Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE

[antijon]

anybody tried this?

[hanon]

Doug,
Should I close the magnetic circuit or it is just the opposite? Even Closing the circuit there is always a gap between the Y coil and the magnetic circuit so flux lines will not jump so easily. Maybe they just jump out of the core when they collide and are forced to come out. But this just my guess. Maybe I am wrong.

Another doubt is that if I should use more than one group to get any juice. I remember that someonne posted that the design shoud be with confronted poles with all poles grouped as

NNNN   but never this NSNS
NNNN                            NSNS

because in the second design the lines will go from N to the closest S without going along the central Y coil located between two N poles. How do you see this?

Please help me with your expertise. Thanks in advance

For those asking about the filed that I use: I use opposing fields, thus, this is with same polarity as I alway had said NN, and powered with the two signals as the 1908 patent. Please go to the website (clicking the World Globe sketch under my nickname) and there you will find all my ideas. I have great problems implementing the commutator. Without a proper scope I do not know if I am feeding right the electromagnets . Any recommendation to build the simplest commutator possible are welcome!

[NRamaswami]

I'm grateful for the kind words of encouragement from the members. Let me first reiterate that I'm not educated formally in Electricity, Magnetism or for that matter in Electronics.

The only advantage I appear to have over the rest here is that I'm a Patent Attorney and having worked closely with many inventors and having obtained patents and opposed both successfully and unsuccessfully Patents I do know a bit of Scientific mentality. Scientists do not trust other scientists and generally they try to mislead as far as possible other competitors. This is not without reason. If a competitor is seen to be working in some area then what companies do is to file patent applications and would get them published early and so the patent for the competitor will not be granted and invention can be deemed to be anticipated. Never mind that your patent applications are not going to be granted. The idea is to prevent the other from getting a patent monopoly. This is the case today when we need to disclose sufficiently to enable another person skilled in the art to replicate the experiment. This is why you find a lot of Patent applications being filed in US, China, South Korea, Taiwan, Japan, Israel and Western Europe.

Earlier the rules differed from country to country and you are permitted to retain trade secrets but needed to show an working device to the Patent Office. Then Patent office would not mind if you kept some trade secrets. These rules differed from country to country. 


I had been told that many have tried to exactly replicate the Daniel McFarland Cook device and all failed. Not at all surprising when the device is disclosed in part and hides some key components.

Nikola Tesla to one of his credits is the one person who broke away from this tradition and disclosed every thing fully and particularly. He used this like the Free emails services of today to get noticed and get recognized. With this historical background I find that most of the patents hide or try to provide misleading information.

On Lenz Law

An essential point of the Figuera -Buforn Patents is that we need to cancel Lenz law.

I beg to disagree with Hanon for Lenz law is not cancelled when you put the output coil between identical poles. The way the bucking coils are shown may provide some output but they can never be more than the input. To put it very correctly Bucking coils would only partially offset the Lenz law but never completely. They partially offset Lenz law because they appear to be taking the higher flux available between identical poles.

There is a thought process that if positive sign wave frequency is used for example if the magnetic collapsing of magnetic fields and reversal of wave form is avoided back emf will not come and if the voltage is kept at always +5 to the peak and  then to +5 as a sign wave Lenz law would be avoided. I do not know if the theory is correct but it does not appear to avoid Lenz law.


On Multifilar coils

A multifilar coil is built by using three core or four core commercial coils that are twisted. If you make parallel coils and duct tape them to cut costs you will find that the coils get twisted any way. The end of the coil No.1 is connected to beginning of coil No2 and end of coil No. 2 is connected to beginning of coil No. 3 and so on to make multifilar coils.

On Electronics

In our experiments we have tried Electronics First. Patrick has given me two circuits and one of them provided as output only milliamps and millivolts when measured. The output was in a frequency higher than 20 Khz for we were not able to feel the current. We accidentially let the carbon electrodes touch each other and the carbon electrodes started burning. It is only then we realized that the device is capable of providing current but for that we need to use very low resistance wires capable of carrying high current. It used low voltage and the output voltge was 56 Volts pulsed DC. The amperage drawn was very little from the circuit when we connected to thick wires and there was no magnetism. We have tried other Electronic circuits and they failed.

