PopularFX
Home Help Search Login Register
Welcome,Guest. Please login or register.
2017-08-21, 22:36:42
News: Check out the Benches; a place for people to moderate their own thread and document their builds and data.
If you would like your own Bench, please PM an Admin.
Most Benches are visible only to members.

Pages: 1 2 3 4 5 [6] 7 8
Author Topic: The Patent Of William Barbat  (Read 99729 times)
Sr. Member
****

Posts: 408
Maybe this will help...not sure.
If K is different between either equation, then will both the equations actually "equate"?

--Lee


---------------------------
"The truth comes from wisdom, and widsom comes from experience."
                   --Valdemar  Valerian
                   --from the Matrix series of books

 
"Whosoever speaks or otherwise acts, has no secrets."
                                     --Roman proverb?
   

Group: Elite
Hero Member
******

Posts: 1852
I don't see how lifting the bucket fits.

Lifting it is more like offsetting with a bias.

If you aren't going to add energy to the bucket then your only option to placing the bucket on a higher ladder step is to lower the ladder.

What happens now is the bucket and the water are stretched taller & more narrow OR shorter & wider but not both.




 
« Last Edit: 2010-12-19, 13:42:55 by WaveWatcher »


---------------------------
"As far as the laws of mathematics refer to reality, they are not certain; as far as they are certain, they do not refer to reality." - Einstein

"What we observe is not nature itself, but nature exposed to our method of questioning." - Werner Heisenberg
   
Group: Elite
Hero Member
******

Posts: 3056
It's turtles all the way down
If K is different between either equation, then will both the equations actually "equate"?

--Lee


More info on this here: http://www.i-am-a-i.org/free-energy/index.html


---------------------------
Just because it has a patent application or is patented does not always mean it really works.
   
Group: Guest
I don't see how lifting the bucket fits.

Lifting it is more like offsetting with a bias.

If you aren't going to add energy to the bucket then your only option to placing the bucket on a higher ladder step is to lower the ladder.

What happens now is the bucket and the water are stretched taller & more narrow OR shorter & wider but not both.

Lifting is analogous to adding voltage to the charge.  However, if we are going to look at this like we are talking about a capacitor, there are some tweaks that need to be done.  I was a little bit bothered by "W=VQ" and in Grumpy's link the formula is actually W = V*deltaQ and it applies to a case where the electric field constant.  In reality when you charge a capacitor by putting current into it the electric field is changing, and the higher the voltage, the harder it is (i.e.; the more work you have to do) to charge it.

For a capacitor we know W = 1/2 C V^2, and C = Q/V.

So that means W = 1/2 (Q/V) V^2 = 1/2 VQ.   So in the capacitor case it's "W=1/2VQ" and not "W=VQ."

The following link shows this for a capacitor where you integrate on the charge you put into the capacitor (i.e.; current flowing into the capacitor irrespective of time) and you get the same formula.

http://hyperphysics.phy-astr.gsu.edu/hbase/electric/capeng2.html#c1

Another comment with respect to lifting the bucket up to a higher height and the energy that adds to the system.  We know that the energy stored in a capacitor is proportional to the square of the voltage (W = 1/2CV^2).  However, we also know that the energy in the bucket of water increases linearly with the height (W=MGh).  Therefore to keep the "capacitor analogy" holding true for the bucket of water, you have to lift it proportionally higher to reflect the voltage.  Suppose one volt equals one foot of height.  Then two volts has to equal four feet of additional height so that the amount of energy in the bucket of water resembles the energy associated with the voltage in a capacitor.

In other words, the height of the bucket of water is actually represents the square root of the amount of energy in the equivalent capacitor.  i.e.; lifting the bucket up from one foot high to two feet high only represents 1.414 volts for the equivalent capacitor.  You have to lift the bucket from one foot high to four feet high to represent two volts in the equivalent capacitor.

Grumpy:

Quote
That's it.  I am proposing that time-dependent electrostatic induction can accomplish this feat.

