Eddy currents and their implications

[frankly]

The coils is oriented in such a way that it provides a linear acceleration on
the disk that is proportional to the magnetic flux.  Non-ferrous metals like
aluminum and copper are resistive to magnetic flux.  If you put the center
of the coil on the edge of the aluminum disk then it can only spin one way.
Well, that is assuming the current is rectified, or the disk is omnidirectional
with a ratchet mechanism.  Yes, those are eddy currents due to the flux
resistive nature of aluminum, and the magnetic flux generated by a coil.

That "god particle" you are talking about I call aether particles, and they
are what is magnetic flux.  The most basic stuff that can be.  Literally
the canvas upon which the universe is painted...

In rare circumstances a coil, by itself, will go overunity.  This is due to external
energy sources.  Usually coils and transformers are exceedingly lossy.  A coil
can be stimulated by external sources to produce current, but it is limited by its
physics.  An example would be an alternator, where spinning magnet induces
current in the coil.  This could also be a number of things such as an ionized
cloud, or a lightning bolt, or fluctuating planetary magnetic fields.  Everything
is relative to the point of observation.  Inductors, by themselves, do not create
current, but when acted upon by external forces can produce substantial current.
Enough current to supply nations, or worlds...

Hi Z.monkey. I wish I could agree with your breakdown of the watt meter, but I can't.

The coils are not aligned with the edge of the disk, they are pointing at the face, the one, for amperage use, faces the one for voltage level. These produce an eddy current as a standing wave, which travels, like a spinning top upon a table, through the disk at right angles to the applied electric force until they meet the permanent magnet, where they are drained away. In this draining away, the exert pressure upon the disk, turning it.

If the energy used to generate these were truly equal on either side, no net movement of the disk would occur, but an oscillating motion would occur instead, and, if you look into the early designs of these, this is exactly what you will find. And. yes, ratcheting devices were employed.

There are still some smaller Eddy currents formed in the opposing direction, which act to stop the disks rotation, which is why they need two permanent magnets, but these are small compared to the others, and the magnets are movable, and as such, afford callibration, done on site with a known load.

If you like, I can show you the internals of one I have here, that I spent many hours meditating upon to solve their operation process.

Also, I have here a rather large permanent magnet and some magnetic viewing film, which I can demonstrate to you with that, rather than being deflected by aluminium, the flux path is NOT shifted, but becomes attached to the dipoles of the aluminium at right angles. This means when approaching, or moving sideways, the aluminium disk, there is no apparent "stickyness". However, upon pulling away the disk with speed, along the same plane as the flux path, there is a vaccum felt, rather like pulling a solid disk from the surface of the water.

This would be rather harder to demonstrate, as I do not have a sensitive force meter. However, an experiment could be contrived if need be.

However, I suggest that my energies could be better spent, and any questions you have that seem to not align with your personal learning, you get the tools to experiment yourself to determine the facts.

As to that, I wonder, has anyone done the experiment with the counterwound primary coils energised from the mains yet?

How about any of the other things..

As I said, I can describe to you proof experiments, but it is up to each of you to do these things yourself, to "see" the truth. If, perhaps, I am wrong, I will revisit the example, to find the problem. I am often wrong, and shoot from the hip sometimes, but that keeps me humble. I think!

The facts are simple to see. Such as the "right hand rule" being a convention rather than a fact.

A place to start would be there. Proving to yourselves, that energy as it is today, whatever the source, is fractured and incomplete and can never provide the required magnetic signature to "find the method" of converting high voltage to low amperage, as Tesla did with ease.

Frankly.

[MotovilovDN]

Обычные Ñ,рансÑ,,ормаÑ,оры переменного Ñ,ока, использующие круглую проволоку, имеюÑ, большие поÑ,ери энергии. Также они имеюÑ, низкий коэÑ,,Ñ,,ициенÑ, мощносÑ,и (большое реакÑ,ивное сопроÑ,ивление) и большой вес. ЭÑ,о  очень сущесÑ,венные недосÑ,аÑ,ки для космической Ñ,еÑ...нологии.
ТрансÑ,,ормаÑ,оры посÑ,оянного Ñ,ока (эÑ,о Ñ,рансÑ,,ормаÑ,оры МоÑ,овилова) Ñ,акиÑ... недосÑ,аÑ,ков не имеюÑ,
Conventional  AC transformers that use a round wire, have large energy losses. They also have low power (high reactance), and a lot of weight. This is a very significant disadvantages for space technology.

DC transformers (transformers of Motovilov), such deficiencies do not have:


http://foto.mail.ru/mail/motovilov_utr/54/58.html#58
http://foto.mail.ru/mail/motovilov_utr/54/58.html#66

[frankly]

Ok.

This is something I found a while back. Apparently, the output of the generator is 6 watts maximum @ 80 volts. I don't know what the losses are in the transformer, but apparently he is driving the primary with oscillating DC.........http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VCTZkiPRGQg

I have asked a few people now what they think the energy needed to sustain a plasma field inside the globe is, with no response.

Any input from here would be appreciated.

Frankly.

[MotovilovDN]

I can not translate, so I am assuming that your English is the translation, the adverts are not very informative for me.

The transformers used are 'auto-transformers" since they are based on a single conductive layer split into different length's.

Tom Webb

ПреобразоваÑ,ель в целом содержиÑ, Ñ,рансÑ,,ормаÑ,ор и авÑ,оÑ,рансÑ,,ормаÑ,ор:
http://worldwide.espacenet.com/publicationDetails/biblio?CC=WO&NR=9421028&KC=&FT=E
http://www.ntpo.com/patents_electricity/electricity_7/electricity_732.shtml

The known power source comprises input (G1,T) and output (G2,T) converter components with LT and MT converter cells, and T >/= O galvanic cross coupling conversion transformers with bifilar windings (2, 9, 12, 16, 20, 22, 24, 26, 29); LO >/= 2 and MO >/= 2 converter cells are based on "Motovilov's transformers" and direct current power transformers each containing two symmetrical groups of windings and rectifiers, including some to effect pulse control of the direct current in the direct current power transformers. In order to reduce the effect of pulse and alternating current in the windings of the direct current power transformers and cross coupling conversion transformers on the leakage inductance Ls in the windings, and thereby also improve the source frequency characteristics, the function of cross coupling and voltage conversion in the source are split between the cross coupling conversion transformers (with a transfer factor of 1 and correspondingly lower Ls levels) and the direct current power transformers introduced for that purpose at G1,1 and G2,1 and intended for use with direct current (2, 9, 22, 24, 29); LO and MO converter cells with direct current power transformers for work with direct current are connected in a special multi-cell circuit characterized by voltage levels Y = 1+2<L>0<(M>0<)> at the circuit, the total power of all the converter cells being P < 2P1 where P1 is the power of the first converter cell; the purpose of the said circuit is to ensure smooth adjustment of the source output voltage without pulse current at the source output or in the direct current power transformers. It is further proposed that there should be a connection L1 >/= 2 and M1 >/= 2 of the converter cells in the multi-cell circuit shown (12, 16).

[forest]

MotovilovDN

Would be much easier if you had this patent translated to English.