PopularFX
Home Help Search Login Register
Welcome,Guest. Please login or register.
OverUnity Research > Benches > PhysicsProf (Moderator: PhysicsProf) > Possible breakthrough with the JouleThief (JT) circuit
2024-05-18, 09:44:49
News: If you have a suggestion or need for a new board title, please PM the Admins.
Please remember to keep topics and posts of the FE or casual nature. :)

Pages: 1 2 [3] 4 5
Author Topic: Possible breakthrough with the JouleThief (JT) circuit  (Read 80653 times)
Topic Options img
img  EMdevices
Re: Possible breakthrough with the JouleThief (JT) circuit « Reply #50 on: 2011-03-17, 16:20:15 »
Hero Member
*****

Posts: 805
MH,  it's not worth your time, just ignore him.     
   
img  acmefixer
Re: Possible breakthrough with the JouleThief (JT) circuit « Reply #51 on: 2011-03-17, 16:35:20 »
Group: Guest
I glossed over the lengthy article and I didn't see any mention of temperature.  In my JTs I always see a fairly wide range of frequencies, influenced largely by the temperature. I can see the frequency change just by putting my fingers on the transistor, or by blowing on the circuit. And if I have just soldered a joint or handled the circuit and it is warm, when the circuit is put down and cools off and power is applied the frequency will change quite a bit.

Try it and you should have the same experience. But to see the changes, you should monitor these frequency changes over a shorter period, such as every second or five seconds. Due to the lack of any tuned circuit, the frequency changes seem to make little or no difference in the performance.

Also, one has to remember that since the output is a constant string of pulses, the waveform actually consists of many waves each having its own frequency. Thanks go to Mr. Fourier for that observation.
   
img  ltseung888
Afraid of finding out the scientific truth? « Reply #52 on: 2011-03-17, 17:21:01 »
Group: Guest
Quote from: EMdevices on 2011-03-17, 16:20:15
MH,  it's not worth your time, just ignore him.     

Is MH the type who chickens out when faced with a real scientific challenge?

He seems to have very strong conviction that he is right.  Is that conviction based on scientific knowledge? 
   
img  muDped
Re: Possible breakthrough with the JouleThief (JT) circuit « Reply #53 on: 2011-03-17, 18:09:05 »

Group: Tinkerer
Hero Member
*****

Posts: 3055
Quote from: exnihiloest on 2011-03-17, 10:28:15
Whom and what are you talking about?

Ordinary technical inventions, or real discoveries and progress in ideas and human knowledge?
...

The important point is: we see that all come from academic institutions, universities or high school, the most of these institutions being prestigious.
...



Those institutions in earlier times were perhaps better
able to prepare fertile minds for the learning process.

When does real learning and the acquisition of experience
begin?  Whatever is absorbed within the confines of the
"institution" is merely preparatory.

Most truly ingenious researchers will admit that discoveries
made are not due to traditional education, but in spite of it...

Where is the credit due?  Not to the "institution" or the "degree"
but to the researcher who is sufficiently "rogue" to step beyond
the walls of the box.  The mind is a terrible thing to waste.


---------------------------
For there is nothing hidden that will not be disclosed, and nothing concealed that will not be known or brought out into the open.
   
img  chrisC
Re: Afraid of finding out the scientific truth? « Reply #54 on: 2011-03-17, 19:49:47 »
Group: Guest
Quote from: ltseung888 on 2011-03-17, 17:21:01
Is MH the type who chickens out when faced with a real scientific challenge?

He seems to have very strong conviction that he is right.  Is that conviction based on scientific knowledge? 

Real scientific challenge? Sound like real mental retardation on your part, Mr. Tseung. You don't know when to quit do you?

cheers
chrisC
   
img  PhysicsProf
Re: Afraid of finding out the scientific truth? « Reply #55 on: 2011-03-17, 20:57:04 »
Group: Moderator
Hero Member
*****

Posts: 2995
Quote from: chrisC on 2011-03-17, 19:49:47
Real scientific challenge? Sound like real mental retardation on your part, Mr. Tseung. You don't know when to quit do you?

cheers
chrisC

I'm the moderator of this thread and will not tolerate further ad hominems, like this one from ChrisC --
 
Quote
"sound like real mental retartardation on your part, Mr. Tseung"
that is ad hominem, arguing to the man rather than to the science, and ad hominems will not be tolerated.  (I retain this one from ChrisC only as a "bad" example.)   Please be respectful.

