-9bS9qP4
REEDIT:Another version by another inventor:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_TjxV3c7pTo&NR=1
Newer computers should be able to run it, unless it's a public computer with no Flash Player-type of software installed on the hard drive. Libraries and the like sometimes delete that software so children can't view Internet p0rn0graphy. Just a tip.
--Lee
IMO this is not to be mixed with resonators.
The radiant Tesla patent should be discussed in a thread of its own.
Radiant energy is a much misused term, and cleverly exploited commercially by smart merchants assisted from people's ignorance in the FE field.
By the way, radiant energy is just what the terms says. Something that comes from radiation. Not necessarily visible or EM. Tesla in his patent says that the particular apparatus captures the possitive charged ions on the air. The man explained. BTW Tesla distinguishes radiant energy (back then all radiated energies were called radiants) and the ether he believed it exists instead of vaccum.
...
I would like to read from someone who has actually experimented with this to tell me the approximate wattage of this method and according to various factors as:
* elevation of terminal
* insulation of terminal
* weather conditions
* day or night
* location
etc
Ok boys.
How many of you have read the Colorado Springs notes in full?
Tito says the extra coil is the tail. As in if you have 2 coils in series and just dump the cap across 1 of the coils, and the other coil will be considered the tail. But I also see tesla refer to an extra coil but in the circuit, the cap is pulsed across bot of the coils as they are in series. He has the extra coils in series with primaries of transformers.
So its hard to find a particular part in the book that really gives us definition of the extra coils role here.
I did read that Tesla said that when he added the extra coil, that the power output was more fierce. But why?
But I had yet to find or lock down where it talks about the extra coils tail. Not yet.
Coils and more coils, and even extra coils. Would it cause a node between the coils?
Mags
Mag, I urge STRONGLY everyone here posting on this very Tesla thread to study Colorado Spring notes In FUll! (all 400 pages)
IMO this is not abou only of Tesla's schematics and diagrams. its about his whole concept of operation. The way he conducted the experiments, his methodology, his reasoning, his ideas as they came, his analysing equipment. Discusion of peculiar effects as well as observations.
All this. I have read it and i am reviewing again and again.
The "notes" are the only legacy Tesla left to us, concerning his day to day procedure and experimental basis.
No point to mention the work of Tesla as written down in his notes, and then to mix it with contemporary theories of Bedini, Bearden and other mumbo-jumbo free energy "specialists" that specialize in selling DVD$ and book$.
This is a Tesla thread and we should treat it as such.
Barth is right. But you can start at page 78 in notes.
The notes can be found on E-mule.
Again, this is another method of obtaining the working circuit with a "tail" known as the odin coil.
Extract from a beutiful book on the very basics of electrics dated back in 1913 "Electricity at high pressures and frequencies"
http://www.archive.org/stream/electricityathi00trangoog#page/n247/mode/1up
By the way, better stick with Tesla's guidelines.
Logos
Love those old books. Got any more? =]
I lived in a small town and mane did the library have some old stuff.
Mags
Guys,
stop researching Tesla's work right now! Go to Forest's post from March 11 and go to link he provided there. Read that patent CAREFULLY!!
This is Steven Mark's patent and his REAL name!!!
@ qwert. All quote Tesla but almost none's work resemble his. You need to do your research instead of reading every misleading patent ending up to same conclusions as always. An inventor claiming a pile of bull...
Tesla research is my choice.
Quote from: Qwert on March 21, 2010, 10:30:13 AM
Guys,
stop researching Tesla's work right now! Go to Forest's post from March 11 and go to link he provided there. Read that patent CAREFULLY!!
This is Steven Mark's patent and his REAL name!!!
@all
Here's the site referenced by forrest on Mar. 11; his only entry on that page:
http://www.rexresearch.com/mckie/mckie.htm
Here's the patent:
http://www.google.com/patents?id=YLcbAAAAEBAJ&printsec=abstract&zoom=4#v=onepage&q=&f=false
The inventor(Marks or not) does say in the description that one tank circuit charges each battery, alternating sides, apparently indefinitely, particularly in overall circuit resonance.
--Lee
Its funny we dont see any working devices floating around, yet everyone has something to say as to what information is better than others.
There is probably many ways of getting things going. Its just a matter of trying to find out.
Its hard to make a decision as to what info is right or wrong just by looking at it.
I am getting into some experiments on the extra coil, mixed with the igniter. I see that maybe using identical coils in series and pulsing across 1 of them, that here may be something to it.
I see resonance as it can be at what ever freq we wish, depending on the resonator design.
If a resonant circuit is easily excited by a small signal input, well what about a large signal input?
I gota go to work, and while im there Ill be conjuring up some fluxtic difusion.
Mags
Digging info on Kapanadze and the newly released video from a replicator, this pic i found on the matrix.ru forum.
It certainly will entertain you Mag, since it encompasses a cap discharging over a coil with a tail (load applied)
Very nice find Logos. =]
Look at the nice spacing on that coil ;]
This device is compact also. Not 1.9 meter drum coil. =]
Is that a pic from the site also? Or is that yours?
Well it looks like a direction to move in. I wonder if this coil with a tail is freq dependent? As in, if you pulse it once, will more power come out the tail.
Mags
I have see it in the past duirng my replication of Kacher, and upon re-mention of that site by Omni, i have re-seen it again.
Not my design. I am not Russian
It looks like he used thick string for spacing the wire on the coil.
Welp time to get some tail. =]
Mags
Im German Russian Irish Polish french, and maybe a sprinkle of others along the way.
But I dont speak any of them. =]
Mags
I have a feeling Mag, that this arrangement will work better with a larger than usual tesla capacitor (say 1uf) and in lower voltages 500-1000 volts.
Don't know why actually..
Just saw the vid on the other thread you are on, it doesnt seem like it has any solid freq to work. Actually it seems like if it were a bit higher freq, the lights would be more steady.
coil tails, could it be that simple? =]
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VZtvJy3cRzo
Mags
Acoording to the other thread, i have expressed there my views. The system behaves as cap-discharge magnificator (assuming its true) rather than resonator. The lamps flicker more or less in relation to spark-gap.
That's my oppinion anyway
I agree totally. I imagine that there could be a solid freq that would really make it sing, but pulse for pulse, thats a great gig.
I am going to cut up a piece of pvc and wind me a coil with some space and make a bunch of taps. This will be fun to try.
Mags
Thats Tesla igniter patent ;D Look how fast microwave cap is discharged and recharged. Pure potential.
Well Forest, it looks like we have many good ingredients to work with now.
So first, we are able to produce a high tension source with a pulsing circuit, regardless if resonance, and discharge the cap into a coil, any coil, but this coil we give it a tail. Not anything different really from Kapanadze just a lower range of power, but the amplifying effects should work regardless, 1 pulse at a time, or at a freq that works best for each variation.
But as to what and where it it happening, theorys...
First, if we send energy to the coil, and current goes in one way and then it comes back out in the opposite direction, and if we make it possible for all of the collapse to be maximally absorbed to the output, either by load or step up to recharge loop, then we should have virtually no ring left. Up then down, it sits and waits till the next incoming pulse. So there will be a freq that will give minimum off time and should be able to work on that freq and down.
So we will call the TC Tail Coil and divide that into the Dog and the Tail, the Dog being the portion of the coil that the pulse is sent across, and the tail wags.
If we pulse the dog, what should we expect to begin with, does it mater the polarity of the pulse to the dog.
What happens to the pulse in the coil while being pulsed, after the input pulse dissipates what happens in the coil to give us more?
Ill finish with a thought then I gota git till next time.
This seems contrary to Don Smith as in he says the primary should be in the middle of the secondary to increase the volts and amps. Unless Dons coils are some way connected at the ends and the tail is in the dog. lol Well there may be some experiments that that coils can be inter woven and improve the effect. Bifi? Put them in seies and pulse just 1? Maybe. Seems to have the qualities for the job.
But we are seeing a few TC projects gong on out there.
Come here Fido, I got my meter, time to measure your tail. =]
Mags
The magic happen in primary.I've always said that if we know exact Smith circuit at primary including neon sign transformer we will find the solution.
But first please help me find what happen in case of Tesla igniter patent.
If capacitor is discharging into low induction coil in the same time high self-induction coil is accumulating energy in magnetic field. That coil is connected between positive of battery and capacitor terminal (exactly what Tito mentioned in one of his tips)
What is going on when there is a break between capacitor and low self-induction coil ? Capacitor and high-selfinduction coil form series resonant circuit IMHO.
1. Is the current from coil now in the same direction as previously ? Charging capacitor terminal connected to that coil ?
2. How fast does it happen ? Can we compute it ? Is that related to series resonant circuit energy flow ?
In all LC circuit tutorials it's started witch charged capacitor, how is energy bounced between coil and capacitor IF the coil is "charged" first ?
Help me find the correct equations so we will not blindly replicate other's circuits.
I bet all equations are quite simple and known.What we have to know :
1. How long lasts capacitor discharge into low selfinduction coil ? I mean HF oscillations
2. How long capacitor must be shorted to low self-induction coil to get enough magnetic field in high self-induction coil to recharge cap later ?
3. How long capacitor and high self-induction coil must form series LC circuit to allow all energy of coil dump into cap and PREVENT OSCILLATIONS (which would flow energy back into coil)
4. What should be the induction of high selfinduction coil to limit charge of capacitor from battery ? We do not need electrons here. Capacitor should be charged by pure potential from coil back EMF I think.
Hi everyone,
been a lurker here for the last 2 months reading lots of topics.
while I was looking for Tesla information I came across this web site
http://www.tesla.hu/tesla/tesla.htm
Colorado Springs Notes are posted here also.
I hope to join in the research soon.
Now back to your regular programming.
JT :)
Forest,
I think its quite the same thing to start resonance witha charged coil or a charged capacitor. Actually they charge/discharge each other as the frequency of the circuit.
Considering the ozone patent, i think the charging cap part is quite straightforward. Charge a coil and then discharge it to a cap. The LC ringing effect of the coil discharging to cap and vice versa is a nuisance to the ozone patent smooth operation i guess.
By assuming some high inductunce of the range 50-100 mH and capacitance of the order 20-100nf for the ozone patent, again the ringing goes to khz range.
But, IMO since a high inductunce of the charging inductor, there is a relative high q (initiating low amp currents) and since the resistance, of the charging inductor is little, there is not any great diminishing of the energy due to oscillation between iron-core charging inductor and capacitor.
Now, to become more hands on. Lets assume the commutator rotates at a rate of 3000rpm or 50 per sec and has 4 conducting/4 non conducting areas (8 totally) That means each last for 1/400 of second or 2.5 msec.
If the charging inductor is 50mH and capacitor 100nf this gives a frequency of 2250 hz/sec or 5-6 cycles per commutator time during inductor collapse to cap. i guess not appreciable energy is spent there.
And upon next conducting commutator contact the first LC (charging inductor-cap) is becoming obsolete since the new inductor offers quite a less impedance to cap thus becoming LC1 of air core primary of few turns and cap, while the cap is charged from the battery.
This is how i see the patent to work and correct me if i am wrong. ;)
...
By the way, facts and clues point that during a discharge of a cap to a coil produces the magic and not the other way around.
@ Mag,
Any news from your tail-ing experiments? Soon i will join you
Hey Logos And Forest.
I have not gotten a chance to play, but I will have some time tonight.
I am going to take some time and do the vids on the basic igniter and Titos relay pulsed transformer and a strobe light powered transformer, just to get them up here for the history of it. Then Im going to get some tail. =]
I find the strobe light to be an interesting drive device. Enclosed spark in the tube is quiet and quite visible. Spots, I see spots! lol Depending on the load, which is inserted in between 1 of the strobe bulb power wires and the strobe tube, the flash changes in the tube. A low resistance load or low impedance, the flash is normal, but as the resistance gets higher the flash turns more into multi simultaneous thing sparks.
I have 2 different strobe tubes, a straight 1.5 in and a curly one. The straight tube can get qite hot fast as compared to the larger curl tube. I suppose I will have to put a request out to Steorn as to the best way to gather that heat and send it back to the bat. ;] lol It seems as for very little current, there is quite a bit of heat there.
But after those lil vids, I will try the whole dog and wag a tail with the same circuits as in the vids, and we will see what we see. Its a start. See ya this evening. =]
Mags
Look at Tesla igniter patent.The discharge in sparkgap of secondary is powerful enough to ignite oil vapour.Not a tiny spark from HV coil.
That clearly shows there is energy transfer.
Let me ask something.What is going on if coil was first shorted with high amperage low voltage current and then one end of coil is completly disconnected from circuit and float in air. What is going on with magnetic field of coil ?
What is going on with current trapped in coils wire turns and what is going on with magnetic field trapped in core (if there is core) ?
You see coil is now like a tail, connected only in one terminal with circuit. Does its energy dissipate in air or rathe into circuit !?
Hey Forest
Im not sure that the "coil" part is part of the equation. As Tito said, Tesla discharged a cap on a copper bar, and power came out the end beyond the connection of the cap. Well that is a more descriptive way to put it.
So I think the cap discharges into the prtion of the copper that the cap was discharged into, and then bounces back to the tail. Im not sure of the effect totally but it is how I imagine till we try. Or maybe the discharge blast causes the tail to get instantaneous bounce and they meet in the middle? Dunno yet.
But it seems simple enough that it is worth looking into. =
Im going to check out Home Depot for some thick solid copper wire to try some doggy coils. It does not even need insulation as there will be spaces between the windings, and it will make it easy to tap into where ever we want. Maybe there can be a tail on both ends. ;]
Mags
Copper wire?
This is probably irrelevant but at least worth knowing.
Copper wire today I believe is always annealed.
I do not believe this to be the case in Teslas time.
Annealing changes the wire Big time.
Just a thought !
And one of the reasons I feel playing with "Gold"
in the "collector"
SHOULD BE TRIED!![not implying anything here]
Chet
Well I was thinking to freeze the copper and shatter it with a hammer then solder it all back together nice and neat.
Then put it into the taffy stretcher. That will fix it =]
Mags
Hey yah know what?
That sounds a lot easier than "chewing"!
{as he spits from his toothless face and reaches for the hammer and taffy stretcher]
Chet
Mag, i was pondering on the kapanadze alleged replication device, and the suggested pulsing a heavy copper wire with a tail thing Tito suggested.
If you see it with a brand new eye, certainly revolves around the spirit of Tesla's 462,418 patent, but with a network of of coils-load-caps to achieve magnification.
Logos
I just scanned through the pat. I will have to read it tonight to get a grip on it.
Home depot has some thick copper for electrical grounds and such. Im going to see of I can pick up some this evening.
I have some 16ga on hand but might as well go for broke and work the heavy copper as recommended.
Be back later
Mags
Oh and like I said earlier to forest, it just may be that the coil is just a way of putting a long conductor in a small place instead of stretched out. ;] And it just may be that the pat you listed shows that fact. But the millions of cycles per sec. concerns me with the pat way of it, where the coil tail does not seem to require that element.
Mags
Well I wasnt able to play last night, but today is mine. I just have to get paid for the job today and then I can play.
I did take a bit of time to make a coil, but my camera is at the shop. Its just made with 18ga. Its just a mini to try while at play. Its a puppy. =]
I am going to hit up Home Depot today also to make the Rottweiler coil. So I will have at least 2 variations to try while at play.
Mags
Quote from: Magluvin on March 25, 2010, 07:10:34 AM
Hey Forest
Im not sure that the "coil" part is part of the equation. As Tito said, Tesla discharged a cap on a copper bar, and power came out the end beyond the connection of the cap. Well that is a more descriptive way to put it.
So I think the cap discharges into the prtion of the copper that the cap was discharged into, and then bounces back to the tail. Im not sure of the effect totally but it is how I imagine till we try. Or maybe the discharge blast causes the tail to get instantaneous bounce and they meet in the middle? Dunno yet.
But it seems simple enough that it is worth looking into. =
Im going to check out Home Depot for some thick solid copper wire to try some doggy coils. It does not even need insulation as there will be spaces between the windings, and it will make it easy to tap into where ever we want. Maybe there can be a tail on both ends. ;]
Mags
Hey Mags, here is some help. "Tesla discharged a cap on a copper bar" = cap discharge into primary! And where is tail? Well primary is in loose connection to secondary, in other words primary see only small number of secondary turns for example only 10% of whole part, and what are doing other 90% of turns??? That is your TAIL you are looking for, that is additional coil for magnifying effect, and of course in that line can be connected one-wire receiver (LONGITUDINAL or TRANSVERSAL). I allready posted picture about connection transmiter-receiver on first page on this forum.
Nice to hear you are on it mag. On the other hand Baroutologos cann sit idle can i?
Speaking of coils and tails, look at my cat's tail? Ha ha! :):)
ps:formal presentation will follow
Quote from: baroutologos on March 26, 2010, 07:04:42 PM
Nice to hear you are on it mag. On the other hand Baroutologos cann sit idle can i?
Speaking of coils and tails, look at my cat's tail? Ha ha! :):)
ps:formal presentation will follow
How much voltage will it produce? And current draw from the power source? Impressive looking unit, though.
--Lee
@baroutologos
"Speaking of coils and tails, look at my cat's tail? Ha ha! :):)"
Speaking of loose connection between primary and secondary , it does'nt mean that primary should have so big spacing from secondary !!! You are loosing energy in that spacing, magnetic field is droping with square of distance! Primary should be in tight connection with just few turns of secondary, for example 3 turns of primary are in good connection with 5 turns of secondary, because you want to transfer all that energy from primary to secondary to get another resonant circuit with HV high frequency (another RLC)! That 5 turns of secondary become new source of high frequency in secondary (another RLC)!
But I'm speaking about 5 of 50 turns in secondary, not 5 of 2000 !
Delboy,
I have made measurments today regarding the coupling coeff. of primary to base drum coil. It has a loose unacceptable coupling coeff. of 0.22-0.23. (WRONG)
-deleted-
I made an error in my calculating formula. Using a software created by Mark S. Rzeszotarski, Ph.D. the Coupling coefficient of my coils (drum-primary) is approximately 0.7
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=TPZGMA6Bp5o
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1g3DwpshYxU&feature=related
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zx-n9rUuIvg&feature=related
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cJA6bHB9jgk&feature=related
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=EbtT_Lc2yXk&feature=related
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=B_f1p6V1Gb8&feature=related
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Rtb4X0fV7zg&feature=related
This is the secret of magnet power motor
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VdUzpCgAhmA&feature=related
Hm... i saw the videos.
I am really disapointed from you Tito. Those videos are noob mistakes that every noob-free energist wannabe (like us) have made in the past.
I hope you are not serious on those...
I agree Logos
The first one the current was read with the amp meter across as a load, thus near zero voltage at .3 amps, not 500v x .3a
The 15v from 12 v was decent. But the caps in series reduces the total capacitance to half, so no go there.
Maybe Teets is trying to distract us from the real deal. Not fair play at all. :'(
Mags
its just my way of simply saying sorry ok!
You all don't really get the point in those videos do you? :-\
;D
No worries. I think we will be fine. We are working on it.
Mags
Chinese wisdom and this is the secret etc ha!
Tito, show us any picture of your setup accompanied by specs and performances. You have made a promise that made hollow. Now you mocking us with noob concepts?
...
The capacitor discharge in order to get OU is plently in the FE literature as Gray motor, Kapanadze etc Not to mention all Teslean patents (that does not claim OU) are based on this principle.
Yet, we have not seen anything!
I would suggest be real usefull and if you have to contribute do so or do not waste your time.
Regards,
Tito
Its time to share Buddy!
If you can bring some clarity to the confusion that would be great!
And I will put your picture back up on my frig!
Chet
Ps
I found your pic -> ;D<-
Chaloopa [the car washing dog] had buried it in the back yard,
She just dug it up !
Yeah she loves to wash cars !
Whats it gonna be Buddy?
deleted
Quote from: forest link=topic=8841.msg234200#msg234200 A=1269426296
1. How long lasts capacitor discharge into low selfinduction coil ? I mean HF oscillations
Let it be:
Lp - primary inductivity [H]
Cp- primary cap. [F]
Rp - active resistance of primary (switch + primary) !
Assuming that voltage level of primary cap droped to 5% of its initial value meaning transient proccess finished, settling time you can calculate by formula : Ts=6*Lp/Rp
Here are examples for primary:
1. GOOD ONE
Rp=0.02 ohm
Lp=10 uH
Cp= 1 uF
----------------
Resonant frequency will be approx 50kHz ant settling time Ts=0.003 s =3ms
2. BAD ONE
R=1 ohm
Lp=0.1 H
Cp=1uF
---------------
Resonant frequency will be approx 503Hz ant settling time Ts=0.6 s
(you wouldn't discharge cap running switch even low as 10Hz)
Now you decide is it better to discharge primary cap into primary coil with core or without (aircore), I mean does it Lp have to be big or small one?
Beside Lp you can manipulate also with Rp to get better results. That is where problems with switch come into play, because primary cap is discharging over switch to primary Lp. You will have small resistance of Lp by using large copper tubes but if your switch have high resistance on time when it make contact you will get bad results! That is why Tesla abandoned spark gaps in first place !
I forgot to say that formula Ts=6*Lp/Rp is correct only if there are oscillations meaning that must be Rp<2*sqrt(Lp/Cp)
One more thing about primary. When you choose Lp and Cp you are automaticaly selected max primary current Ip! Here is formula for first peak of primary current :
Ip=Uc/sqrt(Lp/Cp)
Let Uc (voltage on primary cap) be Uc=1kV , then for first example max current will be:
Ipmax=Uc/sqrt(Lp/Cp)=316 A
and for second example max current will be :
Ipmax=Uc/sqrt(Lp/Cp)=3,16 A
You see, in first example current will be 100 times bigger!
Del. So the res. f. is for secondary and we are switching the Cp faster than it can deplete?
I realized that I might have a nice solution back in 2006 year :o
What I have done was very simple, accidentally done. I put a very fast recovery bidirectional diode (~1ps dumping speed) called transil and a varistor across MOSFET drain and source because I wanted to protect mosfet from damage.
I wanted to create plasma globe using car ignition coil and text suggested to put quite large radiator on FET to let dissipate heat. My FET had run freeze cold without heatsink at all.
I think what I have done was the separation of switching low voltage high current from higher voltage low current from flyback , even if they flow in the same path.And when you have it done some magic can be done in the same circuit.
Hey Forest
DO you have a circuit? Or pics? =]
Delboy have you tried any of what you have posted here? ;]
Ok I got side tracked yesterday. Its 8am and Im going to run up to my shop and get my camera to do a couple vids.
Just some simple stuff that I had talked about before and then we will get into the nitty gritty.
Mags
Quote from: Tito L. Oracion on March 27, 2010, 07:31:15 AM
This is the secret of magnet power motor
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VdUzpCgAhmA&feature=related
So you are saying that if we use an led inline to charge a cap with a battery, then the cap is pulsed into a motor, that we get more Total energy to the motor than what was taken from the battery to charge the cap?
Doesnt sound right teets.
Mags
Quote from: Tito L. Oracion on March 27, 2010, 08:25:44 AM
its just my way of simply saying sorry ok!
You all don't really get the point in those videos do you? :-\
;D
Tito Tito Tito
Why do you refer to stuff that does not clearly show what you intend.
Lets say we did get it and understand. Do you feel safer showing it this way? If these things that you point to are the real deal, dont you think you would have someone knocking at your door by now? lol knock knock, whos there, nobody.
Just explain it. you have been putting us through this for a long time and nobody gets it yet. After all this time, nobody gets it. No wonder people get mad at you. You keep filling up posts telling of your great devices(teasing)
and never ever prove not a single thing. I imagine this going on forever.
Mags
Quote from: Magluvin on March 28, 2010, 08:34:57 AM
So you are saying that if we use an led inline to charge a cap with a battery, then the cap is pulsed into a motor, that we get more Total energy to the motor than what was taken from the battery to charge the cap?
Doesnt sound right teets.
Mags
A few thoughts :
1. There are two switches there : when capacitor is charged IT IS DISCONNECTED from power source and connected to load.Unidirectional energy flow - not killing the dipole.It sounds strange but that assume that there is signal propagated back to source which drains it ??
2. When capacitor is connected to the battery it is charged slowly through the diode.When capacitor is charged CURRENT STOPS FLOWING FROM POWER SOURCE.This is very interesting.
If we add a coil in series to the led diode what will happen ?
I will test it surely, I will - IT IS SO INTERESTING (unfortunately I'm on trip now and cannot confirm that) - what I think will happens is that :
capacitor will charge , led light diminish , BUT ALSO COIL CREATE MAGNETIC FIELD
,and if I'm right that magnetic field will be FREE ENERGY but hard to tap :-(
Now when capacitor is shorted and discharging , DOES IT MEAN ALSO COIL DISCHARGES ITS MAGNETIC FIELD INTO LOAD ? OR magnetic field from coil will collapse charging capacitor so the next time ONLY SMALL AMOUNT OF ENERGY WILL BE REQUIRED TO ADD CHARGE TO CAPACITOR FROM POWER SOURCE ?
Many questions ....
Can we add loop circuit around coil with a switch to short coil at proper moment to prevent dissipation of magnetic field ? we could then discharge capacitor into load and then collapse coil magnetic field into capacitor to see if there is any gain here...
Hey Forest
I have had some of the same thoughts. But eventually if you keep hitting those switches, the dipole will be diminished. Every time we take from the battery to charge the cap, the battery is diminished some.
What I dont get is, how does the charging of the cap through the led, then the cap discharged into the light bulb, compare to a bedini motor? Bedini is not charging a cap and then disconnecting it from the source and just using the cap to pulse the motor. So why show these together as examples. It is just confusion, not helping to understand at all.
Mags
Magnet is another idea, extendin the basic IMHO.
for example : http://jnaudin.free.fr/2SGen/indexen.htm#hysteresis
Seems that adding a magnet to the core of coil in proper position will enlarge current generated when coil magnetic field is collapsing.
I have two ideas related to Tesla igniter patent :
1. Capacitor can recharge very fast due to high self-induction coil having current flowing already in it so current not need be rised from zero volts to charge capcitor.
2. When capacitor discharges ,coil magnetic field also collapses from high -self induction coil and PUSHES electrons from capacitor so the RESULTING CURRENT IS LARGER, meaning a little bit more power.
The second point is interesting : if we have two coils and only one have magnetic field and we short them in series to the power source , does magnetic field BALANCE ITSELF among those two coils like electric current among two capacitors ?!!!
I think this is important!
Quote from: forest on March 28, 2010, 08:54:59 AM
A few thoughts :
1. There are two switches there : when capacitor is charged IT IS DISCONNECTED from power source and connected to load.Unidirectional energy flow - not killing the dipole.It sounds strange but that assume that there is signal propagated back to source which drains it ??
2. When capacitor is connected to the battery it is charged slowly through the diode.When capacitor is charged CURRENT STOPS FLOWING FROM POWER SOURCE.This is very interesting.
If we add a coil in series to the led diode what will happen ?
I will test it surely, I will - IT IS SO INTERESTING (unfortunately I'm on trip now and cannot confirm that) - what I think will happens is that :
capacitor will charge , led light diminish , BUT ALSO COIL CREATE MAGNETIC FIELD
,and if I'm right that magnetic field will be FREE ENERGY but hard to tap :-(
Now when capacitor is shorted and discharging , DOES IT MEAN ALSO COIL DISCHARGES ITS MAGNETIC FIELD INTO LOAD ? OR magnetic field from coil will collapse charging capacitor so the next time ONLY SMALL AMOUNT OF ENERGY WILL BE REQUIRED TO ADD CHARGE TO CAPACITOR FROM POWER SOURCE ?
Many questions ....
Can we add loop circuit around coil with a switch to short coil at proper moment to prevent dissipation of magnetic field ? we could then discharge capacitor into load and then collapse coil magnetic field into capacitor to see if there is any gain here...
Your getting good tarzan ;D
Thats my boy ;)
Your really thinking. ;)
salute you :-*
Try to remember one tip i gave you and that's it. ;D
what tip? oh boy i forgot it. sorry ;D ha!ha!ha! joke. ;D
We don't actually needs an electron to charge a cap ok!
what we need is a faster separator of charge, then battery will replenished itself, though there's a slight lost but we can back trickle charge it to maintain its sleeping beauty. ha!ha!ha!ha!ha! ;D
so that rincles will be in controlled.
always smile don't be very serious ok everything is under control ok. ;D
Teets
Nice to see you around ,please no more "goodbyes".
Chet
Quote from: ramset on March 28, 2010, 08:33:25 PM
Teets
Nice to see you around ,please no more "goodbyes".
Chet
off course yes! if there is person that i have to return with, it is YOU!
oh boy we are now lovers Ha!Ha!Ha!Ha!Ha!Ha! lol ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D
Goodbye Honey, i have to work and make money first ok :-*
LOL hahahahahahahahahahahahha.
;D ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D
Daddy will see you later. hahahahahahahahahahaha.
Teets
You wild and Crazy guy!!
ITS GOOD TO LAUGH :-* :-* :-*
CHET
PS
Yes go make some money !
And next time don't forget the "FLOWERS"
Hey mags and all here.
Instead of theorizing i decided to use existing equipment and try the coil with a tail thing.
I have an air-coil of 380uH inductunce that wire is not isolated for tapping reasons. ;)
I tried the split capacitance balanced current scheme at first and later the usual one.
My power supply is one i assempled at Suturday with existing "junk" in my "office" since my automotive 40watts NST burned... :(
Anyway all components are adjustable as spark-gaps, power supply, load (lamps) capacitance and inductunce. See the attached tried schemes. no more than 2 hours experimenting instead of 10 weeks theorizing.
Setups are self-explained. No magic in that (at least as i made them anyway)
Theory is important. I want to understand everything before toying with Zeus lightning ;D
I think we should concentrate here on understanding how to recharge capacitor at fast rate with using almost no electrons from battery. If we understood that all other tips are clear (extra coil attached to capacitor discharge closed path).
I still do not understand how coil is working, when it stored magnetic field and when it collapses it , in what direction, and where that magnetic energy comes out - from windings or MAYBE from CORE of coil ?
I would not be surprised if that small circuit based on Tesla igniter is actually the same (in internal working, not in plain embodiment) as Don Smith table top device charging large oil capacitor bank. Really, please trust my intuition ::) - I had it always strong and in good direction but the huge amount of ideas deceive me from track too many times.
Maybe it's possible to mak a working prototype using just relay, capacitor, battery and a neon to indicate the rate of discharge of capacitor ?
I don't see why it wouldn't work with relay, even if we need to put it into oil to extend it's lifetime :D
Quote
I think we should concentrate here on understanding how to recharge at fast rate with using almost no electrons from battery. If we understood that all other tips are clear (extra attached to capacitor discharge closed path).
If you find the "electronless" capacitor charge scheme, please do tell me.. As far i know nobody, ever has managed that.
At best it has been reported that capacitors pulsed with high voltage develop an "electret" effect, but its output is sooo marginal that can be attributed to almost any other factor as dielectric properties etc.
Another idea related : Bearden degenerative semiconductor circuit.
If we consider relay solenoid then there is a time required to attract arm and make or break circuit, depending on magnetic field generated by flowing current through relay coil.
What if relay coil can create sufficient magnetic field to switch arm before electrons can reach capacitor terminals ?
OR maybe this is solved another way : a charge pump. When capacitor is discharged there are the same amount of electrons in each capacitor plate, if coil magnetic field collapse can create excess of + polarity on one plate , then electrons from other plate will be attracted to that + one.
Do you have schematic of that circuit http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=EbtT_Lc2yXk&feature=related ?
Quote from: forest on March 29, 2010, 05:59:16 AM
Another idea related : Bearden degenerative semiconductor circuit.
We had the same conversation in energeticforum.com. Eric Dollard has poped up there and classified Bearden-Bedini theories are "falsehoods" for the idiots! LOL http://www.energeticforum.com/renewable-energy/1631-peter-whatever-happened-eric-p-dollard-3.html#post90090
I tottaly agree with Eric.
...
Today it hit me regarding the Ozone patent and potential energy extraction from... ether!
See that link http://free-energy-info.co.uk/Chapt11.html
Imagine the ozone patent turned-upwards with its small fan pusing air, making ozone a a lot of ions and then collecting them under the influence of magnetic field.
We all know one spark-gap quenching method is air blowing ions away. How many of thems are anyway? Is there any potential in them?
This is a device by Tesla for us to play with and easy to assemble i guess.
Wow. everyone was here yesterday.
I played a bit yesterday experimenting, but need a bit more time to fiddle for a vid. I thought I would be able to crank out 2 or 3 vids but it didnt happen.
I have been on ebay also looking at HV caps, diodes and looking at scopes.
Mags
Ahh yes a scope!
I found that my local school systems [university, college, etc]are auctioning scopes off
for Zilch [along with everything else electronic]
Make some calls find these auctions in your area!
Chet
Quote from: baroutologos on March 29, 2010, 06:34:28 AM
We had the same conversation in energeticforum.com. Eric Dollard has poped up there and classified Bearden-Bedini theories are "falsehoods" for the idiots! LOL http://www.energeticforum.com/renewable-energy/1631-peter-whatever-happened-eric-p-dollard-3.html#post90090Quote
I tottaly agree with Eric.
"I had a young student from Korea visit me a few years back. He had no problem understanding the basic concept of producing an energy synthesizing apparatus, because his mind was uncontaminated by all of the Bedini/Bearden falsehoods. The term Scalar Wave is an oxymoron, as scalar is part of the propagation constant that is NOT A WAVE! (Idiots!) "
Hi bar
Sorry but i think it is not Dollard's writings. ???
Here is a simple thing to think.
Bearden/Bedini wrote a tons of info. and shared it to all of us.
Bearden even gave his 30 years of research for us.
There are many succeeded in making bedinis motors including me.
If Dollard is really a man of free energy maker then he should know that the principles of amplification is one, and because of that i am convinced that he is or the writer of that post is the falsehood and IDIOT! sorry.
Always remember everything is possible and can be transformed into a working free energy.
simply
otits
Tito, as far i know nobody has never succeffully replicated per claims a Beidni motor.
Neither anyone else based on bearden preachings. You keep saying you have done it. Prove it.. please. i urge you in case you hold any information of value.
Simply otits ;D ;D ;D ;D
Very funny!!
Tito,
I too built the Bedini energizer and charged, and recharged batteries for many days hoping to "condition" them (their term) to work. All I got was a battery full of voltage (that disappeared quickly) but no real power to use. Did you do somthing different from the published instructions?
Well, Im still working on something worth putting on vid. For the past few days I have been in the non groove about viding stuff that doesnt do much other than dull moments. Im trying to spice up some of it so its worth watching.
I dont know why teets is sending us on the bedini trail. I have read some of his posts putting down Jt's and bedini stuff in other threads. Well when he shows how to power a refrigerator with the bedini, then i will pay attn.
But for now, I have lost all faith in what he is tossing at us as it does not belong here anyway. ::)
Was messing with the puppy coil and didnt realize till later that I didnt try to pulse it with opposite polarity from what I was applying at the time. I will give it a vid shoot tomorrow trying both polarities, whether there is a difference or not. I would have to imagine that the polarity will have a difference. I used the strobe circuit to pulse it. I did get a 12v bulb to light on the outer ends of the coil when pulsing the shorter portion, but the bulb flashes brightest when just pulsed by the strobe circuit itself without the coil. :( But polarity may make a difference. We will see.
Mags
Quote from: Magluvin on March 30, 2010, 12:09:38 AM
Well, Im still working on something worth putting on vid. For the past few days I have been in the non groove about viding stuff that doesnt do much other than dull moments. Im trying to spice up some of it so its worth watching.
I dont know why teets is sending us on the bedini trail. I have read some of his posts putting down Jt's and bedini stuff in other threads. Well when he shows how to power a refrigerator with the bedini, then i will pay attn.
But for now, I have lost all faith in what he is tossing at us as it does not belong here anyway. ::)
Was messing with the puppy coil and didnt realize till later that I didnt try to pulse it with opposite polarity from what I was applying at the time. I will give it a vid shoot tomorrow trying both polarities, whether there is a difference or not. I would have to imagine that the polarity will have a difference. I used the strobe circuit to pulse it. I did get a 12v bulb to light on the outer ends of the coil when pulsing the shorter portion, but the bulb flashes brightest when just pulsed by the strobe circuit itself without the coil. :( But polarity may make a difference. We will see.
Mags
No mags, i'm not sending anybody to bedini trail, i was just answering what bartoulogous posted info about E. dollard. but you know, the amplification method is just the same, i mean i'm using the same technique no matter what device it is ok.
ok here it is, you have to answer this question first:
1) how can you power up an inverter using battery?
2) In coil, To match up batteries amp what will you do?
now! do i have to show it still? :-\
did you not yet study about 7805-24 chips, on how to amplify current using this chips?.
And now the real secret i am is hiding is the technique of amplifying at the same time the current and voltage ok! at least i am saying it to all of you ok! understand? ;D
Quote from: mkt3920 on March 29, 2010, 10:34:26 PM
Tito,
I too built the Bedini energizer and charged, and recharged batteries for many days hoping to "condition" them (their term) to work. All I got was a battery full of voltage (that disappeared quickly) but no real power to use. Did you do something different from the published instructions?
of course sir!
Though bedini showed his device he did not show the efficient coiling and some other connection technique that will contribute to produce a real working free energy ok?!
Think about this:
We need a high voltage to make mercury be activate inside a fluorescent bulb. And we don't need a lot of current there ok!
now if you can't grasp it i'm sorry.
Quote from: baroutologos on March 29, 2010, 08:04:40 PM
Tito, as far i know nobody has never succeffully replicated per claims a Beidni motor.
Neither anyone else based on bearden preachings. You keep saying you have done it. Prove it.. please. i urge you in case you hold any information of value.
I am proving it by showing you the right way ok, now if you won't believe me you just ignore me, as simple as that.
My explanation are straight forward and you know and feel if i'm telling the truth isn't it. though i'm not good in english, i am trying as much as i can ok ;D
Quote from: ramset on March 29, 2010, 09:13:16 PM
Simply otits ;D ;D ;D ;D
Very funny!!
i'm tired i have to rest for a while.
bye honey. HAHAHAHAHAHAHHAHAHAHAHA ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D
Quote from: Tito L. Oracion on March 30, 2010, 06:44:55 AM
No mags, i'm not sending anybody to bedini trail, i was just answering what bartoulogous posted info about E. dollard. but you know, the amplification method is just the same, i mean i'm using the same technique no matter what device it is ok.
ok here it is, you have to answer this question first:
1) how can you power up an inverter using battery?
2) In coil, To match up batteries amp what will you do?
now! do i have to show it still? :-\
did you not yet study about 7805-24 chips, on how to amplify current using this chips?.
And now the real secret i am is hiding is the technique of amplifying at the same time the current and voltage ok! at least i am saying it to all of you ok! understand? ;D
doping is one of the secret isn't it?
oooops sorrry really tired bye :)
Quote from: Tito L. Oracion on March 30, 2010, 07:02:39 AM
I am proving it by showing you the right way ok, now if you won't believe me you just ignore me, as simple as that.
My explanation are straight forward and you know and feel if i'm telling the truth isn't it. though i'm not good in english, i am trying as much as i can ok ;D
theories... the right path... believe me... one of the secret etc etc.
Facts please! I repeat post photos of your setups, state the principle of operation and give specifics of efficiency.
If those very simple things are trouble to you, i suggest you go play elsewhere.
Bye!
UH OH
Teets is getting sent to his room!
Quote:
i suggest you go play elsewhere.
Bye!
---------------------
Not playing "nice" >:(
Hmmm.........
So Teets you can make voltage "and current"!
Of course I am impressed!
So.......
If I stare at my fluorescent light long enough [besides going blind] do you think I will "see" what the sneaky little "mercury guys" can do in there?[to help me make "current"]
Well otits [I like that]
I can't find my car keys sometimes when there right in front of my face!
Its not that I'm stupid ,Sometimes we can be to close to the forrest[not Tarzan guy] to "SEE".
And sometimes we just get "punchy" or punched out from going around in "circles"!
Thats why we need each other to help "focus" .
Teets How bout a little more focus?
BTW I think your "english" is a hundred times better than the beginning.
And probably better than mine![my native NYC tongue]
Chet
Tito
Sorry, but as you can see, we dont get it. We are not stupid. Yet how long have you been shooting clue after clue, can you not see after ALL this time that the way you give us info is not clear to any of us YET.
We really can appreciate your wanting to stay under cover. But at the same time you constantly make it clear that you dont understand why we dont get it yet. Dont you think that maybe Forest or any of us, would say at one point, "AH, Tito, you are a genius, I get it now." But nobody has said that yet. :P Not once.
Ok so a 7805 voltage regulator, input 35v max, ladeeda, Wooptydoo. What does that have anything to do with hundreds or even thousands of volts, other than having to make another trip to radio shack to buy more because we burned them up with your suggestions?
Is your brother beating you over the head with a fly swatter for giving us these valuable clues? It seem that maybe he is your worst fear so far. ::) Very scary. Fly guts are nasty, I would not wish that on anyone. lol
I have an invention that I am getting to market at this time. It is an air freshener for cars that smells like real leather. Not the xmas tree so called leather (crap) Im talking the real deal, yor car will smell like the leather store at the mall, your old 1993 honda will smell like a bentley smell, and it lasts for over a month and does not overwhelm you when you first open the package. Just nice smooth leather scent. Some say it lasts for up to 3 months. I sell them for $5 each and car dealers get them in bulk for $2.50 to put in preowned cars and they want new orders filled every month. I use real leather as the diffuser, and the scent is from a company that uses it strictly for their purpose and is not for sale, wholesale or retail. But I have negotiated with them to sell it to me on the side, and I am the only one they will sell it to. I have a friend that works there that got me in. ;)
My point is, my brother insists that I do it all on my own with out a partner or workers to help produce and distribute the product. Well he is just insane. He is trying to make me as selfish as he is. Meanwhile, he is too lazy to cut, prepare and package along side of me to make himself a good profit offered to him, yet he wants me to take care of him when I make it to the top with the product. ::)
Me for example, I dont post my knowledge to people here in question form, over and over and over, in hopes that they will get my riddles. I give facts. I tell what I know to be true. I get it done. Because I am a good person that cares about others and their hard work, and when they get stuck, if I can help them get past that point I feel good about it and I dont have to keep beating the bush till the last leaf falls off just so they can finally see the truth. Nobody has ever complained about info I have presented, because I lay it on the line, without fear or regret.
Mags
Quote from: Tito L. Oracion on March 30, 2010, 06:55:11 AM
of course sir!
Though bedini showed his device he did not show the efficient coiling and some other connection technique that will contribute to produce a real working free energy ok?!
Think about this:
We need a high voltage to make mercury be activate inside a fluorescent bulb. And we don't need a lot of current there ok!
now if you can't grasp it i'm sorry.
we don't need current to light fluorescent bulb because current will be developed inside and because of mercury that current will be unidirectional
::)
Tito, I have problem to understand how efficiently recharge capacitor very fast from Tesla igniter patent using coil or creating charge pump. :D yeah here I'm blind or rather too absent-minded (too many theories). You won't believe me, but I should have the solution back in 2006 when I stumbled upon something around car ignition coil with connected light bulb, but my friend (who is experienced EE) told me that's nothing important ....
Your amplification method is good and probably much safer then magnification so I'd like to start it small :D using relays for example
Guys , don't blame Tito, it's probably too big secret for one person
See Teets
Just a few Blind guys 8) 8) 8)
Nice guys too ,good guys just like you -> ;D<-
That need the lights turned on so they can see-> :o :o :o
Turn on the light T !
:-*
Amplification is the way to close circuit moving energy back to input, magnetification is using Tesla coil with extra coil to magnify voltage (for example).
Of course I don't know how to do this but maybe just using transformer from magnification + diode bridge to do amplification ?
Anyway,I'm really interested now in extremally fast recharging capacitor which allows for many discharges per second . Parametric resonance looks also nice to start from 1.5V to 220V for example.Or maybe parametric resonance is used to recharging capacitor ? >:( Damn, headache
Quote from: forest on March 30, 2010, 10:46:22 AM
Amplification is the way to close circuit moving energy back to input, magnetification is using Tesla coil with extra coil to magnify voltage (for example).
Of course I don't know how to do this but maybe just using transformer from magnification + diode bridge to do amplification ?
Anyway,I'm really interested now in extremally fast recharging capacitor which allows for many discharges per second . Parametric resonance looks also nice to start from 1.5V to 220V for example.Or maybe parametric resonance is used to recharging capacitor ? >:( Damn, headache
OK! OK! OK! OK! OK! OK!
supposedly you have big and smaller bag.
WHAT IS VERY FAST TO FILL? GOT IT?!
I'm not happy here anymore, I'm sorry if i made you feel bad ok.
My brother just advice me that if i do that then a big problem will arise in my family.
Then, What did i get then??????? a problem?
oh boy I'm not stupid also risking my family, understand? ;D
i think though they are just little hint maybe they made help.
thank you and bye bye!
here is my pic don't forget me! lol
;D ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D
;D ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D
Quote from: Magluvin on March 30, 2010, 09:51:30 AM
Tito
Sorry, but as you can see, we dont get it. We are not stupid. Yet how long have you been shooting clue after clue, can you not see after ALL this time that the way you give us info is not clear to any of us YET.
We really can appreciate your wanting to stay under cover. But at the same time you constantly make it clear that you dont understand why we dont get it yet. Dont you think that maybe Forest or any of us, would say at one point, "AH, Tito, you are a genius, I get it now." But nobody has said that yet. :P Not once.
Ok so a 7805 voltage regulator, input 35v max, ladeeda, Wooptydoo. What does that have anything to do with hundreds or even thousands of volts, other than having to make another trip to radio shack to buy more because we burned them up with your suggestions?
Is your brother beating you over the head with a fly swatter for giving us these valuable clues? It seem that maybe he is your worst fear so far. ::) Very scary. Fly guts are nasty, I would not wish that on anyone. lol
I have an invention that I am getting to market at this time. It is an air freshener for cars that smells like real leather. Not the xmas tree so called leather (crap) Im talking the real deal, yor car will smell like the leather store at the mall, your old 1993 honda will smell like a bentley smell, and it lasts for over a month and does not overwhelm you when you first open the package. Just nice smooth leather scent. Some say it lasts for up to 3 months. I sell them for $5 each and car dealers get them in bulk for $2.50 to put in preowned cars and they want new orders filled every month. I use real leather as the diffuser, and the scent is from a company that uses it strictly for their purpose and is not for sale, wholesale or retail. But I have negotiated with them to sell it to me on the side, and I am the only one they will sell it to. I have a friend that works there that got me in. ;)
My point is, my brother insists that I do it all on my own with out a partner or workers to help produce and distribute the product. Well he is just insane. He is trying to make me as selfish as he is. Meanwhile, he is too lazy to cut, prepare and package along side of me to make himself a good profit offered to him, yet he wants me to take care of him when I make it to the top with the product. ::)
Me for example, I dont post my knowledge to people here in question form, over and over and over, in hopes that they will get my riddles. I give facts. I tell what I know to be true. I get it done. Because I am a good person that cares about others and their hard work, and when they get stuck, if I can help them get past that point I feel good about it and I dont have to keep beating the bush till the last leaf falls off just so they can finally see the truth. Nobody has ever complained about info I have presented, because I lay it on the line, without fear or regret.
Mags
You know mags, i am not waiting for somebody to praise me ok! :P
free energy is just simple actually you just need some kind of a common sense which is not actually common for everyone. hahahahahaha lol ;D
i even say that i am not a genious ok. common sense only ;D
no offense please, just telling the truth!.
@Grizli sorry your late! ;D
Adios!
Tito,
For the 11th, and the last time, you are leaving, once again?
Saying goodbye must be difficult for you, or do you get lonely and keep coming back? Family not suffice then?
Oh well...to each their own.
Quote from: amigo on March 30, 2010, 09:21:03 PM
Tito,
For the 11th, and the last time, you are leaving, once again?
Saying goodbye must be difficult for you, or do you get lonely and keep coming back? Family not suffice then?
Oh well...to each their own.
sooo what's your problem amigo?
and what do you want me to do?
i'm leaving in this topic okay? i don't want the way they dance ok!
so your counting them when i'm leaving hahahahahahaha ;D
count them right maybe your wrong lol.
@Tito
It may not be free energy yet, but it's a free world now.
So, you can leave here as many times as you like. lol
Tito, if you are unable to understand those guys' frustration, I am going to make you a test to find yourself in their position: you say, your idea is very easy, you gave so many hints already.
So here is a test where you can find yourself in their "skin". Of cours, you must give exactly the same solution that I mean. it's a riddle:
1. "What walks on the wall, which first letter is "F"? The answer is: "fly"".
2. "What walks on the wall which first letter is "T"? The answer is: "two flies"".
3. "What walks on the wall which first letter is "A"? The answer is: ?
I gave you two hints and as you say yours is very easy, so mine is very easy for me. I'll give you solution as soon as you respond to this riddle.
By the way, I have a question to you, which does not infringes your secret: What are you going to do with your idea: to patent it? to start production? or just do nothing? I ask as a potential customer to buy this kind of product (not patent) to heat my house instead of using gas. This is the only reason I watch this forum.
@Tito
Before you leave us again here is a multiple choice question.
Is the Zenor used like a........
a) pump
b) cannon
c) pump/diverter
d) cannon/diverter
Zener Diode
Well if we have a circuit that charges a cap to a certain voltage and a zener diode is used to act like a spark gap, as in it will only let loose when the cap reaches that certain voltage, and that zener directs the certain voltage across a coil that has another Extra coil attached to one end, then we can collect amplified power from the sum of the 2 coils and run a refrigerator from a 3v button cell and a computer fan that has fan blades made of carbon that is electroplated with aluminum bicarbonate chocolate salty balls.
Its common sense. Everyone knows this.
Mags
Mag and all, I can assure you that Teets never had any secret neither knows any Tesla amplification method.
I even doubt if he ever get a hold of a welding iron in his hands. If you go through his carrer in this forum, from the very start he brags that he "knows" yet he has not posted any photo of any project he had made.
Yeye, i know what you are thinking... the possibility of 1:1,000,000 of me to be wrong. On this issue i could be my head on ;)
Move on from Teets fallacy and childish playings. If you cannot, sorry you deserve it.
Quote from: Qwert on March 30, 2010, 10:24:39 PM
Tito, if you are unable to understand those guys' frustration, I am going to make you a test to find yourself in their position: you say, your idea is very easy, you gave so many hints already.
So here is a test where you can find yourself in their "skin". Of cours, you must give exactly the same solution that I mean. it's a riddle:
1. "What walks on the wall, which first letter is "F"? The answer is: "fly"".
2. "What walks on the wall which first letter is "T"? The answer is: "two flies"".
3. "What walks on the wall which first letter is "A"? The answer is: ?
I gave you two hints and as you say yours is very easy, so mine is very easy for me. I'll give you solution as soon as you respond to this riddle.
By the way, I have a question to you, which does not infringes your secret: What are you going to do with your idea: to patent it? to start production? or just do nothing? I ask as a potential customer to buy this kind of product (not patent) to heat my house instead of using gas. This is the only reason I watch this forum.
A fly
http://img192.imageshack.us/img192/8817/supressione.jpg
Tito
Chetkremens@gmail.com
[I won't tell your brother] ;D
Been in my "profile" since I joined.
You really want to contribute ?
I believe we have to "work" to change this world.[no magic ]
These fellows [and a couple girls] are "workers" and they are going to
change the world.
keeping secrets ?
Nahhh that changes nothing and causes a lot of "stress".
And although I'm not sure, I don't think our creator would want us to keep this secret.[just my opinion]
Lifes to short buddy!
Make the rest of your life the best of your life .[and you really can]
Your Buddy
Chet
PS
to me this will always be a Tito face -> ;D<- [yes very handsome]
PPS
Forest [I was first not Tito]
Is that Tito's Dad?
http://www.falstad.com/circuit/
When you open the link the applet will open. Go to Import and paste this text in and import and watch. I have been messing with this applet for about a month and it is a nice sim. But this circuit was posted by Void on the Self running coil thread. I had the same effect with some circuits but thought that maybe it was a programming issue.
