Hi all,

Has anyone else had PROBLEMS trying to download post and pages at this site lately. They must have changed the software or something, because it now takes more than 60 seconds to get comments, post, Login to appear. And instead of going to the top of the current page, it goes directly to the newest post, (this part is good). This seems to me to be slowing down greatly the connection time, and new quest may think that the page is locked up and go else where.
Any thoughts?
Bob

RMatt:

This problem is very real and is frutrating.

Marathonman:

Regarding old records, Rather than any one tampering with or other people trying to be Heros, we need to see that these are very old papers that if not properly maintained will wither away. I have my Grand fathers books in 1904 or so and they will fall apart as the due to some paper eating bacterial action on old papers. We in India try to avoid that by using neem leaves being placed in between the papers of many books and then using turmeric powder mixed with water to be pasted on the sides of the books. Both of them have anti microbial properties. If this is not done, the papers would wither away without any one having to do any thing to them. It depends on how the libraries maintain the records. In spite of this we have the problem of maintaing very old records. If this is so in a family archive, just think about how a public archieves would be maintained of very old records and what would be their condition.   What methods they used in spain to maintain the Archaives are not known to me.

What you say is the arrangement of a kind of circular coil or the multiple cores of Figuera or the straight core of Buforn where the secondaries placed between the opposite poles would first face magnetic lines of force to flow from N direction to the S direction and then from the S direction to the N direction. I had tried to do that but I could not achieve that with the rotary device which is specially made to create sparks. I can confirm that sparks when created even with a tester on wire going to the through a coil wound on iron rods,  connected serially to a resistive load, increases the voltage at the load voltmeters. We checked at that time why many old devices used sparks and what sparks do but we did it in a safe way by making minisparks by taping the wires with a tester. Because the sparks increase the frequency, induced emf goes up and so voltage goes up.

But I can also confirm that I had not been able to replicate the feat that you mention as magnetic lines of force alternating in the way described by Figuera. Howver the difference between your description and the description of Figuera as seen in the patent is an orderly circular rotaton through all devices and not a half rotation. But because of the arrangement of the 7 coils, both are the of the same effect.  It applies to common sense that if the forces act like that the gyroscopic motion that you indicate would be the result. However I had not been able to perform that becuase the rotary device built to generate sparks instantly breaks down. My idea is that it is a regular rotation of the magnetic field intensity which rotates between the 7 core coils in a regular way was achieved by Figuera. I have to confess that I have not been able to replicate that feet. But we found that only when the poles are of equal strength and not varying strength we got good performance. Howver I must admit here that the pole strengths are all fixed as we relied on the number of turns to fix the magnetic field strength and not on the variation of electric current flowing through the coils in a routine way. While you indicate a half rotation, Figuera describers a full rotation which constantly fluctuates. As I said the effect is the same in any case.

Hubbard's 8 coil generator also works on the same principle of half circular motion from one side to other first and then half circular motion in the reverse path. I have succeeded in creating magnetism in all 8 coils by still we had not been able to magnetize the inner core. This is what I indicated as half rotation of the earth. Hubbard coil refuses to work if it is not half circular motion. It is similar to your putting a roller and then having a rope around the roller and then pulling the roller from Right hand extending your left hand  outand then pulling the extended left hand towards the shoulder while the right hand goes outwards. This kind of regular arrangement where current fluctuates and the coils are fixed would result in an orderly variation of the magnetic field strength.

While understanding the concept looks easy, performing it is not. This is the problem. Even if some one performs, because it is in public juris now whether they would come forward to disclose is another doubt. Figuera is reported to have achieved about 550 volts and 28 amps and without the sparks in the circular device it could not have been done. His patent also shows that the current goes to the source from where it is taken. It is not clear to me if the voltage is increased and if a bank of batteries are used, the batteries would continuously be recharged automatically. That is not known to me. Without sparks there is no way to increase the voltage.

Figueras patent indicates that he looped another coil of wire on the secondaries and that coil was used to rotate the small motor.

As is shown in the newspaper reports this device that produces sparks was specially made to Figueras configuration. What is that configuration is not known and we have only a sketch of the device and that is where the difficulty comes in. Other than that the patent papers produced by Hanon and the translations appear to be in order.

It is only in view of this difficulty to repeat what Figuera did,  that I used AC current in the three coils. Unfortunately we are not able to produce the same result again as earlier we have used a different type of wire to create a quadfilar wire. It appears that all coils have their own resonant frequencies and their harmonics at which stage or at near that stage, they would withdraw only very small current while the secondary would produce very good results. I simply do not know how to calculate the resonant frequency of a coil or resonant frequecy of primary and secondary combined and what are the harmonics of such resonant frequencies. Normally resonant frequencies are available at high frequencies only but by strange luck we have earlier succeeded in reaching this usiing ordinary coils, and ordinary soft iron and at 50 Hz frequency. We however have disassembled them and we are trying to replicate them. A much smaller coil wound with much lesser number of turns and length of wires virtually consumes nearly 16 amps at input and causes significant losses at secondary output putting up a performance worse than a normal transformer.   

Regarding the resonant frequency action please see this video on youtube..http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kQdcwDCBoNY

We by some mistake, appear to have done it at 50 Hz current due to coil arrangement. Some how the coils made by us earlier with a lot of turns absorbed very little amperage while now at much lower number of turns the coils simply take too much of amperage. The performance that we witnessed earlier was not present now. What I feel is that what we have done is to reach some how unknown to us, the resonant frequency or its harmonics, in a coil using 50 Hz current due to the strange shape of the coil and the excessive number of turns. Since we were testing a concept if it would work, we did not even not down the number of turns and simply wound a lot of coils. This rather unexpected success was not due to any thing but due to resonant frequency or its harmonics being achieved by the unusal coil shape.

