This document details a device that purportedly utilizes an aether vortex to induce electric current, much like a generator, but without any moving parts. The information is presented as it was given, with the exception that the names of those involved have been changed and all personal information has been removed.
References are made to Nikola Tesla's Radiant Energy, Cold Current/Electricity, and the TPU Device invented by Steven Mark.
The validity of this information is left as an exercise for the reader.
The name of this 34 page document file is: Aether Vortex Energy Converter_AVEC Device_1_0.pdf
This document is accompanied by two MS-Excel files and PDFs:
M1_lookup_table1_v14.xls
M7_coil calcsv3.xls
M9_______pulsed power.pdf
M9_calcs for flybacks.pdf link: http://powerelectronics.com/mag/801PET22.pdf
M9_mag amp control.pdf link: http://focus.ti.com/lit/ml/slup129/slup129.pdf
M9_magnetic amplifier calcs .pdf
M9_nanosecond scr switch.pdf
I will help anyone who is interested in researching this device for personal use.
The number of people that have this information is impossible to know. One person gets it and then they give it to several others, it's exponential. So who has it doesn't matter.
The information has been known for a couple of years and some of it has been known for almost 100 years - at least back to 1928. This particular presentation was made available over two years ago. Some tried and were unsuccessful, some did not try at all, others never said a single word about it.
Many think that is is real. Many think that it is not.
Everyone talks the talk about free energy and overunity.
Do you have the courage of your convictions?
Grumpy,
That was a very interesting read. Thanks for posting it.
I have some questions:
1. I don't know what a couple of the acronyms stand for - can you enlighten me?
SEP
SOP
2. There is reference to a FEMM diagram. Do you have that?
3. Did you try to replicate the AVEC device?
4. Do you have any pics or videos of the efforts of others?
-Duff
Quote from: duff on 2010.09.15, 11:05:04
Grumpy,
That was a very interesting read. Thanks for posting it.
I have some questions:
1. I don't know what a couple of the acronyms stand for - can you enlighten me?
SEP
SOP
2. There is reference to a FEMM diagram. Do you have that?
3. Did you try to replicate the AVEC device?
4. Do you have any pics or videos of the efforts of others?
-Duff
1. SEP is Stable Ether Pattern
2. No idea what SOP is and do not see it in the doc.
3. yes
4. yes, but I am not in contact with them to get permission to post them.
SOP = Source of Pulse (I believe)
might be SOL (speed of light) diameter in the table
Grumpy,
Would you mind if I asked others [at other forums] to take a look?
Or will you be doing that yourself?]
Or would you prefer I just mind my own business?
Chet
This is a Military Industrial Complex grade device.
it is already on several public and private forums
Don't post it on Energetic - I hate those Bastards!
I have not found verification, but I suspect it is on some foreign sites, translated, too.
I expect no more than a couple dozen individuals, including government entities, will bother with it.
No Energetic?
Just in time,as you wish!
Chet
I absolutely hate Energetic!
May their asses be cold and left in the dark.
Sorry ,
I just couldn't help my self,
Just because they may be self serving, disingenuous ETC.....................
I went to their biggest thread and invited ALL !!
http://www.energeticforum.com/renewable-energy/271-electric-motor-secrets-48.html#post110497
Chet
Quote from: ramset on 2010.09.15, 17:51:27
Sorry ,
I just couldn't help my self,
Just because they may be self serving, disingenuous ETC.....................
I went to their biggest thread and invited ALL !!
http://www.energeticforum.com/renewable-energy/271-electric-motor-secrets-48.html#post110497
Chet
ASSHOLE!(at least you sent them to OU...LOL!
Hi Grumpy and all
Thank you for this information.
DonL
thank the source
i am but a humble messenger
build it
---
based on the sites I can track, this has been downloaded well over 100 times already - it is going supernova!
Sorry Grump,
But I'm invitin more folks to the feast!
Chet
Greets to many familiar names. I believe 'SOP' was in one of the diagrams in the AVEC .pdf document so a text search wouldn't find it. It appears to be related to control coil units in the toroid and something about their diameter but still not sure what it means. Guesses: speed of particle, sum of products, state of polarization, sequential operating parameters, standard operating power and last but not least stupid operating procedures :)
Somehow this info needs to be linked to the original Spheric posts on OU and OUR. It would give more of a background and history of the original disclosure and events leading to the present.
Spherics started his document with a picture of a tower mounted atomic bomb on a test site. He was emphasizing the magnetic vectored angles.
Looks like 2012 and the rapture all happen in close quarters with this event trigger?
A brief case sized atomic bomb. And in seperate modules it gets through customs. Lovely....
The pin has been pulled. Lets see who chucks the pineapple.
There are only 3 models:
1: For the good of mankind
2: Greed
3: Destruction
Option 1 creates more problems. Fallout from stupidty.
The first thing God gave Adam and Eve out of Eden were animal skins to clothe themselves. Obviously the human's first attempt at using vegetation didnt work.
GK,
I choose 1[one]
And I believe our creator chose this long ago!
Chet
Quote from: ION on 2010.09.15, 21:51:22
Somehow this info needs to be linked to the original Spheric posts on OU and OUR. It would give more of a background and history of the original disclosure and events leading to the present.
Yes I agree.
Grumps, could you please include in the new thread first post a reference to this link (http://www.overunityresearch.com/index.php?topic=45.msg292#msg292) and what it is?
And it wouldn't hurt to reference the new thread with a link in the old "complete information" thread as well. This way they reference each other.
Thanks,
.99
This device stands in it's own right. I'll link it but don't move it or it will get lost in the posts.
Wow. Thanks for linking this Chet.
Grumpy, you said you built it, yes? You didn't mention how it went, or did I miss that part?
Grumpy,
In your build, did you pulse through sat core inductor switches?