$ 1 5.0E-6 32.755850052045055 52 7.0 50
w 192 128 160 128 0
r 160 128 160 192 0 40000.0
w 160 192 192 192 0
w 160 192 160 224 0
w 160 224 192 224 0
c 160 224 160 288 0 3.65E-7 2.2338841606661592
g 160 288 160 304 0
r 160 128 160 64 0 4000.0
R 160 64 96 64 0 0 40.0 5.0 0.0 0.0 0.5
165 192 96 208 96 2 4.687480469482394
w 256 64 320 64 0
w 320 64 320 128 0
w 352 160 352 208 0
w 352 112 352 160 0
w 416 160 416 192 0
w 416 128 416 160 0
f 352 208 416 208 0 1.5
f 352 112 416 112 1 1.5
w 320 160 352 160 0
w 320 336 480 336 0
w 416 160 480 160 0
r 160 64 256 64 0 1000.0
f 480 160 544 160 0 1.5
f 496 240 544 240 0 1.5
w 480 160 480 240 0
w 480 240 496 240 0
f 480 336 544 336 0 1.5
f 480 416 544 416 0 1.5
w 480 416 480 336 0
w 544 176 640 224 0
w 640 320 544 224 0
w 544 256 544 272 0
w 544 272 448 272 0
w 448 272 448 224 0
w 448 224 416 224 0
w 320 336 320 160 0
g 624 400 624 432 0
w 544 432 624 400 0
w 160 64 160 32 0
w 160 32 416 32 0
w 416 32 416 96 0
w 544 320 592 224 0
w 592 224 592 144 0
w 592 144 544 144 0
r 544 80 544 144 0 1.0
R 544 80 544 16 0 0 40.0 12.0 0.0 0.0 0.5
w 544 400 640 224 0
w 544 352 640 320 0
w 416 224 416 368 0
w 416 368 624 368 0
w 624 368 624 400 0
w 640 224 704 224 0
w 640 320 704 320 0
r 704 224 784 224 0 100.0
c 784 224 784 320 0 1.0E-5 -25.551346584075446
l 864 224 864 320 0 1.0 0.03595395196504631
w 784 224 864 224 0
w 704 320 784 320 0
w 784 320 864 320 0
o 55 64 0 42 40.0 0.05 0 -1
Mags
Quote from: forest on March 31, 2010, 03:35:21 AM
A fly
Could be. But it must be the exact answer I mean. (And it's a task for a particular person). Anyway, my intention here is to put a guy into "the skin" of another guy. The first one (let's say, the inventor) knows that the solution is only one step away. Anyway we all know that. Only there still exist thousands of the possibilities to choose that one, small, close step. And even when someone else will select incidentaly THE PROPER ONE, he still is not sure if this is THE ONE, meant by the inventor.
Ok I just ordered some 2kv salty balls from Southpark electronics. They are coming from the Philipines so will have to wait a bit to get here. My buddy is going to electroplate my carbon rod fan blades and he knows how to zener my diodes for gap induction fluxing. I also drilled 3 small holes through my capacitors to wind them like toroids and Im waiting for my tooth picks to magnetize in the microwave. They are not done yet, but I hear something going on in there.
Magnuts
Quote from: wattsup on March 30, 2010, 11:54:31 PM
@Tito
Before you leave us again here is a multiple choice question.
Is the Zenor used like a........
a) pump
b) cannon
c) pump/diverter
d) cannon/diverter
The way i see it is like, it is a cannon/diverter, well, sorry that's the way i see it.
correct me if i'm wrong. :)
;D
Quote from: Magluvin on March 31, 2010, 09:33:34 AM
Ok I just ordered some 2kv salty balls from Southpark electronics. They are coming from the Philipines so will have to wait a bit to get here. My buddy is going to electroplate my carbon rod fan blades and he knows how to zener my diodes for gap induction fluxing. I also drilled 3 small holes through my capacitors to wind them like toroids and Im waiting for my tooth picks to magnetize in the microwave. They are not done yet, but I hear something going on in there.
Magnuts
hi mags
i tried your idea, and wow great, your salty balls are a good source of current. hahahahahhahaha lol ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D
oh boy your a genius! ;D
;D
;D
;D ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D
;D
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cold_cathode
Imagine huge cold cathode, I would say EXTRA huge. What should it contain ? Of course material able to emit electrons, of course field forcing electrons to escape from material, of cource collector.
Don Smith would say - use what is already here :P , but Thomas A. was first, and Edwin but that guy never grasped the idea....
He he ... do you like riddles ? :-\
Mags
quote:
They are coming from the Philipines so will have to wait a bit to get here. My buddy is going to electroplate my carbon rod fan blades
----------------------------
Mags my salty balls came thru unsalted NG
apparently the Philippines is having some quality control issues
their Balls are no longer meeting SBC standards.
Chet
Ok, I have a bit of time for my self. Im putting the projects that I planned on doing this evening on hold for a little project playin with some microwave oven parts. My buddy had a beat up one in the back of his truck and I got the big transformer, the hv diode, nice, the .94uf cap 2000v aaaaand the ac induction cooling fan.
The fan motor has my interest. I have had experience with these when I was a kid with cheap phonographs but never really looked at how they work really. But I looked at the flux path in the core and I see tings, Some tings. lol Shunt coils and thinned out pathways. Interesting. Could we get a resonance going on it with a cap.
But just real quick at the shop I put the secondary of the transformer on the fan(120v ac ind fan) and pulsed the primary( I think the primary, it has the beefy windings) anyway I pulsed it with a 12v bat and the fan turns good.
But I want to just do a lil vid in a bit and try some caps on the fans coil and do an igniter cap charge to the beef and see how the fan goes. I dont know what the voltage is of the diode yet. But I can most likely use it somewhere here but it is good yo have around for free.
Be back in a bit.
Mags
Tito,
I don't really want anything...
As someone said afterward, it's a free world and you can do anything you like, and so did I - by voicing my observations...
This thread deteriorated from the main subject awhile ago anyway, but that's a management issue not a participants problem.
Well management is on it and putting the igniter on vid in a bit.
But when teets says go bedini in the igniter thread, thats just crossing the line. ;D
I have been busy though. But I think I have a good combo of ingredients tonight to put on a good show. Im all giddy.
Havnt played much lately. Had too much going on to be able to think clearly on what I have ideas for and now I got my mojo bayby.
We will have ignition. Anyone got gas?
Magnuts
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5zRTjmnSwqY
Just a short preview of some parts so I dont have to go over it in the vid showing operation..
Magnuts
Ok took a break before the vid to look up the diode. 9kv .5a Im sure there is a good use for it. But not yet here.
This transformer is cool. Its a bit between a 120v/12v and an ignition coil. The ratio of the size of the windings seems odd from the norm. The thick winding must be the primary due to the sticker says High Voltage and it aint talkin about 120v. So I deduced it before looking it up. But the thin wires plugged into the primary seem skimpy for the size on the windings.
But I am just trying a couple cap configs and show time.
Magnuts
http://img192.imageshack.us/img192/8817/supressione.jpg
No comments? :'(
Forest
Is that Tito's Dad?
Tito
On to whom much is given, much is required.
Not my words but they make a lot of Sense.{the "BOSS" has a knack for that}
And you were given a "biggy"! [At least "two biggy's " the 2'nd one Dec 9?]
One biggy made the other biggy look teensy.
give us the 'Teensy biggy"
What did you say Ehrfinder told you to help you understand?
?
Chet
PS
Chetkremens@gmail.com
Just put a letter in the mail.
A teensy one.
couple of seconds?
A teensy itsy bitsy letter.
Or perhaps a "word" most things can be brought down to a word!
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-fK0m5mDxbw
Just a short vid. My cam bat was low so I put it on the charger and did this when I woke up this morning. It is a bit different as the large self inductor was not large enough, almost, but I have to rewind it or just add more wire. It is 22ohm now so if I double the winding to 44 ohm it will turn the fan igniter style.
But this is just a simple, chrge the cap and discharge the cap on the primary to run the 120v ac fan
Magnuts
Quote from: Magluvin on April 01, 2010, 01:10:10 PM
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-fK0m5mDxbw
Just a short vid. My cam bat was low so I put it on the charger and did this when I woke up this morning. It is a bit different as the large self inductor was not large enough, almost, but I have to rewind it or just add more wire. It is 22ohm now so if I double the winding to 44 ohm it will turn the fan igniter style.
But this is just a simple, chrge the cap and discharge the cap on the primary to run the 120v ac fan
Magnuts
Good moves mags ;)
now you try the salty balls with chocolate. lol hahahahahahhhahha ;D
by the way use toothpick in sparkgap treated in microoven filled with fruitjuice. ;D
;D
The effect of mag-wire plays a major role in these kinds of setups, so we must know the effect of every sizes of wire.
And do you know that using this technique you can make a second class TPU.
Actually i made single, double and multiple tank in these technique and the multiple tank is the best of them. and for that you will tanks me. ;D
now if there are more questions don't asked me, i will not answer. lol HAHAHAHAHAHA ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D
And by combining teslas igniter technique makes it more better!
Don't forget i tell the truth.
@ bar and all
i will just surprise all of you in my videos ok, i will show them. actually i just don't know yet how to put them in youtube sorry i'm somekind of a moron sometimes hahahahahahah lol.
Donuts lol hahahahaha ;D ;D ;D
I wonder why everybody is hiding HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHa lol ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D
i feel so very sensitive today. like tesla? ;D
Teets
You %$%$$#%Y%$------ ing crazy guy ;D<-[thats you]
Barts over here
http://www.overunity.com/index.php?topic=7679.1200
Being a "rock star with all his cool toys
Chet
Who opened all the eyes :o ?
Quote from: ramset on April 01, 2010, 04:33:01 AM
What did you say Ehrfinder told you to help you understand?
No! Erfinder open my one eye like this ;)
When he try to discharge a cap into a wire. and that is a very simple free energy he said and he is right. :)
But it is tesla who really open my eye like these :o
And ----- close my eye like this 8)
and overunity .com make my eye like this ::)
and Bar makes my mouth like this :-\
and mags makes my mouth like this :P
AND YOU MAKE ME LIKE THIS! :-* :-* :-* LOL HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA
and i become like this ;D
Teets
you are a Freaken blast tonight :D
Very good
one of the best!!
chet
Ps
But tarzan[forest]
cave man[mags]
and bar
still look like this
8)
8)
8)
Three blind guys?
They need to look like this too
:o
:o<- this one is Forest
:o
?
Quote from: ramset on April 01, 2010, 09:19:41 PM
Teets
you are a Freaken blast tonight :D
Very good
one of the best!!
chet
Ps
But tarzan[forest]
cave man[mags]
and bar
still look like this
8)
8)
8)
Three blind guys?
They need to look like this too
:o
:o
:o
?
No!, i believe mags is now like this ;)
Man should not live by Smileys alone. lol
I just don't get it. If I knew "the trick" to overunity, it seems the safest thing to do would be spread the info so there is more to chase or never open your mouth. Saying you know it (publicly), keeping quiet, and not sharing seems like the worst thing you could do. ???
mkt
quote;
sharing seems like the worst thing you could do. ???
-----------------
you look scared see-> ???
not good !
The Big guy watches over us he looks like this-> <-
Yeah,
have a good day buddy,and your right, to many peeps sweat around here about absolutely nothing.
this right here, is an open goal game "period".
This isn't ten years ago [or twenty]
the world has changed !
Once folks realize that silicon valley is dumping "billions" into these techs
and getting all manner of funding !
Believe me they ain't lookin in chetkremens @gmail.com's basement
{or Teets either]
Time to "play ball".
This guy-> <-
he's on my team! [well, I'm on his team[can't get to cocky]]
I know thats cheating
but the other guys have this guy-> >:(<- { see you can see him [thats NG]]
"Caps" got some of that guys team over here
http://www.overunity.com/index.php?topic=8992.msg235879#new
Chet
Quote from: wattsup on April 02, 2010, 12:18:28 AM
Man should not live by Smileys alone. lol
smileys should be improve like the smileys they use in energetic forum.
what do you say moderater?
so that my appearance will also improve. ;D
TEEEEETS!
What a pleasant surprise to see your handsome face in the morning.
-> ;D<- [are you feeling insecure [some body say something bad?]]
This is the perfect face already!
But it would be much more fun to have the "toys" aron and peter have.
Chet
PS what time is it by you
its 7.32 AM here
PPS
well I gotta go make the "donuts"
Have a good day!
Quote from: ramset on April 02, 2010, 07:33:11 AM
TEEEEETS!
What a pleasant surprise to see your handsome face in the morning.
-> ;D<- [are you feeling insecure [some body say something bad?]]
This is the perfect face already!
But it would be much more fun to have the "toys" aron and peter have.
Chet
PS what time is it by you
its 7.32 AM here
its 7:42 in the evening in my country.
its okay cause i'm very good today ok ;D
are you tracking me chet? ::)
YES
me and this guy-> <-
I just like to imagine where the people I like are when I talk to them.
[didn't say that right but you know what I meen]
But I have to go to work
Chaloopa gets mad when I'm late
Have a nice evening!
:-*
Chet
HMMMM.........
Little "hacky guys"" pestering you?
The BIG guy -> <-
see's them in their little rooms tooo..........[sad and pathetic]
Quote from: Tito L. Oracion on April 02, 2010, 07:39:58 AM
its 7:42 in the evening in my country.
its okay cause i'm very good today ok ;D
are you tracking me chet? ::)
@ Tito
I've been monitoring this thread and keeping quiet about it but today I decided to give you a little wake up call...while you're busy leading us astray while claiming you have the answer(s) to OU take a look at what you're bringing to yourself as bad karma....
From http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hunger
Malnutrition mortality statistics
* On average, 36 million people die each year as a direct or indirect result of poor nutrition, which is more than 1 death each second.
* On average, a child under five dies every 5 seconds as a direct or indirect result of poor nutrition. This is 6 million children per year, more than half of all child deaths.
If you're a Mylow then I could see how this wouldn't bother you...but if you truly have an answer then I can't see how you can live with yourself knowing the facts that this world is literally starving for answers....
Keep LOL...and.... ;D all you want but it's not funny to me...and a lot of starving people out there....
Sorry to poop in your Cornflakes this morning but that's just the way I see this from my perspective...
Good luck to you and yours in the next life....
Regards,
Paul
Quote from: ramset on April 02, 2010, 08:01:53 AM
YES
me and this guy-> <-
I just like to imagine where the people I like are when I talk to them.
[didn't say that right but you know what I meen]
But I have to go to work
Chaloopa gets mad when I'm late
Have a nice evening!
:-*
Chet
HMMMM.........
Little "hacky guys"" pestering you?
The BIG guy -> <-
see's them in their little rooms tooo..........[sad and pathetic]
So your the bad guy?
i new it , sorry i'm not samson delihlah ;D
that's why it wrong info hahahaahahahahhahhaha ;D
do you know that i am also tracking you ;D hahahahahahahahah LOL
Quote from: Goat on April 02, 2010, 12:40:19 PM
@ Tito
I've been monitoring this thread and keeping quiet about it but today I decided to give you a little wake up call...while you're busy leading us astray while claiming you have the answer(s) to OU take a look at what you're bringing to yourself as bad karma....
From http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hunger
Malnutrition mortality statistics
* On average, 36 million people die each year as a direct or indirect result of poor nutrition, which is more than 1 death each second.
* On average, a child under five dies every 5 seconds as a direct or indirect result of poor nutrition. This is 6 million children per year, more than half of all child deaths.
If you're a Mylow then I could see how this wouldn't bother you...but if you truly have an answer then I can't see how you can live with yourself knowing the facts that this world is literally starving for answers....
Keep LOL...and.... ;D all you want but it's not funny to me...and a lot of starving people out there....
Sorry to poop in your Cornflakes this morning but that's just the way I see this from my perspective...
Good luck to you and yours in the next life....
Regards,
Paul
Hi paul
I'm sorry but I'm not making everybody astray, I am pointing everybody to the right way and that's no joke!. >:(
The link you've showed, is that my fault paul?
Is free energy really the solution to this?
What they immediate need is food, how come?
if your being astray, you can ignore me immediately ok.
but you can try some of my hints if they are true so that you will know if I'm real ok.
can you not sense if I'm telling the truth or not?
@ amigo
I'm going to say goodbye again count it. is it in 12th already? ;D
i don't want somebody suffering from hunger because of me.
and if I'm the reason while they are astray, ok i have to go and stop :)
I'm giving some hints just for you to add them in your experiment, and its a great pleasure when you made it right, and its sooooo fun ok.
otits :)
Quote from: Tito L. Oracion on April 02, 2010, 08:01:57 PM
Hi paul
I'm sorry but I'm not making everybody astray, I am pointing everybody to the right way and that's no joke!. >:(
The link you've showed, is that my fault paul?
Is free energy really the solution to this?
What they immediate need is food, how come?
if your being astray, you can ignore me immediately ok.
but you can try some of my hints if they are true so that you will know if I'm real ok.
can you not sense if I'm telling the truth or not?
@ amigo
I'm going to say goodbye again count it. is it in 12th already? ;D
i don't want somebody suffering from hunger because of me.
and if I'm the reason while they are astray, ok i have to go and stop :)
I'm giving some hints just for you to add them in your experiment, and its a great pleasure when you made it right, and its sooooo fun ok.
otits :)
@ Tito
Are you serious? How many times have you said "I Promise"...where is the schematic to OU?....
Of course it's your fault...how else do you think that Free Energy could save this world?
Does fresh water through desalinization and irrigation for food mean anything to you or anyone else that has an OU machine to make things happen....not just in 5 years but right now?
This is just my 2 cents....:)))
Just show me your schematic or STFU ;D ;D ;D ;D
Regards,
Paul
Quote from: Goat on April 02, 2010, 08:13:31 PM
@ Tito
Are you serious? How many times have you said "I Promise"...where is the schematic to OU?....
Of course it's your fault...how else do you think that Free Energy could save this world?
Does fresh water through desalinization and irrigation for food mean anything to you or anyone else that has an OU machine to make things happen....not just in 5 years but right now?
This is just my 2 cents....:)))
Just show me your schematic or STFU ;D ;D ;D ;D
Regards,
Paul
oh common! i don't believe you man.
There are a lot of genius there making shared their stuff.
like for example, sir wattsup and others. they are not claiming but i believe they have it ok.
but i notice that the hit is always in me ;D
ok i will not claim anymore and those hints are my share. i think its more better. ;D
I'm serious okay, and i want to sell this thing in safe way, i need money too. but i feel there is always danger. so i will just use it to make money . ;D
And i don't want to share it in a whole ok, I'm not out of my mind ok hmmmmmm ;D
sorry :)
Quote from: Tito L. Oracion on April 02, 2010, 08:32:51 PM
oh common! i don't believe you man.
There are a lot of genius there making shared their stuff.
like for example, sir wattsup and others. they are not claiming but i believe they have it ok.
but i notice that the hit is always in me ;D
ok i will not claim anymore and those hints are my share. i think its more better. ;D
I'm serious okay, and i want to sell this thing in safe way, i need money too. but i feel there is always danger. so i will just use it to make money . ;D
And i don't want to share it in a whole ok, I'm not out of my mind ok hmmmmmm ;D
@ Tito
Yes I'm serious...
Every second you waste is another life wasted for lack of food and water... something no human on this earth should be in lack of...if you really have an OU unit then...yes I'm serious...
Please make this open source and save as many lives as you can while you still have the chance... ;D
Regards,
Paul
Quote from: Goat on April 02, 2010, 08:13:31 PM
@ Tito
Are you serious? How many times have you said "I Promise"...where is the schematic to OU?....
Of course it's your fault...how else do you think that Free Energy could save this world?
Does fresh water through desalinization and irrigation for food mean anything to you or anyone else that has an OU machine to make things happen....not just in 5 years but right now?
This is just my 2 cents....:)))
Just show me your schematic or STFU ;D ;D ;D ;D
Regards,
Paul
Dont worry , you will never see anything from him. Everybody talk about MIB and how terrible they can make your life and blablabla but the real enemy to OU is all the people who need attention and ALOT and ALOT of that, they will do anything to get it and to keep it, and of course like you know, they will never show up anything but will continue to mislead everybody just to keep they attention.We already have a bunch of that here.
Best Regards,
IceStorm
Do you all have an attention span of a fruit fly or am I just exaggerating here?
From my last reply to Tito, there were at least two pages of non-sense posts, unrelated to the Electrical igniter patent.
Maybe you should all go meet up with IST, hold hands and tell each other stories, because at this pace the world will crumble to pieces (and then some) before any progress is made in the FE field here.
@ IceStorm
I hear you and I believe in man "Kind" and not people who keep promising and not deliver us from the evil grip wer'e in...I'm being extra skeptic these days only because I've spent countless amounts of money chasing a dream...feed and water people....is that so much to ask of an OU community...without all the BS of sales of books and DVD's and all the advertisement for all the magnets and wire...is there a truly functional device out there...Hello?
Regards,
Paul
I hear a lot of complaints from people that dont contribute at all in this thread. Maybe if they posted something helpful or of some substance, then they would have some grounds to put the screws to others that make claims but never show anything.
Im sorry that I have not been around a lot, but my dad had a stroke about a month ago and is paralyzed from it amongst other issues associated with it. So it is just hard for me to focus on things lately. Im trying to get back into the groove, but its tuff still.
I am getting back to some normalcy but I just need to spend time on some other things still for a bit.
Mags
Goat,
I agree with you 100%. In the end, book-DVD-inspirational sellers ala Bedini Bearden style plus the hardware stores make the big bucks.
Anyone frustrated by the world who lives in and having the conviction that technology could be a solution to remedy his problems, yet by the vision of this type of technology - the surpressed one - with OU being its epitome, makes dreamers starry eyed, easily you get involned in a endless struglle of frustration and hope.
This is cleverly exploited by those who make a living on this (hence sellers) and those who are nobodies in life and having no dignity crave for attention by posting and writing and theorizing and claiming, yet making no cotribution of value apart of being funny and pleasant.
harsh critique? It's harsh the truth i know. By the way, AMIGO, this thread even we accept it or not has to do with FE. The ignition patent is just the tool.
Mag is also right. In case anyone BELIEVES, - a belief stems not from reason but from emotion- yet he should try to take things on his hands and do as far his powers permits. This research i have been told is not for the weak in heart and... pocket.
There is nowhere till now a MAKE-A-FE-device yourself.. Sadly that's a fact.
Salutes,
Quote from: IceStorm on April 02, 2010, 08:49:43 PM
Dont worry , you will never see anything from him. Everybody talk about MIB and how terrible they can make your life and blablabla but the real enemy to OU is all the people who need attention and ALOT and ALOT of that, they will do anything to get it and to keep it, and of course like you know, they will never show up anything but will continue to mislead everybody just to keep they attention.We already have a bunch of that hejavascript:void(0);re.
Best Regards,
IceStorm
C'mon ... it's a classical stalemate situation.
Imagine you have worked hard to make free energy, you lost job, you lost wife and children, you are poor ,working sometimes to feed lab equipment and yourself.Then - suddenly it happens - you've got it ! Free energy right ahead your face ! What would you do ?
a) post everywhere detailed instructions and put it into public domain
b) keep it for yourself and try to interest people to invent into it, while searching for a way which allow you to post enough information for others to replicate it yet still commercialize it
The current plan does not allow those two merged which would be natural in the world of honesty and justice.We have to change this world into one which reward our inventors and let them continue succesfull work instead of persecuting them and killing .
I think that every truly inventor need only a nice lab equipment , team work and not to worry about daily bills. Just like all ordinary people with passions.
Well
sittin around Mag's place shooting the breeze.
Nothin wrong with that !
At least where not getting into trouble.
A lot of very good points made by all and its good to talk about these
things ,they should not be left unsaid.
Mags I hope your Dad is coming around.
Tito ,your mom also.
I would like to say one thing Teets
Wattsup SHARES, he has a site where he has EVERYTHING he does
and many others shared work.
I'm working out of town now but when I get home I'll post it.
Forest Yes life can be tough
Its all in your frame of reference NOBODY I mean NOBODY here
has a clue to just how rough it can really be.
Computers, internet probably 3/4 of this world never will see or touch this .
to busy trying not to die!
I thank this Guy -> <- that I have a shot at life without
endless suffering .
Maybe where the guys that are supposed to change this maybe right here it starts?
And don't tell me [not you tarzan] OH I worked so hard for this I deserve
it .
Peeps work all their life like slaves and get Boopkis! Nada!
Well I don't want to Rant ,We all have our problems
And Mags is a cool guy for letting us Talk and work at the same time.
So Teets whats this about Movies? I love Movies!
Also "Clues"
AS I am Clueless!
When I'm down I think of this guy!
He SCREAMS
IT CAN BE DONE!
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=eKPrGxB1Kzc
I like the movies!
And good company!
Chet
Quote from: Goat on April 02, 2010, 09:04:28 PM
@ IceStorm
I hear you and I believe in man "Kind" and not people who keep promising and not deliver us from the evil grip wer'e in...I'm being extra skeptic these days only because I've spent countless amounts of money chasing a dream...feed and water people....is that so much to ask of an OU community...without all the BS of sales of books and DVD's and all the advertisement for all the magnets and wire...is there a truly functional device out there...Hello?
Regards,
Paul
I don't get it, you mean up to now you didn't see a functional device?
how many years you are researching? nothing, just want to know if you don't mind.
@ramset
yes! sir wattsup shares. i even learned a lot from his stuff.
i said he is not claiming but i believe he has it.
by the way, you want to know who and where i am?
i can give you any info you want for me if you want?
but be careful cause when I'm nervous i can easily trigger my gun.
Teets
I'm not really interested in Where you are .
Because "you are here" :D
I don't like guns [I'm a Bat kinda guy!]
Maybe when I get older!
I am more interested in "Where your mind is at"!
{In a sharing kind of way "Good stuff"]
And I hope we all get to see A different world ,
Or at least the "vision" start to happen ,so I can feel better about my kids and grandkids!
Gotta go to work!
Have a good day Fellahs!
Chet
PS
TeeTS I asked you what time it was yesterday ,Because I'm curious?
Thats all Buddy just curious.
I dont know if anyone remembers Zeropoint321 and the self spinning sphere/bifi coil/reed switch. He still has a vid of it up.
Z and I have been talking ever since. Good Guy.
Well when he posted the other vids with the simple schematic, 1 week later he was contacted and Told, not asked to take down the vids with the schematic. Well it ends up the thing was owned by the military. And one of the schematics was copyrighted, as in a copy of a page from somewhere.
I know how it works, but have not built one. And I totally believe it does work.
But all in all, it was a slap on the wrist and Z is still winding bifi coils and spinning his wheels and sharing secrets, and he is alive and kicking.
What teets doesnt understand is that what he has is not unique to him. Its been done and done again. Teets, you can sell it. But to whom? Like you said, you feel it may be dangerous. Well probably. You have no rights to sell something that is not yours. But that is what open source is all about. Do it yourselfers can take advantage of it for themselves and maybe friends, but to profit from it can cause trouble.
Stan Meyers pushed his ideas out there even beyong being told not to. He refused to quit. But from the looks of it , he paid a price.
But if ole Stanley had just shared around his info, and it got to 10 people, and those 10 got to 10 others, and so on, who is the major target now? Stanly, or the whole crew that grew from the seed.
Now if you really want to make money at it teets, you need to be creative in how you combine what you have into other common items. Like an inverter, but yours will run an air conditioner from a 12v bat for a week before killing it. Or a windmill, even a small one, but it puts out 3kw even when the wind is not blowing. ;]
But to search for some other greedy fellow to pay you for your devices, dont be surprised if trouble comes with it.
As for me, I have people on line that will invest in this stuff. They have contact from Bill Gates to Richard Branson.
But I will not take someone elses idea and use it for my profitability. In fact, I dont wish to be filthy rich. It would be nice to make a good living from invention. But with riches, not all troubles will disappear and in fact it could create more problems in your life that you ever had. But I am all for showing my guys something, but I insist that it must be original from me, not at others hard work and expense. And they agree, as they are good guys also.
But if I do get some of this Tesla stuff going, its not going to my guys. They will see it, just for belief factor, but not to be invested in as a sale-able product, but it would be invested in as an idea base to develop original ideas that can be taken through the ringer. But as for stuff that has already been done and to replicate, if I find it, it will be written here on these pages for all to have seeds. If they came knocking on my door after that, they would succeed in stopping nothing, cuz there is an army of you reading these pages. From what I know and understand, I would get a slap on the wrist. I can deal with that, if it happens. But If I continue to boldly go beyond that, I just might be hanging out with Stanley one day soon after.
Im not in a race to the finish. But I am in the race to help the cause. My friends that would potentially invest in stuff like this are not looking for profit. They are happy and comfortable as they are and they just want to see a better world as I do. They, as do I, look at it in ways to get it out there past the barricades that dont want it to happen. That takes money. And we all realize that if we were to try and sell an idea that already exists, there will most likely be trouble down the road.
For example, if we actually found that the igniter can be used to get FE and I posted it here, the news would be out so fast, it just may be hard to stop it. And that would be great. But what if it didnt make it all the way?
My friends are smart people. They see it as, if we have an original and very good working device, to go into a private mass production, and then release the army of working devices to many places at once. Not just a one time appointment with Ch7 news article that will never be shown again after the first showing, but blow it out there till there is no stopping it. And certain criteria must be followed in order to be successful in accomplishing this.
The device must be safe. No rf. No ra. No hv that could be critiqued as rf or ra, preferably low voltage. etc.
But as for these ideas from tesla, the govt owns all the good stuff. So it cant be done as consumer goods.
It would have to be an original idea. Now when I say consumer goods, naturally some company will have to make the devices, and people and bills for the co. will have to be paid, and for doing so, somebody will make a profit and a living from it just like a bread maker, or a company that makes diapers. I have no problems with that.
In the end, making these devices is not free. But it would be a great product for everyone.
But like the self spinning sphere/bifi coil setup, anyone with the competence to do so can build it and have a basic free energy device to play with. But Try to sell it, and they will come.
Mags
Quote from: Tito L. Oracion on April 03, 2010, 08:42:07 AM
by the way, you want to know who and where i am?
i can give you any info you want for me if you want?
but be careful cause when I'm nervous i can easily trigger my gun.
Tito, man you are just way to paranoid dude. You are all, I have it I have it, cant you see it i have it but I cant tell you HAHAHAHAHA I have it Im happy I have it you dont but I do HAHAHAHA But I will shoot you.
Gime a break dude. you bring all this paranoia to yourself. One day you are all sexy with Ram and the next you threaten him. You need to sit back and chill dude. Nobody here has threatened you as far as I have read. People are just tired of you arrogance about it all and you condescending HAHAHAHA's
Either be a good person here or move on to tease some other forum.
Mags
Nice talk people.
It's one of the problem with OU - you need to invest a lot of money or just be a man chattering around about beautiful ideas ;D
The second problem is that most of OU devices I've seen are probably dangerous to health. That would explain a lot of mysterious inventors deaths.
We have to find that one which is neutral or maybe even cure diseases.
I think I know one such device and it's s very simple one.An electric doorbell and maybe also a relay. ;D
Relay and doorbell is a reminiscence of Edison vibrator used in 1875 to creating etheric force.
Now I couldn't be more straightforward,right ? Read every article about etheric force especially from 1875-1876 and you will realize that I'm telling you the truth.
P.S. Once again picture of our precursor ;D
It's interesting if Tesla just took Edison device and spin off from it to build magnifying transmitter ?
Hmmm.....
Threats? Nah "hugs" :-*
Any how, I agree with Mags and the rest of the fellahs.
Only good guys!![the new rules?]
And we build stuff !!
Doorbells ? whatever?
I'm in!
Chet
PS
I'll be settin up a "bench" in the Houseboat startin Tuesday.
Quote from: Magluvin on April 03, 2010, 09:34:57 AM
(...)You have no rights to sell something that is not yours. But that is what open source is all about. Do it yourselfers can take advantage of it for themselves and maybe friends, but to profit from it can cause trouble.(...)
Nope, You're absolutely wrong! Open Source gives EQUAL RIGHTS TO EVERYONE!! In other words, everyone can start his/her own production based on ideas presented in "Open Source" and to SELL those products. One only CAN NOT have EXCLUSIVE rights!!
For example, someone start his production based on ideas from an "Open Source".
A year later his neighbor starts EXACTLY alike production. Now both are selling their products, only the one who started later is selling it cheaper. The first one can do nothing instead of lowering his price; he has no exclusive rights to it. Practically all their neighbors have right to open their production of the same product. That's their risk if they'll sell it.
Quote from: Qwert on April 03, 2010, 03:01:56 PM
Nope, You're absolutely wrong! Open Source gives EQUAL RIGHTS TO EVERYONE!! In other words, everyone can start his/her own production based on ideas presented in "Open Source" and to SELL those products. One only CAN NOT have EXCLUSIVE rights!!
For example, someone start his production based on ideas from an "Open Source".
A year later his neighbor starts EXACTLY alike production. Now both are selling their products, only the one who started later is selling it cheaper. The first one can do nothing instead of lowering his price; he has no exclusive rights to it. Practically all their neighbors have right to open their production of the same product. That's their risk if they'll sell it.
Concerning Reply #322:
Magluvin is only correct if the device inventor has a patent on his device. That's the law; so he's right in that instance.
Otherwise, Qwert is correct about the Open Source. Public Domain exists. His reasoning is legally right.
But! If anyone can improve an existing product sufficiently enough to make the product
different enough from the original to be original in itself, it's patentable.
http://www.tms.org/pubs/journals/JOM/matters/matters-9501.html
--Lee
Well anyway, lets talk about discharging a cap on a portion of a wire that has a tail, or lets say like my puppy coil, we discharge a cap across the first 8 turns and collect from the coil as a whole.
Now the question is, the caps polarity when it is discharged across the first 8 turns, should we have the NEG of the cap on the far end and the POS on the 8th turn, or the other way around?
I have only tried it 1 way and not the other yet. But before I do, I just wanted to get some thoughts going here as to if there is a difference one way or another before I do try.
And also I want to see what some of you know, or even come up with as reasons for having correct polarity of the cap discharge and what happens in the coil when the discharge happens from discharge to output.
I have to work tonight but tomorrow I am spending Easter by myself an going to relax and play with this thing.
But I just want to get our minds going on this and see what the collaboration comes up with before I do the test and then we will see what the difference really is after, if there is a difference. =]
Mags
Mags
your post 317 is like a mission statement.
I like it !!
Chet
PS
Nobody has suggestions for Forest on a scope?
Hey Chet
I didnt see the post that forest was looking for a scope.
I have been looking on ebay and there are some good ones for some good prices.
First, what are you looking to spend? This will be the first thing to think about. Then I will point out what I think is good for the price. =]
Mission statement? Ok whos coming with me? Help me help you, help me help you. Jerry Maguire
Well I have been involved with this stuff off and on since 7th grade. It started with gravity perps, and now Im all over the place.
But the thoughts of the problems and issues of a working device are ones that need careful thought.
Im sure that most people when they get into this realm at first think of riches, but for some that idea fades into something more important. Some look forward as to what they will do when they get rich, but dont think about their fellow man woman and children as to how their lives will be while they are thinking about their money.
I look at it like this.
If we, all of us, did not have to pay for energy, everyones lives would improve. Everyone will have clean water, good food, and shelter with all the amenities. Because the money that is saved all around us can be put to these uses more abundantly. Most thieves will not need to thieve anymore because they have what they need already, as I say, most. Not all problems will be cured. But the quality of life for all should be of a higher standard for most all. Some bad eggs will still exist and some homeless will decide to stay that way, but maybe they will have a fridge with food in the box house that runs for free, with a tv in the fridge door. =]
But the ones that go hungry today, that problem would be lessened to the nth degree, along with the ones that need heat in the winter and cool in the summer.
I could go to Cali from Ft Laud in my electric car for the price of tire rubber and brake pads, not $800 in fuel.
One of the main costs of an airliner is fuel. A huge cost in manufacturing is electricity, along with retail and food stores lighting, air conditioning, refrigeration, food and supply transportation, all adds to the cost of the products.
I could go on but you get the drift.
Lets fix this thing, Now whos coming with me? =]
Maguire
With 11,000 hits on this thread already, you won't be lacking for company!
I say teets rides in the back!
Chet
I have an urge to mess with the coil project, but I have to go in a bit to finish some work at my shop. I will be up till maybe 3am and sleep till noon. So I have to resist. I have indulged in the urge many times in this situation and I get stuck on it and I dont get the work at my shop done. Its addicting. Perpetual crack! lol
But i have to survive.
But the thought of the polarity of the cap discharged into the coil has my mind racing. Should the electrons flow from the beginning of the portion of the coil the cap is discharged into, to the 8th turn and then continue to the end? Or, would it be that the current flows from the 8th turn to the beginning and bounce back to the end to get the best output? Or are there nodes that maybe the tap need to be at 5 7/8 turn and the end is a multiple of that?
There is a lot going on there that needs to be tried and tested. And naturally I will be using an igniter circuit to charge the cap for discharge into the coil.
Mags
Quote from: ramset on April 03, 2010, 10:52:30 PM
Mags
your post 317 is like a mission statement.
I like it !!
Chet
PS
Nobody has suggestions for Forest on a scope?
Thanks man.I have bought one finally ! It's an old and HEAVY (>30kg) but he he , maybe in future I will deserve for a smaller one.In meantime I engaged tarzan from DHL to bring it to my home and hope he would not scalp me from much money ;D
Have a good Holiday Fellas!
Workin day for me Too.
Chet
PS Teets
Don't let the bad guy's win.
These guys-> >:( <-
Today was a big day for this guy -> <- !
Quote from: Tito L. Oracion on April 03, 2010, 08:42:07 AM
I don't get it, you mean up to now you didn't see a functional device?
how many years you are researching? nothing, just want to know if you don't mind.
@ Tito
I spent way too many years and $$ researching this FE stuff and came to the conclusion that 99.9999% is BS.... without proof of an actual independently tested device I'm still not convinced that it exists...the other .00001% is the maybe factor...
Quote from: Magluvin on April 03, 2010, 11:53:56 PM
I have an urge to mess with the coil project....But the thought of the polarity of the cap discharged into the coil has my mind racing....
@ Mags
Not sure if this would help you but I don't think the polarity of the cap to coil matters....at least for Tesla it didn't but then he doesn't mention OU in the 454622 patent...just converting low voltage AC or DC into "currents of enormous frequency and excessively high potential"...it's interesting though as far as the 1 wire transfer though....
BTW...there was talk in the Tariel Kapanadze thread about the dangers of exposure to high frequency electromagnetic waves but I'm not sure from the article how it can be avoided...here's the link...
http://translate.google.ca/translate?js=y&prev=_t&hl=en&ie=UTF-8&layout=1&eotf=1&u=http%3A%2F%2Fprometheus.al.ru%2Fphisik%2Fphys3.htm&sl=ru&tl=en
Hi everybody, happy Easter! ;D
I'm sorry for everything, now i see it, at least i think i made help for someone.
sorry if i made you feel tease. but you know something, teasers sometimes makes you discover something ;D
don't worry, i will just be in the back ground from now on, watching for the improvements.
MAGS Yes I'm using inverters cause its so very easy to make free 12v.
amigo, goodbye once again but i think this is final now on 13th. ;D
By the way i have a new proj. I'm trying to imitate the action of a Human heart, and doing it into electricity. The collapse of a wire makes a bouncing effect from 2 caps connected to it, and make a continous action and i'm collecting some effects.
Bye everyone i'll be missin you :-*
otits ;D
Ooooootits
OOOoooooootits
Where are you??
Please tell me about the "Heart Beat"thingy!!
Plleeeeease??
If Mags tells us how to post movies here [which I don't know either]
Will you share this,
Qoute:
The collapse of a wire makes a bouncing effect from 2 caps connected to it, and make a continous action and i'm collecting some effects.
------------------
How do I collapse a wire?
Squish it?
OOOOooooooooootits
Where are you.................
[I miss you]
Chet
The story of Otis and Chet evolves into a love relationship :)
That was funny rolf
Check this theory and following comments :
http://www.energeticforum.com/renewable-energy/4006-rosemary-ainslie-magnetic-field-model-4.html#post65502
I'm sure that no matter if Earth magnetic field rotate or not (probably not) this magnetic cavitation effect occur.
Not sure what he is up to using an inverter but i would imagine if you use one to run a load through a coil you could work it out to function like a JT where it will either store additively up to the battery potential using the 50/60hrtz to charge a second bank with spikes to extend the run time of primary bank. I might be able to toy with it if I can get my wife to send me one of my 5kw inverters and some microwave parts i have boxed up. I had to take this job really far from home for the summer to finish my training.Knew it would come back to bite me in the arse.tweeking it out and getting it fine tuned would be the hard part. If possible it would sure reduce the expense of needing so many batteries in an off grid system. It might even resolve the issues caused by surges from large motors starting up on inverters.
All in all I suspect it will require a transformer of size like one from a welder to handle the power instead of a tiny teroid.
Im not sure what Tito means a lot of the time. I cant say that anyone does.
He uses an inverter to get 12v for free. Send that out there and see how many questions are returned.
He is clever at never telling us anything. Thats why my interest in what he says is very low at this time.
Coil with a tail? Maybe. But nothing yet.
But Im not about to get an inverter and hook up the output to a 12v battery or any 12v device.. Sounds like advice to put someone in danger. Be careful Doug.
Ram, to put a vid on YT it must be less than 10 min long to upload, and you must have an acct.
Once you have an acct and are signed in, any page you are on will have an UPLOAD icon that will take you to an upload page. From there its easy. You just need to know what folder the vid is on your pc for YT to upload from.
Mags
As for microwave parts, the transformer, the cap, the diode, and the a/c cooling fan and the micro switches ar the only parts I would recomend removing that are of good use.
I would stay away from playing with the microwave device itself. The stuff I mentioned above are all that I had taken from the busted microwave oven, as I never even opened one before, just common sense and reading tells me so.
mags
Quote from: forest on April 05, 2010, 08:21:52 AM
Check this theory and following comments :
http://www.energeticforum.com/renewable-energy/4006-rosemary-ainslie-magnetic-field-model-4.html#post65502
What guys with such ideas always forget is that on Earth you cannot be in two fields at the same time. You are either in the north polarity or the south polarity of the Earth but never both. Even in space, if you are hit by a moving field, it will only be one polarity. You do not need or even want the Earths polarities to move against its normal rotation otherwise we would be toast.
Someone recently said you cannot do anything with a rotor having turning magnets with only a single polarity hitting the pick up coils and this has been shown to be not true. It works. Why. If you are in the North field of the Earth, and you pulse only a south field over a pick up coil, at every pulse off, the Earth's North field takes up the space again and you now have both polarities acting on the pick up coil.
The greatest and simplest proof of this is your simple compass. From thousands of miles away, that compass still knows where the North field is originating from. Seems mundane but there is an extremely powerful force there. So imagine all the atoms know this also and regardless of their molecular make up, all atoms will have a preferential orientation towards to the North on the north hemisphere. When you pulse, the atoms realign in the direction of the new pulse source or magnetic field source, then when the pulse is off, the atoms revert back to aligning themselves with the Earth field. Why do you get a kick when the pulse is first applied. Because all those atoms are pointing towards the North pole normal latent state (not so latent after all). At zero applied energy the atoms are pointing North so at the first pulse, the atoms swing towards the new source but at this first pulse there is nothing to hold it back so you get a first dramatic and unhindered swing that gives you that kick. After which the continued on/off conditions of the pulse control each of the further atomic swings.
Tesla's Radiant energy has only one plate in the air. Why only one plate, with the other side in the ground. Because he knows the Earths field at any given point is a mono-polarity. Otherwise he would have used two plates and hoped to hell each plate will catch one polarity. That is one of the reasons we are alive on this planet, because if both polarities were equally available all over the planet homogeneously, we would have all fried a long time ago. We would be living in a constant short circuit state.
I asked Tito a question about how he sees a zener and he answered that he sees it like a cannon/diverter. To me this means charge a cap and at a certain highest voltage discharge it into a side circuit, NOT THE SAME CIRCUIT. Hmmmmmmm.
Also regarding Tesla's Ozone Patent, thus far I have not been able to replicate it using any type of Mosfet. If anyone can, they will get the answer. But if Tito is using this patent as a basis, then he is surely not using mosfets to pulse it, unless of course he has discovered the secret to using a mosfet in such a scenario. But the mosfet HAS TO LET ENERGY FREELY FLOW IN BOTH DIRECTIONS. But thus far all mosfets can do is fry. So if he is using that patent, then he is using some other mechanical rotary method or he is pulsing a relay and he still has the problem of sticking relay reeds, etc. The other method of using a spark gap is simply a major energy waste.
wattsup
I fully aware of being in one polarity North Earth magnet.
What is gong on with small magnet if you push it against large magnet field ?
As I know it will be catched inside magnetic buble and stick to large magnet with opposite polarities facing towards each other ! What would happen if that small magnet could instantly dissapear ?
There is atomic interaction which I don't quite understand yet which disallow our neo magnets to orientate properly in Earth magnetic field but when it can freely move it will behave like compass needle.
MOSFETs, Tito said, Igniter patent etc.
All those contribute to chaos rather knowledge. In any case, even if the potential source of OU is unknown (if exists at all) in those patent series as indicated that hold the "secret" and all are not about Tito's playing ground thing... (that 99,99 % probably is) i proceed as:
I have obtained a permanent magnet DC motor with carbon commutators.
I am gonna re-arrange (if i can, i think i can) this motor and adapt it to work as the Ozone patent, that is same in operation principle as the ignition patent i guess.
Then i will report.
ps: Little less conversation, little more action.. elvis
Action?
Action for the sake of action ?[I know NG]
Theory?
Forest Quote:
magnetic cavitation effect
---------------------------
Well not exactly a theory!
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=eKPrGxB1Kzc
Just a good way to get your mind around it!
Cavitate the medium,"stress the fields"
Pulse, oscillate, agitate, whatever it takes!
Open the door!
Chet
Thanks for the input Watts
Tito had said something about carbon, aluminum and zeners at one point. The zener was what went through my mind more though. I went through many thoughts of what and where we could use it other than just regulating.
The I looked up HV zeners and I thought hmmm, Zener as a spark gap? And I asked tito if that were the case and he said BIG YES. But then I had to think, well which type do I go fore to start out? I know Teets aint tellin, hints but only 1 piece to a 6 piece puzzle then its muzzle time.
But, After that Big Yes, he comes back with he does not use the zener anymore. Something better. But of course tell everyone zeners and such but its not what he uses, Of course. Well yippy. :-\
But as I thought about it in the back of my mind, the drawing that tito put up for Stefan long ago and is reposted here or Magnifier thread of the 200v/24v transformer with the relay and a cap and diode across the contacts, well there is a post before that describing and he says dont forget to use a zener diode. And I can only assume he meant the one across the contacts and a resistor in series, and he says use 3v or higher.
So if the zener is 3v per say, and we want the cap to hold a high voltage, the zener will keep that voltage low either direction, no? Forward bias and reverse.
Now, could the zener function just be for protecting the contacts? Or does this diode WITH a resistor in series with it, be some kind of valve that lets the current from the coil move slowly thus helping some how to keep the current flowing longer? He was claiming it to be the secret of the SM TPU at the time.
Remember, this is just all the thoughts that I have had ever since. Some of it may be laughable, as I have chuckled my self, but these are thoughtful possibilities.
mags
I also thaugt about this zener. It could be used at the end of the "tail" coil. If you look in Colorado Springs notes, you can arrange some kind of capacitance to store energy of the extra coil - capacitor, isolated coil, coil made of coaxial cable or even batery. It should be connected at the end of the coil between capacitance and the final part of the coil so you get only a part of the energy needed to switch the diode which is small enough to not disturb the resonance. But I have to study some more
Don Smith said to use varactor from transformer to ground.Another possiblity is electrolytic cap - what is the breakdown voltage in incorrect direction across electrolytic cap terminals ? What if zener diode was used to direct flyback or backemf from coil or transformer to charge electrolytic cap ?
Maybe I was not clear enough. What I think is very much in line with Delboys proposal. The capacitive storage is pumped by oscilator - transformer with extra coil, to a very high voltage. The zener diode is connected so that the distance from the connection on the oscilator to the + terminal of the capacitance is such to equal the switching voltage of a diode. This way we get impulses of very high voltage that can power a receiver.
:-*
;D :-*
Hmmm....
I wonder if its possible to have a conversation in nothing but yellow guy
Faces?
Teetums is right, Stefan should put more "eye candy" stuff like they have at
Energetic!
Right know I could use the little guy that bangs his head against the brick wall!
Teets what yah gonna do when we "get it"?
Cause we will!!
You did!
And you can't even figure out how to post movies on U tube. ::)
To me ,thats inspiration!
Settin up the bench![in between the 14 hour days]
Chet
:-* ;D :-* :D :o
:-X :-* :-* :-\ :-* :-* ::) :-* :-* ;D
Hmmmm.....
I can,t speak in sentences yet![you guys are good!
Forest
How do you think "the door bell" works?
Where would you "see"an event taking place in the circuit?
OOOOOOOooooooooTITS
I miss you Buddy!!
:'(
Quote from: ramset on April 08, 2010, 06:46:00 AM
Hmmmm.....
I can,t speak in sentences yet![you guys are good!
Forest
How do you think "the door bell" works?
Where would you "see"an event taking place in the circuit?
OOOOOOOooooooooTITS
I miss you Buddy!!
:'(
from core of coil in some special cases. Read Edison notes 1875-1876 about etheric force.Most of todays electric door bells are made counter productive and etheric force is hidden by back emf. Surprisingly Edison found that allowing a path for self-induction to dissipate back to power source eliminate etheric force.
Tesla started with etheric force called radiant energy and invented magnifying transformer.
Tito grasped idea of extra coil from Tesla Colorado Notes and connected with Edison discovery.There was others too. Recently also wattsup found something related.
This is all I think I know.
Forest
How would you test this "theory"?
If I might make a proposal?
If you take the time to put together an
"idiots guide to building Tarzans doorbells" .
This Idiot will build it!
Try to think of things I can pick up at rat shack [I have one close by}
I will post pics ,movies the whole anchalotta !
Heck maybe Teetums will let me build one of his
Heart on Thingy's??
http://www.overunity.com/index.php?topic=9020.msg236935#new
Chet
Quote from: forest on April 09, 2010, 05:03:47 AM
from core of coil in some special cases. Read Edison notes 1875-1876 about etheric force.Most of todays electric door bells are made counter productive and etheric force is hidden by back emf. Surprisingly Edison found that allowing a path for self-induction to dissipate back to power source eliminate etheric force.
Tesla started with etheric force called radiant energy and invented magnifying transformer.
Tito grasped idea of extra coil from Tesla Colorado Notes and connected with Edison discovery.There was others too. Recently also wattsup found something related.
This is all I think I know.
@Forest
What Edison found and called it "etheric force" was simply what we call now radio wave, he didn't know at that time so he tough that was a mysterious force. There alot of reference about that mistake, do a search on Google with "edison etheric force".
Best Regards,
IceStorm
IceStorm
Instead of throwing unnecessary advices read Edison notes and all related ORIGINAL articles from that times.
"do a search on Google with "edison etheric force"."
YES,I DID but I found MUCH more interesting things when reading Edison notes and Elihu Thomson and Edwin Houston articles from 1876.You just ONLY have to do simple 2+2 ;D
Even if you are right about EM waves production (IMHO you are not) - check described features of released "etheric force" and compare it to currently used radio transmitters .
Quote from: forest on April 09, 2010, 01:53:01 PM
IceStorm
Instead of throwing unnecessary advices read Edison notes and all related ORIGINAL articles from that times.
"do a search on Google with "edison etheric force"."
