OverUnity Research

(http://www.overunityresearch.com/index.php?action=dlattach;topic=1597.0;attach=8899)

The Hendershot Motor Mystery

Compiled by Tom Brown
( Borderland Sciences Research Foundation, Inc., 1986 )

F.D. Fleming : The Hendershot Motor Mystery ( FATE, Jan. 1950 )
Gaston Burridge : The So-Called Hendershot Motor ( BSRA Round Robin, March-April 1956 )
Ed Skilling : A Story of Free Energy ( J. Borderland Research 18 (5/6), July-August 1962 ) & Energy Unlimited # 13
J.G. Gallimore : The Lester J Hendershot Motor ( Private research papers released to BSRF )

http://www.overunityresearch.com/index.php?action=dlattach;topic=1597.0;attach=8901


Compiled & Published by Mark M. Hendershot
The Lester J. Hendershot Story
Published Articles
Photographs
Letters
Assembly Instructions

http://www.overunityresearch.com/index.php?action=dlattach;topic=1597.0;attach=8902

Lester Hendershot's Patent Application

(http://www.overunityresearch.com/index.php?action=dlattach;topic=1597.0;attach=8914)
(http://www.overunityresearch.com/index.php?action=dlattach;topic=1597.0;attach=8906)
(http://www.overunityresearch.com/index.php?action=dlattach;topic=1597.0;attach=8908)
(http://www.overunityresearch.com/index.php?action=dlattach;topic=1597.0;attach=8910)
(http://www.overunityresearch.com/index.php?action=dlattach;topic=1597.0;attach=8912)

Referring to hendershot5.jpg (or the drawing in the prior post)

Perhaps a starting point would be the examination of possible flux switching in a laminated transformer core as used in items 18,19 and 25,27.

Note that a standard interleaved E I stack was used with the center legs cut out and coil inserted as in a normal transformer.

We could test this with a weak  permanent magnetic field applied to the core and note the effect when the coil is excited from a generator with some resistance inserted between coil and generator.

It seems Hendershot may have used this flux switching of the earth magnetic field to generate a small signal as proof of invention, with the coils 19 and 25 being the output coils. Hence the need for N-S alignment along the length of the device.

Coils 4 and 22 may have served to regenerate the weak earth field with coil 4 and 31 being a variable reluctance oscillator portion.

Note that this was a proof of concept drawing and may not have produced much power.

Hendershot5 is a view of the device from the "top" (i.e. looking down)

hmm...

Quote from: Grumpy on 2012.12.20, 16:59:29
Hendershot5 is a view of the device from the "top" (i.e. looking down)
hmm...

When I read the explanation of the collector plate (reluctance armature) LJH says it is horizontal extending down to core 3 therefore I take the view as a front sectional view (not end or top). A top view would show the items 18 and 27 as rectangular (but closer to square) cores with open centers wherein the coils are disposed.

The sketch drawing is rather crude and has many mistakes from a drafting perspective mixing front sectional with pure frontal views.

The guys at NuTech 2000 get it almost right, but still have erred in their sectional depiction of coils 4 and 22 on page 18.

Page 26 fig3.6 shows plan view, side elevation and end view.

Attached is all three views from page 26

EDIT:
Where does Hendershot explain the operation of the Mark 1 device?

Which direction is N-S?

It  is  claimed  in  Statement 20  2  of Appendix D,  that  the  Mark I  device
will  only operate with  its major horizontal axis aligned  in  the north &  south
direction  of  the  earth's  magnetic  field.  To overcome  this  objection,
Hendershot states  that he modified  the  original circuit  the Mark I device
so  it  will  operate  in  any direction which its axis is placed.

Good work guys, it feels good having information about a device doesn't it  O0
I think this is going to be well worth some time.

It's annoying the amount of turns and wire gauge's are missing from the patent.

Cheers DC

Looking forward to it, do they show it working  C.C
be careful it is probably copyrighted

Thanks for the video Deepcut.

My son and I attempted the more complex Hendershot back in 1985 to no avail. He still reminds me of the winding blisters.

I think a better starting point is the proof of concept Mark 1.

Attached is my marked up figure 3.6 from NuTech.

1985 Build partially completed Mark3. Coils were wound on separate bases so they could be moved (spacing tuned). I now have the exact 5:1 vertical output transformers from a tube type TV and the Pyramid electrolytics. May have to revive this at some point, but right now I'm more interested in the proof of concept Mark1.

Yes, I am a builder.

Wow ION great stuff.
Because you have the correct caps then when you get round to ripping one apart and making the inner cap, maybe you could measure the value and post as this will help others in the future.
For now i agree MK1 is priority  O0

Has anyone found the coil turns/ gauge of the wire for the Mark 1 build?

another good pdf.  this one has the letters from Geza Korcsmaros

11meg

12meg pdf "book"

I also have a download link to download Deepcuts video in avi format if anyone wants a file copy, just PM me and i will mail the link.
It is large at 815mb

yes, nice to have all the info and talk about Lester Hendershot again.

One thing that concerns me is the fact that his early free energy invention (motor) is not the same as what is now presented as his invention (basket coils)

He invented a motor, not some receiver coils, and that's what Lindberg and others witnessed. 

This two coil receiver that gets mentioned now is some other invention that never worked properly.   Is this a conspiracy?

EM

Quote from: DeepCut on 2012.12.21, 13:38:06
OK it's not a public video :

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=IPnpIh8Ucb0

I'm off out.

I've emailed the guy for schems and parts.


Cheers,

DC.

hi DC,

Stefan considers the video as a fake, see this:
http://www.overunity.com/13148/hendershot-video-and-plans/msg347684/#msg347684
:D

Gyula

this article is very interesting and descriptive:



New York Times (February 28, 1928):

"Explains Magnet In Fuelless Motor"

Hendershot Says Shifting Its Field To east And West Causes Rotary Motion ~ Winding Of Magnet Secret ~
Inventor Asserts Engine Weighs But 4 Ounces Per Horsepower

Mildly indignant because the manner in which his fuelless motor gains its power had been misrepresented in dispatches from Detroit and Washington, Lester J. Hendershot today stated there was nothing mysterious about his motor, that the force that energizes it is the "same force that pulls the needle of the compass, and there is nothing mysterious about that".

The fuelless motor was not his objective, he explained, at the time he began his experiments some three years ago, when he first became interested in aviation.

"I soon learned that the ultimate development of aviation depended upon the discovery or invention of an absolutely true and reliable compass", he explained. "The ordinary magnetic compass does not point to the true north -- it points to the magnetic north, and varies from the true north to a different extent at almost every point on the earth's surface.

"There is another compass, the magnetic induction compass, that indicates true north. But it must be set before each flight, and is not always reliable.

"I found that with a pre-magnetized core I could set up a magnetic field that would indicate true north, but I didn't know just how to utilize that in the compass I set out to find.

"In continuing my experiments, I learned that by cutting the same line of magnetic force north and south, I had an indicator of the true north, and that by cutting the magnetic field east and west, I could develop a rotary motion.

I now have a motor built on that principle that will rotate at a constant speed, a speed predetermined when the motor is built. It can be built for any desired speed, and a reliable constant speed motor is one of the greatest needs of aviation.

The main secret of Mr. Hendershot's invention, his Friend Barr Peat declares, is the method of winding a magnet in the motor so that it will rotate in the opposite direction than the earth revolves. He says there is no heat, because magnetic forces are cold and the motor is stopped only by breaking the magnetic field in the windings. The magnet in the motor, he thinks, probably would have to be recharged after about 2000 hours of operation.

Mr. Hendershot declares that one of his motors, complete and ready to be installed in an airplane would weigh little more than four ounces for every horsepower it developed, while the best of the gas engines now built weighs about two pounds per horsepower.

Mr. Hendershot says that altitude would not affect the efficient operation of his motor, for the magnetic influence of the earth has been found to remain the same as high as man has ever reached.

He said that the same principle which made his original model operate only when it was placed in one direction, north and south, will be developed so that it will provide a compass that will always indicate true north.

Google and read about the induction compass, very interesting!

but one day prior, this article was printed, and it sounds like a generator.  so there are two devices not one, a generator and a motor.

New York Times (February 27, 1928):

"Fuelless Motor Is A Generator"

The Hendershot "Fuelless motor" is not a motor at all but a generator, according to Major Thomas G. lanphier, commandant at Selfridge Field, Mich., where he with Lester J. Hendershot, the inventor, and D. Barr Peat, have been quietly working on an experimental model.

Major Lanphier said he first became interested in the Hendershot electrical machine several weeks ago through Peat; that in common with others he thought at first it was more or less "bunk" but after seeing it work he became interested.

"I saw the first model which Hendershot built hooked up to a small electric motor of the type used to operate a sewing machine. It not only ran the motor but it burned it out", Major Lanphier said.

Why this generator acts as it does, where the energy comes from that transforms it into power, Major Lanphier was not prepared to say beyond quoting Hendershot. It is the inventor's theory that his machine draws its energy from the earth's magnetic field. While unwilling to describe it in detail until pending patents have been received, Major Lanphier told a little about it. The first model consisted of a ring magnet less than three inches in diameter. Around the magnet were coils rigged as only Hendershot knows how to rig them, and another set of coils pass through the center of the ring.

"With this contrivance we burned out the sewing machine motor and we also kept a 6 watt lamp going with it for 26 hours", he said.

The larger model which has not yet been hooked to a motor that will deliver power to a crankshaft, Major Lanphier himself helped build.

"We put it together out of stuff we picked up at the field and with it we lighted two 110 watt lamps", Major Lanphier said. "I think that we have got enough electricity in this second model to kill a man".

The second model is built around a ring magnet, the outside diameter of which is seven inches and the inside diameter six inches.

It was suggested that perhaps the Hendershot engine was "stealing" power from some big radio broadcasting station.

"We thought of that", Lanphier said, "but we ran it for 26 hours when stations were going and when they were not and we got the same results".

Here's a link about the Earth Induction Compass, that was used at the time by Lindbergh on his trans Atlantic flight.

http://www.vintageaircraft.org/featured/2005%20-%20Vol.%2033,%20No.%2004%20-%20The%20Earth%20Inductor%20Compass.pdf


It is spun by the air as the plane moves, and so the generator coils inside cut through the earths's magnetic field, which has a particular orientation, thus a voltage is induced and the indicator instrument displays that voltage.

But let's think about this in terms of torque. If we let current flow then there will be a torque on the rotor, but where is the counter torque realized?  On the earth itself?     Now if we take that current and feed a coil 90 deg in rotation, we can get a build up of magnetic energy that swirls around and induces current in our device, so we are basically feeding off of a magnetic field vortex that only gets stronger with each revolution.   Is this the secret ?