I'd really like to know more about your replication attempt.
What are your feeling about the AVEC concept now, 2 years later, considering what you've learned since?
-Duff
:)
Which again begs the question...how did it work?
It's great that this information is out in the open, and I'm sure that many of us will work with this a bit. It does seem that there is a lot of precise info here based on a solid understanding of aether dynamics. As with most of these things, the devil is in the details. If the four of you were unable to demonstrate stable and quantifiable OU with the help of a mentor that presumably had done so, that doesn't leave much hope for the rest of us absent such help. On the other hand, if one or more of you were able to demonstrate the same, that would give the rest of us a reasonable chance for success, especially given that one or more of you might be around to help us.
Tao,
Thanks to you, Grumps and the rest of the gang for pursuing this info and for allowing it to be shared with all. I too felt that now was a good time to have this info released.
.99
Quote from: LtBolo on 2010.09.15, 23:08:33
Wow. Thanks for linking this Chet.
Grumpy, you said you built it, yes? You didn't mention how it went, or did I miss that part?
I deliberately left that out. I ain't stupid, yet.
Anyone who failed - gave up.
Quote from: duff on 2010.09.16, 00:33:51
Grumpy,
In your build, did you pulse through sat core inductor switches?
I'd really like to know more about your replication attempt.
What are your feeling about the AVEC concept now, 2 years later, considering what you've learned since?
-Duff
this is just the tip of a very large iceberg
I encourage SM to et back in the saddle and experiment along other lines: gravity, communications, force fields, etc.
The group was more than 4.
I don't think SM or S ever "left" entirely. How could they? The gravity of the situation is far too strong.
Does it work? Proof is left up to the reader.
If you do not believe then I do not want you to work with this.
My only recommendation at this point is that you use more than 1.5kv to achieve the 1kv drop requirement.
I use avalanche transistors. When they work, they work well for this application.
I "dabbled" with saturable reactors - my supply is low current and I never got a good pulse, but the cores were much too large.
If SM used sat inductors as shown in SM17, I suspect he had a lot more current in them than a few ma's.
@Grumpy
Any chance we can get some feedback on what didn't work, and on what you feel the key factors are to success/failure?
The design that S ended up with was a function of a good empirical understanding of the underlying aether physics. Perhaps it would pay us all to back up a bit and do some basic experiments to observe the effects that S mentioned. I've been doing engineering work for about 20 years now, and I can't tell you the number of times I have found it useful to back up and "prove that gravity still works", as we like to call it here. It would be far easier to build and troubleshoot a complex system if the fundamental physics was understood, rather than blindly replicating a device that none of us really understand.
So...can you or any of the others that worked with S elaborate on some of the tests that were discussed in the document, or perhaps suggest others?
This has been a haunting addiction...
Quote from: LtBolo on 2010.09.16, 03:13:03
@Grumpy
Any chance we can get some feedback on what didn't work, and on what you feel the key factors are to success/failure?
The design that S ended up with was a function of a good empirical understanding of the underlying aether physics. Perhaps it would pay us all to back up a bit and do some basic experiments to observe the effects that S mentioned. I've been doing engineering work for about 20 years now, and I can't tell you the number of times I have found it useful to back up and "prove that gravity still works", as we like to call it here. It would be far easier to build and troubleshoot a complex system if the fundamental physics was understood, rather than blindly replicating a device that none of us really understand.
So...can you or any of the others that worked with S elaborate on some of the tests that were discussed in the document, or perhaps suggest others?
Do not building the mechanical part straight out of the gate - you will fail. Do the small experiments first. Develop ways to "see what is happening". Everyone says "I don't see any cold current effects!" What are those effects? Do you see none of them or not the ones your think you should see?
For example: Cold current from 10kv pulses only showed up as a few volts on a battery - very subtle change - hardly definitive - but obviously there.
Charging a cap sucks. Eric Dollard did not get great results either and he used a 20kv Tesla Transformer into his pancakes coils. Look for the oscillation though.
Another example is that he says not to put a magnet in the field - it's dangerous - but a magnetic field will indicate the presence of the aether field, so it is useful, even if dangerous.
I dabbled with saturable reactors and believe they will work, but I use avalanche transistors with mixed results. I am not an EE either.
Keep the current very low - 50ma or less.
I use HT magnet wire for coils.
Quote from: LtBolo on 2010.09.16, 03:13:03
...It would be far easier to build and troubleshoot a complex system if the fundamental physics was understood, rather than blindly replicating a device that none of us really understand.
So...can you or any of the others that worked with S elaborate on some of the tests that were discussed in the document, or perhaps suggest others?
I believe that Grumpy has already posted one separate S recommended test here.
The 'fundamental physics' is explained in the S text provided. It would be no easy task to break this device down into separate tests without destroying the intended effect, I think. You first need to power multiple magnetic fields at orthogonal angles to set-up a 'composite' magnetic field, (or comp field,) to set the sage for the next events, which involve carefully-timed, high-voltage impulse sequences applied to carefully arranged coils. Then the aether, as we know it, will begin to rotate and slowly, over several seconds time, pick up speed and then, and only then, will we see any output on the air-toroid pick-up coil.
How shall we part this out to test the overall theory?
Sure, you should part it out to test for the proper intended functions/effects of each sub-assembly. But you will not really know for sure that the theory is sound unless and until you actually build it and try it. The whole device itself, as complex as it is, is the test of the theory, no?
...and I have the impression that someone around here feels that I am uncommitted. For me, in-completion has always been about lack of funds for materials, (and perhaps some proper/better/more test equipment.)
If anyone here cares to see me finish this thing and post build and test photos here then please send me a PM with your intentions to fund my skylarks. We can go shopping together for ~9" ID HDPE pipe and ~3" OD HDPE pipe. Then we can shop for more spools of magnet wire to wind on these tubes.
