Gabriel Kron and Negative Resistance

[argona369]

Well, just some interesting stuff found while looking
At Left Hand Materials.

The Left-Handed Transmission Line.

?By swapping the roles of capacitance and inductance in a circuit model of a transmission line - which is used in electrical engineering to represent microwave devices such as waveguides and optical fibres - they arrived at the circuit equivalent of a negative-index material?
http://physicsworld.com/cws/article/print/17398


Which sounded very familiar,
From here, http://www.icehouse.net/john1/

Is this really Kron?s negative resistor?
The left hand transmission line.
http://www.edt.bham.ac.uk/hightemp.htm

[Koen1]

Yes, very interesting.

Although that first link you gave is 5 years old, and basicslly describes what was later dubbed metamaterial in general,
the other two are certainly interesting...
Now as you may (or may not) know, Bedini studied both Grays technology and Sweets VTA technology, and Sweet was a "student" of
Krons... And although Krons true negative resistor element is secret since he did that work for the US Navy, he did leave some anecdotes and remarks in his books and interviews.
Gray, Sweet, Kron, and Bedini, all of them have made remarks along the same lines. I'd like to quote Kron, as the quoted sentence says it all, really;

"Although negative resistors do exist for use with a Network Analyzer, in practice it is more convenient to use a second type of circuit, in which the positive and negative resistances are replaced by inductors and capacitors and the dc currents and voltages are replaced by ac currents and voltages of fixed frequency. The use of this second type of interpretation is equivalent to multiplying the wave equation by i=sq.rt(-1)."

(note that he does not only admit that true negative resistors apparently had been developed, but were very few in number, but also that he claims to multiply the numbers by a non-real value... Intriguing? )

Now if you look at the circuits as used by Gray, Sweet, Bedini, and also as depicted in that last link you provided, argona369, you will see very clear similarities.
At least, it seems to me like they all have switched the resistors with inductors, and placed capacitors where they would have liked to have negative resistors...

[pese]

german link to krown.

http://www.teslasociety.ch/info/presse/vakumenergie_NetJ_4.2006.pdf

he was working for General Electric , if he found this.

( and devices , that working longer if he "switched the line power OFF.


G.E. have forbid hin to work lomger with this pehenomena.

Pese

[argona369]

german link to krown.

http://www.teslasociety.ch/info/presse/vakumenergie_NetJ_4.2006.pdf

he was working for General Electric , if he found this.

( and devices , that working longer if he "switched the line power OFF.


G.E. have forbid hin to work lomger with this pehenomena.

Pese

>G.E. have forbid hin to work lomger with this pehenomena.

it looks like anyone can now, if this is indeed Kron?s ?secret?.

[Koen1]

This is not Krons secret "negative resistor", but it is related and can be used as effective NR in most cases,
as is very clear from the remark I quoted and will quote again here:

"Although negative resistors do exist for use with a Network Analyzer, in practice it is more convenient to use a second type of circuit,

In other words: Kron did have a true negative resistor, but in most practical cases did not use it, but instead used a second circuit (connected to the original circuit and intended to produce effective negative resistance, or at least an effect very close to it!)

in which the positive and negative resistances are replaced by inductors and capacitors and the dc currents and voltages are replaced by ac currents and voltages of fixed frequency."

So that second circuit is an ac circuit, where inductor (coils) are used instead of the normal resistances (be it resistors or loads) in the original dc circuit, and where capacitors are used where in the dc circuit one would want to place negative resistors.
But since we don't use NRs, we use this second circuit instead.
I don't think he means that we do away with the original dc circuit in which a negative resistor would have been sufficient to produce OU.
I think he means we keep the dc circuit, but we couple the second ac circuit to the dc circuit, and this can result in extremely efficient and possibly even OU function of the original dc circuit.
The reason why I think so is that Kron also "invented" and used the term "open path" with which he meant the path of the back emf. In (a version of) his interpretation, there was a 'positive' electrical energy running from the battery's "positive" pole to the "negative" pole, and this current is responsible for doing the "work" in motors, lamps, and circuits, and it produces heat when flowing. A path suitable for this type of current to flow through was referred to by Kron as a "closed path", which still accords with common electrical terminology. But in Krons view, and in fact in the view of many scientists of the day, including Gray, there was also an opposite energy flow. This "negative" energy flow is the cause of all the opposing forces and effects seen in a current flow. So back emf, and all the related effects, are all the result of this opposite energy flow, running from the "negative" pole of the battery to the "positive" pole. In normal circuits, this second energy flow is ignored, a circuit is considered a functionable and complete circuit if the path from positive pole to negative pole is closed, and all possible "leakage" is led into a common "ground", which is most often not actually a ground at all, just a common connection for all "negative" leads and their excess charges. But Kron decided this second energy flow should be looked at and used as well, thus creating a second, "open path" instead of a "ground".
This is the second type of circuit he is talking about: the circuit to accomodate the second and "negative" energy flow.
Kron also clearly stated:

"The use of this second type of interpretation is equivalent to multiplying the wave equation by i=sq.rt(-1)."

Now that is quite a claim...

Also, in another report, Kron said:

(in this situation...)"we replace a positive resistance"(read: resistor, load, or any other element showing resistance)" by an inductance, and a negative resistance"(read: where we'd like to have one)" by a capacitor (since none, or at least only a few, negative resistors exist on network analyzers)."

Clearly he admits there is a shortage of true negative resistors, and that they use this trick to get the same or similar effect.

Gray also said:

"To negative energy, a coil produces capacitance, and a capacitor produces inductance."

(and as you know, a coil normally produces inductance, and a capacitor capacitance.) This is clearly almost identical to what Kron said.
More of Grays statements related to this:

"A positive energy resistor is a negative resistor to negative energy. It converges positive EM energy from the environment and outputs into the circuit to which it's connected."
"a conductor to positive energy flow is an isolator to negative energy flow"
"negative energy has very high potential"

The "currentless potential" is a concept that one can also see in the Bearden/Bedini circuits.

If anyone has any positive results experimenting with this idea of Krons double circuit,
please do post them here, I would very much like to read them.

regards,
Koen1