PopularFX
Home Help Search Login Register
Welcome,Guest. Please login or register.
OverUnity Research > Pulsed / Radiant Energy > Barbat Photonic Energy Converter > The Patent Of William Barbat
2024-04-18, 23:11:07
News: Registration with the OUR forum is by admin approval.

Pages: 1 2 [3] 4 5 6 7 8 9
Author Topic: The Patent Of William Barbat  (Read 178786 times)
Topic Options img
img  BEP
Re: The Patent Of William Barbat « Reply #50 on: 2010-12-16, 17:41:13 »
Group: Guest
Peterae,

Yes.

The only toroid shaped delay line I've had a look at the inductor windings were wound around a conductor strip. That strip became one half of a capacitor when the whole things was rolled.

Almost exactly as shown in the attached except the 'core' (here labeled 'inductor strip') was shorted.
   
img  BEP
Re: The Patent Of William Barbat « Reply #51 on: 2010-12-16, 18:51:50 »
Group: Guest
Linear delay lines 'must' have the core grounded. Otherwise the core (usually a copper rod) will wind up with a high potential charge.

Dual distributed delay lines can also be linear or circular. The 'dual distributed' part is where the outer winding is actually two, or more, coils wound in a bucking configuration.

The core is one half of a capacitor. If this capacitive element has three layers, the capacitor output will be the same polarity as the capacitor input - just like Faraday's ice pail.
   
img  altair
Re: The Patent Of William Barbat « Reply #52 on: 2010-12-16, 18:56:32 »
Group: Guest
Quote from: WaveWatcher on 2010-12-16, 17:17:05
Maybe very little, in the shorted coil. The short prevents potential buildup. No potential, no current. You can unload a generator by removing the load or shorting the output leads.
While some potential builds across the shorted coil, it must be limited and extremely low. The shorted winding looks like it must act more as a capacitor plate than anything else.

That shorted coil looks more like the inner metal cylinder of a Faraday ice pail experiment.

In other words, I think Grumpy has nailed this one.

In the magnifying coil, the current is not generated from a potential, or a voltage drop.  The current is generated within the material of the coil itself, as I see it. The lowest the resistance of the coil, the better the performance. A voltage drop would just be an impediment to the generation of a large current.  
In this case here, "no potential" does NOT equal "no current".
   
img  Grumpy
Re: The Patent Of William Barbat « Reply #53 on: 2010-12-16, 19:01:11 »

Group: Tinkerer
Hero Member
*****

Posts: 3941
tExB=qr
Quote from: Quarktoo on 2010-12-16, 16:16:56
Could you show me where the shorted coils are in a Methernitha and back that up with some proof? I have looked into that in detail and did not see that.

I do not know that Testatika has shorted coils, but it has an electrostatic generator.

Tesla used shorted coils. See attached:

When you apply an electric field to one side of the shorted coil, the side closest will be charge opposite the inducing field, and the far side of the shorted coil will be charged the same as the inducing field.  Barbat and Tesla used AC in these instances, so the elecrostatically induced current moved back and forth through the coil.
   
img  poynt99
Re: The Patent Of William Barbat « Reply #54 on: 2010-12-16, 19:31:52 »

Group: Administrator
Hero Member
*****

Posts: 3205
It's not as complicated as it may seem...
Quote from: WaveWatcher on 2010-12-16, 17:17:05
Maybe very little, in the shorted coil. The short prevents potential buildup. No potential, no current. You can unload a generator by removing the load or shorting the output leads.
While some potential builds across the shorted coil, it must be limited and extremely low. The shorted winding looks like it must act more as a capacitor plate than anything else.

That shorted coil looks more like the inner metal cylinder of a Faraday ice pail experiment.

In other words, I think Grumpy has nailed this one.

Unless I'm not understanding what you mean, I'd consider thinking that one through again.  :o

The sending coil and magnifying coil make up a loosely-coupled transformer, and shorting the "secondary" will have a degree of loading on the primary. In addition, the shorted secondary sets up a worst-case condition for conduction current, despite there being little "potential" across the coil. The whole point it seems of having the output coil coaxial with the magnifying coil is for the best coupling via mutual induction. In fact, the desired effect is to maximize the current in the magnifying coil.