Then I wish to go overboard to ensure success by making a tall support structure out of HDPE, or any other non-metallic or non-polar polymer. Cha-ching, indeed! Yes, we will keep our comp field pure, "let's keep things nice and sparkling clean." Why else would I have ordered ten foot leads on all of my inner brooks coil assemblies?
Then I will need someone to pick-up the tab for, how many was it, four or five 12V batteries.
Then we need to make a shopping list for all the 1.5kV impulse drive circuitry.
Don't forget the several 'proper' Watt meters so we'll know what we paid for in the end.
Like Grumpy implied, this build is not for the faint of heart.
EDIT: http://www.overunity.com/index.php?topic=9749.msg257427#msg257427 (http://www.overunity.com/index.php?topic=9749.msg257427#msg257427) ;)
@Grumpy
OK I get the no magnetic field theory. He is basically saying that pulsed high voltage low amperage stress on the coils will result in the coils to "exude" as "ether attraction field mass" around the coil, hence also over the collector.
In the main pdf this is written at Message 3A.
"Your aim with wire choice is to use the highest gauge for maximum resistance per foot and to use as
much as possible within the space available for the coil."
Should that be Minimum instead. Higher AWG will reduce resistance.
Added:
OK foot in mouth. He was talking gauge, sorry he is right.
Added II;
What does SEP mean. Wish guys would declare their abbreviations.
Quote from: Rosphere on 2010.09.16, 11:21:50
How shall we part this out to test the overall theory?
Well, I think that was the point. You have all spent varying degrees of time and money and apparently nobody has had a positive result. I am quite certain that S didn't just one day dream of a hexagonal multi-coil assembly that would create a stable aether vortex which induces high currents in a collector coil. He, and presumably the others he works with, learned about the nature of aether and slowly arrived at a design based on understanding. How does that understanding relate to other credible power generation devices? SM, S, Boyce and others are of the spinning aether school, but Kapanadze appears to be more of the shaking aether school. There is clearly some common physics among successful devices. It might be prudent to start with an aether physics lab approach to gain a better understanding of what we are manipulating and how it behaves, before diving into a very complex device.
As a matter of introduction, I am an EE by education and have been running an engineering company for nearly 20 years. We've solved a few complex problems over the years, and I am a great fan of understanding, then applying. Since there are really no reliable textbooks for aether physics, I was simply hoping that one or more of you had played with some simple and readily replicable experiments to demonstrate aether behavior. While I have a high degree of faith in S...this strikes me as very credible...I am not anxious to try something this complex on faith alone.
Quote from: LtBolo on 2010.09.16, 13:29:55
Well, I think that was the point. You have all spent varying degrees of time and money and apparently nobody has had a positive result. I am quite certain that S didn't just one day dream of a hexagonal multi-coil assembly that would create a stable aether vortex which induces high currents in a collector coil. He, and presumably the others he works with, learned about the nature of aether and slowly arrived at a design based on understanding. How does that understanding relate to other credible power generation devices? SM, S, Boyce and others are of the spinning aether school, but Kapanadze appears to be more of the shaking aether school. There is clearly some common physics among successful devices. It might be prudent to start with an aether physics lab approach to gain a better understanding of what we are manipulating and how it behaves, before diving into a very complex device.
As a matter of introduction, I am an EE by education and have been running an engineering company for nearly 20 years. We've solved a few complex problems over the years, and I am a great fan of understanding, then applying. Since there are really no reliable textbooks for aether physics, I was simply hoping that one or more of you had played with some simple and readily replicable experiments to demonstrate aether behavior. While I have a high degree of faith in S...this strikes me as very credible...I am not anxious to try something this complex on faith alone.
The compexity is exagerated. The pulse circuitry need not be complicated. The power supply need not be complicated.
I make no promises. I make no claims. This is not my technology or my device or my work or my discovery. I am just a messenger and experimenter and my neck is out far enough.
This is why I wrote the most basic "proof" on page "1":
The validity of this information is left as an exercise for the reader.I agree that Kapanadze appears to move it back and forth, so did Tesla. (Never did get a good ground for that damn thing.) Tesla later stated in regards to the Magnifier that it was the method at the time and not the way he would do it now (when he was in his 70's).
It is what it is. Take it or leave it.
EDIT:
The basic effect was discovered by Joseph Henry and Elihu Thomson on different occasions, years apart. Tesla noticed a strange effect when DC generators were first switched on, found the previous references of Henry and Thomson and began his own experimentation. It was Tesla that discovered the super-charging effect and it bears the name he gave it: "Radiant Electricity". Steven Mark discovered his effect much later. I do not know the complete timeline, but assume it was developed either after Steven sold or otherwise lost the rights or was developed separtely. The old TVQ Group could alter gravity with a similar device.
Rosphere
Good to see you are still at it and the coils are NOT in slots.
EDIT2:
The harassment has already started...jeeez...crappy PM's
Thanks Grumpy. Ignore the junk. Eyes on the goal.
Quote from: LtBolo on 2010.09.16, 14:31:59
Thanks Grumpy. Ignore the junk. Eyes on the goal.
Otherwise you just spin your wheels.
Read over it all a couple times. Then work up a plan. Stick to the plan and execute each step.
Jump all over the place like a chicken, and you will waste all your time and achieve nothing.
Summarize the properties of the ether so you can refer back to them over and over. Not all properties are mentioned. Which are missing?
Ignore everyone's BS - that is the most important. Misery loves company.
Do not get sidetracked on little things you find along the way. Make good notes and follow up on these things later.
Tesla's tertiary coil was outside the inductive coupling range of the primary and secondary system. So what induced the power in it? Obviously the logical guess is aetheric waves...radiant energy. If aetheric waves can induce large amounts of power in a coil...but...not being magnetic, is not subject to Lenz...then there is nothing really to self limit the system. That agrees very well with Tesla's statement regarding those coils.
