PopularFX
Home Help Search Login Register
Welcome,Guest. Please login or register.
2017-06-29, 11:51:59
News: Forum TIP:
The SHOUT BOX deletes messages after 3 hours. It is NOT meant to have lengthy conversations in. Use the Chat feature instead.

Pages: [1]
Author Topic: Offer  (Read 28533 times)
Group: Guest
Dr. Jones has been a great source of inspiration to me. And I have recently been blessed with more than I need to survive.

I would like to extend an offer to those who wish to further their education and discovery of alternative sources of energy.

If you are in need of assistance in your experimentation, your learning, let me know. I would be more than grateful to purchase materials and have them sent to you.

All that I ask it that you share openly, be safe, and "pay it forward"
God Bless.

Andrew Manrique
Manriquea@my.uwstout.edu
1-715-308-7781 
   

Hero Member
*****

Posts: 2898
tExB=qr
Dr. Jones has been a great source of inspiration to me. And I have recently been blessed with more than I need to survive.

What do you mean by "recently been blessed with more than I need to survive"?
   
Hero Member
*****

Posts: 2108
  I've talked to Armagdn03 recently and I think he means he has landed a great job.

Thank you, Armagdn03 -- a very kind offer!!  I also have personal funds designated to help with Freedom Energy development. 
   
Hero Member
*****

Posts: 826
I do not really need the prize money so I shall donate it to worthy causes.

I would like to claim the prize so that all can learn something new.

What most of us focused on was the simple COP.  There were much talk and discussion in specifying that the COP should be the Average Output Power over the Average Input Power.  Mathematically, this is correct.  However, this may be misleading in our true understanding of what is going on in the many “overunity circuits” especially those related to the Joule Thief.

The more exact technique should be a comparison of the Output and Input Power waveforms and a detailed analysis of the csv files from oscilloscopes.

In the attached files, the COP was a mere -0.07.  The non-careful researcher may dismiss such a circuit as inefficient and way below unity.  However, the negative sign came from the Average Input Power.  That fact alone indicated that this was a “recharging circuit”.  More Energy is fed back to the battery than supplied by the battery.

In Physics, we understand that for a perfect standing wave, we do not need to supply any power (and hence energy) to maintain it.  The standing wave can have a high node (amplitude).  In the case of the Output Power Waveform, there is a large positive area and an almost equally large negative area.  There is much power going out but also there is much power being fed back.  The area under the curve represents energy (Energy = Power x Time).

I would like to bring this fact for all to learn.  We need to have a new understanding of the COP>1 requirement.  I am sure many of the existing Joule Thief circuits have similar characteristics and these circuits have been proven to light many LEDs or CFLs and the battery lives lasted for long periods.  Energy actually comes from the environment.

I contend from the waveforms that there is more energy available in the Output Circuit than the Input Circuit.  The claim to the prize will be base on this fact.

Poynt99 and Prof. Steven Jones, will you take on my claim???
   
Group: Guest
I've now come up with an idea that can explains extra energy and not violating energy conservation at the same time.  These are the postulates:

1/ The source of extra energy comes from mass.
2/ All magnetic induction and EM waves (RF/radiant energy) are energy derive from mass.
3/ E = mc^2 applies only to isolated bodies at rest.
4/ Conservation of energy applies to systems, not to individual bodies.

What it means is there are two process of energy transfer:  Energy to energy and mass to energy.  A system can undergo mass to energy and then energy to energy to have more energy. 
   
Hero Member
*****

Posts: 2108
@Lawrence:
Quote
I contend from the waveforms that there is more energy available in the Output Circuit than the Input Circuit.  The claim to the prize will be base on this fact.

Poynt99 and Prof. Steven Jones, will you take on my claim???  

For the JT-type circuit, you can measure the input energy rather easily by using a capacitor for the input energy and using the formula:
Einput = 1/2 C (Vfinal^2 - Vinitial^2), where C is the capacitance of the cap.

The JT-type output is often at high frequency making the output power somewhat difficult to measure IMO.  For the New Renaissance prize I offer, I will take on your claim if you will measure the output power calorimetrically, and I recommend dissipating the output power in a resistor and using this to heat water; then the output energy is :

Q = C*mass*(Tfinal - Tinitial),
where T is the temperature, mass = mass of the water heated from Tinitial to Tfinal, and C = the specific heat of water = 1 calorie/gram °C = 4.186 joule/gram °C

Are you willing to make the measurements of input energy using a capacitor, and of output energy using calorimetry, as described?  I hope so.

  
   
Hero Member
*****

Posts: 826
@Lawrence:
For the JT-type circuit, you can measure the input energy rather easily by using a capacitor for the input energy and using the formula:
Einput = 1/2 C (Vfinal^2 - Vinitial^2), where C is the capacitance of the cap.