Or maybe this is easier to visualize, we use the current induced in the rotor to magnetize the stator coils to strengten the magnetic field even more, at each location, so we move the magnetic field location with the rotor position, always at its maximum to induced the maximum voltage to generate the maximum current so that it generates the maximum magnetic field in the stator, so on and so forth, on and on in a circular loop that only amplifies itself with time.  We don't even need to supply any torque as the rotor will be pulled into the magnetic field with the correct design. Energy increases constantly from the pull.

am I making any sense?  

EM

Quote from: EMdevices on 2012.12.23, 05:09:02
...
It is spun by the air as the plane moves, and so the generator coils inside cut through the earths's magnetic field, which has a particular orientation, thus a voltage is induced and the indicator instrument displays that voltage.

But let's think about this in terms of torque. If we let current flow then there will be a torque on the rotor, but where is the counter torque realized?
...

The coil is a magnetic dipole rotating in the earth magnetic dipole. Each time a current is drawn in the rotating coil, the Lenz law applies, creating a flux that opposes the variation and therefore creating a counter torque. It makes no difference that the coil is rotating in the earth field or in the field of a permanent magnet.

Quote from: EMdevices on 2012.12.23, 00:32:59
...
New York Times (February 27, 1928):
...
It is the inventor's theory that his machine draws its energy from the earth's magnetic field.
...

Not realistic. 1) incompatible with the density of energy in a magnetic field except if you consider that the device has an influence on many Km³ of space around it. 2) there is no difference with extracting energy from the magnetic field of a permanent magnet and everybody failed in trying this, in spite that there is a an energy density around a permanent magnet that is superior to that of the earth in the same volume, by many orders of magnitude.

If Ion could test his build and get results I will switch tracks and build one. Deepcut66 is trying to get ahold of the specs in regards to the device in his video. I am suspicious of the caps in the video.
The wire would have to ordered. The skewers are for kabobs from the grocery store. The iron could be done from cut garden wire and bundled. All that is needed are the measurement specs. A;though the wire gauge and circumferences are given. I do like Ion's 2 separate boards. The rail transformers could be another board just placed on top. They don't necessarily have to be on rails. Or maybe the steel plays a part.

I have come to the conclusion about this technology and it is this:
You build an intervection device (heterodyning two magnetic fields at an interference point) will get you killed. Building an oscillating magnetic field device will get you warnings. The oath I took to gain my top secret security clearance will not let me build weapons or upset the economic balance of any nation. See my dilemma now?

NOT meant to derail ********************************************************************
But this item here presents an alternative:
Just check out his generator is all @1:10. This would be great way to disseminate any technology we achieve.


A spark gap, capacitor, and a pull string. And it runs 120vac devices. Now where do you think he got this?

Quote from: Grumpy on 2012.12.20, 23:33:59
Attached is all three views from page 26

EDIT:
Where does Hendershot explain the operation of the Mark 1 device?

Which direction is N-S?

Is there someone who would combine these views into an isometric or 3D drawing?

I am starting to see that we might have enough.

It looks similar to Magnacoaster & Kunel. And correct if me I am wrong but I see 2 Hendershot type devices. The linear one and the 2 coil one.
And of course we have this Mark 1 and Mark III? And we have Steven Mark. Hmmmm...

Quote from: Paul-R on 2012.12.23, 13:55:37
Is there someone who would combine these views into an isometric or 3D drawing?

I will plug it in today.

http://www.overunity.com/13148/hendershot-video-and-plans/msg347781/#msg347781 (http://www.overunity.com/13148/hendershot-video-and-plans/msg347781/#msg347781)

(http://www.overunityresearch.com/index.php?action=dlattach;topic=1597.0;attach=8929;image)

@GK
Good eye, and we can see the flux gap on the end coil Hmm were have we seen that before?.

Thank you for the link to "African teen wows MIT", you know I think it is people like this that will change our world. Not some egocentic bobble-head sitting in a lab who has never created anything and thinks everyone else is stupid. Hands on, on the ground and determined to make a difference that is the future in my opinion.

AC

I'm glad someone took notice to my marked up figure 3.6 drawing from NuTech.

I will not be dragging my Mark III out of mothballs, spent too much time on that 27 years ago.

Rather, the Mark I shown above is a simpler proof of concept device.

We only need to find out if flux switching actually works in the laminated cores with the center leg removed and coils disposed as in the drawing.

IMHO, this should be our first step.

Cheers ION sounds like a plan.

God this device is clever.

Thanks guys. I needed this feedback. I have a flux gate/gap already in inventory. Also these smaller units sit on a color monitor too.
I came to the realization that DEW(dir. enrgy, wepins) can not be sent as kits or even plans to another country, let alone being experimented with. This simple configuration even in segments can be sent to Africa and around the world without any officials noticing.

Now there are two types: The configuration that EMD showed is strong field and the Kunel is weak field. Only the weak field devices can be oscillated. Er, on a bench. One would need uNclear power to flex a rare Earth field. Imagine that device and the promises it holds.

With this being said I don't see the need for a 3d model. I would rather rip into my inventory.

So true GK, especially when considering NMR, the stronger the bias field the higher the resonant frequency, which can be out of reach by the typical garage researcher.

It's like a string that is pulled tighter and will vibrate at higher frequencies, except of course with NMR we pluck the "string" in one plane and it resonates in both orthogonal planes due to the gyroscopic/magnetic interactions which makes this so special.

Paul-R asked for these.

If we look at the fields and the angles of the windings to each coil the phasing aspect start to become apparent.

What I am not going to assume are that the transformers have a center core. Ion's flux path did not show this. It doesn't make any difference in the drawings I created but it does matter when analyzing the fields.
The cores in the upper linear segment all touch each other except the left or south(per the original document) transformer is not touching, like in the drawing.

(http://www.overunityresearch.com/index.php?action=dlattach;topic=1597.0;attach=8929;image)

From everything i read, there is no center leg in the square laminated transformer cores. These were removed by Hendershot, and this makes good sense if you want a loosely coupled bias to the flux.

You could probably substitute powdered iron round cores with a centrally located air core to effect the flux switching.

When time permits, sometime after the holiday stuff, I will try to test the merits of both types.

Does anyone have any ideas on how the basket-weave coil and "antenna" create the wave?

What's the effect trigger?

Hi G
Here's a quote from the patent.

QuoteI use a small collector 1, preferably a small metallic plate horizontally disposed and having a downwardly extending flexible strip 2
of magnetic material terminating opposite a core 3 of a first coil & to be attached thereby.
The strip 2 has soldered to it one end of a copper wire 5,which may or may not extend to the collector proper 8, whose other end is soldered to the middle of the inner winding or layer of a second coil 6

So he does describe a collector, this collector i think picks up magnetic field variation from the E/I transformer flux oscillation and funnels it around the basketweave coil.

I don't see a slight clue of possibility of flux switching in this setup. Switching means multiplying but flux simply add, even in non linear magnetic materials. So the explanation must be elsewhere.
Does someone know why we can't find Hendershot's patents in the databases?

QuoteThe personal account he gave was much the same as the newspaper quote, with the minor exception that he was hit by a bolt of 220 volts, not the jolting 2,000 the over-eager reporter had written. He was demonstrating the motor in the patent office, and the shock paralyzed his vocal chords, resulting in several weeks of recuperation before he completely recovered.

It would appear he electrocuted himself while demonstrating the device to the patent office  C.C

There was apparently an army replication of the motor which had been shown to work, this was built by the army.

Well he does not exactly say the flux is switched.

QuoteHe theorized that the magnetic compass did not point to true north and varies from true north to a different extent at almost every point on the earth's surface. Also, the induction compass has to be set before each flight and at that time was not always reliable. He claimed that with a pre-magnetized core he could set up a magnetized field that would indicate the true north, but he didn't know just how to utilize that in the compass he had set out to develop.

In continuing his experiments, he found that by cutting the same line of magnetic force north and south, he had an indicator of the true north and that by cutting the magnetic field east and west, he could develop a rotary motion.

With this principle in mind, he switched his plans and began working on a motor which utilized this magnetic power. He built one that would rotate at a constant speed, a speed pre-determined when the motor was built. It could be built for a desired speed, he said, and he felt that a reli-able constant speed motor was one of the greatest needs in aviation at that time. The one he built developed 1,800 revolutions per minute.

Quote from: Peterae on 2012.12.28, 09:35:58
...
Well he does not exactly say the flux is switched.

I saw elsewhere this possible explanation (not from him).
Imho Hendershot had no idea for a consistant explanation, presuming he had really something. It reminds me the Coler's device. An instability could lead to a perpetual field change, but in any case, one wonders where the energy comes from.

I am probably the guilty party that brought up the idea of flux switching, as I noted the flux path when pointing the apparatus along the N-S line would divide along 2 paths in the square cores (with the center leg removed) as shown in the marked up figure 3.6.

Agreed, this is just a wild guess on my part, but if the centrally disposed coils (inside the square cores) are truly the output coils, as stated in the patent, It seemed logical to extend this description into the idea that the flux must be somehow be oscillating between the two available paths.

I welcome other ideas for how this might work, I was just trying to reverse engineer (working backwards from output to input) up to that point in the apparatus.

I have no idea of the influence of the basket weave coils or other parts of the circuit.

When I first saw the schematic diagrams of the Mark I many years ago, I was clueless to the operation, and to a large extent still am.

To my knowledge, no one has ever actually built a Mark I device. Most folks (including myself) move right on to the Mark III, which has better, but conflicting documentation, as there are many schematics available.

Perhaps we need to discuss and guess at some possible operational methods for these devices before building, so we know how to tune them and what to look for.

A complex build is probably unnecessary. A very simple proof of concept would suffice if we understood the concept. (big if)

I should probably change the text I inserted into the figure 3.6 to "may oscillate" rather than "will oscillate".

BTW, nice isometric drawings, GK. What program did you use for this?

There is a way i think we can prove that his motor or generator worked.

I need to go over the details as i am working from one read at the beginning, it goes like this  >:-)
A person involved was the first person to fly a certain plane across an ocean if i remember it took 13 hours flight time, the plane that was used was not capable of this without running out of fuel way before it got to it's target.
If it was direct across ocean then i don't sea anyway for it to land and refuel  O0
So if the aircraft details can be confirmed that it would not have made the trip on one fuel tank(lets face it he was the first one to do it) then i think we have a good reason to believe Lester's device helped  :)

QuoteBTW, nice isometric drawings, GK. What program did you use for this?

Moray and POVray. They are both free. You get them now from POVray site. Keys are there also. I have been using these for then years now. The environment is based on basic geometric building with union or division or bezier. This does not do B-spline, fluidic or nurbs well. Autodesk is better for that. Either way you cannot escape from Cartesian.