So then what is the best way to generate a wave in the aether? It is said that aether is a super fluid with very low viscosity and very high density. Observing other fluids...like water...it becomes pretty apparent that large volume, strong impact, and high speed would be the best for generating the strongest pressure waves. Applied to aether, assuming that an electrostatic field alters aether density, that would imply a large volume of copper, high voltage, and rapid switching. Sound familiar?
Pondering more...when heat alters the density of air, we see perturbations in the light passing through it. Since a magnetic field is carried within aether, is it plausible that a wave in the aether creates a variation in magnetic field density, much like light wiggling over the hot pavement? When that magnetic field is reasonably strong and the aetheric wave is strong, the resulting wiggling of the magnetic field density would cause induction in any metal in the field. Since the movement of the field was done by an aetheric wave that cost very little to produce, the resulting power could be produced at a significant discount. If it were further possible to generate the aether wave as a standing wave, the wave intensity would continue to increase and the magnetic field variation would also increase. Using that line of reasoning, the intensity of the static magnetic field would directly affect the intensity of the variations by the aether wave. Maybe I'm deluding myself, but this is really starting to make some sense.
Now off to the lab to drag myself back down to reality...
Quote from: Grumpy on 2010.09.16, 14:04:43
Rosphere
Good to see you are still at it and the coils are NOT in slots.
Yes, that was due to your suggestion to maximize the area of open-air space adjacent to the CCU Brooks coil assemblies.
The alignment of my two inner-plates is not as pristine as I would wish. Instead of resting on the six tubes, my inner-plates are zip-tied to the coils themselves and the coil OD's are not all as exactly equal nor as parallel enough to yield superior plate assembly alignment.
I am hopeful that the gain in exposed CCU area will exceed any losses due to imperfections in overall toroid shape.
Quote from: Rosphere on 2010.09.16, 21:41:17
The alignment of my two inner-plates is not as pristine as I would wish. Instead of resting on the six tubes, my inner-plates are zip-tied to the coils themselves and the coil OD's are not all as exactly equal nor as parallel enough to yield superior plate assembly alignment.
I matched drilled .250 inch holes in both plates in the regions that are between the pulse coil fields (project them staight out and there is a trangular region), then used .250 inch threaded acetal (Delrin) rod and nylon nuts on both sides of both plates. Nylon rod is good too. Holds them very well and the rods are small. If you order plastic threaded rod, got a few - they are very handy for all sorts fo things.
ltBolo
Quote:
So then what is the best way to generate a wave in the aether? It is said that aether is a super fluid with very low viscosity and very high density. Observing other fluids...like water...it becomes pretty apparent that large volume, strong impact, and high speed would be the best for generating the strongest pressure waves. Applied to aether, assuming that an electrostatic field alters aether density, that would imply a large volume of copper, high voltage, and rapid switching. Sound familiar?
Pondering more...when heat alters the density of air, we see perturbations in the light passing through it. Since a magnetic field is carried within aether, is it plausible that a wave in the aether creates a variation in magnetic field density, much like light wiggling over the hot pavement? When that magnetic field is reasonably strong and the aetheric wave is strong, the resulting wiggling of the magnetic field density would cause induction in any metal in the field. Since the movement of the field was done by an aetheric wave that cost very little to produce, the resulting power could be produced at a significant discount. If it were further possible to generate the aether wave as a standing wave, the wave intensity would continue to increase and the magnetic field variation would also increase. Using that line of reasoning, the intensity of the static magnetic field would directly affect the intensity of the variations by the aether wave. Maybe I'm deluding myself, but this is really starting to make some sense.
----------------------------------------
See I like that!
Helps me get my head around How this works,
Thanks lt
Chet
Quote from: ramset on 2010.09.17, 00:06:01
See I like that!
Helps me get my head around How this works,
Thanks lt
Chet
Thanks for the vote of confidence...but my ramblings may be that of a madman. It MIGHT be the way it works, and if so, lots of stuff starts making sense. We can certainly hope, yes?
QuoteThanks for the vote of confidence...but my ramblings may be that of a madman. It MIGHT be the way it works, and if so, lots of stuff starts making sense. We can certainly hope, yes?
Not a madman at all. You seem to have a very clear insight into how it might work. Welcome to this forum.
Quote from: wattsup on 2010.09.16, 13:28:35
What does SEP mean. Wish guys would declare their abbreviations.
Spherics' definition of a magnetic field is a
Stable
Ether
Pattern
EDIT: Now that we have a wider audience, does anyone in this forum have access to magnetic 3D visualization software?
I have always wanted to see a visualization of this Main-SEP, CB-SEP, and 6x CCU-SEP composite magnetic field developed in 3D. This itself may give us more insight into its operation.
Then, perhaps, we may also be able to simulate the operation and see a vortex develop. One thing at a time.
Quote from: Rosphere on 2010.09.17, 10:00:42
Spherics' definition of a magnetic field is a Stable Ether Pattern
EDIT: Now that we have a wider audience, does anyone in this forum have access to magnetic 3D visualization software?
You can download Finite Element Method Magnetics (FEMM) here:
http://www.femm.info/wiki/HomePage
:)
the only one I have is of the tetrahedral version, which was kinda left out of this document
Quote from: tao on 2010.09.17, 13:23:28
I have already done visualizations 2 years ago, when 'spherics' himself even commented on them. I see that they weren't included in the AVEC pdf. If you gents want 'em, I'll upload them.
I'd like to see them.
Thank you
DonL
While interfacing with S, did any of you see his builds or other video from him?
Quote from: LtBolo on 2010.09.17, 14:20:09
While interfacing with S, did any of you see his builds or other video from him?