Good luck but those are just words.  If you actually did experiments on the bench you would find that no matter how you approached the problem, you still end up paying the real energy price to charge the capacitor.  There is just no way around it.  I am assuming that for both of us this is an academic discussion so let's not fret about it.

This story is analogous to how I showed that an inductor acts exactly like a physical spring, we are just using different "through" and "across" variables to describe the behaviour.  Otherwise they are identical.  Any person with common sense knows that a spring is not a potential source of energy.

In this case I showed how charging a capacitor is equivalent to lifting up a bucket of water.  So the question is can you lift up the bucket of water with less energy than MGh dictates that you have to expend to move it up by "h."  Unless you have a source of Upsidasium, the answer is no.

Not that I am stopping anyone from dreaming here...  After all Santa is getting ready...

MileHigh
« Last Edit: 2010-12-19, 18:51:25 by MileHigh »
   
Group: Elite
Hero Member
******

Posts: 3056
It's turtles all the way down

This story is analogous to how I showed that an inductor acts exactly like a physical spring, we are just using different "through" and "across" variables to describe the behaviour.  Otherwise they are identical.  Any person with common sense knows that a spring is not a potential source of energy.

MileHigh

MH...

I'd be delighted if you could expound a little on your spring analogies and compare them to the compression of a gas.

Then I may throw a few questions at you, in a good spirit of course.


---------------------------
Just because it has a patent application or is patented does not always mean it really works.
   

Hero Member
*****

Posts: 2913
tExB=qr

For a capacitor we know W = 1/2 C V^2, and C = Q/V.

So that means W = 1/2 (Q/V) V^2 = 1/2 VQ.   So in the capacitor case it's "W=1/2VQ" and not "W=VQ."

Grumpy:

Good luck but those are just words.  If you actually did experiments on the bench you would find that no matter how you approached the problem, you still end up paying the real energy price to charge the capacitor.  There is just no way around it.  I am assuming that for both of us this is an academic discussion so let's not fret about it.


Can you explain why it takes exactly half of the work to charge a capacitor?

If you had paid attention to my posts, I said that an experiment that I performed is what led to consider that a means of performing less work to induce a conduction current may exist.

It is a rather novel idea.
   

Group: Administrator
Hero Member
*****

Posts: 2609
It's not as complicated as it may seem...
Can you explain why it takes exactly half of the work to charge a capacitor?

Is this what you meant by the above?

Why is half the energy lost when charging a capacitor through a wire?

.99
   

Hero Member
*****

Posts: 2913
tExB=qr
Is this what you meant by the above?

Why is half the energy lost when charging a capacitor through a wire?

.99

I meant less work is required and asked "why".  If half of the work were lost, it would be W=2VQ.
   

Group: Administrator
Hero Member
*****

Posts: 2609
It's not as complicated as it may seem...


Pliarism is the ultimate form of flattery MileHigh  - Thank You!

http://www.overunityresearch.com/index.php?topic=457.msg7932#msg7932

A transformer, or any variation on a transformer, will never be able to produce more energy out than you put in.  This can be PROVEN with some understanding of electromagnetics and mathematics.  Once you understand this, it becomes no different than looking at a mechanical spring.  Nobody in their right mind would look at a spring and say that it is a source of free energy.  Their common sense tells them that this is the case.  An electrical coil is just an electromagnetic version of a mechanical spring, but people can't see this if they don't have the background knowledge.

Anyway, another "rain on the parade" posting from me.  Sorry!

MileHigh
   

Group: Administrator
Hero Member
*****

Posts: 2609
It's not as complicated as it may seem...
I meant less work is required and asked "why".  If half of the work were lost, it would be W=2VQ.

Sorry Grumps, I'm still not with you.

Half work, less work....compared to, or with reference to what?

.99
   
Group: Guest
Quarktoo:

I assume that you meant "plagiarism" when you mentioned the ultimate form of flattery.  I wasn't plagiarizing you.

Okay, the ball is in your court.  Can I ask you to explain why an inductor is like a mechanical spring in a few paragraphs?

Thanks,

MileHigh

P.S.:  Thank God my live spell check is working on my computer.  I couldn't live without it.
   