YES,I DID but I found MUCH more interesting things when reading Edison notes and Elihu Thomson and Edwin Houston articles from 1876.You just ONLY have to do simple 2+2 ;D
Even if you are right about EM waves production (IMHO you are not) - check described features of released "etheric force" and compare it to currently used radio transmitters .
To be honest , i really don't care about your opinion, i didnt talk like you do about hypotheses, i talked about fact. One thing you must know its in 18XX alot of controversial theory was emerging and alot of misunderstood phenomena too, that was the end of that century but the beginning of the fundamental basement for the current science. They didn't have all the equipment that we have today, in fact they had about nothing so , something unexplainable can take alot of mystical word to describe it like "Etheric force" or whatever. But when they discover in the end that its only EM Wave , its done , no more "Etheric force", but whats funny its when someone more than 100 year later look at that with the same mind as 100 year ago ignoring all the science in between and see a miracle or a hidden key in that, how do you describe that ? Current science must be understood before going back in time and searching for anomaly, else , the only thing you will do is trying to rediscover what we already know but this time by guesswork. Look at the joulethief thread loll look how many post is there, they found what a simple step up transformer do and how to build one but with the idea in mind that there something unexplainable and mysterious in it. A simple elementary book on electronic will have teach all the facet of transformer in no time. Its why i said that the current science must be understood before searching for anomaly because empirical fact are unmovable, only its variable can teach us something new if they go outside of the evidence.
Best Regards,
IceStorm
There is sadly a growing evidence in forums like this that Icestorm is quite right about his views.
@Icestorm
QuoteTo be honest , i really don't care about your opinion, i didnt talk like you do about hypotheses, i talked about fact. One thing you must know its in 18XX alot of controversial theory was emerging and alot of misunderstood phenomena too, that was the end of that century but the beginning of the fundamental basement for the current science. They didn't have all the equipment that we have today, in fact they had about nothing so , something unexplainable can take alot of mystical word to describe it like "Etheric force" or whatever. But when they discover in the end that its only EM Wave , its done , no more "Etheric force", but whats funny its when someone more than 100 year later look at that with the same mind as 100 year ago ignoring all the science in between and see a miracle or a hidden key in that, how do you describe that ? Current science must be understood before going back in time and searching for anomaly, else , the only thing you will do is trying to rediscover what we already know but this time by guesswork.
You know I always find it odd that even the latest nobel prize winning physicists in their literature and lectures will admit we still do not fully understand what electricity,magnetism and gravity are fundamentally. It would seem that it is always the people with the most understanding who are the first to declare that all is not know while the ones with the least understanding continue to declare that we know everything. I apply a simple logic--- If we really knew what E,B,G fields were fundamentally then we could manipulate them to our will in any number of ways---, yet even in this modern day and age we must still spin silly propellers and belch flames from our silly rockets in hopes of getting off the ground. As well most power production occurs at conversion rates far below 50%, for nuclear reactors it is near 5% I hear, lol. No, I am afraid everything is not understood in fact I think almost nothing is truely understood based solely on the dismal state of our technologies, as many state ---proof is required and I have seen very little if any in regards to useful application of supposed understanding in modern physics. It is also funny that all the theories we presently have will probably be thrown out with the bath water yet again and replaced by string and wave field theory which sound reminiscent of the same theories we had 100 years ago.
Personally I would agree with Albert Einstein--"The only thing that interferes with my learning is my education.", as well historically it has always been the "black sheep" individuals who have evolved science and technology and the rest are basically spectators. Again we can apply some simple logic, How can you expect to discover something new or unique if you think and act just like everyone else--when you do the same thing as everyone else?.
Regards
AC
Quote from: allcanadian on April 09, 2010, 06:07:22 PM
@Icestorm
You know I always find it odd that even the latest nobel prize winning physicists in their literature and lectures will admit we still do not fully understand what electricity,magnetism and gravity are fundamentally. It would seem that it is always the people with the most understanding who are the first to declare that all is not know while the ones with the least understanding continue to declare that we know everything. I apply a simple logic--- If we really knew what E,B,G fields were fundamentally then we could manipulate them to our will in any number of ways---, yet even in this modern day and age we must still spin silly propellers and belch flames from our silly rockets in hopes of getting off the ground. As well most power production occurs at conversion rates far below 50%, for nuclear reactors it is near 5% I hear, lol. No, I am afraid everything is not understood in fact I think almost nothing is truely understood based solely on the dismal state of our technologies, as many state ---proof is required and I have seen very little if any in regards to useful application of supposed understanding in modern physics. It is also funny that all the theories we presently have will probably be thrown out with the bath water yet again and replaced by string and wave field theory which sound reminiscent of the same theories we had 100 years ago.
Personally I would agree with Albert Einstein--"The only thing that interferes with my learning is my education.", as well historically it has always been the "black sheep" individuals who have evolved science and technology and the rest are basically spectators. Again we can apply some simple logic, How can you expect to discover something new or unique if you think and act just like everyone else--when you do the same thing as everyone else?.
Regards
AC
Poor you, you still don't understand what i said , well , i agree with you that maybe in 100 year we will throw our current theory to the garbage, there nothing wrong here. but now listen to this sentence : If you don't know the current science HOW CAN YOU KNOW WHAT IS NORMAL OR NOT. Its exactly what people here is trying desperately to do , finding anomaly in the current science to advance it to another level. You seem that you don't know what to do so you post total non sense to the continuation of this discussion ?, wake up , what you wrote don't make any sense , Theory is Theory, Law is unmovable but not Theory but what we have should be analyzed deeper , else , tell me how you will know that you got something or not ????? The ONLY way to discover something or disprove current theory is by knowing them. I realy don't understand what you don't understand here.
Best Regards,
IceStorm
IceStorm,
I do sense your eagerness for facts, but what others are saying is that those who had given us the "facts" might not know what is truly factual and what is not. Besides, everyone is really just repeating like parrots what someone else told them, whether it was a teacher, a scientists, some book, etc. Nobody really *knows*...
I'll give you a really "cute" example of what I mean...have you seen the movie Contact? If so, please recall the scene at the presidential reception where Palmer Joss (the religious leader) talks to Dr. Arroway, and they are debating science vs. religion, fact vs. faith.
At one point he asks her: "Did you love your father?"
She responds something like: "What kind of a question is that? Of course I did."
Then he says: "Prove it!"
I love facts, but lately I realize more and more that I can not say what's fact and what's fiction (or faith), as I really do not *know* for sure. Most of the things were told/taught to me by someone else, and even the things I "discovered" for myself, I am not sure of either.
How many things you yourself can honestly say that you *know*, rather than "believing", taking on pure faith, or taking for granted as told by the orthodox science?
Quote from: amigo on April 09, 2010, 09:19:46 PM
IceStorm,
I do sense your eagerness for facts, but what others are saying is that those who had given us the "facts" might not know what is truly factual and what is not. Besides, everyone is really just repeating like parrots what someone else told them, whether it was a teacher, a scientists, some book, etc. Nobody really *knows*...
I'll give you a really "cute" example of what I mean...have you seen the movie Contact? If so, please recall the scene at the presidential reception where Palmer Joss (the religious leader) talks to Dr. Arroway, and they are debating science vs. religion, fact vs. faith.
At one point he asks her: "Did you love your father?"
She responds something like: "What kind of a question is that? Of course I did."
Then he says: "Prove it!"
I love facts, but lately I realize more and more that I can not say what's fact and what's fiction (or faith), as I really do not *know* for sure. Most of the things were told/taught to me by someone else, and even the things I "discovered" for myself, I am not sure of either.
How many things you yourself can honestly say that you *know*, rather than "believing", taking on pure faith, or taking for granted as told by the orthodox science?
I understand what you say but there a concept that you dont fully understand in what you wrote, Fact doesn't mean (for scientist) that you know that if you mix A with B you get C as result , a fact is Mathematical , take Ohm law for example, if someone don't know the Ohm law you will have a infinite debate with him about his experimentation, because he will not understand correctly how to Mathematically interpret his result, same thing with Lenz law, Faraday Law etc . How many people you see working with capacitor and coil here ? how many have you seen calculating the Inductive Reactance and capacitive Reactance ? but you see them trying to interpret blindly the end result. Doing a experiment is firstly Mathematical, for knowing the end result , if the end result is not what you expected after experimented, there 3 choice, you made a error in your calculation, you forgot to calculate a parameter , you found a anomaly. There no reason to make blindly a experiment if you have no idea what the solution should look like. By playing with the mathematical concept you can extrapolate new theory and do experiment to prove that you are right. Its the only way for the science to advance. Its why i said that people should learn the current science first, and extrapolate later by having all the current view so they will be able to mix new theory and doing real experiment on new concept (or old concept).Tesla was EE and had a heavy mathematical background, like Moray and many other who was great thinker. Look at tesla colorado note , he never done anything blindly, everything was recorded and mathematicaly confirmed.
Best Regards,
IceStorm
Ice storm
Math won't tell us all the answers!
This Guy didn't need it!
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=eKPrGxB1Kzc
Some times a little reverse engineering [like the fellows in TPU]
and a lot of hard work are all we have !
But this Quest will come to fruition!
Chet
Quote from: IceStorm on April 09, 2010, 09:45:58 PM
I understand what you say but there a concept that you dont fully understand in what you wrote, Fact doesn't mean (for scientist) that you know that if you mix A with B you get C as result , a fact is Mathematical , take Ohm law for example, if someone don't know the Ohm law you will have a infinite debate with him about his experimentation, because he will not understand correctly how to Mathematically interpret his result, same thing with Lenz law, Faraday Law etc . How many people you see working with capacitor and coil here ? how many have you seen calculating the Inductive Reactance and capacitive Reactance ? but you see them trying to interpret blindly the end result. Doing a experiment is firstly Mathematical, for knowing the end result , if the end result is not what you expected after experimented, there 3 choice, you made a error in your calculation, you forgot to calculate a parameter , you found a anomaly. There no reason to make blindly a experiment if you have no idea what the solution should look like. By playing with the mathematical concept you can extrapolate new theory and do experiment to prove that you are right. Its the only way for the science to advance. Its why i said that people should learn the current science first, and extrapolate later by having all the current view so they will be able to mix new theory and doing real experiment on new concept (or old concept).Tesla was EE and had a heavy mathematical background, like Moray and many other who was great thinker. Look at tesla colorado note , he never done anything blindly, everything was recorded and mathematicaly confirmed.
Best Regards,
IceStorm
I do understand many things as I have spent time contemplating them (and even more things that I still can not grasp), yet I still can not say that I truly *know* any of them...
What I read from your post above is that Mathematics needs to precede empirical evidence, or as is in many cases today, Mathematics is sufficient proof of something being a fact. I respectfully disagree, because that is a trap based on an assumption that events occur identically from moment to moment, or that the same laws apply throughout the Universe.
If you consider that we are traveling through vastness of space and that each passing moment we are at a different point in that (infinite?) space, the same rules could not possibly apply, because those rules are derived from a formulation that occurred moment (or many moments) ago.
Further more, because we are constantly moving in an unknown (they tell us it's a spiraling) trajectory, we have no evidence to support that we are (will ever be) back to the same spot of that (infinite) space where those formulations were originally derived.
So basically Mathematics is an invention that we use to describe the World around us in so-called exact terms, yet the fundamental premise it is based upon is flawed, namely that the same rules apply from moment to moment and from point in space to point in space.
It is a presumed that every point in (infinite) space is the same with the same properties and so we just proceed based on faith (or take it for granted), instead of applying the scientific method of empirically deriving those parameters by probing and calibrating our knowledge from point to point and from moment to moment (I know it sounds extreme, but in my humble opinion that is the only factual way to be sure).
From where I stand, our orthodox science has stopped, for the most part, conducting empirical tests (I suppose because most things are driven by businesses nowadays and they prefer not to spend money on "wild goose chases" if it's not going to yield them profit). And even worse, we have taken basic principles for granted as unchangeable or immutable, and under that presumption all future conclusions are drawn upon.
Lastly, we have devised new "sciences", and I'll use Quantum Physics as my favourite example, where particles are invented (almost) on a daily basis to fill the gaps in the theory, and where this theory is accepted as if it's gospel, with all new conclusions being drawn based on these (more than) shaky grounds.
And isn't their (Quantum Physics') first doctrine that they don't care where it comes from or how it got there, but that they simply assume (claim) it *is* there and that's their starting point for the whole THEORY (and I emphasize that word because some people use Quantum Physics to explain other things, even existence, as if it is a proven and accepted truth - an axiom).
Quote from: amigo on April 09, 2010, 11:15:59 PM
I do understand many things as I have spent time contemplating them (and even more things that I still can not grasp), yet I still can not say that I truly *know* any of them...
What I read from your post above is that Mathematics needs to precede empirical evidence, or as is in many cases today, Mathematics is sufficient proof of something being a fact. I respectfully disagree, because that is a trap based on an assumption that events occur identically from moment to moment, or that the same laws apply throughout the Universe.
If you consider that we are traveling through vastness of space and that each passing moment we are at a different point in that (infinite?) space, the same rules could not possibly apply, because those rules are derived from a formulation that occurred moment (or many moments) ago.
Further more, because we are constantly moving in an unknown (they tell us it's a spiraling) trajectory, we have no evidence to support that we are (will ever be) back to the same spot of that (infinite) space where those formulations were originally derived.
So basically Mathematics is an invention that we use to describe the World around us in so-called exact terms, yet the fundamental premise it is based upon is flawed, namely that the same rules apply from moment to moment and from point in space to point in space.
It is a presumed that every point in (infinite) space is the same with the same properties and so we just proceed based on faith (or take it for granted), instead of applying the scientific method of empirically deriving those parameters by probing and calibrating our knowledge from point to point and from moment to moment (I know it sounds extreme, but in my humble opinion that is the only factual way to be sure).
From where I stand, our orthodox science has stopped, for the most part, conducting empirical tests (I suppose because most things are driven by businesses nowadays and they prefer not to spend money on "wild goose chases" if it's not going to yield them profit). And even worse, we have taken basic principles for granted as unchangeable or immutable, and under that presumption all future conclusions are drawn upon.
Lastly, we have devised new "sciences", and I'll use Quantum Physics as my favourite example, where particles are invented (almost) on a daily basis to fill the gaps in the theory, and where this theory is accepted as if it's gospel, with all new conclusions being drawn based on these (more than) shaky grounds.
And isn't their (Quantum Physics') first doctrine that they don't care where it comes from or how it got there, but that they simply assume (claim) it *is* there and that's their starting point for the whole THEORY (and I emphasize that word because some people use Quantum Physics to explain other things, even existence, as if it is a proven and accepted truth - an axiom).
You need to understand that ALL the science that we use today and all is derivative are Mathematical concept because Nature itself talk with Mathematics,empirical evidence get confirmed by mathematics , if you cant derivate something from a math point of view its because you don't understand something or some variable are missing. Your terribly wrong in your assumption that we only use a static reference point in calculation, A vector is stationary if taken alone but when incorporated in a function he is not anymore because Time play a role. Quantum Physics is a theory and still need ALOT of work done and experimental proof before getting accepted by all, its the SAME exact thing as the classical physic, it took time and experiment to make the foundation. Mathematical theory need experimental proof to be right and the inverse is true too , when you cant get result its because some variable are missing or the hole concept is bogus but in a way or another , the end result is the same. People today have access to all the knowledge but are too lazy to learn and when i ear "Mathematics is not essential" i can only laugh at that, that mean "Ill not use electronic because it take too much math to realy understand what i want to do" , "ill not experiment because im too lazy to calculate what i have in mind".
With a post like you did , i realy think ill give up , nothing worth to talk here.Realy little people here understand what they do , its just sick. You want to know what its the Myth ? , its not to be able to make a OU machine, its someone with about no knowledge making a ou machine.
My last post.
Best Regards,
IceStorm
In physics math can only describe theory, theory is not the actual WORLD.All discoveries started from anomalies in theories. In 1875 Edison found anomaly but that anomaly WAS never correctly described by theory.What then Elihu Thomson and Edwin Houston proved was that two opposite "etheric forces" eliminate each other . You can apply Maxwell equations if you wish and state it was simply interference of two EM waves, but I state it was two longitudinal pure electric or pure magnetic waves combining into standing wave . What I 've found strange from notes is HUGE secondary emission from all metallic objects ALSO IN OTHER ROOMS made by single etheric force.
I know that my knowledge is minimal but don't you see something strange in that ?
Try to make it using current radio or radar transmitters using the power level they used...
What if EM wave is composed really of two pure longitudinal waves forming standing wave between transmitter and receiver and modulation of that standing wave is what we sense with our equipment ? So all we see is net sum of two longitudinal waves and modulation of that sum which diminish with square area from transmitter.
I think Ice has a point here. He is talking about pure scientific approach to the matter. It is not a question of creativity and trying new things.
As far as I am concerned this approach is the most efficient in discovering new things.
I would appriciate if Ice would contribute to the topic of this debate. Mybe he could explain what tesla ment by term electric activities in the coils.
Blah blah blah, and blah blah blah again!
I think Amigo and Loner made some excellent points in reference to the last two pages of posts and Icestorm has made his opinion quite clear--Quote: "To be honest , i really don't care about your opinion". I would agree that understanding current science and the math is helpful but it is not a rigid requirement for success. I know many people who have built some very bizarre devices which do things they are not supposed to do and they know literally nothing of current science,electronics or math-- they study nature. So what does this tell us? I think it tells us that math and science are great but we should understand that this knowledge in itself tends to "taint" our perspective. Personally I believe the power of observation is the most important aspect for success, that is to see things as they are and not how we believe they should be based on what we are told. I am not a child, I do not need to be told this is the way things are and that is just the way it is by anyone, I can think for myself. I consider this to be acting as a "responsible adult", in fact we call a young person "mature and responsible" when they become independent (Free from the influence)of others. So why is there so much hostility towards others thinking and acting independently when in fact it is a sign of maturity?. I cannot speak for anyone but quite frankly I value everyone's opinion's but that does not mean I believe what they say, I will decide that for myself.
Regards
AC
Quote from: baroutologos on April 10, 2010, 09:28:49 AM
Blah blah blah, and blah blah blah again!
What is a blah anyway?
Wattsup,
One Blah,
Not so bad.
6 Blah's [two sets of three]
Very serious!
Chet
Blah blah blah wall :D
Quote
II know many people who have built some very bizarre devices which do things they are not supposed to do and they know literally nothing of current science,electronics or math-- they study nature. So what does this tell us?
Regards
AC
Just name one and present it formaly. In my whole life i have not seen any.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1-NhDeNGh7M ;D
Today's scientists have substituted mathematics for experiments, and they wander off through equation after equation, and eventually build a structure which has no relation to reality.
Nikola Tesla, Modern Mechanics and Inventions, July, 1934
The scientists of today think deeply instead of clearly. One must be sane to think clearly, but one can think deeply and be quite insane.
Nikola Tesla, Modern Mechanics and Inventions. July, 1934
If Edison had a needle to find in a haystack, he would proceed at once with the diligence of the bee to examine straw after straw until he found the object of his search... I was a sorry witness of such doings, knowing that a little theory and calculation would have saved him ninety per cent of his labor.
Nikola Tesla, New York Times, October 19, 1931
http://www.quotationspage.com/quotes/Nikola_Tesla
;D
Hey Guys
Sorry but I have been so busy, life.
I want you guys to take a look at something.
Got to this link and the applet will come up, or if you have it downloaded, the Falstad sim.
Then import the text below. It is an Igniter circuit in a round about way as no specific part values formulated.
The scopes at the bottom are Vin, Cap, Large Inductor, Spark Gap.
It should start in reset condition, but notice the scopes. Action already.
Now hold the switch down by clicking it and watch for a bit, then release.
There are a lot of things going on here other than just producing sparks for the gas engine.
The sim is in slomo but thats good.
http://www.falstad.com/circuit/
$ 1 5.0E-6 35.60246606707791 50 5.0 50
v 448 528 592 528 0 0 40.0 5.0 0.0 0.0 0.5
l 592 528 592 336 0 1.0 -0.003247948688275401
w 448 528 448 448 0
w 592 336 448 336 0
c 448 336 448 448 0 1.0E-5 9.892347934590477
w 448 448 368 448 0
w 368 448 368 256 0
w 448 336 448 304 0
w 448 304 784 304 0
s 784 256 784 304 0 1 true
T 480 128 592 208 0 1.0 4.0 0.0 0.0 0.999
w 368 256 368 128 0
w 368 128 480 128 0
w 480 256 784 256 0
w 480 256 480 208 0
187 640 128 640 208 0 1000.0 1.0E9 5000.0 0.0010
w 592 208 640 208 0
w 592 128 640 128 0
o 0 64 0 35 5.0 0.2 0 -1
o 4 64 0 35 80.0 0.2 1 -1
o 1 64 0 35 80.0 0.2 2 -1
o 15 64 0 35 7.62939453125E-5 9.765625E-5 3 -1
Mags
If you have tried the circuit, look at how the cap is never at a steady voltage for the contacter to accurately know when to discharge the cap into the primary. And the voltage buildup on the cap and coil are up pretty high to be around that battery source. Dunno, How would the timing ever be right with all that oscillation going on?
Mags
fascinating.............hmmmmm.......
Quote from: wattsup on April 10, 2010, 01:11:08 PM
What is a blah anyway?
hi sir wattsup
i think blah is some kind of wow power leveling gold. ;D joke lol
remember ? ;D ;D ;D
or maybe it is a BRA!,BRA!, BRA! ;D hahahahahha
;D
Quote from: Magluvin on April 11, 2010, 09:35:40 PM
...
http://www.falstad.com/circuit/
$ 1 5.0E-6 35.60246606707791 50 5.0 50
v 448 528 592 528 0 0 40.0 5.0 0.0 0.0 0.5
l 592 528 592 336 0 1.0 -0.003247948688275401
w 448 528 448 448 0
w 592 336 448 336 0
c 448 336 448 448 0 1.0E-5 9.892347934590477
w 448 448 368 448 0
w 368 448 368 256 0
w 448 336 448 304 0
w 448 304 784 304 0
s 784 256 784 304 0 1 true
T 480 128 592 208 0 1.0 4.0 0.0 0.0 0.999
w 368 256 368 128 0
w 368 128 480 128 0
w 480 256 784 256 0
w 480 256 480 208 0
187 640 128 640 208 0 1000.0 1.0E9 5000.0 0.0010
w 592 208 640 208 0
w 592 128 640 128 0
o 0 64 0 35 5.0 0.2 0 -1
o 4 64 0 35 80.0 0.2 1 -1
o 1 64 0 35 80.0 0.2 2 -1
o 15 64 0 35 7.62939453125E-5 9.765625E-5 3 -1
Mags
I've been lurking here, using the same simulator. This circuit uses a pulse generator to switch the igniter circuit:
http://www.falstad.com/circuit/
$ 1 5.0E-6 10.20027730826997 50 5.0 50
d 160 144 224 144 1 0.805904783
w 352 256 400 256 0
w 400 256 432 256 0
w 320 256 352 256 0
R 192 208 128 208 0 5 496.0 5.0 0.0 0.0 0.5
w 320 224 320 256 0
w 320 144 320 192 0
f 272 208 320 208 0 1.5
l 256 144 320 144 0 0.01 -1.2930514272196453E-4
c 320 144 432 144 0 1.4999999999999999E-5 2.607709398100415
T 432 176 496 192 0 0.01 20.0 -1.2932504132845413E-4 5.0749135682010005E-8 0.999
w 432 256 432 208 0
w 432 176 432 144 0
w 496 176 496 144 0
w 496 208 496 256 0
g 432 256 432 304 0
w 496 256 544 256 0
w 496 144 544 144 0
c 224 144 224 224 0 1.0E-10 2.5944860206738696
R 160 144 128 144 0 0 40.0 1.5 0.0 0.0 0.5
w 224 144 256 144 0
w 192 208 272 208 0
w 224 224 224 256 0
w 224 256 320 256 0
187 544 144 544 256 0 1000.0 1.0E9 1000.0 0.0010
o 19 64 0 35 5.0 0.05 0 -1
o 24 64 0 35 5120.0 0.003125 1 -1
The scope shows power at the diode and voltage at the spark gap. If you use a resistance in place of the spark gap you can see the effect on power at the diode of varying the resistance over a wide range. Once the system has settled, it doesn't seem to make much difference.
I'm not really kitted out to test this in practice at present.
Batfish
Mags
Hopefully its been the "good" kind of busy!
Teets!
How come you left out this Teetsla quote?
Our virtues and our failings are inseparable, like force and matter. When they separate, man is no more.
--------------------------------
Seems like Teetsla wrestled with right and wrong ?
Just like you Teets!
Are you related?
{very similar spelling].
Chet
PS
And we know the choices he made [secrets]
Lead to a long and happy life!
HHMMmmm...............
Teets
The truth will "set you free" -> <- .
This guys way -> >:( <- will make you nutty!
Well "nutty-er"
TEETSLA !!
-> ;D<-
hi everyone ;D
i just want to share this.
This is the secret of muammer Yildiz
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9qF3v9LZmfQ&feature=channel
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=oB1gslDaeS4&feature=channel
@goat
hurry up copy it.
we can do it in a huge version ok.
About the Lego Overunity Wheel:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9qF3v9LZmfQ&feature=channel
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=oB1gslDaeS4&feature=channel
May be the author of these videos just tries to fool overunity researchers. I suspect he has a battery in the base because he posted the following trick on his website:
http://home.earthlink.net/~lenyr/magkick.htm : "Have you ever wondered how those magnetic motion toys work. The picture above shows one and what is inside it. The circuit is very simple. It consists of a coil around an iron core, an NPN transistor and a 9volt battery. That is it! No resistors, no capacitors; just the coil, transistor and battery."
Or, may be, I do not get the joke.
Greetings, Conrad
The vids are a joke. From what I understand the guy is a teacher and it was more of a thought provoking project for his students. But it did get out of hand for some OU people. And has nothing to do with the oscillations in the igniter circuit I pointed out before teets posted this crap.
Mags
Easy project. good luck :P
Quote from: conradelektro on April 13, 2010, 01:41:48 PM
About the Lego Overunity Wheel:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9qF3v9LZmfQ&feature=channel
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=oB1gslDaeS4&feature=channel
May be the author of these videos just tries to fool overunity researchers. I suspect he has a battery in the base because he posted the following trick on his website:
http://home.earthlink.net/~lenyr/magkick.htm : "Have you ever wondered how those magnetic motion toys work. The picture above shows one and what is inside it. The circuit is very simple. It consists of a coil around an iron core, an NPN transistor and a 9volt battery. That is it! No resistors, no capacitors; just the coil, transistor and battery."
Or, may be, I do not get the joke.
Greetings, Conrad
No! you don't understand do you.
He says there that there is a capacitor and the capacitor is powering the D.C. computer fan motor and the inductor is energized as the magnet pass and energize the capacitor. that means, this is a motor/generator!, the transistor serves as an amplifier. mag kick is different story ok!
I think this is a crap if you don' t understand it ok! >:(
watch it again it seems that you didn't get it!
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9qF3v9LZmfQ&feature=channel
as i said, i just want to share it, it has nothing to do with igniter but if you include that then it is more powerful ok!
He clearly says the DC fan motor is the generator that is powering the capacitor that feeds the coils...
Tito... have not tired of all the BS you speak all the time?
ps: Post a photo of your "projects" just in case
Well for one, in the vid you posted for a second time, if you watch the top left of the vid, his had is constantly pushing the wheel. A lil Mylow action. And two, if his integrity is so good, then why 2 explanations for how it works, first an atraction and Lenz effect, and then a pc fan motor rotating at about 20 rpms generating enough power into the big cap to pulse the stator coils , multiple times per revolution mind you, and multiple 3 coils.
Lie and lie some more, thats all I see. Joke HAHAHA byby now
Oh and sure, add the igniter to the motor and it will run on its own better. Actually I have an igniter on my toilet and it flushes with sparks. Not much faster though I have to say. I put an Igniter on my PC and its acting funny now.
On real subjects, I have been trying to sync a feedback pulse to close the contacts at a particular phase of charge on the cap. If it is oscillating, the bat, cap and large inductor, when the contacts are open, considering the variable speed of a gas engine, then there would invariably have a varying spark due to the unknown condition of the charge of the cap at any particular time because of oscillation when the contacts are open. Tesla states that the spark is suppose to happen when the contacts close to discharge the cap into the primary. Seems odd.
Mags
Maybe more explanation....
Imagine the oscillation not being there. We close the switch, shorts the cap, charges the inductor, then release the contacts. Any charge that is built into the cap from the inductors collapse, will go back to the battery as the potential of the cap is more than the battery and that cap and battery will level out. But it oscillates.
Not forever, but if the oscillation dies very quick, then we possibly dont have the potential in the cap to dump into the primary. Remember, no diodes, so the cap will not remain charged when the coil collapses into it.
So what Im getting at is the description for the purpose posed by Tesla is uncertain once the circuit is applied.
I get sparks, Ill do a vid here shortly just to get a spark coming from it. I have the relay operated by the 555 to adjust the timing.
Mags
Tesla's ignition system is in use today. It is called CDI or capacitive discharge ignition. It puts out when the cap charged to 600volts or so is dumped into the primary of a high voltage transformer. Some guys were doing water burning experiments and what they were doing was putting a capacitor in parallel with an electronically fired ignition.
The efi produced the normal spark and the additional charged capacitor then discharged through the spark gap plasma. Duplicating lightning. First there is a leader or I call it a scout plasma. This creates the conductor for a much larger current.
True sparks that's the spirit. The spark of the high voltage source together with the low voltage source is greatly enhanched.
In any case in energy terms there is not any gain. As you simply put it, the HV spark goes forward, makes a conductive path and the large volume LV source follows.
You will understand that there is not any energy gain from that procedure if you put a load that the Low voltage (capacitor) source alone cannot power effectively. e.g. a series of 220v lamps after the spark-gap. In this case the HV source has not any problem at "penetrating to the load" whereas the LV source cannot follow the HV discharge and again the spark returns to its normal size (as if there is not any LV high current source).
...
There has been a vast philology at energetic forum that this method enhances energy yet many people cannot grasp simple things.
Bart
Quote:
this method enhances energy
--------------
Useful energy?
or the kind that makes my hair stand up?[no, not like Teetsla]
Chet
Quote from: Tito L. Oracion on April 13, 2010, 09:32:19 PM
watch it again it seems that you didn't get it!
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9qF3v9LZmfQ&feature=channel
@tito
The author of that video already confirmed it was a fake. lol
If he would have put some air core pick up coils elsewhere around the turning magnets, he could have picked up more power to send to his motive coils. But as he shows it there, it will never work because the magnet approaching those single coils will never charge the coil enough to then reuse that energy to push it out. lol Actually he would need more magnets all around the wheel.
Hmmmmm. Might be something to try.
http://amasci.com/elect/poynt/poynt.html
P.S.
wattsup
That info seems important to your experiment also. Seems that it's possible that output circuit with closed loop path have different source of charge like ground while power source be just a Poynt flow generator using tiny energy to recreate dipole (which is a source of electric energy).Did you tried a collector coils with ground connection like in Don Smith lecture video ?
Quote from: Magluvin on April 14, 2010, 03:47:40 AMImagine the oscillation not being there. We close the switch, shorts the cap, charges the inductor, then release the contacts. Any charge that is built into the cap from the inductors collapse, will go back to the battery as the potential of the cap is more than the battery and that cap and battery will level out. But it oscillates.
Not forever, but if the oscillation dies very quick, then we possibly dont have the potential in the cap to dump into the primary. Remember, no diodes, so the cap will not remain charged when the coil collapses into it.
So what Im getting at is the description for the purpose posed by Tesla is uncertain once the circuit is applied.
I get sparks, Ill do a vid here shortly just to get a spark coming from it. I have the relay operated by the 555 to adjust the timing.
Many have seen how quickly and efficiently a spark raises the potential across a coil or primary.
Immediately after this injection of energy the voltage drops as the field collapses.
I've been playing with a pnp circuit to replace the spark gap. What I am looking to test is to place
a short across the coil shortly after the potential is initially setup using a npn or mosfet.
Doing this manually is interesting but I have had limited time to play with solid state methods. I'm
hoping to, someday, see this circuit show a magnetic or core resonance.
Shorting a primary immediately after initially injecting a potential across it should induce quite a bit
of current into the core and should then be reflected out on the secondary.
Performing the energy injection and then shorting the primary using solid state switching should
come with little energy cost.
I just haven't had the time test this out yet.
Take care.
nap
Sparks
I know of CDI. But I have to say that this is somewhat different or just crude. The theory is good. Instead of holding power to the primary, then releasing to get the spark, the source is held through the large inductor, due to lower current use while closed then dumped into the cap to be discharged to the primary. But if the cap is constantly changing state of charge, unlike modern CDI, then how are we sure to get a spark at any particular time?
Naps
I like the idea of the shorting of the primary while fully charged. Got any views of the setup?
Mags
"An inductor (an electromagnet coil) is an electric current device. A capacitor is an electric voltage device. If energy is stored in a shorted coil, the energy is in the surrounding magnetic field, and there must be an electric current circulating in the coil. If energy is stored in a non-shorted capacitor, the energy is in the voltage field between the plates. If the short is suddenly removed from the inductor, there is a loud bang, and a huge voltage briefly appears. If a short is suddenly connected to a capacitor, there is a loud bang and a huge current briefly appears. Capacitor, coil. Electro, magnetism. "EM" energy."
http://amasci.com/miscon/voltage.html
What if capacitor discharge and coil discharge can meet in space ? or rather what if we arrange frequency of discharge of capacitor , coil disconnection , length of coil wire ,then attach antenna to coil in such way that capacitor discharge (which is creating current) will meet voltage spike in antenna then both immediately will diminish....
Hey Forest
before I started playing with this circuit, I thought I had an idea of what is going on in this circuit from the beginning to the end of the cycle of events, and more or less the description of the circuit. But things are not quite as they are presented I feel. Not in a bad way, but some info must be missing, cuz I think Tesla would know exactly what I am thinking, but the pat doesnt say it.
Just as in the sim circuit, every time you hit the switch and release, you get a different output, every time. So when we close the switch, the cap and inductor are at different levels of charge at any time.
Now, unless the large inductor and cap are very large as that they have a resonant freq that is so low, that by the time the contactor is ready to spark the piston, literally, that the cap has just reached full charge at that point in time, or maybe just in the range of full charge.
So Im working on a sim circuit to try and sim the situation I just described to see if I can get that timing just right each cycle and see what we see.
Mags
No!, its not fake, if it is a fake we can make it run, the inductors has primary and secondary, the primary has the transistor to amplify and make a discharge action in the core and that makes an electromagnet and it add torque of push and attract ok, and the two secondaries made in series charges the capacitor and power up the fan and contribute to the rotation!. and by adding some tail it makes it more really powerfull cause a strong collapse of magnetic field is strong that produces a strong electromagnet.
;D
Yes,it's not fake as you described it Tito, but Mags touched most important aspect : synchronization.Without proper synchronization there is no significant output and Tesla even patented various method of adjusting his igniter circuit.The problem is in oscillator initial stage : let assume it is MOSFET driven and MOSFET is managed by kind of circuit - it all depends if it runs on ON or OFF state at start and what it means to the ignition circuit. You can have coil shorted or capacitor charging.The best method seems to have first coil shorted , then coil collapse charges capacitor while additionally power source also does this.
The second aspect Tesla mentioned in interview : it's of tremendous advantage to break at peak of wave.
Hey Guys
I will be moving this week so I wont be much on the net till im done.
I did some playing with the igniter on the sim and if the large inductor is very large, the time it takes to charge between sparks seems long enough for the cap and inductor not to go into oscillation between sparks.
And all that would depend on the engine involved and its rpms/spark timing.
So in a modern spark coil, and considering the multiple cylinders and high rpms achieved, the primary of a spark coil would not be connected to power very long anyway. And in newer vehicles, individual coils are used and the on time would be longer for each compared to 1 and a distributor.
But without values on the large inductor and cap as per teslas original idea, it is hard to say what was really happening for sure, and he says that the values can be changed for a particular use.
Will touch base within the week.
Mags
8)
8)
8)
The sad story of the three blind OU researchers
by Tito Teetsla..................
"warning "
This is an extra sad story [so far].
As this goes to print, untold numbers of children are suffering,
Women and mothers are starving,
and men are weeping for the ones they can not save!
As Teetsla fluffs his pillow and gets ready for a good nights sleep,
some infant somewhere gasps her last agonizing breath as she
mercifully starves to death in the arms of her tortured mother.
But thats ok cause in the morning Teetsla is going to build his
kid a bike that runs without any apparent power.
Teets, you gonna change the ending?
On to whom much is given ,much is required!
Those little dead babies will be staring back at you someday!
Teets,
If your kids ever find out [and they will]that you let peeps die so you could have a better life.
They will probably "Piss" on your grave instead of leaving flowers when your gone!
Man up Bud!!
Chet
ok!
This is how i see it on how to amplify a small volts and currents:
It looks like when you make a single pulse then a module of a chain reaction run into a point you need. 8)
let say for example: The domino effect, you can make two fall by one, and when the two fall then you can make four falls by two and soooooo on.....
now! how to do it? you make your first move or else you will fall ;D
its like a multiplication effect.
or divide and conquer. ;D
LIKE A BOMB EFFECT!
USING THIS METHOD ON ANY DEVICE WILL MAKE IT OVERUNITY OK!
OVIOUSLY ITS A COIL TECHNIQUE TECHNOLOGY.
THE REACTION OF A COIL INTO ANOTHER COILS AND TO OTHER COILS AND TO OTHER COILS AND SOOOOOO ON.... HMMMM......
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=S_Vn1C7eUzA&feature=fvsr
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=B3eXWPrgWJ0&NR=1
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Fcnzam_R9c4&feature=related
Good Morning Teetsla
[well its morning here]
so its as simple as
D
O
M
I
N
O
S
?
HHMMmmmmm...................
Chet
Hmm...that is also called chain reaction wow!
Yes! why?, its true ! ok!
nice vids. But they are missing an element. There was not enough energy created to put the dominos back in place after the tumble. They have to be reset somehow to keep on going.
Not a good example.
Unless you are implying that a second secondary will be able to put out just as much power as the first secondary, while not pulling any more from the primary than it did just having 1 secondary.
Mags
Quote from: Magluvin on April 21, 2010, 11:48:57 PM
nice vids. But they are missing an element. There was not enough energy created to put the dominos back in place after the tumble. They have to be reset somehow to keep on going.
Not a good example.
Unless you are implying that a second secondary will be able to put out just as much power as the first secondary, while not pulling any more from the primary than it did just having 1 secondary.
Mags
No! i'm implying the way energy propagate for a single pulse.
and if there is missing in there then even the dominos can not do that!.
The dominos need to be reset or restored to their initial potential energy state. Say all the dominos were hinged on the floor. If you go to the last domino and lift it you will find that a great deal of force is needed to restore the dominos to the upright position. The force application will need to be reduced as the dominos reach vertical. If not the chain reaction will occur in the oposite direction.
Another example : small bomb can destroy large building.Energy needed to create that bomb is tiny compared to damages.If you can control explosion and put small piece of energy back to create initial bomb that would be infinite explosion.
Bad example but still example....
Professor Teetsla
It does seem that if you don't stand the domino's back up!
Its game over!
You just went bowling!!
Chet
Quote from: forest on April 22, 2010, 07:39:14 AM
...If you can control explosion and put small piece of energy back to create initial bomb that would be infinite explosion.
Bad example but still example....
@forest
Are you serious about the "infinite explosion"? I never heard that that was possible. The
Big Bang which created the universe is the biggest 'explosion' I ever heard of.
--Lee
Quote from: the_big_m_in_ok on April 22, 2010, 05:23:16 PM
@A
Are you serious about the "infinite explosion"? I never heard that that was possible. The Big Bang which created the universe is the biggest 'explosion' I ever heard of.
--Lee
Followed by a great number of implosions
"To get a stellar implosion (leading to a supernova and then either a black hole or neutron star), the fuel at the center of the star gets used up, and the core cools rapidly. The pressure that has been holding up the outer layer drops, and the outer shells start falling toward the center. The gas has a long way to fall (the radius of a red giant can be as large as the distance from the Earth to the Sun) and builds up a tremendous speed. It all meets at the center, at which point most of the mass rebounds into a supernova explosion. About 20% of the mass gets compacted at the center and either forms a neutron star or (if the original star was really large) a black hole."
Its easy for someone to lay claim to overunity effects on just about anything, not just domino's, yet they will never show example to the comparison.
Just about done moving. Got a lil table setup so i can sit and get busy. I am going to have more time available soon. i not only had to move my apt. but my shop also.
The only way I really see ou happening at this point is like in the sim that shows the output increasing with each pulse. But is the total power produced or stored equal or less than what went in? Is power in, irrelevant to power out when we consider power conversions some how?
As in the ingniter, the time that there is power building in the large inductor, well of course the power consumed during that time is les than the conventional way, but that is not saying that we get more out than in, at least from what I know thus far. It could be just more efficient and the other way just very low in efficiency.
So that just indicates that the previous spark coils were just of bad design for the speed of engines of the time.
But I still have to try some things before I dismiss the igniter as a use in OU.
Mags
:(
I'm so sorry everyone, it seems that you didn't get what i mean, but that is all i can give.
I said for every pulse there is like a domino effect happening ok.
Thats the problem Teets, and I suppose you are just getting that now, we dont get it.
We wish we could get it. But none of us do.
It would be nice if someone told us that they knew how to make Lemonade with water sugar but would not give us the last ingredient. One of us just might be able to figure it out that last ingredient.
But you tell us that you know how to make a club sandwhich, but the only ingredient given is white toast, most all of us will most likely be making the sandwhich quite a bit differently than yours and not get the same taste. That is if nobody knows about the club before you say you have it.
Your idea of clues are not even close for anyone to get what you have. And you know this by now. Yet we keep hearing from you like you are really giving us something. There are many hear eagar and willing to put in the effort. But we wish to know more and be more sure before we are led down that unkown road for nothing. It happens a lot and most are tired of it.
I saw something in this patent before you brought it up that you had seen something in it much earlier. But Im not seeing it now as I percieved it from the begining.
You can talk dominos all day, but it does not help without some basic comparison.
Mags
8)
8)
8)
Teetsla
Quote:
I said for every pulse there is like a domino effect happening ok.
----------------------------
"Like" How? Like "Magic"? :o
Teets,
When an OU event happens,I am sure it would or could look like "Domino's".[cascade]
SSOOoooo..............
How does it happen?
Chet
PS
Teetums
If I were you I would ask this guy -> <- what to do.
I don't think he revealed this to keep it a secret.
The same secret that drove Tesla mad!
The Truth shall set you free!
:-*
Mags
Checkout the Papps Engine. It uses an electrical ignition system of sorts. The funny thing is that it is exploding inert gas over and over and over again. As the gas condenses or is restored from a plasma to a gas it sucks the piston forward. Then the fusion catalyzed explosion and repeated an timed as necessary. The power comes from the restorative force of the atom.
This force sets up the dominoes. The electrical ignition system knocks em over.
Quote from: sparks on April 22, 2010, 09:35:21 PM
Followed by a great number of implosions
"To get a stellar implosion (leading to a supernova and then either a black hole or neutron star), the fuel at the center of the star gets used up, and the core cools rapidly. The pressure that has been holding up the outer layer drops, and the outer shells start falling toward the center. The gas has a long way to fall (the radius of a red giant can be as large as the distance from the Earth to the Sun) and builds up a tremendous speed. It all meets at the center, at which point most of the mass rebounds into a supernova explosion. About 20% of the mass gets compacted at the center and either forms a neutron star or (if the original star was really large) a black hole."
That's it. How fast do you think that supernova was traveling in space ether just before it blows up. Once it blows, some particles will travel in the opposite direction of its travel and if they move out fast enough, will in essence for a split second be in the same space, not moving in ether and just disintegrate and turn into tiny black holes. If there is enough matter surrounding these blacks holes, the matter will fall towards the holes and the holes will get bigger and join together. At least that's how I see it. It's not one black hole but many smaller ones that agglomerate. All the conditions have to be just right, proper mass speed, proper explosion strength, proper counter direction velocity of propelled mass, proper amount of available mass (wood for the fire) surrounding the black holes, etc. That's why they are so rare.
@all
This generous ether is available. Let's say you can get 1 volt from a single wire aerial line connected to a radiant energy circuit that outputs 1 volt onto two wires, positive and negative. You can grab 1 volt per second or 1 million 1 volts per second, it's up to you and it will always be available, but only 1 volt. What do you do. You know the 1 volt will charge a capacitor very very very quickly. So what do you do? It's there for the taking.
Tesla has shown that a capacitor will eagerly accept and store that energy. So again what do you do. Well...........
In 99% of cases, guys are just amplifying the 1 volt into 5 volts but all that does is raise the volts and decrease the amps. So you are basically playing like a yoyo and getting no where.
You could also play the coil to coil game but again, there will be more and more losses to overcome.
This is my idea on how to harvest it.
http://www.overunity.com/index.php?topic=8185.msg237431#msg237431
With such a circuit, you can grab as much energy as you need, anywhere. You can make more stages or more units and parallel them. You will not be stretching out the voltage and quickly produce real voltage and amperage.
I will open a new thread on this idea today or tomorrow. Just busy with so many other things. lol
Hi Wattsup,
Here is a patent you may be interested in.
http://www.google.com/patents/about?id=bl0LAAAAEBAJ
Figure 4 is similar in some respects to your design.
Another switching design, using supercaps.
http://www.google.com/patents/about?id=nVoOAAAAEBAJ
If you combine these 2 patents you have a dc power source that could possibly run from an electrostatic generator or piezo element.
Quote from: DreamThinkBuild on April 23, 2010, 10:03:39 AM
Hi Wattsup,
Here is a patent you may be interested in.
http://www.google.com/patents/about?id=bl0LAAAAEBAJ
Figure 4 is similar in some respects to your design.
Another switching design, using supercaps.
http://www.google.com/patents/about?id=nVoOAAAAEBAJ
If you combine these 2 patents you have a dc power source that could possibly run from an electrostatic generator or piezo element.
Those patents are close but not quite the same. But in general guys will get the idea that capacitors can be charged individually, then put into parallel before they are all discharged into a bigger, then do the same to the next bigger cap until they are all charged and then all discharge into an even bigger cap. Make as many stages as you want.
i think it was during an interview that Tesla said you can do this and get millions of volts. lol
I maybe should not have posted on this thread so I am sorry for that. I will open a new thread on this and again sorry for interjecting.
Tito L. Oracion said:
Quote
ok!
its like a multiplication effect.
or divide and conquer. ;D
LIKE A BOMB EFFECT!
...
THE REACTION OF A COIL INTO ANOTHER COILS AND TO OTHER COILS AND TO OTHER COILS AND SOOOOOO ON.... HMMMM......
Okay...maybe I'm understanding what some of you are getting at.
Don Smith implied, or actually stated, any number of coils can be placed near each other and achieve overunity as long at they're all in resonance.
That's the 'infinite' I took away from what I read on the thread. If so, I agree with Tito. I'm winding coils by hand now for a high frequency, low voltage(read: fairly safe) system to experiment with in my apartment.
--Lee
Quote from: wattsup on April 23, 2010, 09:10:20 AM
That's it. How fast do you think that supernova was traveling in space ether just before it blows up. Once it blows, some particles will travel in the opposite direction of its travel and if they move out fast enough, will in essence for a split second be in the same space, not moving in ether and just disintegrate and turn into tiny black holes. If there is enough matter surrounding these blacks holes, the matter will fall towards the holes and the holes will get bigger and join together. At least that's how I see it. It's not one black hole but many smaller ones that agglomerate. All the conditions have to be just right, proper mass speed, proper explosion strength, proper counter direction velocity of propelled mass, proper amount of available mass (wood for the fire) surrounding the black holes, etc. That's why they are so rare.
@all
This generous ether is available. Let's say you can get 1 volt from a single wire aerial line connected to a radiant energy circuit that outputs 1 volt onto two wires, positive and negative. You can grab 1 volt per second or 1 million 1 volts per second, it's up to you and it will always be available, but only 1 volt. What do you do. You know the 1 volt will charge a capacitor very very very quickly. So what do you do? It's there for the taking.
Tesla has shown that a capacitor will eagerly accept and store that energy. So again what do you do. Well...........
In 99% of cases, guys are just amplifying the 1 volt into 5 volts but all that does is raise the volts and decrease the amps. So you are basically playing like a yoyo and getting no where.
You could also play the coil to coil game but again, there will be more and more losses to overcome.
This is my idea on how to harvest it.
http://www.overunity.com/index.php?topic=8185.msg237431#msg237431
With such a circuit, you can grab as much energy as you need, anywhere. You can make more stages or more units and parallel them. You will not be stretching out the voltage and quickly produce real voltage and amperage.
I will open a new thread on this idea today or tomorrow. Just busy with so many other things. lol
hi sir your really a genious hmmmm.....
I salute you again for that ;)
;D
Well, I can visualize getting energy from the vacuum or aether. The igniter for example. What if the impulse ending abruptly into an inductor, leaves the current and field build continue by way of inertia, inertia that Tesla spoke of.
So that extra climb could be where gain begins. But the cutoff needs to be at peek current during discharge, meaning either immediately, or at peak field rise of an inductor.
So having proper cutoff during peak of impulse, leave the inductor with only 1 place to get the excess energy while winding down from the inertial climb, something you wont get without dc impulse with proper cutoff.
So some very good switching method will be needed, as good as one can afford to get min and max, on and off continuity, and speed/control. Im not going to let my next whack at this go caveman. =]
I have an idea to just apply this to a pulse motor as the output for cap discharge. And it can be comparatively challenged by setting up the motor as a normal pulse motor. It seems like a logical scheme. Or we could measure sparks. =]
What I want to see from it is, if the pulse motor itself, getting very short reed pulses of higher current into .14ohm big coils, using more power total than the use of the large inductor having less current flowing through it for most of the time to charge the cap to run the motor coils.
I imagine even though there is a variation in rpm and torque, that the power used comparison will have to be calibrated accordingly to find out if more or less power is used either way.
But it will be also a bit more interesting with the motor going along with it. I yike motors. ;D
Im just getting to the point that I can open the project stuff boxes from the move.
Mags
Mags, switching method is the solution IMHO
The key for all electrical OU devices.
ARC not spark if you are using spark gap, or a proper exact timing compared to LC circuit energy flow.
It's like a ocean wave, if you watch on the shelf sometimes a proper synchronized wave breaks at the peak of amplitude and spread all the energy forward against coast.
In LC energy continuously change form, EM wave showing two faces.If you have antenna then one end of wire is open. If you have a perfect circuit breaker disconnecting antenna at the peak of amplitude of wave energy is accumulated in antenna opened on both sides and here is very abrupt collapse allowing ambient background to take place again . Something like that.I didn't resolved it completely - it's just a theory but very plausible.
Think another way : if that ambient background is returning to its natural position then this energy flow is opposite to first created by your circuit artificial field.Now look what happen : your artificial field if allowed to spread as EM wave (but we shouldn't do that) would be diminished according to the law with square of distance from source.Very fast. Yet ambient source flow is opposite to the center - it is like concentration of field to a point :o
forest,
Just grab a soldering iron for once in your life and stop theorizing DUDE.
:'( I'm trying to help......
http://www.overunity.com/index.php?topic=6123.msg238894#msg238894
bart wow DUDE, do you have diamond wow balls ? because wow iron ones would be to wow soft if you post wow working device... ::) wow I would like to see it wow
and this -> <- guy too ;D
Ouch!!
Some of the blind guys are fighting!
8)
8)
8)
I think everyone contributes in their own ways. And each has their own values as to what is worth what.
Im getting the stuff put together for the igniter pulse motor project. I had a lot to sort through after the move.
Im also going to post a new thread on a magnet motor idea I have worked on for a while but had to stop and take a breather. I did a build that had a critical flaw in timing that I will disclose with pics and vids of the concept. My motto at Fizzx was " I always think of it like an electric motor, ya gotta have pole switching." And this idea is to the point.
Ok im digging out things I need. I may get the other thread going in a bit just to throw some meat on that table.