If you need further explanation, pls see the "Rigor without Rancor..." thread on this bench.

« Last Edit: 2011-03-17, 22:01:43 by PhysicsProf »
   
img  PhysicsProf
Re: Possible breakthrough with the JouleThief (JT) circuit « Reply #56 on: 2011-03-17, 21:48:28 »
Group: Moderator
Hero Member
*****

Posts: 2995
Lidmotor posted a variation of the basic JT circuit that I find fascinating... and invite comments.  His video is here:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-FoQWCzfq1w

You will note that he demonstrates (not a theoretical claim alone) that once the resonator rings, he can remove the 20Kohm resistor to the base -- and it keeps going...

From his vid, I extracted the schematic (attached).

I did a replication using an MPSA06 transistor, 17Kohm R, red LED.  And three different tries at an inductor.  No success yet in lighting the LED.  Any ideas?  Does anyone know on which forum this is being discussed also?
It may be that one needs to use an air-core inductor and movable core -- and "tune" it in...  I haven't tried that yet.

I found the short across the diode to be very strange.  -- but this from comments on the vid:
Quote
#

Hey, Lid is the diode really shorted as shown in the diagram ?
PoirierMike 1 day ago
#

@PoirierMike ----Yes. You wouldn't think that it would work that way but it does. Usually there are one or two small switching diodes in series there also. We got this idea from Dr. Stiffler who uses this arrangement on his circuits.
   
img  ltseung888
Start the debate threads on sound resonance? « Reply #57 on: 2011-03-17, 22:12:50 »
Group: Guest
Measuring or Comparing the Sound Wave Energy

@PhysicsProf,

At this moment in time, I am not interested in the absolute Input or Output energy of the Sound waves.  I am only interested in the comparison.   The first comparison is the following:

1.   A tuning fork on a resonance box is struck with the provided hammer alone.  A speaker connected to an oscilloscope can be placed at a known and fixed distance.  The waveform and the amplitude of the voltage can be measured and recorded.  The duration of the sound can also be recorded by a stop watch (or if the scope can capture the waveform for a few minutes, which will be ideal.).  Alternatively a Recorder or Video Camera can be used.

2.   This result is then compared with placing another identical tuning fork next to the first one.  The usual configuration is for the open ends of the resonance boxes facing each other.  The first tuning fork is again struck with the speaker at the same known and fixed distance.  The waveform, the amplitude and the duration of the voltage can be measured and recorded.

3.   The result of these two tests is then compared.  There may be some doubt on the exact force used to strike the first tuning fork.  So the result can be averaged over a number of tries by the same experimenter.

4.   If you can get hold of more identical tuning forks, you can try to put 3, 4…n and repeat the above three steps.  The exact placements of the tuning forks on resonance boxes will be determined by actual experiment.  Another academic team in China may have already done that but they are not releasing the results yet.

I hope the description of the experiment is clear.  The theoretical part may interest you more.  Only Newtonian Mechanics involving the Laws of Conservation of Momentum and Conservation of Energy are used.  In other words, I use elastic collisions as the model.  Please consider starting a thread for the debate participants and another for the general public.  Thank you.

Hope this effort will help to establish the validity of “resonance bringing-in environmental energy” faster.  We do not need to rely on Nuclear Reactors and their dangers.  Amen.
   
img  PhysicsProf
Re: Possible breakthrough with the JouleThief (JT) circuit « Reply #58 on: 2011-03-17, 22:13:59 »
Group: Moderator
Hero Member
*****

Posts: 2995
Quote from: exnihiloest on 2011-03-17, 10:40:39
Dear Professor,
You are reversing the burden of proof (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Philosophic_burden_of_proof).

Why should we lead experiments on JT oscillators and not on Colpitts oscillators or whatever else?

We lead experiments either because we have a theory to check, or to confirm anomalous results that puzzled us.
Then what are the objective elements about the JT circuit, that should trigger the need of experiments?

It was my previous question and nobody replied.


If you will refer to my first TWO POSTS of this thread, you will see that I presented "anomalous results" that puzzle me and are the basis of starting this thread and pursuing the JT-type circuit.  The observation of a measured n = 113% I consider anomalous (don't you?)