There may be some electrostatics involved, but the amount of ES induction will be quite feeble compared to that of the magnetic induction.

.99
   
img  forest
Re: The Patent Of William Barbat « Reply #55 on: 2010-12-16, 19:39:11 »
Sr. Member
****

Posts: 462
good catch!
Today I thought about it too and Russian forum user nickname Tiger who has the best replication of SR device used a copper tube inside ferrite rings . It has HV connected to it and to the ground via spark gap.I think such tube can be considered poor shorted coil.
   
img  altair
Re: The Patent Of William Barbat « Reply #56 on: 2010-12-16, 19:46:41 »
Group: Guest
Quote from: poynt99 on 2010-12-16, 19:31:52
/snip
The whole point it seems of having the output coil coaxial with the magnifying coil is for the best coupling via mutual induction. In fact, the desired effect is to maximize the current in the magnifying coil.
/snip


Exactly !
   
img  Grumpy
Re: The Patent Of William Barbat « Reply #57 on: 2010-12-16, 19:54:41 »

Group: Tinkerer
Hero Member
*****

Posts: 3941
tExB=qr
Quote from: poynt99 on 2010-12-16, 19:31:52
Unless I'm not understanding what you mean, I'd consider thinking that one through again.  :o

The sending coil and magnifying coil make up a loosely-coupled transformer, and shorting the "secondary" will have a degree of loading on the primary. In addition, the shorted secondary sets up a worst-case condition for conduction current, despite there being little "potential" across the coil. The whole point it seems of having the output coil coaxial with the magnifying coil is for the best coupling via mutual induction. In fact, the desired effect is to maximize the current in the magnifying coil.

There may be some electrostatics involved, but the amount of ES induction will be quite feeble compared to that of the magnetic induction.

.99

ES induction is a cumulative effect and repeated application will soak the field into the conductor - i.e. more electrons will flow after a ramp-up time.  At the right rate, there should be a lot of current in that shorted coil, which is electromagnetically coupled to the load coil.
   
img  tak22
Re: The Patent Of William Barbat « Reply #58 on: 2010-12-16, 20:10:46 »
Newbie
*

Posts: 18
I can't participate at the high level of knoweldge/experience here, but I can research!

Found this will looking around for ESI references:

Quote
Crank up the voltage over 600kv and wind spiral coils and interrupt the direct current in very short pulses and you too can make a Tesla Magnifying Transmitter. Put away that spherical Tesla coil and enter the world of Longitudinal Vortex Energy via the Tesla Magnifying Transmitter.

Short recap. Tesla built a Pinch Machine that more resembled the physical shape and electric dynamics of the sun and was therefore a Theta Pinch. He discovered Impulse Radiant Longitudinal Electric Energy in the process. This Radiant Electric Longitudinal wave could transmitt DC over space. It generated a pressure wave of neutrinos and its coronal discharge more represented star light. It did not need magnetic induction and it was not restricited to the inverse sqaure of the distance law. The rays neither diminished with the inverse square of the distance nor the inverse of the distance from their source. They seemed to stretch out in a progressive shock-shell to great distances without any apparent loss. Under further test as seen below he described it as a Corona or Whitefire. In effect, Tesla had managed to interrupt a high voltage direct current several thousand times per second. In doing so, he had discovered a way to completely separate electrostatic energy from current impulses. Tesla found it possible to produce millions of electrostatic volts by this method without any current. He discovered that the shape of the conical secondary capacitors to be important so geometry played its role. He discovered electrostatic resonace with his test and experiments.

He found that the transformative abilities of these smooth copper coils were maximum when the coil mass equaled the mass of the impulser's conductive copper strap. It did not matter how thin the coil windings were. The equality of copper masses brought maximum transformative effects. When this equal mass condition was fulfilled, Tesla said that the coil-capacitors were "in resonance". Electrostatic resonance. White discharges from each of these free ends had very different characteristics, indicating the unidirectional flow. Electropositive terminals always appeared brush-like and broad. Electronegative terminals always appeared constricted and dart-like. He began placing these "secondary" coils within his "primary" impulser circuit. The strap, which connected his magnetic arc to the capacitors, formed the "primary". He made necessary distinctions among his Transformer components. Few engineers actually appreciate these distinctions. The "primary" and "secondary" of Tesla Transformers are not magnetic inductors. They are resistive capacitors. Coil-shaped capacitors! Tesla Transformer action is electrostatic induction.