The flux switching happens by the little relay rattler at the north end. This excites the ferromagnetic / flux in the core itself. Since this is very fast switching the material rings. This is Kapadnadze, Kunel, Leedskalnin(which is the largest ringer), Magnacoaster. Basically you have a virtual spark gap. Which lends itself back to Hutchison, a bias with interaction injected into it. This model happens only two ways but which is really only one. Two bias can be used with a slight offset or a large offset. Look at all the devices with this explanation and now you know how to work the wheel works of nature. Because that is the process committed in Nature and by God / Ark of the Covenant. Argue if you want amongst yourselves with this. They would be wasted words. The 2 control parameters are time which is an offset and power which is another offset. By adjusting with these 2 parameters towards a given or measured target the ability exists to either ring it or rock it.

The 2 models that come from this are merely the target interaction. Ferroexcitation to an ambient placed coil(Steven Mark) or internal target excitation(John Hutchison). Now you all have become very dangerous men to the status quo. And this is why you can not, I repeat, can not make money at this. It is like waving a red flag.

How does switching magnetic flux increase energy?  If you are not adding to the amount of energy already there, then you are just moving it around.  Changing the magnetic field is inductive, but the cores are "around" the output coils, and orthogonal to the N-S earth field.  Then you have the normal solenoid between the two cores, and in the middle of the output circuit.

Attached are three schematics for each section of the Mark 1 generator:

It starts @ 0:50
http://www.mojvideo.com/video-soviet-weather-engineering-over-north-america-by-tom-bearden/0d7a5d3c68f508fe6588 (http://www.mojvideo.com/video-soviet-weather-engineering-over-north-america-by-tom-bearden/0d7a5d3c68f508fe6588)

All the devices we have seen are agitative. This lends itself to a new kind of induction. A target is agitated or interfered with otherwise we would see many more people producing this effect that defies what has been previously taught. The goal is power from this process. There are a few people to claim and show demos against at least 500,000 people who claim impossibility. And that is because the masses are trained in moving electrons at a speed comfortably to them. The next level is to manipulate the nucleus like Bearden mentions. If the thousands of people claim fraud then how can so many educated or experienced be incorrect. The new idea is always dealt with incorrectly when it applies to a common problem in an uncommon way.

http://www.spacedaily.com/reports/MIT_researchers_discover_a_new_kind_of_magnetism_999.html (http://www.spacedaily.com/reports/MIT_researchers_discover_a_new_kind_of_magnetism_999.html)

Without some inkling of a previously unknown effect this is another exercise futility.

There must be some sort of permeability change that propagates from the basket weave coil through the rest but damned if I see it.

Quote from: giantkiller on 2012.12.28, 19:40:44
...
The next level is to manipulate the nucleus like Bearden mentions.
...

We should be circumspect with Bearden. He mentions many things but never provides real things. He has not even built a working MEG. He still affirms that it works although everybody failed in duplicating his device, except JL Naudin using suspicious measurements whose the uncertainty exceeded the alleged COP (and even Naudin abandonned the MEG).
Judging on the facts (or more exactly on the non-facts  :) ), for me Bearden's theories are only endless blah, blah, blah. He belongs to the ranks of those fantasists of the wishful thinking.

An instability of a magnetic flux through a magnetic circuit could lead to a perpetual oscillation, provided that energy comes from somewhere.
For example, scientists made recently a simulation of atomic spins, using groups of 3 cylindrical permanent magnets in an unstable mechanical configuration, one of them facing the two others with an opposite pole. In the video (http://physics.aps.org/articles/v5/140), we see the instability that propagates everywhere among the magnets, after it has been triggered. Nevertheless the effect ends after some time. If the Hendershot generator is based upon a magnetic flux instability, which could be a likely cause, the key point remains the question of the energy source that it taps.

Quote from: exnihiloest on 2012.12.29, 11:09:58
for me Bearden ... belongs to the ranks of those fantasists of the wishful thinking.

What you really mean is that he is a theoretical physicist  and not an experimental
one.

He gets chalk dust under his fingernails rather than oil.

Quote from: Paul-R on 2012.12.29, 11:33:58
What you really mean is that he is a theoretical physicist  and not an experimental one.
...

I don't mean this. A theory is something logical and refutable, for explaining, predicting and quantifying possible observable effects. There is no theory with Bearden but blah, blah, blah, i.e. only fuzzy words without operational meaning.

Quote from: exnihiloest on 2012.12.29, 11:29:39
An instability of a magnetic flux through a magnetic circuit could lead to a perpetual oscillation, provided that energy comes from somewhere.
For example, scientists made recently a simulation of atomic spins, using groups of 3 cylindrical permanent magnets in an unstable mechanical configuration, one of them facing the two others with an opposite pole. In the video (http://physics.aps.org/articles/v5/140), we see the instability that propagates everywhere among the magnets, after it has been triggered. Nevertheless the effect ends after some time. If the Hendershot generator is based upon a magnetic flux instability, which could be a likely cause, the key point remains the question of the energy source that it taps.

QuoteThree of a kind. Each rod is a 2-centimeter-long bar magnet that can rotate freely in the vertical direction. They experience "frustration" at these 3-magnet vertices because there is no single arrangement that satisfies every magnet's desire to be oriented oppositely from its neighbors. A square-meter array of these magnets serves as a model of materials called spin ices.

Could it be that this is what Spherics implied? In the Bearden vid, Tom expresses a 2 source excitation against the Ionosphere, a bias. Hutchison speaks of the same vectoring. Spherics also mentions the comp wave protocol. A process that returns an echo that is greater than the input by using 2 pulses against a bias of copper, a magnetic field and ambient space.  

QuoteThe key point remains the question of the energy source that it taps

Finding it can be illusive. Applying it against or with something can be another quest. But how can it be applied? I believe we have seen numerous examples by those that don't, can't, or won't mention it. Spherics mentioned it then left. Must not meant to be known. But we do have a number of people who have applied it and those that don't know of the process then claim fraud. And that's ok. Just takes training. Because the bottom line is a lot of effort has been put forth into this search with a lot of different minds and disciplines.

In my current twin Tesla coil setup I am working on a driver that produces a spark gap at 68khz because that is the resonant build of the coil sizes. Between the coils exists a space that the MRI process alluded to. In that design the interaction of 2 sources is applied against a bias to retrieve a NMR signature. In my setup I want to experiment with the overlap in 3d space like Bearden and Hutchison talk about. They are not incorrect in what they talk about because the highlight of both their expositions are the same. In my builds that produced the most radical or mysterious effects it all entails multiple sources of differing qualities. So what if there are not standard terms or acknowledgements that label the event. I really don't see or understand the difficulty here.

If we constantly head for the known then the unknown remains unknown.

My comp wave controller is broken somewhere and need time with JDO300 to repair. His time is starting to free up. This controller for $300.00 is a phenominal acquisition. Until then I must use a spark gap which applies enuff energy to find the effect / symptom when the random or slower vectoring happens. This is what Hutchison states as using intuition. If one wants to use FETS then the protocol has to be spot on (Spherics / Bearden). The 68khz driver is a symbiotic design. The oscillator has to drive the matched output coil, which I have to engineer. What a pain... But the frequency has to be maintained all through the circuit path.

How does this relate to extra energy? If it can ring it can be pushed at the correct moment to gain momentum and eventually the COP is > 1. All matter becomes solid at the correct frequency.

QuoteWithout some inkling of a previously unknown effect this is another exercise futility.

Hendershot was very clear about the principle of operation, cut the field lines North & South produces power, cutting the field lines East & West produces motion.
I cannot work out how the device cuts the field lines though  :-[

So how do you cut field lines East & West anyone fancy a go at a diagram, if you can then that would be an experiment to try. O0

 I see 3 possibilities and orientations for cutting the flux of the earth with the induction compass, that he might have experimented with.



Fig 1,  this is a top view and that's how they operate normally on an airplane.

Fig 2,  cutting the flux N-S with axis of rotation horizontal.

Fig 3,  cutting the flux E-W with axis of rotation horizontal. (this is the one that does not make sense from an induction point of view, so probably it is this one that Hendershot found out is special)


I choose 3,  but that's not the whole story, some other ingredient was there,  pre "charged" core, or magnetized core.

EM

Fig 3 reminds me of Luis Rota's "detector"

Still don't get how it might work enough to even try anything.

Thanks EM for the diagrams.

Certainly in the Hendershot motor there was a magnet, he mentions that they were originally not sure if the magnet would eventually lose it's magnetic field, as if the energy maybe used up from the magnets field.

One interesting thing about the motor is that it maintained the same RPM under varying loads, and this rpm was set by the coils, this is interesting as it probably means the generator produces a set amount of power by varying either the voltage or current, if it's the voltage that varies then i would not like to run the device without a load, you would reach a point where a lightning bolt would be unleashed, which sounds like what may have happened to Lester at the patent office.
This also ties in with SM about it feeding itself, therefore i think we can assume this constant set RPM of the motor is the result of automatically feeding energy back into the system, this i think must have been done with coils.

So it would appear we are creating an environment where we input energy and get more back, even if it's only a little extra back.

I am also interested in the transformer with the middle leg removed, this could be interesting as i don't know of anyone having ever tried this, we have a flux magnetometer which uses a toroidal core and then a winding wound over the outside diameter of the toroidal core, this seems similar but with the coil aligned and contained inside the core instead.
I have almost built one of these using a small LT77 audio output transformer for some testing, very annoying all new transformers seem to have welded laminates which makes them impossible to disassemble, i may need to use eBay to get an old frame output transformer for larger tests.

@Emdevices

QuoteI see 3 possibilities and orientations for cutting the flux of the earth with the induction compass, that he might have experimented with.

I guess the real question is do we need to cut the field gradient?, you see Faraday's law is not explicit when considering Δ(BA)/Δt and we could say a lack of something is as much a change as more of something so long as there was something there to begin with. That is the change Δ(BA) is not defined and gives no indication as to how or why the change occurs only that it does.

At which point I would quote GK -- "If we constantly head for the known then the unknown remains unknown" and in this respect we know what does not work because most of our technology is based on it and it is used every day. We know what we normally do is not the answer therefore it must be something else in which case I think there are two perspectives, one we are not intelligent enough to find the answer or two we are half way there because we can exclude everything we normally do. Personally I think it is easy as most great discoveries and insights are in fact easy, a man applies a current to a coil then measures an induced current in a nearby coil and calls it mutual induction, he wins a Nobel and lives happily ever after ... simple.

AC

Quote from: giantkiller on 2012.12.29, 16:35:12
...
In my setup I want to experiment with the overlap in 3d space like Bearden and Hutchison talk about.
...

Like Nostradamus predictions, Bearden's talk is so fuzzy that one may imagine anything vaguely linking up his fantasies to the reality. It's wasting time.
Hutchison is another problem. This guy did never understand the phenomena that he faced and he was never able to determine the precise conditions of their apparition, leading to the impossibility to reproduce them. Consequently what he says is a pure fancy, and like Bearden but for another reason, his speech is senseless, in particular in the context of the Hendershot device.

