Where the OVERUNITY using INDUCTION COILS comes from (eg Joule Thief)

[jbignes5]

 I'm just not understanding why you are looking at the speed of a magnet running across a coil and why it has anything to do with a joule thief.. Am I missing something here?
The joule thief uses a bifilar winding right? Well as close as it comes to a bifilar winding.
From my last post I specifically referred you to the bifilar coil to get back on subject. As the subject of this referred to the joule thief.
It seems that every time someone asks this question someone distracts the conversation away from the subject and presents an experiment that is not on subject.


On subject:
" Measurements (Nichelson, 1991) of the same size single and double wound coils, both with
approximately the same inductance have shown that, at resonance, both the voltage response and
voltage gain to be several orders of magnitude greater for the double wound design ."


"Tesla's new "generator" can be explained solely on the basis of its electrical activity. A bifilar
coil is capable of holding more charge than a single wound coil. When operated at resonance, the
distributed capacitance of the bifilar coil is able to overcome the counter force normal to coils,
inductive reactance. It does not allow what Tesla described (Tesla, 1894) as the formation of "false
currents."

In the case of the joule thief this technique can squeeze all of the available charge out of a battery because it doesn't resist like normal solenoid coils do. The reactive resistance eats up charge in normal solenoid coils. This makes the source work harder to furnish charge to drive the system. This can drain the source faster. The bifilar method negates the reactive portion and allows the source to furnish all of it's charge which it converted into near perfect potential<-little loss, to the load or converter<(transformer) into a load. What you want to do is raise the voltage as high as it will go so that loss is kept to a minimum getting to the load, then transform it as it does work in the load. Such a case would be a motor, where Tesla called it a rotating transformer.
But I don't think this technique has anything to do with overunity persay. It has more to do with getting energy to the load to which it can convert to energy into a more working form.

The Overunity would be a way to use a gain mechanism to furnish more energy to the system via that mechanism. Lets say increasing the magnetic gain in a system via a medium that can increase the magnetic density at will. Like plasma for instance. We know plasma has a density and there are different forms of plasma called modes. Cold or dark plasma being not intensified and hot or active plasma being intensified. This is controlled by the electric field. Higher potential field equals hot plasma. Lower electric field means cold or dark plasma. Plasma is highly reactive to magnetic fields. Meaning the space is higher density for the magnetic field to pass or be conducted.

Lets look at Thane Hines experiment with a high voltage coil inside of a low voltage coil. It seemed to amplify the output of the low voltage coil, why? The only difference I could find was that the high voltage coil attracted more free plasma to it and it amplified the magnetic field in the low voltage coil thus increasing the output. It makes sense because when we make strong magnets we us a high voltage capacitor dump to form the plasma streams inside of the magnetic material. This field does not have to be maintained for any amount of time beyond the Curie temperature of the magnetic material. Once it is locked in the plasma flows in a never ending loop and if we scoop off some of the plasma it creates a vacuum that is filled back again by the free plasma in the environment dictated by the material itself.

[tinman]

 author=jbignes5 link=topic=17297.msg507871#msg507871 date=1499018913]

I'm just not understanding why you are looking at the speed of a magnet running across a coil and why it has anything to do with a joule thief.. Am I missing something here?

Yes,you are missing something.

The joule thief uses a bifilar winding right? Well as close as it comes to a bifilar winding.
From my last post I specifically referred you to the bifilar coil to get back on subject. As the subject of this referred to the joule thief.

The JT dose not use a bifilar winding,such as Tesla intended a bifilar wound coil to work.

It seems that every time someone asks this question someone distracts the conversation away from the subject and presents an experiment that is not on subject.

The thread topic is-

Where the OVERUNITY using INDUCTION COILS comes from

An example was the JT-but it was just an example.
If passing a magnet passed an inductor,creating a current flow,isnt !INDUCTION!,then i have no idea what is.

On subject:
" Measurements (Nichelson, 1991) of the same size single and double wound coils, both with
approximately the same inductance have shown that, at resonance, both the voltage response and
voltage gain to be several orders of magnitude greater for the double wound design ."

Could you post a link to these test's that were carried out please.

"Tesla's new "generator" can be explained solely on the basis of its electrical activity. A bifilar
coil is capable of holding more charge than a single wound coil.

Yes,because it has a greater capacitance value.

