Resonnant circuits in cascade.

[thrival]

Yes, resonant stages is the way to go. Utility companies occasionally burn up transformers from phenomenon called
ferroresonance. This is covered in Basic Oscillators by Gotlieb. Under certain circuit conditions, steel likes to
resonate at twice the input frequency, also it expands and contracts like a piezo. It also picks up harmonics of
the fundamental and that causes a power surge within a whole range of frequencies, not just one, that smokes
the transformers. Yes that's free energy, more than we put in. The gain from resonance isn't the same as stepping
up a transformer. With the latter there are trade-offs. Resonance is only virtual power but it can be made into real
power with cascade stages and secondaries, and yes the antennae is our source frequency from which we "suck"
all the power we need. There are radio experts who just can't grasp secondaries-parallel tanks in cascade. They think
in terms of filter networks which is all wrong in the wiring for our purposes. Start with high frequency in the antennae
and step it down in each stage. There is twice as much power in a 100Hz signal as a 50hz signal. Step it down and
extract the power.

I think all Henry Moray's rectifier/detector/"valve" did was keep the power flowing down the antennae in one direction, not
radiating it out during half a cycle. He used a "tribo-luminescent zinc" which could be simply zinc sulfide used to coat
cathode ray tubes. So break an old b/w TV or spent flourescent tube and harvest your powder. The detector probably
also helped establish the frequency, as the accrued input static from his wire antennae, rythmically jumped the phosphor.
Maybe there was an electronic cascade effect in the phosphor that increased the total electron flow and strength of the signal.
I use to think his cold electricity was from hole flow, but think I figured that out, is too easy.

Take a transformer. Observe the laminated steel plates. Now think, couldn't a transformer also be made of steel wire
coiled, with copper coils wrapped around the steel wire? Now your wire core transformer still works, just like a laminated plate
transformer, but here's the trick; the two ends of wire from the steel coil are left open! In fact they concentrate magnetic
energy racing up and down the wire in AC fashion at the same rate as your input into your copper coils! Now magnetism is cold... has
no temperature to speak of. Now here's a question worthy of experiment; what if we wrap another steel coil and connect the leads
from the first steel coil to the second. (remember, the first steel coil has copper coil primaries and secondaries.) Will the magnetic
field in the steel wire convey to the second coil? If yes, will field strength be lost or diminished in the first coil? If not, can we wrap
copper coils on the second steel coil and get twice or more bang for our buck? To answer that question, take two cylinder shaped
magnets N-S attracted and insert similar sized steel plugs between them. Now you have one longer magnet. In fact increase the
number of steel plugs until your magnet has reached the length of infinity. Has the field strength decreased as you increased the
magnet's effective size? Not Really! The number of field lines is the same, but you've increased the magnet's surface area/length and
can pick up a lot more stuff with the same field strength!

Point is it's possible we'll get not just the energy we put into the copper coils, but magnetic current from the steel coils
to boot. That magnetic current could act or behave like cold electricity. And because it's true oscillating magnetic current,
(just like occurs in laminated plates), it could be converted back to regular electricity again, to heat irons and such, but better
to use the magnetic current for light bulbs, computers and things you want to run cool.

[Elvis Oswald]

If I get what you are saying... then I would say that steel wire with copper coiled around it...  would... I dunno. 

If steel will work as a core - that is if it will add inductance to the coil - then it would not be as good as iron, right?  You can magnetize steel wire... so off the top of my head, I'd say it would add inductance.  You'd have to laminate it with something to keep it from draining current, I'm sure.  Even an iron core should be laminated to prevent this - right?

Wrapping that inductor (the copper coil with steel wire coil) around another core of iron would... I dunno again.
But I think that the difference... between a coil of copper wire wound straight around an iron core - and - a "coil" of copper "coiled" around a core... that would be interesting. 
The magnetic field coming off a copper wire is in a paticular direction by anyone's model... and the configuration change might have some interesting affects on the iron core.  OR maybe not.  And if it does... it might be bad.   unless you believe theories that say the current in the copper causes a standing wave that draws in magnetic energy... then the effect might be very good.
I better stop rambling until I do a little research, or the EEs will flame me

About the phosphorous... IF you assume "stray capacitance" on a coil... I think maybe the phosphorous would lower the amount... or eliminate it maybe?  It might actually put you somewhere between the results you see from a coil and what you would see from using a copper pipe as a coil... this would be bad.  Right?

I've been up for 30 hours.  So maybe I'll take a better look at this later.

I have been thinking of LC circuits and driving one off the other and it would seem that maybe voltage... and therefore current would build and build in the first with a steady supply... and that may power a secondary circuit with some loss - but who's counting if the source is free.   But if this works... then what to do with all the excess before it melts the wires?  I probably only *wish* I had such a problem, eh?

I need to read some more of that first year EE book so I am more confident in the theory.  But I have been sidetracked now with the link to all the scanned tube manuals from the 30's.  All I can think about is what Tesla must have been using for his device. 

Thanks again - and peace!!

Thanks again for the input.   

[thrival]

Hi Elvis.

Hey man, it's fun to think one's way around the textbooks, what they never got around to describe or consider.


If I were doing the resonant cascade thing, I'd be sure that each stage was made of bigger and burlier wire,
just to be safe. On the other hand if one were using the magnetic current from the steel wire instead of
electron flow from the copper wire, there's little danger of burning anything up. I recall from reading his book,
Moray's device had multiple stages and one could get more power out of the device by tapping into previous
stages. In fact the only limit on power he was able to draw, was determined by the loads. Wouldn't it be neat
if resonance weren't even necessary? -- just cascaded stages of wire core transformers? We could theoretically
draw magnetic current flow from every steel wire stage! Sure, laminate it if you like. Might want to do that
anyway to keep it from rusting. Steels have different hysterisis properties. The same design selection factors
might apply.

[magnetoelastic]

There is twice as much power in a 100Hz signal as a 50hz signal.

If that is true, then why isn't there infinitely more power in a 60 Hz signal than in DC?

[magnetoelastic]

Some of Faraday's and Henry's earliest experiments with inductors were constructed like this - with a donut shaped coil of copper stitched around by fine iron wire to make a torus.  There is nothing of any significance at the ends of the iron/steel wire, because the magnetic flux would rather leak between adjacent turns of the iron/steel than between the ends.