 I am certainly not ruling out other approaches -- as you see in the other thread on this bench ("Rigor without Rancor..." thread) which lists several devices I would like to study, because of "anomalous results" claimed there.

@Lawrence -- I would like to test the tuning fork experiment you propose -- but only if you can propose a means of quantitatively measuring the energy (or power) outputs involved -- hopefully you have thought of a means to measure?
I have given this some thought -- I found a digital sound-level meter on sale at PartsExpress for $19.88.  That's a start.
I should leave it to you to propose the experiment that would demonstrate the effect you claim or suggest.
For example, would you use an echo chamber, or an anechoic chamber?  I probably have access to both types at the university.

Added:  LT, I see that you have written while I was composing this post; I will digest what you wrote and get back later... gotta run, gone several hours.
   
img  chrisC
Re: Afraid of finding out the scientific truth? « Reply #59 on: 2011-03-17, 22:29:28 »
Group: Guest
Quote from: PhysicsProf on 2011-03-17, 20:57:04
I'm the moderator of this thread and will not tolerate further ad hominems, like this one from ChrisC --
 that is ad hominem, arguing to the man rather than to the science, and ad hominems will not be tolerated.  (I retain this one from ChrisC only as a "bad" example.)   Please be respectful.

If you need further explanation, pls see the "Rigor without Rancor..." thread on this bench.



Well, I better be careful. This is a really important scientific thread, might even yield O.U under the proper medical conditions!
It's good that a real Physics Professor is learning about  electronics and learning to use a DSO.  Who knows, pigs might fly too!

cheers
chrisC
   
img  duff
Re: Possible breakthrough with the JouleThief (JT) circuit « Reply #60 on: 2011-03-17, 23:21:59 »
Group: Guest
Quote from: PhysicsProf on 2011-03-17, 21:48:28
Lidmotor posted a variation of the basic JT circuit that I find fascinating... and invite comments.  His video is here:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-FoQWCzfq1w

You will note that he demonstrates (not a theoretical claim alone) that once the resonator rings, he can remove the 20Kohm resistor to the base -- and it keeps going...

From his vid, I extracted the schematic (attached).

I did a replication using an MPSA06 transistor, 17Kohm R, red LED.  And three different tries at an inductor.  No success yet in lighting the LED.  Any ideas?  Does anyone know on which forum this is being discussed also?
It may be that one needs to use an air-core inductor and movable core -- and "tune" it in...  I haven't tried that yet.

I found the short across the diode to be very strange.  -- but this from comments on the vid:

The following thread is related to Joule Thief variants.  Lidmotor & slayer007 are both posting there...

http://www.energeticforum.com/renewable-energy/4999-joulethief-sec-exciter-variants-10.html
   
img  poynt99
Re: Possible breakthrough with the JouleThief (JT) circuit « Reply #61 on: 2011-03-18, 01:22:42 »

Group: Administrator
Hero Member
*****

Posts: 3213
It's not as complicated as it may seem...
It appears as though someone has been changing the title of the posts when they reply. Please refrain fromm doing that as it makes it appear that there are two different threads, when in fact they are the same one.

.99


---------------------------
"Some scientists claim that hydrogen, because it is so plentiful, is the basic building block of the universe. I dispute that. I say there is more stupidity than hydrogen, and that is the basic building block of the universe." Frank Zappa
   
img  duff
Re: Possible breakthrough with the JouleThief (JT) circuit « Reply #62 on: 2011-03-18, 03:28:49 »
Group: Guest
   
img  PhysicsProf
Re: Possible breakthrough with the JouleThief (JT) circuit « Reply #63 on: 2011-03-18, 05:57:58 »
Group: Moderator
Hero Member
*****

Posts: 2995
Quote from: duff on 2011-03-18, 03:28:49
Interesting...

Slayer circuit 12 v 1m A Simply the Best
http://img534.imageshack.us/i/6rx.mp4/

Forum link: http://www.energeticforum.com/renewable-energy/4999-joulethief-sec-exciter-variants-55.html#post134504


Duff -- thanks for the links, I looked at them.  However -- I would appreciate a schematic and some words to explain how to do what is shown in the video, or how to get a basic slayer-circuit to resonate and get started.

I echo the request of Skywatcher at the above thread, in response to that same vid:

Hi totoalas, thanks for the informationa and pic.
I'm having trouble getting much of anything out of mine, could you give all the details of your setup if you please, thanks.