Not only we don't see how field lines would be cutted, but if cutting the earth field lines is the explanation of the Hendershot's device, then it is a conventional explanation that doesn't require new physics nor hidden energy source. In this case we can apply the known laws of electromagnetism to calculate the expected energy that we could recover. Unfortunately this doesn't work.
1) cutting the field lines from the terrestrial magnetic field with a magnetic circuit that is not at all wide, as this one from Hendershot, can't produce as much energy as the Hendershot's device, by many orders of magnitude.
2) cutting magnetic field lines is a process that induces a counterforce, the Lorentz force, and so the electric energy is taken from the mechanical energy that moves the circuit through the field lines. And in the case of the earth rotation making the field lines to cut a circuit, one wonders where is the fulcrum of the circuit  :).
Each point is enough to discard a simple field lines cutting.

The constant speed of the motor indicates it is driven by a set frequency, and also depends on the number of poles, so like the article mentioned, it's speed is determined when the motor is assembled or designed.  (AC motors have a rotational speed determined by the frequency and the number of poles)

So, there is a revolving magnetic field, there's induction, and of course rotation in the case of the motor.

The secret is in how it is wound, according to the article.

EM

Here's a picture of the toy plane

The motor is meant to predate the electronic generator but to me this looks like an electronic generator to drive a motor, not a magnetic motor

Nice find!

I think the motor and generator are the same thing, for example, sticking a rotor inside a stator ring that already has a rotational field produces motion, so there is the motor.  It would seem the basic element is the generator, and since it depends on the attitude to the earth and is a ring wound with coils, it is very similar to the TPU.

However, I think we would benefit more if we follow Hendershots experiments and concepts described in the context of the motor, keeping in mind that we can always remove the rotor later.

EM

Quote from: Peterae on 2012.12.30, 14:27:40
Here's a picture of the toy plane

The motor is meant to predate the electronic generator but to me this looks like an electronic generator to drive a motor, not a magnetic motor

I agree.

Zooming in and looking closely at the picture, you can see the basket weave coils towards the front and what looks like the 2 coils that we see sitting in the square cores (with the center leg removed) in the patent sketch.

The whole generator (Mark I type) looks to be mounted upside down and to the ceiling of the fuselage

The motor driving the propeller is probably a standard small AC "universal" motor.

The cutaway was probably provided so LJH could "tune" the device and demonstrate the lack of  batteries.

I don't think this was ever meant to fly, as the weight of all those cores would have been excessive compared to the size of the plane and the propeller. Just a demo device, since there were no radio controls, it would have quickly crashed . That is not something LJH would have liked.

Absolutely ION just a toy to watch and play with, to a kid when the propeller turns all the better  ;D

Here's another device  O0

QuoteFate Magazine, October 1956, pp. 123-125; "Report from the Readers"

Mysterious Invention

"The Hubbard Energy Transformer" brought back to me exciting memories of another inventor. In 1918, while doing painting and decorating, I was hired to paper several bedrooms in a large two-story house. While at this work I went down to the back porch to pick up some materials. I happened to glance at the light meter and saw it was not moving.

I opened the fuse box and saw the main power fuses had been removed. It took only a minute to make sure the line had not been taped beyond the meter.

The only member of the family at home at the time was a young man in his early twenties [C. Earl Ammann]. I asked him, "Earl, where do you get your juice? I noticed it does not come from the power lines".

"Come along and I'll show you", he said. He led me up to the attic. He placed some steel bars on a work table and picked up a coil which looked like a loose coupler. After placing the coils on the steel rods he touched the opposite terminal. The bell rang with great force, and there was quite a spark, too.

I picked up the coils to make sure there was no contact with other appliances. I could see right through them. There was no battery inside. The bell rang just as vigorously. The wire was iron.

In the basement Earl had what he called an Activator Transformer, the size of two fists, which had to be within 10 miles of the radius of the generator coils. The activator was not in contact with any visible wires or appliances. It was activated by the electric currents which surge around the earth and activate the compass needle. By cutting into these currents, earl said, we can obtain unlimited power.

A year later Earl demonstrated his Cosmo Electric Generator in Denver. He had placed two copper spheres on the front fenders of his car in pace of the headlights. From these copper spheres he obtained enough power to drive that old jalopy all over Denver as reported in the Denver Post at the time.

While Earl was demonstrating his invention all over the streets of Denver, the power had been cut off in the foothills. In spite of this, when he went to Washington DC shortly afterward to try to obtain a patent on his Cosmo Electric Generator, he found that charges had been filed against him claiming he had a device to steal power from the power lines.

K. H. Isselstein,
Spokane, WA

HaHa

QuoteThe Hendershot "Fuelless motor" is not a motor at all but a generator, according to Major Thomas G. lanphier, commandant at Selfridge Field, Mich., where he with Lester J. Hendershot, the inventor, and D. Barr Peat, have been quietly working on an experimental model.

and

this is regarding his first model

Quotehis wife told of his conception of the machine and how the miniature model was constructed from the parts of a worn out radio which had been given to the inventor by his uncle.

and
an operational quote from Hendershot himself

Quote"I found that with a pre-magnetized core I could set up a magnetic field that would indicate true north, but I didn't know just how to utilize that in the compass I set out to find.

"In continuing my experiments, I learned that by cutting the same line of magnetic force north and south, I had an indicator of the true north, and that by cutting the magnetic field east and west, I could develop a rotary motion.

Notice in the text the Ammann device used iron wire.

Wish there was more info on this fellow.

Indeed that was one thing that caught my eye as well iron wire  O0

I'm beginning to wonder if these devices were using something like Radium as a power source.
Cooke, hendershot, SM, and now this new one and there were probably more.

If i remember didn't Hubbard go down that route with a similar device, IE coils and the like

was radium ever used in valves, if so that could explain how SM had some, even as a kid i had a glow in the dark watch which used Radium i think.

Yes on Hubbard too.

MARKUP OF A MARKUP...

Quote from: Peterae on 2012.12.30, 22:13:54
Indeed that was one thing that caught my eye as well iron wire  O0

I'm beginning to wonder if these devices were using something like Radium as a power source.
Cooke, hendershot, SM, and now this new one and there were probably more.

If i remember didn't Hubbard go down that route with a similar device, IE coils and the like

was radium ever used in valves, if so that could explain how SM had some, even as a kid i had a glow in the dark watch which used Radium i think.

Hello,

Most watches with semi permanent glowing dials now use whats called tritium.

http://www.cpfmarketplace.com/mp/showthread.php?169525-For-Sale-Tritium-Vials-*-Part-2

It is radioactive (not very dangerous) and should glow for approximately 10 years maybe more now.

Cheers ST

I was probably wrong about the Radium though  O0

QuoteRadium is over one million times as radioactive as the same mass of uranium

but if tungsten wire coated with Thorium was used maybe the story would be different.

 :)

The Hendershot motor is most likely powered by energy received from the power grid running at 60 Hz in North America, not the earths magnetic field.

How do I know this?  well because the motor he built ran at 1800 RPM.

QuoteIt could be built for a desired speed, he said, and he felt that a reli-able constant speed motor was one of the greatest needs in aviation at that time. The one he built developed 1,800 revolutions per minute.

The synchronous velocity of an AC motor is dictated by the frequency and the number of poles, here's the formula.

RPM = 120 f/p,      where f= frequency in Hz, and p = number of poles.

So let's calculate:    RPM = 120 * 60 / 4 = 1800


So his motor had 4 poles and was powered by 60 Hz frequency,  or just the same it could run on a higher harmonic and have more poles, like120 Hz/ and 8 poles, etc..


EM

Thanks EM.  I have always found the frequency of Hendershot devices coincidental.

A motor designed for a synchronous speed of 1800 RPM could not run at 1800 RPM. A common running speed for such a motor is 1750 RPM.

So, if it had a running speed of 1800 RPM it didn't have a rotor or didn't use Lenz or both.

For that matter the source of his power could have had a frequency of 30, 15 or 7.5 Hz. All he would need for those frequencies is the correct number of poles and a design for running on harmonics.

Based upon that........ I have decided his devices were Lentz free, had no rotor and ran off of Earth's magnetic field   :D

"Oh by the way Lindy, if you want to use one of these, you have to fly only over power lines" (there were few of those around in 1930's except in cities, rural electrification was just beginning, but never mind).  :D

No one has been able to tap substantial power from the radiation loss of the grid. Presenting the possibility as a fact is misleading.

Someone prove me wrong show me a circuit that can light a 6 Watt incandescent lamp to full brightness at 100 feet from any major power line. Not flea power LED's, let's see some real Joule heating. Not ionized gas in a fluorescent tube.

Common sense once again has flown out the window.

regardless, 1800 RPM is so clean and even

Was that rounded off or otherwise approximated?  Is this frequency determined by the components selected and tuning?

Has anyone read the letter to Hendershot from Geza Korcsmaros, Jr.?

He talks about an "aether vortex"...and "earthquake activity"...

Quote from: Grumpy on 2013.01.14, 15:19:57
regardless, 1800 RPM is so clean and even

Was that rounded off or otherwise approximated?  Is this frequency determined by the components selected and tuning?

They probably used a strobe method e.g. neon bulb or flash tube  driven off the power line to determine approximate rpm. Alternately a calibrated relaxation oscillator may have driven the tube, but it would not be exact. 1800 was probably an approximate number and should not be considered a concrete value since LJH said they could be wound to provide any RPM.

I reject notions that substantial power can be derived from the radiated energy of the 50 or 60 Hz. power line at a reasonable distance that would make it useful i.e. able to provide power for a home or automobile, or even my 6 Watt incandescent lamp challenge.

Anyone that can prove contrary, please supply your circuit and operational theory. An extremely hi Q tank circuit tuned to line frequency would still require an antenna in very close proximity.

I would accept the idea that the motor may have synchronized to the ambient 60 Hz, but not that it derived it's power from such.

Perhaps Exn could chime in on this as he is a radio operator and knows what is possible with radiated power at 50 or 60 Hz.

Ion

QuoteSomeone prove me wrong show me a circuit that can light a 6 Watt incandescent lamp to full brightness at 100 feet from any major power line. Not flea power LED's, let's see some real Joule heating. Not ionized gas in a fluorescent tube.

I agree with you in principal but from a completely different perspective,lol. Take a good hard look at the picture below, look at all those florescent tubes lit by the EM radiation from the power lines, that is real energy it's not imaginary otherwise the bulbs would not be glowing.

Now as you say, how is it nobody is intelligent enough to extract this energy we know is present and light a single 6w bulb? Well it should be obvious that people are not nearly as intelligent as they believe they are. It like saying we should blame the bulbs, the EM energy and the power lines for our own ignorance and I think that is just silly.