The JT-type output is often at high frequency making the output power somewhat difficult to measure IMO.  For the New Renaissance prize I offer, I will take on your claim if you will measure the output power calorimetrically, and I recommend dissipating the output power in a resistor and using this to heat water; then the output energy is :

Q = C*mass*(Tfinal - Tinitial),
where T is the temperature, mass = mass of the water heated from Tinitial to Tfinal, and C = the specific heat of water = 1 calorie/gram °C = 4.186 joule/gram °C

Are you willing to make the measurements of input energy using a capacitor, and of output energy using calorimetry, as described?  I hope so.

 

Dear Prof. Jones,

I believe you must have observed changes in waveforms when you use capacitors instead of batteries.

The trick with the Joule Thief or FLEET type devices is to hunt for the best “resonance” condition.  I put “resonance” in quotes because I am not too sure that we can use the standard resonance concepts in such devices.  A  few individuals or teams trained by me told me that they had achieved “resonance conditions” that can be commercially exploited.  One is the LED hat from Taiwan.  The NEW hat will light up more LEDs for much longer periods.

I can tune the FLEET prototypes so that the Average Positive Output Power is greater than 15 watts.  I may be able to use heater elements to heat small amounts of water and recharge batteries at the same time.  The recharged batteries can again be used as Input batteries. 

There is still something I do not understand.  Sometimes I can get the Average Negative Output Power to be greater than the Average Positive Output Power.  That implies that the Output (with load) circuit is NOT drawing energy from the Joule Thief Primary.  It may even be supplying energy back to the Primary.

Thus I think that changing the battery to capacitors or changing the environment to get calorimetric readings may change the “resonance conditions”.  That would not do justice to the “resonance tuned” FLEET circuits.

We may all learn much more if we just focus on the Output and Input Power Waveform comparisons at this time.  The resonance hunting is still very much empirical.  I have a gut feeling that the South African system Sterling Allan is investigating belongs to such “commercial resonance conditions.”

May God Guide us all in such research.
   
Hero Member
*****

Posts: 826
Dear Prof. Jones,

I believe we should examine the oscilloscope measurement technique thoroughly before dismissing it.  The measurement technique is based on the well established physics principle that the Instantaneous power is equal to the product of the Instantaneous Voltage  and the Instantaneous Current.  This principle is true whether the system is DC, AC or Pulsed.

If the oscilloscope can provide the Instantaneous Voltage and Instantaneous Current values in csv files, we can use EXCEL to do all the necessary calculations.  These calculations include Average Input Power; Average Output Power; Peak-to-Peak voltage and current; RMS voltage and current etc.  In particular, EXCEL can display the Output vs Input Power waveform comparisons.  Your Atten oscilloscope can provide such csv files.

In the FLEET circuit tuning, we make changes to the resistor, capacitor values until the Output Power Waveform on one oscilloscope is much bigger than the Input Powe Waveform on another Oscilloscope.  We then take csv measurements and bmp screen shots.  That was how some very impressive “commercial resonance conditions” were obtained.

If the Input battery were to be replaced by a capacitor, the entire tuning process must be redone.  The impressive “commercial resonance condition” would not apply.  We would be dealing with an entirely different circuit in the resonance hunting context.

Thus we should not dismiss the oscilloscope measurement method in such resonance hunting environments.  In particular, when the average Input or Output Power were observed to be negative, we have a NEW knowledge.  How should we interpret such experimental results?

The Divine Wine has subtleties.

Looking forward to your carefully thought-out comments.
   
Hero Member
*****

Posts: 2108
Dear Prof. Jones,

I believe you must have observed changes in waveforms when you use capacitors instead of batteries.

The trick with the Joule Thief or FLEET type devices is to hunt for the best “resonance” condition.  I put “resonance” in quotes because I am not too sure that we can use the standard resonance concepts in such devices.  A  few individuals or teams trained by me told me that they had achieved “resonance conditions” that can be commercially exploited.  One is the LED hat from Taiwan.  The NEW hat will light up more LEDs for much longer periods.

I can tune the FLEET prototypes so that the Average Positive Output Power is greater than 15 watts.  I may be able to use heater elements to heat small amounts of water and recharge batteries at the same time.  


Lawrence:  
  I am suggesting that you replace the input batteries with a large-C capacitor of approximately the SAME voltage.    Depending on how long you run with the capacitor each time and how large C is, the voltage may not drop excessively.
 Then look at the waveforms, and I suspect these will not change so much; actual measurements will tell.

 The attached photo shows large caps on my electronics bench today (two of are involved in tests currently).  There are two 10,000 mFd (300VDC) red caps, the blue one is 60,000mFd (25VDC), and there are two 2,600 Farad (that is correct) caps rated for 2.5 V.  I believe you will find that using a large-C cap like this may not change your waveforms so much compared to a battery, as long as you operate at nearly the same voltage as you had previously on the battery.   Would you try it?  It should not be difficult to make the substitution and observe the waverforms.  

   Regarding the output, you note:

Quote
I can tune the FLEET prototypes so that the Average Positive Output Power is greater than 15 watts.  I may be able to use heater elements to heat small amounts of water and recharge batteries at the same time.