When operated at resonance, the
distributed capacitance of the bifilar coil is able to overcome the counter force normal to coils,
inductive reactance. It does not allow what Tesla described (Tesla, 1894) as the formation of "false
currents."

An illusion due to the increased capacitance.
When charging an inductor,voltage leads current,and when charging  a capacitor, current leads voltage.
The !counter force! (CEMF) still exist's.

In the case of the joule thief this technique can squeeze all of the available charge out of a battery because it doesn't resist like normal solenoid coils do.

You do know how a JT work's-dont you ?
It has nothing to do with this bifilar coil stuff,as the coil design on a JT is not of a bifilar type as mentioned by Tesla.

The reactive resistance eats up charge in normal solenoid coils.

Impedance due to inductive reactance ?

The bifilar method negates the reactive portion and allows the source to furnish all of it's charge which it converted into near perfect potential<-little loss, to the load or converter<(transformer) into a load.

No it dose not. The included capacitance in a bifilar coil is so small,it makes very little difference.
The only thing an increased winding capacitance dose,is lower the resonant frequency of the inductor.
Further more,the JT has a primary winding,and a trigger winding,and dose not incorporate any traits of a bifilar wound coil.

Lets look at Thane Hines experiment with a high voltage coil inside of a low voltage coil. It seemed to amplify the output of the low voltage coil, why?

No gains were ever had in TH's transformers.

The only difference I could find was that the high voltage coil attracted more free plasma to it and it amplified the magnetic field in the low voltage coil thus increasing the output. It makes sense because when we make strong magnets we us a high voltage capacitor dump to form the plasma streams inside of the magnetic material. This field does not have to be maintained for any amount of time beyond the Curie temperature of the magnetic material. Once it is locked in the plasma flows in a never ending loop and if we scoop off some of the plasma it creates a vacuum that is filled back again by the free plasma in the environment dictated by the material itself.

Are you saying the magnetic field around a PM,is plasma ?


Brad

[jbignes5]

"Yes,you are missing something."

No I am not missing anything, the Title is pretty specific:
"Where the OVERUNITY using INDUCTION COILS comes from (eg Joule Thief)"
The example given is the style of a joule thief and not magnets passing a coil.


"The JT dose not use a bifilar winding,such as Tesla intended a bifilar wound coil to work."
The Joule thief uses interposing winding as does the bifilar winding. It uses the same sympathetic generation scheme. Yes, it wasn't a Tesla intended but it is still the same none the less.


"An example was the JT-but it was just an example.If passing a magnet passed a conductor,creating a current flow,isnt !INDUCTION!,then i have no idea what is."

As usual you cut the last bit off of the title which clearly states an example of Joule thief.
Also there is a big difference between magnetic induction and electric induction.


"Could you post a link to these test's that were carried out please."

I posted enough information for you to investigate it. Don't read or follow links?

"An illusion due to the increased capacitance. When charging an conductor,voltage leads current,and when charging  a capacitor, current leads voltage.The !counter force! (CEMF) still exist's."

This is the problem. You say it is an illusion but yet it negates this counter force for real. That means it gets rid of it and it is not an illusion. What is an illusion is talking like that, in double speak.
Because the coil has capacitance built in it negates the counter force. End of story.

"No it dose not. The included capacitance in a bifilar coil is so small,it makes very little difference.The only thing an increased winding capacitance dose,is lower the resonant frequency of the inductor.Further more,the JT has a primary winding,and a trigger winding,and dose not incorporate any traits of a bifilar wound coil."


First you say it has capacitance then you say here that it is so little. More double speak.


This is what it has. The capacitance is a real time capacitance meaning it lasts as long as there is a voltage potential in the coil. This mirrors the capacitance in a capacitor. This is done by laying two conductors side by side or two channels that can do two things. One: induce a voltage into the second conductor of opposite polarity and create a capacitance between those two conductors much like is done in a traditional capacitor as high as the wires insulation can stand.


"No gains were ever had in TH's transformers."

No gains that you or anyone else will admit to. That doesn't make it any less true.

"Are you saying the magnetic field around a PM,is plasma ?"


Yup! A cold plasma that can be revealed by an intense voltage field.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2B-lKgcQJvg


Now a few things to remind you of here. The air is being pumped out. A straight vacuum. Now no vacuum is perfect but yet plasma is still "created", your word not mine. See plasma is the medium. For the most part it is in a state we like to call as dark mode. This makes it invisible because there is no real energy in it. But it is capable of conducting voltages and form around magnetic fields. In the example video I have shown they are merely intensifying the plasma already around the magnets. This shows the structure of the plasma and the density of that plasma that is locked into the magnets material, this is done upon creation of the magnet.