Mags
Ok I got my motor setup and just getting some things in place to make a few runs.
The other thread on my mag motor is another thing that needs to get going. But I want to get this buzzing first.
The plan is to use a large inductor to charge a cap and then discharge it into the pulse motor as a load.
Will be interesting to see it go. I yike motors. :D
I will set it up so the big motor coils can be put in series or parallel or even single combinations to get the best run going. Im going to use a reed to operate a relay for the contactor. 40A relay.
Mags
So Teets
Is your brother gonna let you play "domino's "
With Mag's new motor?
Maybe put some "Nitrous" in that bad boy?
Huh?
[its a motor , you want one for the kids bike!]
Chet
Ram
Teets does not really care that this could help everyone. He is looking out for himself.
Sure he bragged a lot that he has it and he even has better newer ideas, but thats all he wants us to know, otherwise we would know something by now.
He has gotten what he needed from everyone here but they get nothing in return. It shows his character.
So I would not even bother posting requests from him, but you can if you wish. I dont think it will be beneficial. =[
Mags
Sorry for interrupting, just one commend
As i was reading this topic i noticed the discussion about a "loose" wire, or an abrupt "ending"
It reminds me of "water hammering" Not sure of the english term (cavitation?) . It happens sometimes when you close a tap you can hear a loud "bang" in the plumming system.
Now put that into electrics:
Maybe there should be some kind of a pick up coil around/at the loose end to "catch" that stopping shock.
Quote from: Cherryman on April 27, 2010, 05:33:19 PM
Sorry for interrupting, just one commend
As i was reading this topic i noticed the discussion about a "loose" wire, or an abrupt "ending"
It reminds me of "water hammering" Not sure of the english term (cavitation?) . It happens sometimes when you close a tap you can hear a loud "bang" in the plumming system.
Now put that into electrics:
Maybe there should be some kind of a pick up coil around/at the loose end to "catch" that stopping shock.
YEEEEESSSS! ;D
Tesla said that he believed that the electric flow has inertia. So if you cut it off abruptly, there will be still something coming from the end for a short period of time. And while it is exiting, we are no longer pulling from the source, so all energy in is accounted for and ceased. So what flow exists can be used to do work, AND what went out will need to come back to fill the void created by the inertia, and that can be used to do work also. And if it resonates well with the load, there should be more energy out than in.
Mags
Quote from: Magluvin on April 27, 2010, 02:38:21 PM
Ram
Teets does not really care that this could help everyone. He is looking out for himself.
Sure he bragged a lot that he has it and he even has better newer ideas, but thats all he wants us to know, otherwise we would know something by now.
He has gotten what he needed from everyone here but they get nothing in return. It shows his character.
So I would not even bother posting requests from him, but you can if you wish. I dont think it will be beneficial. =[
Mags
Hi everyone good day ;D
i'm sorry everyone, i thought i have given you the closest clues i could give. to the clues i gave, all what we need is hard work, experiment and unlimited imagination ok.
let me give you something to think:
Every word is composed of letters and sometimes words are long or short but these words are nothing if they are not used in a sentence and it is more better if sentence is use in a big poem, and or a book.
and many times all what we need in a big story is the gist so that other could grab it easily.
@mags
i've learned many things here, i admit that but they are nothing more than a big clues, and they are nothing if there is no hard work and experiment ok.
That means my success is not from here but from hard work and experiments and you know what? accidents are just normal in my life everyday in my experiment. then you want me to give it just right away. hmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmm!
One time in one of your letter to me, you said that you are also not giving some important info in this forum am i right mags? :-\
i think you play the same thing ;D
God Bless you
Richard Rosenthal ;D
by the way you can't see me cause i'm not stupid moron to put info's of mine in the internet. hahahahahahahahahahahhaha! ;D
;D ;D ;D
SWITCHING?
OF COARSE IT SHOULD BE FASTER BEFORE CURRENT FLOWS IT SHOULD BE IN OTHER STATE POSITION. SO THAT THE VACUUM EFFECT WILL RUN. GOT IT! ;D
THAT'S WHY WE ARE GETTING ENERGY FROM THE VACUUM OK! ;D
For one, I have not asked anything of you for a good bit of time here Teets. It does no good. I have learned that.
And two, I was just telling ram that he is basically wasting posts. You will not give as you said, again and again. Its all here and everyone pretty much feels the same. Yet one day you will again say that you will show pics and vids and drawings, as you have done again and again, but it will never happen and we are used to it by now. You are just one of those guys that says and never does.
And three, you can try and turn this all on me, but what we discussed is just an increase in efficiency, not an OU situation. You are the one that claims trifilar yet zero explanations, just that we need salt to make crackers. Thats a bit of nothing.
And four, There are many here that feel the same as me, and the ones that mean it will post here about it as they normally do.
Thanks for nothing but wasted space on my thread.
Mags
Quote from: Tito L. Oracion on April 27, 2010, 09:37:08 PM
SWITCHING?
OF COARSE IT SHOULD BE FASTER BEFORE CURRENT FLOWS IT SHOULD BE IN OTHER STATE POSITION. SO THAT THE VACUUM EFFECT WILL RUN. GOT IT! ;D
THAT'S WHY WE ARE GETTING ENERGY FROM THE VACUUM OK! ;D
Nope dont got it. We are just stupid pieces of meat with eyes. Maybe we need 1 in. thick glasses, but I dont see how that will help. Your clues are just salt on the cracker. Nothing.
Mags
Well, salt from cracker, they are tasteless without salt. ;D
wasting space in your thread? :o
well this thread is nothing without salt ;D
And salt is nothing without everything else. Say salt is a magnet, well what do we do with that magnet? Nothing without other magnets, coils, transistors, diodes, quality bearings, mechanisms, etc. And then its how to put it together. We that do put things together and show, we know that we need these other ingredients. We know that salt is worthless without the tasty foods that it compliments.
Hey teets, Im not here to argue with you, but you are here to tell me nothing. I know you think you have given too much, what ever that is. So just let it go dude. Enjoy your great works, as we will enjoy ours.
Mags
I have found some transformers with bifi coils that are in parallel that can be made to be bifi in series with a little soldering. I wonder if it would be an advantage to do so. I have seen many like this but all in parallel, never in series as Tesla claims that there is more energy stored this way in an inductor.
Here is my stuff, and Im still digging for my relays.
Mags
ok, fine!. >:(
Loner
Thanks for the feedback. Im just wondering if a bifi primary of a transformer can help to get more out of the secondary as compared to a regular wound primary. Wouldnt that be sweet. =]
Mags
An electolytic capacitor is like a bifilar wound coil that exploits the skin effect. I always wondered how the current actually runs inside an electrolytic. Does it instantaneously charge the entire surface area or does it flow from opposing terminals on down and around the spiral.
Yeh goodbye Tito.
Yeh OK yeh, Buy
Yeh yeh OK yeh goodbye.
Ya know, I really liked Tito for a while. But its just getting old.
I found my relays and caps. Im gunna hook it up today and see if she even runs. =]
Mags
Oh looks like Teets is mad
Mags
HHMMmmmm...................
Looks less than happy!
Join the less than happy club Teets!
A sad group of Ou researchers trying to change the world!
Teetsla [pictured above] is toughing out a hemorrhoid problem right now,as he has been a big pain in the @#s about helping the three
Blind OU researchers
8) -Mags
8) -Bart
8) -Tarzan [forrest]
Teetsla thinks they want to keep this a secret [OU]
WRONG!!
No more secrets Teets!!
Thats why we're here.
Its time!!
:-*
Keep up the good work Mags. Tito has nothing. No pictures or proof, just unsubstantiated words. Also, love the pic.
Quote from: Magluvin on April 28, 2010, 12:48:24 PM
Oh looks like Teets is mad
Mags
With respect to Reply #461:
What's that big circular thing in the background? ??? Looks like a Tesla pancake coil on growth hormones. A heavy dose of those!! ;D
--Lee
Yeah that planar coil is a biggun. Pioneer had a set of headphones back in the day that had a pancake coil diaphram suspended between 2 symmetrical swiss cheese pancake magnets and the holes in the mags was the path way for the sound pressure to emanate from. They were very good headphones. You could actually hear 20hz like never heard before, and lower. But i thought it was a very interesting way to go about it.
But Teslas chopstick pancake coil in the pic above, it could go through schools, like and 88 magnum. =]
What the heck was the man thinking. I think he needed to get laid. lol And he lived to be of a good age considering all the strong emf, microwaves, gamma rays, etc. he had close experience with.
It would be nice to know and understand more of what he was all about.
Mags
That's funny ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D :P
Well, okay if you really didn't get something from my clues then so be it. but i think you fight with your conscience now that is if you have it. thank you for those sweet words.
so you really saw something in igniter patent ha?
how did you come up here?
your mad at me cause i didn't tell the deep secret ha ! ;D
pretending not getting anything is a big sin to your self, be careful cause your more than a thief.
bye ;D
your all very close to the solution but your all very far from truth;D
@wattsup
your solution is good but there is more better solution than that sir. ;D
you can increment the volts and amp. using a combination of ______ and ________ ;D
@ all
The greatest achievement that a man can be really happy is that you got it by your self.
@stefan
will you please delete all my records and me, cause all my post is just a junk.
at least i can be a guest here ;D
HHMMmm..
Teets your looking at the wrong picture!
The ones that need help aren't sitting in their comphy houses typing on their computers.
Their freakin dyin Bud!
Starving!
Suffering!
beyond what you or I could ever imagine!
Secrets ??
Conscience?
Teets "WAKE UP"
I'm not so sure I want your secret.
It carries to much responsibility for just one man!
It would change my life[which ain't so bad],and require me to work very hard for very little.[its the kind of thing you can't "sell']
So far so good!
But that could change!
And I really wouldn't mind! It is better to give than receive.
Teets
Why do you act like the rest??
Secrets
Greedy
smelly
Why do you use their silly sayings to justify your reasons for not sharing what has been given to "YOU"?
On to whom much is given much is required
And lets not forget the camel the needle and the rich guy!
Chet
Tito
You claim I am a sinner? As Jesus said, You Hypocrite.
You have lied consistently that you were going to tell, going to show, and never do, sinner man.
Give me a break oh righteous one. You assume a lot without knowing anything.
Why ask Stephan to erase you posts? Is it that you dont want anyone to read the one that says you are from the Philippines? Because someone may be Tracking you. lol
As far as I am concerned, you are schizophrenic. One day "Very funny" the next " You are a sinner" you Hypocrite.
Ill do you a favor. You are now blocked from this thread. Its what you want. Its a solid BYBY.
Mags
Ok wel how do I block this nutty Philipino?
mags
Quote from: Magluvin on April 30, 2010, 12:37:24 PM
Ok wel how do I block this nutty Philipino?
mags
The Moderators know how. PM one of them.
--Lee
:-\
Tito and his travesty... We are to blame mags, we should admit it. My initial evaluation of this noob man, was precise. It was a fault to even listen to him and expect anything of him.
Mistakes are to learn from. Let this trash perish.
I am watching this thread from the beginning and I see nothing specially wrong in Tito's behavior against this community, comparing yours' against him. He does not insult anybody; that's YOU who insult him. Maybe he overuses somewhat this space, but no more than you do the same, guys. He just promised something and does not mean to keep his word. But YOU are the abusers, not him!
Well said.
You can be quiet now.
Well maybe you didnt read the one where he said he had a gun and would pull the trigger on Ramset if he tried to find him. And Ram was not even suggesting anything of the sort. But YOU might be all for that kind of thing. Actually that was my turning point with teets.
So carry on.
On other things, Im sorting out which caps and large inductors work best for the pulse motor. Its funny how much discouragement can be had if you only try a couple different ones and then some work great.
I should be able to do a vid tonight or tomorrow. I spent all morning getting my shop tools that are in a garage at the house now so I can get back to life as usual.
Mags
I don't see a threat to try to gun someone living in the USA or Europe, if he lthreats from the Philippines. However, I see an insult to name someone a "trash" in a public forum.
Do you know how many people sit , watch and wait for tito to show and tell what he repeatedly said he was going to, and never does? I can tell ya, probably most who read this thread, no. of reads, are probably looking to see if he is saying anything of significant value, but only to have to wait for him to post again. Very sad.
Maybe you and teets can open a new thread where you all can talk about, well, nothing.
Mags
You can cry or you can just do your works. It's a choice.............
But insulting the guy will not get you anywhere and in actual fact these personal niknaks are totally counter productive and may be construed as a willful attempt to subvert the issue.
So the best thing to do when you have nothing good to say is to simply refrain. Wow....... what a novel idea that is.
I agree with wattsup. Just ignore such ones. Do not insult. And please: stop non-productive texts, pictures.
your right. In fact I see this crap in other threads, even worse. But I have said to ignore tito before.
But I tell ya, teets makes 1 more coment about my morality, call me a sinner, or say that I am holding back things and a liar, I would like to block the hypocrite. Because he has shown that he is all of these.
He can make his own thread. I wont touch it.
He asks me what I saw in this patent. Well, I spelled it out in the beginning of the thread. He says Im holding stuff back.
Actually, as I stated in a recent post, that what I thought this patent was all about, that I may have been mistaken. Just because this way of making a spark is more efficient than the common way, does not mean that there is more energy coming out than going in. It could just mean that we dont have to waste power this way as compared to the common way. It was my fault for assuming that the common way was possibly very efficient and that this way could sent it over the top.
But this is what I want to find out. Does this sound like Im being dishonest? I am admitting my possible mistakes of assumptions that I have made, as I have done before.
But teets says that he tried to get people to notice this pat. way back, and he proved it by posting where he said it. Well cool. But so far I have tried many different configs with not so interesting results, as I have stated that a vid wasnt warranted, yet.
But I have come up with this getting a pulse motor to to be the load as a way to try and get a useful and possibly measurable way of testing this out. Well maybe Teets thinks Im holding out because I did find something, only because I have not shown anything yet. Hypocrite. When in reality, not just any old coil and not just any old cap AND not just any old switching will do here to get pleasing results. Im sure that many experienced builders can agree. This is not just any coil and reed switch running a magnet rotor. That stuff I can do 3 or 5 varieties of vids in an evening, as I have done.
So now I will be in ignore state, all business. Im sure that everyone will be happy now. I guess.
Mags
and not just any frequency ::)
Little of topic but maybe not:
can someone explain me what is going on sometimes with an arrow thrown from a bow ?
Normally having that arrow in hand I feel how stiff it is and waving it in air makes nothing special just a tiny disturbance.Sometimes however when somebody throw that arrow and correct angle to the correct badge made of correct material then end of stuck arrow fall in high frequency trembling producing a high-pitch like sound. The effect is so spectacular that you will find it in most of adventure movies especially in westerns.
Is that something related to Bloch wall manipulation , wattsup ? Can somebody explain me how it is done mechanically for arrow ? Please !!! :-[
Why am I asking that ? Because I have a strong feeling we can do the same with magnetic field ! Magnetic field being like that stiff arrow and we can throw it and stop it and make it self-oscillating like that arrow. Just help me find the reason, the answer .Our today methods is like waving arrow by hand.
Also look here : http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Einstein-de_Haas_effect
Again it looks like we can drive electrons by inertia....hmmm
I think it is mechanical resonance. Any shape or form of a subject has got a (mechanical) resonance frequency, consider glass when a singer's voice matches its resonance the glass brakes.
Somehow the ambient conditions for the arrow was good for giving energy just at its resonance.
Gyula
@Magluvin
I saw your build but do not have enough information on the used components and general system design to be able to properly comment on it.
If it is based on the photo you put up here;
http://www.overunity.com/index.php?topic=8841.msg239400#msg239400
then there are too many questions to ask before one can comment.
Are those magnets all north or south up. Are the three right coils drive coils or some are pickup coils. If they are pick up coils, why are they located on the side and not on top facing down on the magnets. The circuits you are using seem very elaborate. Why. Is there any way for flyback to return to source. You know, a guy could go on and on with question and questions, so it is not easy for anyone to comment without the proper back ground.
Maybe I have not looked far enough given my own lack of time because of present orientations.
I can tell you that with that magnet wheel set-up you can easily try the Tesla Ozone Patent if you use the magnet/reed as the switcher and the three coils as the motor coil. You first have to measure the inductance of the coils to see if they have enough to both drive the wheel and charge a discharge capacitor. Switching will always be the weak point in any device. The reed would have to be on a bracket that can adjust a distance from one magnet to the other to properly get the timing etc.
Don't give up.
For my HHO tests i need a simple reliable spark. Once, just when i push a button.
Nothing fancy, preferable made out of kitchen "stuff" ;-)
I now have a piezo out of a lighter.. But it seems not so reliable, any tips?
http://www.youtube.com/user/YbborNetsrek#p/a/u/0/F5BdqyglLe0
Forest
I think Guyla has your answer with the arrow. Imagine the arrow being jolted by the release of the bow. The arrow may bend a bit, sending it off with a wiggle. And the time of flight of the arrow is fairly short, so the arrow has not finished wiggling by the time it hits its target.
As for the Einstein wiki, I read it and it sounds interesting. Will have to ponder that a bit. ;]
Watts
The rotor has diametric discs, N42 1/2x1/8 . It was one of my original Whipmag rotors, modified to 16 magnet positions for pulse motors. The pic that you pointed to was just some of the stuff that I am using for this experiment, not anything connected yet. The coils read at .14 ohm in parallel.
The mags were not all installed in the pic as it was used for other experiments earlier. With all the mags in place, alternating N and S out, I pulse the coils when the coil is centered between the rotor mags. This way we get a push off of 1 mag and pull from the other, of which I have found to accelerate the rotor much quicker than just repelling or attracting 1 lone rotor magnet at a time. I use a reed polarizing mag so that the reed only closes on 1 magnet polarity from the rotor for timing.
I think that with this igniter circuit "igniting" the motor coils, that there will be a point in the rpms that will be most efficient as the timing and cap and large inductor time will coincide with each other best. It will be interesting. I am working on it as we speak.
Cherryman
You can use a cheap ignition coil for a car to get a good reliable spark by just using 12v to pulse the input of the coil with a push button. The spark will be released when you release the switch. Im not sure what you are using it for by looking at the vid.
You can also get a small HV spark with a 120v to 12v transformer and putting 12v on the 12v side, and when you release the connection, the 120v side actually produces a HV spark, more than 120v. The 120v end leads have to be pretty close together to get the spark to jump. 25KV will jump across an inch. So if it jumps across 1/16 inch, it is about 1.5KV. Hope that helps
Mags
@Magluvin
I't seems i got the piezo a bit more reliabel ;-)
But i will consider youre first idear also.
Tnx!.
HHMMmm...........
Poor Teetsla,
Its not his fault ,he got what he asked for [and he asked a lot]
Now the secret will drive him "nutso"!
He's sort of like cap't Kirk in a star track episode!
Like his namesake Tesla he will probably be seeing "aliens" soon!
Teets some things change your life forever!
Ready or not!
"Ask and you shall receive"
Careful what you ask for,you could go "nutso" like Tesla!
Teets ,when ever you are ready to "share".
chetkremens@gmail.com
You know I won't keep it a secret [I don't want to go "nutty"[well nuttier]].
"The truth will set you free Teets"
Chet
:-*
Ok, a descent vid using the pulse motor coils as a load. She is running ok. I will do measurements tomorrow and do a vid on it before I fiddle more. I kept the rotor mags in just 8 positions all N out, but my vid after next will have all 16 mags alternating N and S and a polarizing mag on the reed, and you will see the difference using the same circuit. As I described to Watts above, it is just better and its the same amount of pulses as just the 8 mags.
The vid is not on YT yet, I think they are having problems. It says unable to load vid due to unknown problem. I tries another vid also and it said the same thing, so it must be them. They usually get these things fixed pretty quick.
See ya in a bit.
Mags =]
If you would, can someone try to upload a vid to yt? I just would like to know if its me or them that has the problem. I tried 4 different vids and it wont go. Thanks
Mags
YT still isnt able to upload. I will do it in the morning, hopefully it will work
Mags
Still cant upload the vid. I tried other vids also just to see, but they wont load.
Mags
Ok read through some YT problem suggestions and found another way to load the vids and it worked.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=akLziSmk8JU
I dont like the changes YT made. I wish it was the same as before.
Mags
Here is another vid with some variations. I found that there is an interaction with the large inductor and the rotor to get it to go faster and added another cap in parallel.
This is getting interesting. =]
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=T9XiCMdRSjk
Mags
Just some thoughts on the 2 vids above
It seems that my findings of the motor finding an rpm that is of a frequency that conforms with the inductor/cap charging freq is correct. I have to make timing adjustments of the reed as the speed levels off to get it to go faster. I have had to make these adjustments on pulse motors before, but these are adjustments of more measure, as the phasing between the motor and the inductor/cap goes through phases as the rpms rise.
In the second vid, I am pleased with the speed increase. And the interaction with the large inductor(I just call it that from the patent) and the rotor was something that I came up with after applying a magnet to the inductor core and seeing results. My setup needs to be tightened up and more flexible and I want to have more separation between the inductor and the reed as there might be some interaction.
The inductor, even in the closed loop transformer ferrite core, really affects magnets around it, they pulse, but it does not hardly have any affect on iron. So this suggests that the core of the inductor is not emanating the pulse, it is just modifying the magnets field due to the change in the cores saturation condition from the inductor coil powering on and off. The Orbo effect.
So I thought lets see what the inductor would do next to the rotor, and I saw that it was good. =]
More capacity. In the pat. the cap looks large, as compared to other of his drawings. So more is better so far. Havnt tried more than the 44uf yet.
One more thing that I have seen that I will vid is that I can get the motor setup so that it will run in either direction, not with large inductor next to the rotor, without making any timing changes. Just spin it the other way and it goes. Never had that in any of my pulse motors. In one direction its just a bit faster than the other, but very close. And very interesting.
Gota git. Ill be putting more vids later. There seems to be a lot going on with this that will keep me busy for a while. Im just glad to be able to have the time to mess around again. The move was very stressful.
Mags
Hi everyone good day
And to mags i'm so sorry but i felt i was first hurt thats why i said that. i'm a peaceful man, the gun is just a toy ;D
i will just leave it all to God ok.
i'm sorry if i did not do my promise just because of some reason.
i hope in my simple way of giving a little clue hope it helps even just a little.
mags i'm happy for you where ever you are i'm on your side always friend, i don't want spontaneous cruel ok.
by the way don't anymore block me cause i will be the one to stop ok friend? ;)
maybe i deserve those nutty words from someone but remember, i was first hurt ok.
To everyone i'm sorry please understand me if i cannot give you the best secret i am holding. i am reserving that for my 2 sons ok.
i am happy for all of your success, someday somehow it helps to the world.
Always smile take rest and God bless
happy experimenting
bye friends. This is my final last, but don't worry i'll just be a guest always. ;D
otits ;D
No worries Teets. Im sorry too. ;)
Mags
Teets
:-*
But what was the first one [the little one]?
Did I miss it?
Chet
Besides ,
Look at the mess oil is making in southern U.S.,
Even if you don.t share your secrets!
get off your ass and get busy bud!
These guys are killing our planet ,a gallon at a time!
Teets
Share your "little" OU secret with the fella's,
and we'll keep busy until you and your Boys get the biggy goin!!
That would be nice!!
Chet
I did some playing last night but no vids till later today. I was trying to figure out how the rotor was able to go in both directions without timing changes. It must be that the reed is just firing very short pulses just as the rotor mags are passing center of the coils. I had not seen this before and maybe it has always been that way. Later I will set it up just in pulse motor config and see if the results are the same.
I also tried a 1uf cap and the reed sparking was less but the inductor was producing a lot of pulsing noise. The ferrite transformer core is not glued together. I just used black tape tightly to hold it together, but the seams are apparently clacking so I need a tighter wrap.
Another thing that comes to light is the fact that when charging the inductor, there is current flowing through the motor coils and the inductor is like a 22 ohm resistor in series, so there is motive reaction there also along with cap discharge. So that tells me that for comparison purposes, that I can run the regular pulse motor with a 22 ohm in series to get a some what close comparison to what is happening, and if the cap discharge is a help here or not.
The motor coils are not a short conductor coil as prescribed by Tesla, but things are apparently working. After this project I will put a transformer together to see what the "quiver" Tesla spoke of that happens during the cap discharge on the short, stout, conductor has in store for us.
Mags
[See Nikola Tesla: Colorado Springs Notes, page 324, Photograph III.]
FIG. 6. PHOTOGRAPHIC VIEW OF THE ESSENTIAL PARTS OF THE ELECTRICAL OSCILLATOR USED IN THE EXPERIMENTS DESCRIBED
I had arrived at the limit of rates obtainable in other ways when the happy idea presented itself to me to resort to the condenser. I arranged such an instrument so as to be charged and discharged alternately in rapid succession through a coil with a few turns of stout wire, forming the primary of a transformer or induction-coil. Each time the condenser was discharged the current would quiver in the primary wire and induce corresponding oscillations in the secondary. Thus a transformer or induction-coil on new principles was evolved, which I have called "the electrical oscillator," partaking of those unique qualities which characterize the condenser, and enabling results to be attained impossible by other means. Electrical effects of any desired character and of intensities undreamed of before are now easily producible by perfected apparatus of this kind, to which frequent reference has been made, and the essential parts of which are shown in Fig. 6. For certain purposes a strong inductive effect is required; for others the greatest possible suddenness; for others again, an exceptionally high rate of vibration or extreme pressure; while for certain other objects immense electrical movements are necessary. The photographs in Figs. 7, 8, 9, and 10, of experiments performed with such an oscillator, may serve to illustrate some of these features and convey an idea of the magnitude of the effects actually produced. The completeness of the titles of the figures referred to makes a further description of them unnecessary.
The Tesla quote above, I had found while looking at some things Delboy had posted on the Magnifying Transmitter thread the other day, but this was on the previous pages to what he had posted.
But I thought about it today. Is there an advantage to having a primary coil of a few turns of stout wire? Could it be that the oscillations in the primary and the cap are not killed off as easily as a hundred or more turns of another primary that are commonly used? Why else would Tesla do it this way?
For all this time, I know we can get caps and coils to resonate and ring with a single pulse, but I also know that a secondary with a load will kill it. Kill it as in if we were to kick a cap/coil resonator, the oscillations would die faster, even just about instantly, with a secondary coil with a load on it if it were near the primary. But, what if the few turns of stout primary, which of course no doubt be of some high freq, just might not loose its waves of oscillation as quickly as a high resistance primary, as to say that maybe the resistance would be a main cause in the nature of the thing.
So if we can get more than 1 oscillations to affect a secondary, and even other secondaries along with it, for every kick, maybe we get a bunch of oscillations into the secondary before they die off in the primary than a typical primary.
Each one of those slowly dying oscillations adding up with the next to become equal to and greater than the initial kick, if what my mind is telling me is of any value, other than another way to look at it....
Maybe the stout primary is of so little resistance and the caps instantaneous discharge into that resistance, the amount of wattage at that moment would be staggering. But would that wattage in the amount of time that it existed, be more than the wattage and the amount of time to charge the cap for discharge?
Mags ;)
I come up with thing sometimes that I dont fully understand why I had come up with it. I suppose its just experience and some subconscious thought that brings some things to light without a clear explanation. But then I have to find out if it is true. =]
Mags
Hi Magluvin,
Would like to add some thoughts on your above post.
QuoteIs there an advantage to having a primary coil of a few turns of stout wire?
I think the very small inductance (I think of some tens of microHenry maximum) made a very fast response time for the primary coil, current was only limited by the inner resistance(s) of the capacitor(s) and the thick wires, so an extremely high peak current could be had, surely the L/R time was very very small.
Tesla wrote he loved capacitors because he could draw quasi "unlimited" power from them. Here is a conversation between him and a Counsel:
"Counsel
I understood a little while ago when you made the statement of using several thousand horsepower put into a condenser, you could take out of the condenser a million horsepower. I wondered if you got the same condition with this machine.
Tesla
Yes; I charged the condenser with 40,000 volts. When it was charged full, I discharged it suddenly, through a short circuit which gave me a very rapid rate of oscillation. Let us suppose that I had stored in the condenser 10 watts. Then, for such a wave there is a flux of energy of (4 x 104)2, and this is multiplied by the frequency of 100,000. You see, it may go into thousands or millions of horsepower."
Here you can find the thread I quoted from the total text is included in the link scotty provided in his post: http://www.overunity.com/index.php?topic=6250.msg146671#msg146671 If you go down to the bottom of that thread, you can see Tito's question which I think one of his 'secrets' (it was in Dec, 2008).
Question arises: was it overunity? Unfortunately no,
at least not in that way, Tesla simple took out the same Wattsecond energy from the capacitor during a much shorter time (so he seemingly amplified the power but in fact it must have been peak power which of course can be much much higher but lasts for much less time.) This is why he used stout wires of a few turns: to get the smallest resistance possible to maximize current.
But if we are to believe Tito that he has something, then the answer for his question at the end of the thread is partly included in his question I think...
rgds, Gyula
Quote from: gyulasun on May 05, 2010, 02:45:25 PM
Hi Magluvin,
Would like to add some thoughts on your above post.
I think the very small inductance (I think of some tens of microHenry maximum) made a very fast response time for the primary coil, current was only limited by the inner resistance(s) of the capacitor(s) and the thick wires, so an extremely high peak current could be had, surely the L/R time was very very small.
Tesla wrote he loved capacitors because he could draw quasi "unlimited" power from them. Here is a conversation between him and a Counsel:
"Counsel
I understood a little while ago when you made the statement of using several thousand horsepower put into a condenser, you could take out of the condenser a million horsepower. I wondered if you got the same condition with this machine.
Tesla
Yes; I charged the condenser with 40,000 volts. When it was charged full, I discharged it suddenly, through a short circuit which gave me a very rapid rate of oscillation. Let us suppose that I had stored in the condenser 10 watts. Then, for such a wave there is a flux of energy of (4 x 104)2, and this is multiplied by the frequency of 100,000. You see, it may go into thousands or millions of horsepower."
Here you can find the thread I quoted from the total text is included in the link scotty provided in his post: http://www.overunity.com/index.php?topic=6250.msg146671#msg146671 If you go down to the bottom of that thread, you can see Tito's question which I think one of his 'secrets' (it was in Dec, 2008).
Question arises: was it overunity? Unfortunately no, at least not in that way, Tesla simple took out the same Wattsecond energy from the capacitor during a much shorter time (so he seemingly amplified the power but in fact it must have been peak power which of course can be much much higher but lasts for much less time.) This is why he used stout wires of a few turns: to get the smallest resistance possible to maximize current.
But if we are to believe Tito that he has something, then the answer for his question at the end of the thread is partly included in his question I think...
rgds, Gyula
The answer lies in simple other Tesla answer....
" [Returning to a discussion of Fig. 31], [E] is supposed to be a condenser. That [A] is the generator. Now then, supposing that this is a generator of steady pressure. I can obtain oscillations of any frequency I desire. I can make them damped or undamped. I can make them of one direction or alternating in direction as I choose. At G are devices which operateâ€"lamps, or anything else. Some experimenters who have gone after me have found a difficulty. They said,
"No, we cannot produce a constant train of oscillations."
Well, it is not my fault. I never have had the slightest difficulty. I produced constant oscillations and I have described how I produced them. Anyone who has no more than my own skill can do it."
Hey Guys, thanks for the good replies.
Is it possible that these simple conversions are all that tesla was talking about, and that there is no over unity at all in Teslas experiments?
As I have said in above posts, I may have made a mistake in what I thought I understood from Teslas writings and this pat. description. But I cannot say for sure as of yet till I try.
Titos claims, we cannot fully believe for sure because he will not prove or back up his claims. But does that mean he is not truthful? None of us can make that assumption for sure, but it is what we can conclude thus far because of a level of trust within ourselves by what we know so far.
So maybe he should not have made the claims if he had no intention of spilling the beans. But it is what it is.
Yet Tesla did make some of the same claims. The Faraday dynamo, the Peirce Arrow, and the receivers that he worked on in the hotel lab at the end of his days.
And maybe none of those things had anything to do with what this thread is all about.
I dunno yet. But I will try and test within my abilities and level of understanding to find out. I may miss something along the way and skip by a really important item or feature that I just didnt notice or not be knowledgeable of to recognize. But I try as well as I can. =]
When I see 10 watts to 10,000 watts or horse power, that can be very influential in thinking that OU may or must exist in what he is saying, Tesla that is. How could this conversion be close to possible?
In everyday standards, to load up a cap to a tot of 10 watts, we can assume that only around 10 watts or a bit more due to efficiency would be used to make that energy stored. So even if the output is produced in a flash, 10,000 watts or even horse power, it is unfathomable that there is no gain at all. How many pulses of 10 watts would it normally take, by conventional thinking, to produce these incredible amounts of power, even if it were very short bursts? But as I read it, this great amount of energy IS produced by 1 discharge from the cap.
Be back in a lil bit. =]
Mags
Ithink the problem is how to take out this magnified energy without killing the oscilation. That is - can we pump the second condenser to a much higher value and discharge it into some device.
I thin Tito talks about multiple stages, so somehow he is extracting energy without inductive connections between stages.
It is not overunity - which does not exist. In a way it is a kind of electric leverage.
We are talking about work in and work out.
In a patent of Tesla's referring to system for electrical distribution he takes a generator plant and charges a capacitor through a normal close coupled transformer. Then he dumps it into his system which has a capacitor at the end of the line and inductive loads parallel to the capacitor in series with the spark gap. The spark gap is pulsing like crazy so the impedance of the inductive loads is way too high to be driven directly from the spark gap discharge but the capacitor after the spark gap is quite capable of being charged. The inductive load pulls from the capacitor as needed. This system of electrical distribution was never employed. The spark gap could be capable of energy conversion from chemcial or thermal energy. This manifests as running with gain. If this process is repeated millions of times a second and each cycle runs at a cop of greater than one your biggest problem is controlling the process.
Been a bit busy still unpacking and sorting my stuff.
Here is a vid of the igniter inductor working as and orbo drive without the large coils in place, but still in circuit.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=P2MwBg33D80
Mags
The vid took a bit long to process, YT and its new way kinda sucks. But the vid is finished processing now
Mags
Did a vid last night of the igniter pulse motor and I show the circuit on the sim prog. Some had asked me to show a circuit of it, and it is possible that without explanation, the pat. may be confusing for some at yt.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=v7KAjf00abw
Mags
Quote from: Magluvin on May 04, 2010, 09:36:51 PM
The Tesla quote above, I had found while looking at some things Delboy had posted on the Magnifying Transmitter thread the other day, but this was on the previous pages to what he had posted.
But I thought about it today. Is there an advantage to having a primary coil of a few turns of stout wire? Could it be that the oscillations in the primary and the cap are not killed off as easily as a hundred or more turns of another primary that are commonly used? Why else would Tesla do it this way?
Maybe the stout primary is of so little resistance and the caps instantaneous discharge into that resistance, the amount of wattage at that moment would be staggering. But would that wattage in the amount of time that it existed, be more than the wattage and the amount of time to charge the cap for discharge?
Mags
Hello Mags,
you are missing one important thing, and that is SECONDARY SHOULD NOT BE LOADED !!! (DIRECTLY = BY TWO WIRES). Tesla showed how should it be connected. Don't worry about primary(NO OVERUNITY), it should be few turns of wire because you want high energy pulses(high current), and that pulses are transfered to secondary where resonant effect is magnifying them. There is huge energy rise, because it is accumulated, and it is oscillating free(BIG REACTIVE EVERGY OSCILLATIONS OF HIGH VOLTAGE AND HIGH FREQUENCY), it is not consumed by DIRECT receiver and then you pick it up by receivers as Tesla suggested, as much you wish. (THERE IS BIG OVERUNITY BECAUSE INDIRECT CONNECTION OF RECEIVER WITH SOURCE) PLEASE TRY TO UNDERSTAND THIS !
Thanks. Delboy ;)
Quote from: bboj on May 06, 2010, 03:34:05 AM
Ithink the problem is how to take out this magnified energy without killing the oscilation. That is - can we pump the second condenser to a much higher value and discharge it into some device.
I thin Tito talks about multiple stages, so somehow he is extracting energy without inductive connections between stages.
It is not overunity - which does not exist. In a way it is a kind of electric leverage.
We are talking about work in and work out.
My last post answers this question also "
how to take out this magnified energy without killing the oscilation".
To all of you!
Please read Tesla's patents on his receivers (pat 685955 and pat 787412) and try to understand how they work.
Try to understand next thing. RLC in resonance is accumulating energy to some max level depending on how big Q factor is. Isn't this true? If you have calculated P, then Xl or Xc in resonance is X=Xl=Xc=Q*P (VAr) and we call it reactive power, that are basics. Tesla used this on bigger scale, changed it in open RLC circuit, optimised it (spiral form of coil) and instead one wire used Earth itself. By not disturbing resonance and picking up energy longitudinaly, he converted VAr to W ! That is explanation of Teslas overunity.
If you do not belive in longitudinal receiver, how could his bulb light in short circuit like on picture 183c?
Thanks Delboy, makes sense.
Question, is there a minimum charge voltage recommended for discharge? As in, can this be accomplished discharging 500v vs 50,000v.
Trying to stay small here. =]
Thanks again
Mags
Quote from: Magluvin on December 01, 2010, 12:35:22 PM
Thanks Delboy, makes sense.
Question, is there a minimum charge voltage recommended for discharge? As in, can this be accomplished discharging 500v vs 50,000v.
Trying to stay small here. =]
Thanks again
Mags
Hmmm, to have enough V/m (volts per meter) you have to have high voltage and high frequency. How high? Well read Teslas recommendations for bulb, for example, in his patent 454622 he says lowest practicable limits are 15kHz and 20kV.
That is of course on secondary, but if you asked on primary than approx. it should be divided by Q factor of secondary ;) For example 20kV / 200 = 100 Volts ;)
delboy
Now I can agree with you.Except it needs pure unidirectional energy transfer and the physical meaning was found lately ! It is 100% efficient energy transfer without BEMF based on quantum transition from primary to secondary.
Hey Delboy
Lets say the primary is a few turns, If we discharge 100v into it, what amount of turns are we looking for on the sec. ? And should it be of the traditional Tesla coil look and type, or are we looking at a Kapanadze style? Spacing between windings?
Bifilar? Is there any need for bifi here? =]
I saw a vid yesterday that a guy had a setup like a Tesla coil laying horizontally, and the output was maybe developing a 1/8 inch spark but continuous, then he applied 1 single primary wire from a step down transformer, and a light bulb lit very bright on the secondary of the step down transformer. The secondary was only 4 turns of some heavy speaker wire on what looked to be a ferrite core. The primary looked like many turns of fine wire of witch only 1 end was used to make connection with the driver Tesla coil. Does this qualify as a good connection between the 2? Or as per the pics above, use caps in series to connect both wires?
Thanks Delboy. You have been a big help. ;]
Mags
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VRQkRYXtob8
Here is the vid. I tried the neon transformer on a large 110v to 12v transformer. 1 wire nada. Both wires nada . 1 wire and a spark gap on the other, nada. But, 2 560pf 1kv caps in series, with 1 wire and direct with the other wire, we have light. Not as bright as 12v would do, but it lit. I know this is just a very rough way to try it, but I found what worked and didnt, for what I had at the time.
Also the primary of the transformer is high ohms. But I was surprised that the neon about 2kv at 45khz actually affected the transformer as good as it did, considering it is designed more toward 60hz.
Wound a large inductor with 23awg wire for igniter circuit. Will give it a go tomorrow
Mags
Quote from: Magluvin on December 01, 2010, 06:46:55 PM
Hey Delboy
Lets say the primary is a few turns, If we discharge 100v into it, what amount of turns are we looking for on the sec. ? And should it be of the traditional Tesla coil look and type, or are we looking at a Kapanadze style? Spacing between windings?
Bifilar? Is there any need for bifi here? =]
Mags
It should be traditional Tesla spiral pancake coil, but as big as posible, find the place in your room :P NO BIFILIAR ANYWHERE!
One more requirement is that secondary should be wounded from center to outer diameter in clockwise orientation!
Spacing between windings not needed if isolation is good, but always put some for example only 1-2 mm between secondary windings. But if you ask for spacing between primary and secondary than put minimal spacing same as secondary (1-2 mm) because few turns of primary need good connection with few secondary turns. In global you get loose connection (secondary always have at least 50 times more turns) that is required for free oscilation.
Originaly for secondary you should have 1/4 wave length for used frequency, wounded in spiral form to get some inductivity (of course it should be large because of needed high Q) and small resistance (thicker wire for example AWG18) And that is big problem, because if you use 50kHz you will have to wound one mile of wire :D, and of course nobody stops you to try with smaller one.
Hey Delboy
So the sec. oscillates on its own? No cap? Also, the primary should be at the perimeter of the sec.?
Hmm 1 mile of 18awg, thats a big roll. =]
Thanks Delboy
Have you heard of the TRISIL devices that I am playing with? Just wanted to know what you think. ;]
Mags
Quote from: Magluvin on December 02, 2010, 12:58:40 PM
Hey Delboy
So the sec. oscillates on its own? No cap? Also, the primary should be at the perimeter of the sec.?
Hmm 1 mile of 18awg, thats a big roll. =]
Thanks Delboy
Have you heard of the TRISIL devices that I am playing with? Just wanted to know what you think. ;]
Mags
Secondary should have cap because of resonance and it should be for example simple metal ball , enough big for required capacity depending how big is resonant frequency and how big power you want to have oscillating. Yes primary should be on outside and secondary inside.
What kind of TRISIL devices, give me link.
For shorter secondary you must use higher frequency, for example Tesla used 250kHz in patent 645576 so that value gave him only 300m required for 1/4 wave length, and he used 50 turns in secondary that was 2,44 meters in diameter. Higher the frequency bigger the losses on ground level. Tesla used higher frequency for demonstrating transfer of energy in higher elevation (>10km) through Air while he somewhere else recommended range (30-50)kHz for transfer of energy through Earth ;)
delboy
can you help me (I thin other could be interested too). ?
in case of using this scheme we should be able to use existing flyback coils or car coils for lower frequencies.However there is one big problem - how to measure secondary wire length of such nice coil without destroying coil ?
If we could use a generator and a scope to measure exact length of secondary (and primary) of such coil we would easily adapt circuit frequency to 1/4 wavelength
Everything else is measurable using proper multi-meters or equations.
Quote from: forest on December 02, 2010, 04:14:30 PM
delboy
can you help me (I thin other could be interested too). ?
in case of using this scheme we should be able to use existing flyback coils or car coils for lower frequencies.However there is one big problem - how to measure secondary wire length of such nice coil without destroying coil ?
If you know exact dimensions of coil, and number of turns, than you can calculate approx length of wire used by formula L=N*D*pi if only one layer used, and if multilayer than D should be D=(D1+D2)/2
D1 - outer diameter
D2 - inner diameter of coil
Other problem is that car coil is not optimised as Tesla suggested
-Both,primary and secondary have high active resistance because thin wire used,
-there is ferite core used, and you are limited with high frequency
-small dimensions give small energy accumulated because this is designed only to fire the sparks
-design is cilindrical coil of several thousand of turns (not spiral form which is minimizing capacity of coil) giving high capacity to coil that will eat up all energy and nothing left to oscilate when potential reach high level
- etc. .... ;)
So the length of the wire is the name of the game.
Seems odd. In audio crossovers, a coil, no where near a tenth of a mile long, wont let much above its -3db crossover point, at 6db per octave, at 20khz, the signal will be down 54db, with a crossover point of 100hz.
But, we are talking about something else here. We are talking about how fast the charge cycles through the coil(secondary here) from end to end. Thats just guessing from the formulas you have described.
What would happen if you wind the flat sec. counter clockwise? And why. =]
And can you have 2 or mor smaller sec coils and put them in series? Or would their proximity to each other be adverse?
Trisil I attached the spec sheet in pdf. Just got them today. Gota see what they can do. Forest posed a file that shows the difference between TRISIL and TRANSIL.
Thanks DB Dat Boy =]
mags
Quote from: Magluvin on December 02, 2010, 08:20:36 PM
So the length of the wire is the name of the game.
Seems odd.
mags
You are focusing on just one problem here, but there are others problems like:
-primary cap what value and what voltage to be discharged to few turns of primary
for example lets say that Up=2kV and Cp=0.1uF Lp=10uH (frez=159kHz)
this will give impedanse Z=sqrt(Lp/Cp)=10 Ohms
if we ignore transient resistance of controller, peak primary current will be
Ip=Up/Z=200 A ! But if I choosed Cp=1uF (now Z=3,16 Ohms) to have Frez=50kHz than peak primary current would be I=632 A ! You SEE THE PROBLEM!
Thats why we need thick primary wire, to reduce loosses!
-problem of hiting the resonance of secondary to get highest voltage on secondary
Because of this problem you have to have one more inductivity with slider,in series with primary, to adjust resonant frequency of primary
And thats not all... ;)
Quote from: delboy on December 03, 2010, 02:22:34 AM
You are focusing on just one problem here, but there are others problems like:
-primary cap what value and what voltage to be discharged to few turns of primary
for example lets say that Up=2kV and Cp=0.1uF Lp=10uH (frez=159kHz)
this will give impedanse Z=sqrt(Lp/Cp)=10 Ohms
if we ignore transient resistance of controller, peak primary current will be
Ip=Up/Z=200 A ! But if I choosed Cp=1uF (now Z=3,16 Ohms) to have Frez=50kHz than peak primary current would be I=632 A ! You SEE THE PROBLEM!
Thats why we need thick primary wire, to reduce loosses!
-problem of hiting the resonance of secondary to get highest voltage on secondary
Because of this problem you have to have one more inductivity with slider,in series with primary, to adjust resonant frequency of primary
And thats not all... ;)
Yes! buddy your obsoletely correct! ;D
But! i think instead of saying a lot of things like that. then
we can say 'it only needs some balance'
And that's all :D
joke ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D
;D
Quote
You are focusing on just one problem here, but there are others problems like:
-primary cap what value and what voltage to be discharged to few turns of primary
for example lets say that Up=2kV and Cp=0.1uF Lp=10uH (frez=159kHz)
this will give impedanse Z=sqrt(Lp/Cp)=10 Ohms
if we ignore transient resistance of controller, peak primary current will be
Ip=Up/Z=200 A ! But if I choosed Cp=1uF (now Z=3,16 Ohms) to have Frez=50kHz than peak primary current would be I=632 A ! You SEE THE PROBLEM!
Thats why we need thick primary wire, to reduce loosses!
-problem of hiting the resonance of secondary to get highest voltage on secondary
Because of this problem you have to have one more inductivity with slider,in series with primary, to adjust resonant frequency of primary
And thats not all... ;)
That's the reason, Delboy, That in HF resonators we prefer at using Large inductance, small capacitance because at "same" resonant apparent power losses are enormously smaller.
Or to put it another way, there is not a way (except superconductors) to achieve a large current resonance with the same strentgh and at same energy expense as small current one. ;)
Quote from: baroutologos on December 04, 2010, 03:53:24 AM
That's the reason, Delboy, That in HF resonators we prefer at using Large inductance, small capacitance because at "same" resonant apparent power losses are enormously smaller.
Or to put it another way, there is not a way (except superconductors) to achieve a large current resonance with the same strentgh and at same energy expense as small current one. ;)
You are talking about secondary, while I was pointing out important things about primary.
-It will be expensive primary cap(paarallel and series combinations), because current will be order of few hundreds of Amps.
-It will be cheap primary, because it is few turns of copper pipe
-It will be expensive secondary , because it is too much in lenght, and big diameter, thick wire etc.
-It will be cheap secondary cap because it can be metal ball of proper dimensions
SEE HOW THINGS HAVE DIAMETRICAL POSITIONS ;)
And of course, inductive connection of primary to secondary should be tight, but as usually it is not like that. Anybody give me link of your Tesla Coil with close primary windings to secondary, without as usually over 1 inch distance. Give me example of 1mm close connection primary to secondary.
Copper Pipe
does it have to be hollow, as in pipe, or can it be solid or thick stranded wire? Does the diameter matter and also wall thickness?
Hmm, I wonder how a conductors affect upon itself, changes as the wire, or tube, or solid, gets larger in dia. Is there any plus to having a hollowed out conductor?
Mag
Quote from: Magluvin on December 05, 2010, 09:36:07 PM
Copper Pipe
does it have to be hollow, as in pipe, or can it be solid or thick stranded wire? Does the diameter matter and also wall thickness?
Hmm, I wonder how a conductors affect upon itself, changes as the wire, or tube, or solid, gets larger in dia. Is there any plus to having a hollowed out conductor?
Mag
It doesn't have to be hollow, it can be solid or thick stranded wire as long as resistance is small as possible, that is the point. I just mentioned copper pipe, because someone will have them by hand, and someone will have thick copper cable etc. Tesla introduced cooling the primary to the point of liquid nitrogen, to have even less resistance = modern superconductor theory ;) Why that? Because oscillations will last longer when you have less resistance!
Thanks Delboy
Do we want the primary and the sec to be tuned to the same freq?
Mags =]
De Boy =]
A pancake coil, should it be wound all the way to the center, no hole? And, is the mag field concentrated at the perimeter when using it as a primary at the receiver? As in, if you just have 2 cake coils face to face, it would not be the way to transfer from one to the other, and the best way is primary, or secondary at perimeter, correct? ;D
I see like a wave of field, flat on the surface of the cake, and concentrated at the perimeter, just going by teslas drawing in the magnifying transmitter pat , but never really had confirmation from anyone till you. u da man.
Tinselkoala did a vid demonstrating 2 coils face to face to demonstrate a cake and a cake bifi to show the difference in energy transfer of the 2, from 1 to the other, kind of as if that was the way they are used. But I have an idea that it was not a correct way to determine things when concerning the cakes. ;) It was done in response to a request on the bifi difference.
Thanks for all the help
Mags
Quote from: Magluvin on December 06, 2010, 09:47:56 PM
De Boy =]
A pancake coil, should it be wound all the way to the center, no hole? And, is the mag field concentrated at the perimeter when using it as a primary at the receiver? As in, if you just have 2 cake coils face to face, it would not be the way to transfer from one to the other, and the best way is primary, or secondary at perimeter, correct?
Mags
Yes, it should be wound all the way to center , no hole. Point is that primary is on perimeter, but only few turns. That few turns will see only few turns of secondary, it will be in high inductive connection! For example only 1 primary turn will affect on only 5 turns of secondary! The rest is simple inductivity, and you have open RLC circuit! With that, you just created generator (5 turns of secondary) in series with inductivity (rest of turns, for example 45 of 50) and capacity (top-load). That is why Tesla called it magnifying! You just have to tune it precisely to resonance to get highest voltage as possible on top-load.
Tesla throwed sparks to see how high voltage is developed, not to impress someone, or to have fun with that, like most of you do! Tesla designed it with some purpose.
Well, I finally managed to wade my way through this thread - it started out great, but went astray somewhere. Very interesting nonetheless, imo largely the result of Magluvin and delboy...
@delboy - you seem to have a masterful grasp of this stuff. Question, what do you think would be the effect of using the same setup (pancake coil with a few-turn primary on the perimeter) except when building the pancake, you use a different gauge wire every few turns - start outside with heavy-gauge, decreasing gauge as it winds its way towards the center?
Ok, were going to be doing some more on this subject for a bit.
Im finding more and more that if I think of the inductor as a flywheel and the capacitor as a spring, I get a better feel for what is going on in these circuits. We were in Rosemarry's thread so we will bring it here as its appropriate.
I think that with the igniter circuit, I need to tune it a bit. Like a lot of circuits, the desired output can be compromised by 1 off value part.
So Woopy has a couple vids that show that an inductor can be thought of as an electronic flywheel, and he does some tests on shorting the cap to energize the inductor.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=XrwgEb5ac_w
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=RQFD1cDlEUU
Now I am suggesting the possibility of being able to use this flywheel to get more out than in. Ill be working on the circuits after the weekend as Im finishing some test setup of the bitoroid transformers right now.
