Partnered Output Coils - Free Energy

[EMJunkie]

Without having direct access to the scope data the best I can see is about an 8 Micro Second delay.

So the Math is 8us / 0.333ms X 360 = 8.6 degrees - This is an approximation only!

Input Power with the following data:

From: Hybrid Toroid Transformer test 2

Input:
CSR: 10.3 Ohms
Input Voltage: 1.04V
CSR Volt Drop: 280.0mV
Blue: Ch2 across CSR
Yellow: Ch1 Across the Input.
Period: 0.0003333333
Frequency: 3000Hz

Output:
CSR: 10.3 Ohms
Load: 98.6 Ohms
Output Voltage: 1.48V
CSR Volt Drop: 128.0mV
Blue: Ch2 across CSR
Yellow: Ch1 Across the Input.
Period: 0.0003333333
Frequency: 3000Hz

So the Input Power calculated from this data is: V x I x COS(Theta) = (1.04V - 280.0mV) = 0.76V x (I = E/R = 280.0mV / 10.3Ohms) = 0.027Amps x COS(8.6Degrees) = 0.0203 Watts, 0.02052 Watts Apparent

Oddly:
(I = E/R =128mV / 10.3Ohms) = 0.012427
(I = E/R =1.48V / 10.3Ohms + 98.6Ohms) = 0.0136

Calculator Rounding issues?

Output, because it is resistive will be, and is, in phase so: 1.48V x 0.0136Amps = 0.020128 Watts

I hope this is of use Tinman? I hope it is right at least to the best of my ability with the data I have.

One could + CSR Input Resistor: 0.280mV x (I = E/R = 0.280mV / 10.3Ohms) = 0.0271Amps = 0.00761 Watts

Please correct me if I am wrong!

   Chris Sykes
       hyiq.org

[MileHigh]

I have no objection toward refining my measurements. What i do object to is the bias toward my measurement errors having to be in the negative. Read all the post from people in the !know!,and you will soon see it's almost as though they insist that i keep measuring until i meat the expected criteria-->under unity. Not once have i seen any of those in the know that have said-hey,due to the phase shift on the input,the input you calculated will be higher than it actually is. Nor have i seen any of those in the know say that the error on the output could be in favor of the calculated output-it's always assumed to be in the negative.

What becomes apparent is-no mater how far you go to insure correct measurements,it is never enough unless it shows a COP<1. As long as it remains within known physics,then it's all good. As soon as it go's beyond the !must adhere to! known science,then there is always errors some where. The more i do,the more is requested-->fair enough. But when you start to get comments like-your scope is wrong,your meters are wrong-and so on,it gets a bit anoying. Then you have to go ahead and start proving that your equipment is reading correct,and start supplying references to equipment error margins. So i post a link to a website that offers these error margine's,and i make a video showing that my scope,the SG and even the DMM all read the same value's-exactly. But still my resistor values are incorrect,as things just dont add up. I swap out the two 10.3 ohm resistor's with each other,and the output remains exactly the same-along with the input. I then change out the 100 ohm resistor for another that is close to the 98.3 ohm's,and still things remain the same.

So why is there a discrepancy at the output?--i do not know. As i said,i can only be as accurate as my equipment. Anyway,off to jaycar now to see if they have any of these high end CVR's,although i have a feeling even that will not be enough,and it will once again become equipment error.

Brad:

There is a very powerful counter-argument to what you are saying.  If you are going to be serious about your measurements then why aren't you factoring in your error margins?  Now, I realize that that's something that you normally don't deal with.  I also realize that is something in 5+ years of reading the forums that you may have almost never seen.  Notice also, that the so-called "free energy professionals" never or almost never show any analysis of their results which include factoring in error margins.

However, let's bring the discussion into the "real world."  In my junior college chemistry and physics classes, when i did my lab experiments and wrote up my lab reports, error margins and the number of significant figures were part and parcel of every report.  You were not allowed to submit a lab report without including your error margins and showing all your calculations with error margins factored in.  If you used too many significant figures when you weren't supposed to you got docked.  When I did an electronics lab report, or a electromagnets lab report, or a communications lab report, I factored in error margins.

So what is happening is that when you are measuring what is apparently slightly over unity, then people have an expectation of getting the job done properly.  Think about when car designers design a car.  Every single dimensional measurement on every single drawing that defines the car has an error tolerance.  Every single subcontractor that builds parts that go into the car has to build parts that meet the dimensional tolerances in the drawings provided by the car company.  If not, the car simply won't fit together.  Depending on the part, the dimensional tolerances can be relaxed or very tight.  The same thing exactly applies to an iPhone for the mechanical tolerances.  And, for the chips that go into the iPhone, there are electrical tolerances that have to be met with the same level of scrutiny as the mechanical parts.  A clock chip will have to meet certain clock phase and jitter requirements, and the output signals have to be within the tolerances for high and low levels, and for slew rate.  Too fast or too slow a slew rate will be unacceptable.  Too fast a slew rate and the iPhone will start emitting too much EMI and fail FCC testing.