Hero Member
*****

Posts: 2913
tExB=qr
Sorry Grumps, I'm still not with you.

Half work, less work....compared to, or with reference to what?

.99

To charge a capacitor, you do work to move charge into the capacitor.  Apparently it takes exactly twice as much work to move the same amount of charge along a wire.  Can anyone explain "why"?  I think I know why, but wanted to get other ideas on this.
   
Group: Guest
oh dear.

explain this and explain that.
this forum is a nice thing but it is useless to me.
   

Group: Administrator
Hero Member
*****

Posts: 2609
It's not as complicated as it may seem...
To charge a capacitor, you do work to move charge into the capacitor.  Apparently it takes exactly twice as much work to move the same amount of charge along a wire.  Can anyone explain "why"?  I think I know why, but wanted to get other ideas on this.

You passed over this, but it asks the same question. But that's ok.

Is this what you meant by the above?

Why is half the energy lost when charging a capacitor through a wire?

.99

Have a look at the attached document if you haven't yet. This is a commonly asked question regarding caps charging caps, but it applies equally to all conventional sources charging caps. It may answer your question.

.99
   

Hero Member
*****

Posts: 2913
tExB=qr
You passed over this, but it asks the same question. But that's ok.

Have a look at the attached document if you haven't yet. This is a commonly asked question regarding caps charging caps, but it applies equally to all conventional sources charging caps. It may answer your question.

.99

This doesn't answer the question.

To charge a capacitor, you do work to move charge into the capacitor.  Apparently it takes exactly twice as much work to move the same amount of charge along a wire.  Can anyone explain "why"?  I think I know why, but wanted to get other ideas on this.

Maybe MC can explain it.  Since this site is basically useless to him, he might know the answer.
   
Group: Guest

To charge a capacitor, you do work to move charge into the capacitor.  Apparently it takes exactly twice as much work to move the same amount of charge along a wire.  Can anyone explain "why"?  I think I know why, but wanted to get other ideas on this.

Maybe MC can explain it.  Since this site is basically useless to him, he might know the answer.

I can


This doesn't answer the question.


Nothing does.
No matter what you write it won't answer the question.
   

Hero Member
*****

Posts: 2913
tExB=qr
I can

Please do.

(I'm not in agreement with the explanation that says it takes more work to pack charges closer together, but I do agree that a capacitor hold half of the energy that some may think it should hold.)
   

Group: Administrator
Hero Member
*****

Posts: 2609
It's not as complicated as it may seem...
This doesn't answer the question.

To charge a capacitor, you do work to move charge into the capacitor.  Apparently it takes exactly twice as much work to move the same amount of charge along a wire.  Can anyone explain "why"?  I think I know why, but wanted to get other ideas on this.

Maybe MC can explain it.  Since this site is basically useless to him, he might know the answer.

If the answer is wrong, then would you mind stating why?

Where does this "apparently" statement come from, and don't say the equation, because I think that was already explained in the document.

I think I know what you are asking, but you're asking it in the wrong way.

.99
   

Group: Administrator
Hero Member
*****

Posts: 2609
It's not as complicated as it may seem...
oh dear.

explain this and explain that.
this forum is a nice thing but it is useless to me.


Well, what would you like us to do marcocontroller, to make your experience here useful to you?

.99
   
Group: Elite
Hero Member
******

Posts: 3056
It's turtles all the way down
I think we should stand on our heads, spit wooden nickels and turn this place into a casino to please everyone :D


---------------------------
Just because it has a patent application or is patented does not always mean it really works.
   
Group: Guest
Doesn't anybody realize this can go on forever?

Well, what would you like us to do marcocontroller, to make your experience here useful to you?

.99

It's not about making my experience usefull to me.
You have to understand that you need real things not theory.
This place is like theorist heaven.
How come nobody seems to be doing anything exept theorizing? or is it just me seeing things wrongly?

 :)


   
Group: Elite
Hero Member
******

Posts: 3056
It's turtles all the way down
Doesn't anybody realize this can go on forever?