Here is an example
If you connect a 1uf cap across a 5v battery then disconnect it, the cap should have 5v across the terminals. Im sure we agree. =]
The cap hold a determined amount of energy, correct? 5v on 1uf cap has a finite calculable amount of energy.
And that amount of energy is how much we took from that battery, correct? An amount we could count on every time.
I have another theory on this, but will get to that next week. ;]
So Im going to use the flywheel in my circuit to use only the amount of energy that is in a 1uf cap at 5v, but charge a 1uf cap to above 5v.
Its not that much, but it is something. ;]
mags
@ Magluvin
Fantastic work you're doing, I can see from your posts lately that you're on a high of creativity...keep the juices flowing and keep it up!
Regards,
Paul
Hey Goat
Thanks. Ya know, when I say flywheel in reference to and inductor, Im serious. ;]
And it helps some that never thought of it that way, see it in a new light. ;] It helps imagination take place where it may not have been before.
mags
Hey Magluvin
I think I know what you're talking about, I once tried charging a cap bank on a bedini wheel using milliamps and ended up with over 1,000 V on the cap bank in no time and man could it deliver an instantaneous charge...so if you add the inductor as you say then yes big bang for the milliamp buck :)
My problem was always returning that big bang to the source but you're way seems like it could do it....I look forward to your experiments and results.
Regards,
Paul
Hey Goat
Well that is an issue, getting it back to the source. Especially all of it and or more. ;] At least with what we have so far. Thats the way we have to think about it. Use the kick in the pants to at least know its real and we are not wasting out time. ;]
Ive read that a cop of at least more than 1.8 - 2 would be needed.
So once we get just above cop>1 we still have a ways to go.
But we are at the least getting more to a load than what the battery could put out by itself over time. Like an electric bike could go 50% further just on a regular charge, etc. Its not useless. These are just beginning things, but at least we are here. ;]
I gotta get some sleep.
Mags
Mags
Just ground both capacitor and battery negative and touch positive of capacitor to positive of battery, you will see a back current flow to battery if capacitor if of correct value and enough charged (of cource voltage above battery).
The ultimate source for better HV devices is Earth ground ! Don Smith
OK magluvin
Good idea to transfer here.
I made a circuit with what i understood from your recent post
The result is impressive, but i wonder if i missed something
Thank's for your apreciation
good luck at all
Laurent
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Auv_66Ke-iw
Quote from: woopy on March 25, 2011, 03:02:37 PM
OK magluvin
...
I made a circuit with what i understood from your recent post
The result is impressive, but i wonder if i missed something
...
Laurent
hi Laurent
your calculation of energy supplied by the input cap has a mistake
you must find the energy on the input cap for its start voltage and then subtract the energy remaining on the same cap for its final voltage - this will give you the correct input energy
if you need to be more precise about energy transfers between capacitors then you must measure the actual value of the capacitors and not rely on the case marking (which can be around +/- 20% of the actual value!)
here is a good online capacitor energy calculator to save time with cap energy calculations:
http://www.electronics2000.co.uk/calc/capacitor-charge-calculator.php (http://www.electronics2000.co.uk/calc/capacitor-charge-calculator.php)the page at that link can also be saved to your computer to use offline
hope this helps!
cordialement
np
http://docsfreelunch.blogspot.com (http://docsfreelunch.blogspot.com)
Ok this is the general idea.
There are 4 pics below that show where Im going with this. It is not an idea that I just think works. It just does.
The first pic is the same circuit Woopy made the first video of. With the addition of the diode across the batt and switch.
1 The first pic shows the circuit idle no current flowing and no charge in the cap. The scope shots are Source, Inductor and Cap in order from left to right. Source is 5v dc. The resistor is added to the inductor to give its real world values in the circuit. Woopys inductor.
2 The next pic shows the switch closed and a charge building in the cap, through the inductor and diode at upper left with current flowing clockwise. The diode on the right is not conducting anything yet.
3 This pic shows me open the switch when the cap reaches 5v, equal to source. Now the diode on the right is conducting, current is still going clockwise, just not through the battery, but now the diode.
4 Now the currents have finally stopped. The cap is charged to 6.32v.
The flywheel crammed that extra 1.32v into that cap after the battery was disconnected.
Is that extra 1.32 not free? When we charge a cap from a source, the cap when fully charged by the source, will contain and equal amount of energy that was taken from the source to charge it.
So when we cut off the battery here, when the cap reaches 5v, and we know the source is 5v, then we have to know that the 1.32v worth of energy in the cap came from where? ;]
Was thinking a one point if the 2 flywheels, a physical one and the inductor, what would be the differences. Could we get this same advantage in the physical world?
First, lets look at what is involved with getting them spinning.
The physical fly, tend to take a lot of energy to get them started, like an inductor has impedance. But I see them different. The real flywheel to get it spinning up consumes a lot of energy right from the start, and the excess input it took to get it going, will no longer be needed once up to speed.
But the inductor consumes less in the time it is switched on, and the energy consumed or let through the circuit as the inductors wheel gets spinning, allows more energy to be pulled from the source till the wheel is up to speed( field peak= current peak). So they have a bit of different attributes.
I broke off from these experiments early on when I figured that, at the time, how can I get 6.32 v in a cap to deliver all of its energy back into the battery. I then knew that just getting over cop was not enough for looping.
But lately, I have bunches of ideas that stem from old projects. And I think I found the answer for the 6.32v conversion.
Charge 10 caps to that voltage from the battery with the circuit.
Put them in series and discharge into the batt. 63.2v Now when this series cap discharges into the batt, once the cap is discharged down to 5v, we have put back more than we took to fill all ten caps individually. The amount we figured we got for free was
1.32v x 10 =13.2v 13.2v-5v = 8.7 of the free got back to the battery + 100% of what was used for the process.. The more caps we charge and put in series for discharge, the more % of free we get to keep per discharge. That last 5 can be joul thieved in. ;] lol
Mags
Quote from: Magluvin on March 27, 2011, 04:05:04 AM
...
But lately, I have bunches of ideas that stem from old projects. And I think I found the answer for the 6.32v conversion.
...
Charge 10 caps to that voltage from the battery with the circuit.
Put them in series and discharge into the batt. 63.2v Now when this series cap discharges into the batt, once the cap is discharged down to 5v, we have put back more than we took to fill all ten caps individually.
...
Mags
hi Mags
yes, looks feasible - when i tried the old variation on this (charge 2 caps in parallel - reconnect 2 in series to feed back to battery) the battery just discharged! :(
http://www.overunity.com/index.php?topic=10231.0 (http://www.overunity.com/index.php?topic=10231.0)perhaps 10 caps in series will behave differently? looking forward to hearing how you get on
all the best
np
http://docsfreelunch.blogspot.com (http://docsfreelunch.blogspot.com)
The problem is to KNOW exactly where is energy.If at 1/4 of resonant frequency period it is still in magnetic field of coil then we need to disconnect coil right then and got energy in capacitors in parallel.Many.
The dump excess into battery but not allowing to kill the dipole, meaning voltage in capacitors HAS TO be left at higher level then power source.
Our habits are against us,not circuits
http://www.freestacja.pl/wp-content/uploads/2011/02/radio_0.jpg
Hey Forest
Maybe you are missing my point..
lets say that 5v in the cap can be considered an amount of energy, the same amount at 5v, every time.
When we charge the cap to 5v, then disconnect the battery, the cap continues to load up to 6.32v. The extra 1.32 is, well extra, free.
But having a way to force all that 6.32v worth of energy back into the batt may be done with a joule thief. If the JT can use the charge in the cap till the cap reaches .5v, then we are charging the battery with more energy than was taken from the battery.
Or like in my previous way, charge 10 caps with the circuit. Then all caps in series is 63.2v of which 50v is what the battery produced, and the 13.2 was free. In this way we can just dump the series caps into the batt till the cap is down to 5v, equal to the batt. That would leave .5v in each cap. 6.32-5= 1.32 1.32-.5= .82v
So each cap will have delivered 5.82v from each cap back to the batt, while the battery only provided 5v to each to begin with.
If it were 20 caps, then we will have gotten more of our free 1.32v back to the batt. 50 caps, even closer to 100% of the 6.32v back into the batt.
Took me a while to get the grip on it, but I find it solid.
Mags
Quote from: Magluvin on March 27, 2011, 07:44:25 PM
Hey Forest
Maybe you are missing my point..
...
When we charge the cap to 5v, then disconnect the battery, the cap continues to load up to 6.32v. The extra 1.32 is, well extra, free.
...
If the JT can use the charge in the cap till the cap reaches .5v, then we are charging the battery with more energy than was taken from the battery.
...
Mags
hi Mags
i think that both you & Forest are essentially making the same point about collecting the stored energy: ie., when you transfer energy back to the battery, leave some in the cap(s) so the source dipole isn't killed
but the extra 1.32 is not showing free energy, i think
it's some energy from the battery that got stored in the field of the coil (as Forest mentioned) - caused by the series current flowing round the circuit. whilst the cap was getting charged
when the current flow was stopped, the coil 'flywheel' effect (which you've mentioned earlier) tried to maintain the current by using the energy stored in its field
this 'discharge' of the coil field energy got added to the energy in the cap - and it shows up as an extra 1.32V on the cap
so all the energy now in the cap has come from the battery
this must be why that old 'charge 2 caps in parallel, discharge as 2 caps in series' version (mentioned a couple posts above) just depleted the battery...
...no extra energy was getting returned to the battery - because it all came from the battery in the first place!
it looked such a neat idea too :(
np
http://docsfreelunch.blogspot.com (http://docsfreelunch.blogspot.com)
Hey Nul
I understand your reasoning, and I dont want to argue, and i know you are not trying to argue. =]
I am basing my thoughts on the idea that we have been fooled into thinking that things are the way they described them to us.
Like the Gabriel transformer. This was a Tesla idea in 1890.
And what we had learned about transformers is actually true. Its just we were never told we could separate the flux produced by the secondary from the primary flux core, of which causes the primary to draw more from the source as the sec current rises. ;]
So we HAVE to question everything. Everything!
And if we have stored energy in the inductor, energy put there while charging the cap to 5v, energy beyond what it took to charge the cap, then you may be right. But Im not thinking so. =]
I am working on proof on this very subject as we speak. ;]
I look at it like this. In a battery, when we take energy from it, we are just per say taking electrons that are packed into one side, and allowing them to fill holes in the more empty side. We could say this in a few ways, but this is just 1 way.
If we fire up the circuit, slowing things down so we can watch what is going on, and we stop or disconnect the battery somewhere below 5v so that when the inductor stops spinning(per say), the cap ends up with 5v. Did we expend a caps worth at 5v of energy from the battery at the time we disconnected the batt at the point below 5v that finally reaches the cap? How can we say for sure? Are you sure and ready to move on?
When we slow things down, being that the inductor will not accept gobs of current and charge the cap instantly, we have to watch the current as it increases. It increases more as the field builds in the inductor, never really getting to a current level that would be seen if we were just directly charging the cap from the battery. The only reason current is increasing is the fact that the inductor is determining how much gets through over time. But what is going in, IS what is coming out in reference to the inductors leads.
I dont believe that more current had gone through the inductor to get to the cap during the time the cap was charging WHILE the battery was connected. I dont believe it. Where did it go? Not in the cap. Are they packed into the inductor and slowly delivered to the cap after the batt was disconnected?
Take this example. Battery, cap, inductor and an led in series. the led will light till the cap is full and the led will go out due to no more current will flow against the charged cap. Well guess what? That cap is now charged, and will light the led all by itself when we reverse the polarity. We used energy from the battery to charge the cap THROUGH the led. A measurable amount of energy used in the led. But we still have that same amount of energy still in the cap after wards. We can use that energy 2 times, just about. We have a loss due to the led V drop, but that is just a function of the led to not conduct below that drop. Not a loss, just a barrier. That barrier did cause waste. But that is all in circuit design.
So get rid of the led and just replace with a diode and the inductor with a primary of a transformer. Now we can charge the cap through the transformers primary and still have energy in the cap for the other phase, and after that the cap is still charged, just in the opposite polarity. Like a controlled oscillation, stopping at the peaks and switching to give the other cycle, all from 1 half cycle charge from the battery that charged the cap in the first place.
If the transformer sec is loaded, then we will see the cap wont have too much left in charge, only because the draw on the sec caused a damping in the primaries ability to freewheel, or oscillate. No real loss, just the energy running in the primary was taken up from the sec on the other side, and the primary was stalled from freewheeling.
That is where the Gabriel transformer is a key element in all of this. The primary can be put into oscillation and not be killed by the sec current produced flux, because that flux is not instilled into the primary windings. So now we can have an extended oscillation of the primary while taking from the secondary. Oscillation is preserved and each cycle can produce power out without being killed off quickly.
If that doesnt make sense, I will come up with a way to describe it better. ;] Or better yet Ill have to prove it. ;]
mags
I have presented this before but its is hard to get most to listen.
Hey Loner ;]
Just as you say, I put some "maybe's" and "possibly s" just in case i am wrong, even though at times I think Im right. ;] I have to because I dont think I would like the taste of my foot. ;]
When you spoke of the flywheel, I thought of my separate descriptions between the inductor and the physical wheel.
The physical wheel is different. A lot of energy is expended to get it started and that energy that is further put into the spinning, need not be as much once it is already spinning. And once it is at full speed, very little is needed to keep it there. ;]
The inductor on the other hand, requires voltage(pressure) to get it going, but the current is low in the beginning. The power is low when starting the inductor flywheel. As it speeds up, more energy is required to accelerate, more current flows, more power required.
So in my frame of mind, with a cap in series with the inductor, we are charging the cap, but the inductor is in the way of getting it done NOW. It is just a form of decreasing resistance in the path of getting the cap to become equal or leveling out with the source.
If we forget that the inductor actually stores any energy that had gone through it, and we see that it just has a decreasing resistance as the cap charges, we can then say that the cap, when it reaches the same level as the source, holds an equal amount of energy that was taken from the source. Agreed? ;]
Now we look at the energy stored, per say the flywheel is spinning, freewheeling weighted wheel. While the resistance is decreasing and the flywheel is accelerating, where can we say that energy was used to get it spinning?
We could look at the action that is happening in the inductor is just as I described, a decreasing resistance value, and we could calculate that and be accurate as to the amount of energy being fed through the inductor and ignore the flywheel other than it is just an artifact of the current that had gone though the inductor.
I would say that in the series circuit presented, when current flows, that current is the same throughout the circuit at any given time.
I dont think anyone could argue this.
So I dont see the spinning up of the inductor as an energy loss between the source and the cap getting charged, just a delay of sorts.
I dont see it as a hole in the water pipe where we lost something before the water gets to the bucket.
I dont see it as a place in the circuit that took anything from the source, that didnt make it to the cap.
If it did, and this is key, then our current in the circuit would be different on the input lead to the inductor as compared to the output lead of the inductor. But we know that current in the circuit is a constant per time of flow, especially being that the circuit has no branches and is just a closed loop.
As for the differences in voltage vs current in the inductor, that is easy. Imagine the inductor being 1 ohm in resistance. That would be when the inductor is not in circuit.
So when we present a voltage across the inductor, the resistance (impedance) of the coil will be very high in the beginning, thus high voltage and low current. As the wheels get spinning that resistance decreases, more current flows and the resistance becomes even lower.
Once the resistance finally becomes 1ohm, high currents will flow and the voltage measured across that resistance will be low, when measured across the inductor, especially if the source cant hold its own against the very low resistance, and other resistances in the circuit will affect this also.
So, did we use any energy from the source to get the wheel spinning, as in actual energy taken from the source and not provided to the charge cap? Did all of the energy that came from the source, from no charge in cap to full charge in cap, reach the cap?
So in my circuit description in the above post, if we got rid of the diode that is across the bat/switch, and we disconnected the batt when the cap reached 5v(source =5v), did we consume more from the batt than it took to get the cap charged to 5v? I say no. I say we are left with a spinning flywheel that has nowhere to put the energy instilled in the inductor. And I think its free if we capture it properly.
Lets get rid of the cap and the diode across the batt/switch so we have batt, switch inductor and diode in loop. Now when we close the switch, the inductor starts spinning and currents are accelerating.
But now we are just discharging the battery, and getting the wheel spinning. In the circuit we still just have a decreasing resistance seen in the inductor, and electrons are just filling holes in the + side of the battery. Our loss is the battery just having a load on it that varies as the circuit continues to flow current.
We can say that we stored the energy in the inductor, but only to the point that the inductors field cannot increase any longer because the source cannot provide more pressure than 5v. Beyond that, the battery just sees a resistance load, and the action of being drained because the batteries - and + want to equal out.
If we have a water fall and we can figure how much water per min is falling, then we add a paddle wheel under the falls, can we still say that the amount of energy from the source had a loss or conversion of energy between the amount of water that begins to fall and the amount that made it past the paddle wheel to the river below? No, it is the same amount. Plus we got the wheel spinning. =]
This is not a perfect example, but it gets the message across.
=]
Mags
And, what really might blow your mind is my late thoughts on heat developed in circuits. I dont have it all worked out in my head yet, but it just may also be an artifact of current flow through a resistance.
What does the heat offer to the circuit other than a change(higher) in the resistance that it came from? It is more like a physical flywheel as in the power is high before the heat, lower resistance, and as the heat increases, the resistance gets higher and currents lowered. But I still think that we didnt loose anything creating the heat, especially when the heat is a desired effect.
But in a circuit that doesnt have the intentions of creating heat, the heat that is created in the circuit is just more of an obstacle to current flow rather than a loss, due to higher resistance and lower current flow. ;]
One thing though, the heat stored or created would need another device to return its energy back to the system, but the inductor can do it all on its own. =]
Mags gone crazy : :-*
HI every one
Mags
Does it matter if we use circuit that use a bit of battery power which has to be recharged afer a month of continous usage ? I don't think so.
Anyway it's a basic circuit.It will work IF we left voltage on cap above battery voltage and discharge the rest BACK into battery GROUNDED with a really good ground with IRON.
The faster we do it the longer it will work on the same battery.
It has to do with battery, it won't work without it. In fact if we SHORT battery or CAP very quickly when it is GROUNDED while applying higher voltage (even HV) at positive terminal it will recharge ! Just a small idea ::)
nothing important ...
Hi Mag and all
Nice theory i will reread to get it totally.
In the mean time i have made a small experiment after my last video and the correction i have received about it..
I decided to charge a cap with a battery at 10 volts and than to discharge it in parallel in a same value (63 volt and 47 micro F) cap and the efficiency is about 50 %. See test 1 in the pix 1.
Than i redo the same but this time the cap is discharge through the diode and inductor (always MOT primary) and this time the efficiency of the transfer is about 74 %. See test 2 in the pix 1
So without the freewheeling the direct transfer is 50 % efficient and with the freewheeling (that is to say with one diode and one 220 mH inductor and all the added resistance of them) the efficiency climb to 74 % that is to say 1.48 time better.
What do you think of this result :o
good luck at all :)
Laurent
hey Woopy and Loner
Woops, well I see that in the first circuit, when you discharge from the first cap, 10v, into the second cap, you end up with 5v in each. This shows that the 2 caps still have the total energy taken from the batt. No loss, just a transfer of energy. ;)
But in your second circuit, if Im seeing it correctly, 8.4 in 1 cap and 7.9 in the other? That IS more than what was taken from the battery. Absolutely, no doubt. Do me a favor and check the polarity one each cap in both circuits to see if there are differences, just polarity once the circuit performs its function.
I have had a cap that I was discharging to another cap, through and inductor and diode, that the cap that was discharging, went full reversal of polarity than it started with, all due to the inductors inertia. But the charge is still good, just reversed polarity.
The first circuit had 100% transfer from the batt. But your second circuit is well beyond 100% ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D
Im at lunch, will be back later. Great show woops.
Hey loner
I will have to get back at ya this evening on that. In basic terms, I think that in our case, not in every circuit with inductors, the circuit objective is to charge the cap when all is said and done. Once the cap is full, lets say equal to the batt voltage or more, once it happens and the circuit stops conducting, the function of the circuit is complete for that cycle. Lets say that small losses in the circuit are negligible. but where are the losses really?
Just because the cap did not get charged instantaneously, Does that mean we lost anything along the way? The resistance(impedance) is only slowing the process down, the process of charging the cap, as compared to direct charging. Where do we lose any energy from the source in that time, just because the impedance only slowed down the process of getting the cap charged? Just because the current was slowed down during that time? Thats not a loss. ;]
Im not a poet, nor the best writer or speaker. But once I do get it all straight and in my mind, my words will be like a good song. ;]
Be back later. thanks for the hard work woops, and you are doing awesome. ;]
And thanks loner for really trying to get what Im putting forth. Its hard to get a grip, and I fall from such great heights at times myself, but then I remember the details that got me here, and it all makes sense again. ;]
Mags
Hi Mag
Please read better my post . In the second circuit the result is 8.4 in a cap and 1.9 in the other (not 7.9). Which should be slightly over the 10 original voltage. but it is probably due to the scope shot imprecision.
But there is something anyway and i have tried a crude explanation see the pix. I think that if you try to replicate my drawings in the real life (for instance the blue color should be water ) it will be impossible to recreate a potential difference with the flywheel (because what you explain in your previous post ).
But in electrical reality it is possible and this is fantastic ;D. It seems that the transfer with freewheeling effect "IN ITSELF" is 130 % efficient.
Will reread your post to better understand.
Good luck at all
Lasurent
Hi Loner
thank's for answering
As i also like the inertial real force, and i would be very interested in the Amish method of pumping by inertia.
Have you some thread or link to visit on this subject ?.
Perhaps you have already seen but i am also involved in a one pulse per revolution bouncer motor ä la Milkovic or Mattew Johns and looking for a way to better use of the huge vibrating power of those kind of machine .Just for info, i include here a video but don't want to distract too much.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Awci9aWLPhI
But i think that the real physical flywheel has not the same working model as the electrical freewheeling. I think that in physical model if there is any OU to find, it will be in the centrifugal force but until now i did not manage to get anything extraordinary from my experiment. I hope it will perhaps come (Amish pump).
But Today, i am absolutely sure that the ELECTRICAL freewheeling transfer (or pumping) is far more efficient than the BARE transfer.
And the work here is to understand HOW and WHY as usual
good luck at all
laurent
hey all
While Im at work, Im thinking all the time, and not about work. The work just automatic and my brain is on the bench. =]
Sorry for the mistake on the 7.9 value. Imagine the smile on my face at the time. But when I went back to work, I remembered that this config can only produce so much, as is. So when you replied that I read it incorrectly, I felt assured that we are still in the ball park. ;]
Lets say that if through testing that we are certain that we are at least getting more out than in, we can then at least have something that will help our beliefs in what we are searching for. We now know for certain that it is possible. We can hold it in our hands, finally.
This is a very basic circuit. Not any complication to it. This is a circuit that Rosemary should put on the table. It would not be as hard to defend the theory against the wolves. Simple and to the point.
In Woopys second circuit above, was thinking that of the voltages he had shown, the diodes drop could be figured in and his numbers show accordingly. So I suggest using a higher voltage, maybe 20v as the source. I believe our output numbers will increase for the good and help lower the percentage of the diodes drop on the whole.
If your source were 2v, that diode drop will affect the output in a huge way. Our numbers will be far short of 100%, as the diodes drop could be .7v to upwards of 1v. So 20v will show an improved output ratio. ;]
As for losses, it is weird I admit that I see things in what could be in a different light.
But my theory that the inertial forces that is built in the inductor come at only the cost of the changing impedance effect on the circuit, and not a loss of power, can very well explain why we are able to get more in the cap, after we disconnect the battery at the point that the cap has reached battery voltage level of 5v.
Run this through your noggin. ;]
If we hit the switch and wait for the cap to reach 5v, and then we very quickly removed the whole inductor from the circuit. Would you say that if we measured the cap and it has 5v measured and the source was 5v, did we lose anything in the transfer? Do you believe that some of the current that was flowing in the inductor(conductor), some how kept something that never got to the cap?
Well I do believe that electrons and or charge is compressible. Could it be that some electrons, per say, were compressed in the inductor, and when we took the inductor away, we lost those extra electrons that it held and the battery is missing those plus the ones put into the cap? Is that the loss you are speaking of. ;]
Well if we consider the source as having potential for motive force, and the cap has potential of accepting that potential from the source, I could say that the source is pushing and the cap is pulling. Just those functions should be like a push and pull situation on the inductor, there by where was there really any compression?
The source sees the cap as a destination, but the impedance of the inductor is like breathing through a coffee straw to begin with. No mad rush of current, just an increase as the current flows through the inductor. Why would we call impeding or resisting a current from flowing a loss? i would say its conserving energy by not draining the battery so fast. And thats all the source sees in the inductor is a changing resistance.
If we have a 12v battery and a 12v motor that does some job.
We connect the motor to the battery and the motor does work, just as it should.
Now we add a 0.5ohm resistor in series with the motor. Now we connect the circuit and we notice that we are not getting as much work done. Oh, we have a loss in the resistor, and thats why the motor isnt putting out as much work now. loss?
No. There is just not as much current flowing now due to total resistance of the motor and resistor. AND less is being pulled from the battery. We are not pulling the same amount of power as before with just the motor as a load.
Loss? Ok yes there is loss. Loss to the output of the motor because for the amount of current flowing through the circuit, the resistor is helping to determining the current in the total circuit. It is lowering the total current. We are drawing less from the battery because the total resistance is higher.
It is not as if we are pulling the same amount of current as with just the motor and battery alone, with the resistor added.
And we have just losses in the resistor? so thats why the motor doesnt put out as much work because of losses?
"The resistor is just a limitation" not a loss.
If we add the resistor, less will be pulled from the battery. "LESS". ;]
Thats why the motors output is not as high, because we have added a limiter, a valve that is half closed. We didnt lose anything other than what the eff of the motor allows as physical output. Thats just the fault of the motor design. We only lost a desired effect from the motor, BECAUSE WE ARE NOT PULLING ENOUGH CURRENT FROM THE BATTERY TO RUN THE MOTOR PROPERLY. ;) This is not a loss, but a limitation in the application.
We only lost the desired amount current to run the motor properly for its job title. It doesnt mean that electrons and or charge is being spilled on the ground and wasted.
So if we look at the inductor in the same view, it may come clearer to you that the varying resistance of the inductor in the circuit is not a losing deal. It is just in control(valve) of the currents in the circuit and thats it. Where is the loss? Especially if we have a gain. ;)
I think it would be a hard argument for someone to come in here and tell me where the losses are, and how we lost them. I dare ya! ;D
I just may be able to fend for myself in debate with only what I know now, and find some good friends on my side along the way.
I can see losing rf through holes in our capture device and not being able to recapture and bring it all back to where it came from. But in a basic circuit, Im seeing things differently, and seem to have explanation for so called anomalies we are encountering, and the explanations seem to fit. So far. ;]
So until we have a better explanation or reason to not believe, then I say we go with it for now and see what comes of it.
I am going to name this circuit, The Believe Circuit. Because thats what it does. =]
Back in a bit. Showwa and eats.
Mags
Maybe it's not different flow around circuits, Loner, just we use parts and arrange them to use original flow to kill the source ;D
What is the reason of dropping voltage across resistor ? heat generated ?
What I believe is crazy and I cannot prove it.
I believe that we are using the original energy flow to set an opposite dipoles in circuits which affect power source (either by chemical reaction or by lenz law).
Electrons are just small magnets which flips by this energy flow and generate whatever we wish and has nothing to do with killing the source dipole.They are just here and always ready to pass energy in chunks while flipping either magnetic side or electric.Unfortunately the only tip which points to that is Mr. Dole work and Don Smith schematic.While in area of "not killing the dipole" Don schematic shows a resistor divider without loosing power inside resistors.That's the only explanation I found for Don Smith method of lowering voltage down in output side of his device. I think Dole could confirm that using HV resistors divider.
And finally when we are using that original power without killing it we would be happily able to pass it in circle.Like my neverending thought about : "what is going on with electricity returned back to power station?".
hey Loner
Lol dont take my post as me arguing with you. ;] It may have seemed that way. What I am saying is for everyone that reads it. ;]
I will stick to just the inductors flywheel idea for now and Ill get back to losses and things later. My statements on losses and where the energy went if not to the cap, is all based on if any of the circuits energy were actually converted to another energy(inductors production of mag field) then the gain must be just magical. But if the circuit doesnt consume(lose) energy in the production of that field(flywheel), then that can explain why we got more out, because we produced that field for free, and the circuits reaction to that field build was just a lengthened time period to charge the cap due to impedance(changing resistance and or "negative resistance"). =] Just a theory is all Im presenting.
I read in a thread here the other night, dont remember which, but someone stated that when it comes to inductors and transformers, information is a little on the light side. I agree. I yahoo searched inductance. I found that answers.com had a few definitions from different sources.
http://www.answers.com/topic/inductance
They are not all coinciding informations. What is the truth? What is all the confusion? Well im determined to find out. ;]
Think about it. If tesla had invented a transformer in 1890 that was capable of more out than in, but all we ever seen is transformers that ALWAYS pull more in than out, even with no load ;), I say there is a coverup. And if that is so, what else do we need to question? Im asking some of those questions, whether they are absolutely valid yet, time and testing will tell.
Im like everyone else. If we have a gain, where did it come from? And maybe the answers are not necessarily from the vacuum or aether. maybe it is just a function that common physics does not describe. And probably most or all people into physics, just go by the book and never notice anything otherwise.
Woopys latest test where he charges a cap from the source and uses that cap in the Believe Circuit as a source, leaves us with something to be considered.
We now have a finite amount of energy as the source in that cap, and we still obtained a gain. Did we lose anything?
Im not saying losses do not exist.
What I am saying is, some things or functions just might not be or have a loss as we might think from what we are told. ;]
Im going to get into some bench work this evening and try not to post long non understandable information for now. I may be premature as to anything that I have stated. But consider it all just theories at this time.
Stick around Loner. I think it will sink in as we go.
I think your catching on forest. ;]
Mags
inductance = flywheel or spring valve (a valve having a rotor inside or a spring with a piston inside) - can oscillate naturally (inertially) or forced
capacitance = elastic bag - can oscillate when pressure ratio in and out is specific to the elasticity and size
resistance = valve which can also resonate if flow speed match the resistance of valve (like water in fast opening valve)
voltage= pressure of ether flow
current = amount of ether chunks flowing in time or just amount
electrons = small standing waves having both magnetic and electric side at 90 degrees
correct me and comment :)
IMHO There is no need of COP>1 , COP=1 is enough if we learn how to compress flow before load and decompress when flowing throught the load back to the source. Load effects are not connected to source dipole energy but are alone produced by electrons.Crazy,yeah I know....
And a question at the end ; what will happen if I connect a capacitor charged to higher voltage to the battery in series (+ - + -) and load across both ? Will charge equalize ?
Hi all
just a small video of my understanding and questions on the subject
good luck at all
laurent
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=CjOG7OJslgA
Hey all
Woopy. You are doing great things. ;) I have to check the calculations. I think there is something we are missing in figuring this out.
I had the same thoughts as you when I just ran it thorough my head. If we have 2 10uf caps and charge one up to 20v, and we short them as you did, each cap will contain 10v, as you have wonderfully shown.
Then I thought, well what if we put the 2 caps in series now to get our 20v back. BAHH or like you groaned in the vid, MMMMMMMM! ;D
I now have 20v, but in a 5uf cap!!!! What?????
BAGHHH!! cant be!
Then I climbed out of hell, where I thought I was for a moment and regained level ground.
This is a very important discovery, as you have experienced it and I had thought it. I like this. We work well together and communication is good.
This will be a VERY touchy subject, VERY. Not right now. ;]
So back on earth, we have 2 10uf caps with 5v in them. At first we only had 10v in 47uf. But now we have 5v in 94uf. The difference is, we cant run a 10v device from the 5v in the caps, but we can run a 5v device on the 94uf at 5v, for just as long as a 10v device on a 47uf cap at 10v. Get it? All being that the devices consume the same power levels. i can full describe it if you wish, but I think its good so far. So we are just not calculating nor thinking it properly the way we are.
But that loss that you calculated and I thought, well where did the power go in our thoughts and calculations? I think its still there, we just shouldnt go about dealing with trying to get the 10v ability back after conversion to split the voltage. You and I both know that if we use some energy into trying to put the 2 5v caps all back into one, there would be considerable LOSS =] in the work it took to do so.
But now for the super nasty thoughts. lol
If we have 20v in a 10uf cap and another 10uf that is empty, then we connect them to get 10v in each 10uf cap. If we put the caps in series and we only have 20v in a 5uf cap, we DID lose, a lot. We could never get the 20v 10uf amount of energy from a 20v 5uf cap. That is nuts woop. How dose that kind of loss happen?
What if it is a trick that is a real trick, the effect of energy actually disappeared in thin air and we were left with only 2.5 level in our water jugs instead of 5?
Here is the nasty good part, I hope. If we can make that energy just disappear, gone, nada, neva commin back, cant have it, well maybe just maybe we can double it by another way. It only seems logical that if the energy could just vanish into thin air, that there could be a way to increase it, out of thin air. Lol, that is just mind boggling. If we had never seen this issue, maybe we would never think of a possible way to accomplish the same trick but in reverse.
I may be very wrong here an we may have suffered a HUGE loss. But freekin how? I know you are felling this right now woops. I feel ya.
We have to investigate this. At least its not boring. ;D
Like in your vid, you said very low resistance to connect the caps, so little loss, try this woops, do the same thing but with a resistor, and check to see if we lost anything. If the resistor is high value, it will take some time for the caps to level out. Tell me how much we lost. hehe =] If we lost anything, then heat is a loss. If you end up with 5v in each cap, what can we say about heat? Was it free? I havnt tried this as Im really being spontaneous with the thoughts here and you have the test setup with all the same parts as before.
If the caps have less than 5v after then I submit that the heat was energy taken and converted into heat . But what if those caps level out to 5v woops? Do we have something here or what? ;)
I have said that I wasnt completely sure about heat not being a loss of energy from the source, but if you would, entertain me.
I will still maintain the flywheel as free till we discover otherwise.
Imagine a battery and we have a resistor that is getting hot, emitting heat, do less electrons make it to the positive side of the batt than what came out of the negative? Or are we just discharging the battery and heat is a free byproduct? Remember, the hotter it gets, the less we pull from the battery. Would we not think that the hotter, the more current? =]
I dunno. Maybe Im just nuts and should be sent out for an afternoon of electroshock treatments.
I just may be eating both of my feet tomorrow for lunch. I will clean them well in the morning, and bring some A1 sauce. ;]
But Im ok with it. I just cant see why we lost 50% woops. Something is up.
If you could do the 2 caps and resistor test, we will at least nailed down something that is on the list. I just cant imagine a 50% loss in heat here. Where did it go. We must be calculating something wrong. Will think on it.
Well, this is more fun than titos puzzles. No offense Teets. ;D We just seem to have plain objectives to work with and interesting results.
Mags
Ok I havnt done these calculations since mid 80s. Im as sad story. lol
But my mind is open. ;)
Found a calculator on this site
http://hyperphysics.phy-astr.gsu.edu/hbase/electric/capeng.html
Im getting proper results there.
But in my example, why the loss? Is there a reverse trick? I just love this stuff, and its killin me. lol Na, Im enjoying it. I will be back in an hour to find out.
Laundromat time. I forgot it was laundromat day.
Mags
Hmmm. I was reading the info below the calculator on the site.
From the definition of voltage as the energy per unit charge, one might expect that the energy stored on this ideal capacitor would be just QV. That is, all the work done on the charge in moving it from one plate to the other would appear as energy stored. But in fact, the expression above shows that just half of that work appears as energy stored in the capacitor. For a finite resistance, one can show that half of the energy supplied by the battery for the charging of the capacitor is dissipated as heat in the resistor, regardless of the size of the resistor
Im confused. I have to really think about what is going on. This describes what is happening in that we really are getting 50% eff in exchange in woopys demo.
I find it hard to believe that we lose half due to heat on any value resistor. Well what of a super conductor? I should suppose using caps is a losing game all together? From what this explains, when we charge a cap, we use 2 times as much energy from the source to charge the cap to the source voltage level. ???
Tesla used copper ribbon or strip conductors as he said the heat was dissipated easier to keep the resistance low. Well why worry if the heat does build up if we lose 50% no matter the resistance value?
Are we losing 50% in the Believe Circuit? When we open the switch when the cap is at 5v and the cap continues to 6.32v, did it cost twice as much to get that 5v in the cap, than what that 5v in that cap is worth?
Ok, Im calling in sick tomorrow and going for my electroshock treatment.
This can put a big dent in many things.
Something is fishy. Is this the loss that you were speaking of Loner? did you know it was a 50% loss?
BZZZZZAP Still dont feel any better about it. Hit me again tube sock!
magzzzzapp
Well, just did a sim with a 5v source, charged a cap through a 100ohm resistor. Then I discharged the cap into a 100 ohm resistor.
I got the same amount of power in both resistors whether charging the cap or discharging. hmmmm
Something is fishy. fishy fishy The smell is bad
Mags
Quote from: Magluvin on March 30, 2011, 09:04:10 PM
Hey all
Woopy. You are doing great things. ;) I have to check the calculations. I think there is something we are missing in figuring this out.
I had the same thoughts as you when I just ran it thorough my head. If we have 2 10uf caps and charge one up to 20v, and we short them as you did, each cap will contain 10v, as you have wonderfully shown.
Then I thought, well what if we put the 2 caps in series now to get our 20v back. BAHH or like you groaned in the vid, MMMMMMMM! ;D
I now have 20v, but in a 5uf cap!!!! What?????
BAGHHH!! cant be!
Then I climbed out of hell, where I thought I was for a moment and regained level ground.
This is a very important discovery, as you have experienced it and I had thought it. I like this. We work well together and communication is good.
This will be a VERY touchy subject, VERY. Not right now. ;]
So back on earth, we have 2 10uf caps with 5v in them. At first we only had 10v in 47uf. But now we have 5v in 94uf. The difference is, we cant run a 10v device from the 5v in the caps, but we can run a 5v device on the 94uf at 5v, for just as long as a 10v device on a 47uf cap at 10v. Get it? All being that the devices consume the same power levels. i can full describe it if you wish, but I think its good so far. So we are just not calculating nor thinking it properly the way we are.
But that loss that you calculated and I thought, well where did the power go in our thoughts and calculations? I think its still there, we just shouldnt go about dealing with trying to get the 10v ability back after conversion to split the voltage. You and I both know that if we use some energy into trying to put the 2 5v caps all back into one, there would be considerable LOSS =] in the work it took to do so.
But now for the super nasty thoughts. lol
If we have 20v in a 10uf cap and another 10uf that is empty, then we connect them to get 10v in each 10uf cap. If we put the caps in series and we only have 20v in a 5uf cap, we DID lose, a lot. We could never get the 20v 10uf amount of energy from a 20v 5uf cap. That is nuts woop. How dose that kind of loss happen?
What if it is a trick that is a real trick, the effect of energy actually disappeared in thin air and we were left with only 2.5 level in our water jugs instead of 5?
Here is the nasty good part, I hope. If we can make that energy just disappear, gone, nada, neva commin back, cant have it, well maybe just maybe we can double it by another way. It only seems logical that if the energy could just vanish into thin air, that there could be a way to increase it, out of thin air. Lol, that is just mind boggling. If we had never seen this issue, maybe we would never think of a possible way to accomplish the same trick but in reverse.
I may be very wrong here an we may have suffered a HUGE loss. But freekin how? I know you are felling this right now woops. I feel ya.
We have to investigate this. At least its not boring. ;D
Like in your vid, you said very low resistance to connect the caps, so little loss, try this woops, do the same thing but with a resistor, and check to see if we lost anything. If the resistor is high value, it will take some time for the caps to level out. Tell me how much we lost. hehe =] If we lost anything, then heat is a loss. If you end up with 5v in each cap, what can we say about heat? Was it free? I havnt tried this as Im really being spontaneous with the thoughts here and you have the test setup with all the same parts as before.
If the caps have less than 5v after then I submit that the heat was energy taken and converted into heat . But what if those caps level out to 5v woops? Do we have something here or what? ;)
I have said that I wasnt completely sure about heat not being a loss of energy from the source, but if you would, entertain me.
I will still maintain the flywheel as free till we discover otherwise.
Imagine a battery and we have a resistor that is getting hot, emitting heat, do less electrons make it to the positive side of the batt than what came out of the negative? Or are we just discharging the battery and heat is a free byproduct? Remember, the hotter it gets, the less we pull from the battery. Would we not think that the hotter, the more current? =]
I dunno. Maybe Im just nuts and should be sent out for an afternoon of electroshock treatments.
I just may be eating both of my feet tomorrow for lunch. I will clean them well in the morning, and bring some A1 sauce. ;]
But Im ok with it. I just cant see why we lost 50% woops. Something is up.
If you could do the 2 caps and resistor test, we will at least nailed down something that is on the list. I just cant imagine a 50% loss in heat here. Where did it go. We must be calculating something wrong. Will think on it.
Well, this is more fun than titos puzzles. No offense Teets. ;D We just seem to have plain objectives to work with and interesting results.
Mags
I'm not an EE or a mathematician. But either the math or the theorem has to be wrong. I would tend to think that a simple experiment could be devised to test. I thought about using a low voltage circuit like a 1.5v quartz movement and see how long it runs but it is some what voltage dependent. How bout using a resistor as a load submerged in a calorimeter to test series V. parallel cap charge? This seems to me as a definitive, quantitative experiment.
hey Tek
Either Im an idiot and still cant see it yet like a fool, or what Im seeing and reading today has just put me into the 4th dimension of twilight zone.
Something is fishy. This 50% eff is just nuts. How do we get anywhere near cop with this in mind.
From the explanation, it takes work to charge the cap. I always thought that as long as the caps voltage level is lower than the source, that it would gladly accept additional charge to equal the source. Where is the work in that. The source sees an empty or even partially empty cup. I would think the leveling out is a release of unbalanced tensions. The source has to do 2 times the work to get the 1 thing done from what they say. What da heck. I do not buy that. We better have cop8 or we aint gunna do nuthin but drain our batteries using caps..
Im exaggerating a bit. But im angry. Again Fishy fishy.
Anyone remember the Barney Miller episode where the asian guy ate the marijuana brownies by mistake? lol Remember what he kept saying? Mushy Mushy. That was his way of saying fishy fishy. =]
Woopy, this is very awkward, no? How can these things make no sense, unless there is something wrong with what we know and understand. I have never run into something like this in all my experience.
We have gone from having what we might think of as 130%eff, to "we dont really know nuthin at all" all in one day? We found that capacitors are just beyond our comprehension.
Have you ever heard before that it is a 50%eff transfer from batt to cap?
Fishy fishy fishy freekin fishy
Mags marina del fishy
Quote from: Magluvin on March 31, 2011, 02:42:23 AM
hey Tek
Either Im an idiot and still cant see it yet like a fool, or what Im seeing and reading today has just put me into the 4th dimension of twilight zone.
Something is fishy. This 50% eff is just nuts. How do we get anywhere near cop with this in mind.
From the explanation, it takes work to charge the cap. I always thought that as long as the caps voltage level is lower than the source, that it would gladly accept additional charge to equal the source. Where is the work in that. The source sees an empty or even partially empty cup. I would think the leveling out is a release of unbalanced tensions. The source has to do 2 times the work to get the 1 thing done from what they say. What da heck. I do not buy that. We better have cop8 or we aint gunna do nuthin but drain our batteries using caps..
Im exaggerating a bit. But im angry. Again Fishy fishy.
Anyone remember the Barney Miller episode where the asian guy ate the marijuana brownies by mistake? lol Remember what he kept saying? Mushy Mushy. That was his way of saying fishy fishy. =]
Woopy, this is very awkward, no? How can these things make no sense, unless there is something wrong with what we know and understand. I have never run into something like this in all my experience.
We have gone from having what we might think of as 130%eff, to "we dont really know nuthin at all" all in one day? We found that capacitors are just beyond our comprehension.
Have you ever heard before that it is a 50%eff transfer from batt to cap?
Fishy fishy fishy freekin fishy
Mags marina del fishy
But Mags what do you think of my proposed experiment?
Hey Tek
Well from what im seeing today, i cant say i trust anything at the moment. I understand that if we are open minded that we see things beyond what is in the books.
I can see how if things are flawed on purpose, that there are and were people that are smart enough to design the whole system as they present it, and everything works the way they want it. From design to product, we have all the formulas and knowledge to accomplish things with great predictability. I believe They could be that smart to get it all to work very well, with all the alterations intended to shadow the goodies.
Why are we having issues with cap charging? Why does the sim show a micron of loss in transfer, but the site claims 50%loss, we have seen an apparent 50% loss. The sim cant be that far off, or nothing would work at all with any circuit. Just a simple charge a cap from a battery through a 100 ohm resistor, and discharge the cap through a resistor, and scoped the source. There was no difference in the resistor measurements, and the scope shots were identical for charge and discharge. But the source shot had shown a .12mw more from the source than what the resistors read. I cannot see that the sim is that far off, cant be, not for such a simple thing. And I have used the sim for 555 designs, and others that when I really built it, it worked perfectly. So I dont buy it, not yet, not right now. Fishy
I think that if heat is the way to go, I could collect my lunch money fer that calorometer, and try. i wish I had all the necessary equipment to do things. Can we make one?
Gotta get to sleep. Fishy
Mushy Mushy
"We use HALF the energy to kill the source dipole" Bearden
If we continue to Woopy water analogy : one pressurised tank with water is opened and water flow to second tank, both connected and pressure is equalized. So imho if there WAS as water flow then pressure in each container is lower then in original one.Energy in each one is 1/2 because energy is pressure.Energy is not lost.
However :
1. in electric circuit electrons do not move, amperage is just a flow of energy
- there is no empty capacitor ! , electrons are there just in equal "pressure" on both terminals
2. energy in capacitor is dependant on voltage SQUARED
3. can we have capacitor charged partially ? I mean I have two caps : one rated 1uF/400V and second 1uF/63V both charged to 24V for example.Does it mean we have the same amount of energy and charge in both ????
I think, yes - but I'm not sure.
Quote from: forest on March 31, 2011, 04:47:06 AM
"We use HALF the energy to kill the source dipole" Bearden
If we continue to Woopy water analogy : one pressurised tank with water is opened and water flow to second tank, both connected and pressure is equalized. So imho if there WAS as water flow then pressure in each container is lower then in original one.Energy in each one is 1/2 because energy is pressure.Energy is not lost.
However :
1. in electric circuit electrons do not move, amperage is just a flow of energy
- there is no empty capacitor ! , electrons are there just in equal "pressure" on both terminals
2. energy in capacitor is dependant on voltage SQUARED
3. can we have capacitor charged partially ? I mean I have two caps : one rated 1uF/400V and second 1uF/63V both charged to 24V for example.Does it mean we have the same amount of energy and charge in both ????
I think, yes - but I'm not sure.
Theory is the problem. We need absolute scientific proof......calorometer.
Hi Mag
Thank's for the big laugh this morning by imagining you eating your feet. :D
OK i made 4 small tests with inserting a 10 kohm (10000 ohms)resistor in the "believe circuit"
1- i put the resistor between the + of the charged main cap and the diode. Results i loose the freewheeling effect and the 2 cap equalise at the half original voltage as per direct transfer.
2- i put away the diode and now the cap is between the + of the main charged cap and the inductor. Result is as per 1.
3- i put away the diode and the inductor and now the resistor is between the + of the charged cap and the + of the receiving cap. Result = 1 and 2.
4- finally i redo a simple direct transfer (without the resistor) and the result is as per 1,2and 3.
It is difficult to be very precise as the scope shot are measured at 25 volts and the space are very small between the marking. But what i can say is that a 10 kohm resistor seems to kill the freewheeling effect , but has no or very low effect on the direct transfer.
@Forest,
i like your idea that a cap is never empty . Can you further develop ?
@ TEK
i am not equipped to try your test sorry.
good luck at all :)
Laurent
Quote from: Magluvin on March 31, 2011, 03:14:04 AM
Hey Tek
Well from what im seeing today, i cant say i trust anything at the moment. I understand that if we are open minded that we see things beyond what is in the books.
I can see how if things are flawed on purpose, that there are and were people that are smart enough to design the whole system as they present it, and everything works the way they want it. From design to product, we have all the formulas and knowledge to accomplish things with great predictability. I believe They could be that smart to get it all to work very well, with all the alterations intended to shadow the goodies.
Why are we having issues with cap charging? Why does the sim show a micron of loss in transfer, but the site claims 50%loss, we have seen an apparent 50% loss. The sim cant be that far off, or nothing would work at all with any circuit. Just a simple charge a cap from a battery through a 100 ohm resistor, and discharge the cap through a resistor, and scoped the source. There was no difference in the resistor measurements, and the scope shots were identical for charge and discharge. But the source shot had shown a .12mw more from the source than what the resistors read. I cannot see that the sim is that far off, cant be, not for such a simple thing. And I have used the sim for 555 designs, and others that when I really built it, it worked perfectly. So I dont buy it, not yet, not right now. Fishy
I think that if heat is the way to go, I could collect my lunch money fer that calorometer, and try. i wish I had all the necessary equipment to do things. Can we make one?
Gotta get to sleep. Fishy
Mushy Mushy
Mags, Someone could make one using an old Thermos bottle,for the experiment and a digital thermometer. I don't happen to have one. The process uses a measured amount of water at a starting recorded temperature and the ending temp. the lid has a sealed hole for the temp probe as well as the load wires that are connected to the submerged resistor. I would place the thermos bottle on a timed rocker table for agitation instead of the stirrer rod that is in the gif I am posting.
also the gif shows an air space. the air space in our case is the Thermos vacuum. ignore the rest of the diag. For our purposes measuring minute changes in temp., I would suggest as small as possible water as possible. This home spun device should dispel any argument on power gain or loss. A similar method is used in testing microwave oven wattage. I'll see if I can find a reference.
Well, Im at lunch, and I have decided not to cook up the feet yet. =]
There is something for sure that doesnt make any sense. Either we are going about transferring the energy the wrong way, or there is something else happening.
Forest. I understand the cap never empty. But it is empty of potential difference. that is what we are concerned with. ;]
they say it takes work to charge the cap, at a 50% loss.
Well what about a non polarized cap, that sitting on a table or where ever, can have small voltages developed from thin air. Sometimes positive, sometimes negative in reference to the leads. Was there work involved it what takes place in the cap?
This is still just crazy. In essence from what is said to be, there should be a 50% loss all over any circuitry. Yet we have motors that are above 90%eff. We supposedly have dc-dc power supplies that are said to be above or around 90% eff. Were did our loss go in these examples? The dc-dc supply has plenty of caps, and there is heat. Where is our 50% loss now? Is 50% loss the new 100% eff scale?
Is it that we only suffer losses when the cap is below the source level, and we have eff in building that cap voltage higher than the source?
Is it our flywheel that gives us the advantage over 50% to see anything close to 100%? Questions questions.
I still hear Woopy groaning MMMMMM in the vid. A shock to the system. I think there has to be another way.
Woopy, the resistor will not let the inductor spin up as far as we need for the time it takes for the cap to accumulate the charge. Imagine without the resistor, the inductor will peak and the cap is already near source voltage, so the inductor is not spinning as fast because it didnt ever get up to the currents to do so with the resistor. I see the resistor as a limitation not a loss. Just think, it is said that no matter the resistance, the 50% loss still stands, but you encountered a non effective Believe Circuit buy increasing the resistance. Our 50% loss has changed here to other than 50%.
Doesnt jive with the heat loss story.
My idea for test was just to see if the cap, fully charged, discharged through the resistor will still give the voltage division from 10v in 1 cap to 5v in both. And they are saying that no matter what the resistance, anything above 0 will cause the 50% loss.
Now wrap your head around this one..... This is very important!!!
Lets say we have zero resistance. Zero resistance in the cap and the leads, and source, all super conducting material.
If we charge the cap from the source now, Will we get more than 10v in the cap from a 10v source??????????????? That is a huge question. there can be no heat developed, But I betcha we still only get 10v into the cap this way. ;) Where was any work wasted or spent in heat here to get the same results of 50% loss anytime, all the time. Tricks.
