Part 2.

QuoteMy first move is to experiment with this coil. I have done preliminary experiments that shows me that it works well with longitudinal energy or impulses.

Well, I look forward to the day when you can share your data.  By the way, you don't have any kind of "monopoly" on "impulses" like you seem to imply.  Your "impulses" are really and truly nothing special.  What's a computer motherboard?  Billions and billions of impulses per second with controlled slew rates.  They are not strange and unique to what you guys play with like you seem to be suggesting.

QuoteAs for you insisting I didn't answer your question well to be honest I did and you are ignoring the post.

Here is the question again:  You have an ideal inductor of three Henries.   You connect the inductor to an ideal voltage source of seven volts.  What will happen?

Will yo do me the courtesy of copying and pasting your answer here?  Because I sure as hell don't see an answer from you and I am suspecting that you are going to say something like it is in one of your linked clips or linked references and I should go look there.  That will not cut it. I have now asked you three times for your answer.

QuoteYour memory is bad and half of what you think you remember you make up in some kind of logical fallacy.

That is not true in the least bit.  Please don't cynically take advantage of my honesty.  By the same token, you dug up the transistor story and tried to use it against me.  I gave you a full explanation in my reply and you did not even acknowledge it.  Plus in that thread I also acknowledged my mistake and apologized.  Being a real person on the forums takes character and courage and it's unfortunate we see so much weak-kneed spinning at times.  Let's not play silly pi**ing in the wind games.  Is that a deal?

QuoteAs for proof by experiment lets look at this video which is similar but different.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kPWVbTk5Z9Q

Honestly, there is nothing in that clip at all.  It's just the same old pulsing coil deal a la Bedini.  Tinman has another year under his belt now and I am willing to bet you he knows what major mistake he made in that clip at this point in time.

My gut feel Jbignes5, is that if you share your bench work and make YouTube clips and are prepared to discuss them here, then you are going to be in for a shock if you are willing to engage with people like me.  I have watched a lot of pulse motor and other clips and I have never seen anything out of the ordinary.  That's often the crux of the matter when you have a beginning experimenter.  The circuit under test is doing exactly what it is supposed to be doing but the experimenter mistakenly makes fragile tenuous connections with the esoteric stuff that you see on the forums.

Looking forward to seeing your answer.

Milehigh

Quote from: MileHigh on July 14, 2013, 03:11:28 AM
Jbignes5:

I am not going to comment too much on your unusual view of the solar system and the displacement pressure stuff and longitudinal waves and related matters.  I am just going to make select comments.

"Radiant field" is a meaningless term unless you state exactly what you mean by that.

I read something the other day were they sad that the "crystal batteries" are nothing more than galvanic current and the moisture was being provided by the air.

Yes I am familiar with that idea that the solar system must be powered.  I still in a way find is shocking that people that are ostensibly interested in science in one form or another make statements like this.  All of the planets are in a perpetual free fall around the sun.  Do you get that?

If only the fantasy you write about above was true.

Honestly I view the statement above as a complete and total cop-out.  You guys have been talking about this stuff for years and years and saying that you can't measure it and need new measuring devices.  Well, WHERE ARE THEY?  I have a very cynical view about this.  I view it as a curtain to hide behind.  "We think we know it's thee but we can't measure it."  It's like saying I have a $400K sports car but you just can't see it.  It's too convenient and if the enthusiasts say it and believe it among themselves then you are basically giving the scammers Carte Blanche to use it too to pull off their cons.

To be continued in part 2.

MileHigh

My unusual view of the Universe is from this group of scientists who are actually looking at the Universe not with theories but with their eyes and then explaining what they see with real data and results of real experiments. They are rewriting the logical fallacies that we all have been subjected to our entire lives with facts.


http://www.thunderbolts.info/wp/


I suggest you read and listen and educate yourself to the truth.

It doesn't matter what I think about radiance. Go look it up, it is very clear what radiance is both in my usage of the term and it's meaning.

You read counter logical fallacies posed by people who have not done the experiments. In fact the galvanic response is exactly what they were and are trying to remove from the crystal batteries. Again you only remember what lets you support your logical fallacies. In the current experiments the galvanic response has been all but removed from the experiment. A very very small percentage of the power is done through galvanic response. But you read one little blurb and wow it all about galvanic response. Then again I encourage you to actually do the experiments and see for yourself. I have done the experiments, in fact I am still doing the experiments.

