Partnered Output Coils - Free Energy

[EMJunkie]

Hi Chriss

I attach two images for helping me to express my question.

At first image, we can see your arrangement where two bucking coils are in series in the same axis. In this mode we have a self canceling magnetic field. But the same time we have also a canceling E-field as vectors are in opposite directions. The same time, Floyd Sweet said:

"If the directions of the two signals are such that opposite H-fields cancel and E-fields add, an apparently steady E-Field will be created. The energy density of the fields remain as calculated above, but the value of the E-field will double from E/2 to E"

So, wouldn't be more appropriate in order to follow this technique to arrange our coils as in the second attachment?  In this second attachment bucking coils are the one close to the other in a parallel axis. In this position we also have a canceled magnetic field and the same time we have a sum of both the E-fields. Like Ed. Leedskalnin did in his pmh device where one coil is parallel to the other in a curved iron core. What is your opinion on this?

Thanks

@Jeg - Your way of thinking is exactly right!

Two Output Coils (Partnered Output Coils) can be arranged in such a fashion that one can work together with the other to be of benefit to us! This way they Increase the Excitation Frequency, working with the Input Frequency and NOT against it! Conventionally Output works against the Input!

To be honest, I have said it before many times, Experiment is the only way to learn! Use your gut feeling! It will lead you in the right direction!

I have attached a Picture I have used a few times and also one that many will debate till the cows come home.

Youre on the right track Jeg, keep up the good work!

Kind Regards

   Chris Sykes - hyiq.org
   To Reach New Horizons!

[EMJunkie]

I think i saw somewhere in your videos that is for adding more drag or magnetic resistance to the return path of the secondary induced magnetic flux ? I will check again.

@Jeg,

No, it's to do with the Magnetic field, youre right there, but no drag, no resistance.

Kind Regards

   Chris Sykes - hyiq.org
   To Reach New Horizons!

[EMJunkie]

@ALL

Please Vote in the Poll everyone! I really want to see what the over all consensus is!

Kind Regards

   Chris Sykes - hyiq.org
   To Reach New Horizons!

[SkyWatcher123]

Hi folks, Hi emjunkie, thanks for your reply.
I comprehend which setup is proper now.
I'm going to wind a setup on a ferrite flyback core, like your early version and try that using a bifilar oscillator as the inducer primary.
Thanks.
peace love light

[EMJunkie]

Hi folks, Hi emjunkie, thanks for your reply.
I comprehend which setup is proper now.
I'm going to wind a setup on a ferrite flyback core, like your early version and try that using a bifilar oscillator as the inducer primary.
Thanks.
peace love light

Hi SkyWatcher123,

Make sure you have 1:3 step up or more. 1:5 is what Floyd Sweet Used.

Its the Rate of Change of the Magnetic Field over Time. In saying this I have found in my devices Lower rather than Higher Frequency is better however - Currently I don't know why. My Frequency Ranges from 50Hz to 5KHz. Most of my devices running at a much lower frequency than 5KHz!

In other words, Bi-Filar Joule Thief Trigger arrangement may run at too higher of a Frequency to really see results! Just something to think about 

Try to keep your Input Coils impedance at a level so that the running frequency will consume the lowest current for the highest Field, this is why I have found in the past, LC Tank Circuit, and resonating the input to some degree is the best.

Kind Regards

   Chris Sykes - hyiq.org
   To Reach New Horizons!