Much more in the full link.

http://www.thunderbolts.info/forum/phpBB3/viewtopic.php?f=10&t=53#p476

tak
« Last Edit: 2010-12-16, 22:33:06 by tak22 »
   
img  BEP
Re: The Patent Of William Barbat « Reply #59 on: 2010-12-16, 20:11:23 »
Group: Guest
I'm going by actual experience with generators and alternators from 50kW to 4gW.

This experience was had due to tests requiring the demonstration of a 'worst case scenario'.

With the exception of electrostatic induction, as Grumpy describes, shorting the secondary does indeed apply some load to the primary after the initial surge during the short circuit. This load is very minimal because in all cases with conventional devices no potential always equals no current. The only reason there will be some minimal current is because the coil means there is some induction. Since induction is involved, some potential will be allowed to build up between winding turns. This will show as some load on the primary.

The way transformers are designed they will fry if they reach this point because the shorted secondary will cause the primary impedance to drop. This drop causes the primary to cook.

Try it. Short the secondary of a regular transformer. After the smoke clears look at which windings burned. (Not really. Please don't cook a transformer on my account  :) ).

In the power, pump and compressor industries it is called 'freewheeling'.  

>>> Edit
Too wordy, again. I should have just said: Spin up an MG set (Motor-generator). Short the generator leads and watch the RPM of the motor drop for an instant and then race beyond normal speed before synchronizing with the line frequency again. The motor current will also drop to a near unloaded value.
<<<

Sorry folks but until something beyond conventional is proven, in my mind this cannot be argued.


I really hope this device is using something other than electromagnetic induction. If it is, I would love to see enough info to replicate it. I don't see enough yet.
   
img  the_big_m_in_ok
Re: The Patent Of William Barbat « Reply #60 on: 2010-12-16, 21:46:13 »
Group: Guest
Quote from: Peterae on 2010-12-16, 16:29:50
There's an interesting circuit here of an electrostatic speaker esl63
They also short the delay coils.
Wow.  "Interesting circuit" is understating the point to some extent, I think.  I downloaded a copy of the drawing for reference.  The round things are physically parts of the speaker, right?  And it uses two high voltage Cockroft-Walton voltage bridge multipliers?  Never saw a speaker that needed that kind of voltage.

What is the speaker part of?  How does it work, as designed?  Maybe there's a usable experimental modification of this device that's applicable to Barbat's invention?

--Lee
   
img  the_big_m_in_ok
Re: The Patent Of William Barbat « Reply #61 on: 2010-12-16, 21:55:15 »
Group: Guest
Quote from: WaveWatcher on 2010-12-16, 18:51:50
Linear delay lines 'must' have the core grounded. Otherwise the core (usually a copper rod) will wind up with a high potential charge.

Dual distributed delay lines can also be linear or circular. The 'dual distributed' part is where the outer winding is actually two, or more, coils wound in a bucking configuration.

The core is one half of a capacitor. If this capacitive element has three layers, the capacitor output will be the same polarity as the capacitor input - just like Faraday's ice pail.
I speculatively ask (offhand) that possibly the coiled capacitor looks like it might be usable as part of a Testatika setup or else in an Influence Machine from the late 1900's?

Just curious if anyone thought of that.

--Lee
   
img  MileHigh
Re: The Patent Of William Barbat « Reply #62 on: 2010-12-16, 22:12:23 »
Group: Guest
Quote from: Quarktoo on 2010-12-16, 20:51:30
Normal transformer 80% efficient with accelerator coil (shorted coils on ends of inductors) squared = 320%

Have a look at Thane Heinz, he figured it out. http://www.youtube.com/user/ThaneCHeins

Just some comments for you Quarktoo.  There is no way that putting loops of wire, a.k.a.; "shorted coils" on the end of an inductor will will increase the energy in a coil.  Meanwhile, Thane is having a hard time getting any traction because in his recent round of clips he is not doing a convincing demonstration of anything.  Nor is there any such thing as a "damaged" electron.