First we have to do the experiment then find out what the problems are in testing the devices. There is an order to doing experiments. First you must ask ta question. Then design the experiment that might answer that question. Then an accurate way of measurement must be designed to test it without damaging the test equipment. I have not gotten that far yet in this experiment because I have to sit here and defend my position to someone who just "for fun" Likes to poke holes in everything one says without doing one experiment themselves. Because you don't know the terminology or even the method that we are talking about then how can you state anything at all about these investigations?

This brings me to your reasons to do as such. There is a great force behind the current views that you hold so sacred. The theories make huge sums in cash and if Tesla was right and we find a way to live without slaving our lives away it will destroy the little bubble you guys live in. You know the ones who are making huge amounts of cash from US. You state you are a professional in the engineering field. You make your stream of cash on us and will protect that stream with every last breath. That includes making logical fallacies to support your income stream. We on the other hand are here to free humanity from scumbags like you. You lie with every breath and when shown those lies close your eyes and continue on with the attacks of credentials and logical fallacies ad numb. I for one will not be answering your tripe anymore after this last batch of posts. I have better things in my life to attend to. Like my experiments. You do this for "Fun", we are doing this to free ourselves from the likes of your kind that only feed off of our hard work like the parasites you are.

You ask all kind of questions and this is because you are outside of your field as I have said many many times. You continue to ask these questions and post after post counter with your logical fallacies without even going to this great bank of information they call the internet. Research the field before saying one more thing. If there are terminologies you don't understand then go out and find your answers. One tip don't just look at one results when looking into this field. Research is not just cherry picking the answer that falls to your "Thoughts". it should be a consensus of information or at least a majority of the information agreeing.

You also need to stop looking at the videos we post as just in and out measurements. There is a lot being said about the comparison video of bifilar vs. solenoid style coils. Of which you did not even pick up on and which I have been trying to point you towards. But the problem is that this is what you guys do time and time again. Instead of looking at the video and seeing the interesting thing he was trying to point out you make assumptions and instantly move to the input output argument. It is starring you in the face and despite all others efforts to point you in the right direction you harp on other aspects instead of what was the point of the video.

Again I will stop answering your posts and you can stop "challenging" my posts which the challenge is utter BS.

As for the ideal this and the ideal that well IDEAL=MADE UP. It is not real in any sense of the word. There is no such thing as an IDEAL anything. That is only a suppression tactic put out by people who do not like transients. They remove the transient from the equation and then don't have to deal with it. IDEAL=FAKE=MADE  UP or NOT REAL. Hows this for an ideal situation. You not being here messing with our investigations and experiments. Now that would be an ideal situation. Go have "fun" somewhere else and let the big boys experiment in peace with out disruptions and delay tactics or logical fallacies. This is not a healthy debate because in order to debate you must know something about the opposing sides take on it. You are just posing counter attacks without even knowing the terminology or concepts for which we are trying to experiment on.

Again I call out your reasoning for doing as you are doing and that is two things GREED and PRIDE.

Quote from: jbignes5 on July 14, 2013, 09:00:12 AM

My unusual view of the Universe is from this group of scientists who are actually looking at the Universe not with theories but with their eyes and then explaining what they see with real data and results of real experiments. They are rewriting the logical fallacies that we all have been subjected to our entire lives with facts.


http://www.thunderbolts.info/wp/


I suggest you read and listen and educate yourself to the truth.

It doesn't matter what I think about radiance. Go look it up, it is very clear what radiance is both in my usage of the term and it's meaning.

You read counter logical fallacies posed by people who have not done the experiments. In fact the galvanic response is exactly what they were and are trying to remove from the crystal batteries. Again you only remember what lets you support your logical fallacies. In the current experiments the galvanic response has been all but removed from the experiment. A very very small percentage of the power is done through galvanic response. But you read one little blurb and wow it all about galvanic response. Then again I encourage you to actually do the experiments and see for yourself. I have done the experiments, in fact I am still doing the experiments.

First we have to do the experiment then find out what the problems are in testing the devices. There is an order to doing experiments. First you must ask ta question. Then design the experiment that might answer that question. Then an accurate way of measurement must be designed to test it without damaging the test equipment. I have not gotten that far yet in this experiment because I have to sit here and defend my position to someone who just "for fun" Likes to poke holes in everything one says without doing one experiment themselves. Because you don't know the terminology or even the method that we are talking about then how can you state anything at all about these investigations?