Hopefully you can view this as an interesting challenge.  As you can see the real big guns got involved and they are very wise and very experienced.  This is not a scholastic or professional environment demanding reports with all error tolerances factored in.  However, when you think that you have your measurements done as best as you can, then the final thing to do would be to crunch all of your error tolerances.  If you still showed over unity when you factored in all of your error tolerances, and the big guns agreed that you did your measurements properly, then you would really have something.

Then there is another thing to consider.  The device you made was not supposed to be an "over unity transformer."  It was supposed to be a device to measure the electric field on the inside of a toroid.  But it turned out that it didn't really do that, and instead you are having an interesting time making over unity measurements on it.  This is not a device that was purpose built to demonstrate over unity, it's just a device that is interesting and is showing an apparent anomaly.  Beyond that, the coils and the magnetic cores are passive components.  To borrow from Monty Python, all of these components are dead parrots.

MileHigh

[MileHigh]

Also, I forgot to mention the issue of the power factor and why people are not getting excited about it.

Let's say your phase angle is 5 degrees.  The real power is proportional to the cosine of the phase angle.  I am using my trusty Windows 7 calculator.

Phase angle 0 degrees:  Cosine 0 degrees = 1.

Phase angle 5 degrees:  Cosine 5 degrees = 0.996

Phase angle 10 degrees:  Cosine 10 degrees = 0.985

I can't be 100% sure, but just from eyeballing your waveforms it looks like the phase angle is less than 5 degrees.   Therefore, the real input power is at least 99.6% of your measured input power.

So the phase angle angle is not too exciting.

[tinman]

Well since my posts # 5777 and 5778 garnered nary a comment, thought I would try once more before throwing in the proverbial towel.

Here is another impulse test method that should kick the transformer into oscillation if there truly is a gain>1.

While it may be fun to discuss  measurement technique as I said before, when you are at the limits of your equipment and believe you have a device with gain, it may be time to try putting the rubber to the road with a real "proof of the pudding" test.

Good scientific method tests from many angles.

Something is not right with this circuit,as adjusting the pot changes both wave forms-one is an exact mirror of the other,no matter where the pot is set. If i invert the yellow channel,you only see the blue channel,as the yellow trace is hidden behind it. If i hook up the two coils out of phase with each other,then we draw a lot of current,and no ringing at all-not to mention a smoking pot.
If i set the two coils in phase,they mirror each other exactly-same amplitude and wave form. If i replace the battery with a 2000uF cap,and charge that cap to battery voltage,it keeps ringing strongly for around 1/2 an hour before it stop's.

It dose nothing at a low pulse frequency. The frequency needs to be up around 40KHz before the ringing starts. As i raise the resistance on the pot,the amplitude of both wave forms drop's-there is never any difference between the two wave form's.

See scope shot's below.

[EMJunkie]

Without having direct access to the scope data the best I can see is about an 8 Micro Second delay.

So the Math is 8us / 0.333ms X 360 = 8.6 degrees - This is an approximation only!

Input Power with the following data:

So the Input Power calculated from this data is: V x I x COS(Theta) = (1.04V - 280.0mV) = 0.76V x (I = E/R = 280.0mV / 10.3Ohms) = 0.027Amps x COS(8.6Degrees) = 0.0203 Watts, 0.02052 Watts Apparent

Oddly:
(I = E/R =128mV / 10.3Ohms) = 0.012427
(I = E/R =1.48V / 10.3Ohms + 98.6Ohms) = 0.0136

Calculator Rounding issues?

Output, because it is resistive will be, and is, in phase so: 1.48V x 0.0136Amps = 0.020128 Watts

I hope this is of use Tinman? I hope it is right at least to the best of my ability with the data I have.

One could + CSR Input Resistor: 0.280mV x (I = E/R = 0.280mV / 10.3Ohms) = 0.0271Amps = 0.00761 Watts

Please correct me if I am wrong!

   Chris Sykes
       hyiq.org

I did make an error in my math, I have corrected now! Sorry for that.

I also get COP = Output / Input = 0.027738 / 0.0203 = 1.37 Inclusive of the Input CSR. COP = 0.99 without taking it into account. Either way it is burning 0.00750268 Active Watts on the input!

Tinman, a very through job of Measurements!

   Chris Sykes
       hyiq.org