None of the inventors who have demonstrated devices Daniel McFarland Cook, Nikola Tesla, Clemente Figuera, Hubbard, Harry Perrigo, Hendershot had any Electronics available to them. Therefore I would not use Electronics. It is an avoidable waste of money, time and effort. I say after experimenting with Electronics but I concede that my competence in this area is characterized by zero knowledge. So I may well be wrong.

The only patent that considerably discloses things is that of Buforn. Normally we Attorneys tend to talk a lot, write a lot and Argue a lot and with that basic traits BuForn has considerably discussed and disclosed a lot of things.

On Commutator

In my opinion having done a lot of experiments and variations, The commutator is not necessary. It was a clever method by which Figuera has disoriented and diverted the attention of the potential infringers.

When we started we failed and then I realized that the weakness was in the lack of knowledge on how to make Magnets both permanent and Electromagnets and had to study to learn them and applied it to build them. How to magnetize and demagnetize and how to make powerful magnets and how to avoid lenz law are some of the things that we tried to learn.

On Size

It is not as if I went straight to large cores. Where is the money? You forget that money point when you criticise me for using large cores.

We used just four iron rods as the core of a solenoid. 6 inch long iron rods. Secondary wound first first and then primary and secondary together and then secondary wound over the primary. I reasoned that this way we will capture all the flux that would be due to the input. Output was lower than the input. then when we moved the small coil towards other iron rods that were lying nearby voltage increased and surprised and we surrouded the coil with a lot of iron and this resulted in trebling of the output wattage for the same input. These were ordinary helical coils. We learnt practically that Greater the iron Greater the output. That was an important lesson. So we went to larger cores as we could afford. 

On Figuera Patent

I think that Figuera disclosed a lot. There are certain things that I was not able to understand in his design. His essential points are

a. In dynamos when the magnet rotates the coils make the iron on which they are wound electromagnets and these Electromagnets are of opposite polarity to the rotating magnet and they prevent the magnet from rotation. We need to over this force and hence we need to supply more input to genereate lesser output.

b. If motion is avoided this problem is solved

c. To produce current we need to create only rotating magnetic fields by providing time varying electric fields.



His design discloses two most important things.

a. There are two parallel primaries.

n. Primary output of both primaries goes to two different Earth points.


Many would disagree here but he shows that the primary output goes to Al Origin. The source of all. This has been the most confusing thing to me. What is Al Origin Earth.

I'm most certain that if this method is employed using multifilar coils and modifying the design of the device as required a higher voltage and higher amperage output would be easily achievable. This will result in very high amperage output current and would need a very low input current of higher voltage if we use AC. This is how we come across the 100 volts and 1 amp input. 

I prefer AC to Pulsed DC. Primarily because of the risks involved in using Pulsed DC.

If pulsed DC is used the input should not be more than 30 or 40 volts. Otherwise the current drawn will be very heavy. Pulsed DC is AC rectified by Full Wave Diode Bridge. The coils do not present any impedance to such a current and the current drawn is so heavy at higher voltages. Multifilar coils which provide enormous impedance to AC do not provide any impedance to this form of current. This is quite risky to use this unless you work with low voltage input but still the magnetic saturation will be achieved immediately. The saturation in the secondary is one that needs to be seen to be believed. It is better to avoid this. By providing AC input we not only avoid this high current input we also prevent heating to a significant extent.

How Scientists Work and Mislead People and do not trust any one

Figuera provides the correct principles but has diverted the attention of the people by showing a commutator. Hanon would strongly disagree.

A few years back I was tasked with writing an important patent application. It was a Billion dollar patent application. We had been given a formulation and I have carefully vetted and selected two young scientists whose families are known to me to assist me in the process. The application was complete and it had to be filed in another country. The client directed me to send the scientists home and remotely viewed my office room and was satisfied that there was none other than me. He then directed me to change the composition of the formulation. He indicated to me that while he can trust me, he had no trust in other Scientists. I made the necessary changes and then filed the application and then I was instructed to destroy the copies I had in my computer for the actual formulation. The composition of the drug was totally different from what was originally written. Once I deleted it I also did not know what was the composition till the patent application was published. This patent had been granted.