15 watts output (average +) is impressive and certainly should allow you to "use heater elements to heat small amounts of water".  Then you can easily calculate Q (heat) -- I gave the equation in my previous post.  I would suggest that you dissipate as much of the output power as possible in the output heater elements, so as to see whether indeed you are achieving ou.

Yes, you may have to change the "tuning" -- but the reward for this effort is that you will FINALLY be able to see what is happening with reliable and credible measurements regarding the input and output energies (and power).   And finally able to convince others! IMO.

   Continued oscilloscope measurements are not likely to convince most researchers on these FE forums - for reasons we have explored before, but in addition you yourself admit some questions from DSO readings:
Quote
There is still something I do not understand.  Sometimes I can get the Average Negative Output Power to be greater than the Average Positive Output Power.  That implies that the Output (with load) circuit is NOT drawing energy from the Joule Thief Primary.  It may even be supplying energy back to the Primary. -- Lawrence

May I suggest that using calorimetry as described, along with a large C cap for input energy, will enable you to FINALLY convince others (and perhaps yourself) regarding what is happening (one way or the other) in your circuit, which you have been working on for years.

My best wishes for your efforts.




   
Hero Member
*****

Posts: 826

May I suggest that using calorimetry as described, along with a large C cap for input energy, will enable you to FINALLY convince others (and perhaps yourself) regarding what is happening (one way or the other) in your circuit, which you have been working on for years.

My best wishes for your efforts.[/b]

Dear Prof. Jones,

Your suggestion is appreciated.

However, the oscilloscope csv analysis and the comparison of Output and Input Power waveforms are based on solid physics principles.  When we observe Negative Average Input and/or Output Powers, we have to pause and answer questions.

Does Average Negative Input Power mean – more energy is fed-back to the battery (or capacitor) than energy supplied?

That statement and observation alone will give all of us new insights.  Think along this line.

You are one of the few who can eliminate the possibility of experimental errors or Scope errors because you already have the Atten Oscilloscope and have access to the more powerful Scopes at BYU.

May God Guide us with this New Knowledge.




   
Hero Member
*****

Posts: 2108

However, the oscilloscope csv analysis and the comparison of Output and Input Power waveforms are based on solid physics principles.  When we observe Negative Average Input and/or Output Powers, we have to pause and answer questions.

Does Average Negative Input Power mean – more energy is fed-back to the battery (or capacitor) than energy supplied?


Not necessarily, Lawrence, when observed using an oscilloscope.  One problem is that oscilloscope probes (including wires) can pick up the RF generated in the JT and give screwy results -- this is a possible source of error with an oscilloscope.  But this will not be a problem using a large-C cap for the input and calorimetry for the output energy.


So once again, if you will use a large-C cap for the input (to allow measuring the input energy), this will resolve the question -- because if indeed "more energy is fed-back to the... capacitor than energy supplied", you will see this unequivocally as a rise in voltage in the capacitor!  Why not try this?

You have done a lot of admirable work.  It is time now to move to a more reliable (and convincing) method of measurement.
   
Hero Member
*****

Posts: 826
Not necessarily, Lawrence, when observed using an oscilloscope.  One problem is that oscilloscope probes (including wires) can pick up the RF generated in the JT and give screwy results -- this is a possible source of error with an oscilloscope.  But this will not be a problem using a large-C cap for the input and calorimetry for the output energy.


So once again, if you will use a large-C cap for the input (to allow measuring the input energy), this will resolve the question -- because if indeed "more energy is fed-back to the... capacitor than energy supplied", you will see this unequivocally as a rise in voltage in the capacitor!  Why not try this?

You have done a lot of admirable work.  It is time now to move to a more reliable (and convincing) method of measurement.

Actually, I do not need more convincing.  I already received some “commercial resonance condition” information which I cannot disclose now.  When such prototypes turned into products, I may be given permission to disclose them.  Thus I feel confident that commercial products using “lead-out or Bring-in” energy from the environment is just around the corner.

One of them is the LED Hat.  Almost any one with successful research into the Joule Thief or the FLEET circuits will not be surprised to find that we can use less battery to light more LEDs and such batteries can last much longer.  The surprise may be the magnitude.  (I may receive a number of such hats as gifts after the product rolls out.  I shall send you one.  The remaining discussion at this point is that whether such Hats make you more clever or more stupid?)

The other is the battery charger.  Almost any Joule Thief Researcher can claim that they have successfully recharged batteries while lighting LEDs at the same time.  Few can claim that they can recharge banks of 12V car batteries – giving a quantum jump to electric car technology.  (I may be driving in one of these after the product rolls out.)

Mr. Wang Shen Ho emailed me recently saying that his government-funded, top-secret OU research has been declassified.  He and his team will be promoting his inventions that I know about since 2004.  See the attached picture.

The Divine Wine comes in many favors.
   
Pages: [1]
« previous next »


 

Home Help Search Login Register
Theme © PopularFX | Based on PFX Ideas! | Scripts from iScript4u 2017-06-29, 11:51:59