It's not about making my experience usefull to me.
You have to understand that you need real things not theory.
This place is like theorist heaven.
How come nobody seems to be doing anything exept theorizing? or is it just me seeing things wrongly?

 :)

I will have to agree with you MrCo....the theorizing does get wearisome after a while. A few of us have well equipped labs and are experimenting in background mode. I, for one do not have a lot to report from my bench tests just yet. I am a builder, tester, experimenter, looking for a few definitive hypothesis that can be proven on the bench.

Meanwhile the forum is a place to kick around some ideas, potential theories etc. Some of us try to add something positive to the forum, in humility, like some of the great gentlemen that have paved the path of science. Perhaps their viewpoints and models were like "Plato's Cave" and they are a victim of lack of better insight, so we will have to pave other, better roads that lead to new horizons in science, better models and ways of visualizing what is really happening.

There are some that come here full of arrogance, haughtiness, ego, that may actually know more and some may even have better models to present. But their method is so abrasive and condescending that it will probably be lost.

This forum was put together and is wholly maintained and funded by a couple of individuals whom I respect. They don't get a dime from those that come here to squat and take a dump on every post and p**s in the face of other forum members. The owners of this site are very patient with some of these types that show up. I would be far less patient.

You won't find useless advertising here. For that I commend this forum.

No we don't have all the answers as some claim to have. We are brothers traveling down an unknown road to a near impossible destination. I hope you can join us in that spirit.

I am interested in your work and your "start of something new" thread.


---------------------------
Just because it has a patent application or is patented does not always mean it really works.
   
Group: Guest
To: MileHigh
From: The Rabbit Hole


Message:
Quote MileHigh, "Can I ask you to explain why an inductor is like a mechanical spring in a few paragraphs?"

Paragraph 1
When an atom loses energy, it gets colder and smaller since voltage is a vacuum. Next, we have a coaxial coil made of copper tube. It is sitting on a slippery surface and we suction liquid nitrogen through it. We measure a contraction of 1 inch in both axial directions for a total of 2 inches over 1 minute with each end moving at 1 inch per minute in opposite directions.

Paragraph 2
Now we take that same coil and anchor one end with a heavy shorted out coil. We suction liquid nitrogen through the coil and it contracts the same 2 inch distance over all per one minute of time. But! The free end of the coil is moving across the floor at twice the speed. That is acceleration E=MC2 The C2 of the equation is the result of the increase of A=B oscillations resulting from cascade effect.

Summary
Ed Leedscalnin's PMH and your capacitor puzzle are opposite but the same.

You stored the vacuum of voltage in your capacitor and threw the current away. I stored the vacuum of current in Leedscalnin's shorted coil and threw the voltage away. Waste not, want not the two opposite in every way potential energies.

A capacitor is stored time and Leedscalnin's PMH is stored space - "vacuum" packed to keep the energy fresh during the holiday season.

- Merry Christmas Demon'zzzaaa..  ^-^

Well, that reply was "far out" for sure.  Your reply is not even remotely close.

I will rephrase the question:  Can I ask you to explain why an inductor in an electrical circuit acts like a mechanical spring in a few paragraphs? You can even take a real-world example if you want, like the main coil in a ###### motor.

Thanks,

MileHigh
   
Group: Guest
MH...

I'd be delighted if you could expound a little on your spring analogies and compare them to the compression of a gas.

Then I may throw a few questions at you, in a good spirit of course.

Ion:

Not ignoring your post but I will touch on this later.  I promise to not even look anything up, we will see if my thoughts are on track.

MileHigh
   
Newbie
*

Posts: 12

I've been researching again, looking for DIY methods for creating cuprous oxide layers. 

What I'm finding is that by using electroless chemical deposition method, and by adjusting the PH, you can get either p-type or n-type cuprous oxides.

Any thoughts on whether p-type or n-type might be more desirable?

tak
   
Pages: 1 2 3 4 5 [6] 7 8
« previous next »


 

Home Help Search Login Register
Theme © PopularFX | Based on PFX Ideas! | Scripts from iScript4u 2017-08-21, 22:36:42