Partnered Output Coils - Free Energy

[MileHigh]

Second
Why do you think the VPP being delivered by my FG is dropping the higher this negative resistance rises?. The answer is simple. The FG is trying to push current in one direction,while the HTT is (at the same time)trying to push current in the opposite direction-->back to the FG. This can be seen in the scope shot's i posted in regards to your test. We see that the voltage is always higher on the HTT side of the CVR,which means the current flow through that CVR is from the HTT to the FG,while at the same time,the FG is trying to deliver a current that flows from the FG to the HTT.

It's not as simple as that.  Look at the table that I just made in my previous posting.  You have to account for the polarity and the current direction.   If the HTT was trying to push power into the FG the positive and negative voltage swings of the FG would increase.

It would appear that higher voltages on the HTT side compared to the FG output would indicate power being pushed into the FG.  However, that setup is not the same as Smudge's setup for the "negative resistance."  I think it best to stick to dealing with the alleged negative resistance setup for now.  I can't really comment on your scope traces.  What you should consider when making these kinds of high frequency tests is to show one or more pictures of your setup along with the scope shots.  People like PW and Poynt would be able to recognize how the setup affects the scope captures.

One final thing about your scope captures is that you see the FG voltage drop as the frequency increases.  I don't know how much coax cable you are using or anything like that, but as a general rule of principle it is normal to see the output voltage decrease as the frequency increases when you are in the MHz range.  The coax cable itself and other components will start to act like a low pass filter at very high frequencies.

[MileHigh]

Chris:

MileHigh, you call what you're doing "analyzing"?

Really?

   Chris Sykes

After putting in that time and work in a sincere effort to help Brad analyze his setup over the past two postings, and including several other postings that took more time and more work, you can kiss my ass for your stupid-ass bitch comments.  I don't pretend that I know everything, not by a longshot.

You should be ashamed of yourself for acting like such an idiot.  Anybody that thinks his comments are out of line please PM him and urge him to conduct himself like a normal person.

MileHigh

[ramset]

Mh
well I'm a little sad that you stepped off the curb.. and got into the gutter.
I do agree that He seems to be goading you along ..

While some like to see that and it does sell tickets  I hope there will not be 27 pages of insults and colorful metaphors coming ?

Obviously you are sincerely trying to contribute to the understanding of what Brad is seeing here, however it is becoming increasingly obvious that there are other possibilities which most likely will take very specific and actual experiments to properly investigate.

perhaps Chris will be doing "that" analysis here ?  [ NOW  _that_ would definitely sell Tickets....]

actually I don't believe the Tinman will rest until this has been properly vetted.


respectfully
Chet

[MileHigh]

Chet:

I am just nipping it in the bud.  It can stop right now and we can all just move along.  As time goes on, it will become apparent that there is nothing special or unusual about Brad's toroidal transformer.  It is a purely passive device.  However, what's interesting and a learning experience for all is the discovery process.

MileHigh

[Smudge]

Okay I attached a marked up graphic taken from Smudge's pdf.  From what I understand that is basis of the claim for the "negative resistance."  The setup uses the R2 inductive one-ohm resistor, and the primary.  Smudge took that data and crunched some numbers and arrived at a negative resistance.  Is that the claim that you are agreeing with also?  If there is another setup and another claim for a negative resistance then I am only talking about the claim in Smudge's pdf.

You can put Channel 1 on the top half of your scope display for the direct function generator output.  On the bottom half of the scope display you can put (Ch1 - Ch2) so that it shows you the voltage across the one-ohm resistor only.  Turn up the gain on your scope for (Ch1 - Ch2).   You do that properly and you will easily be able to see if the current flow is in phase with the function generator output or 90 degrees out of phase or somewhere in between.  You will be able to see the current direction and magnitude, and you have to relate that to the actual voltage being put out on the function generator as shown on the top half of your display and paying careful attention to what the current direction means when the function generator output is above zero volts vs. below zero volts.

Now looking at all that data, if you believe there is a "negative resistance" then that implies that power should always be flowing into the function generator, for both when the function generator output is above zero volts and below zero volts.  Will you actually see that, or will you see something else?  By looking at that scope display for the entire sine wave you will be able to easily say when current (and power) is flowing into the function generator and flowing out of the function generator.  You have to pay attention to the instantaneous polarity of the actual function generator output the whole time.

Simple guide:

Function Generator Voltage    Voltage on far side of resistor    (Ch1 - Ch2)     Current Direction             Power Direction
   Channel 1                                     Channel 2

  +10 Volts                                     +11 Volts                          - 1 Volt        Into FG                           Into FG
  +10 Volts                                     + 9 Volts                          +1 Volt         Out of FG                        Out of FG
  - 10 Volts                                     -11 Volts                          +1 Volt         Out of FG                        Into FG
  - 10 Volts                                     -9  Volts                            -1 Volt         Into FG                           Out of FG

MileHigh

MH,

That marked up graphic suggests that the scope channels in the display were as shown in your modified circuit.  They were not so I think you could be misleading people who read your post.  Brad shows the channel 1 and channel 2 connections as the yellow and blue take off points, so the inductive resistor (which Brad calls CVR and I call CSR) was the imperfect current monitor.  It is not clear from your post whether you are suggesting the addition of that non-inductive 1 ohm as another test, or whether you assumed that the original test was done with it and you just want the test repeated with the math channel used to subtract what you incorrectly believed to be channel 1 and channel 2.  Could you please clarify.

Edit.  When I wrote the above I had not seen your earlier post without the marked up circuit, so it seems you were suggesting the additional CSR.  Sorry, and please ignore my request for clarification.  However anyone seeing your post in isolation could be mislead by that marked up circuit attached to the scope shot.

Please note that Brad has done a series of tests with a good 1 ohm non-inductive CSR in the position you show and has displayed the two waveforms you suggest (but has not done the subtraction).  There one channel is the function generator output where you could pay attention to the instantaneous polarity of the actual function generator output the whole time.  If you care to look at those scope displays for the entire sine wave and do the subtraction in your head you could yourself easily see when current (and power) is flowing into the function generator and flowing out of the function generator.

Edit 2.  I see in Brad's reply #6118 he does indeed use the scope math to do the subtraction.

Smudge