Richard VIALLE's new theory about negative mass and overunity

[profitis]

ionic displacement current with hydrogen @attomix?

[Khwartz]

@Atommix

I am not qualified at all to know the value of your work and you must be free to publish it in this website. But please, even if "negative mass" in the title of this thread, could you open a new thread about your own work so that it would not too much interfere with the continuity of the work done here?

Anyway, it is just my opinion and invite the other users to say if they prefer a new thread for or to mix the whole here.

Nevertheless, the work of Atommix looks huge enough to justify a new thread and to avoid the risk here of confusion.

Cheers,
K.

[tim123]

I agree with Khwartz, Atommix, please start your own thread.

This thread is about the Vialle gen. Let's keep it on topic.

[tim123]

Updates:

1) ZVS driver:

  - I bought this ZVS driver but it failed. I replaced the mosfets - but it still doesn't work - so...
  - I've ordered some parts and I'm going to re-use what I can from the board and build a new one.
  - Likely Problem - it may not run at a high enough frequency. Will see...

2) Coil:
- I've wrapped a second layer on the coil (not yet tested) - for 2 reasons:

a) To equalise the voltage in the coil around each bar...
  With a 1-layered coil, the voltage drop across the coil would be reflected in the bars - i.e. the bar nearest the +ve terminal would see a higher-voltage / larger electric field than the one near the -ve.
  This provides a mechanism for capacitive coupling *between* the bars. (I'm pretty sure)

  With a 2-layered coil - where the second layer comes back to the start, the voltage drop is equal all the way along the coil.
  So this *should* eliminate cap-coupling between the 2 inner bars.
  (It wouldn't eliminate it between the bars and GND though - but that doesn't matter)

b) Verpies said that a single layer winding acts like a single turn in a toroid coil (in a different plane) - and it seems logical that it should apply to a straight coil too, to an extent.
  So it may have some bearing on this too.

3) Homopolar Generator similarities...

There are *may be* some similarities between the VG and the HPG...

If you re-arrange the HPG to be linear it comes out similar to the VG.
So the magnetic field may be inducing current flow by that mechanism too...
Just a thought.


Tim

[Khwartz]

Updates:

1) ZVS driver:

  - I bought this ZVS driver but it failed. I replaced the mosfets - but it still doesn't work - so...
  - I've ordered some parts and I'm going to re-use what I can from the board and build a new one.
  - Likely Problem - it may not run at a high enough frequency. Will see...

2) Coil:
- I've wrapped a second layer on the coil (not yet tested) - for 2 reasons:

a) To equalise the voltage in the coil around each bar...
  With a 1-layered coil, the voltage drop across the coil would be reflected in the bars - i.e. the bar nearest the +ve terminal would see a higher-voltage / larger electric field than the one near the -ve.
  This provides a mechanism for capacitive coupling *between* the bars. (I'm pretty sure)

  With a 2-layered coil - where the second layer comes back to the start, the voltage drop is equal all the way along the coil.
  So this *should* eliminate cap-coupling between the 2 inner bars.
  (It wouldn't eliminate it between the bars and GND though - but that doesn't matter)

b) Verpies said that a single layer winding acts like a single turn in a toroid coil (in a different plane) - and it seems logical that it should apply to a straight coil too, to an extent.
  So it may have some bearing on this too.

3) Homopolar Generator similarities...

There are *may be* some similarities between the VG and the HPG...

If you re-arrange the HPG to be linear it comes out similar to the VG.
So the magnetic field may be inducing current flow by that mechanism too...
Just a thought.


Tim

Hi tim.

Just to say I thought you were about a capacitive coupling between the bars and the coil, which was indeed checked by Pascal. Between the bars themselves is very something else and even not sure it is something to be avoid to get better results.

Anyway,  good to have a try but remember you didn't obtain with standard setups the huge COPs we are supposed to obtain with the standard setups.  So imho, hard to know if any setup will be better because you have not yet any true comparison base. So still I think that would be better methodology to first achieve what has been already achieved apparently as level of results, before to go on our own ideas.

Best regards,
K.