This is the extent to which Scientists go to confuse the competitors. They do not even trust others in the same team and would keep the secrets themselves. No super duper Internet security will work for people like me can just read and memorize and walk out and rewrite what we memorized. So I would request Hanon to consider the possibility that the commutator is a clever design to deceive competitors. 

On How to Avoid Commutator

I have built the devices and I have seen that the commutator is not needed. This is a practical observation.

We can simply provide the power at both opposite ends of N and S Magnets to the input coils. A line wire divided in to two does this job easily and both of them are simultaneously powered at diagonally opposite ends. The polarity of the many cores remain NS-NS-NS

Just provide the resistors in between the series of N magnets like NP1-R-NP2-R-NP2 and S magnets like SP1-R-SP2-R-SP3 etc and the Provide the power simulataneously to the input points and the job is done.

Every thing that the commutator is supposed to do is performed without the trouble of mechanical work, sparks, burning Electronics and it is all so simple. Just reposition the Resistors.

No commutator needed. You would place one resistor between SP1--resistor --SP2--resistor--SP3 and so on.

The First input coil will always have the highest current and the opposte coil will be having the least current and the most amazing thing is that this primary ends goes to Earth. Two different earth points. If you build quadfilar coil based cores (or pentafilar or hexafilar as the case may be) and provide resistors in between the two primary S coils the first one will have higher current and will have more magnetism and the second one because of resistor or (even without it ) will have lower current and hence lower magnetism. Ultimately the last of the Coils in the series will not even have any current..may be some thing in millivolts region but nothing more than that and we can control it easily. Since the current is given from the opposite end, in the corresponding opposite coil we will have a stronger or weaker magnetic field.  Always we will have a Strong S Coil and a weak N coil and a Strong N coil will have a corresponding weak S coil. Commutator is not needed. No Electronics needed to achieve this. We have already tested this and what I'm saying is correct. You can use your simultators to verify this but this is common sense. 

Please try this and you may easily find out that COP>1 is easily doable. The polarity is NS-NS-NS.

Whether you reach COP>1 or less than 1 is based on the thickness of secondary coils and its turns and the amount of magnetic flux to which they are subjected to.



I have not dared to do a self sustaining device for I had been warned that this can crate a device that can suck the electricity in the atmosphere and can bring in lightening by Patrick. I discussed adding one component and my driver who has not even passed 10th grade said Are you crazy we both will be killed on the spot. We will be hit by lightening?.

However It is quite possible to do such a device by providing power from an input UPS and then charging that UPS continuously to do this but we have not tested this. I think with a spark plug this is doable and lightening chances are reduced but why take a risk where I'm not trained.

Theoretically this is doable but if we look at the Report of the Inspector of Patents to Buforn it does not disclose a self sustaining part.

You cannot defeat Lenz law by using output coils placed between identical poles. That will not work. Figuera very correctly teaches that Lenz law must be defeated to achieve cop>1. But please take this with a bit of salt as I'm not a competent or trained person. The only qualification I have is that I have done hands on experiments and seen the results.

While I report my experimental findings  let me repeat that I'm not academically qualified to speak on this topic. I share my experimental observations. When you do the experiments hands on, you see that many variables can be done.

[NRamaswami]

Continuing with my earlier Post I have pmed Hanon on how to use the identical poles.

Using Identical Poles to Generate Output

You can use NN poles and get results. But not as in the Bucking coil.

You should surround the Core with Square coil. Coil must be wound CCW-CW-CCW-CW and many such cores must be placed on the iron core. You see here all the coils are in replusion mode but they would work. Iron should be a square with 90' and coil must be wound on all four arms as CCW-CW-CCW-CW so that all poles are identical and insert this to the iron core surrounded by plastic and you have output in the output coils.