Let's be perfectly honest here and just say the words -- I know the energy is there, I know this and I can see this, but I am not intelligent enough to figure out how to extract it. You see that wasn't so hard was it?, the first step to solving a problem is admitting you have one and denial is not a solution to anything.
Again --- We know this energy is present, we can measure it, we can see it, we can feel it but we do not know how to utilize it efficiently due to a lack of understanding. I would suggest people keep repeating this until it makes sense because implying it is not possible is absurd.

AC

Has anyone read the letter to Hendershot from Geza Korcsmaros, Jr.?

He talks about an "aether vortex"...and "earthquake activity"...

Quote from: allcanadian on 2013.01.14, 19:01:43
Take a good hard look at the picture below, look at all those florescent tubes lit by the EM radiation from the power lines, that is real energy it's not imaginary otherwise the bulbs would not be glowing.

What might the voltage be on those high tension lines?

If a DC HV pulse will put a magnetic field into oscillation, how might this be used to build a generator?

Could it be so simple as wrapping a coil around a magnet and then setting the magnet into oscillation with a pulse? 

I think it would depend on the nature of the oscillation, as I think the oscillation is not like AC but rather oscillating DC, or AC that is biased above the zero line.  Anything resembling an oscillation would be inductive since it is changing.

Grumpy

QuoteIf a DC HV pulse will put a magnetic field into oscillation, how might this be used to build a generator?

I would think a person would start with the most obvious question, what is a magnetic field?. If we do not know what is it then how is a person supposed to understand what might effect it or how it may be set into oscillation. Would you like to know what it actually is in reality?.

AC

Quote from: Grumpy on 2013.01.14, 19:26:21
If a DC HV pulse will put a magnetic field into oscillation, how might this be used to build a generator?

Could it be so simple as wrapping a coil around a magnet and then setting the magnet into oscillation with a pulse? 

You always coming with this idea of yours, DC HV pulse to a coil, and feeling the oscillation with a magnet in your hand.You imply  this simple experiment should be a proof of overunity!

Could you please tell us more about what you think is happening there, or what condition we need, to see that anomalous oscillation?


Anyway, you can't extract energy from a moving or oscillating magnetic field! You always extract energy from the cause of the movement or the oscillation. When a permanent magnet accelerate an iron piece towards itself, it's not the magnetic field which doing the work, but the electric field!  Basically it's free, atomic energy, which caused the iron piece (mass) to accelerate. If you don't plan to take them apart ever again, you can say you harnessed a free energy source, and forced it to doing work for you.  :D

From AC:

QuoteI agree with you in principal but from a completely different perspective,lol. Take a good hard look at the picture below, look at all those florescent tubes lit by the EM radiation from the power lines, that is real energy it's not imaginary otherwise the bulbs would not be glowing.

Actually those bulbs are barely lit on a dark night. Yes there is an electrostatic field under high tension wires that can cause fluorescent lamps to barely light. Can you collect this and do something with it? Perhaps the answer is yes, but it would not be worth the return on investment.

That photo is representative of an old argument which is not very well thought out. Believe what you will, I'm not gonna dance.

Quote from: Chef on 2013.01.14, 21:22:26
You always coming with this idea of yours, DC HV pulse to a coil, and feeling the oscillation with a magnet in your hand.You imply  this simple experiment should be a proof of overunity!

Could you please tell us more about what you think is happening there, or what condition we need, to see that anomalous oscillation?


Anyway, you can't extract energy from a moving or oscillating magnetic field! You always extract energy from the cause of the movement or the oscillation. When a permanent magnet accelerate an iron piece towards itself, it's not the magnetic field which doing the work, but the electric field!  Basically it's free, atomic energy, which caused the iron piece (mass) to accelerate. If you don't plan to take them apart ever again, you can say you harnessed a free energy source, and forced it to doing work for you.  :D

You and I agreed not to respond to post made by the other.  I have honored this agree since the time you requested it.

Anyway, you missed my point since you let emotion translate my words.

In the letter to Hendershot from Geza, he states two profound things:
"From all out work up to the present we have arrived at the following facts:
1. the magnetic field possesses a resonant frequency
2. the field can be put in a state of resonance by utilizing pulsed direct current"

I'll dance because I done the fluorescent tube and LED thing. Both will light easily in a strong electric field and both will be dim. Both will light even more easily when subjected to higher frequencies. An incandescent bulb will not light in either case unless connect by at least one wire and a fair amount of capacitance on the other side to complete the circuit.

No way in HE-double-toothpicks will a 6 Watt incandescent light to any reasonable brilliance, if at all, in the first situation. The second would require a well completed circuit (capacitive or otherwise) and only connections located at the proper points (nodes - anti-nodes).

I have used a 100Watt incandescent bulb to work on my transmission lines and antennas.

All of it is explainable and conventional. There is no way to pull a reasonable amount of energy from power lines without climbing the pole and risking your life.

   

Grumpy

QuoteIn the letter to Hendershot from Geza, he states two profound things:
"From all out work up to the present we have arrived at the following facts:
1. the magnetic field possesses a resonant frequency
2. the field can be put in a state of resonance by utilizing pulsed direct current"

Now that is a really interesting letter ;)
Thanks

AC

Geza and his group have their own device that is very different from Hendrshots, but he does not disclose any details of it.  They appear sincere, and secretive.

From the way the two facts are stated, it sounds like a magnetic field can be put into a state of oscillation with a DC pulse, not that it is normally oscillating at some frequency.

These facts may very well be the fundamental facts required to solve our goal.

So, what can we do with these facts?:

1. the magnetic field possesses a resonant frequency
2. the field can be put in a state of resonance by utilizing pulsed direct current

Quote from: DC
...anyone, what do you think of the plasma experiment
on TinselKoala's YT channel apprently showing that the
magnetic field is rotating naturally ?

Charged particles in motion do create their own magnetic
field which interacts with any static magnetic field nearby.

Does TK's demonstration actually show that a permanent
magnetic field rotates or does it show how charged particles
tend to move in circular patterns within a magnetic field
when they intersect that field?

Grumpy:

For what it is worth I did read the letter by Geza a while back and also noticed the points you mention.

My guess is the resonant frequency is some function of coupling with the earth magnetic field. Due to the very large area covered by the earth field, it may have a time constant or reactive component that can be coupled to to produce resonance.

If using a long open ended coil, it may be possible if the pulse is clamped to prevent reversal or rides on top of a DC component.

I prefer the latter as it is in line with Spherics suggestions.

@Dumped

QuoteDoes TK's demonstration actually show that a permanent
magnetic field rotates or does it show how charged particles
tend to move in circular patterns within a magnetic field
when they intersect that field?

This is why it is so important to consider what it is we are actually seeing or measuring in reality. The plasma in the video is constantly dissipating thus there must be a constant current flow to maintain it. If this was not the case then we could simply establish a plasma field and no additional energy would be required after establishing the field. In the video I imagine he is using a DC source and following the right hand rule the plasma should rotate in proportion to the current flow or rate of dissipation which in this case are equal.

AC

Quote from: DeepCut on 2013.01.15, 00:05:57
I thought that but the former seems intuitively more likely, why would the particles 'decide' to move in a spiral path, surely it's more likely they are following a path laid out before them.

DC.

Try http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lorentz_force

Look at the graphic to the right of "Trajectories of particles due to the Lorentz force"

Even though the analogy is rather loose...... Look into "Gyroscopic Drift" under the subject of ballistics.

Basically, there is no spin or rotation of the magnetic field but spin is an intrinsic part of a charged particle (I don't like the word 'particle' except to define a point in spacetime. It isn't a little spinning sphere of dung or some other material.) and there is momentum in static fields (that should start an argument  ;) ).

The analogy is a spinning projectile moving through a static air mass is like a particle with spin moving through a point where the magnetic flux density is static (and the correct orientation to the path of the moving charged particle.

Gyroscopic drift happens even when the air isn't moving  :)

Where the analogy really breaks down is the bullet sees air resistance and gravity -- and there is 'work' done by each on the other. There is no such resistance or work being done between the moving charged particle and the static magnetic field.

I think it is wrong to say a static magnetic field has a RESONANT frequency,  because it has many resonant frequencies, or can excite many resonant frequencies.

Take for example a proton precession magnetometer.  After the spins are polarized by the coil, the current is stoped and the proton spins begin to precess around the external magnetic field vector, and the resonant frequency of precession depends on the strength of this field, but the static field is not in resonance.    

Ferromagnetic materials owe their properties to the electron spins not protons, and the resonant frequency is much higher.  I think it is 29 GHz or so at a field strength of 1 T.   So in the earth natural magnetic field of about 50 e-6 T,  this resonant frequency is about:  1.45 MHz   (in comparison, proton in earths field is resonant at about 2130 Hz)


But let's get back to Hendershot,  I don't read that he generated a lot of power from his motors, because spinning at constant RPM is really very little power dissipation, just a bit due to friction.

I find it very currious that the secret was premagnetizing the core, or causing a magnetic bias.   This is similar to the TPU, a magnetic bias to the iron wire, or ferrite or torroids, etc..



EM

Looks like Hubbard's coil falls in the same category

QuoteThe boat traveled at a speed of between eight and ten knots--silently, except for the whirring of a chain belt which connected the motor with the propeller shaft.  When the chain belt was removed, the motor ran free at a speed estimated at 3,500 revolutions [the rest of this line is unreadable]

3500 RPM is very close to the synchronous speed of 3600 RPM which most AC motors are designed for.   (2 poles 60 hz)

EM


PS,  I think that premagnetizing a core of a coil or biasing it magneticaly, eliminates the losses from magnetic domain flipping due to an AC magnetic field (hysterisis loses), so perhaps building a coil that has a magnetic core of high permiability induces enough signal that can be useful, especially if a high Q tank circuit is utilized, or regenerative feedback is employed.

Please don't get hysterical on me!   LOL   :D

What if an electric circuit is just an aether pump.  I.e. it just circulates the aether (virtual particles?).

Rick Anderson wrote a very intersting article back in 1997 - well worth posting:
http://freenrg.info/Physics/Scalar_Vector_Pot_And_Rick_Andersen/Rick_Andersen_lfg1.htm

Notice the coil on the plant picture - two coils separated

read the description of the circuit and what it does:

The output of this voltage amplifier is then power amplified and made to drive a solenoidal- or Helmholtz-type coil arrangement which is oriented axially, i.e., at right-angles to the radial electric field, generated by the subject with respect to the grounded Faraday cage which surrounds the subject. Thus, every variation in the subject's natural radial electric field is highly amplified, then "re-broadcast" back into the subject as a correspondingly-modulated magnetic field, at right angles to the original electric field. Of course, a varying magnetic field gives rise to an induced varying electrical field and current in a conductor (the subject)-- and so a "regenerative" effect occurs just as in the old radio sets of the 1930's: A weak signal is picked up, amplified, and fed back to the input, in phase with the input, to give what is known as regeneration or positive feedback. The overall effect will be to "boost" or regenerate the body's own natural electric fields and modulations, presumably strengthening and organizing these fields, which is believed by some to be the key to "rejuvenating"
body processes.

there's more:

In actual use, of course, the magnitude of the subject's electric "aura" field will be small, it will be modulated by many frequencies across the spectrum, it will be mixed with amplifier noise, and it may even exhibit momentary reversals of polarity. In spite of all these variables, the small Lorentz "force field" will continue to circle the subject in one direction only-- because any polarity reversal in the electric field causes a corresponding reversal in the amplified/injected magnetic field, and reversing the sign of both fields produces the same direction in the third vector as was the case before they were reversed. Only when one of the fields is reversed, can the Poynting vector "point" the other way. But since the magnetic field is an amplified version of the electric field, they must always reverse simultaneously, if at all. Thus, like pumping a child's toy top, any "wiggle" in the fields gives the Poynting vector a "push" in the same direction. A small-scale, personal "whirlwind".

