The secret to Overunity

[forest]

useless useless useless talk

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Egg_of_Columbus

[forest]

understanding what he would have said: that after the deed is done, everybody knows how to do it; [/font][/size]

[Void]

the current when charging capacitor is not as the current across a resistive load.

The formula for finding the current while charging a capacitor is:

I=C*dV/dt

it is nothing more than the change of voltage over time. It is not related to the current of the source as much as the voltage.

take 9v source across a 3kv cap you will generate 0.0000405 joules in a time constant. Step up the same voltage to 10kv and put it across the same cap you will generate 5 joules in fraction of the time constant. You stored more energy but the power source is the same...that's the secret

Hi Tajerek. Again, a capacitor's voltage changes due to a change in charge distribution from one capacitor plate to the other.
Current is a flow of charges. It takes voltage (a potential difference) to cause the charge to move, yes, but this movement
of charge occurs at the expense of energy. It doesn't happen for 'free'.  Voltage times current means energy expended over time.
If there is no current flow between the plates of a capacitor then absolutely the capacitor won't charge up.

I'll say it again. Something very unusual would have to be happening for a system to gain more energy than is being
expended at the input of the circuit. I don't see anything unusual in what you have described so far.


All the best...

[citfta]

That's correct, I am not claiming to generate more than what the cap can store in one cycle, however what is in the cap is not directly related to how much you draw from the source. It is function of the voltage you put across the cap , the combined resistance R and C. Small current is only needed to get the charges across the combined resistance of the circuit, if that's small enough you literally need just voltage.

Don smith showed the devices, I am showing the formulas that prove it and therefore the ways to replicate it scientifically. Don didn't explain the theory and science behind his devices that's probably experimenters were guessing to replicate it. Also I don't think his aircore inductors were as efficient.

That statement I highlighted is absolutely wrong.  Anyone with the most basic understanding of electronics can see the error of that statement.  What you are saying is the amount of water in a glass has nothing to do with the amount of water that ran from the faucet.

[Tajerek]

understanding what he would have said: that after the deed is done, everybody knows how to do it; [/font][/size]

If you think I am doing a copy of Don Smith device you are mistaken. I do not use CW and CCW coil like he does, my spark gap is not between the HW module and the cap, I do not use aircore but magnetic cores made of a ferromagnetic material able to store all the energy from the cap. I do not use radio transmission and any relation between length of wires like Don... maybe Don knew but hid the theory or didn't reveal everything on purpose.
What I am saying is easily provable by known scientific formulas and no able scientist can deny such scientific facts.