THEY that are behind any alterations to laws of physics, did not cover all bases and didnt see where the issues are with proving for a true fact, that what THEY say, is the way things really are. We are at the crossroads here. We just have to figure out which road to take to find the truth.
Something is seriously flawed. We have a lot of work to do.
We have to get around this puzzle. But this puzzle is unlike Titos puzzles. Here we know things. We know our issue. We know what what we are experiencing here is of a nature that we never had come across. Well probably not everyone, and they are not talking, for what ever reason.
I wonder if people in the know, are just sitting back and laughing.
Well, at least today I can still stand on my 2 feet. For now. ::)
Be back later, with what ever I come up with while thinking at work.
This stuff is like my second job, that doesnt pay well. ;) but I have more pride in this than my real job. ;]
Mags
I think about this too and found that it is either a mistake in measure or : charge is not conserved or energy is not conserved.
The problems is in 1/2 in capacitor energy formula. Like something is missing here.
Quote from: forest on March 31, 2011, 02:39:09 PM
I think about this too and found that it is either a mistake in measure or : charge is not conserved or energy is not conserved.
The problems is in 1/2 in capacitor energy formula. Like something is missing here.
Well, by THEIR definition, the energy is conserved in producing heat.
So if current flow produces heat as a loss to the circuits energy, then any time there is current, there is heat, and a 50% loss at all times in circuitry. So when we charge our rechargeable batteries, we use 2 times as much energy to recharge them, maybe more. So the batteries are expensive and we have to pay 2 times as much for enegy to get a half a bag of doughnuts to use them again. Nice. Not.
hmmm, this will be a sad story for the ou community. If we ever have just a bit of gain, we are only a bit better than 50% eff. Getting near 100% is a big hill to climb. How could we ever get to our goals if 50% eff is just all over the place, every where in our circuits?
We will have to somehow find a way to measure what we lost from a known amount of source energy.
Im not folding here. Im just trying to understand the SCHEME of things, in order to find the flaw or trick that avoids these losses, or if the losses are very real and we just cant get past that.
We cant measure a battery to get an accurate value of energy there. It will have to be a large cap.
I have read somewhere that Faraday had it right and others screwed it up. I will have to start there.
Hope you all will be patient with this stuff. If there are things we dont know nor understand then how can we build anything.
When people design circuits, do they figure the 50% loss in all aspects of the circuit? When we figure power in/out, do we have to include that loss in our calculations?
I remember my electronics teacher telling us there is a 50% loss in standard transformers. Well, I dont get that result when I read the specs, input and output VxA for comparison from a standard 12v 1A wall unit supply. Where is that 50% loss now? Seems quite close to equal, minus idle currents in the primary added to usable input current produced by secondary current flux. Didnt we lose anything, like 50%? Even in the filter cap in the unit? Or is it only when we charge a cap from start to finish that we only get a half a bag of doughnuts??
Hmmm, that could be an area to look at. We may be going about delivering the charge to the cap all wrong. Mabe my feet are scared.
Tesla said there is efficiency in the charging of the capacitor in the Igniter circuit. We need to investigate it more. With my tests thus far, I may not know enough to find the gain. Sad but probably true.
This all has me doubting myself a bit. I still dont buy it. Something is a miss. How can anyone not take notice to these things when working in the electronics field?
Well, most probably never build and test the weird stuff we do. So they never have an initiative to see anything wrong. Maybe nothing is wrong. That statement sucks to me right now. Im looking at my toes so I can remember what they look like when their gone. ::)
Mind blowing stuff.
What ever it is, if we understand it more or at all, it will be knowledge gained. <--- Oooo looky, we may gain something here. =]
Mags
Hey Woopy
How do you feel about, we see the 50% loss, and with the diode and inductor, we see a gain? Do you feel we really have a gain with the inductors actions vs direct charging eff?
Could it be that the inductor has an effect that can overcome the loss, if there really is one? Or does the inductor alter some other property to avoid the loss.
Im still amazed that we loss 50% buy doing something that would never seem so.
Just blurting as I feel the need.
Mags
Well, Huston, we have lift of. Forget about the invisible losses and enjoy the show. ;]
I have a way of coming up with things for some reason, and here we go.
I love my mind, and I can keep my feet. ;]
We are going with woopys method of using a cap as the source. Both the source cap and receiver are 10uf for this test.
The source is charged to 1000v, for purposes of Big Show.
And we have the recycle diode in place.
1 The 1000v cap is charged
2 The switch is closed
3 We wait till the receiver reaches 10v yes 10v
4 we open the switch and the recycle diode takes over to continue charging the receiver with the flywheel.
The outcome
The 1000v source cap is now 990v
The receiver, being cut from the source at 10v, reached 132v!!!
And this is the best part. We only have to replace 10v worth into the source cap to fill it up again. Not replace a complete 1000v worth at 10uf. Is that a savings?
I think so. It may be easier than if empty. Dunno. losses may be behind us here.
I have to get together a portion of the circuit that cuts the switch at the desired cutoff point now. It is imperative.
Now cutoff at 10v may not be optimum. Why I have stuck with cutting it off at source voltage is beyond me and in the past. It may become more eff at 5v, or 23.4v, ill do the work to find out, but we have increased our gain by many folds here.
I think were back folks. ;]
Mags
I redid the test at 5v cutoff and the output was 119v on the receiver
Then I did a cutoff at 1.2v and the receiver got 43.22. the source was reduced to 998.8v This is a beautiful thing.
I did a cutoff at .2v got 17.5v in receiver and source was down to 999.8v.
Well, I wont speculate any further. Back to work =]
Mags
here is the circuit in the sim and the code.
http://falstad.com/circuit/ for the applet
Copy code below and import into the applet from the file menu.
$ 1 5.0E-6 0.05817778142098084 50 5.0 43
s 384 80 448 80 0 1 true
v 448 352 448 80 0 0 40.0 1000.0 0.0 0.0 0.5
r 384 352 448 352 0 0.01
c 384 352 384 80 0 9.999999999999999E-6 0.0010000000000002418
r 384 80 304 80 0 2.0
l 304 80 224 80 0 0.22 9.31524329736314E-19
c 224 80 224 352 0 1.0E-5 0.0010000000000000425
d 224 352 304 352 1 0.805904783
s 304 352 384 352 0 1 true
d 304 352 304 256 1 0.805904783
w 336 144 384 80 0
w 304 256 304 176 0
w 304 176 336 144 0
o 6 1 0 291 0.009765625 9.765625E-5 0 -1
o 3 1 0 291 0.009765625 9.765625E-5 1 -1
Close the switch on the right till the cap is fully charged to 1000v.
Then close the switch on the bottom till the desired cutoff is reached.
You can lower the speed of the sim at the upper right slider so you can see in the first scope shot when to release the switch at a particular voltage.
The second scope shot shows the 1000v cap and what is left in it after the cutoff.
Just hit reset at the top right to start over to clear the cap values to empty. =]
Mags
You will be able to see the femf caused by the flywheel effect. It may seem like the flywheel spins for a long time. The sim is running slow enough that we get to see this action.
Bemf happens very quick. So it is a fresh thing to see the time that the freewheel goes in this application.
Tesla was the man. ;]
I think having the 1kv really gets the wheel going as compared to 10v.
I did a 21.6v cutoff, and got 203.36v out. The 1kv cap always equals 1kv - cutoff. It really gets hard to believe there is a 50% loss happening. The sim does not show a loss such as this. In other tests that I did last night. What if the calculations are not presenting what really is? hmmm. We may have a win win situation. Me thinks it.
1 10uf cap at 10v 10v/10ohm load=1A 10vx1A=10W
2 caps in parallel, 20uf at 5v 5v/5ohm=1A 5vx1A=5W but with 2 times the capacitance. I see no loss here. Not 50% Crazy aint it? ;)
So why 50% loss from battery to cap as the physics site stated? ;)
I think we are in a much better position than we were last night. ;D
=]
Mags
Mags
From your circuit I can get above 730V in output cap while source cap level down to 600V. Always above 1kV when taking sum.
Evidently there is gain and gain depends on the time when we cutoff connection to source cap - meaning flywheel effect depends on resonance between inductor and output cap and the period of charging them from source.
Resonant energy systems.
I have one idea to test.
at king Magluvin
thank's a lot for the soft and code
it work really well
But the best for today it works also IN REAL LIFE
i took your circuit with the sim and put 30 volt at the battery with 2 cap of 47 microF 2 BAT 43 diode and the secondary of the MOT with a resistance of 107 OHMs and 19 H inductance, and the sim results was very encouraging
Than i did it in real with the real things
And i played with this since 2 hours now. And as Forest say it is very dependant from the switching. But the source voltage goes down about from 30 volts to 21.8 that is a lost of 8.2 volts and the receiver get 15.7 volts (from 0 volts ) for example. I see in this test example a gain of nearly 200 %. Not bad at all for a first test. ;D
BRAVO MAN
let's go on the good way
i think i have an explanation regarding the 1/2* C*V^2 formula which is not adapted at what we are doing. But I have to go now . Will contact later
BUT BRAVO BRAVO BRAVO
good luck at all
Laurent
This is what Nulpoints posted at Roses thread....
hi Magzzzz
it would be great to think 'contrariwise', but sadly the only thing here that is Overunity is your enthusiasm!! ;)
at the start, the input 10uF cap charged to 1000V holds 5000mJoules
at the end, the input 10uF cap at 990V holds 4901mJoules
so the input 10uF cap has supplied 99 mJoules to the 'Believe' circuit
the output 10uF cap at 132V holds 87mJoules
(ignoring the 0.5mJoule of 10V on 10uF)
Efficiency = 87/99 = 88%
if you want to even approach 100% then you need to transfer the charge from input to output in many steps of smaller energy transfer
it took me a year, using the same circuit arrangement in 2008, to confirm that the only things which are incorrect in the EE text books are that the value of charge-separation in an isolated circuit like this is NOT constant - and the energy dissipated : energy stored ratio is not always 1 : 1 as claimed
i've already given you & woopy a link to the thread which contains my results so i won't include it again here
i'm not trying to be negative about your work - i admire your zeal - i would like to save you guys from wasting your valuable time
regards
np
Im seeing the picture here now. But we still have a chance here.
We have to have more mjoules out than was taken from the source cap.
Forests figures seem to work here. This is Forests post.....
Mags
From your circuit I can get above 730V in output cap while source cap level down to 600V. Always above 1kV when taking sum.
Evidently there is gain and gain depends on the time when we cutoff connection to source cap - meaning flywheel effect depends on resonance between inductor and output cap and the period of charging them from source.
Resonant energy systems.
I have one idea to test.
Here we have more voltage on the output vs what was taken from the source cap. Is that what we might be looking for to get a gain when we calculate? It just may do the trick. Im at lunch so no time to check.
If we calculate what we took on the source, being calculate total to start minus what is left, in joules, then calculate the amount in the reciever cap, did we make it over the top here?
I have not gone through all the cutoff points yet.
Woops or forest, if you can work on those numbers that forest had presented, and see if we are good. I will do it also this evening. We need to nail this down. =]
Thanks guys for all your input here. ;] it has been great. ;] We have some turned over some stones and have made it past a couple road blocks here so far. We cant really expect not to have problems all the way. Some may quit now, and never find the gold ring in the sand.
Be back later. =]
Mags
Hello all
Maximum energy transference between a source and a load happens when the impedance of the source equals the impedance of the load. This means that one half the energy is left in the source as heat, etc. Is this where the 1/2 figure comes into play in the EE text books?
:)
Ok,I've got what I wanted to check. Simulation don't say you truth but it can show remnant of it.
Charge source cap then quickly discharge in impulses into output cap in the circuit like that in picture , once you get it right output cap will be charged steadily above 800V and yet there is very high freqency oscillation. I've got up to 4V on inductor in disconnected circuit ! Steady.
Might be and error in simulation but I doubt. Looks like displacement current oscillating aka electrostatic like.
Look at the time at the picture.Firs scope shot on left is inductor ,then resistor then capacitor (output one)
Hi Mag the king and all
Ok i have tested the new BELIEVE CIRCUIT for some hours now on the sim and than in reality and i got always the same ... that is really over unity efficiency in the transfer.
OK but now i notice that all the discussion is going or will be glued around that bloody formula 1/2 x C X V^2. Or other sayd multiplying the Capacity of the cap divided by half and with the Voltage squared.
In all my knowledged experiments this kind of formulas are the same and works very fine for all DYNAMIC systems and are relative to KINETIC energy. I mean a constant flowing current , or air or water flow ,etc creating a constant work
But we are not dealing with a dynamic system here. we are dealing with a multiplied static system.
i mean that we consider that the cap is charged wit a given energy. which is a POTENTIAL energy.
And we will use this potential energy once after once , as a pulse motor to engage at each pulse , the full power of the freewheeling effect.
So the energy stored in the cap follows the potential energy laws and not the kinetic laws.
That means that the Voltage is not SQUARED .
So the potential energy (at the beginning of the process) is the capacity of the cap multiplied by the potential difference (voltage) and that's all. NO SQUARING OF THE VOLTAGE.
And if the use of this potential energy is able to create an increase in the potential energy of the receiver cap....... thank's the freewheeling effect .......there should be is a gain or what ?
And do not forget that we are not working continously but by pulse. We recreate at each pulse a new static situation, from which we can reactivate the OU frewheeling efficiency.
If i am right with this theory, i revendicate the rhigt to eat the feet of king Magluvin the first :D :D :D
And always a lot to think about.
I insert a crude drawings of my thinking about kinetic and potential system and of course subect to all dicussion.
But until further real contradiction i will stay with King Magluvin idea . But there is always the risk that the the ISNOGOOD tries to be CALIF at the place of the Calife :D :D ;)
@ Forest
Yes good idea
And of course if the circuit is really 200 % OU and much more as i could experiment, we will have to try a mean to reconduct the "gain" voltage back to the source cap or the battery, or we will be fired by this severe and impitoyable community and sent back to school for an indifinite time :D:-[
Do not worry i like risk
good luck at all
Laurent
montek
Thats something we are trying to decipher. ;] Lets say IF there are some things in physics that may have been modified by THEM, maybe we can figure it out. We are running into things that seem a miss.
You are welcome to comment and contribute anytime. ;]
I admit, I dont know everything and have forgotten some. But I have this "what if" mentality on things. Sometimes I see things going on even though I may not fully get the whole picture. This is why if we all come together and have a collective mind, we can probably lick this bugger. ;]
Forest
The added inductor you have with the resistor. The resistor is set at 100ohm. I would figure it to be maybe less than 1/2 ohm, for ideal purposes. My big coils are 2mh and they are .45ohm. So if that 100ohm resistor is representing the ohm value of the new inductor, then that may be the problem you are seeing with inconsistencies. Unless you have a 1mh coil on the bench and it also reads 100ohm. I dont think so though. ;] Woopys 220mh is 2ohm and the other coil on his transformer was some henrys, dont remember, but 19ohm I believe. So make sure that resistor is correct then try comparison again. I got stuck on that situation also before. so its ok, we all make mistakes and we are all here to help each other across the street as we get in our old age. =] ;] Keep on keepin on Forest. It is all a great help, and I enjoy the company. ;]
Woopy
This is good stuff you are bringing to light and I need to get myself in the know on these things too.
Nulpoints calculations got me flustered. I really have to get my joules together here and know these calculations myself. I have never really had to do any calculations of energy in caps in the field, so now I have to.
This is good stuff guys. For how simple this all appears, I dont think we will have to go on for years before we figure out if we can make this work or not. There isnt a whole lot more ground to cover, as I think we are half way up the hill. ;]
We may have to try some igniter experiments also, as woopy did in the shorting cap circuit, just to cover all bases in this scheme.
Lets work this one out and then go to that as needed. ;]
Ok, I need a showwa and dinner, then it will be a Friday night working on this.
Mags n Friends ;]
Hi Mag
do not be so shy
you just did open the PANDOR box and it wortks....!!
now wake up
your circuit is awsome
and it is a breakthrough
do not worry
you will be killed
but i am, with you
big laugh onother time :D
good luck at all :)
laurent
hey Woopy
I really hope they will kill me. That is the proof we need. lol
Im cooking some dinner. After I am going to dig in and see if we can configure to get an output that is of common voltage, like 15v in the receiver cap to run a 12v neon transformer, small one, 45ma idle and with AV plug. Im gunna try to loop this thing. I will do some tests on the sim to get things the way I want.
If we increase the receiver caps uf, the voltage will be lower but more charge stored. So the voltage will already be converted to a useful potential for common purposes. ;] Thinkin
I was pleasantly surprised that the sim can show ou effects.
Do you know what that means? No aether energy needed, no energy from the vacuum. Because Im sure that wasnt programmed in there. ;] Ive always had the opinion that we could do this purely with circuitry. Maybe some setups get energy from the outer limits. I didnt believe it and thought that it was just a reason to describe what they really just dont understand. But I think here we are solid and self contained.
Thanks for the boost of confidence. And glad to have good people on this team. ;]
Back in a bit.
Mags
"As far as the laws of mathematics refer to reality, they are not certain; as far as they are certain, they do not refer to reality." - Einstein
Does that fit here? ;]
Mags
Actually I do see it now without calculations. =]
I used the same circuit and did a cutoff of 500v from 1000v source.
The receiver got 856v! Now, we know that if we split 1000v 10uf into 2 10uf caps, we have 500v in each, we know we are good with the power transfer. So the 856v shows gain with the source cap still at 500v. We are good. lol It takes me time for some things to sink in. I can say that I believe. ;]
And really before I was seeing it this way, but somebody comes along and says it dont add up, and then Im not sure about anything for a bit.
This circuit is an oddity though, in that if we want to use the output into a load, we need to dump the whole load from the receiver into a load in order to empty the cap to prepare for the next cycle.
Im sure that something can be done with it.
I think Nulpoints said to us a pulse or ramp charge. Im not sure if we could use a joule theif to bring back our source potential.
Well, Im tired. More tomorrow.
Mags
Mags
This 100ohm resistor I put there after checking without it ;D ;D ;D
It was for purpose of draining oscillations so I could see when it stops but there is no easy stop :o Resistor here is no following ohm law.
Maybe it's simulation error but it present very long oscillation afer disconnecting from power source
Hey Forest
It could be possible that the sim falters at times. But when it does its noticeable. Like it locks up, or if you have diodes left 1 legged to the circuit. Like it doesnt know how to calculate that.
When ever you see an issue, always try to rebuild the circuit from scratch. I have exported problem circuits anf the problem was exported also.
I know this sim has some issues. But as I use it and know what causes the issues, Ive had less of them.
Like if you are deleting parts to change them, it is best to stop the circuit and not have it running during the changes. Thats when I get some issues.
Im going to try spice here soon.
Hey Rose has some high value resistors in her circuit and has oscillations that seem to survive for a long period.
Im not sure what the extra inductor and switches are for in your circuit. Can you describe? =]
thanks Forest, I dont mind changes at all. Thats how you find things.
;]
Mags
The extra inductor is here because for 220mH inductor it's hard to get the effect observable in simulation. Also it is due to low inductance aka Tesla stout copper bar.
I've lost exported data but circuit is easy modification of yours. Just charge source capacitor and dump into output cap to obtain more then 500V in output caps. This need also carefully adjusted simulation speed. When you got red color blinking between cap and inductor then it is in self-oscillation mode and output cap is not discharged at all or just barely. Voltage across inductor can be as high as 4 volts.
The other way would be to charge cutoff source capacitor aroud 600V and then connect both source and output cap in series and dump to source battery.
I see.
Well I think we are there Forest. I think that now is a good time for experiments beyond what I have presented. So we can uncover more possibilities.
Keep them coming forest. negative results also should be included for the experience of it.
Be back later. By brother is coming over today. Its been a year.
Mags
Was testing the circuit to see if we have some straight evidence that we have gotten more out than in.
In the pic below, we have the same circuit we have been dealing with, except the recycle diode will now exclude the original diode while recycling. It is a way of not having to go through 2 diodes at any time. ;]
Here if without the recycle diode, we charge the source cap to 1000v. then we just hold the switch at the bottom til the source is exhausted and the receiver gets 991.74v and the source was left with 8.26v.
Hmm, I didnt see any loss here. hmmm. And being that we have verified that the sim is very good at predicting this circuit on the bench, we can rely on that.
Also while the switch is being held down, as the receiver cap reaches 500v, the source cap has also descended to 500v at the same time.
It is just plain logical that the 2 10uf caps when at 500v each, that those 2 caps each hold half of the energy of 1 10uf(source) at 1000v.
It has to be evident due to the exercise above. Otherwise when holding the circuit down till complete transfer, how could the receiver get 99% of the source and the source still have 1%. No heavy losses here. Its not like we lost 50% along the way then gained it back. Very interesting. So we can fully say that when the 2 10uf caps are at 500v, 20uf 500v = 10uf 1000v in energy.
So now to the circuit below. We cutoff the source when it is at 703v, we end up with 703v in the receiver.
So here we have a 20uf cap at 703v from a 10uf cap at 1000v.
Thats just simple logic. The 20uf cap at 703v has the same energy as a 10uf cap at 1406v !!!
This is very conclusive. =] Do ya believe it? ;]
Mags
Now the question is, can we charge a 10uf cap to 1000v or more, from a source cap 20uf at 713v ? Been playing with that.
So far, I got 991v into a 10vuf cap from a 20uf 714v source cap.
The circuit needs to be different when increasing from a low voltage source to a higher voltage. It took a bit to get to 991v. Ill put the circuit up tomorrow. It still needs work but I felt good about going through the couple stages and still down about 1% and improving. That is pretty good imho.
Again I post this quote from http://hyperphysics.phy-astr.gsu.edu/hbase/electric/capeng.html
"From the definition of voltage as the energy per unit charge, one might expect that the energy stored on this ideal capacitor would be just QV. That is, all the work done on the charge in moving it from one plate to the other would appear as energy stored. But in fact, the expression above shows that just half of that work appears as energy stored in the capacitor. For a finite resistance, one can show that half of the energy supplied by the battery for the charging of the capacitor is dissipated as heat in the resistor, regardless of the size of the resistor"
Does this make any sense? What is right here? Anyone? ;] My devices on my bench have resistance. Yet why do we not see losses of 50% in "work" in my examples. Each conversion should have had 50% losses. So I supposedly lost 50%, then 50% of what was left. But in reality, Im only down 1% after 2 conversions. Does this smell fishy? Fishy fishy.
Mags
Ok I got our 1000v + into a 10uf cap from 20uf at 713v.
I just used the same circuit but used a 20uf as the receiver.
I cutoff the source at 500.32v and got 500.93v in the receiver.
Now we put the 2 20uf caps in series and we get 10uf at 1001.25v ;D
So now we can be looped. With a bit of increase as we go. The cutoffs will need to be precise but all is feasible. ;)
Im tired.
Mags
Was thinking at work on this. It will be a tough bunch of switching to make this work on its own. One problem is we will be ending up with caps being combined that I cant see a way of decombining to recycle them into the circuit.
But doing it all manually works, for showing that it can be done.
Im going to try some bifi coils next. I wont be able to run that on the sim, so it will just be experimental on the bench.
I also am going to try some igniter style circuits with some small changes.
This is all in hopes of being able to possibly get where we are without all the cap dividing and combining to get the results.
We have a foundation to work with and we know ways of taking advantage of the femf.
I think we have come pretty far in the last couple weeks. I think I said last week we were close. ;]
Be back later
Mags believes ;]
For what it's worth I'm a believer too.
Keep up the good work Mags.
Hi Mag
i made a lot of test with the sim and on the bench.
For info,It seems that i have to add a resistor (about 100ohm in the sim )in the circuit to have the same result in real life as per the sim (probably due to long wire and bad connections).
I get better results with the secondary of the MOT (19 Henry inductor and 107 ohms resistance)
From a 25 V source , i can get 23 volt in the receiver cap (10 uF ) and 2 volts in the source cap (10 uF ), if i let the process to completely drain.
But what i can say is when i use the official formula (1/2 x cap value x stored voltage ^2) we never go OU
So if your source cap is 10 uF 10 volt the stored energy is 100 x 10 x 0.5 = 500 uj. if we divide it in 2 cap of 10 uF, each receiver cap will have
5 volt and the formuly gives 5^2 x10 x 0.5 = 125 uj that is each cap stores only 1/4 of the energy of the source cap. Very bad indeed.
So each time you divide a cap in 2 cap of same capacity , the voltage is divided by 2 in each cap, ...and as the voltage is a tension ( as a spring ) , the spring in each cap is 2 time less streched , and as the streching is calculated squared, 2 time less streching in a cap is squared less powerfull ...caramba bloody squared voltage !!
But what is interesting is that ,if we only consider the transfer from cap to cap (directly) , As we decrease the voltage by 2 in each cap, the total stored energy is 50 % less and this transfer is only 50 % efficient. And the same transfer with the inductor and diode can reach 85 % on my bench . And more in the sim (up to 98 %).
So as you sayd, it would be interesting to study how this increase in efficiency works, and if we can isolate or multiply it ?
Somebody spoke about an electrical pendulum effect ?
Any body an idea ?
good luck at all
Laurent
Hey Woopy
If the calculations are correct, and it actually is 1/2, then the flywheel is doing a very good job.
If the calculations are wrong, not your doing, then I think I know what is conveyed.
If we have 10uf 10v and we apply that to a 10ohm load, initial currents will be 1A and descending as the caps voltage goes down.
If we have 20uf 5v and we apply that to a 10ohm load, initial currents will be .5A and descending as the caps voltage goes down.
BUT, if we have 20uf 5v and we apply that to a 5ohm load, we are back to 1A initial, AND we are working with 20uf cap as compared to 10uv 10v.
And in all reality, the 20uf 5v should have a longer discharge into 10ohm than either of the above. Over time, till the cap is empty, is what will show what is right and what is wrong.
The load is important when considering the voltage applied.
A 9v transistor radio wont run on 5v batt, no matter how many 5v batteries we have in parallel. This is does not say that the 10 5v batteries dont hold as much energy than 5 10v batteries. It is just how you configure amp hours and voltages.
I believe we do have an equal amount of power when we do the split.
I dont see how I can possibly get the numbers I have, by actually loosing half the energy and then coming up with a gain. The only possible way to do that, is if we are able to get the flywheel going for free. Or maybe some of it is free. We could say that what was lost was stored in the field(flywheel) and the extra that we gain is free. Something is free, thats for sure.
Do an experiment on the scope....
Charge a 10uf cap to 10v and put a 1000ohm resistor as a load and watch.
Then a 20uf at 5v across 500ohm resistor and watch. The 5v into the 500ohm should take as long to discharge over time vs 10uf 10v. ;]
What would the calculations say that half is? 10uf 10v / 2 = 10uf 7.5v? Maybe. Either way, we have our lil flywheel doing nice tricks. ;]
Does that make sense? You can use any values that you may have to do the experiment. These were just an example as in half here and double there. ;]
Can you see what is going on here? ;]
THEY maybe have us convinced that if we use a 10ohm load in each case, we will assume that we only have half the energy.
This is all just theory woops. But something in the calculations is not in our favor. ;]
I should be able to put together a vid this week.
Thanks for continuing on with me woops and Forest. All data is good. ;]
And thanks Infringer for the vote of confidence. We are going to need all the support we can get. Once we get things going, the creeps will come and confuse. Im just glad that things are as simple as they are, as it is easier to defend. ;]
There is some puzzle to all this though. The way that I got the 1001.25v was so simple, yet it took me 2 days to come up with the simple solution. It was a puzzle. ;]
Mags
Hi Mag
As i am trying to understand all this matter , i force me to be convinced and to accept that this "bloody voltage-squared " formula which is applicated to all kinetic energies in this world by THEM and is tought in all text books is real and works .
and my question is
- where come the " squared " from in the formula I mean is it a real squared or something less ?
- is it applicable in a pulse situation, i mean when we charge a cap , than stop the proces and than release the power stored to charge another cap ?
are we in a dynamic process where the "bloody formula " is in full action or are we in a special situation where we have to deal with potential ( not squared ) situation
Ok for tonight
goog thinking at all
Laurent
Ok folks. this is getting nuts. Good nuts. ;]
Something that is strange is, the way we think about how a circuit works when we even see it in a schematic. We forget things or we dont always see the "what ifs" in what is presented.
Remember me saying that it would be difficult to accomplish the switching and conversions of sometimes caps in parallel and then series throughout the process of running a starting source to the end result?
Well I was at work putting circuits together in my head. Well I decided to go against my instincts on something I had thought earlier. ;]
I have only the last part of the circuit to figure, and it is just a bunch of switching. And the timing for cutoff I think I will go with timing from a 555, possibly.
This sounds like we are making things worse. But the results are....
start with a 10uf "capacitance" at 1000v and process that through 3 stages of Believe Circuit, and we get 1320v into a 10uf "capacitance"
I will disclose this week. I have the switching down on the 3 stages, and its simple. Im not pulling a tito here. I just want to see if anyone gets it. Its an important exercise for the mind. It will open a door that you have never walked through and the door is here for the opening.
Tito keeps showing us the radiant energy receivers. And I think that many know of these and believe that you can get free energy there, but wheres the beef? Not everyone is interested in having 100 wire antenna in their back yards, as he suggested to make 100 of those circuits. No fun and try portability with that one.
The believe circuit needs no antenna. Just inductors and 1 precharge to get it started. Maybe the antenna can give you the precharge if you dont have a source to begin with.
I am flabbergasted at the level we have gotten to this point. And guess what, with more switching, we can add more stages. ;)
And get this, with each stage we have less voltage each time. ;)
I dont believe for 1 single solitary second that we loose anything in power transfers. If there is any, I really dont care cuz I dont see it. ;)
Common woopy, I know you and forest will figure this out. Run the sim, and start with any voltage you wish, I just like high as we lose less from voltage drop of the diode overall.
Then run 3 stages, 1 at a time. after each stage, reset the sim, replace the caps with succeeding larger values of double previous and just edit the source to the last voltage gotten, as I have described earlier. But run 3 stages.
At the end, what do you do with a "capacitance" of 40uf at 350v to get 1320v into a 10uf cap.?????? If I told you that an 80uf "capacitance" at about 225v would give us even more, would you believe? lol
Looks like we are losing here. lol Just think. My feet love me and no longer fear being on a plate. ;D
If you give in and cannot wait, I will tell. Just give it a shot. I have given some clear clues. But I wont tito anyone here. Sorry Teets. Its just how it is. :-*
Thinking caps men, the party has begun.
Mags believes You betcha
Well, it looks like Woopy is out for the night.
Well here is the answer
If we have a 10uf cap at 1000v, we end up with 703v in 2 10uf caps when run through the believe circuit.
We parallel those caps to get 20uf at 703v. Now we use that as our new source in the believe circuit and have a 20uf for the receiver.
We get 2 20uf caps at 500v. Parallel them to get 40uf at 500v, and put an empty 40uf as the source. We run the circuit we get 2 40uf caps at 350v. 80uf tot at 350v
Now for the key. In that last stage we need the source cap and the receiver cap, each 40uf, to be made of 2 20uf caps each parallel.
2 20uf caps parallel for the source and 2 20uf caps parallel for the receiver. Got it? ;]
So we have actually 4 20uf caps all at 350v. Now disconnect them and put them in series. BAM we have 1400v in a 10uf cap.
Like I said, it was a puzzle. I wrecked my brain to get to this position.
Just think, if I had just given up thinking it will never work, when really the gain was there the whole time, we just could not see it yet, or lets say use it. But we did find a way to use it, in the next stage. ;]
But once we use the believe circuit 3 times to get what we can see as a definite gain, we are home free. =] We no longer need external input to the circuit. It compounds the gains as they are made.
So if we start with 1320v , the end result will be 1716v. =]
Many may have given up at the sight of some physics calculations, or figuring 50% losses in each stage of transfer. Dont believe that crap.
Do these tests your self, you will believe. Yup. ;]
So here it is folks. No doubt, some of my best work, probably in my lifetime. I earned it. I didnt get the circuit from anyone, nor my theories, that have yet to be completed. ;)
Ill be on the bench. Please, any questions, just ask. ;]
Mags
It seems you may have done it Mags, hats off to you...a fine example of lateral thinking.
All the best.
Regards...
thanks Cap
Ya know, I used this circuit, without the recycle diode, in my earlier experiments last year. At the time, I had the flywheel effect in my mind, and I also had the recycle diode a bit later, but never got the gain. None that I knew of. ;]
The secret is to cutoff the source cap at 7v if it was 10, then the recycle diode will fill the receiver cap to 700v. Its a ratio that works at all voltages. There may be other cutoffs that may have more eff, but I will stick to this and work with making things better as we go. I like the fact that if we need to connect the 2 caps in parallel, there will be no sparks at the switch because they are equal. Thinkin. ;]
I have put many hours in this and feel good about it. Its here. We can build it.
Now to get it all together to work on its own. And make a way to skim the 320 from the top of the 1320v cap and run the 1000v back to the circuit. Its just silly aint it?
All the info is on the last 6 pages. Teslas Igniter pat had shown me the way of the inductor, and that it works as a flywheel. Actually in the Igniter pat, when I ran it on the sim, that flywheel never stops, just keeps on keepin on, and the kicks kept it going. ;]
Thanks for reading all. Take it, keep it, share it. I have seen it, and I saw that it was good. ;]
The adventure continues. Stage 4 10uf 1000v to 10uf 1700v ;D
Mags
here is the circuit thus far as I have figured to get to the end of the 3rd stage. I am contemplating a 4th stage, that if it gets to 2000v on the 10uf cap, we have a simple way to produce 2 10uf caps at 1000v each, from 1 10uf cap at 1000v. =] get my drift? 200% eff.
Anyways here is the 3 stage to avoid complication.
The batt charges the source cap to 1kv, then the batt is switched off, forever. lol
Now the first switch to the right of the batt switch is the first stage, and the switch must be opened when the source cap is down to 700v.
The believe circuit will charge the 10uf cap to the right of the source cap to 700v. Now the upper and lower switches at stage 1 get closed. This puts those 2 10 uf caps in parallel. 20uf at 700v ;]
Then we close the second stage switch. We open when the 20uf 700 of the first stage reaches 500v, and the stage 2 believe circuit will charge the 20uf cap in the second stage to 500v.
We now close the switches above and below stage 2. This will give us 40uf at 500v.
Notice we are still using stage 1 caps, now combined with stage 2 caps. Stage 1 caps with stage 2 caps are the combined source for stage 3.
Took forever to figure this out. ;] Few hours actually. ;]
Now we have 40uf at 500v, we close stage 3 and open when the source gets down to 350v, and the 3rd stage believe circuit will charge the last caps, 2 20uf=40uf to 350v.
We now have 2 40uf caps at 350v = 80uf at 350
Now for the difficult decisions on how to switch out all the caps in groups of 20uf, and connect them in series. We now have 10uf at 1300v up to 1400v!!
but how to get it to be a single source for the first stage? Thats where stage 4 comes in. It should bring us to 2kv, dump into a 10uf cap and we have 1 for the money anf 2 for the show. Well 1 for the money and 1 for the show.. Get it?
Those that have been following and know what is happening, please feel free to show some simpler ways if possible. =] Any input is welcome.
Mags
hey
Read the above, but i may have made a mistake in the end game. A good mistake. Im seeing 1320v at 20uf!!! hmmm leme check this. its good. See Im still working on it and discovering good things, even if it was a mistake. ;]
Mags
Ok I have been working things out with the plethora of switches that ar needed. Adding a fourth stage, im counting 13 switches. maybe 3 more for possibly disconnecting the diodes if need be.
Im close. I think transistor switching will work fine and I dont care about the on resistances of them. =] the transfers will work fine.
This will be a fun week. Im beat. I will hopefully come up with a simpler solution to the switching.
I think we may be farther over the top than I had quoted. I will have answers tomorrow.
Just got back from leaving my last sentence. had an idea that I tried that worked. It eliminated the end game switching to get the caps in series. I got it another way. Stay tuned, this is getting easier in the last couple min. See ya tomorrow. Skittles, the world is a rainbow. ;]
I took the 3rd stage and used it, 350 at 160uf to get 1320v in a 10uf cap. Now we can just switch out the source cap back and forth after all stages are complete. So as it will be with the new way, we can skim 320v from the source cap and leave the 1k to restart the process. Its good. Easier than I had predicted earlier. =]
It feels weird. Lately Ive been pretty much forward moving on this. the ideas are all coming together quite nicely. if time is of the essence, we are making fantastic progress.
Hey woopy, dont read the books for a while, they wont help you here.
Just experiment. The gain is there. You will see it. We already have. ;]
The only thing to hammer out is the timing of the switchings for the cutoffs and such. If we want higher freq process, use lower inductances. Lower freq = higher inductances.
night
mags
Hi Mag
wow you are skyrocketing :D
just a small doubt
you said in your reply n0 612
"So we have actually 4 20uf caps all at 350v. Now disconnect them and put them in series. BAM we have 1400v in a 10uf cap."
If i put 4 caps of 20 uF at 35o volts in serie i get 1400 volts in 5 uF and not 10 uF or do i miss something ?
What is very interesting anyway is the fact that by multiplying the transfers the freewheeling effect maintain a very high efficiency
Will go on the test
good luck at all
Laurent.
hey Woopy
I just woke up for work. =] Ill be back at lunch. I may have made an error there. I have to look it all over.
umm we start with 10uf and end the first stage with 20uf
we start with 20uf stage 2, end stage 2 at 40uf.
start stage 3 at 40uf, end at 80uf
1 80uf at 350v = 4 20uf at 350 so 4 20uf at 350 in series =1400v
Yes, We will be using all the caps in the circuit at stage 3.
Ok Good Luck woops, Ill be back later. =] Just try it all for size. I think I have come up with an idea to eliminate the having to get them in series in the end, but we will be getting similar results. ;] Will think on it and post later today.
Mags
Laurent,
You are correct about the value. You end up with 5uF at 1400V. How does that compare to the original cap(s) of 80uF at 350V?
.99
He guys
Your right 5uf
Ive not had much sleeps
But as I said last night, In my daze and confusion, I have a way to directly get the 80uf, all caps in parallell still to get it out..
At work will be back after work
thanks for the correction..
I have to review last nights posts there were so many.
Mags
ok solved it will present at lunch =] Reduced stages simpler About 3 hours from now. =]
Been tired, and the stages were getting to me.
Stay awake woopy, 3 hours
mags
In regards to offering any help with the switches etc., there is this:
Why do you need so may stages?
Obtaining 350V in a 80uF capacitor can be achieved with one stage, with the source capacitor being 10uF at 1000V.
Can you think of any adjustments to the original switch that would yield this result?
.99
Quote from: poynt99 on April 06, 2011, 09:37:34 AM
Obtaining 350V in a 80uF capacitor can be achieved with one stage, with the source capacitor being 10uF at 1000V.
.99
say it was actually possible to transfer 4.9 Joules of energy starting from 1kV on a 10uF cap, to give 350 Volts on 4x 20uF in parallel, without any significant I*I*R loss in the wiring/switches (leaving up to 0.1 Joules [141 V] on the source 10uF)
you've ended up with less charge-separation at your output - and you haven't achieved any work
so what?
Hi,
I just read this thread and wanted to make a comment on the capacitor energy issue. From the energy formula, the energy goes up as the voltage sq. and only proportional to the capacitance. So you were wondering where the energy lost came from when charging a capacitor from a capacitor. The opposite was always a problem for me. Charge 2 capacitors in parallel, and then connect it in series. By doing so, the voltage is double, but the capacitance is halve, so the net energy gain is 200%. If you did the same with 3 capacitors (3 parallel, than 3 in series ), the net gain is 300% (32/3). So "playing around" the parallel & series connections will give you any gain you're looking for. So where did the extra energy come from by playing with this switching?
As far as the formula 1/2CV2, it is based on work to move a charge in an electrostatic field. The sq appears in other formulas like kinectic energy= 1/2 mv2. E=mc2.
/Wayne
hey guys
I may be eating my feet
I have been working on this solution. I may be all wrong here.
My stages got to me. I have to sit down with this tonight and see what I was thinking.
I have been at it for 40min here at lunch and Im just screwing up trying to go so fast.
if it was all wrong, Im sorry for any inconvenience. =[
I keep getting my caps divided and multiplied all screwed up.
Ill go over it tonight.
Im on it, right or wrong, I will tell.
Gota get back to work.
mags
Mags,wayne
The problem is with equations definitely. If you assume energy transfer without loose and without gain , just pure energy conservation , from one larger cap into two smaller or from one full into empty one then we could use other equations and the result is broken charge conservation. Charge is lost during operation.
Something is really fishy. Let's assume that really 50% is lost as a heat. Heat is EM radiation. With coil acting as flywheel we have no such problem , that means inductance can recover that energy like radio antenna back into electric current.
That 50% difference is very suspicious to me.I would expect the difference varied by resistance in path of transfer, not just exact 50% always.
Hello Magluvin
Since you are basically moving energy from one capacitor to another it seems that you need to think in units of energy and not in units of volts.
Energy in a capacitor is U = 1/2(CV2)
V = applied volts
C = capacitance
BTW the 1/2 comes out of the integral used to calculate the area under the capacitor charge curve vs time period.
Hyperphysics has a good explanation http://hyperphysics.phy-astr.gsu.edu/hbase/electric/capeng.html (http://hyperphysics.phy-astr.gsu.edu/hbase/electric/capeng.html)
:)
Hi all
the real thing is if we apply the formula, which is written in all text book, the energy transfer from a cap to a cap of same value is 50 % efficient.
and of course the question is where did those other 50% go ???
In heat or something else ? in this case the 50 % energy are fully lost and unrecoverable yes or not ???. and in this case it is simply not possible to recover them or a part of them , because they are no more there ?? yes or not ?
So my question is , from where the energy of the Inductor and diode ( "believe circuit" as Mag named it ) comes from , to recreate much better efficiency in THE SAME ENERGY TRANSFER.
My bench experiment shows around 50 % efficiency in a direct transfer, that is transferring a cap to a cap without any resistance and about 85 % efficiency by ADDING RESISTANCE OF INDUCTOR AND DIODE ???
Please explanation
Hi wayne
i do not understand your 200 % gain in your calculation, for me the result is the same , if i charge 2 cap of 10 uF at 10 volts, they store the same energy as those same charged cap mounted in serie of course as per the bloody 1/2 X CAPACITY X VOLTAGE ^2.
good luck at all
Laurent
Hi Montec
thank's for the post concerning the , as i named it " bloody formula " there is no insult here against the formulator people but this formula puzzle me and really derange me on this research.
I know that this formula is used all over the place concering the kinetic energy and it is in general used with atmost efficacity .
as i can understand , this formula says that a single cap of 10 uF and 10 volts , is discharged in a same empty cap of 10 uF .and by doing this it loses 50 % of the stored energy.(as per hyperfhisics link )
So i can understand that the voltage is a pressure or a spring. So at 10 volts the spring is streched with a lot of force, or work. Than we decide to split in the same capacity the stored force, so the concentrated energy will be diluated in 2 entities. So you you simply distreched the spring to release more space, in order to refill the 2 capacities at half the voltage. or half the spring tension .
So more volume at less concentration. and of course because the bloody formula 50 % lost energy.
OK but now we are at the end of the releasing phase and every thing is calm and equalised... but where are the bloody energy come from and says " please wake up everybody , we can not stay at this point and we will pile all above the other and recreate some more energy. So we will rebuild from 50% of the standard transfer up to 85 % or more.
where is this staff of people comes from ?
sorry to repeat me , but explanation and discussion is welcome
good luck at all
laurent
Laurent,
I assume you are in general, "OK" with the equation in question, because you have seen first-hand on your bench that the equation seems to be true to your results. That is, when you use no inductor, and have a pure resistance between the two capacitors, energy seems to be "lost".
You are having difficulty accepting it, but it is true, when using a piece of wire, 50% of the energy will be lost in heat in that interconnecting wire.
When you insert an inductance (and a diode) between the two capacitors, the situation is now different. Now, rather than a dissipative element (the piece of resistive wire), you have a less dissipative element (an inductance and lump resistance) between the two capacitors. This less dissipative element stores some of the energy that otherwise would be lost if only a wire was used. The inductor not only stores some of this energy, but it releases it again in the direction of the empty capacitor.
You can continue to improve the efficiency of this energy transfer by increasing the inductance, while trying to maintain a relatively low lumped resistance.
Eventually, you will approach 100% energy transfer, but you will not quite get there, due to the finite resistance we always have in inductors (not super-cooled).
Hope that helps.
.99
Thank's Point99
i have to go sleeping
and i will be dreaming of this
in my mind, a wire of respectable diameter (probably 0.8 to 1mm diameter )as the one comming out of my cap, can probably transfer some amps in a very short time, in other words a lot of energy.
the transfer of the very low power cap (10 uF at 10 volts that is to say 500 uj)
this is very low energy can be transported really easily through the wire without really heat creation.
So my question is if i measure the resistance of the 1mm diameter (Cap wire ) on the 5 centimeter length of this wire , none of my meter will be able to detect a so small resistance,
But if i measure the resistance of the inductor (the secondary winding of a MOT) i get 107 ohms .
So adding "a huge resistor" under the form of an inductor has a better efficiency than a bare solid wire ( with almost no resistance) ??
I am very open to all explanations
good night at all
Laurent
Quote from: woopy on April 06, 2011, 04:18:36 PM
In heat or something else ? in this case the 50 % energy are fully lost and unrecoverable yes or not ???. and in this case it is simply not possible to recover them or a part of them , because they are no more there ?? yes or not ?
So my question is , from where the energy of the Inductor and diode ( "believe circuit" as Mag named it ) comes from , to recreate much better efficiency in THE SAME ENERGY TRANSFER.
My bench experiment shows around 50 % efficiency in a direct transfer, that is transferring a cap to a cap without any resistance and about 85 % efficiency by ADDING RESISTANCE OF INDUCTOR AND DIODE ???
Please explanation
Hi wayne
i do not understand your 200 % gain in your calculation, for me the result is the same , if i charge 2 cap of 10 uF at 10 volts, they store the same energy as those same charged cap mounted in serie of course as per the bloody 1/2 X CAPACITY X VOLTAGE ^2.
good luck at all
Laurent
The efficiency of the inductor comes from the inductance part of the impedance which does not dissipate heat. Without the inductor, the impedance is the wire resistance + capacitance. With the inductor, the efficiency is demonstrated to be much higher. From what I read about Tesla, he was always thinking of resonance, and its importance may be in storing energy (parallel LC) or transferring of energy (series LC) as shown here and is of importance.
Woopy, since you asked, I just realized my error in the thinking about the parallel to series, there is no change in the total energy. Thanks for pointing it out. Had that mental error for a while.
/Wayne
Laurent,
You are correct. Even though the lead resistance is very low, it is a finite resistance, and therefore will dissipate energy, no matter how small. 50% of the energy in the source will be converted by the wire or leads to thermal energy, even if the wire resistance is only 1 milliOhm. It does not matter what the resistance is, the same 50% will be lost in the wire.
Now, if you introduce an element that can store and release energy in the form of a magnetic field (an inductor), and if this element has a relatively high Q (high inductance to resistance ratio L/R), then you have the right tool to transfer your energy efficiently from the source capacitor to the load capacitor.
If you could make an ideal inductor, your energy transfer would happen with 100% efficiency.
You may find it helpful to read the document attached to this post:
http://www.overunity.com/index.php?topic=8334.msg210142#msg210142
poynt99
Quote from: Magluvin on April 05, 2011, 06:16:25 PM
Ok folks. this is getting nuts. Good nuts. ;]
Something that is strange is, the way we think about how a circuit works when we even see it in a schematic. We forget things or we dont always see the "what ifs" in what is presented.
Remember me saying that it would be difficult to accomplish the switching and conversions of sometimes caps in parallel and then series throughout the process of running a starting source to the end result?
Well I was at work putting circuits together in my head. Well I decided to go against my instincts on something I had thought earlier. ;]
I have only the last part of the circuit to figure, and it is just a bunch of switching. And the timing for cutoff I think I will go with timing from a 555, possibly.
This sounds like we are making things worse. But the results are....
start with a 10uf "capacitance" at 1000v and process that through 3 stages of Believe Circuit, and we get 1320v into a 10uf "capacitance"
I will disclose this week. I have the switching down on the 3 stages, and its simple. Im not pulling a tito here. I just want to see if anyone gets it. Its an important exercise for the mind. It will open a door that you have never walked through and the door is here for the opening.
Tito keeps showing us the radiant energy receivers. And I think that many know of these and believe that you can get free energy there, but wheres the beef? Not everyone is interested in having 100 wire antenna in their back yards, as he suggested to make 100 of those circuits. No fun and try portability with that one.
The believe circuit needs no antenna. Just inductors and 1 precharge to get it started. Maybe the antenna can give you the precharge if you dont have a source to begin with.
I am flabbergasted at the level we have gotten to this point. And guess what, with more switching, we can add more stages. ;)
And get this, with each stage we have less voltage each time. ;)
I dont believe for 1 single solitary second that we loose anything in power transfers. If there is any, I really dont care cuz I dont see it. ;)
Common woopy, I know you and forest will figure this out. Run the sim, and start with any voltage you wish, I just like high as we lose less from voltage drop of the diode overall.
Then run 3 stages, 1 at a time. after each stage, reset the sim, replace the caps with succeeding larger values of double previous and just edit the source to the last voltage gotten, as I have described earlier. But run 3 stages.
At the end, what do you do with a "capacitance" of 40uf at 350v to get 1320v into a 10uf cap.?????? If I told you that an 80uf "capacitance" at about 225v would give us even more, would you believe? lol
Looks like we are losing here. lol Just think. My feet love me and no longer fear being on a plate. ;D
If you give in and cannot wait, I will tell. Just give it a shot. I have given some clear clues. But I wont tito anyone here. Sorry Teets. Its just how it is. :-*
Thinking caps men, the party has begun.
Mags believes You betcha
:D
Actually for hundreds or even thousand of the same pattern, we always have a shortcut, i just said that for those lazy ok ? ;)
like in mathematic equation, there is very long method and there is very short method, but one answer, as simple as that ;)
OK! sorry but we don't actually need stages by stages technique, but its okay for the meantime. ;)
its just actually a matter of D,C2,R technique we can reach that. 8)
As i always say battery is the best and reliable source as a starter.
no worry bro, i'll just be at the back watching and i am very very happy no matter where you come up ;)
Even you discover the best secret in coil technique then i am very very happy, no worries bro. :)
sorry for my interference don't worry i'll just cross by ;D
goodluck happy scruitinizing ;)
:)
Hey All
Well, after beating my head in since yesterday morning, I realize a big mistake I had been making along the way. It was the calculating the caps in series that gave us over the top voltages.
Big mistake. I had several tomes caught myself and kept doing it.
Yesterday mornings posts were where I had came to my senses on this.
I now have a chart made up to reference these issues in the future.
I have to apologize to all and especially Point and Tito as I had, in my feelings of big accomplishment, wrote some things that should not have been written.
So, the only thing that we have gained here is compensation for losses through transfer from source to receiver. Where normally we would lose 50% total, we can mostly eliminate that loss.
Its crazy that if we have a 10uf at 10v, connect another cap and each cap only holds 1/4 of the original energy. Total half. Sucks dont it?
Maybe it is better that we think of it in terms of tanks of air pressure than weighted water.
An issue that still sticks from yesterdays posts is, if we lost 50% in heat losses, how does the inductor overcome those losses?
Is the heat not generated any more with the inductor? As Point had said, that the inductor stored enough energy to overcome the heat losses. Well, if energy from the source was used to get the inductor going, did the inductor only consume half of the energy from the source and had the ability to overcome those losses? How is that?
Im not nearly done here. Even with my big mistake, last night I went through it all very thoroughly as to dotting my Ps and Qs. I ran through the 3 and 4 stages, and from a source of 1kv, still ended up in the mid to upper 900v range in a 10uf cap.