This brings me to your reasons to do as such. There is a great force behind the current views that you hold so sacred. The theories make huge sums in cash and if Tesla was right and we find a way to live without slaving our lives away it will destroy the little bubble you guys live in. You know the ones who are making huge amounts of cash from US. You state you are a professional in the engineering field. You make your stream of cash on us and will protect that stream with every last breath. That includes making logical fallacies to support your income stream. We on the other hand are here to free humanity from scumbags like you. You lie with every breath and when shown those lies close your eyes and continue on with the attacks of credentials and logical fallacies ad numb. I for one will not be answering your tripe anymore after this last batch of posts. I have better things in my life to attend to. Like my experiments. You do this for "Fun", we are doing this to free ourselves from the likes of your kind that only feed off of our hard work like the parasites you are.

You ask all kind of questions and this is because you are outside of your field as I have said many many times. You continue to ask these questions and post after post counter with your logical fallacies without even going to this great bank of information they call the internet. Research the field before saying one more thing. If there are terminologies you don't understand then go out and find your answers. One tip don't just look at one results when looking into this field. Research is not just cherry picking the answer that falls to your "Thoughts". it should be a consensus of information or at least a majority of the information agreeing.

You also need to stop looking at the videos we post as just in and out measurements. There is a lot being said about the comparison video of bifilar vs. solenoid style coils. Of which you did not even pick up on and which I have been trying to point you towards. But the problem is that this is what you guys do time and time again. Instead of looking at the video and seeing the interesting thing he was trying to point out you make assumptions and instantly move to the input output argument. It is starring you in the face and despite all others efforts to point you in the right direction you harp on other aspects instead of what was the point of the video.

Again I will stop answering your posts and you can stop "challenging" my posts which the challenge is utter BS.

As for the ideal this and the ideal that well IDEAL=MADE UP. It is not real in any sense of the word. There is no such thing as an IDEAL anything. That is only a suppression tactic put out by people who do not like transients. They remove the transient from the equation and then don't have to deal with it. IDEAL=FAKE=MADE  UP or NOT REAL. Hows this for an ideal situation. You not being here messing with our investigations and experiments. Now that would be an ideal situation. Go have "fun" somewhere else and let the big boys experiment in peace with out disruptions and delay tactics or logical fallacies. This is not a healthy debate because in order to debate you must know something about the opposing sides take on it. You are just posing counter attacks without even knowing the terminology or concepts for which we are trying to experiment on.

Again I call out your reasoning for doing as you are doing and that is two things GREED and PRIDE.

Great post!


" Again I will stop answering your posts and you can stop "challenging" my posts which the challenge is utter BS."

I agree and I will stop also. Pages are filling up with garbage because of it.

Continue on. 

Mags

   If an electronic cloud forms a medium.   And we compress this medium by moving a charged plate straight away at it.  Would a longitudinal wave move through the electron cloud like a sound wave?   If tesla was charging his ground terminal with lots and lots and lots of electrons would they create electrical sound waves in any free electrons in the earth?   In a klystron microwave tube we get a stream of electrons to move from cathode to anode that is caused to become rarified and compressed along the flow path.   A fixed observer perpendicular from the stream is alternately charged from more negative to less negative without one  electron moving from the stream to the observer.   His  hair will alternately stand on end then collapse against his skull due to the  charge of the clumps of electrons moving in the stream.  In an electroscope you can move the gold leafs by just passing a glass rod with a wire in it connected to ground near the metal at the top of the electroscope.   Electrons in the metal are pushed into the gold leafs and they move apart.  Again not one electron moves from the glass rod to the electroscope.  What does move from the grounded metal to the electroscope is the electric field of the electrons inside the rod.  This is how we couple two resonant tanks together.   We use a capacitor between two tanks.    As  the electric field in one tank changes it excites oscillations in the second tank.  The second tank is excited using electrostatic induction or capacitave coupling.

My question sparks is this:


Would two bifilar pancake coils that are connected via two capacitors create an oscillator? Now that would be an experiment. As I go and perfect my technique for winding the coils this will have to be looked into. Would stacking the coils in parallel reduce the nominal resistance of the wire and allow for better oscillations? Or should we use the litz wire method to do that?