Quote
Take a Whimhurst for example. The counter rotating disks tear some of the mass between the plates and they take on an imbalance of mass/energy. Normally, electricity will distribute itself evenly though the environment but electrostatic likes to hang out in clumps which classic EM theory can not account for.

Friction between two materials can create static electricity.  There is no imbalance of mass/energy happening.  Even friction with the ambient air can create static electricity.  Electrostatic charge on a conductor will spread itself out, but on an insulating material it can indeed be in uneven clumps.

Anyway, I am just making a few comments because some of your statements are far out, I never participate in these kinds of threads.

One day you might want to do some bench testing to check what happens when you put shorted coils at one or both ends of an inductor.  You won't find any excess energy.

Sorry for the thread interruption!

MileHigh
   
img  Grumpy
Re: The Patent Of William Barbat « Reply #63 on: 2010-12-16, 22:23:20 »

Group: Tinkerer
Hero Member
*****

Posts: 3941
tExB=qr
Quote from: Quarktoo on 2010-12-16, 21:32:28

Damn Grumpy! I was not even done all calling your bullshit on the previous post and now you go and post this... I don't see a shorted coil in Tesla's paper you posted but then the image is fuzzier than my back. Could you point that shorted coil in Tesla's patent?

So back you the previous post:



Ed Gray used an accelerator coil that was made of silver wire and that is well documented.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=RCiA7025xq8

EDIT
The the two coils at the end of the motor were shorted together to trap / block the magnetic field that normally follows the shaft out of the motor. (Compression/acceleration)  - Thane Heins.

BTW - Norm Wootan shows another way to build an accelerator coil but I wind ALL the wires that go back to the start OVER the top.
EDIT

The centrifigul force of an electron traveling in a straight line across silver, verses spiraling around copper, causes the electron to accelerate. Also, silver is super corrosive and is one reason that it is the most conductive of all metals. Those loose charge carriers, what Barbet calls low mass electrons, move freely and are split easily due to the higher velocity, AB effect and current as a result.

Electrostatic charge is formed from damaged electrons. Take a Whimhurst for example. The counter rotating disks tear some of the mass between the plates and they take on an imbalance of mass/energy. Normally, electricity will distribute itself evenly though the environment but electrostatic likes to hang out in clumps which classic EM theory can not account for.

Incomplete electrons are like incomplete people, they stick together like glue. This could explain Ramset and the other dependtards. All we need to do is shoot Ramset and one other dependtard through a huge copper tube wrapped around a giant horse shoe magnet. Ramset will come out one tube on... say the North pole of the magnet, and the other dependtard will come out the copper tube on the South side - just like the Methernitha magnets are wired. This re-polarization process is a way to recycle damaged electrons into useful energy again and at overunity.

Man... I love the sight of napalm on the web.

Nappy time

PS - While typing this, I was listening to the video and Gray claimed 400% efficiency. Go figure...

Images of Tesla ES induction circuits are from page 335 of "The Inventions, Researches, and Writings of Nikola Tesla".  I drew red arrows to point at the shorted secondaries.  Notice that in these circuits, the primary is usually "open" as it is driven by AC ES rather than DC pulses.

Also see my last post page 1 of this thread.

I don't believe that Thane actually figured anything out.  Kapanadze sure did!

Anyone have a true diagram or very pic of Testatika?

Ed Gray used the term "electrostatic": see third attachment below:



Regardless of the avenue of thought or path of exploration, the end result is the same: freedom

A squirrel doesn't care where a nut or a pinecone comes from as long as they keep coming.  O0
   
img  poynt99
Re: The Patent Of William Barbat « Reply #64 on: 2010-12-16, 22:38:44 »

Group: Administrator
Hero Member
*****

Posts: 3205
It's not as complicated as it may seem...
Quote from: WaveWatcher on 2010-12-16, 20:11:23
I'm going by actual experience with generators and alternators from 50kW to 4gW.

This experience was had due to tests requiring the demonstration of a 'worst case scenario'.

With the exception of electrostatic induction, as Grumpy describes, shorting the secondary does indeed apply some load to the primary after the initial surge during the short circuit. This load is very minimal because in all cases with conventional devices no potential always equals no current. The only reason there will be some minimal current is because the coil means there is some induction. Since induction is involved, some potential will be allowed to build up between winding turns. This will show as some load on the primary.