So have we gained anything? Have we avoided loss in energy transfer? Well it certainly looks like it. Can we save by using inductors in our circuits to avoid losses that exist everywhere?
Can we run a load with this circuit to get 2 times as much work done from our source, by overcoming these 50% losses?
Im not going to bring myself down over the mistake. It was a hard and good lesson learned. it wont be made again.
Ok, again, really sorry for bringing any false hopes here, as it truly was not my intention.
Mags
One more thing
I did a test on the sim. A direct transfer from 1 cap to another wit a diode and very low ohm resistor. It gave a complete transfer from on to another. I increased the resistance ad we fell back down to half the voltage in each.
I will do some real tests tonight on this. Were the wires acting as the inductor in this case, along with all the conductive plates in the cap and the diode?
So if I cannot get a complete transfer in the real world, did the sim perform a superconductive process with the very low ohm resistor?
Mags
Hi Magsy - In my book there's NOTHING lost. Just a good lesson learned - and for that you need the kind of integrity you've shown us here. Endless respect for that. I hope - if we're proved wrong - to be able to do the same. You've set a good example.
AND WELL DONE - nonetheless. Always a pleasure to challenge mainstream. Even if it's not an outright win.
Kindest as ever,
Rosie
.
It shows a lot of integrity and security to admit when one is wrong mags. You've earned my respect. ;)
Thanks for setting a good example for others.
.99
I know it's pretty hard not to get overly excited when you think you've discovered something great. It's even harder to listen to others when they try to explain things. You get the impression that they don't understand what you mean or are just trying to confuse you. Everyone needs to just calm down, sit back, and really think things through. It sounds like that's exactly what you did. kudos. I give you a lot of credit and respect for the work you do. You just ran into one of those "aw shit" moments. Keep up the good work and don't give up. You'll get it yet.
Hi all
Thank's Point 99 for the link , i have printed it and will study
no problem here Mag
You are right ,because if i am interested in those forum,it is to,learn something and of cousre from a lot of trial and error . I have made all my life like this and i am very happy because sometime you get big succes and some time big " fessee" ( another bloody thing when you do a "connerie " you have to pay for this and receive a fessée which is in general very injuste because all the experiment can be transfered on the very simple woopy formula ( 1 to 1 ) so one bad experiment = 1 good experience. So in this respect it is without any doubt OU . But you know it anyway.
But Mag please take the time to read the post of Groundloop here above, it is really interesting and relevant of what we are working on.
Further more ,for my blablating tonight , i think you are really right . And i am very aware that until now, nobody in this world can claim to have SEEN an atom, right ?, nobody here in this worl can claim to know how MASS is consisted from ( and there is a lot of phisicist here in Geneva who are trying to prove that the theory of MASS is correct by finding the BOSON OF HIGGS. And if they do not find it. all the theory wiil be to redirected from the beginning. Does photons exist out of mathematics and trace on complicated captors , and neutrinos .... ??. And so on so the the big bang is not sure at all only theory .
i am not saying that phisic is wrong at all. Because i use it every days in my work, and especially when i let my loan fall on my foot (it does not hurt very much :-\) but the effect is real especially on the smile of my wife.
So Mag you are right and go on freeing your spirit and your sense. You will kill no body unless you you eat your feet and legs and disappear in a Black hole of ???... and in this case we will miss you
Lot of pleasure here .. and i will go on the experiment
good luck at all
Laurent
and
Thanks a lot you guys, and girls. ;]
Tonight Im going to relax and I ordered a Stromboli from Dough Boys with mozzarella, peperoni mushroom and green pepper. After last nights dinner of feet, I need to hobble to the door for the delivery. =]
Was thinking about if the inductor can give us the gain from a losing situation, how do we put it to use in a positive situation? ;]
But ya know, not tonight. Tonight no flywheels, no electrons other than the ones in my tv set moving around. No capacitors, those sneaky lil buggers. Just me and my Stromboli for 2. Me = 2. =]
Thanks for your words. It means a lot. ;]
Mags
I took a bit of time here to read Groundloops paper.
Thanks GL. I feel like dejavue(spelling?) really bad. ;] I actually found that 703v by experimenting with the switch timing. Was looking for that point of cutoff so the caps would be equal. Crazy.
Woopy, what do you think about what you read? I read twice and have to read again. Shall we continue? =]
Ok no more tonight, 2 episodes of All In The Family are on. Memories.
Mags
Hi Mag
What a question ? Of course we have to go on.
Just a small rest and your brain will retrieve all the power. For a next experiment.
In the paper from the post of Groundloop at the end, there is another calculation where " Q = C x U " could become after transfer " sqrt(2) x C x U or 1.41-- x C x U, so an increase of 1.41.. in the output than input. I have to reread all this another time and perhaps also in original german language to fully understand the details.
but go an man go
remember the Woopy formula = one bad experiment = one plus in experience. And as the experience is in my yes more important than the missed experiment , this is clearly OU :D
and good luck at all
Laurent
hey Woopy
Lets see. So solution no. 1 solves my calculation issue, correct? So we are back folks. =]
So we are on the right track, just took a wrong turn. lets go back to stage 1. Stage 1 is half way there. Its funny how the numbers come together. start with 1000v, end up with 1400, skim 400, restart the process.
As a reminder, this is all just on paper so far folks. If GL's paper is correct for the first secret, then we only need 1 stage of believe circuit, and the secret no. 1 solves the cap energy transfer issue. No energy lost because no transfer of energy. Just physically manipulating the cap to change voltage and capacitance, to do what I have been trying to do for days here. We are 100%(on paper). ;]
Once I figured solution no. 1, I knew where we were. Like the last couple days have been bad on me. So Im feeling very good right now. Like somebody died, but came back to life a couple days later. And they look, walk and talk exactly like they did when they died. ;]
The first thing that came to mind is hard drive disks, stacked on a motor, but offset the center and mount all the disks oblong on the same side of rotation. Then we make another stack that would be stationary, with gaps between the disks. Now we have a continuously varying solution no. 1. ;] Maybe in a vacuum or just an airtight container to keep things clean.
Ya know, I remember this idea no. 1 way back. Never made a connection.
So no 1 gets rid of the transfer problem. And solution no. 2 is where we are with the believe circuit, of which I didnt invent. ;] I have also invented a new thing, its a rolling device I call a wheel. And I just invented a pet that leaves you with no responsibilities what so ever, I call it a rock. lol just fun on the situation. I really believe that most every way has been done. Were just on the beach with our metal detectors finding the lost coins.
I wonder if there is a drag in making the change. Gotta think of everything. There might be a drag or working against a pulling force, where as in the other direction or further rotation there may be an attraction, a pulling force. So if it is a rotating device, hopefully they work in harmony and not much energy used in the process.
Here is the paper again from GL in Word Pad form in case anyone does not have MS Word. ;)
Wow, Just think of all the best feelings we had a few days ago, and they were just ripped away like a tsunami. But can you Believe we are back from the brink! We back like lojack! Remember, on paper so far.
;]
Mags
Hmmm, the uploads would not go through. Said the limit was 2500kb limit as a single file. I retried by splitting them in 2 , and it said 500kb limit. Hmmm, why cant I upload anything without the limit getting smaller. Are we seeing suppression?
Can someone else try and convert the GL file to wordpad and upload it here for others that done have ms word? Wordpad shows all the graphs and drawings as well, so no heat losses in that transfer. ;]
Thanks to whomever gives it a shot.
Mags
Mags,
I may be wrong, but I suspect the author of the document GL posted, may have made at least one error.
The assertion is made in that document, that if the pre-charged capacitor's plate area is reduced by 1/2, the capacitor voltage will go up by a factor of 2.
I believe it will go up by a factor of about 1.41, not 2.
It may be quite a challenge to test this using a variable capacitor, as you are proposing. Most of these variable capacitors are values on the order of 100pF or so, and placing even a 10M Ohm voltage meter across the capacitor may load it enough, that you may not be able to obtain a stable enough measurement to see what the voltage actually increases to. Simple enough to test though, just charge the variable cap, remove the source, then place the meter on it. Does the voltage hold or begin discharging? If it discharges, how rapidly?
One alternative test that you may consider trying as a means to prove the theory, is to first, perfect your cap to cap energy transfer, using the same value capacitors. Get as close to 100% energy transfer as possible. You will be shooting for Vinitial x .707 on each capacitor. Try a MOT primary for your inductor.
Next, replace the empty capacitor to be charged with one at half the capacitance value. Now, run the energy transfer test again using the original source cap at the same initial voltage as before. Does the voltage on C2 charge to Vinitial x 1.000 (.707 x 1.414), or Vinitial x 1.414 (.707 x 2)?
This is not the same test as the variable capacitor test, but it may valid nonetheless.
.99
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8iONzbOfmzc
for me it looks similar to our problem with two capacitors and lost energy
I believe that energy really is radiated in radio waves which we know as a heat or other phenomena, but the real cause is oscillation between two caps and inductance of wires producing every 1/2 period of oscillation opposite dipole like bemf from video above. Ring -down process. Evidently adding other inductance we are changing frequency of oscillator and limiting radiation. Tesla said below 30khz makes almost no EM radiation.
Quote from: forest on April 09, 2011, 07:20:49 AM
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8iONzbOfmzc
for me it looks similar to our problem with two capacitors and lost energy
I believe that energy really is radiated in radio waves which we know as a heat or other phenomena, but the real cause is oscillation between two caps and inductance of wires producing every 1/2 period of oscillation opposite dipole like bemf from video above. Ring -down process. Evidently adding other inductance we are changing frequency of oscillator and limiting radiation. Tesla said below 30khz makes almost no EM radiation.
There is only a very small amount of EM radiation, right at the instant the source cap is connected. Remember also, that since we are using a diode, there is no oscillation.
Any loss in this process is a dissipation of energy in the form of heat, and only in the resistive elements of the circuit.
.99
wrt the variable capacitor test, presuming that the voltage doubles while making the plate area 1/2, then the energy stored in the capacitor will indeed increase. However, the increase in energy will have been as a result of physically moving the charges in one of the plates.
I'm not sure that the author took that into account. He seems to indicate that it would require less energy to move the plate than what is gained in the capacitor. Proving this may be difficult using such small capacitors.
.99
In part 2 of the document, the author shows a variation of the capacitor energy transfer experiment, but the end result is the same. 50% of the energy from the source capacitor was transferred to the charge capacitor, and with zero loss.
This is again, great news for being able to transfer energy from one place to another without loss, but I fail to see if he is alluding to some notion of overunity. What conclusions do others here draw from the document?
.99
Hi all
hehe and yooouupps ,i am getting lost here
What is the specification of "Q " seems to be , as it is discribed as the magnitude of charge ?? what is it ? , in respest of energy stored ?
please answer
Laurent
Hmm woopy
Well it looks like we cant use air pressure unless we have 2 vessels one for the low pressure side and one for the high side. I dont think we can look at it this way. Not sure yet.. Been working on things today. Gota run to the store.
Mags
Hi Mag and P.99
Sorry to insist but i can 't make my mind on this
At "Hyperphysics" they say that the energy stored in a cap can be assimilated to an air tank. So a capacitor is a condensor or as we name them in french a "condensateur".
And they speak of Q as the "magnitude of charge"
And the stored energy seems to be different of this Q
so if somebody would be kind enough to put all this in simple understandable word or drawing ?
And to go on my stacked brain on this energy transfer, i redo some graph,
And in graph 3 you can see that the transfer pipe are the same as per graph 2. So the same resistance and heat lost , as the pipe dimension are the same or do i miss something ?.
But aside those pipe resistance, we ADD the resistance of the inductor ((turbine (inductor) in the pipe motorising the flywheel)) .So the transfer is braked by the resistance of the pipe (heat lost ) and further more by the "turbine inductor-flywheel resistance)
And the transfer of the stored energy ,which should loose 50 % , due to pipe resistance not only does not decrease to 50% but it increases , or does simply improve to almost 98 %??????
I need to learn much more on the inductor secret please help
good luck at all
Laurent
Woopy,
Do you have an understanding about inductive and capacitive reactances and why they dissipate no power?
Just remember; a capacitor or an inductor can store and release energy, whereas a resistor can do neither, it can only burn off energy. A piece of wire at low frequencies is purely resistive, so it burns off energy when connected between a source cap and a charge cap. When you replace that piece of wire with an inductor, no energy can be burned off so it stores it, then releases it. As inductors are not ideal, there will always be some loss of energy.
Have a look at this page, it may help.
http://www.allaboutcircuits.com/vol_2/chpt_11/1.html
.99
Woopy
Think like this. ;]
Have 2 air tanks to represent each capacitor. When the tanks are at normal air pressure, consider the cap to have no charge. Here is an example.
When we do a cutoff (switch) before the source cap reaches 50%, and we have the inductor continue to pull from one side of the cap(lead or tank) to the other, to complete the charge form the freewheeling. So after cutoff, the flywheel is decompressing one side of the cap(air tank) and compressing that to the other side.
With a single tank representing a cap, we cant visualize how a cap in circuit actually works.
Think of an AV plug. 1 side at a time gets compressed and the other decompressed, 1 side at a time. So there can be the same situation with dual air tanks to represent the cap. ;]
I understand your trying to visualize it. ;] Hope that helps.
Ive been looking into getting the flywheel rolling with HV impulse driven by a stout primary. We envision a Tesla coil by this, but with the right rectifier and a particular cap and inductor size, the voltage on the sec dont have to be of great value loaded to charge the cap to usable more levels voltage. It just seems very easy to pump a small cap to kilo volts for discharge into the primary. The secondary flywheel is of heavy gauge wire and many turns.
Just some things Im trying.
I have some materials coming this week for variable cap experiments. Im trying for some high capacitance. Will be able to see if it takes a lot of work to vary. ;]
Mags
Thank's P.99 for the link it is very informing as the whole content of this link.
If i understand well, the reactance is applied in sinusoidal or AC input. So the inductor in AC does not consume energy. Does it also apply in DC ?
Hey Mag
I tried today in the sim, to stack on your circuit, 4 series of" * resistance 2 ohm and inductor 220 mH and cap 10 uF " all that in serie in the "believe circuit."
And almost each time i try it, the the soft does not converge. It seems that when the result should be more than 100 % the soft collapses ?
Please have a try and let me know.
than i tried in real life with 2 MOT and 2 reciever cap in serie. and i got also interesting results. The result is far better with the inductor in serie as per direct transfer. I wonder if we stack more of those serie of Cap-inductor, what would the result be?
good luck at all
Laurent
friends
do you remember modification of Mags circuit I posted with continuous oscillation between coil and one of plate of capacitor ?
I BELIEVE that tiger2007 posted circuit is a variation of this effect and this is real free energy , yet with very small amplitude in simulation.
HOWEVER remember that simulation is describing hypothetical coil , not the one with FINE FERRITE !!!!
tiger2007 circuit show amplitude up to 10volts from initial 12V battery impulse
I think this is the correct effect to investigate. Just simulation won't help too much. The dumping of capacitor is just by-product when blocking self-running oscillator is done.
Hi Mag
just a ( very bad ) picture of the modif on your circuit But you will understand no problem.
the DC input voltage in the main 10 uF cap is 1000 V
the resistors are 2 ohms
the inductors are 221 mH
the caps are 10uF
please try it , very interesting indeed
Laurent
Hey Forest and Woopy
Can you give a link to that circuit Forest? ;]
Ill try anything. =]
Woopy Are we looking for the charge that is on all the caps? ;]
Ill put the circuit to the sim in a bit. Just got home from work.
Ok shower and eats.
Back in a bit
Mags
Forest,
It is very hard for me to understand what Tiger 2007 is claiming?[on his Forum[Link below]]
Can you interpret ??
This is a post From "Choose user name" RE : Tiger 2007 [On the TK thread today]
Quote:
BTW,
another one selfrunning device by Tiger and his comments here: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bcftGrBEaL0
The creator is fully open to all and makes no secret. After some work, the bulb can be connected as it is so at the link above. That's beginning ;)
discussion here: http://bit.ly/hD2W5m
-----------------------------
Thanks
Chet
PS Mags
SUP!
Sup Chesta!
just tryin to keep on keepin on. ;]
Workin on figuring out Atom's ville. ;]
Mags
Hey Woopy
I ran the circuit. Im not sure how you are figuring your output.
Something I had learned from adding more stages was what amount of voltage and capacitance it takes to get finally 10uf at just <1000v.
If we have 10uf 1000v and transfer all the way to another 10uf cap through the BC, we can get nearly 100% transfer.
At 700v we need 20uf to get 10uf at just less than 1000v with BC
At 500v we need 40uf to get (same as above)
At 350v we need 80uf to get (same as above)
At 250v we need 160uf to get (same as above)
Its seems odd that if we have 1 10uf 1000v split down to 2 10uf 500v caps, we cant even get close to achieving 10u 1kv objective through the BC. I think is like 835v from 20uf 500v in full transfer..
So at 835, we can see a loss, heat, other. That is if 20u 500v is half of 10uf 1kv. When we have a conversion of 20uf 700v to 10 1kv, I can at least see that something is coming as a positive, otherwise I would have to consider 20u 700v to be half of 10uf 1kv. ;]
Im doing some things with the igniter circuit. You had it going in the cap shorting vids. ;] To make use of it, possibly instead of just shorting the cap, connect the cap to a BC. It intrigues me to get the Large inductor in the ingniter circuit to continue freewheeling. It keeps a steady state of flow at a low rate from source to charge the cap.
This is key. Like Point and forest explained we are working with a 1/4 cycle LC in the BC I think, lol tired, correct me if Im wrong.
In the igniter, if the large inductor is rolling all the time, then the cap gets charged from the source, but just with less work from the source. Lol again , theory. Tesla said it was an eff improvement. The source doesnt have to bang a charge into the cap when needed and depleted. The source doesnt feel the pulses in the circuit beyond the large inductor. Im just trying to mix it up a bit.
Mags
I keep having thoughts of using a cap that has 1kv in it, or what ever voltage, just 1k per say. And we never take from that cap, we only add it in series with another cap to raise the total voltage for potential purposes. I dont quite have it clear as to how I should go about it.
There seem to be some varying ideas as the words, dont kill the dipole.
If we added in series, a cap at 1000v, which can give us larger potentials than we have been dealing with, any time we wish. But we must never allow that cap to become bellow 1kv.
At times it makes some sense, and then I think, well, if its in series, it WILL lose voltage.
So we start with a cap thats 1kv as a reciever and never let it die bellow 1kv.. lol Again, just ideas so far.
Mags
Mags
Read Reply #591. I have slow computer and watched only first minute of (unconnected!) oscillations. Amplitude is low but coil in simulation has no ferrite core and we can't simulate bifilar,right ? So multiply obtained 4 volt by ferrite permeability and bifilar energy gain.
Quote from: woopy on April 12, 2011, 02:32:16 PM
...
If i understand well, the reactance is applied in sinusoidal or AC input. So the inductor in AC does not consume energy. Does it also apply in DC ?
...
Hi Laurent,
The answer to your question above is no. If you apply DC to a transformer or an inductance, the current will be determined by the coil DC resistance,
after the moments of switch-on. At the instant of switch-on the DC voltage to a transformer or inductance, the current is blocked by the L self inductance plus the copper resistance and after about 5 L/R time the current keeps to the V/R value (R is the coil resistance, V is the DC voltage).
A side note to this: a constant DC current applied will bias the core towards the saturation area in most of the cases and it will keep at that area of the B-H curve, depending on its value, on the number of turns and on the core properties.
Another side note to the AC case you wrote
"So the inductor in AC does not consume energy." : It does not consume real or effective energy but it consumes reactive energy (VAR) which is normally small for a transformer for instance when it is unloaded.
Gyula
Thank's Gyula
very good explanation as usual. :)
So as we have no sinusoidal AC but more a pulse DC in the believe circuit, how is the really important improvement in the transfer cap to cap possible.?
What is the "mechanic" of the flywheeling effect in the diode- inductor pair in the" Believe Circuit "of Magluvin?
thank's
Laurent
Quote from: woopy on April 13, 2011, 09:02:42 AM
So as we have no sinusoidal AC but more a pulse DC in the believe circuit, how is the really important improvement in the transfer cap to cap possible.?
What is the "mechanic" of the flywheeling effect in the diode- inductor pair in the" Believe Circuit "of Magluvin?
thank's
Laurent
From this post:
http://www.overunity.com/index.php?topic=8841.msg281256#msg281256
Specifically:
QuoteJust remember; a capacitor or an inductor can store and release energy, whereas a resistor can do neither, it can only burn off energy. A piece of wire at low frequencies is purely resistive, so it burns off energy when connected between a source cap and a charge cap. When you replace that piece of wire with an inductor, no energy can be burned off so it stores it, then releases it.
.99
Seems funny that if there is resistances in any circuit, to be able to transfer 1000v from a 10uf cap to another 10uf cap, we can get up to 99.9% transferred. And usually the source cap holds the balance left over of which voltage wise, the totals add up to 1000v.
Seems like resistance is just non existent in these cases. ;]
We do have current flow. Why no losses in inherent resistances in the circuit? CURRENT FLOWED. With apparently no heat being generated at all in any resistances. Think of the BC's function. The source cap is going down in voltage and the receiver is going up. Some where along the way, both of those caps reach 500v at the same time while one is going up and the other is going down!! Are you making a connection?
Here in the BC we have a point that if the caps were removed from the circuit, each would hold 500v, just like a direct transfer, just like the 50% heat losses in a direct transfer. So can we say that the inductor stored the other 50% while still having the 50% heat loss?
Try the circuit on a bench. No recycle cutoff, just hold the switch till transfer is complete. 10v 1000uf source on a BC with a 0v 1000uf receiver. When the source cap reaches 5v, the receiver is also 5v, no doubt.
So think about this. We got the flywheel going very well during the first half of the cycle, all while losing 50% in heat, and still able to transfer near 100% of source to receiver. And the source contains the balance when all is said and done.
SOOO, during the first half cycle of the BC, we have expended 50% in heat, AND got the flywheel going enough to complete the transfer.
Now, IF we have expended 50% in heat during the first half of the cycle( proof of 500v in each cap at the same time during the cycle resembled the losses physics quotes, No? =] ) And we got the flywheel going during that half cycle, where did the expenditure into getting the inductor going come from? Can you spot or show that it came from, umm from, well where? Free? ;]
Its a bit silly isnt it? ;]
I get the phase thing, but over time, the current flowed. Resistance should have intervened somewhere along the way during a near 100% transfer. But we suffer super resistance losses in direct transfer. Monster losses compared to microscopic.
Still smells fishy. ;]
Mags
Sorry,
You've lost me mags.
Could you formulate one or two questions directly pertaining to what you are wondering about, or what your confusion is about? I'm sure I can answer your questions if you could just nail down exactly what you are asking.
Thanks,
.99
Hi p.99
My question is very precise
I think that in the "Believe Circuit " we are not on an AC system, but in a DC system. So the reactance of an inductor , Which in AC system can transfer energy without lost of energy ( ok Guyla that is not totally true, because the VAR, but i try to get my response as simple as possible ), because the sinusoidal gain and lost due to the sine wave (pos and neg), does not apply here. Right ?
In a DC system, the inductor effectively stores energy and than can release it but certainly not so much as it originally stored it. Because inherent resistance, Right ?
The inductor in the "BC" is installed between 2 cap and is connected to those 2 cap with resistiv wires , one wire on each side of the inductor . Right ?
As those 2 pieces of wire, has a small but real resistance , they should from themself destroy 50 % of the tranfered energy anyway, as they do in a normal transfer , i mean , without the inductor . Right ?
So if i don't miss something , in the BC (Believe Circuit ) the inductor has not only to be almost free working (i mean almost without any resistance ,that is no lost, which is surely not the case) , but it has also to recover the lost of the 2 adjacent wires, which in normal transfer, should destroy as i insist to remind ,50 % of the transfered energy. Right?
And finally i think that we have to consider not only the inductor , but the "mariage " or wedding pair of inductor and diode. because in my real life testing this effect NEEDS the pair. Without inductor and only a diode= no improvement of the transfer.
without diode and only inductor = no improvement of the transfer.
thank's to all for the good work
I am very happy to learn so much with you
and good luck at all
Laurent
Quote from: woopy on April 13, 2011, 05:24:22 PM
Hi p.99
My question is very precise
As those 2 pieces of wire, has a small but real resistance , they should from themself destroy 50 % of the tranfered energy anyway, as they do in a normal transfer , i mean , without the inductor . Right ?
You are correct in the previous, but not in the above quoted statement.
I have already posted this information, but sometimes it takes a while for things to sink in. It is also fully explained in that document I referenced.
When you introduce an inductance, you want to use an inductor of relatively high Q factor; that is the ratio of the inductor's inductance divided by it's resistance is high. For example, if we have an air-core coil of 100 turns using 14AWG wire, we may have an inductance of only 40uH, with a DCR of say 0.05 Ohms. If we insert a high permeability core, the inductance may increase by a factor of 1000, yet the DCR remains the same at 0.05 Ohms. This latter coil will have a Q factor roughly 1000 times higher than the air-core.
Once the inductance becomes appreciable, the impedance it presents to the circuit dominates the impedance of the wiring, and so rather than the energy getting burned up in the wiring, it gets absorbed by the inductor (which dissipates very little energy), which then releases it again to the charge capacitor. There will always be some finite resistance and finite and practical inductance, so the process can never be 100%, but we can get very close.
Quote
And finally i think that we have to consider not only the inductor , but the "mariage " or wedding pair of inductor and diode. because in my real life testing this effect NEEDS the pair. Without inductor and only a diode= no improvement of the transfer.
without diode and only inductor = no improvement of the transfer.
thank's to all for the good work
I am very happy to learn so much with you
and good luck at all
Laurent
Yes, for energy transfer the diode is required. ;)
.99
Ouups P.99
i fergot the precise question
I precisely ask you if you can explain me how the pair of inductor -diode stores energy without lost in the BC, are they almost supra conducting ?, and if not how can they store so much energy to overcome theyre own resistance plus the resistance of the adjacent wires and the associated tremendous 50 % lost ?
i hope not to be ridiculous here , but 2 years ago i did not know what a electron was , and be certain that today i always have no more clue :D
P.99 i am serious here . I am trying to understand what is going on. So please try to answer my question in words or example or drawings that i can understand.
thank's
laurent
hi P.99
thank's for answering so fast
we are crossing the reply no problem :D
I have a small problem to understand your explanation because you evoke " inpedance " do you mean that in the " BC " we are in an AC situation ?.
I think we are in a DC situation and in this case we are in a "resistance " situation.
OK i have to go sleeping
Always happy to learn
Laurent
No problem Laurent.
Sometimes it is better to think about inductors not in terms of AC or DC, but in terms of what the current is doing.
Ask yourself this question:
"Is the inductor current changing?"
If the answer is "YES", then you treat the inductor as a resistance that changes depending on how fast the current is changing through it. The faster the current changes, the higher the resistance (impedance).
So, in the case of the capacitor energy transfer experiment, the current is changing, and therefore the inductor will offer some impedance (similar to resistance, but frequency dependent and with a phase shift) to the circuit. If the inductance is large enough in comparison to the total wire resistance, most of the energy will be absorbed by the inductance rather than being burned in the total wire resistance. Therefore, more of the energy will be transferred to the second capacitor rather than being lost in the resistive wiring.
Make sense?
.99
Hey Point
I will reply to your request, but first I would like to see if anyone else understands where Im coming from with my last post. Most that have been following here should get the drift in what Im saying. Ive been saying it for a while. ;]
Woopy? Forest? Anyone? Do you get my drift? ;]
Mags
Quote from: poynt99 on April 13, 2011, 06:53:44 PM
No problem Laurent.
Sometimes it is better to think about inductors not in terms of AC or DC, but in terms of what the current is doing.
Ask yourself this question:
"Is the inductor current changing?"
If the answer is "YES", then you treat the inductor as a resistance that changes depending on how fast the current is changing through it. The faster the current changes, the higher the resistance (impedance).
So, in the case of the capacitor energy transfer experiment, the current is changing, and therefore the inductor will offer some impedance (similar to resistance, but frequency dependent and with a phase shift) to the circuit. If the inductance is large enough in comparison to the total wire resistance, most of the energy will be absorbed by the inductance rather than being burned in the total wire resistance. Therefore, more of the energy will be transferred to the second capacitor rather than being lost in the resistive wiring.
Make sense?
.99
Another way to say it is, as long as the currents are changing, it is considered A/C. So in our circuit, from start to finish, we can say we are dealing with AC, as varying DC can be considered AC, as in an AC signal with dc bias ;]
As for the energy is expended and stored into the inductor, I fail to see how it is that the resistances in the circuit are ignored by the current in any situation. And virtually no heat is produced and losses by way of producing heat are seemingly nil? Current did flow through the resistances, didnt it? More will be in my reply. ;]
Mags
Mags,
Yes, current still flows through all the resistive wiring, but it will be a much lower current compared to that if the circuit consisted of the wiring and caps alone.
P = I2R correct?
So, since the R of the wiring has not changed, but the current has been reduced by a lot (when we utilize an inductor), there will be less power dissipated in the R of the wiring.
.99
Quote from: poynt99 on April 13, 2011, 06:53:44 PM
The faster the current changes, the higher the resistance (impedance).
.99
Is this what you really meant to say?
If it is, I can not even come close to grasping that concept and I need references to re-educate myself that a higher impedance speeds current flow.
mikemogo
Quote from: mikemongo on April 13, 2011, 07:34:49 PM
Is this what you really meant to say?
If it is, I can not even come close to grasping that concept and I need references to re-educate myself that a higher impedance speeds current flow.
mikemogo
Yes, that is what I meant to say.
However, you've interpreted it backwards; A higher rate of change of current through the inductor produces a higher impedance across it's terminals.
Inductive Reactance: X
L = 2Ï€FL
.99
Quote from: Magluvin on April 13, 2011, 07:16:15 PM
Another way to say it is, as long as the currents are changing, it is considered A/C. So in our circuit, from start to finish, we can say we are dealing with AC, as varying DC can be considered AC, as in an AC signal with dc bias ;]
Mags
If you want to be technically correct, then you must not think of pulsed DC as AC. "Alternating Current" literally means that the current alternates
direction i.e. a voltage going both above and below ground or the reference level, or a current flowing away from, then to the source.
Pulsed DC is a varying current that becomes lower or higher in magnitude over time, but the direction or polarity of the current is always either positive or negative.
.99
Quote from: poynt99 on April 13, 2011, 07:26:22 PM
Mags,
So, since the R of the wiring has not changed, but the current has been reduced by a lot (when we utilize an inductor), there will be less power dissipated in the R of the wiring.
.99
Hey Point
Well, if we added a 5kohm resistor to reduce the current, or even a lot, 5mohm, and we let a 10uf 1000v transfer to another 10uf 0v and we wait till they level out to 500v each. Should not our losses be different here with the reduction of current? As you described. ;]
Mags
Exactly Mags, exactly
This is the problem. Why loss is always 50% not matter what resistance is used ? Looks like a law NOT RELATED to resistance, something is cleverly hidden.
And ohm law is probably around it to cover.
We expect that the amount of resistance would modify loss amount but it only change the time length of event.
Thus I conclude it has to be an oscillation which loss 50% between two caps and strangely enough this is the same circuit Tesla used to generate longitudinal radiant energy as presented by Dole.
If you consider equation Q= C*V and suppose energy is not lost during transfer you will end up with charge loss.
Now consider what I shown in my circuit mod. continuous oscillations when circuit is unpowered.
What I propose is radical : 50% of energy flow around circuit
and that part is lost and that loss is modulated by oscillations (imagine flow of water between two containers with open valve - it is not a single step transfer, it always roll back and forth before going into rest state) - the output is heat which is radiant energy !
Now the problem is that our "adored" Maxwell theory hide that and cover in many places , and it only stick out from various holes as a BEMF or reactive power or heat loss.
of course I must re-think this idea much more but the obvious connection with Tesla "harpin circuit" is striking.
Hi all
thank's for your very informative answers and patience.
I very slowly make up my mind on this subject. Not intuitive at all. But very interesting.
@Forest
i think you speak of this circuit and the high frequency (green ) on the left. I got also this type of frequency after the transfering (in the middle is the inductor trace on the BC). The amplitude of the frequency depends at what voltage you stop the source cap and leave the inductor work alone going on the transfer. Notice that i tried to stop this frequency by shorting the inductor (upper small circuit)
hope this helps
Laurent
Quote from: Magluvin on April 14, 2011, 01:00:10 AM
Hey Point
Well, if we added a 5kohm resistor to reduce the current, or even a lot, 5mohm, and we let a 10uf 1000v transfer to another 10uf 0v and we wait till they level out to 500v each. Should not our losses be different here with the reduction of current? As you described. ;]
Mags
No, the loss will be 50% again.
The goal involves more than just reducing the current; you need to shift the balance as to where the energy is being absorbed. When you add the inductor, you are shifting the balance of absorbed energy away from the circuit resistance to the inductor and it's magnetic field, where it gets stored then transferred to the second cap.
.99
hey Point
I hear what you are saying. No ill will toward you, but Im not seeing the logic in that.
See, it is also important to all whom are reading this. If I had not made my previous post, the the only explanation others would have from you is that the inductor reduces the current in the circuit to the point that very little is lost in heat related losses.....
Mags,
Yes, current still flows through all the resistive wiring, but it will be a much lower current compared to that if the circuit consisted of the wiring and caps alone.
P = I2R correct?
So, since the R of the wiring has not changed, but the current has been reduced by a lot (when we utilize an inductor), there will be less power dissipated in the R of the wiring.
.99
But now there is more involved according to your last post. ;]
But I still find your reasons incomplete.
Consider 2 caps, 1 with 1000v and one has no charge. If we use and inductor and diode, we have almost a complete transfer from source to receiver caps.
Now consider the same 2 caps, 1 with 1kv and one at 0v, but we have a resistor "only" between the 2 caps. This resistor will be of a value that in comparison to the previous consideration above, the resistor cap setup will make full transfer, losing 50% and both caps will end up with 500v, but in half the time that the circuit with inductor/diode makes its complete transfer.
The reason for half of the time will be clear in a moment.
We set these 2 circuits side by side. We close the switch on both.
The source cap will start losing voltage potential in the inductor/diode circuit as fast as the resistor circuit. By the time the resistor circuit only circuit reaches 500v on each cap, the inductor/diode circuit will also have 500v on each cap.
There is a point in time in the inductor/diode circuit, that the caps, source and receiver are at 500v each, while the circuit is still completing, or in the middle of, its near 100% conversion.
That means that the caps, in total, at that time, are at the 50% loss point. Just like the resistor circuit. The same dang loss in time.
We can all agree that the inductor is building its field during the time that the source cap is of higher voltage than the receiver cap.
And once the source cap, in the middle of the near complete conversion, is equal or less than the receiver cap voltage, there is no longer a build up, but a decline(collapse)in the inductors field.
So during the time it takes for the caps in both circuits to reach 500v each, that is the time during the transfer that the inductor was storing its energy.
So now if we have just the inductor/diode circuit, and we close the switch to get things rolling, we have another switch across the inductor and diode also. So when we see the 2 caps reach that 500v each at the same time, call it a crossover point, we close the switch shorting out the inductor/diode. The caps will come to rest at 500v each, due to the elimination of the inductor/diode from the continuity path of the caps.
So here, our caps, in total have suffered a 50% loss, just as the resistor circuit did, at this point in time.
But now, since we closed the switch across the inductor/diode, the inductor is still spinning, in the same direction through the diode and switch, looped. It still wants to push current, till it dies down due to resistance which puts a damper, and limits the current flow.
If we added a 1kohm resistor in that loop, the inductors freewheeling action would die quickly due to the limitation of the resistor to pass the current that the inductor would like to continue. Damper
So if in the inductor/diode circuit, we can say that during the time that the caps reached the crossover point, that was when the energy was stored in the inductor.
If we got that inductor going during that 50% loss time, when the caps reached 500v each, then where did the energy come from to induce storage into the inductor? Was there a larger loss from the source than 50% during that time? I say not. Or can we say that getting the inductor rolling doesnt cost anything here? Fishy ;]
We already see that in both circuits, when activated at the same time, they both reach 500v in all caps at the same time. So at that point, we have an equal loss in both circuits. But in the inductor/diode circuit, we have the inductor still going.
So how do we assess where the energy that was stored in the inductor came from?
If in both situations we disconnect the caps from the circuit when they are all at 500v each, we have a similar situation with the 50% loss but the flywheel keeps on rolling with the capability to recover most all of that 50% loss.
I dont think things are working they way you describe. Not to be a dick, just to be truthful. =] or maybe there IS more than you have described. ;]
Respectfully
Mags
Does my previous post make sense to anyone here? =]
Mags
Quote from: Magluvin on April 14, 2011, 01:05:20 PM
hey Point
I hear what you are saying. No ill will toward you, but Im not seeing the logic in that.
See, it is also important to all whom are reading this. If I had not made my previous post, the the only explanation others would have from you is that the inductor reduces the current in the circuit to the point that very little is lost in heat related losses.....
But now there is more involved according to your last post. ;]
But I still find your reasons incomplete.
I dont think things are working they way you describe. Not to be a dick, just to be truthful. =] or maybe there IS more than you have described. ;]
Respectfully
Mags
It hasn't been my intention to spell everything out completely for you and Laurent.
I have been providing you with bits and pieces of key facts so that you may contemplete them and hopefully figure it out on your own.
You may still disagree, but I assure you that everything I have told you is correct.
.99
Mags
Simply speaking : magnetic field around wire should be a free gift.Why ? Because how do you explain that magnetic field is stable if you run circuit a minute or a day or a year. It does not add to itself, it's a response of ether to balance electric current density inside wire.
Quote from: forest on April 14, 2011, 02:18:29 PM
Mags
Simply speaking : magnetic field around wire should be a free gift.Why ? Because how do you explain that magnetic field is stable if you run circuit a minute or a day or a year. It does not add to itself, it's a response of ether to balance electric current density inside wire.
I absolutely agree with you forest. Good point.
Rosemary
.
Quote from: Loner on April 14, 2011, 02:31:01 PM
Forest, good point, except, the field is "Free" only when not changing. To alter the field strength or size requires input or output, depending on direction. Conventional theory states this is exactly in for out, minus circuit losses, but as is slowly being noticed, that is not always true. (Remember, transformer...) Defining that point is why I'm watching this very informational discussion.
(To EE's, I understand this concept is not acceptable. Live with it. sorry for that remark, but true reality is always stranger than fiction.)
I think Tesla understood it also and instead of fighting against changing which is useless he make it freely changing and the effect "escaped" from circuit as 50% gain, not loss ;D
You see if this 50% is free gift then the clever man will try to divide part which is inside wire from the part which is around and collect both . Now you see what next ,right ??
wow moving fast here
thank's to all
@ Mag i really be with you in your post 688
now just before going to sleep 1 more question
if the connecting wire for the DIRECT transfer (without inductor and diode, that is cap to cap) could be supraconductor (i mean no loss in at all ), would we also get 50 % energy lost in the transfer ? I think yes and you ?
good night at all
Laurent
Quote from: poynt99 on April 14, 2011, 01:57:29 PM
It hasn't been my intention to spell everything out completely for you and Laurent.
I have been providing you with bits and pieces of key facts so that you may contemplete them and hopefully figure it out on your own.
You may still disagree, but I assure you that everything I have told you is correct.
.99
It may have sounded that I was charging you with neglect, but we are trying to look deep here. Just in case you have not noticed. ;]
The Point I was trying to make was, we are looking beyond just simple explanations. It may be that I just find out the hard way. ;]
So I was exclaiming, that your answer was not as definitive as what we were looking for. And as you said, your intention is not to be spelling it all out for us. So we continue......
Mags
Quote from: Magluvin on April 14, 2011, 05:18:08 PM
It may have sounded that I was charging you with neglect, but we are trying to look deep here. Just in case you have not noticed. ;]
The Point I was trying to make was, we are looking beyond just simple explanations. It may be that I just find out the hard way. ;]
So I was exclaiming, that your answer was not as definitive as what we were looking for. And as you said, your intention is not to be spelling it all out for us. So we continue......
Mags
From my perspective, I offer an insight and some key information, then I see if that is understood. If it appears so, then I move on and offer more information based on questions that arise from the previous info. As we proceed, we can go more in-depth if required. That is how I gauge the information I offer.
So far no one has acknowledged or been able to demonstrate that they understand the fundamentals I have presented so far....and you feel you are ready to jump into more detail already?
.99
Quote from: forest on April 14, 2011, 02:18:29 PM
Mags
Simply speaking : magnetic field around wire should be a free gift.Why ? Because how do you explain that magnetic field is stable if you run circuit a minute or a day or a year. It does not add to itself, it's a response of ether to balance electric current density inside wire.
Hmm. How can I say it in another way.
My serious question is, if we compare the 2 circuits, the first circuit using an inductor/diode, and the second with just a resistor.
I cannot say that everyone understands, that during the period of discharge from the source cap, when the 2 caps, in either circuit, lost 50% at the "point" that the caps reached 500v each, During that time in both circuits is 50% is gone, hastalabyby 50%.
All well knowing that at this crossover point, circuit inductor/diode is not done yet, as the inductor is rolling and has enough energy to suck the source cap just about dry, and pump it into the receiver cap. The inductor is loaded with enough to cover those losses, ALREADY LOST IN PROCESS, by nearly 100%. If I never looked in the middle of the process, and just knew what was in and what was out, we would not be filling these pages today with this stuff. =]
But I did look in the middle. Things dont add up.
Answer this at this time. Would you agree that when all caps are at 500v at an instant in time, can you say that only so much energy from the source caps(both circuits) have delivered the same amount of energy? Has to be. Because if we removed those caps from the circuits when they are at the crossover point, All caps will measure 500v each. We have to agree on that. ??? Other than that, we still have the inductor spinning a way in the inductor/diode circuit.
If we could swap out the inductor at the crossover point while the circuit is in the middle of transfer, when both caps are at 500v, from the inductor/diode circuit into the resistors place in circuit 2, I bet that inductor would take that 500v in the source cap and pump it to the receiver cap. And our caps left in the disassembled inductor/diode circuit will be standing with a 50% loss. And that 50% loss occurred during the charging of the inductor. So why do we not have any MORE energy lost from the disassembled circuit, the energy that got the inductor going in the first place?
So during this one way discharge, during the time that the source caps are declining in potential, where can we say that energy beyond the 50% lost already, got the inductor to its peak at this time? Just because the inductor was in the circuit, should we say that the 50% loss came from getting the inductor going? What a coincidence. ;]
I suppose that the magnetic field in the inductor just reaches out and just nullifies any currents running through all resistances in the circuit and reduces heat losses in those resistances to virtually nil.
I only see the 50% loss. And I see we have a flywheel all spun up while were losing the 50%, the same exact 50% that is lost while doing a direct transfer.
You know, if we do a direct transfer from cap to cap, we have a high freq oscillation. If we are able to disconnect the caps at a certain time, a time when that discharge induced oscillation only makes it to the peak of the other phase, 1 half cycle, I bet that we see a near 100% complete conversion. We still have inductance, just small, thus high freq osc. And we simulated a diode by disconnecting at the reverse phase peak. Same as inductor/diode BC.
We didnt lose 50%? Only if we let it oscillate to its death.
If we add just an inductor and no diode, we get a longer, lower freq oscillation.
The only reason we lost 50% in a cap to cap transfer, is that we let it happen. We let the oscillations continue to decline till the caps are at 500v each.
If we have a larger value resistor involved in a cap to cap direct transfer, there could be no oscillations, at least not noticeable with the naked eye. We should just see dc declining in the source and inclining in the receiver. resistor-damper.
Mags ;]
Quote from: poynt99 on April 14, 2011, 05:42:12 PM
From my perspective, I offer an insight and some key information, then I see if that is understood. If it appears so, then I move on and offer more information based on questions that arise from the previous info. As we proceed, we can go more in-depth if required. That is how I gauge the information I offer.
So far no one has acknowledged or been able to demonstrate that they understand the fundamentals I have presented so far....and you feel you are ready to jump into more detail already?
.99
Hey Point
Lol I hope we are still cool here. Lets just say that maybe it would be easier to understand the simple explanation of heat losses vs virtually no heat losses with inductors, if we knew the details of how it occurred. =] Because for some reason, from what I see, the details better be good to pull me from this apparent rut Im in. ;]
I read in a pdf that inductors should be added to secondaries of transformers and the windings of motors, as these would be advantageous. This is my next project.
Mags
Quote from: woopy on April 14, 2011, 05:00:27 PM
wow moving fast here
thank's to all
@ Mag i really be with you in your post 688
now just before going to sleep 1 more question
if the connecting wire for the DIRECT transfer (without inductor and diode, that is cap to cap) could be supraconductor (i mean no loss in at all ), would we also get 50 % energy lost in the transfer ? I think yes and you ?
good night at all
Laurent
You know, if we do a direct transfer from cap to cap, we have a high freq oscillation. If we are able to disconnect the caps at a certain time, a time when that discharge induced oscillation only makes it to the peak of the other phase, 1 half cycle, I bet that we see a near 100% complete conversion. We still have inductance, just small, thus high freq osc. And we simulated a diode by disconnecting at the reverse phase peak. Same as inductor/diode BC.
Well at this point I believe that if it were superconducting, caps also superconducting, no resistance......
In a direct cap to cap would resort in a never ending oscillation.
But a better question would be what would happen in the BC while superconducting. Would we see a different outcome than a normal world BC? Maybe the source cap would completely deplete its charge and even go reverse polarity, and the receiver gets bumped to beyond the original source potential. That would be special, no?
As for losses. What is in the details, with and without the inductor?
Does the inductor go negative resistance to accomplish not allowing other resistances in the circuit to produce heat while current flows through them?
Other than that, I still see current flowing through those circuit resistances, with or without inductors and said losses being had.
Mags
Superconducting does not change much. It depends on frequency. With low inductance we would have high frequency and still heat loss because of radiation (energy outside wire cannot "glue" to wire when abruptly changed). Tesla said no more then 30khz to limit EM.
Now,I think I found mechanical analogy. Car crash.
Normally car crash generate radiant energy : heat sound and so on. It destroy vehicles.High frequency.
Not very long time ago there was clever man in Poland , Lucjan ÅÄ...giewka. He invented and patented a bumper with internal flywheel. Depending on construction this bumper was able to convert large part of crash energy into high speed internal flywheel effect which was then radiated as heat and sound much longer then the crash incident itself. Watch also Stan Deyo videos how he explained the ufo. Very interesting.The same about Bruce De Palma.Where are those inventions ? Buried...
Inductor is doing the same thing I think.
http://www.project-epar.pl/wp-content/uploads/2010/05/skanowanie0006.pdf
Hello all
The energy transfer between two caps stops when the voltage potential across each cap is equal. So you will always have energy left in the source cap. So with two caps of equal value you can at most get only 1/2 of the energy to transfer. Now if you add an inductor and diode between the caps then it is possible to get more energy to transfer between the caps. This happens because the inductor will store up energy in the form of a magnetic field.
When the source cap discharges through the inductor, the inductor builds up a magnetic field that depends on the current flow. This field is maintained as long as the current flow does not decrease. When the current flow starts to decrease (the voltage at the receiving cap is approaching the source cap) then the magnetic field collapses and imparts energy (current) in the direction of the receiving cap. The collapsing magnetic field causes the coil to act as a voltage source (coil internal resistance and induced current from the collapsing magnetic field) in series with the source cap which boosts the voltage seen by the receiving cap. The receiving cap gets more energy than it would in a simple energy transfer between caps.
You can model the coil as a secondary energy source that siphons off energy at the start and adds it back in at the end.
:)
hi all
yes it is going on, thank's to all
on my latest post, i asked , what would be the result if ONLY the transfering wire should be supraconductive , but not the cap.
the idea was to isolate the transfer system.
So what happen if i have a main normal source cap which is connected by a supraconductive wiring to the normal receiver cap ?.
I think that, in this ( virtual ) circuit , the transfer will oscillate some time and the cap resistance will slowly damp the oscillations to the final result = 50% lost of the stored energy.
So i think that whatever is the transfer mean ( resistive or supraconductive ), and this OF COURSE WITHOUT THE COUPLE INDUCTOR /DIODE, the direct transfer maximum efficiency from a cap to a cap can not avoid 5o% energy lost.
And if this transfer is so good because it loses ONLY 50 % energy lost , that means it is in fact 100 % efficient ????? i mean it is no way to get a better result in a direct transfer.
And it is totally logical if we consider the energy stored as the pressure in an air tank
if we have 2 same capacity tanks , one is 100 bars and the second is 0 bar if we transfer the first tank in the second of same capacity, and this by any means, the pressure will be 1 / 2
in each tank . So the total energy stored now in the 2 tanks together, , Weird but true as per the "bloody formula 1/2 * C * v^2 , is the half ( 1/2)
And of course all better result should be considered as an anomaly ? I mean that the adding of a DIODE / INDUCTOR in the transfer circuit which improve the efficiency of the transfer is to be considered as an anomaly ?
ouups tired i go sleeping
good luck at all
laurent
think that way : plain transfer means two capacitors connected with a straight wire.However this wire has capacitance, very small indeed. Transfer is not "one way shot" but very high frequency oscillations.
50% energy is lost and this has to be additionally checked , because this loss maybe due to breaking dipole (50% energy floating around is radiated) or maybe due to symmetry of circuit.
Can you try dump one charged cap into two empty caps in parallel or in series ? Is there still 50% energy loss ?
Look http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xx2sMj765fY
Isn't that confirmation of very long oscillations ? What is missing is a receiver not influencing transmitter.
Hi Forest
thank's for the link to the video but really sorry i don't understand what the guy is demonstrating.
Can you explain please
Thank's
Laurent
He demonstrated just a blocking generator which once started from battery is working about 4 hours producing continuous oscillation. Like Joule thief ringer.
We don't want so long oscillations, just from single impulse oscillation should work steadily for a few seconds, and of course with much higher voltage. Now the key is to catch radiated energy by receiver and of course it must be in fixed frequency.
Isn't that like echo ? Releasing small amount of energy in very short time can generate very short by intense sound. No energy gain is here, however if you are in the mountains you got multiple echo and suddenly it is heard as long roaring thunder.
Quote from: forest on April 16, 2011, 03:41:55 AM
think that way : plain transfer means two capacitors connected with a straight wire.However this wire has capacitance, very small indeed. Transfer is not "one way shot" but very high frequency oscillations.
A wire has a small
inductance, not capacitance. Then, the frequency of damped oscillation is determined by:
1/2π√LCQuote
50% energy is lost and this has to be additionally checked , because this loss maybe due to breaking dipole (50% energy floating around is radiated) or maybe due to symmetry of circuit.
Can you try dump one charged cap into two empty caps in parallel or in series ? Is there still 50% energy loss ?
The energy is lost because the wire is
mostly resistive (i.e. Low Q-factor), therefore 50% of the energy is burned up in heat and lost to the environment.
Seems you're still having trouble seeing the forest for the trees.
.99
Quote from: poynt99 on April 17, 2011, 09:20:16 AM
A wire has a small inductance, not capacitance. Then, the frequency of damped oscillation is determined by: 1/2π√LC
The energy is lost because the wire is mostly resistive (i.e. Low Q-factor), therefore 50% of the energy is burned up in heat and lost to the environment.
Seems you're still having trouble seeing the forest for the trees.
.99
Thanks.Obviously I thought about inductance of wire ! Stupid mistake sorry.
I no EE, but from what I have been picking up, a wire's capicity or resistive potential is governed by load and or wire gauge.
So, therefore, a wire can be either capicitive or resistive...is that not correct ?
Regards...
Quote from: woopy on April 15, 2011, 07:00:13 PM
on my latest post, i asked , what would be the result if ONLY the transfering wire should be supraconductive , but not the cap.
the idea was to isolate the transfer system.
So what happen if i have a main normal source cap which is connected by a supraconductive wiring to the normal receiver cap ?.
I think that, in this ( virtual ) circuit , the transfer will oscillate some time and the cap resistance will slowly damp the oscillations to the final result = 50% lost of the stored energy.