Quote
My L2 coil is on a 1-3/8" diameter tube at 4" long.
L2 coil is 18 gauge at 22 turns at 300 milliohms.
L1 coil is 24 gauge at 2 ohms.
tried mpsa92, tip42, 2n3906 transistors.
I have 6 yellow leds in series off one AV plug leg and another 6 leds off the other and they are about 50% of full brightness.
When using 12 volts and the smaller transistors i can slide L2 to a position where there is tolerable heat in transistor, though output isn't great.

Maybe i need to use smaller gauge for L2, or smaller for L1, any help appreciated.
\

What is the basic schematic here? for starters...  I haven't had chance to read the whole thread over at that forum...
   
img  acmefixer
Re: Possible breakthrough with the JouleThief (JT) circuit « Reply #64 on: 2011-03-18, 12:32:32 »
Group: Guest
The 'strange' mode of operation is no less explainable in physical terms than the normal mode.  Just because it is strange does not mean that it does not obey the laws of physics.  The experimenter's inability to account for its strange operation is due to his lack of understanding.

Strangeness does not mean the experimenter should attempt to incorporate it into a circuit design.
   
img  exnihiloest
Re: Possible breakthrough with the JouleThief (JT) circuit « Reply #65 on: 2011-03-18, 12:49:23 »
Group: Guest
Quote from: PhysicsProf on 2011-03-17, 22:13:59
If you will refer to my first TWO POSTS of this thread, you will see that I presented "anomalous results" that puzzle me and are the basis of starting this thread and pursuing the JT-type circuit.  The observation of a measured n = 113% I consider anomalous (don't you?)

 I am certainly not ruling out other approaches -- as you see in the other thread on this bench ("Rigor without Rancor..." thread) which lists several devices I would like to study, because of "anomalous results" claimed there.
...

113% is not much, an error can come either from the measurement itself (in JT circuits, there are many underlying phenomena) or from the evaluation of the measurement accuracy. Is it enough to trigger the curiosity of others? Perhaps yes or no. Isn't your alert premature? Such anomalies happened also in some of my own experiments, for example when I was trying to recover the energy from back emf, and after carefully verifying the measures, they were explainable. Another way was for me to try to loop the circuit, and by doing so, I have always found where the mistake came from.

Nevertheless I agree that you are right with the method. You saw anomalous results and you informed us about the fact, for verification or further experimentation. So forgive me about my previous post, I have no more objection, we are on this forum for this goal.
   
img  PhysicsProf
Re: Possible breakthrough with the JouleThief (JT) circuit « Reply #66 on: 2011-03-18, 15:02:14 »
Group: Moderator
Hero Member
*****

Posts: 2995
Quote from: exnihiloest on 2011-03-18, 12:49:23

Nevertheless I agree that you are right with the method. You saw anomalous results and you informed us about the fact, for verification or further experimentation. So forgive me about my previous post, I have no more objection, we are on this forum for this goal.


To tell the truth, I might have proceeded with my experiments even without your approval, exnihiloest ("out of nothing"?)...   :)  But thanks.

Quote
"
Strangeness does not mean the experimenter should attempt to incorporate it into a circuit design." -- acmefixer

When "strangeness" (see my first two posts) possibly correlates with n>1, then this experimenter will certainly seek to incorporate it into circuit design.

Today I will get back to the Tek 3032 for further tests.  Will report the results here, whatever they are, but it is likely to take a few days since will be on the road after the tests.
   
img  feynman
Re: Possible breakthrough with the JouleThief (JT) circuit « Reply #67 on: 2011-03-18, 16:49:35 »
Group: Guest
@all

It's unfortunate this thread has been slightly derailed by armchair physicists, but I've made my thoughts known about the purpose and agenda of detractors, disinformers, charlatans, and others.

I did some further experiments, namely with battery voltage vs frequency, and the correlation was present but not compelling.  I will calculate the correlation coefficient, and post it.  But to be honest, I am more interested in other basic research, which I think will yield higher correlation coefficients. 

@acmefixer

Quote
I glossed over the lengthy article and I didn't see any mention of temperature.
-acmefixer

Good idea.  Thank you.