The way transformers are designed they will fry if they reach this point because the shorted secondary will cause the primary impedance to drop. This drop causes the primary to cook.

Try it. Short the secondary of a regular transformer. After the smoke clears look at which windings burned. (Not really. Please don't cook a transformer on my account  :) ).

In the power, pump and compressor industries it is called 'freewheeling'.  

>>> Edit
Too wordy, again. I should have just said: Spin up an MG set (Motor-generator). Short the generator leads and watch the RPM of the motor drop for an instant and then race beyond normal speed before synchronizing with the line frequency again. The motor current will also drop to a near unloaded value.
<<<

Sorry folks but until something beyond conventional is proven, in my mind this cannot be argued.


I really hope this device is using something other than electromagnetic induction. If it is, I would love to see enough info to replicate it. I don't see enough yet.


 :o I'm dumbfounded WW. That's not how the transformers I use work.

Short the secondary, and depending on the turns ratio, coupling factor, and pri/sec wire size differences, there is a corresponding maximal current flowing in it (the secondary). There is no such thing as a "short", and hence there will also be a corresponding voltage across the secondary.

.99
   
img  poynt99
Re: The Patent Of William Barbat « Reply #65 on: 2010-12-16, 22:54:40 »

Group: Administrator
Hero Member
*****

Posts: 3205
It's not as complicated as it may seem...
Note also that we are dealing with an air-core transformer, so there are no saturation effects.

Measurement of a secondary voltage, and the current in the secondary is dependent to a degree on the secondary Z value relative to the R of your "short".

.99
   
img  ion
Re: The Patent Of William Barbat « Reply #66 on: 2010-12-16, 23:18:24 »
Group: Elite
Hero Member
******

Posts: 3537
It's turtles all the way down
Quote from: WaveWatcher on 2010-12-16, 17:17:05
You can unload a generator by removing the load or shorting the output leads.

You must be talking about some specific generators as this statement does not apply to all generators, specifically not permanent magnet generators. MH made this same statement some time ago.

Are you talking shunt field wound DC machines or AC induction machines? This cannot occur with a series compound wound machine, where part of the field is derived from the current delivered to the load.

I can see where it might occur with a shunt wound machine as the field voltage is also shorted.

In an AC induction generator, the field must be allowed to build before load is applied or output goes to zero.

I routinely show those interested how a fully loaded (short circuited) PM generator will stall the engine.

The load is totally reflected to the prime mover with these machines.

This works whether the stator winding is fixed and the permanent magnets rotate or vice-versa. Lenz's law does not suddenly give up.

 In the case of the other machines, what is giving up is the field excitation, so it is no longer a generator.


---------------------------
"Secrecy, secret societies and secret groups have always been repugnant to a free and open society"......John F Kennedy
   
img  MileHigh
Re: The Patent Of William Barbat « Reply #67 on: 2010-12-17, 00:45:28 »
Group: Guest
Quarktoo:

Actually you will find that this is a place that is open to all viewpoints about a discussion and there is no need to be rude.

Quote
To suggest that static clumps together but the electrons have equal charge would violate coulombs law. So the only way that the mass could or would clump together is if it had different energy levels.

I'm not really sure what you mean here.  I think you are misreading my statement because I wasn't suggesting what you are saying.  I have no problem with Coulomb's Law and I didn't make any statements about electron energy levels.

Quote
one would assume that part of the energy from the mass has been transferred.

Are you implying E=Mc^2 energy like you did later in the posting also?  That's not the case.  It's mechanical energy that creates static electricity.

Quote
I have done bench testing on lots of shorted coils. It does produce a pulse compression and that does produce more energy. Many free energy devices have used this technique.

Perhaps one day you can share your data with us.  There is no way a coil can produce excess energy.  We should just agree to disagree on that one.

Quote
Why don't you wrap a few hundred turns of #34 around a large choke. Then while you pulse it, short that winding over the top and measure the result. Pulse compression transfers space into less time and that is acceleration. Again, pretty basic stuff. E=MC2 ring a bell?

