PhysicsProf Steven E. Jones circuit shows 8x overunity ?

[nul-points]

An increasing battery voltage does not mean the battery is gaining energy. Dozens of experimenters on this site have been fooled by this.

i agree with the 'intention' of this statement - but, as they say in all the best 'law films' : "it's the truth, but not the whole truth"...

the 'truth' is that OUR CIRCUIT may not be increasing the energy of the battery - but the WHOLE truth is that the battery energy IS increasing


let's think about it - a battery has an effective internal resistance, let's call it Rbatt

let's apply an external load, Rload, across a battery, soon after a previous heavier load

the voltage we measure at the battery terminal, Vb, is a result of the 'potential division' of the 'real' battery potential, Vint, by the combined effect of Rbatt and Rload:

Vb = Vint x Rload /(Rbatt + Rload)

for example, let Vint = 12V,  Rload = 11 ohm, and Rbatt = 1 ohm (to  simplify math only!)

Vb = 12 x (11/ (1 + 11)) = 12 x 11/12 = 11V

now if we have a constant Rload (and we haven't recharged the battery), then the only ways for Vb to have increased since its previous load, are EITHER

a) the internal voltage, Vint, has increased

- OR -

b) the internal resistance, Rbatt, has decreased

BOTH of these states are taken as an indication that the battery is now in a higher state of charge - effectively, the available energy stored in the battery HAS increased



whether we like it or not, when a battery terminal voltage INCREASES under constant load then the available energy in that battery HAS increased


that in itself is a matter of interest to me, at least (as i mentioned a few posts ago, in relation to the tests i've been reporting here about looping some of the o/p energy back to the battery)

however, as we've all acknowledged, it is possible for this operation to occur WITHOUT that extra energy coming TOTALLY from our circuit

and so THIS is a closer approximation to the WHOLE truth about battery 'relaxation'

(and this is what is often mistaken as an increase caused solely by our circuit)

as Nick has rightly pointed out, what we've just seen referred to cells/batteries can ALSO apply to capacitors - and not just the 'relaxation' effect

(i give some experimental evidence of this in my PDF file 'The Secret Life of Capacitors', the subject of one of my threads here in this forum)
  link to PDF download page-->http://www.overunity.com/index.php?action=downloads;sa=view;down=479


it seems to me that 'battery relaxation' and 'dielectric adsorption' are, at present, merely 'labels' not explanations - there is real increase in stored energy and this must either have come from some internal conversion of kinetic energy back to potential energy at the micro (quantum) level, or else there has been an input of energy from the ambient environment


just my 3 x (2 / (1+2)) cents! 
np


http://docsfreelunch.blogspot.com

[frankly]

Right -- as I noted, this could be "battery relaxation" (for example).

With regard to the ideal toroid experiment -- I wrote,
The question is, how is the change in magnetic field at the center of the loop SENSED by the loop, when the magnetic field outside the toroid itself is ZERO?    There is no magnetic field to affect the electrons in the wire, from the toroid, just an electric field.  And does this electric field propagate outward from the toroid at the speed of light?  I suppose so.

I'm hoping Frankly will consider the appearance of the electric field outside the toroid in the absence of a magnetic field outside the toroid, in his theoretical model.

Well, although I have not received any enlightenment from .99 regarding the questions I posed to HIS/HER statements, only the idea that I misunderstood HIS/HER statements somehow, (and if so, would like explanation please), I will answer this somewhat crossed message question.

Firstly, please be specific.....are we looking at a solenoid, or a torroid? Secondly, There is no Bloch wall formed on an electromagnet with present energisation, so a different set of phenomena are used to establish the rules of interaction than are used with magnets alone. Thirdly, with a torroid, or closed core transformer, as you rightly point out, all the magnetic energy for "induction" is within the core, therefore, how can this be "transferred" to the adjoining coil and provide useable energy via the collapsing or building magnetic lines of force.....and do it so well? The only answer is that the wire is being energised in some way that is not immediately apparent, and is occuring within the bounds of the primary coils' geometry, as it cannot be "sensed" untill the secondarie's winds are lower to the face of the torroid than the primary, so energy is lost. In the same manner, by placing wraps further out, there is loss. I wonder, has anyone used flat strap to wind a transformer? Probably not in nearly a hundred years. Interestingly, this is what was used for transformers with the AC electricity in it's early form...wire ribbon. Why? What did they know that seems to have been forgotten, or missed?

Previously I asked why amperage and magnetic strength of the B field were related. I wait for an answer.

