Selfrunning Free Energy devices up to 5 KW from Tariel Kapanadze

[verpies]

Thanks for that profound answer. But my point is this: The connected primary coil creates a magnetic field in the core of a transformer.

Yes. Let's call the time to "charge up" the core with the magnetic flux, the T₁.

Now we disconnect that coil and quickly connect a load to the secondary coil. Then the collapsing magnetic field generates a current through that coil and the load. So the load is running actually on a collapsing magnetic field rather than on a building magnetic field.

Yes

When the field has collapsed, it is zero <warning> and the current stops to run trough the secondary coil.

That's assuming a discontinuous mode of operation.
Note that in such mode, the time it takes for the secondary current to decrease to zero depends on the load connected to the secondary.  Let's call that time T₂.

Now we connect the primary coil again and disconnect the load from the secondary coil. That means the power source that provides the current for the primary coil »sees« each time it is connected just an idle running transformer

Essentially yes, but it would be more accurate to state, that the power source »sees« just an inductor, because for all intents and purposes the secondary winding does not exist while the core is being "charged up" with magnetic flux during T₁.

Thus in that operation mode that transformer should only need the current as if it were not connected to any load on the secondary coil (idle) when in fact it is connected to a load.

That's true. In the Flyback mode of operation (when pri & sec currents do not flow simultaneously) the T₁ time is independent of the load connected to the secondary.  Because of this, the average power and energy delivered by the power source during T₁ is constant (over that interval).

But maybe I'm confusing here something ... 

Yes, you are confusing the power over one T₁ cycle with the average power over multiple T₁+T₂ cycles.
The power during T₁ is constant but the power during T₂ is not (it varies with the load).
If T₂ is shorter then the whole T₁+T₂ cycle becomes shorter and the primary winding gets the chance to charge the core with magnetic flux more frequently. More frequent charging cycles mean more average power drawn from the power supply over multiple T₁ charging cycles

[verpies]

Believe it or not I made a solar battery conditioner that produced such powerful cap discharges into a battery which caused rapid current spikes of several amps through a pair of wires about 1 meter long and the ringing in the wires could be heard as well as picked up on my scope as a radio signal. EMR or EMI was too much without some shielding.
The sudden discharges caused an effect that could make some people ill. And it was random frequency based on power supplied.

What was switching these current spikes (transistor, spark gap, etc...) ?
What was the peak current of the spike ?
Were those wires parallel or twisted ?  How far apart were they ?

[Zeitmaschine]

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=e92yz5Y1img&feature=youtu.be

To me that device looks too complicated. Why has SR193 no need for all that coils?

It would be interesting to measure the ground current going through that ground wire. Or to see what happens when the ground wire is disconnected while the device is running.

Here's the problem as I see it, many of us use terms differently, to me "Back emf" is the same as "counter emf" and happens in any wire or coil any time a current is flowing in it ( but only when the current is flowing ) the back emf or counter emf first happen together with the applied emf when the coil is charging.

»The electromagnet will store energy when powered and will generate a "back EMF", or counter EMF (CEMF), when the supply is switched off.« That's the definition of that website.

Yes, you are confusing the power over one T₁ cycle with the average power over multiple T₁+T₂ cycles.
The power during T₁ is constant but the power during T₂ is not (it varies with the load).
If T₂ is shorter then the whole T₁+T₂ cycle becomes shorter and the primary winding gets the chance to charge the core with magnetic flux more frequently. More frequent charging cycles mean more average power drawn from the power supply over multiple T₁ charging cycles

But I'm sure the answer lies somewhere in here. If T₂ is shorter than T₁ doesn't that mean it generates more current because the faster the magnetic field collapses (due to the load on the secondary coil) the higher the voltage/current in that coil? When I move a permanent magnet through a coil fast then that coil generates more current compared with a slow moving magnet. To put it another way: The magnetic field builds up slowly because of the low current going through the primary coil but it collapses fast due to the high load current going through the secondary coil. Does that compensate one another or not? Even if it compensates then could a fast collapsing field perhaps attract (or deflect) additional electrons (from ground or a metallic object) so the output current gets boosted?

A second thought: The more load connected to the secondary coil the more current goes through that coil the faster the magnetic field collapses the more electrons are deflected from ground into the circuit the more the current gets boosted. Could that be correct? 

This is still confusing.

[verpies]

»The electromagnet will store energy when powered and will generate a "back EMF", or counter EMF (CEMF), when the supply is switched off.« That's the definition of that website.

That is such a poor choice of words
I don't like it because it suggests that this "back EMF" is a voltage that would cause a flow of current through the electromagnet in the backward direction, if that current was allowed to flow.

In fact the opposite is true:  If the current caused by this "back EMF" is allowed to flow, then it will flow through the electromagnet in the same direction as before.

[zcsaba77]

I'd need to know the frequency to be able to answer that question.

example:
40; 80; 120; 500; 1000 kHz

its reason because I want to know how deep inside bulb in wolfram tread, I watched one of Igor's video, he immerse to water fully and take out and again immerse, if bulb rise normaly like on use main power, 200-300w bulb raise temperature inmediatly, and his bulb glass not broke/explode in water, I think bulb on HF produce less heat, but it is my theory, maybe wrong