Lets look at the process here:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=noGGcyPHtdI

This is a two step process. First pass is high current low voltage. The second process is high voltage lower current. The second process is the key since the first process only weakly magnetizes the material.

This second process loads the material with more plasma from free space, or all around the magnet. Coincidentally this is why we can use coils to create a magnetic field as well. They are just locking the plasma into the material in a HIGHER DENSITY and why the second pass is very important to strengthen the field.

I would also like to clarify something here:

"Measurements (Nichelson, 1991) of the same size single and double wound coils, both with
approximately the same inductance have shown that, at resonance, both the voltage response and
voltage gain to be several orders of magnitude greater for the double wound design."

AT "RESONANCE" is a very important key.
Do you see how they are talking about "VOLTAGE" only here. That is another key aspect that people would rather not concentrate on.

W=V*I  Raise either V or I and there is an increase in W     Hmmm..

To reduce the resistance of the wire itself, even Tesla was trying to negate that as well:

https://www.teslauniverse.com/nikola-tesla/patents/us-patent-685012-means-increasing-intensity-electrical-oscillations

Pay attention to the reason why he wanted to do this. To harness the free oscillations that a free oscillating capacitor discharge emits. Getting rid of the cemf is only part of the process. Reducing the wires resistance is another.

Read it multiple times to get the gist of this.

Think about this now. If you can harness a freely oscillating capacitor through a coil that has negated cemf and lowered resistance then would the secondary reduce the oscillation?
This is the reason Tesla devised the disruptive discharge circuit. It negates the feedback to the capacitor via a magnetic pathway across the spark gap. This separates the capacitor from the emitter coil and allows the circuit to continue oscillating away. The bifilar method is another way to get rid of the return feedback in the transformer. When the secondary responds the bifilar is going through the second pass through the coil and negates the response from the secondary. All with one blast from a cap.
Think about the interference cancellation effect. With noise all you need to do is provide an opposite wave and the noise will be cancelled. Same thing here but with electrical impulses.

"Active noise control (ANC), also known as noise cancellation, or active noise reduction (ANR), is a method for reducing unwanted sound by the addition of a second sound specifically designed to cancel the first."
"The patent described how to cancel sinusoidal tones in ducts by phase-advancing the wave and cancelling arbitrary sounds in the region around a loudspeaker by inverting the polarity."

This can be done actively on low frequency emissions or passively on higher frequency emissions.

Reference patent here:

https://www.google.com/patents/US2043416

[jbignes5]

Funny how the second process pumps a lot of current through those magnetizing coils to magnetize the magnet,, or am I seeing the current wrong,, it was on the video.

Out-gassing is also fun to watch under the influence of highish voltage and a PM field,, high voltage is a relative thing,, to some of us it is like 5KV and others it is 1MV,,

There are several types of magnets being made here.
The tube magnets or circular magnets are made from the inside out. They use a lower magnetic field and are usually of less strength. 3 volts at 6 amps.
I guess the plates could be magnetic. They just pass 27 amps at 300V to load the plasma in the already slightly magnetized alloy. There is a big difference between the two types. This draws in Plasma from around the material and loads it in between the already established weak magnetization of the material during the Curie temp transition. The first process sets the alignment roughly and the second attempt loads the alignment with plasma. If you focus on the horseshoe magnet you will see this process. Every magnet has to be preset in the heating to cooling phase to get a strong magnet after the second treatment.


Yeah Tesla when talking about low voltage was in the range of 1MV and bellow. Weird huh...

[jbignes5]

It is that very large coil under the plates,, the one with about 11 ohms resistance and most likely a lot of large diameter wire,, that is what magnetizes the horseshoe magnet,, another place to see the process is for making speakers,, they magnetize the magnet after the speaker is assembled.

I get picked on a little bit when I say high voltage,, when in actuality the few volts I am talking about doesn't even register for some   I kind of say high and low in reference to what I am playing with forgetting that there is a huge difference between high voltage and low voltage.

Yeah you can do it another way by putting the coil around the horseshoe itself but since this method is easier for mass production they chose to load the magnets with plates magnetized with either polarity.

Besides the magnet, what do you think about the other information I presented?