No. He was writing a more informative document, but ceased contact before we received it.
He said that posting working devices is what gets you into trouble. He gave an account of an instance where he was visited and some of his property taken, but I removed this because it is quite specific.
If you look at the builds that didn't work and then compare them to what he said, you will see that they are all flawed. So, everyone that says they built it and it doesn't work did not build it correctly. Mark Snoswell on overunity.com says they can make sub-ns pulses at 500v and goes on about saying that the information is incomplete and the device was never built and it doesn't work.
In the document, you will see that you MUST drop at least 1000v across the pulse coil. Just because you hit it with 4kv, does not mean you automatically meet this requirement. This requirement can NOT be met with 500v pulses. Pulse rise-time is just one parameter and you do not need sub-ns pulses. Great if you have them, but not absolutely necessary.
As far as I know no one tried switching MOSFETs as shown in the doc and I doubt that S would have done it this way with a sat reactor available.
There was an excellent build attempt on a private forum that was unsuccessful. This unit used a Marx bank, but as I recall the voltage was no more than 1500v and may have been less.
Depending on parameters, you may need 10kv.
Do not expect to see some sort of "energy release". Expecting this is a misinterpretation and misunderstanding of the process. You pulse your coil, and the mass responds, the aether around the coil also responds. Do this right and the response is quite strong. Do not think of "electrostatics" - this is incorrect - it is electrodynamics as it occurs DURING the rise of the pulse and this is during the change!
The charging of conductor fro this initial response is synonymous with an effect explored by Harold Richards termed Electrification by Impact where a dielectric impacts a conductor and charge is imparted to the surface of the conductor. AEther is a dielectric.
I understand. That tends to leave it a matter of faith in the individual. You guys had a better sense of the person from communication, so I guess that helps. Too bad he isn't here to offer a bit more.
Thinking about the electrostatic/electrodynamic effects, I was viewing it from the perspective of ball lightening and those that I have heard suggest that an E field is the cause/result of a density gradient in the aether. It would stand to reason that a rapidly applied voltage gradient that forced a density change would create an aether wave, much like an explosion under water or a pistol shrimp doing its thing. That may not be a proper analogy, though.
The fact that it takes a few seconds for this to spin up is giving you a glimpse of aether behavior. Something that takes a while to spin up and down is exhibiting inertia, which makes me wonder whether pulses that are too narrow or spinning too fast might hurt the process. Not sure what it takes to impedance match or properly load your impeller, if that makes sense.
This is really at the heart of why I would personally like to start with simple experiments. By understanding how aether behaves first, it seems like it would be far easier to get this working. I guess I saw this design more as a means of understanding aether, with the expectation that other (simpler) designs might start to make sense. The big question that looms in virtually every credible device is: Where/how does the quantum energy enter the system? Once you wrap your head around that, the rest becomes implementation detail.
From Aether Vortex Energry Converter pdf
Quote
I added a separate SEP coil to each input coil to replace the 900V level to keep the length shorter and therefore volume of input coils so diameter of unit to build is reasonable for you.
This sounds like there was originally only one SEP coil & he changed his working model.
Does anyone know the details of this???
-Duff
@LtBolo,
Great posts!
I am heading down the parameter path of 2KV with sine waves in multilayer winds. I had used my large power supply before but that also produced current. I am steering away from that and going to build a Marx bank. Going to try a MOT first with a HV bridge.
Quote from: duff on 2010.09.17, 18:02:43
From Aether Vortex Energry Converter pdf
This sounds like there was originally only one SEP coil & he changed his working model.
Does anyone know the details of this???
-Duff
A very smart person told me that the SEP magnetic field compresses space around it. Easier to expand it if it is first compressed, or should I say easier to expand it further.
Quote from: LtBolo on 2010.09.17, 17:54:31
...
The fact that it takes a few seconds for this to spin up is giving you a glimpse of aether behavior. Something that takes a while to spin up and down is exhibiting inertia, which makes me wonder whether pulses that are too narrow or spinning too fast might hurt the process. Not sure what it takes to impedance match or properly load your impeller, if that makes sense.
Yes, too fast will hurt the process; there is a frequency/diameter relationship to successful operation. I think that a pulse-wavefront must intersect the next 120-degree-off pulse-wavefront at a particular working-radius; too fast and the radius is too small, too slow and the radius is too large.
Quote from: LtBolo on 2010.09.17, 17:54:31
This is really at the heart of why I would personally like to start with simple experiments. By understanding how aether behaves first, it seems like it would be far easier to get this working. I guess I saw this design more as a means of understanding aether, with the expectation that other (simpler) designs might start to make sense.
Perhaps, by measuring how it reacts to various stimulation?
First define what "it" is, (not "is" is, that's silly.) Then define what stimulation is. (...not going there.)
Maybe "it" could be somewhere out in the deep vacuum of space; an unorganized 'white noise' of energy some say behaves as a fluid of extremely high density and extremely low viscosity. (Has anyone tried to measure the density and viscosity before? -Sorry if I missed it.)
Maybe the stimulation could be the existence of, oh say, one carbon atom.
How does the aether react to the existence of one carbon atom in deep space? Well, this can only ever be a pure thought experiment for obvious reasons; all of your in-proximity test equipment, with its many various atoms, might somehow interact and influence the one carbon atom and throw-off your test results.
'All your labs are belong to us.'
Think about all of the influences upon the aether near the Earth in comparison to the pure test conditions just described; the biggest thing is probably our local galaxy cluster, pick out our own Milky Way galaxy (wow, look at that giant vortex,) find Sol (with enough mass to reflect the aether pressure as light and heat,) and then park your saucer here on Earth (with it's iron core and electrostatic atmosphere.) How the hell are we supposed to get anything accomplished with all this activity going on in our aether lab?!
