Pulsed DC Transformer with Embedded Magnets

[PhysicsProfessor]

The physics professor is just another one of Lawrence's many personalities. ...
Mark

This is, of course, a blatant lie -- and Mark offers his falsehood without a shred of substantiation.  He cannot substantiate his unqualified absurdity, because it is not true.

I am a full professor of physics emeritus.

Now, observer, I appreciate your invitation to stay despite such repeated insults and lies, but no thanks. (I may post on occasion; if the nonsense diminishes significantly.) 

  There are other places including other forums where I can discuss results of my studies without such juvenile mocking and nonsense as we see here.

Indeed, consider this post in response to my query on another forum, one which is well-moderated (overunityresearch.com):

Hi PhysicsProf,

Years ago I also "played" with Joulethief circuits to drive white LEDs. I found the most sensitive part for detuning the frequency was the base electrode of the transistor, even a finger approach or light touching to it changed frequencyso I believe the base-emitter transistor capacitance influences frequency maybe the most. This circuit seems to be an RLC oscillator, R is mainly the 1kOhm plus the dynamic base resistance, L is the feedback coil in series with the 1kOhm, I mentioned C already. If you place say a 10pF ceramic capacitor in parallel with base-emitter you can change (lower in this case) the frequency.

To increase efficiency, I agree with Dumped and other possibility is using very low saturation switching transistor like the ones used in photo flash circuits. These have well under 0.1V collector-emitter saturation voltage when conduct so that dissipation in the transistor is at a minimum possible. These transistors have also have high current gain (over several hundred) so that the base drive current can be low.

So we observe that  I received serious input there, but here you see this childish nonsense, a high percentage of recent posts on this thread are "spam" and trivialities and ad hominems..
 
I have taught from Newtonian mechanics to E&M to quantum mechanics -- over 22 years of teaching in two major university systems. 
On this OU forum, I observe such a deplorable lack of dignity and common decency evidenced on this thread. 

Where are the moderators? 

And so you will find that researchers such as Bob Boyce (as he said earlier in this thread) and I will prefer to go elsewhere.  And there are places to go (such as OUR) where there is respect and serious scientific discussion, where juvenile nonsense and mocking and ad hominems are minimized.
Not here.

[chrisC]

....
Indeed, consider this post in response to my query on another forum, one which is well-moderated (overunityresearch.com):

So we observe that  I received serious input there, but here you see this childish nonsense, a high percentage of recent posts on this thread are "spam" and trivialities and ad hominems.....
Not here.

Wow! so we should be impressed you have 22 years of experience at 2 universities and you know some RLC oscillator configurations in transistor coupling circuits?

And it will take you more time to figure out how to measure non-linear ac power after you've consulted with your peers so you don't make a fool of yourself to tell the world of how wonderful Tseung's O.U discovery is? We'll be waiting....

cheers
chrisC

[Poit]

Dear Sir,

As you know here in Russia, it is very cold and we drink copious amounts of Vodka to survive and make our women look thinner. I would like to offer you the Siberian Peninsula (including all mineral rights) in exchange for your vodka heater invention.

Yours sincerely,

Vlad

In Serbia Russia, vodka drink you!

[quarktoo]

@PhysicsProfesser

Dear Professor,

I will hold out the olive branch and kindly ask the others to back off and give me some space, or I will call upon TheBuzz and get all medieval on your asses. Seriously guys, give me a moment of civility with this gentleman.

You seem torn between two worlds. In your day job, you teach students free energy is not possible (in the physical sense) and then you come and are ridiculed when you hold that up as credibility. You can't have your cake and eat it too.

The problem is further compounded when you ride a horse like Lawrence. Years ago, I read his leed-out theory for about 10 minutes and dismissed him as just another sub-genius with delusions of grandeur.

You can be the best jockey on Earth but if you are sitting on a donkey in a horse race, you become the donkey. We are often judged by the company we keep and so far, the only thing Lawrence has proven is that he figured out how to add more advertisements to this forum. I suppose in that regard, he accomplished the impossible.