As to "just conveying my thoughts" on what the form of the wheelwork of nature really is?? That thing that is the water in our pond? If I did that, what would you learn? No. How about you reflect on what I have said. The answer is there. Right before you. Only one person thus far has even attempted to think and imagine a solution, then, (hopefully) test that idea with apparatus. Oops, sorry. Did I just suggest that someone do science?

I wonder, did anyone measure the mass of the plates in the battery that is charging and measure the capacitance of the entire circuit and find the resonant frequency.....to see if there is a correlation with the running frequency?

What of these reported "sweet spots" with the present design?

Where are the joyous words extolling the solution has been found, for it is these that prove the thoughts. The basis of the harmonic scale of matter.

Have any mass measurements been done?

Why does the mass of the primary and secondary have to be so similar in transformers? What does "harmonic resonance" lock onto?

We hear the standing wave in our well tuned musical instruments all the time. Pianos are a prime example. Why is it that no-one has applied that thinking to energy amplification.

I recently learned that an "amplifier" in electrical engineering is not "amplifying" anything. To amplify means to increase in strength. So, the end result must be that energy is greater out than in via some sort of fulcrum or pulley. Like a gearbox, amplifying the mechanical energy to push the car faster with less engine speed. Utilising inertia to relieve torque. This was the reason for heavy flywheels in old engine designs. The storage of inertia so the energy from it could be amplified via pulleys and such.

However, nowadays it seems that to amplify a signal means to hold back on the original strength of the current, or working force, and control it. This means that the highest amplification of the signal possible is the same as having no amplifier present. The control of the signal DOWNWARDS in strength is referred to as amplification. It is this type of thinking that prevents discovery of the truth.

How, in what manner, can we amplify energy when we are not taught that energy spins and has inertia, just like a flywheel??

This motion is called reactance, reluctance and resistance and is the source of all of the original though forms and quaternion equations that once described, in perfect detail, the overall manner in which electricity operates based upon circles not lines.

How can vectors describe rotation of subatomic particles? It cannot. So, "science" invents quantum math to blur the edges of their straight lines, and gets further and further away from the truth.

Anyway, I am now ranting.

Back to the issue at hand.

What is affected by the energy from a source of electricity to form a magnetic field around the energised current carrying medium?

Ohh, and also, if you take out the core of a transformer and leave the coils adjacent, does it still work? Why? What must be done to prevent them interacting and transferring energy one to the other with the changing magnetic field?

This type of science is what must be done, all over again, to find the truth. I cannot just blurt it out, for I will not be believed. I tried that once before.

I have no credentials, only experimental experience. And, without the math skills to back me up, all I have is these words.

I can point the way, but you must walk.

I can show you pictures, and videos 'till the cows come home. These would only be the source of more conjecture.

I tried asking for expert assistance, none came. So, I now ask the questions of you that I asked myself, in order that you may also do the same thinking. This is what a teacher does, so the student may learn for themselves. Only in that manner will the result, once realised, be believed.

Do the investigations I suggested, think on the real reasons behind the simple processes, and the truth will be revealed.

Or, you can simply do nothing but continue along, blundering in the dark. Frankly, I don't give a damn.

[NickZ]

  I think that all Jt circuits have a certain amount of feed-back to source. But, most all of these circuits are drawing more juice than they are returning, and will therefore always discharge the battery. The battery or capacitor while forming part of a circuit also have a natural resonance factor of one type of another. Once disturbed or drained by the draw, will try again to reach an equilibrium, if and when it can do so. And will do so by drawing from the only available source, Aether.   This is a usually overlooked by most people as being relatively unimportant in ordinary electronics circuits. 
   I also feel that the small capacitor (103, 471, etz) that is being used in the Hartley or Backwards Jt type circuits may be one of the keys to this anomaly. 
  Now some people are finding that you can light the led, by just using coils, and yes, that capacitor, with no battery, just a ground connection.
   My two pesos...

[rukiddingme]

TIL that a microwave oven can be used as a Faraday cage.

Thank you.

[xee2]

i agree with the 'intention' of this statement - but, as they say in all the best 'law films' : "it's the truth, but not the whole truth"...

I was referring to the MoPoZcO video. But the statement is true. I (and many others) have noticed that if a run down battery is left over night, without any energy being applied, it will sometimes have a higher voltage in the morning. If the voltage can increase without any power being added then battery voltage increase is not a good indicator of energy being added to the battery. I am not saying this is always the case, only that using battery voltage is not a reliable way to measure energy in a battery since it can sometimes be misleading.