In the proper rotational direction and strength, the Lorentz "regeneration" field should have the overall effect of "recharging", reinforcing, or realigning the force fields of the body in a way that may be related to the effects that are reported to occur when certain Yoga-like "spinning to the right" exercises are performed over a period of time.

Quote from: allcanadian on 2013.01.14, 19:01:43
...Take a good hard look at the picture below, look at all those florescent tubes lit by the EM radiation from the power lines, that is real energy
...

- A power line doesn't radiate. You are confusing quasi-static fields and waves.
- What is real is the power plant that makes current from generators thanks to mechanical forces, and the tranfert of a part of their energy in the lamps by induction.

Quote
Well it should be obvious that people are not nearly as intelligent as they believe they are.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mirror_test

Quote
I know the energy is there, I know this and I can see this

(http://trzupek.files.wordpress.com/2009/02/crystal_ball.jpg)

Possibly  :)
AC Reply #84 on: 2013-01-14, 20:01:43

How to search with Google:
Put the text with quotes in Google, add " site:overunityresearch.com" and you win!
http://www.overunityresearch.com/index.php?topic=1597.msg27737#msg27737

We should consider the magnetic avalanche effect. If this propagates at meters/second, might it obey the rules for transmission lines i.e reflect off the open end of a core or circulate in a poleless (ring) core if reset to the opposite polarity.

Since hard drives seem to have the problem we might experiment with the thin magnetic film platter from a removed hard disc. Winding a few turns through the center and pulsing with DSRD circuits, we might be able to measure the speed of propagation to a coil wound on the  opposite side.

We could also test with iron wire of a sufficient length e.g. try to determine propagation speed in a linear one meter length with driving and pickup coils at either end.

An interesting test for the new year.

Quote from: DeepCut on 2013.01.15, 15:22:37
...
Don't know how i missed that ! I'm obviously not as observant as i thought i was ;+}

DC.

No problem, DC !

@Exn

Quote- A power line doesn't radiate. You are confusing quasi-static fields and waves.
- What is real is the power plant that makes current from generators thanks to mechanical forces, and the tranfert of a part of their energy in the lamps by induction.

You may have noticed I did not use the term power I used the term ENERGY, and yes ENERGY does radiate from the source and it is fairly well understood why this happens. Are you disputing the fact that ENERGY is radiated by the power lines which lights the florescent tubes?, because your post is incoherent and overgeneralized.

QuoteAC Reply #84 on: 2013-01-14, 20:01:43
How to search with Google:
Put the text with quotes in Google, add " site:overunityresearch.com" and you win!
http://www.overunityresearch.com/index.php?topic=1597.msg27737#msg27737

QuoteWell it should be obvious that people are not nearly as intelligent as they believe they are.

Exn we don't need to play these silly games of semantics do we?, as well you have made the false assumption that I do not apply this thought to myself. Unlike yourself I will be the first to admit I am not nearly as smart as I may think I am which is part of the reason I made the statement. Also unlike yourself I automatically assume I may be incorrect in some way, I may not state this outright but as a rational person I automatically assume I could be incorrect.

Do you have an intelligent point to make or can we expect more of the same nonsense?.

AC

@Exn
I think we could make a few simple assumptions here, first the Hendershot device must extract energy from somewhere if it worked as claimed. Second if his device worked as claimed then there is some process operating which we do not understand. In which case it seems logical that we should examine the basic premise of how energy can be extracted from ambient forms of energy or man-made sources at a distance.

It may be that if we could develop a device to extract tangible amounts of energy from a power line at a distance then we would basically have a wireless means of power transmission. The boys at MIT have been working on this however they are using a very specific setup. Now if we could develop better ways to extract EM energy from a power line which is not completely dissimilar from what the boys at MIT are doing then it seems logical this could apply to ambient sources in some way.
I'm not suggesting stealing power I'm speaking about a better way to extract energy which we may consider ambient energy, low energy sources covering a large area.

I mean no offense but all of your posts revolve around why everything cannot work and you seem to be implying that nothing can ever work in my opinion. To me this is pointless because you are not part of any solution to producing a real device which works. Maybe we should try something different, rather than constantly telling us what cannot work how about telling us how this device could work, hypothetically speaking of course, do you have any ideas?.

AC

Quote from: allcanadian on 2013.01.15, 16:02:17
@Exn
You may have noticed I did not use the term power I used the term ENERGY, and yes ENERGY does radiate from the source

Energy of power lines doesn't radiate (the radiated part is fortunately negligible otherwise there would be no more energy at the end of the power lines).
Energy is stored in the magnetic and electric fields of the line and there is a periodic energy exchange between the fields and the current, at the curent frequency. This field can be shared with a receiver, for instance, coupled lamps.

Something radiating is autonomous. It's not the case here, which is quasi-stationary. We have fields, we have not waves. Energy is taken from the line only when there are coupled circuits in its field, dissipating energy in a load. When the load is removed, energy is no more taken from the line, this is the proof that energy is not radiated, unlike the case of a receivig radio antenna whose the presence or the absence doesn't influence the energy radiated by a transmitter.

You have personnal interpretation and language about a common and well known phenomenon, leading to unprecise, not relevant and even, misleading concepts.

Quote from: allcanadian on 2013.01.15, 16:52:42
@Exn
I think we could make a few simple assumptions here, first the Hendershot device must extract energy from somewhere if it worked as claimed. Second if his device worked as claimed then there is some process operating which we do not understand. In which case it seems logical that we should examine the basic premise of how energy can be extracted from ambient forms of energy or man-made sources at a distance.

It's useless to propose a conventional and well known phenomenon, such magnetic/electric fields similar to those of power lines, to explain the extraordinary phenomenon supposedly at work in the Hendershot's device, except if there is some clue that Hendershot demonstrated his device under power lines or in a tremendous level of electric or magnetic fields.

Quote
...
I mean no offense but all of your posts revolve around why everything cannot work and you seem to be implying that nothing can ever work in my opinion. To me this is pointless because you are not part of any solution to producing a real device which works. Maybe we should try something different, rather than constantly telling us what cannot work how about telling us how this device could work, hypothetically speaking of course, do you have any ideas?.

AC

It's much more positive to dismiss absurdities, than to propose ones by neglecting the facts, by taking pleasure from a wishful thinking or by refusal of learning science.

Quote from: DeepCut on 2013.01.18, 15:27:44
How long have you two been married ?

:P

DC.

;D
Time to leave him, please take him with you, you will save me.

@Exn

QuoteIt's much more positive to dismiss absurdities, than to propose ones by neglecting the facts, by taking pleasure from a wishful thinking or by refusal of learning science.

I guess this is where our beliefs diverge as I have always believed that as a scientific person nothing should be rejected until it is given due consideration. In fact if you have ever read the biographies of the most famous scientists in history you would find most all were famous simply because they followed though on a notion which everyone else rejected.
I guess the relevant question here is where do you think we would be if everyone simply dismissed everything they did not understand?.

So basically you seem to be saying that your purpose in this forum is not to help anyone succeed in proving this technology for the benefit of mankind but to criticize them for even trying, does that about cover it?.

AC

It's not magic. Just a question of flux crossing and therefore, of coil size. With coils of around 50 mtrs diameter, it will work even better than expected.

Generally speaking, the following video shows how the Hendershot device works.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BLXVLDysroY (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BLXVLDysroY)

Taken in light of that video, the magnet/armature/phone ringer coils portion is the energy source and the rest is the amplifier.

The horseshoe magnet supplies the power. The armature oscillates within the Wesley W. Gary "neutral zone" creating a magnetic oscillation in the coil cores which creates a current in the coil wires around those cores. That current feeds the combination capacitor/coil devices which store energy in the large capacitors and oscillates through the transformers to feed the load.

Part of the amplifier portion gives some feedback to the phone ringer coils which keeps the armature oscillating. One of the important aspects of the device is that the transformers are, as shown on the parts list, "vertical oscillator type" which uses an E/I core with a small separation between the E and I parts of the core which affects saturation. Normal power transformers will not work.

There must be a non-linear response somewhere. I suspect it is the combination capacitor/coil devices creating a flux density change in the capacitor portion to create something similar to parametric oscillation but I don't see how this is happening.

Another option might be that it is coupling to the earth's magnetic field but I doubt that just because the energy density in such a small area doesn't seem sufficient to supply the power shown.

I spent 3 months looking at it and was getting down to collecting materials to do a build but got stumped on the magnet. It was said to be a 1950's era radar magnet but there wasn't any more information than that. There were not any size or material specs or field strenghts given. There was a note from one of teh participants back in the day that said the size of diameter of the cap/coil device was related to the face sizes of the magnet but without knowing more about the magnet there isn't any way I know of to calculate what's needed.

In the end, I wasn't willing to spend $500 to light a 100W light bulb - maybe.

I think the main operating principle with the Hendershot device is cutting the earths field East/West creates motion and cutting the earths mag field north/south creates energy, if sense can be made from that then a sound understanding could lead to a working device.

I think this device is early enough and have enough witnesses to be a real device.  O0

Quote from: Peterae on 2014.07.27, 21:01:15
I think the main operating principle with the Hendershot device is cutting the earths field East/West creates motion and cutting the earths mag field north/south creates energy, if sense can be made from that then a sound understanding could lead to a working device.

I think this device is early enough and have enough witnesses to be a real device.  O0

Agreed, this device is one of about five devices that I believe were real.

Quote from: ION on 2014.07.28, 01:54:03
Agreed, this device is one of about five devices that I believe were real.

Not to change the thread but this info fits.
The Hubbard device had many witnesses too in 1920. Lindbergh was making strides in the political arena to promote this after he, with witnesses saw it in operation in 1927. Then his child was kidnapped and killed in 1932.
Bottom of page 9:
http://www.hyiq.org/Downloads/The%20New%20York%20Times%20February%2027,%201928%20and%20The%20New%20York%20Times%20February%2028.pdf (http://www.hyiq.org/Downloads/The%20New%20York%20Times%20February%2027,%201928%20and%20The%20New%20York%20Times%20February%2028.pdf)

A barrel array of 8 Tesla coils...