In between the NN coils what happens is that the flux is three times more than the flux between opposite poles. But the flux dissipiates in all directions. So to capture it you need many coils of the type square coil type. In the Square coil also you will have identical poles facing each other but it works. But why it works is not known to me. If it works we accept it. But it is very expensive to do it.

If you want me to draw this and send this to you I can do it. You will see that you will get immediate results. If you want to draw power from identical poles, use identical poles to get the power and if you want to draw power from opposite poles use opposite poles. This seems to be the law of nature.

Now there is a difference between using AC and Pulsed DC..

Pulsed DC is approximately Four times more powerful than AC. So it will draw in more current which will create more magnetism but more heat.

Identical poles have three times the flux between the opposite poles.

Therefore using pulsed DC and identical poles you can generate about 12 times more output than that you would get by using AC and opposite poles. This is the reason of higher output that earlier efforts were focussed on pulsed DC.

But it is very violent and can lead to runaway currents and burning of wires very easily. It can draw lot of current. It costs more money to build pulsed DC based units.

Controlling AC on the other hand is easier and safer. When you realize that output is not based on input but is based on

a. The amount of iron used and the magnetic field strength of iron core

b. Thickness of output wire

and c. number of turns of output wire

you look at stability, sustainability and safety of operations. All these are present in the NS-NS-NS type of thing and any output sufficient to meet our needs can be obtained. In July 2013 had we used much more thicker wires and used them to create lesser number of turns the problems of excessive voltage that made it unusable would have been immediately solved. The Earth batteries were there any way to provide whatever amperage we needed.

Even without the Earth batteries higher output is available by using the Figuera device. I hope that some other people will now test the Figuera device now since the problem of commutator is solved and how to reposition the resistors is explained.

Unfortunately well trained scientists minds are put inside a cage where they can only think that input contributes to output. That is not the case really. Secondly you all appear to avoid iron core and iron rods which are much more magnetisable than laminated transformer iron. Higher the magnetic field higher the eddy current and higher the waste seems to be the normal dictum. But contrary to that if you use higher magnetic field strength and very thick output wires and thinner input wires and iron rods with gaps the loss due to eddy currents is not an issue. Connecting a lot of step down transformers in series for this reason would not yield the desired result. The material of the core matters.

I think I have explained every thing needed for this device to be replicated by any one interested. If there is a need to post I will post.
 

[antijon]

Hmm, people really getting into it. 

Just wanted to post something else I realized while playing with a simulator.

Inductive kickback, as it's called, is really just returning the current you apply to create the magnetic field. Using a diode to catch the kickback and direct it to the battery recharges it. I'm not saying it returns 100%, but it returns quite a bit.

If you look at the left scope on the left, you see power leaving the battery as -4.46W, power being returned to the battery is the 4.45W... Of course that's the peak wattages, not the total over time. But you can see power returned is at least 50%. The other scope is the load resistor. If you compare the peaks between the two scopes, you see that when there is current on the battery, whether it's supplying current or taking it, it is producing power across the resistor. Meaning that 50% of the time, the resistor is being powered for free.

Now I'm not saying this is overunity, but technically it is. The input power over time is extremely small, because a good bit of the energy is being returned. The output is all output. So in this case, maybe what, 2W on the input and 7W on the output?

The turns ratios are important. This is because the 5V sees the output as a very high impedance. So with a normal transformer, if I had 5V and wanted 120V, I would use a 1:25 ratio. But, because the impedance would be small, when the switch opens it produces a very FAST current. This is like the normal arc on a switch. In this case, the ratio is 1:50. The higher impedance means that the current must move slower, and you get what we see here, a low voltage current that recharges the battery. I'd advise everyone to use a very high ratio. But, this is only half of the circuit, so if I can get it figured out, it might not be necessary.

This reminds me of his other patent that said it was like an induction coil. This is an induction coil. lol Except we can control the kickback, or slow it down, to reclaim energy. So can an induction coil be made to produce free energy? kinda seems that way to me.

For the record, switching the supply at 1 amp peaks produced around 120V, this is about what you see in the scope shots.