That's pretty vague and I can be a stickler for details when it comes to this.  Your setup sounds like some sort of transformer but you are not being specific enough with respect to the timings and stuff like that.  However, no matter what the details are there would be a standard explanation for what's going on using different terminology that you use.  Again, there is definitely no fission or fusion going on in a setup like this - no nukes.

I looked at the book and I will have to pass.  I don't read that kind of stuff and I can see that it is filled with alternative theories.  Just because they are alternative theories doesn't necessarily make them right.  Honestly, in my opinion it looks like a junk science pulp book.

MileHigh
   
img  Grumpy
Re: The Patent Of William Barbat « Reply #68 on: 2010-12-17, 01:00:16 »

Group: Tinkerer
Hero Member
*****

Posts: 3941
tExB=qr
Quote from: Quarktoo on 2010-12-17, 00:17:07
Ask and ye shall receive.

Note how one wire goes to the magnet? The wire is split off at the top of the magnet to go to the two coils, OR through the blocks. I have seen it done both ways. I used to have a hi res photo where they used a bar magnet. It was real easy to see what was going on in that photo.

Methernitha stated the magnet is sorting out the static based on polarity and then it is recirculated to make the current heavier.

EDIT  - I can not account for the validity of the brown schematics. There is a lot of disinfo. out there on this subject.

first pic is the Testatika Clone from Jorge Resines
   
img  ion
Re: The Patent Of William Barbat « Reply #69 on: 2010-12-17, 01:50:25 »
Group: Elite
Hero Member
******

Posts: 3537
It's turtles all the way down
This thread is starting to hit some gravel on the side of the road. The ride is getting bumpy. Hope we don't wind up in a ditch.

Can we sort of swing it back around to the thread title?


---------------------------
"Secrecy, secret societies and secret groups have always been repugnant to a free and open society"......John F Kennedy
   
img  Grumpy
Re: The Patent Of William Barbat « Reply #70 on: 2010-12-17, 02:03:49 »

Group: Tinkerer
Hero Member
*****

Posts: 3941
tExB=qr
Quote from: Quarktoo on 2010-12-17, 01:25:00
I wondered for ten years who built that. Is he talking? The photos are awesome and I have a bunch of them.

As far as I know, he didn't talk about it.  I found those pics a few years ago.

Have you seen Potter's web site on Testatika?   http://www.linux-host.org/energy/testatika.htm

Getting back to Barbat, I do not agree with the general assessment that energy has to be released to achieve OU, or that "extra energy" somehow has to be created by whatever means.

To induce a current, you only have to make the electrons drift.  If you can do this with finesse rather than brute force, I am sure they move quite readily with little effort.

This brings up a very important point worthy or intense discussion:

Is energy lost from the electrons when they are moving as a current and facilitating their functions in electrical circuits?  Are electrons just carriers of forces?
   
img  MileHigh
Re: The Patent Of William Barbat « Reply #71 on: 2010-12-17, 02:04:54 »
Group: Guest
Go ahead and swing the thread back, be my guest.

Quarktoo:

You don't have to be such a "bad boy," chill out.  There is a decent chance that I have more real-world experience with electronics than you.  I normally stay out of these threads because any "TPU" style thread is not to my taste at all because I don't believe any of them work.  However you were making such far-out statements that I felt like commenting.

Quote
You don't seem to understand what you wrote or what I wrote. If wrapping a few turns of #34 around a large choke, shorting it out while pulsing it confuses you,... if you think that is a transformer,... then you clearly have no real world experience.

It's unwise to prejudge people, let's leave it at that.

Perhaps in another thread there will be an opportunity to debate some of your ideas.

MileHigh
   
img  Grumpy
Re: The Patent Of William Barbat « Reply #72 on: 2010-12-17, 02:17:50 »

Group: Tinkerer
Hero Member
*****

Posts: 3941
tExB=qr
(This is very important and I do not want it to get buried.)

This brings up a very important point worthy or intense discussion:

Is energy lost from the electrons when they are moving as a current and facilitating their functions in electrical circuits?  Are electrons just carriers of forces?
   
img  Grumpy
Re: The Patent Of William Barbat « Reply #73 on: 2010-12-17, 03:17:25 »

Group: Tinkerer
Hero Member
*****

Posts: 3941
tExB=qr
Quote from: Quarktoo on 2010-12-17, 02:50:08
No, electrons can't be just carriers of forces and A-B effect proves that. There would not be excess energy created if they were just carriers and energy can't come from out of nowhere. "A-B effect is a creation event, more energy out than in." - Richard Feynman

Like I stated before, all electricity is the result of mass to atomic energy conversion. The amount of mass converted is so small, you could never measure it. "Not everything that counts is countable" - Einstein.