QuoteWhile the device has been patented, the claims for it are so broad that Hubbard says he does not feel safe in making public his secret. In general, he says, it is made up of a group of eight electro-magnets, each with primary and secondary windings of copper wire, which are arranged around a large steel core. The core likewise has a single winding. A coil thus constructed, he says, is lifeless until given an initial impulse. This is done by connecting the ends of its windings for a fraction of a second to an ordinary [two words unreadable R.L.R.] -ing circuit, he says.

@GK

If he hit the coil that is on the iron core with a simple car battery, the core will become an object that holds its own gravity. If by chance copper atoms respond more to gravity then magnetism, then that would make perfect sense. The field is overrated. There is nothing better then proximity so his 6 other coils all around would have a good part of the earth gravity cancelled around the copper wire slit an more freely respond to their primaries. We need to condition the space around a pri/sec, then pulse the primary. But the best will be dual primaries.  Hehehe

Wattsup

Don't know whether this is the right place to post this but I have been looking at the Hendershot motor.  Here is my take on what it consists of and how it might work.  Enjoy!

Smudge

Quote from: Smudge on 2014.08.18, 15:26:48
Don't know whether this is the right place to post this but I have been looking at the Hendershot motor.  Here is my take on what it consists of and how it might work.  Enjoy!

Smudge

Smudge thanks for the paper, I read it with interest as it expresses some very novel ideas.

A couple of questions:

1) Since this is supposedly a self running motor, are the windings on the inner core shorted as in an induction motor in order to develop am opposing field. Your paper does not mention what to do with these windings.

2) The toothed part which is captured below appears to be a solid cast and machined steel part from an alternator of the period. As such the flux lines will flow into the metallic base which is a continuance of the teeth. Today alternator rotors are made from very heavy gauge stamped steel parts (at least in the smaller low end machines as used in cheap automobiles). I cannot speak of larger alternators which may use cast and machined rotors. How would the continuance of flux into the base of the rotor affect the drawings you have presented?

As you can see from the attachment, a modern alternator has like pole faces on each separate toothed part. As you know, this rotor portion has an internal coil and slip rings that is used to energize the field from an external source and regulator. Power output coils are part of the stator magnetic structure which surround the teeth.

Did Hendershot use the alternator part in a novel manner as you seem to suggest or was this part made especially for him with a non magnetic base affixed to the magnetic poles?

Looking forward to more discussion on this subject and the other Hendershot devices, including the one with basket weave coils.

kind regards, ION

That rotor got my attention too.  I was told, though I do not know firsthand, the design lends itself to anti-cogging at low RPM.  Is it possible this property is somehow being exploited in the Hendershot motor?

Quote from: ION on 2014.08.19, 12:54:58
Smudge thanks for the paper, I read it with interest as it expresses some very novel ideas.

A couple of questions:

1) Since this is supposedly a self running motor, are the windings on the inner core shorted as in an induction motor in order to develop am opposing field. Your paper does not mention what to do with these windings.

Perhaps I didn't make this clear, but the voltage induction into the windings on the donut is fed to the U shaped coils.  This could be each donut section feeding one U coil or all the donut coils in series feeding all the U coils in series.  Either way the induction into the donut coils is by flux cutting and the motor force comes from the poles at each end of the U coils being in the magnetic field from the teeth.

Quote
2) The toothed part which is captured below appears to be a solid cast and machined steel part from an alternator of the period. As such the flux lines will flow into the metallic base which is a continuance of the teeth. Today alternator rotors are made from very heavy gauge stamped steel parts (at least in the smaller low end machines as used in cheap automobiles). I cannot speak of larger alternators which may use cast and machined rotors. How would the continuance of flux into the base of the rotor affect the drawings you have presented?

As you can see from the attachment, a modern alternator has like pole faces on each separate toothed part. As you know, this rotor portion has an internal coil and slip rings that is used to energize the field from an external source and regulator. Power output coils are part of the stator magnetic structure which surround the teeth.

Did Hendershot use the alternator part in a novel manner as you seem to suggest or was this part made especially for him with a non magnetic base affixed to the magnetic poles?

I can't answer your question because I don't have any more information than you do.  My guess is he made a small motor that just turned the prop on a toy aeroplane and that ran on the earth's magnetism.  That external field would provide teeth with the pole polarities shown in your drawing of a modern alternator, but only if aligned with the field and if the teeth and their mounting disc were ferromagnetic, and the rotor shaft were non-ferromagnetic.  And of course the effect would be quite weak.  If Hendershot went on to create more powerful motors then he would have put magnets at each end to get the same poled teeth.  As regards the feasibility of my scheme, I think the ferromagnetic cores in the U coils are necessary in order to get some leverage, i.e. they require less current to get the required pole strength.  If the U coils were air spaced I fear the system could not be OU.

Smudge

Quote from: Matt Watts on 2014.08.19, 18:40:37
That rotor got my attention too.  I was told, though I do not know firsthand, the design lends itself to anti-cogging at low RPM.  Is it possible this property is somehow being exploited in the Hendershot motor?

Hi Matt

I never took one of these apart and noticed if the stator poles were shaped the same or not, which could lessen cogging. An alternator with sufficient cogging could stall a small engine at very low idle and high electrical load, so I guess an anti cog design would be smoother load for the engine at low idle. I would think that back emf or Lenz repulsion would fall off anyway at low rpm's so probably not needed. I'm sure automotive electrical engineers spent a lot of time refining these devices and making them cheap and mass produceable over the years.

I cannot answer your question, but it is possible.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Smudge, thanks for the explanation and extra drawings. I am, however, finding it difficult to visualize exactly how this would work even with fixed permanent magnets. I'm sure the problem is mine, not yours.

Cheers, ION

Grumpy

QuoteIn the letter to Hendershot from Geza, he states two profound things:
"From all out work up to the present we have arrived at the following facts:
1. the magnetic field possesses a resonant frequency
2. the field can be put in a state of resonance by utilizing pulsed direct current"

As we know the earths mag field is weak but in NMR thats good as it decreases the NMR frequencies of the sample, infact it looks like the frequency would be around 2kHz, although the field resonance would be weak but so is the earths mag field.

If a low power pulses DC cirrent was made to travel through a sample of iron and aligned with the earthd mag field then it maybe possible to cause field resonance.

QuoteNuclear magnetic resonance (NMR) in the geomagnetic field is conventionally referred to as Earth's field NMR (EFNMR). EFNMR is a special case of low field NMR.

When a sample is placed in a constant magnetic field and stimulated (perturbed) by a pulsed or alternating magnetic field, NMR active nuclei resonate at characteristic frequencies. Examples of such nuclei are the isotopes carbon-13, and hydrogen-1 also referred to as protons. The resonant frequency of each isotope is directly proportional to the strength of the applied magnetic field, and the magnetogyric or gyromagnetic ratio of that isotope. The signal strength is proportional both to the stimulating magnetic field and the number of nuclei of that isotope in the sample. Thus in the 21 tesla magnetic field that may be found in high resolution laboratory NMR spectrometers, protons resonate at 900 MHz. However in the Earth's magnetic field the same nuclei resonate at audio frequencies of around 2 kHz and generate very weak signals.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Earth%27s_field_NMR

Quote
Peter

Quote
Grumpy
In the letter to Hendershot from Geza, he states two profound things:
"From all out work up to the present we have arrived at the following facts:
1. the magnetic field possesses a resonant frequency
2. the field can be put in a state of resonance by utilizing pulsed direct current"

As we know the earths mag field is weak but in NMR thats good as it decreases the NMR frequencies of the sample, infact it looks like the frequency would be around 2kHz, although the field resonance would be weak but so is the earths mag field.

If a low power pulses DC cirrent was made to travel through a sample of iron and aligned with the earthd mag field then it maybe possible to cause field resonance.

Quote
Nuclear magnetic resonance (NMR) in the geomagnetic field is conventionally referred to as Earth's field NMR (EFNMR). EFNMR is a special case of low field NMR.

When a sample is placed in a constant magnetic field and stimulated (perturbed) by a pulsed or alternating magnetic field, NMR active nuclei resonate at characteristic frequencies. Examples of such nuclei are the isotopes carbon-13, and hydrogen-1 also referred to as protons. The resonant frequency of each isotope is directly proportional to the strength of the applied magnetic field, and the magnetogyric or gyromagnetic ratio of that isotope. The signal strength is proportional both to the stimulating magnetic field and the number of nuclei of that isotope in the sample. Thus in the 21 tesla magnetic field that may be found in high resolution laboratory NMR spectrometers, protons resonate at 900 MHz. However in the Earth's magnetic field the same nuclei resonate at audio frequencies of around 2 kHz and generate very weak signals.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Earth%27s_field_NMR

I think Gaza was referring to the appearance of a large increase in magnetic field strength when HV DC pulses are applied near a magnet, and that this has a pulse frequency at which the field is extremely strong.  Thus, you can create a device that utilizes this increased magnetic field for motive or inductive purposes. 

Hendershot used a simple device to toggle between two large coils to provide the switched HV, and he had two coil assemblies, producing an AC output.

Do you have a HV DC supply?

Just in case you haven't seen it yet. Akula meets Hendershot http://youtu.be/sPAz8aR1Ylg

Does that mean that Akula has abandoned his own original inventions in favor of the good old and tried dusted-off technology of Hendersot ?  :o

Quote from: verpies on 2015.01.30, 12:24:34
Does that mean that Akula has abandoned his own original inventions in favor of the good old and tried dusted-off technology of Hendersot ?  :o

Dear Verpies.

Off topic, most definitely, it seems Roman ( Akula ) has taken T-1000's saying of " There are many roads to Rome " very seriously !!   :)          https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pYjREkw1v-A

BITT ??

Cheers Grum.

Quote from: Grumage on 2015.01.30, 12:57:27
it seems Roman ( Akula ) has taken T-1000's saying of " There are many roads to Rome " very seriously !!   :)

He either has a very special eye to these devices or is sitting atop a nuclear waste facility.  Seems everything he touches runs by itself.

Quote from: Matt Watts on 2015.01.30, 23:26:42
He either has a very special eye to these devices or is sitting atop a nuclear waste facility.  Seems everything he touches runs by itself.

Roman works for a company in Germany which specialize on R&D of free energy devices and it is not surprise when something outlandish come to akula and he just starts to build it... ;) He's paid for that job.

Quote from: T-1000 on 2015.01.30, 23:49:43
He's paid for that job.

And a fine job it is.  What is most interesting to me about Roman is that he is able to see something in these devices so easily that we struggle with.  He knows exactly where to look and exactly what it is he is looking for, then makes some adjustments and bingo, it runs.