The original Michelson-Morley experiment only proved that the aether was not blowing that day, near the surface of the Earth. Does it ever?
Despite all that, I am sure that some of us here can think of a few meaningful aether experiments. We are not out to prove it exists, we are out to measure its properties in relation to our material manipulations.
We could start with a simple magnetic field's stimulation of our local aether. S describes it as an ordering of the aether; a stable aether pattern. What happens when we remove the current from a saturated air coil? The magnetic field collapses, of course, but why? Might it be the outside pressure of an un-patterned 'white noise' pushing in from all sides?
Sure it is. But at what rate does the 'outer most magnetic boundary' collapses towards the coil? Also important, at what rate does the ordered magnetic boundary expand from the coil? If we knew this rate, could we use this information to tune our various designs?
Quote from: LtBolo on 2010.09.17, 17:54:31
The big question that looms in virtually every credible device is: Where/how does the quantum energy enter the system? Once you wrap your head around that, the rest becomes implementation detail.
Perhaps the energy is always entering every 'system' all the time. This is the aether fluid pressure that maintains the standing waves of all matter. We are just trying to bleed-off a bit for our own use without starving our device of the aether pressure that each atom needs to remain in existence, if possible.
I'm certainly not trying to engage in the philosophical bloviating that some are prone to. My questions and explorations are more along the line of Tesla's admonitions that a bit of thought and theory can eliminate the majority of the experiments. In AVEC, we have a design that is purported to do something useful. What? How? It supposedly causes aether to spin in the presence of a magnetic field, which apparently causes induction of one or more forms of electricity in the collector. Good, but S used the term induction-like, so how do we measure it...or can we?
The bottom line is that if those coils when pulsed at high voltage are capable of creating a disruption in the aether that ultimately causes induction somewhere, we should be able to fashion some small scale tests to observe and optimize that process. I"d personally like to start there.
Stoyan Sarg's book is actually suggesting that the aether can provide power through magnetically activated plasma. Given that virtually every successful device uses high voltage, spark gaps, tubes, or other similar stuff, it isn't difficult to believe that. His point is that free energy experimentation is substantially intuitive and empirical, and doesn't have a supporting theory from which to make predictions. Apparent the theories he is working with provide a decent explanation and allow some predictions. He feels that we are on the brink of replicable devices on a broad scale, and wants to have some theories that can back up the results. I'm in complete agreement.
Anyway, I'm a methodical thinker that really likes to follow a logical sequence. I'm hoping that S's revelations can give us enough to do that.
Completely unrelated, but so far, I really like the spirit in this forum....as opposed to a few others that will remain unnamed. I get really turned off by the silliness some places. Thanks guys!
Enjoying your posts so far LtB and I agree with much of what you say.
Glad to have you here with us and thanks for your support of OUR.
.99
Quotewe should be able to fashion some small scale tests to observe and optimize that process. I"d personally like to start there.
LtBolo
I totally agree with your stance on this. The bifilar coil test may be one of a number of ways to do this, but even then we need a way to detect what is occurring.
SM's first device wound on a discarded wire spool seemed to have that kind of simplicity, but for the lack of good video clarity, we have been unable to crack it.
Welcome to the forum, I have enjoyed all your posts thus far.
Rosphere:
Your post gave me some interesting food for thought. Keep it up. And welcome.
Quote'All your labs are belong to us.'
could you expand on this a bit?
Quote from: ION on 2010.09.18, 16:35:02
...could you expand on this a bit?
Sorry, my prose are not as dry they should be for an engineer. "All your base are belong to us," is from some long-ago foreign video-game poorly translated into English. This phrase has been roundly mocked over the years but most have probably missed it, I almost did. In jest, I changed the word "base" to "labs" ...hm... should have been "lab"... "All your lab are belong to us!" :D But in my case I was referring to the inescapable influences of planets, suns/stars, galaxies, etc. on the aether in every science lab on Earth, and not some computer game foe. (Edit, reference added: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qItugh-fFgg (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qItugh-fFgg))
One of the simplest experiments was mentioned by 'microcontroller' in the shoutbox when we were chatting a few days ago:
Take two coils, place a magnet between them, pulse one coil and see what it does with the other coil.
Hypothesis:
The magnetic field of the magnet compresses space, the radial field of the pulsed coil expands space, sit with modulate the magnetic field density, the third coil will show this as a varying EMF.
Keep the philosophy on your own benches.
Hypothesis:
The magnetic field of the magnet compresses space, the radial field of the pulsed coil expands space, this will modulate the magnetic field density, the second coil will show this as a varying EMF.
Quote from: Grumpy on 2010.09.16, 02:46:20
The group was more than 4.
I don't think SM or S ever "left" entirely. How could they? The gravity of the situation is far too strong.
Does it work? Proof is left up to the reader.
If you do not believe then I do not want you to work with this.
My only recommendation at this point is that you use more than 1.5kv to achieve the 1kv drop requirement.
I use avalanche transistors. When they work, they work well for this application.
I "dabbled" with saturable reactors - my supply is low current and I never got a good pulse, but the cores were much too large.
If SM used sat inductors as shown in SM17, I suspect he had a lot more current in them than a few ma's.
Can you recommend any particular avalanche transistors to work with? I assume these are a type of bipolar junction transistor with high current handling capabilities?
:)
time 5.40:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mxoaAHlC37I
http://www.treurniet.ca/Smith/RotorPics.htm
Wings,
Are you thinking this is proof of a moving magnetic field changing the apparent mass of matter?
Some fairly easy things to test and little known facts about highly magnetized falling objects(easy for all but the heat part):
On single bipolar fields(one completed toroidal field under stress of compression or not)...
1. Some of the energy being released during the fall will be used when the polar axis aligns itself with the direction of the fall. Acceleration is retarded until the axis are aligned with the fall.