We have used the coils in a different way to produce more than 100% output results and to be precise 116% results which I cannot give due to patent application reasons. After filing the PCT application, I promise to provide that information. We are able to replicate that performance without any difficulty even yesterday but at lesser number of secondary turns it turns out to be only 103% efficient. We simply need to keep on increasing the secondary turns and check other things. 

This performance being not natural, was earlier verified by a Professor who checked the configuration and felt that the measurements will need to be done with very accurate meters before he can accept the results. He felt that however instead of using soft iron rods if we use nanomaterials used for advanced transformers, we can significantly improve the performance. Let me just say that competent people are studying that design.

I will post more information next week.

Regarding the coil that blocks electricity from moving forward, I had been instructed not to disclose any thing and I'm sorry I have to concede defeat to TK..I have further instructions not to disclose coil shapes and wire patterns. I'm sorry I cannot oblige you.

I will not answer any questions. My apologies.

As nobody answered my question if there are any working builds, and as I refuse to read 50 pages when the device is said to be "simple", I'll add some thoughts here anyway.


First of all, based on the intial patent description, this looks just like an ordinary ac/ac transformer to me.


It may be special that the pulses of "N" and "S" are overlapping, but that's about it.


Is it a scam? The author doesn't want money. But he sells books, eg. "science heresy". So maybe it's a prank, llike the many utube vids of fake OU? I have to say, if it is a prank, then it is extremly well done!


Third option is: it's real. I don't see any other options.


I also don't see why it can't be put on a single torroid core with 4 coils, why those air gaps? After all, we want to simulate a magnet that comes close, so a max flux should be the goal.


Yeah, well, seems like I'm talking to walls again, however.

NRamaswami Most of the problems you/r having can be resolved with methods of construction already known in other patents.I would site Tesla for the most part because all his works are in collections which makes it easier to access.
  How can one use a magnet to block current for example. Well it is firstly stated wrong. How ever to keep it short the answer is you convert all of it to magnetic fields and place the same sign poles against each other so they repel. In turn the current is retarded because it can not advance as a magnetic field against another magnetic field of same sign. Actually it could be reversed or forced to flow backwards if the correct field was stronger at the proper time.
  The induced coils are being hit with south pole magnetic fields.No north pole fields are aimed at any of the induced coils. Like'n it to a super bloch wall. The control is no more then variable resistance in rotation that is fed by a single source of current from a battery or mains. The fine line of the bloch wall is or needs to be centered. If both inducer magnets were turn on at the same time with south facing poles facing the induced coil or space it would be in.The super bloch wall would fall dead center of the space.Each set has to be centered perfectly. Other wise you create what amounts to cavitation between sets and you lose power.  It needs to be built on adjustable rig.
  You could use a simple model for proof of concept. Use two magnets set up the same way. Build a coil with no iron core mounted on a piece of wood and stationary.build a fork of wood and mount a magnet on each tine facing the coil inbetween the two tines.Make sure you have a way to adjust the distance between tines. Move the fork side to side so only one magnet at a time is close to the coil. In turn the bloch wall is traveling across the coil with the magnets opposing each other. Do it fast and there ya go. Add a iron core that is longer then the coil and reduce the movement of the magnets. The bloch wall has to pass the entire coil not the entire core. If you go past the entire core you get stuck.

   The difference is that figuera's version the magnets are on or fully saturated then the resistance control is turned on to bring it into electrical motion pushing the current against the fields which repel ,stopping any new current from entering. The amount of current required and will fit once turned into a field will just bounce back and forth in a sense between inducers. The induced circuit is actually of little concern to the action of the inducers. Provided it is scaled so the load is not greater then the output of the induced coils how ever arranged. A field in motion will remain a field because of the motion.Certainly you cant expect something to remain in motion if it does not exist.

   This device is the simplistic version,it can be improved with out much difficulty in the methods of winding the coils. Its the conceptual understanding that counts because you can apply that to what ever tickles your fancy. Even a shake up flash light can be modified to work off this notion using two magnets.
Most of you dont want to consider this to be the case. The only drawing in the patents which indicate any reference to the orientation of the inducer magnets is the one with the rotory  resister. Unless the laws of physics are different in your location the inducers have the north poles facing out and the south poles facing into the induced from both sides. The number of lines of force are doubled at the intersection of repulsion by angular opposition. In an attraction configuration the lines of force will decay and build between electro magnets but they will still represent a single magnetic path around the entire collection including the induced.The induced coil will never see the pole end.It will be as if you were pushing a magnet through a coil but not far enough to do anything. The magnet and it's field has to leave,exit, the coil completely to produce any real measure of effect. Then reverse direction and in doing so it will produce even more then it did when a single pole went through the coil. When the other side of the magnet goes through the coil it's lines of force are now angularly reversed a 180 degree difference. When two opposing fields go in and out of a coil they are 360 degrees reversed. Which one do you think is greater?

   

watch this video on you tube i think it is relevant to your 180 - 360 degree rotation dilemma. i know it is about a single phase motor but look at the double revolving field theory.  http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=awrUxv7B-a8&list=PLsZ7gsPPXNMO9K32jh2f   i think the same effect is possible with DC as long as the currant is varied from high to low with opposite polarities i.e. Single revolving field  or am i looking at this wrong. by the way both of you are a credit to this forum....thank you.