You speak his language T.  Have you ever heard him in his videos say something you thought was rather odd, but turns out to clearly be very important?

Quote from: Matt Watts on 2015.01.31, 02:03:37
You speak his language T.  Have you ever heard him in his videos say something you thought was rather odd, but turns out to clearly be very important?

So far everything he speaks about are going along lines of my research. The only one thing to me was new at some point was how he described operation of his Kapanadze style device where the strong resonant electric field from Tesla coil helped to NMR effect on his receiving coil which had strong magnetic field in alignment.

For his Hendershot style video I do not see capacitors inside of cylindrical basket coils and this is main difference between original and his version. And on resonator coils with magnets he got capacitors. The rest of stuff for counter-balance is looking same so you do not need Earth grounding for its functioning..

Also for understanding Hendershot device the following principle may be valid in http://realstrannik.com/forum/freeenergylt-antanas/192-analiz-aleksandr-mishin-tpu.html (please toss it over Google translate)

(http://realstrannik.com/media/kunena/attachments/54/oo.jpg)

Each coil is part of capacitor plate and the discharge is bouncing between two same coil-capacitors there.
This might been possible how Hendershot operated his device but also might be misleading to the other type of operation...

I'm still very curious about these open-ended coil schematics I see from these fellows.  At some point I'm going to do some experiments with this type of configuration.  The first one will be with coax cable--one side on each end open, the other conductor connected.  I'll wrap the coax around a core and try some various waveforms induced into it and see what it looks like on the scope.  From the conventional viewpoint, I don't expect to see any current developed, but it would be nice to be wrong, then I'll need some help explaining it.

Orthofield, you had some interesting points to make on the Hendershot Generator here:

http://jnaudin.free.fr/html/hender.htm

I wonder if you have thought about it anymore since that post back in 1997?

I built a unit back in the mid 1980,s but never was able to get it operational. More recently I learned that Hendershot used beeswax to fix the large inner capacitor to the "basket weave" coils. This led me to think there might be some form of acoustic coupling between the two, with the capacitor acting as an electrostatic ultrasonic transducer.

Although the serpentine coils have been later named basket weave, they don't bear much resemblance to actual basket weave coils of the early radio era where that type of construction was used to lower inter-winding capacitance. My guess is the Hendershot coils serve a different purpose acoustically, and may also explain the large capacitance values used in the device.

I have not seen any of the replicators pursue this line of research, not even have I dusted off the old unit to test this idea, but I might!

Regards

Hi Ion,

Wow, I haven't looked at that in a long time! I don't see too much that I would disagree with, except the assertion that all you need is a resonance and nonreciprocal linkage, and then you have OU. I doubt that to be true. It may be a requirement, but it's not sufficient. After that, the thing I'm less sure about would be the magnetic- ion interaction. I'm not so certain it would give enough C variation to get serious power. But maybe...

As far as thinking about it more, I didn't pay too much more attention to the Hendershot device after that, but went on the hunt for efficient, relatively low frequency, passive, nonreciprocal networks that maybe could be used in an OU device. I went more over to the Hall/Corbino side rather than the vibrating transducer side.

But looking through my papers on this stuff, I note that most of these transducers have a piezoelectric like terfenol, so it makes sense that sound is involved.  I know of one magnetostrictive project with a nonreciprocal element that actually used beeswax (an excellent acoustic conductor.) Also, hey, maybe the clapper actually vibrated the 'basket weave' coil through the base, to add a little extra oomph :-)
I wonder just how easy it is to affect the C of an electrolytic capacitor? Taking one and measuring the C with or without a big fat magnet aligned with the axis would be a place to start.

I'll have to look at the coil again, because there are some cross coil configs with interesting properties (E parallel B EM waves at right angles to the intersection)-- but that's pretty exotic.
I just pulled up the 125 honeycomb coils in the patent database, will look to see if there is anything interesting there...

Fred

Hi Ion,

Hmm, it doesn't make any sense to me now that he would use the basket weave coil to reduce parasitic capacitance, because with that big mass of dielectric nearby there would still be plenty of C.  So why use a basket weave? So I went and looked.

De Forest, attached, shows the use of a Lecher line wrapped around a tube, as a highly Q transmission line stub. He discusses detecting both electromagnetic and electrostatic nodes on the wire, similar to the use of Lecher wire to measure wavelength.

With the dielectric nearby in Hendershot, you have a distinct slow line structure. With two such slow lines, you might be able to create some large delay effect, that, for instance delays CEMF from the clapper until it becomes a positive force to drive the clapper? Would need a big mass of dielectric, and a coil with a large cross section (=high L).

Pure speculation-- but resonance effects have been used in permanent magnet motors (which the clapper basically is) to apply CEMF to the next motor cycle. (patents by Goddard, Macdonald, Rupp, Subieta-Garron).
In this case, the Hendershot machine becomes a permanent magnet motor where CEMF does not impede motor action but supports it.

I note that the iron Cook Coils are long enough that there could be a substantial domain motion delay, with the secondary induction on one coil delayed enough to support the primary on the other coil (or something like that). Tesla also had transformers with a thin layer of metal between the windings to cause a delay, which could reach 90 degrees I think.

The patent from 1925 by Willy shows serpentine coils used as retardation coils, and also right angle coils intended to reduce mutual L and C. It's the only patent in this class besides De Forest that seems relevant. Retardation coils seem to be often discussed in these patents as a way to make voices clearer in radio reception. It was a time of extreme levels of experimentation in radio, with all sorts of weird antennas, including underground ones (Rogers) and miscellaneous even stranger things. In fact, I recall a patent (but can't remember who did it right now) for a 'radiant energy detector' that had a clapper or something like it.

These are more like free associations than research, but maybe there are some clues...There's also a patent class for coil/capacitor combinations, maybe there is something there...

Regards,
Fred

I'm just now getting back to my Hendershot build. Does it matter which direction the basket weave coils are wound? Should they be oppositely wound or wound in the same direction?

https://youtu.be/f24OAlUKlUI

Quote from: panyuming on 2026.02.03, 04:24:39
https://youtu.be/f24OAlUKlUI

Do you think the experiment is genuine? The lamp stays lit for a long time compared to the initial pulse that is supposed to trigger an oscillation.

Quote from: F6FLT on 2026.02.03, 19:32:38
Do you think the experiment is genuine? The lamp stays lit for a long time compared to the initial pulse that is supposed to trigger an oscillation.

It is not often that an experiment is published despite that it does not work as intended.

When someone posts a link, it would be polite to explain why. Why are they bringing up this topic? Why should we click on the link? Is there something in particular that makes them think it's relevant and useful in our field?
Posting a YouTube link without any personal effort to analyze and summarize it for the community—I don't see the point. I could send 100 of those a day.

Quote from: panyuming on 2026.02.03, 04:24:39
https://youtu.be/f24OAlUKlUI

Interesting video and I often use comparative measurements. Some would spend hours on simulations or measuring things down to the last mV where I like comparisons to indicate the direction I am heading. Mainly because it's magnitudes faster and much more intuitive when doing experiments.

For example, we want to measure the basic efficiency of a DC-DC converter or joule thief. Rather than run a sim or measure input vs output current/voltage/power I just loop the output back to the input and see how long it runs. Now because the feedback is almost instant we can get a much better feel for what works and what doesn't. In fact, I stumbled onto many different new phenomena doing this.

Suppose we have a replication of the Hendershot Generator. Where is the energy flow in all this and how does the geometry relate to one another?. So I use a capacitor as the input and loop the output back to the input through an LED or light bulb. Now we have a visual indication of the run time. We could think of it as "pinging" the circuit and we send in a set pulse of energy to see what happens. So we hit a switch to charge the capacitor to X voltage in one pulse which pings the circuit and watch to see how long the light stays on, move a coil then ping the circuit, move a wire and try something else then ping the circuit. We don't need to measure anything exactly only find out what works better and a direction to proceed in.

Very important, always note what you changed in the circuit by writing it down if you get a better result. I like to stick a little piece of white electrical tape on things and number them so it's easier to make notes.

The video is of very little interest, since there are no measurements. Nothing to conclude.

Quote from: F6FLT on 2026.02.06, 17:16:37
When someone posts a link, it would be polite to explain why. Why are they bringing up this topic? Why should we click on the link? Is there something in particular that makes them think it's relevant and useful in our field?
Posting a YouTube link without any personal effort to analyze and summarize it for the community—I don't see the point. I could send 100 of those a day.

You are right. I'm sorry. :-[

@panyuming

Don't be sorry for such a small thing. I appreciate your contributions, which stick to the facts and rationality, the only way for us to succeed.  :)

Please allow me to say one thing at the beginning: I'm sorry.   :-[

On February 9, 2026, Pachuka released another video: 
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lQCFfJIe_UE 
https://www.youtube.com/@Pachuka/videos 

In the video, it seems that a small incandescent bulb kept glowing continuously without any other input. 

Of course, there are many similar videos. The devices shown in those videos might have hidden power lines; there might be concealed batteries; there could be airflow off-camera making the device in the frame keep spinning; or the naturally decelerating mechanical motion in the video could be played backward to show an automatic acceleration effect. 
I used to believe what everyone said, that what was shown was real. Later, I watched it much less. 

Because of the special nature of free energy, real videos are rarely released. 
Even if a real video exists, it won't show others how to make it. 
Perhaps the videos by Bedini, Kapanadze, Ton Smith, and others are genuinely OU devices, but since I couldn't replicate them successfully, I began to doubt the original videos. Eventually, I could no longer judge the authenticity of various videos. 

In Pachuka's video, the output power doesn't matter; if it can indeed run on its own and keep a small incandescent bulb continuously lit, that's an effect I have been unable to achieve. 
The video also shows different effects depending on the placement and angle of permanent magnets, which I have never seen before. 
If I replicate the Hendershot device, even if I correctly replicate several coils and mutual inductors and adjust a few correct resonant frequencies, if I don't know how to change the angle of the magnets, I might still not achieve self-operation. 
In my early years, I was able to successfully build a 9-inch TV because I had the hardware circuit diagrams, PCB layouts, and component specifications, as well as detailed adjustment steps for each part. 
Ton Smith's device is very simple, yet I have never been able to replicate it successfully.

The following three videos from Pachuka show: an oscillating circuit powered by a transformer of about 5VA, which excites some incandescent bulbs over 100W, about 1/3 brightness, with at least 20W output. Then he pulls the power plug from the wall, stopping the input. The output continues to light the incandescent bulbs and lasts for several minutes. The clock in the video runs at 25 times speed.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=m0rvnvWQ6Dw
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=TdSE9hQRjHI
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dL5BKGqBp9M

Kapanadze's early devices and Ton Smith's devices used sparks as excitation, which were rapid discharges. 
Kapanadze's later devices had slow or very few driving sparks, which could be counted by ear. I find it incredible. 
Pachuka's spark excitation also involved very few sparks. O0