Quote
Try it and you should have the same experience. But to see the changes, you should monitor these frequency changes over a shorter period, such as every second or five seconds. Due to the lack of any tuned circuit, the frequency changes seem to make little or no difference in the performance
-acmefixer
.

There is little variation , at least in my 7khz trifilar joule thief, of the frequency over short periods.  Furthermore, I can only take data as fast as I can write (no digital capability on this scope unless I connect to the serial port).  In any case, from my observations, the 'noise' (frequency fluctuation) at the 1second scale is at least one order of magnitude lower than the noise at the 10 second scale.  The highest resolution I could get would probably be around 1second if I collect data via the serial port or a video camera.

Quote
Also, one has to remember that since the output is a constant string of pulses, the waveform actually consists of many waves each having its own frequency. Thanks go to Mr. Fourier for that observation.
-acmefixer

Indeed it does, there are always harmonics, but there is also a fundamental frequency.  Are you arguing I'm not observing the fundamental frequency?   Or just that there are an infinite series of harmonics above where I'm looking?  Thanks


Quote
If you will refer to my first TWO POSTS of this thread, you will see that I presented "anomalous results" that puzzle me and are the basis of starting this thread and pursuing the JT-type circuit.  The observation of a measured n = 113% I consider anomalous (don't you?)
-PhysicsProf

Absolutely PhysicsProf.  Just ignore those who's purpose here is to derail research.   This sort of basic R&D has tons of benefits, not limited to

-validating / invalidating 'official knowledge'  (book knowledge)
-acquisition of relevant electronic components
-acquisition of relevant test equipment
-experience with test methodology
-experience with replication / replication speed and ability
-evaluation / classification of anomalies and/or potential OU conditions
-provide pool of basic research upon which to draw from

Anyone who's experimented with circuits long enough knows that sometimes really anomalous behavior can occur, and often these are related to  conditions not predicted by conventional theory .  We are also considering anomalies that may be caused by OU (overunity) conditions.  For anyone who thinks this is impossible, then quit wasting your breath by posting here.

@all

I can only do experiments involving a single-channel scope and frequency counter at the moment (I need to purchase a four channel scope sometime in the near future), so for now, here are some future experiments I am considering to contribute to some basic research about this circuit.

On the agenda for Joule Thief:

Frequency vs Temperature
Frequency vs Voltage
Frequency vs Battery Capacitance
Frequency vs Battery Resistance
Frequency vs Time
Waveform vs Output Resistance
Waveform vs Output Configuration (diode or not)
Waveform vs Load
Output Configuration (diode or not) vs Current Draw
Output Resistance vs Current Draw

Cheers,
Feynman
   
img  feynman
Re: Possible breakthrough with the JouleThief (JT) circuit « Reply #68 on: 2011-03-18, 17:01:55 »
Group: Guest
@PhysicsProf

I noticed the thread duff linked to (the lidmotor thread on Energetic Forums) has the subject "SEC Exciter and other Variants"

I actually have about 5 or 6 original SEC Exciters that I purchased several years ago from Dr Stiffler.  You can google his information, and the associated electromagnetic anomalies.   These are the original boards Dr Stiffler was sending out a few years back to anyone interested in research and replication.  They are PCB boards and the coil inductance is already tuned etc.   I've tested them and they work.

SEC Exciter Resources:

Stiffler Cold Electricity Circuit (PESWiki)

SEC Exciter Hydrogen Production (PESWiki)

Example blog of a replicator of SEC Exiters

Dr Stiffler's official site (www.stifflerscientific.com)

SEC Exciter Official Order Page

My SEC Exciter boards are prior to March 2011, probably more like March 2007 or March 2008 or so.

The SEC Exciters oscillate in the megahertz range, provide one-wire power and other interesting behavior.  They may have something to do with longitudinal EM, but I haven't gotten that far.  I only recently moved all my research gear out of storage.

PhysicsProf, I will be happy to part with a couple of these SEC Exciter boards for free -- so just PM me.  The same goes for anyone here doing actual research and publishing public results -- I will be willing to part with an SEC Exciter, I probably can give away 3 of them.

They look like this


-Feynman
   
img  exnihiloest
Re: Possible breakthrough with the JouleThief (JT) circuit « Reply #69 on: 2011-03-18, 17:38:34 »
Group: Guest
Quote from: PhysicsProf on 2011-03-18, 15:02:14
To tell the truth, I might have proceeded with my experiments even without your approval, exnihiloest ("out of nothing"?)...   :)  But thanks.
...