So let us wipe the black board clean and start fresh. I will make you three promises:

1. Our conversation will be civil.
2. You are going to learn something.
3. You are going to question everything you thought you knew about electromagnetics.

Now, that is a mighty heady way to start a conversation but I never talk shit unless I am intentionally trying to bait someone into telling me something. I do it all the time but I will not bait you in this conversation.

As an act of good faith, I will tell you something personal about myself. When I got out of the military, (nuclear submarines) I took my GI bill and decided to go to school. (About 1979)

After the first class, I approached the physics professor and showed him a magnet motor idea I had. The principle was sound and in retrospect it was similar to Howard Johnsons flux gate. Without investigation, he dismissed my idea by telling me "It violates second law. You can't get something from nothing."

I clicked the magnets together in my hand and replied "That isn't nothing and I don't want to turn out like you. All you know is what someone programmed into you and that is not knowledge, that is a belief." I went on to tell him "I am not coming back here since I don't want to become like you. I need to form my own thoughts." Hence my total disdain for all things magical thinking.

I don't know what my life would have been like had I got an education. As it were, I started a computer business and things worked out for me. That was my first and only day in college. The education I have is the one I gave myself.

That first and last day of college began the first step of a journey of nearly 35 years. I now feel I am able to understand the physics of electromagnetic energy at least at an empirical level and explain some of those mysteries like the double slit experiment, Faraday's disk, the real Leedscalnin PMH experiment that nobody seems to do or Marinov's perpetual mobile.

That is real information about me and I don't share anything personal with anyone. I don't come here to make friends, I come here to learn, teach and sometimes have some fun making trouble. It is a process that gets people to spill information. So let our conversation begin and in the end I will give you an experiment that will puzzle you and your peers for life - perpetual motion.

The first thing you need to learn is what electricity is and they don't teach that in school. Often you will find the word phenomena associated with the definition because some of the most simple questions cannot be answered. When academia does attempt to provide an answer, it is nothing more than a label like "field" or "force carrier" which begins a circular thought and in the end explains nothing.

On a related note - I think Feynman got it just before he died or maybe confession was good for the soul after the Papp incident decades prior. Feynman appeared on a PBS special with Mandelbrot and Feynman spilled the free energy beans that Bohm had figured out back in the 70's as I recall.

So we should start at the beginning and end at the end. I promise you in the end, you are going to finally understand what is happening at a sub-atomic level and electricity will suddenly all make sense. Then you will better understand why Lawrence's experiment is flawed and why he and others are ridiculed on this joule thief subject.

The first "effect" of electrical production is voltage. Voltage is a vacuum field and that is why an electron attempts to fill that space. We measure a voltage field by the tension and that tension is a vacuum. So in reality, at an atomic level if you flipped your scope upside down, it would indicate accurately. No wonder people are confused huh? I only think in relative particle charges and it took years for me to deprogram myself.

But first we have a little puzzle that needs to be solved. Voltage moves at the speed of light, an electron moves down a wire slightly less than 1 meter per minute while the magnet is passing the inductor at say 2 meters per second.

How did we go from 2 meters per second with a magnet to the speed of light? If you look up the definition of voltage, it will say something like voltage is the photonic force carrier of the electromagnetic force. This is not accurate.

So the first question I have for you is: What caused the speed amplification of a magnet moving 2 meters per second to voltage moving at 299,792,458 m/s - the speed of light?

Try your best to answer that question. I am not interested in writing an essay, I want to have a conversation and the ball is in your court. If you can empirically find a flaw, you will be the first physics professor to do it and I have had this conversation dozens of times and have not lost yet.

Again, I will politely ask others to stay out of this conversation. If it becomes necessary, I may be able to still start a locked or moderated thread under an old user name.

[XS-NRG]

And so you will find that researchers such as Bob Boyce (as he said earlier in this thread) and I will prefer to go elsewhere.

If you need that long to see if this thing is OU or not:

GO!! PLEASE GO !!

Why are you still here?
Do i need to pay you to leave?

Clown Professor