So i think that whatever is the transfer mean ( resistive or supraconductive ), and this OF COURSE WITHOUT THE COUPLE INDUCTOR /DIODE, the direct transfer maximum efficiency from a cap to a cap can not avoid 5o% energy lost.
And if this transfer is so good because it loses ONLY 50 % energy lost , that means it is in fact 100 % efficient ????? i mean it is no way to get a better result in a direct transfer.
good luck at all
laurent
If you had two ideal capacitors (ESR=0 Ohms) of the same value connected together with an ideal wire (Z=0 Ohms) and no diode, then the transfer of energy from C1 to C2 would be instantaneous (with no oscillation), and there would be no energy loss.
So if C1 started with 1.00V and C2 with 0.00V, the end result would be with both caps at 0.707V.
.99
Quote from: Cap-Z-ro on April 17, 2011, 09:35:53 AM
I no EE, but from what I have been picking up, a wire's capicity or resistive potential is governed by load and or wire gauge.
So, therefore, a wire can be either capicitive or resistive...is that not correct ?
Regards...
Capz,
There is no such thing as "resistive potential".
Generally speaking, a wire has resistance and inductance, but no capacitance.
When we begin working with higher and higher frequencies (which includes transient type currents), then it becomes necessary to start looking at wires as transmission lines. In this case the wire can "see" some capacitance, but it does not "have" capacitance. TL's are another topic for discussion however.
.99
100 feet of wire stretched horizontally in the air 100 up will accumulate a charge...is that not by definition a capacitive property ?
The varying values of resisters is defined as a resistive property, is it not ?
You appear to be engaging in games of semantics, are you not ?
Regards...
Quote from: Cap-Z-ro on April 17, 2011, 11:11:58 AM
100 feet of wire stretched horizontally in the air 100 up will accumulate a charge...is that not by definition a capacitive property ?
The varying values of resisters is defined as a resistive property, is it not ?
You appear to be engaging in games of semantics, are you not ?
Regards...
You appear to be mixing up and confusing two very different phenomena.
An elevated conductor such as you mentioned acquires a charge separation because it is immersed in the earth's electric field and has become one plate of an "earth capacitor". Measured with respect to earth ground there will be a potential difference.
What we are discussing in this thread is the use of a piece of wire to conduct electron flow in a closed circuit for charging one capacitor from another.
Two very different concepts actually. ;)
.99
Hi P.99
Yes i aggree with you, but it is not what i meant in my post.
What i meant is that the virtual circuit would be 2 NORMAL caps (that is with some resistance) directly connected (without diode and inductor) by a hypothetical zero resistance Wire.
The idea to check here is .
When we have to transfer the energy from a cap to an other cap of same capacity (or not) even if we would have the best transfer wiring (zero resistance), we will lose anyway 50 % of energy.
So if we get exactly 50 % of energy lost after the transfer, in this case, this direct transfer was 100 % efficient, as it seems to be impossible to get more , without using a diode and an inductor in the circuit.
So to resume,
2 normal caps directly connected with an hypothetical " zero resistance" wire have the best direct transfer possible efficiency (100% ) and this high end transfer will result in 50 % energy lost in the best case.
So if the wire is somehow resistant,which is always the case in real life, the direct transfer will not be 100 % efficient , but perhaps 98 % . That is we will always and anyway lose more than 50% of energy in a direct transfer in our terrific real life.
Does it make sense ?
Thank's for your patience
Laurent
If that wire is coiled its capacitance increases to the point it is recognized as a capacitive inductor...isn't that correct ?
Regards...
Quote from: Cap-Z-ro on April 17, 2011, 11:34:07 AM
If that wire is coiled its capacitance increases to the point it is recognized as a capacitive inductor...isn't that correct ?
Regards...
The capacitance will remain constant because the plate surface area and distance to the earth has not changed.
The conductive plate made up by the wire is mostly just a plate, regardless of it's configuration. It is all about surface area.
All capacitors have some integral series inductance as well, but this is many magnitudes lower than the capacitance value. Placing the "lead wire" at one end of this coiled capacitor plate may have the effect of very slightly increasing this stray inductance.
.99
Quote from: woopy on April 17, 2011, 11:33:26 AM
Hi P.99
Yes i aggree with you, but it is not what i meant in my post.
What i meant is that the virtual circuit would be 2 NORMAL caps (that is with some resistance) directly connected (without diode and inductor) by a hypothetical zero resistance Wire.
The idea to check here is .
When we have to transfer the energy from a cap to an other cap of same capacity (or not) even if we would have the best transfer wiring (zero resistance), we will lose anyway 50 % of energy.
Yes, that is correct.
Quote
So if we get exactly 50 % of energy lost after the transfer, in this case, this direct transfer was 100 % efficient, as it seems to be impossible to get more , without using a diode and an inductor in the circuit.
So to resume,
2 normal caps directly connected with an hypothetical " zero resistance" wire have the best direct transfer possible efficiency (100% ) and this high end transfer will result in 50 % energy lost in the best case.
So if the wire is somehow resistant,which is always the case in real life, the direct transfer will not be 100 % efficient , but perhaps 98 % . That is we will always and anyway lose more than 50% of energy in a direct transfer in our terrific real life.
Does it make sense ?
Thank's for your patience
Laurent
I know what you are saying, however we should be careful when distinguishing between % efficiency of transfer and % of energy transferred.
With two normal capacitors the energy transfer efficiency is 50%, regardless if the resistance is in the capacitors or the piece of wire joining them (they can be considered together).
The amount of energy transferred to C2 is 25%. The amount left in C1 is 25%. The amount burned up in the wiring is 50%.
So in summary, we can not say that this "normal" energy transfer (with the 50% loss) is 100% efficient, because it is only 50% efficient. In fact it cost us 50% of the total energy just to move 25% from one place to the other. In that sense, you might view it as being even less than 50% efficient.
.99
dump one capacitor into two empty connected in series, then in parallel
what is the result ?
Quote from: forest on April 17, 2011, 12:26:59 PM
dump one capacitor into two empty connected in series, then in parallel
what is the result ?
Specify the 3 values....then
you provide the answer. ;)
.99
Thank's p.99
I am happy that we are OK on the first point.
Now i will go on structuring my mind.
When i look at "hyperphysics.com", they explain the stored energy in a cap with a comparison with the stored energy in an air tank. And i can very very well visualize this. So the voltage in the cap would compared at the pressure in the ai tank.
So 2 caps of same capacity would be compared to 2 air tanks of same capacity.
So the first air tank(cap) is at 99 BAR pressure and the receiver cap is empty (or has only the atmosphere pressure that is about 1 BAR).
There is a tubing with a valve between the 2 tanks,
So when i open the valve on the tubing. depending of the opening the tanks will more or less fastly equalise to 50 BAR each.
So as the pressure (exactly as the voltage in energy stored formula for the caps) is SQUARED in the formuly 1/2 * C * V^2, so after the transfer, (of course if we operate carrefully ), the pressure in the air tank is 25 % in each tank and together it is 50 % lost of energy as perfectly expected.
So we did not loose one molecule of air in the transfer, the quantity of air is the same but the pressure of this air is simply divided by 2 (or almost 2), and almost nothing was lost in the tubing.
The transfer was almost perfect (almost 100%) but the pressure lost is comparable at the Voltage lost in the direct cap transfer. And the end result is almost 50 % lost in energy .
Does it make sense ?
Thank's
Laurent
Assuming that the air tank analogy is a good one, then yes the combined potential energy in the tanks is reduced by 50%. Keep in mind also, that Hyperphysics does not touch on the efficiency or amount of transfer issues.
I would stay away from thinking that the process was 100% as you say. This is what I was trying to say before as it only adds confusion to the discussion, imho.
.99
Quote from: poynt99 on April 17, 2011, 09:36:42 AM
If you had two ideal capacitors (ESR=0 Ohms) of the same value connected together with an ideal wire (Z=0 Ohms) and no diode, then the transfer of energy from C1 to C2 would be instantaneous (with no oscillation), and there would be no energy loss.
So if C1 started with 1.00V and C2 with 0.00V, the end result would be with both caps at 0.707V.
.99
hmmm, well this is interesting.
If in the "normal" world, 100v on one cap and zero on the other, if we make direct transfer, we end up with 50v on each cap. Each cap is 1/4 and if we put them in parallel we have a total of 50% of the total energy left. 50% gone.
Now we go to superconductive world.....
100v in a cap, do a direct transfer, we end up with 70.7v in each cap. We combine them in parallel, we end up with what, 100% energy left?
100v 10uf = 70.7v 20uf So if we skimmed 20.7v from 70.7 20uf to end up with 50v 20uf, we lost 50% of the energy in the 20uf cap?
I suppose thats correct. Then the 50v 20uf cap, we skim 15v to have 350v 20uf, we lose another 50%. Then skim 10v to 250v, another 50% loss.
Its the same as my chart through the 4 stages.
Its hard to fathom, but seems correct.
It seems like a far throw for 70v 20uf =100% where 50v 20uf is only 50%. But it is what it is.
So in the BC if we start at 1kv and we do a cutoff of 703v, which gives 703v in each cap, we are just close to ideal world conversion. We have a bit of loss from 707v to 703v. So with the BC we are very closely approaching ideal world conversions, without superconducting properties.
ps An ideal wire has no inductance in superconducting world?
Mags
Quote from: woopy on April 17, 2011, 01:00:18 PM
Thank's p.99
I am happy that we are OK on the first point.
Now i will go on structuring my mind.
When i look at "hyperphysics.com", they explain the stored energy in a cap with a comparison with the stored energy in an air tank. And i can very very well visualize this. So the voltage in the cap would compared at the pressure in the ai tank.
So 2 caps of same capacity would be compared to 2 air tanks of same capacity.
So the first air tank(cap) is at 99 BAR pressure and the receiver cap is empty (or has only the atmosphere pressure that is about 1 BAR).
There is a tubing with a valve between the 2 tanks,
So when i open the valve on the tubing. depending of the opening the tanks will more or less fastly equalise to 50 BAR each.
So as the pressure (exactly as the voltage in energy stored formula for the caps) is SQUARED in the formuly 1/2 * C * V^2, so after the transfer, (of course if we operate carrefully ), the pressure in the air tank is 25 % in each tank and together it is 50 % lost of energy as perfectly expected.
So we did not loose one molecule of air in the transfer, the quantity of air is the same but the pressure of this air is simply divided by 2 (or almost 2), and almost nothing was lost in the tubing.
The transfer was almost perfect (almost 100%) but the pressure lost is comparable at the Voltage lost in the direct cap transfer. And the end result is almost 50 % lost in energy .
Does it make sense ?
Thank's
Laurent
See, this is why I feel that we didnt lose in resistance from heat production. Not 50% in heat losses. I feel we lost 50% because of the containers vs pressure.
Like woopy says, did we lose 50% in the air lines due to heat losses?
Very good call woopy. ;]
mags
I am not well versed in fluid dynamics so I'll let someone else answer that.
.99
Quote from: Magluvin on April 17, 2011, 02:22:05 PM
ps An ideal wire has no inductance in superconducting world?
Mags
A
real superconducting wire still possess inductance, and it can be wound into an inductor.
The hypothetical situation I posted where the wire was ideal (i.e. Z=0 Ohms), is strictly hypothetical.
.99
Quote from: poynt99 on April 17, 2011, 01:19:50 PM
Assuming that the air tank analogy is a good one, then yes the combined potential energy in the tanks is reduced by 50%. Keep in mind also, that Hyperphysics does not touch on the efficiency or amount of transfer issues.
I would stay away from thinking that the process was 100% as you say. This is what I was trying to say before as it only adds confusion to the discussion, imho.
.99
I can sort of agree on this. We shouldnt count the air molecules as a count of energy, just the pressure, the closeness of the air molecules or atoms, which ever element in involved is being pressurized.
But the count of air molecules or atoms can be accounted for hear also, as we didnt lose any in the process. The 2 tanks hold them all in total, we just lost pressure.
But if there are no heat losses in the air tank conversion, should there not be 70.7 bar in each tank after direct connection of a 100bar tank, to an empty tank? If we only have 50bar in each, then where did our 50% go?
Was it lost in moving the air from 1 tank to the other? As we would need outside energy in order to re compress all back to 1 tank.
So I believe it is more of a container vs pressure that gives us these results rather than resistance heat losses.
On the other hand, if we had a way to use a flywheel to use the energy being transferred from tank to tank, instead of direct decompression from tank to tank, we could then get most of the pressure from the first tank to the second one.
I see that with the flywheel, we avoid the 50% loss by not wasting the energy put into the direct transfer that only ends up in 50% of the input. And I think that waste in direct transfer is just a container vs pressure deal, not a loss in resistances.
Mags
Quote from: poynt99 on April 17, 2011, 02:59:49 PM
I am not well versed in fluid dynamics so I'll let someone else answer that.
.99
It can be said that waves of sound can be considered fluid like. But fluids are not usually compressible, where a gas or electrical charge can.
Mags
Quote from: poynt99 on April 17, 2011, 03:08:10 PM
A real superconducting wire still possess inductance, and it can be wound into an inductor.
The hypothetical situation I posted where the wire was ideal (i.e. Z=0 Ohms), is strictly hypothetical.
.99
So if we had a non hypothetical situation, the 2 caps would in fact oscillate forever. And all we would need is a diode for complete and direct transfer. And with no resistance, this conversion would, in theory, happen instantaneously, with the only limit here being the speed of electricity through the superconducting medium.
Is the speed of electric transfer, from say NY to LA in a normal wire, with real resistance involved, move at light speed(or close) ? Or does that speed change also in superconductors?
Mags
Quote from: Loner on April 17, 2011, 03:38:33 PM
Mag, that is an excellent question. Are you talking speed of electrons, speed of EMF, (Which is not correctly measured, but detected by electronswe motion. See the problem...) or speed of charge propagation, which, for the guys at MIT, is a hotly debated subject.
To me, at least, these questions are at the heart of the matter..... I can only answer one, and that's the speed of current, or electron motion, which is snail slow. The others I need help with, as it depends on detection methods.
Here is the best explanation of electron flow I can describe.
Sound waves are like ac current. the sound uttered from your mouth pressurizes air. The actual air particles around the area of your mouth dont make it very far, just the pressure of the vibrating air propagates to push and pull on the air surrounding your head and expands from there.
If we have a pipe from NY to LA, we could hear sounds from one end to the other, but it is only a pressure wave that moves. Same as in AC lines, the electrons never make it from the power plant to the other end of the wires. They are just like a long row of people just doing the bump( disco dance =] ) at 60hz. Eventually that bump gets to the other end of the line.
At sea level sound waves propagate at near 750mph (this no. has changed over the years) In water, it is different. its faster.
So maybe there is a difference in the speed of electricity in a superconductor vs real world wire.
As in the speed of sound, a different medium will affect it, maybe in different mediums, electric flow is also changeable.
So if the sound wave pipe from NY to LA were to just have DC pressure, that pressure would take a bit of time to reach LA, but this time the particles are on the move, from NY to LA, up to speeds of 750mph. Im not sure if any faster would cause the pipe to burst.
I tend to think that electrons can move very fast. just because AC only moves them back and forth in a conductor, doesnt mean they are not getting from here to there and back fast. The freq of the AC component would determine how far they go and come back. =]
But maybe electricity has just one constant. Even through a resistor, the other end will feel the input at the speed of light, just not a lot of current flow.
Im just trying to grasp the superconducting advantages and limits here. =]
Mags
Hey Loner
Any links to that Mit debate?
Mags
Quote from: Magluvin on April 17, 2011, 03:28:29 PM
So if we had a non hypothetical situation, the 2 caps would in fact oscillate forever.
No, the caps have an internal resistance, so we are back at square 1.
Quote
Is the speed of electric transfer, from say NY to LA in a normal wire, with real resistance involved, move at light speed(or close) ? Or does that speed change also in superconductors?
Mags
The velocity of propagation for a pair of wires (twisted for example) varies anywhere from 0.6c to 0.85c, depending on the characteristics of the wire and the wire jacket.
Because the length of the line is an appreciable portion of the signal wave length, here too we need to start thinking about the wires as transmission lines.
Now, the drift velocity in a superconductor? That's a topic for another day.
.99
Wow
always more interesting here
I go, on the air tank theory and assume and accept that, the 50% energy lost is a real fact and that's it.
But the lost of stored energy is not due to the tubing transfer (or wire resistance heat lost in the case of cap transfer ), but simply to the DOUBLE VOLUME for the air to expand. So the air pressue is simply divided by 2 in each tank. Seems very logical.
And always because of the SQUARED calculation of pressure (or voltage ) the result is mathematically and always giving a 50 % in energy lost always because 1/2 * C * V^2 formula and that's it.
And now the question is , how and why , in the Believe Circuit (BC) of Magvulin it seems possible to improve this result ? I mean we really in real life do not lose 50 % of energy
I mean and it is a fact by using the BC we can reach in real life i insist , a 82 % (with very basic circuitery ) and more transfer energy ( see all the above post ),
For instance if i put an air turbine in place of the valve in the air tank transfering tubing, and this turbine should activate a flywheel during the transfewr , do you think that the stored energy in the flywheel could be strong enough to go on emptying the source tank to almost 1 BAR and to recompress this air in the receiver tank to almost (let's say 90 BAR ) ?
yep
sliping is needed
good luck at all
Laurent
Quote from: poynt99 on April 17, 2011, 05:02:52 PM
No, the caps have an internal resistance, so we are back at square 1.
Well if we have a superconducting wire, why not a superconducting cap? ;] Square 0
If we look at your example, where the wires are superconducting, and the caps are not, then we may not end up with .707v from 1v. Correct ?
Listen. I know there are a plethora of equations that describe everything under the sun, well almost. But we should be able to describe all things that are calculable, in plain words. Like if 10uf 100v is equal to 20uf 70.7v instead of just 20uf 50v is 50% of 10uf 100v. It took a few pages to get that out.
Im still trying to get it right in my head as to these facts.
For example. If we have 2 caps 10uf at 70.7v, we can use one of those caps to charge an inductor enough to pound almost all of that 1 cap into the already charged cap at 70.7, all the way to near 100v.
Seems like there was enough to do the job, even against the charge, 70.7v, that was in the receiver cap already. One might think that it would take more that 10uf 70.7 to accomplish this feat.
But Im getting close I believe. These are all good things to have knowledge of here.
Tito said there is a gain in the Igniter circuit. But all considering, I dont see it yet. It is the same circuit as the ozone pat. And many have referenced it also as capable of OU.
Tesla stated in the igniter pat. that it produced and increased eff. Once I had gotten that idea from reading the pat. I fell out of the loop here for a bit. But that is not to say that the circuit with some changes just may do the deed. We can only push forward and try things.
We continue on....
Mags
Quote from: Magluvin on April 17, 2011, 06:22:05 PM
Well if we have a superconducting wire, why not a superconducting cap? ;] Square 0
You
were referring to a
non-hypothetical scenario, and so was I in response.
Quote
If we look at your example, where the wires are superconducting, and the caps are not, then we may not end up with .707v from 1v. Correct ?
You
will end up with 0.500V, no maybe. ;)
Quote
Im still trying to get it right in my head as to these facts.
For example. If we have 2 caps 10uf at 70.7v, we can use one of those caps to charge an inductor enough to pound almost all of that 1 cap into the already charged cap at 70.7, all the way to near 100v.
Incorrect. If you start with two capacitors at the same voltage, how is the inductor going to get energized when there is no potential difference placed across it?
.99
Quote from: poynt99 on April 17, 2011, 06:51:39 PM
You were referring to a non-hypothetical scenario, and so was I in response.
You will end up with 0.500V, no maybe. ;)
Incorrect. If you start with two capacitors at the same voltage, how is the inductor going to get energized when there is no potential difference placed across it?
.99
I actually have to go back to respond to the first 2 sentences, but for now on the 3rd sentence...
We could just discharge the cap directly into the inductor till the cap is empty, and then the inductor discharges in to the already charged cap. I see where you are coming from as if it were through the BC. But I have shown a BC circuit already that has a switch going diagonal across the same circuit, and a diode that crosses the other way, in order to be able to do either way.
In the BC we get left with a bit in the source cap. When we directly charge the inductor, we can get all of the source cap into the inductor.
Anyway sorry for the confusion
Mags
Yes,
I forgot about that alternative method, as shown in the document GL uploaded.
You are correct, I was clearly thinking only about the cap to cap with an inductor directly in between.
.99
Quote from: woopy on April 17, 2011, 06:11:02 PM
Wow
always more interesting here
I go, on the air tank theory and assume and accept that, the 50% energy lost is a real fact and that's it.
But the lost of stored energy is not due to the tubing transfer (or wire resistance heat lost in the case of cap transfer ), but simply to the DOUBLE VOLUME for the air to expand. So the air pressue is simply divided by 2 in each tank. Seems very logical.
And always because of the SQUARED calculation of pressure (or voltage ) the result is mathematically and always giving a 50 % in energy lost always because 1/2 * C * V^2 formula and that's it.
And now the question is , how and why , in the Believe Circuit (BC) of Magvulin it seems possible to improve this result ? I mean we really in real life do not lose 50 % of energy
I mean and it is a fact by using the BC we can reach in real life i insist , a 82 % (with very basic circuitery ) and more transfer energy ( see all the above post ),
For instance if i put an air turbine in place of the valve in the air tank transfering tubing, and this turbine should activate a flywheel during the transfewr , do you think that the stored energy in the flywheel could be strong enough to go on emptying the source tank to almost 1 BAR and to recompress this air in the receiver tank to almost (let's say 90 BAR ) ?
yep
sliping is needed
good luck at all
Laurent
I with ya here Woopy
I see the direct exchange or connection as just a said pressure in a said volume that is allowed to expand into a volume that is double. No need to figure in resistance heat losses.
We are just losing from allowing the pressure to be released in expansion. It is a waste to do so. ;]
I would like to see an experiment where superconducting components would show 70.7v in each cap from a cap of 100v.
If this were the case, would not the inductor and diode provide an improvement on this? ;] ou?
Gotta go do laundry =[
Mags
Sorry Loner. Were not trying to confuse.
See, I think that if we are looking for OU, that there is a possibility that it doesnt follow common rules as we know them. Or the rules are not all correct.
We can calculate and formulate all we want. For the most part, the rules do not allow OU.
I think that its possible that when we use the inductor to overcome the losses we are experiencing, and it works well at doing so, then maybe if we have no losses to begin with, we may be able to use the inductor to help get an OU situation.
If we are not really losing 50% by way of resistance, as we are comparing the air tanks, then why the claim that we are? ;] So we may be uncovering something here. Something that we want to know, and may help us with our goal.
I see that when we do a direct connection from cap to cap that current flows, through connections(wires, buss bars, what ever) and real work could be done with that current flow. But in this situation, we are wasting that ability to do work. We may as well put a heavy wire across a battery till it has half its charge. Waste.
Sure it will produce heat. But Im not seeing the heat as the loss. Im seeing the battery level out and lose charge unnecessarily, allowing the negative side electrons fill the holes in the positive side of the battery. Unless its heat we are trying to achieve.
Im seeing it as a function of current through a resistor or wire.
Like an inductor for example, if we run current through it, it produces a magnetic field. In the beginning of current flow through the inductor opposes the flow, like a high ohm resistor. No great losses there, little current is flowing. As the field builds, the current flow increases.
It has been said here that the inductor produces a magnetic field instead of heat, and that losses "in the circuit" are reduced tremendously. So how does the single inductor in a circuit of other parts, like diodes, caps, wire, connections and switches, reduce the circuits resistance losses by almost 100%?
Especially if in a near 100% enegry transfer, more energy had gotten to the receiver cap as compared to a direct transfer, where we experience a 50% loss.
Currents are flowing through the circuit, but resistance losses are close to nil. How can that be?
So maybe in the direct transfer from cap to cap, the losses due to resistance dont exist as the books say. Maybe the caps just level out to 50% losses just because direct dumping is just a stupid thing to do. ;]
Energy is flowing from cap to cap, but in a useless way. So we introduce a flywheel in the path of current flow and we can get up to 99%+ from 1 cap to another.
Or in a direct transfer, from cap to cap, at first the currents oscillate at very high freq till it settles. If we were able to disconnect the caps at the end of the first half cycle of the oscillation, I think we will find that most of the source caps charge will be in the receiver cap.
Just as if we used a diode to cause a rectification of the oscillations. So during that half cycle, the caps go through a point that each cap has 1/4 the total energy stored.
Source cap has 100v and receiver has 0v. Half way through the direct discharge, the caps hold a total of 1 half the initial source value of energy.
So the inductor is able to overcome almost all seeming losses in the transfer.
Hope you are getting our drift here. Something just doesnt seem right. Were trying to figure it out. ;]
mags
Hi Loner
very interesting post
I totally agree with you, that we have to focus on the inductor properties (eventually coupled with the diode) and how the "pumping" works.
Now i think i am ready to make a further step to discover the " compagnon field " in the coil.
yep i like surprise and i am sure there is something here. ;)
And if it is not a surprise and all this can be explained by common physics rules, i will anyway learn something more, so for me it is a win win situation , so let's go :D
good luck at all :)
Laurent
Wow i think I will have to wait till after work to reply to all of that Loner. Very interesting though. Thanks for the input here.
I do understand that the inductor is the focus.
We had to get the cap thing out of the way though. As we use it to determine accuracy of the ins and outs. =]
We could use batteries, but the caps give a simple and accurate view. And its simple. ;]
It all may come to a head that the books are correct. I cant say that yet. Not right now. But if it does, our experience will be deep.
I have ideas for bifi coils, and series coils with shorting on one of them during a cycle.
I have not gotten into these yet, but I imagine once the series coils got rolling, if we short one and release later in the cycle, the one that was shorted is still rolling hard through the short, then released later as the other coil is wound down. I dont know if the results will be better, or same, or worse. But it is the weird and wacky ways that maybe nobody has tried yet. ;]
The bifi's capacitance interests me. If we charge up a bifi capacitance, with both ends open, I think the initial burst on the coil when shorted would be immense. Each coil winding will in complete have opposite charges, and when shorted just may cause more effect than an external cap dumping into the coil. We will see.
No stone unturned. ;]
Thanks guys ;]
mags
Don Smith said interesting thing. He said that electricity is EM field : electro-magnetic. Both equal and opposite. I conclude that one is flowing internally inside wire and one is flowing outside and cannot escape due to the balance.Electrons are just small magnets which provide the lag between two flows and this lag is current and is used to move them around so they produce magnetic field around and the effects of magnetic field change. I think you know what is the 'holy grail' here,right ?
Mags
You are on the right track. The ultimate answer is to get bifilar coil and manipulate by changing connections ;D ;D ;D
magnet wire with a high negative resistance.
Quote from: Dave45 on April 18, 2011, 08:00:45 PM
magnet wire with a high negative resistance.
Hey Dave
Are you baring gifts? ;]
Mags
I have put these pdfs up on other threads. I think we can add them here. They compliment each other and may advance our view into the inductors.
The first is of how a transformer really works, and the other is of transformers using multiple cores.
They are a short read, and I think you will read them at least twice.
I dont know if anyone here has seen them yet, so if not, indulge. =]
Im wondering if we can make use of the multiple cores to advance our inductor goals.
Mags
hi mags ;)
i think these pdfs are good here also
http://www.overunity.com/index.php?topic=7748.msg281925#new
:)
Thanks Teets
We all need all we can get. ;]
Mags
Quote from: Magluvin on April 18, 2011, 08:11:28 PM
Hey Dave
Are you baring gifts? ;]
Mags
Just a hunch, brass wire should exhibit negative resistance because of the zinc content.
hi all
just 2 more cents here
On the Magluvin links
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=x8-x7FjaiMc
Laurent
Very Nice Woops!!.
It appears that being the steel ball makes it ALL the way across the S mags, and past the N, I wonder if 2 N will have the same pull once crossing that line.
By the way, Im not putting restrictions as to topic related. As long as they are good, and originated some how from here, its ok by me.
Which pdf was this from woopy?
Thanks
Mags
edited the word into to past
@woppy
I saw your three magnets video and I thought that if the ball crosses from positive to negative with the same quantity of magnets added at the left of the first magnet, then you can repeat the pattern around a ring and get the ball perpetually running.
I could be wrong though!
Jesus
hey Dave
Any links? I did some searches
Brass Wire
Brass Wire Inductor
And so on. I see some rf applications, of which I noticed something else....
It was talk of aluminum and brass cores.
I wonder what results that would give. Solid would be a lot of eddys, but powdered into toroid cores, I wonder if there is anything worth looking for.
Im getting some things together to pour my own cores.
But brass wire.
I ended up finding these that should be of concern with our projects.
http://www.token.com.tw/what-is-a-inductor.htm
http://www.token.com.tw/what-is-a-inductor.htm
Woopy. have you noticed if you use higher voltages, that your eff increases, as compared to low voltages like 5v?
I think we can try to make better inductors than ones that we can buy or get premade. Ive seen laminated cores welded across the laminates. This has got to be bad for eff. But I think we can do better. Ill come up with some schemes of materials and epoxy.
The bifi thing is biting my ear, Make me, make me. Im winding one this week to work with. I have others but I want low resistance.
The only way to get good current is with a wire that can handle it.
Anyway, Cant find really anything on the brass wire having any special properties that might be.
That might be a good thing. ;]
Mags
Very nice Niev =]
The double S and single N makes total sense.
Mags
I wonder if a bit of space would be helpful with these modules in series. If the space was only on the original entry, it looks as if woopy gets it to the gap, it just may choose the SS at that point.
Another reason for this is to possibly rectify the direction. If they are all connected, it would end up multi directional, of which woopy has shown it to be unidirectional with the single module.
So just woopys initial setup in series, but the gap I believe is a good idea.
This is good stuff Woops. I wish I had those style mags. I dont think round would work the same at the SS connection. ;]
You da man ;] You may be going to smot heaven. ;]
Mags
hey Magluvin Iv noticed that some experiments using zinc has shown negative resistance, Dean 2 in his magnetic thread has stated that the brass works very well with his magnetic fields its what he uses for his rails. it may work in a core http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Kdup42Epq0o&feature=autoplay&list=UL0hZCPKd5jWc&index=7&playnext=6
Just a hunch something to check out, leave no stone unturned.
Yes!! no stone unturned! Checking the video now.
I pause them when they load slow till loaded.
Thanks dave.
Mags
hey Dave
Watched the vids as there is a series of them.
It looks as if it is a big capacitor. It would be interesting to try with other cores, like aluminum. Just to see if brass actually helps. As it looks like a pretty serious setup, nice. maybe something to it. The coil interaction would be something to see on a scope. Reading the open end to the other end. That would interest me. ;] And maybe the brass core has eddys that help out here. Dunno, just juices flowin. lol
Cool.
Thanks
mags
Hi Mag and Jesus
the video is not aiming to a magnetic ramp or smot or motor. Perhaps it can do but the aim is to check the EDGE CURRENT.
So in your link in your reply 751 i lookewd arround the DISTINTI .com website and found this link
http://www.distinti.com/docs/nm.pdf
Were they try to explain a new version of magnetism.
So related to this theory , the magnetic field should not be a DONUT as per standard theory, but it should be spherical.
They made the small experiment as per my video to demonstrate that there is an " edge current " arround the magnet. Which we can see with a detecting screen.
I simply replicate this experiment , to see if it is true and it is, this edge current does exist, and it explains why the steel ball do not stay in the middle of the magnet, but stick between the repelling magnet , because the edge currents are adding and create a very strong magnetic field much greater than magnetic field which is in the center of the magnet.
I have to go deeper in this theory because it seems to be interesting . What do you think.
perhaps this can help in our inductor working process
good luck at all
Laurent
@woopy
Even though it is clear that you are headed on a different direction. Could you make the experiment of the six magnets on a row with pattern N S S N S S and the metal ball rolling from the right to the left to see if the ball gets to the first N magnet at the left?
That is if you have the six magnets and the time to do the experiment.
Jesus
Hi Jesus
i did the test with 7 magnets as you mentionned ,just for fun
And no surprise, if you put the steel ball at the beginning of the ramp the ball cross all the ramp and sticks on the last magnet.
And if you try to start in the middle of the ramp you have no acceleration so as usual in those ramps no interesting result. I mean if the ramp is very long the ball will stop in the middle. There is no continous motorisation here.
Sorry :-\
So we have to focus in the EDGE CURRENT on my video. Do you think it can helps on our quest, of the inductor fonction ?
Laurent
Hey Woopy
What do you have in mind with the edge currents?
Im just not sure what your getting at. ;]
Mags
Quote from: woopy on April 20, 2011, 05:43:20 PM
Hi Jesus
i did the test with 7 magnets as you mentionned ,just for fun
And no surprise, if you put the steel ball at the beginning of the ramp the ball cross all the ramp and sticks on the last magnet.
And if you try to start in the middle of the ramp you have no acceleration so as usual in those ramps no interesting result. I mean if the ramp is very long the ball will stop in the middle. There is no continous motorisation here.
Sorry :-\
So we have to focus in the EDGE CURRENT on my video. Do you think it can helps on our quest, of the inductor fonction ?
Laurent
Thank you @woopy!
I just do not have a clue on how to use the edge current.
But there is a pdf that tells how to make a permanent magnet motor that uses the edges of two magnets as drivers.
Jesus
What if the steel ball is mounted on the outer edge of a wheel...and the magnets arranged in an incomplete circle...the starting point.
When the process is started by pushing the wheel, an attached gear then moves another magnet into the circle to complete the loop.
Regards...
Hi Cap
Thank's for the idea, But i think it is not the thread for this topic here. I hope we will stay focusing on the INDUCTOR /DIODE pumping effect.
So Mag
in your link to DISTINTI i found this "NEW MAGNETISM" theory with the edge current, And i wonder if it could help us to better understand the magnetism in the inductor by a different way (simply a proposal). But i have no experience ,on that at this point ,and i simply made some experiment to check, and as you said we have to turn all stones.
Perhaps somebody has more knowledge on those edge current ?
But for today, i redo my experiment in the sim with the BC with a lot serial "diode inductor and resistor. "
And as i install more than 4 series , depending of the right switching of the current on the source cap, the soft does no more converge (see pix) .
That means that the soft is at its limit.
SO Or it can't violate the programable limit that the conceptor insatalled in it , because he integrated the WELL KNOWN formula.
Or the soft can not handle that very basic and not so complicated montage. Which i doubt.
So if i run the sim at very low speed, i can clearly see tha it works steadily all along the process untill a red line said to him "YOU CAN NOT CONTINUE THE PROCESS BECAUSE YOU WILL VIOLATE THE RULES " and so it can not converge.
The soft can not afford OU , But if we follow the process (in very low speed setting ) you can see that the soft stops really close to 100 % energy transfer. ??
So i think that we have really to dismantle 4 to 5 MOT and test in real life a longer serie of those inductors.
anyway we will learn something
good luck at all
Laurent
Hey Woopy
As for the sim locking up, or errors, sometimes lowering the source voltage helps. And maybe just use a wire instead of the bottom diode. As I said before, diodes in an open link(when you open the switch) at times give problems. It is not usual in real life that diodes are used this way, so the sim may be correct in the errors, as its is seeing something out of the norm.
When using just wire instead of that diode, just slow the sim down and open the switch when needed for testing. ;]
I have had the sim go completely wacky showing more than trillions off voltages, amps and power. So testing in the real world is necessary when using any sim.
Its a very helpful tool for free. A lot of the time it is great.
Ah now I know the pdf. ;]
One thing Im not sure of with the magnetic film and their explanation.
I have worked with the magnet film, still do. But how it works in showing magnetic fields is a bit tricky to interpret.
The bright spots and lines are showing strong field areas, but they are also when the field is horizontal or planar to the film.
You see the surface of the pole is dark. There is a lot of field there, but its vertical, perpendicular to the surface of the film.
At the edges of the pole, some flux takes a very sharp turn to the other pole once outside the core of the magnet core, or mass, or IT. lol loss for words.
And when you use the film, as in the pdf, when you look at the edge of the magnet, you see the line in the middle in between the poles. That really just shows the field when its planar to the film. A thin magnet. from pole to pole like those, have a strong arc of field, so the light line is showing a very small arc at that point on the magnet. As you raise the film away from the magnet, the light line gets wider, as the arcs are greater in diameter as we go outward from the mag.
Not trying to distract you from the project, not at all. In fact what would be more interesting is using the film on an inductor. ;] I hadnt gotten into that subject for too long. I wasnt making a connection with the idea.
If you experiment with the mag film the way I suggested you will begin to see what Im sayin is true. ;] I looked up how the film is made and how to use it properly when I began using it. I dont know if I have that info readily available.
I think I may have a solution for the BC. In the pdf Toroidal Transformer Based Power Amplifier, it shows how to use multiple cores to multiply primary flux without drawing more from the primary. Now if this works, we can charge 1 coil, but really be charging 2, or 3, or 10, for the price of 1.
In itself it would be a key element as a transformer. But to bring the BC back to life by using inductors with multiple cores, would be a nice place to be. ;]
We seem to know so far what a regular inductor will accomplish for us, and its use will come in handy to keep efficiency high when needed.
So I think that different coil configurations need to be tested. I have 2 multi core inductors Im winding now. Takes time. lol.
Ill put up pics when they are finished.
Im putting up the pdf here again, as I think it will help us greatly. ;]
Mags
I was thinking of creating an annex to my "capacitor energy transfer" document to better explain the role the inductor plays in increasing the efficiency and to show the mechanism involved for its energy storage and zero (theoretical) energy dissipation.
However, I don't want to go through the trouble if no one is interested. Please let me know.
.99
Hehe P.99
As i said , for my very low electronic level , every input in better comprehension on this stuff will be anyway benefical.
So for myself i do not see why you seems to hesitate to share your knowledges ?
But i speak for me, don't want to anticipate others comments. ;)
good luck at all :)
laurent
@ Woopy
have you tried the film on an inductor with and without core
Hey Loner
Can you specify which link?
Im winding my primaries for my 2nd multicore inductors.
Should have pics this evening.
The first is a mod of the first example of 2 cores. Primary wound on first core, secondary wound on both cores.
The second core is larger than the primary wound core. As the pdf suggests, there are inductive interactions.
But if I can get more of the induced field from the secondary coil into the 2nd core, then more current can be had from the secondary vs what we normally get in a normal transformer config.
The second multicore inductor is of the last example in the pdf.
3 cores, each with individual primary windings connected in series, and secondary wound on the 3 cores as a whole.
Just a simpler way of going about it as shown. ;]
What Im hoping for is to use the primary as the BC inductor, but also collect from the secondary. Being that the pdf claims that the secondary current flow wont affect the primary oscillations, then the primary should still do its job as a BC inductor. And we can add what the secondary produces to the result of the BC.
Like transferring from 1 cap to another, 1 100% transfer, and get work done or store energy from the secondary.
Should be done with the second inductor in a couple hours.
Mags
hey Mags
looking forward to the pics, been winding a few myself here lately,Iv been thinking of concentraiting the magnetic field into a small area, kinda like a pancake coil this is what comes to mind
Heres the pics. Ill be trying them out tomorrow evening.
Happy Easter!
Mags
Supposedly with the first one, if the secondary is open, the primary inductance will be of the primary coil and the small toroid core. I have a spacer so the primary and secondary cores dont touch.
If we short the secondary, the primary inductance should go up, according to pdf. This will decrease the input current. So if we have a load on the secondary, the primary input will lower.
The second pic is a way to accomplish the last toroid example in the pdf.
I went with 15 turns on the primary each core. 45 turns in series on 3 cores. Supposedly when the sec is shorted, each primaries core gets the 2 others added. Its like a scrambled egg generator. lol.
But the interesting thing from the pdf on this one is, the more cores and primaries added in this fashion, the secondary voltage rises. Not the norm. Says the pdf. ;]
So we shall see wut is uP. Would be a nice simple solution if it is what it is.
And all the little switches and diodes, and batteries, etc will have a greater purpose. ;]
Mags
The first test will be to check the primary as a flywheel first in a BC.
Then check the primary with the sec shorted. If we still have flywheel, we are happy. ;]
Then we set up the BC on the primary inductor, and a separate diode/cap on the sec. Then we add up what we spent and got.
These tests will go for both inductor variations.
This pdf has captured me. The principles are simple and an easy low cost build to try.
These were not built for 120v ac, but it could be configured as such. Im just going for single shot stuff here at first.
Mags
Hey Woopy
Have you figured any thing out with the edge currents?
When I was reading it, I wasnt making a connection.
But it sounded like you did. ;]
Its under one of these stones. ;]
Im getting excited on testing the inductors tonight. It should be easy to setup and try both this evening.
Was thinking this morning on how to integrate the secondary in loading 1 receiver cap with the primary.
I think I have it worked out. The issue that first came to mind was how to have the secondary separated from the input source cap, while the source cap is discharging into the primary to get to the receiver cap. I think it requires 1 more diode to accomplish this.
Mags
Hi Mag
I will reread and reread the Distinti site to get a better idea on all this stuff.
Can't wait to your results with the multi core inductor. I have some joule thief toroid that i can rewound in a mulitcore unductor.
Yep good stuff here
Good luck
Laurent
Hey Woopy n Loner
Im getting on it in a bit. Just ate and gotta fix a flat on my ebike and change the kittys litter. ;]
I had thought about saturation. As I chose the cores from the selection that I had, I knew I would have to contend with that.
I imagine if the primary core saturates, the BC will lose the ability to store more beyond saturation? Or as you said, the effect goes air core when beyond saturation.
That is an interesting thing, a coil can operate cored/air combo. Has anyone looked into that? Makes sense. Like the orbo cores.
So the first 2 core inductor, the primary can actually saturate the small core and expand to the larger core.
I wonder if thats what happens when the sec is shorted?
Many questions.
Thanks for the input.
Back in a bit.
Mags
Ok, I get flywheel from primary whether the secondary is shorted or not. Im not seeing much change if any.
So now I have to look into what the secondary is doing.
My setup is simple. The Nimh AA are at 5.6v to the cap lower in the pic. I just insert 1 battery and remove to charge the cap. The caps are connected at the left and neg of battery connects there. The meter reads there also.
The micro switches, one on the bottom is the activate and the one on the right is to just switch the pos of the meter between caps. Just to make it easy to see this or that one.
More tomorrow
Mags
Oh Some figures.
The caps are 22uf 100v
Diodes are 1kv 1A, trying to locate my box-o-rectifiers. Looking.
Full transfer is 5.6v to 4.3v. Its got to be a good portion of the downfall is the diode drop. 1v? So higher voltages will give better results. ;]
I stayed low on voltage as I dont want to saturate. So far, using 3 AA gives similar ratio -1v diode.
So I dont think I am yet.
Much more to go.
Mags
I did a few other tests with the circuit and other inductors.
One of them is a heavily wound toroid with 20 awg, and the other is a large spindle core of 26awg and a few thousand turns.
The first (2)multi core fared better in transfer results.
The tri core averaged just over 3v using the primary as just an inductor. It had the worst results of the bunch. =[
The (3) core inductor, the cores are from chokes,all the same type and style as they were from the same salvage board, and the (2) core are from amplifier transformers. Its possible that choke inductor cores may not be good for us here.
Next will be to see what the secondaries can do.
Mags
Something the pdf said was, if you shorted the sec of a normal transformer, ya just might smell it soon. ;]
But here we dont have that issue.
I will be also trying a 3rd coil on the 2 core, shorting the 2nd coil to make the connection between cores.
Mags
Hi Mag
Nice setup
just some question
On your multi core (2) i mean the small toroid wounded with the bigger one, by using only the small primary toroid, (the secondary is opened) you get a transfer from 5.6 volt in the source cap to 4.3 volts in the second cap and this after transfer, right? How many voltage left in the source cap ( probably 0 ) ? In this case your transfering is anyway very good with so a small inductor.
you get about 59 % efficiency (in energy transfer as per the bloody formula) against the standard 50 % as for a normal direct transfer. And that without taking account of the diode lost which is apreciable at so a low voltage.
For my experiment, to get a really good transfer the inductor must be much bigger, i would say minimum 220 mh (as per a primary MOT, to much higher arrounf 1 H and more)
But the interesting thing here is that you get a better transfer than normal transfer , and now you will be able to check what happens when you will play with the secondary of the multicore. Can't wait the result.
Have you some info about the resistance and inductance of your coils ? So we can compare and make about the same testing.
Anyway bravo and good luck :D
Laurent
Hey Woopy
Actually my source cap gets left with the balance of the total. If the receiver gets 4.3, the source is 1.3, from 5.6v total. maybe that will increase your eff calculations. ;]
The primary is .06ohm and the sec is .12ohm. The wire is 22awg from radio shack. The small core is about 1 in dia and the large is about 1.5in dia.
The cores are 2 that I have had that seem different from the bunch that I have. They have a bumpy texture, as if molded that way, or large particles.
I had done some testing with magnets to see which cores had more or less attraction force. These were weaker than any of the size. Some others seem to be just iron with a painted or powder coat surface. I find some conduct electrically from one side to the other, some dont.
Its possible that eddy currents are desirable in choke cores. ??? Or the conductive ones are just cheap.
It seems as if when you chip the surface paint, if its shiny, it will conduct. If black or dark gray, most likely no conduction. We dont want conducting cores. No eddies.
Mags
Well, Im not getting much output from the sec on the 2 core inductor. I messed with it for quite some time. Not much more than 1.5v into the 22uf from a 22uf.
I reread the pdf. This config should be able to output as much as in, as it says, this one doesnt multiply the flux.
It nay contain another problem. As the pic shows in the pdf, it looks as if you could have the cores touching. But later examples and text indicates there should be a fair amount of space between cores. I have maybe 1/16th in of 2 layers squished as a spacer for the 2 core.
Have not got to the 3 core, but I am worried that the cores touch at the corners.
I am going to wind a 3rd coil on the 2 core before rewinding the connecting winding to separate the cores. But I think its worth trying this way for now for comparison, while I have it together. And the 3rd winding can just remain on the large core during the change.
I also have to try other inputs as this may not be what this thing wants to work properly.
Back later
Mags
Havnt messed with the coils tonight. Was thinking about the beginnings of the BC and what was the point in the first place. And I remembered...
This all started when I was doing the sim some months back. I called it the precharge circuit. When the switch was closed, the source(battery) charged a cap through an inductor and diode, providing nearly 2 times the source voltage to the cap when the cycle finished.
But all the energy was from the battery, pulled from it by the flywheel. Even when the cap reaches above source voltage, the flywheel had enough to load the cap to near 2x source voltage.
Then we add the recycle diode.... and some how I deviated from battery source to a cap source. Thats where we lost it.
We had it.
If we have a battery 100v as the source in the BC, then we cutoff the source when the cap reaches 50v. The cap hasnt reached full 100v charge from the batt yet. But the inductor recycles the cap to near 100v.
Did we save?
Ya know, I went to cap-cap in hopes to make ease of figuring results, power in power out.
Think about it. Its there. Its there in a form of more into the cap than what was taken from the battery.
The key is part charging the cap from the source while the source is connected. The inductor just happens to be in the path of that charging.
So if we cut off when the cap reaches 50v, what ever the inductor gets into the cap beyond that is free.
It would be different if we just charged an inductor directly and when source is disconnected, the inductor dumps its energy to the cap. The reason its different is in our setup, the cap is reaching 50v while the inductor is charging. ;]
I am going to go over it carefully over the next couple days.
Something I have learned. Just because what we got out, isnt enough to get it all back to the battery, doesnt mean we didnt get more out. ;] Need over cop 2 for that.
Mags
Think. If the inductor/diode can give this high eff transfer, 100v source to charge the cap to 100v, then if we cut off the source when the cap reaches 50v, thats it isnt it? We didnt take more than that from the battery at that time..
Silly
Mags
Like Tito said : battery could overcharge or explode. Dead batteries are used as a set of capacitors.They have large surface area while also shorting too much current , but may be damaged.
I have such very dead battery and it seems that can be charged but once you connect small load like 5W bulb it lights only for less then a minute from surface charge (like capacitor).
We see differences between using a cap as a source vs a battery. The cap, if its the same value as the receiver cap, drains as it discharges and the voltage along the way declines, where the battery is virtually constant compared to the cap.
This is why we only get near the same voltage transfer with the caps and with the battery we get near 2 times. Because the battery voltage doesnt decline like the cap as a source. maybe a 1F cap as source? I have one.
What we will need to do is have a good way to determine how much power was taken from the battery vs how much was stored in the cap.
As I determine if the multi core inductors will help here, I have hopes that they will help to increase any gains from the battery sourced BC BBC lol
Ok lunch is over. Back later
Mags
Hi Mag
Yes good idea to make a back trip to the source.
It calms everything down and we can reconcentrate on the important things.
Besides replaying with your first sim circuit and playing at very low speed to observe the scope of cap and inductor, i was attracted by this link which can be of interest here
http://www.overunity.com/index.php?action=downloads;sa=downfile&id=464
and some pix relative
YUP this inductors are really something fascinating
Lot of fun
And good luck at all :D
Laurent
Doing some intial testing with an amplifier as input to the multi core devices.
This is all in search of a better inductor.
Here is a vid on the 3 core shown earlier.
I used an 8ohm resistor in series with the primary for initial testing.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=EViIfsK5xjs
Mags
Ugg the yt vid is still processing It never used to take this long.
Mags
The vid is not done processing yet.
I did some other measurements that will make sense when the vid is seen
These are measure of voltage across each device,
and are just peak voltages during the sweep.
Amp out 2.96vac
Resistor 15.06vac
Primary 2.066vac
Bulb 24.98 the bulb is 14v
What doesnt make sense is the amps output is 2.96v but we have 15.06v across the resistor. ???
Measured it twice.
More this week
Mags
Ok. Here are 3 pics of my new multicore that I just finished at lunch.
Im tired of winding toroids. lol And these are small. They come in a pack of 5 smaller ones and 5 larger ones(prewired as inductors from Radio shack) These are the larger ones. .6 in. OD .3 in. ID.
But this is what I have come up with from testing. My previous 3 core had shown some truths to what the author implies. The more cores with primaries, the more voltage on the secondary. ;] So I am at 5 cores/primaries at 75 turns(6 ft) each of 30AWG Radio shack. And the secondary is 2 wires(6ft each) wound bifi for testing alternates, series, parallel, single, and both with individual capture circuits.
Each primary is .7ohm and in series is 3.5ohm which I will try tonight first with the 8ohm non inductive resistor in series and then direct to the amplifier.
In my tests with the 3 core, the 3 primaries in series saw almost 2v but the secondary(reduced to 14 turns like the primaries) was 19v. ;]
It will be interesting.
Tonight I just have to strip and connect the ends to the terminal strip and test.
Mags
Well, more winding to do. =[ but =]
Surprisingly, the output V on this one was less than the input V. 2 things I will have to try. My turns on the sec are less in no. than each primary. Figuring the diameter of the sec, each winding will need to consist of 18ft not 6 ft. This will give me 3.5ohm primary and with the sec each 2.1ohm or 1.05ohm parallel. Hopefully my voltage will be up.
If that doesnt do it then in must be the 5th core is causing an issue. 3 worked amazingly in having more sec voltage vs. primary. 4 work well too. So 6 will be next. The pdf had shown an issue where additional cores are needed, and this may be a time that the odd no. didnt work. The pdf doesnt go into those details.
I added some things tonight that helped.
I added a 4.7uf cap in series with the primary. This, at near 2khz gave me just above 40v across the primary, but only 15.4v out of the amp. The cap had 36v across it.
Must be resonance.
Also added a bridge to the output, with the sec windings in series, and a 47uf cap, then to a 10w 12v bulb.
Some pics below.
An interesting thing I tried and have to look into at lower power levels is, I put a 22uf cap across the primary while running just for a second, and the sec sent out a smoke ring. lol But it measured fine, no shorts. meter reads to .01ohm.
So what will that mean? The sec definitely got a boost from it. Resonance?
Im going to be at these things for a while. But will show anything interesting. ;] These little toroids work well. I have to get a few more packages.
Mags