Of course every one acts like he wants, my point was certainly not to play censor. Similarly an objection such mine about the relevance of a method, must also be possibly expressed. At times when free speech was not so easy as today, a French philosophe said: "I do not agree with what you say, but I'll defend your right to say it". I share Voltaire's disposition.

Yes, "out of nothing"!   Here is the proof:
0: nothing, 1: something.   0 = 1 - 1 .   Extract 1 and -1 from 0, and you win!  Ex nihilo... est!   ;)
   
img  MileHigh
Re: Possible breakthrough with the JouleThief (JT) circuit « Reply #70 on: 2011-03-18, 17:52:10 »
Group: Guest
Lawrence:

Quote
Will you be willing to have a scientific debate at the bench of a real Physics Professor.  PhysicsProf can be the moderator.  All he needs to do is to verify that every single equation I use is correct in Newtonian Mechanics.

The first debate will be on:
The two tuning fork in resonance experiments done in all Physics Courses do produce a louder and longer sound experimentally.  The theoretical explanation is that the first vibrating tuning fork produces a pulsing order motion of the molecules.  This pulsing order can do useful work (such as exciting or pulse-pushing other tuning forks).  The energy to do such work comes from the kinetic energy of the air molecules.

If you want to start a thread I am willing.  However, I have already stated that it's almost impossible to make the measurements to confirm or deny that your tuning fork experiment can produce over unity.  You did not reply.  If you can propose a way to make the measurements then we have something to talk about.

About kinetic energy from air molecules:  I saw a diagram from you about that, can you give me the link for that?  At risk of repeating myself, you cannot extract energy from random motion.

Feynman:

Quote
It's unfortunate this thread has been slightly derailed by armchair physicists, but I've made my thoughts known about the purpose and agenda of detractors, disinformers, charlatans, and others.

The thread is healthy because both sides of an argument are being debated.  I am not a detractor, disinformer, or charlatan nor do I have an agenda.  I am just interested in the truth and having some fun.

You have already read several astute and thoughtful technical comments from me to some of your postings and you ignore them.  Try "breaking on through to the other side" and expanding your horizons.

I have a question for you:  How do you know if you are looking at scalar waves or longitudinal waves?

Quote
Anyone who's experimented with circuits long enough knows that sometimes really anomalous behavior can occur, and often these are related to  conditions not predicted by conventional theory.

I know that you would like to believe that.  It makes it seem that you have "edge" and are really doing some hot shit.  Unfortunately it's not true.  I can almost guarantee you that everything that you claim you observe that is "not predicted by conventional theory" is in fact 100% conventional and predicted by theory.  It's simply due to your ignorance, and I am not saying that in a pejorative way.  The issue is do you Feynman have the character to open your mind and listen to what others have to say when they explain the phenomena to you.  Are you willing to try to get up the learning curve or will you persist in claiming that you are on the "cutting edge?"  You can use this forum to learn and grow or you can put your wagons in a circle and be in your own little alternative world.  It's all up to you.

MileHigh
   
img  MileHigh
Re: Possible breakthrough with the JouleThief (JT) circuit « Reply #71 on: 2011-03-18, 18:08:14 »
Group: Guest
Feynman:

Quote
On the agenda for Joule Thief:

Frequency vs Temperature
Frequency vs Voltage
Frequency vs Battery Capacitance
Frequency vs Battery Resistance
Frequency vs Time
Waveform vs Output Resistance
Waveform vs Output Configuration (diode or not)
Waveform vs Load
Output Configuration (diode or not) vs Current Draw
Output Resistance vs Current Draw

I also suggested that you try looking at the Joule Thief output for three different load resistors instead of using a potentiometer.  The reason I suggested that to you is because it allows you to deduce some things about a discharging inductor.  Both the Joule Thief and the Bedini motor are excellent examples of a discharging inductor in action.

So I have a challenge for you Feynman:  Can you write a two or three paragraph description about how a discharging inductor works?  What are the salient points and what about different loads?  Can you articulate that to enlighten everyone reading this thread?

Here is the big kicker behind that question:  Probably 95% of the free energy experimenters that work with coils don't understand how an inductor works.  I know that sounds crazy but it's true.  I am almost sure that you fall within that 95% grouping.