While thermodynamics are often misapplied when associated with an accelerated device, and second law does not provide for C^2 , call me old fashioned but I still feel it applies at an intuitive level.

I can't emphasize enough how important understanding that base A-B effect experiment has been to me. It is not a difficult experiment to do if you  use your imagination. You don't need the reflectors and all that. It has ben ten years and I doubt I could ever find the junk if I still have it. (I have loads of old junk experiments.) Combined with an experimental understanding of longitudinal waves and acceleration, it really helped me find what I am looking for in any free energy device and I always find it - no exceptions thus far.

Look, we all know that the Methernitha is real. You have to be a total wack job to think that was some elaborate hoax. So look at what is there. Here is the magnet from the back. As stated, they had different ways of doing the same thing but here you can see a wire under some black shrink tube that connects the two sides of the magnet and associated capacitor plates. White arrows point to the shadow of the wire underneath.

Oh, and Potter.. I don't think so but I don't know. I don't know what I don't know.

You can wrap a iron coil around a copper core and power the iron wire. The ends of the copper core will now attract organic material because it converted current into static.

Conversely, you can wrap a copper wire around a iron core and convert static into current if electrostatic is sent through the iron core. Here is an examples taken from photos off of Stephan DePew's web site:

http://rimstar.org/sdenergy/testa/grid_coils.htm

Photo 1 = the hidden wire that connects the two sides of the plates together - look for shadow

Photo two = Static to current.

Where can that quote by Feynman be found?  I don't see how a little influence from the A-field is "more out than in".

Potter's page has some interesting stuff.  Does Testatika have cores in those cans?
http://www.linux-host.org/energy/principles.htm

Go down to the Linden Experiment:
diagram is attached and it claims that Baunmann performed this experiment if front of witnesses.

My point about electrons is that we perform "work" to make them move and keep them moving, but they are not lost like space junk shot into the sun.  The relationship between the work required in joules, the amount of charge in coulombs, and the voltage in volts is: V=W/Q    This is not the only way to move electrons and if you can find a better way then you can move more with less.  I lower the work required, it only looks OU from other perspectives.  So, I think the whole show can be reduced to very simple principles.   I did a lot of tests before that I did not really understand and misinterpreted, but they make sense now and I was so damn close that I didn't know it.
   
img  Grumpy
Re: The Patent Of William Barbat « Reply #74 on: 2010-12-17, 03:41:04 »

Group: Tinkerer
Hero Member
*****

Posts: 3941
tExB=qr
Quote from: Quarktoo on 2010-12-17, 03:25:29
Here is another simple point. Let's say we move a magnet over a inductor at 1 meter per minute (just fast enough to induce voltage that results from A-B effect.)

Now, no matter what we do mechanically, we are not going to go to the next order unless we accelerate magnetically since we are going to double the speed of electron flow on a wire. (Slightly less than 1 metyer per minute.) So we use the shorted coil trick and square the output minus losses. Experimentally, it works and I can't argue with reality.

Go an old tesla coil? I'll bet if you placed a big magnet plate under the coil with a coil of small wire wound around it until you have about 500 turns, that Tesla coil will jump off the table when you power it up. I will also bet you get 325% more output so be careful, a toy could become lethal.

If you get a exponentially stronger current with a stronger magnetic field, then we are talking about the same thing from entirely different perspectives. 

I would apply the magnetic perpendicular to the inducing field and the resulting current to increase electron precession and therefore increase the output by orders of magnitude.

You understand your language and I understand mine, but it's all good!  LOL!

Does anyone know where the equation V=W/Q came from?  I want to see how it was derived.
   
Pages: 1 2 [3] 4 5 6 7 8 9
« previous next »


 

Home Help Search Login Register
Theme © PopularFX | Based on PFX Ideas! | Scripts from iScript4u 2024-04-18, 23:11:07