2. Once the axis is aligned, the acceleration toward terminal velocity returns to classical.
3. As velocity increases the interaction with other bipolar fields increases.
On multiple bipolar fields(multiple toroidal fields under group stress of compression)...
1. Some of the energy being released during the fall will be used for the duration of the fall due to each individual field using energy to align itself with the direction of the fall.
2. the multiple axis (all being equal) cannot align themselves with the direction of the fall so energy from the fall is converted to heat instead of acceleration. The falling body never reaches 'classical' terminal velocity.
3. As velocity increases more of the fall energy is converted to heat.
There are similar but contrary rules for so-called point sources or monopoles but they aren't accepted either.
The easiest test..... mark a pole on a very strong magnet.... drop it in a sandy spot.... keep track of where the mark is each time.
Just an observation...low voltage SEPs and high voltage inner coils form concentric capacitors with voltage biases of the type proposed by Aspden as potentially harnessing aether energy. He also suggested aether vortexes as the basis for the inertia observed in certain systems. Just thinking out loud...
I had observed a same inertial effect in my spiraling electric field experiments. I can tune now more accurately to the necessary conditions, where the spinning imparted on the plasma. If the tuning is right, and I start the system as positive side looking up, and no spinning imparted, and turn the tube upside down, spinning start, and get to the speed very fast. If I turn again up side down after 10 sec, spinning stop nearly immediately, but if I let the spinning for some minute, or more, depending on allowed time, after turning up side down, the spinning would wind down slowly. I made different tests, and there were some very long wind down time, nearly 30 min.
Maybe I will upload some new video on the next week, however the youtube only allow 10 minutes, and these videos would be very boring, but very interesting to see, the plasma arc come to full stop in 10-30 minutes.
Chef
Quote:
Maybe I will upload some new video on the next week, however the youtube only allow 10 minutes, and these videos would be very boring, but very interesting to see, the plasma arc come to full stop in 10-30 minutes.
------------------------------
Sir,
This sounds Amazing !,I hope you can post some vids.
Chet
Quote from: Grumpy on 2010.09.17, 14:52:36
There was an excellent build attempt on a private forum that was unsuccessful. This unit used a Marx bank, but as I recall the voltage was no more than 1500v and may have been less.
It was much much more -- and as Grumpy noted, it still didnt work.
We have found experimentally that the best avalance device is a micro spark gap. As long as the total energy is low (which it is as we are after votlage and not current) then you can get good repetition rates and the fastest possible rise times with a micro spark gap. Just put the spark gap in seris with your pulser - nothing easier.
Quote from: marksnoswell on 2010.09.23, 03:33:54
It was much much more -- and as Grumpy noted, it still didnt work.
I don't recall that unit putting out 1500v. As I recall he could not run that high because the current would be too great.
Only a few others even pulsed coils at that time.
I consider that time period wasted time.
A short gap in series with primary switches is what I call a sharpening gap. It works great for that.
So, what does everyone think about this device?
Fake, BS, Holy Grail, undecided?
Too difficult, too many unknowns, too expensive?
My take is this:
One should be able to perform a simple experiment with a simplified configuration proving anomalous energy production.
To move on to full scale builds of presumed Kilowatt power production before proof of concept is expensive and costly.
Look at the FTPU.......simple to the extreme, but is something happening in this unit that is hitherto unknown?
If any of this stuff is real, this is a good starting point. There are only so many combinations of connections available to such a device. Deriving a concept for this device alone would be a giant step.
"it is the coils and how they interact"
In the "Rant Room" post I suggested that we might embark on a discovery path if we heeded the clues.
But the problem with forums is lack of focus, thread derails, too many pet WAG's that are not even developed into viable theories with little bench testing and verification or nullification.
I see real development as extremely difficult because of this. I believe the secret could be cracked, but it would require a level of organization, teamwork, task assignment, and a managed R&D effort that you just won't find possible on a forum.
Try to imagine something as important as a Manhatten type project being successfully executed by a forum.
If the information is authentic, it will be a good start and certainly a great help. The bifilar test has already proven to be interesting, albeit it is still unclear if this is the kick SM talked about.
I'll bet few will do anything with the info, and even fewer, the insight to have success with it.
.99
Quote from: ION on 2010.09.29, 22:01:18
My take is this:
One should be able to perform a simple experiment with a simplified configuration proving anomalous energy production.
To move on to full scale builds of presumed Kilowatt power production before proof of concept is expensive and costly.
Look at the FTPU.......simple to the extreme, but is something happening in this unit that is hitherto unknown?
If any of this stuff is real, this is a good starting point. There are only so many combinations of connections available to such a device. Deriving a concept for this device alone would be a giant step.
"it is the coils and how they interact"
In the "Rant Room" post I suggested that we might embark on a discovery path if we heeded the clues.
But the problem with forums is lack of focus, thread derails, too many pet WAG's that are not even developed into viable theories with little bench testing and verification or nullification.
I see real development as extremely difficult because of this. I believe the secret could be cracked, but it would require a level of organization, teamwork, task assignment, and a managed R&D effort that you just won't find possible on a forum.
Try to imagine something as important as a Manhatten type project being successfully executed by a forum.
Well, we can all go it alone, as we have been, or form a team of devoted individuals. Only one team because we will be lucky to get enough people for one. Teams can be good if everyone does their part, else they fail. Some might reluctantly join and later drop out. Others may want to join and be excluded. Others may have secret motives and the whole thing becomes a soap opera of betrayal and deceit.
Anyone interested in a team effort?
A FEW GOOD MEN
Some of us are builders, some of us theorize, some of us dissect, some of us analyze. Some like testing on the bench. Some are good at video enhancement. We all have unique skills.