Now, don't you think that something is out of whack when people researching free energy with coils and coils and coils don't really understand how they work?   What is the point of working with circuits and playing with scopes and multimeters when you don't understand how the basic building blocks that you are experimenting with work, especially since you may be using them on a daily basis?

So again Feynman, can you write out three paragraphs that will explain how an inductor works?  This is a reality check for you, perhaps a time to do some soul-searching.

There is no point in you continuing on with your experimenting if you don't have a fundamental understanding about how coils work.

MileHigh
   
img  muDped
Re: Possible breakthrough with the JouleThief (JT) circuit « Reply #72 on: 2011-03-18, 20:32:27 »

Group: Tinkerer
Hero Member
*****

Posts: 3055
Quote from: MileHigh on 2011-03-18, 18:08:14
...

There is no point in you continuing on with your experimenting
if you don't have a fundamental understanding about how coils
work.
...


This sort of discouragement has been the bane of virtually all
who research the unknown.  Fortunately, this expressed
sentiment does little to diminish the researchers' passion to
find answers - in fact it stokes it.

Can you imagine what our world would be like today if all
past researchers had taken this advice to heart?

But then, perhaps that is your real purpose MH - to offer
encouragement in a left-handed sort of way?

I suspect so.  People are rarely ever as they seem to be...

"Role playing" is an effective strategy.


---------------------------
For there is nothing hidden that will not be disclosed, and nothing concealed that will not be known or brought out into the open.
   
img  MileHigh
Re: Possible breakthrough with the JouleThief (JT) circuit « Reply #73 on: 2011-03-18, 21:12:18 »
Group: Guest
Dumped:

Call it "tough love."  If you have a passion to find answers then your passion to learn should be even stronger.  Are the forums a place to exchange ideas and learn or are they just a place for a free-for-all exchange of ideas where anything goes?  Are the forums a place for a thousand monkeys to bang on typewrites in an attempt to produce a coherent sentence or do you want to make them become more than that?  Are these places just an adult electronics sandbox where people play like children with pink and blue plastic shovels?

For you to take offense and label my comments discouragement is just the wrong way of looking at things.  If you play with coils and talk about pulsing them day in and day out you sure as hell should understand how they work.  It's politically incorrect in the extreme on the forums to say these things.  It's an unwritten code that you can't discuss this.  Know what the end result is?  The end result is Aaron Murakami in 2009 trying to do an Ainslie replication where it was obvious that he had no clue what he was doing.  He had no understanding about how an inductor works and he was not even competent enough to operate his oscilloscope.  This represented 10 years worth of intellectual stagnation on his part, the amount of time he was in the "free energy game" by then.

So you had better believe it that Feynman and others should understand how an inductor works.  Self-honesty is so unbelievably difficult around these forums.  I find the whole thing bizarre.

Look at the example of Rosemary Ainslie.  Perhaps a half-dozen people in the past few weeks have told her that her battery output power measurement is suspect.  She brushes it off.  Part of the reason that she brushes it off is because the vast majority of the "free energy masses" will say nothing and be mute like such good sheep.  Some of them will offer her blind encouragement ignoring the serious issues raised about her measurement techniques.

So I would like to see if Feynman understands how a discharging inductor works.  I will help him understand it if he doesn't know.  Hence the challenge to him.  Then there is always the option to ignore the issue and go back to "playing electronics" in the sandbox and marveling at Rosie's big sandcastle.

MileHigh
   
img  GibbsHelmholtz
Re: Possible breakthrough with the JouleThief (JT) circuit « Reply #74 on: 2011-03-18, 23:00:54 »
Group: Guest
Quote from: MileHigh on 2011-03-18, 21:12:18

  I will help him understand it if he doesn't know.  

MileHigh


I've seen you emphasized the important of how an inductor works for a while.  I'm still much curious on how it works.  You must have put a lot of thoughts into it.  I'd like to know your thinking.  This is how I think it works ( not much of  a few paragraphs... probably why I always get bad grades on essays  ;D ). 

We put x amount of energy into an inductor call it 1/2 Li^2 .  On discharge, we gain 1/2 Li^2. 

Thanks
   
Pages: 1 2 [3] 4 5
« previous next »


 

Home Help Search Login Register
Theme © PopularFX | Based on PFX Ideas! | Scripts from iScript4u 2024-05-18, 09:44:49