Would that we could organize the TPU project so that more skills are brought into the mix. If we are to succeed we need to get better organized so that the very finest talents can be appropriately utilized and targeted to solve some of the mysteries surrounding the TPU.
We need a few men who are really good at video restoration and enhancement to clean up some of the existing TPU videos and stills. Anyone out there that has done some film industry type restoration work would be very helpful. Frame merging and sharpening software exists for this task. This is vital to a better understanding of the construction and wiring of the various TPU's ........Any takers?
We need a few good men to do some detective work tracking down some of the people seen in the video's, perhaps getting statements from them. Also maybe finding out if Steve Mark is still alive and his state of health. One man, John Sanchez was an observer n the lab where the TPU was tested. It would be good to hear his impressions. Also, more than one camera was shooting in one of the video's...who was that man...where is the tape. How many people in the video's are still alive? A young man was helping Steven as he cut one of the devices apart. Who was he? Also pieces of the cut TPU were given to those present to take home. Does anyone realize how valuable it would be to have one of those pieces?
We need a few good men who have people skills, that can make phone calls, e.g. contacting Dr. Schinzingers family members to see if any of them recall him talking about the device and what he may have said. Also perhaps contacting Michael Fennel that wrote the engineering report. Other co-workers at Extreme Technology, Spheric Audio Labs, or even "Spheric" himself. David Doleshall, Jack Durban.
We need a few detective types to piece the whole story together.
We need two or three solid theories of operation so that we could do some testing along those lines until some hint of success allows us to consolidate to a single theory.
A lot of work was done in the past, but it was all disorganized and now lies buried in so many derailed threads the wheat has gotten all mixed with the chaff, and the valuable kernels are fading from view. Some of this needs to be exhumed and put into a cohesive form...a large task indeed.
Also in the SM / Lindsay emails I keep discovering names and events that should be followed up e.g. SM lamented not having Dr. Schinzingers notebook (May 8 2006) could this be preserved in his estate.....could we have someone in the family scan it and send it to us?
Much work has been left undone. I would suggest that recruiting be done in the public forum. Actual work in private. Requirements to get into the private? Expertise in a given area.
Just my 2cents
Quote from: ION on 2010.09.30, 11:37:30
We need two or three solid theories of operation so that we could do some testing along those lines until some hint of success allows us to consolidate to a single theory.
I have a solid theory of operation. Enough to test and verify. Some supporting math.
From G:
QuoteI have a solid theory of operation. Enough to test and verify. Some supporting math.
That's great. If you feel you are on a good path keep at it and add embellishments as you see fit. Might be a time when you want to throw the paper into the ring for peer review and comments.
If you choose to keep it close to your chest that is OK too.
I used to think I had a theory, but was never able to develop it to the point of some solid proofs.
Well, I certainly did not discover the effect. I am no expert on it. A Nobel will not be given to me for noticing that the pieces fit or for proving it. Anyone working with this will have to do it for selfless reasons. If selfish, you will loose in the end.
Induction of the collector is via an aetheric version of the Wilson Effect (H.A. Wilson).
Moving aether is your dielectric and it can move linearly or rotate.
Maybe a unified project could be run something like a company, make it a company project. Choose a project manager for it, get some willing engineers, a couple techs etc. and divide up the work. The team is just not located in the same building, but with the internet that should be no problem. If the volunteers are dedicated there is no reason it won't work, but would obviously require volunteers. Keep it all open source so somewhere those not a part of the team can give input to it.
I think we all got theories but everyone out there is waiting for US to build, test and prove them. Who wants to invest time, money and effort building someone else's idea or theory if it is not proven? I think that is why a lot of threads die.
Quote from: Room3327 on 2010.09.30, 16:35:37
I think we all got theories but everyone out there is waiting for US to build, test and prove them. Who wants to invest time, money and effort building someone else's idea or theory if it is not proven? I think that is why a lot of threads die.
How do you prove that you are moving or changing the aether itself? Any experiment that you perform will be criticized and rediculed to death. Who wants to deal with that? Not me.
The theory fits. Take it or leave it.
We may not be able to prove the aether is moving but we can prove the device works that is all that is needed IMO.
Quote from: Room3327 on 2010.09.30, 16:42:19
We may not be able to prove the aether is moving but we can prove the device works that is all that is needed IMO.
Then all there is to do is build it and get it to work ;)
I actually have been doing that Grumpy, I'm one of those people that does, and not just talk about it. :)
I am partial to this idea as it fits my ideas very very well, I am just on a slightly different path then you and it only involves construction of the device. I am looking at rotating the aether in a slightly different way, using polyphase rotation like in AC motors with AC instead of DC pulses. But my design of the LSR is the same basic design as yours, I was wondering if you noticed that?
If we build several of these devices, we will have a broader base to explore the effects associated with them.
If you can do half of the build, start a thread looking for the other half. Let's see if we can get a few of these built for testing by the end of the year.
If you can do it all, start with the experiments on single coils.
Dynamic manipulation of a HV static field has been touted as holding promise. The HV coil parallel to LV pulsed coil is the only parameter I have seen that did something external to the coils themselves, it rocked household GFIs, emp-ed routers and cable boxes. Now I have switched configs to the HV coil inside a LV pulsed coil mechanically which puts a smaller dynamic field inside a static HV field. I will also alternate the HV with LV and try that. I bought the EC600 to better gauge the HV input voltage parameter and use lower current.
Quote from: Grumpy on 2010.09.30, 16:54:42
Then all there is to do is build it and get it to work ;)
QuoteMaybe a unified project could be run something like a company, make it a company project. Choose a project manager for it, get some willing engineers, a couple techs etc. and divide up the work. The team is just not located in the same building, but with the internet that should be no problem. If the volunteers are dedicated there is no reason it won't work, but would obviously require volunteers. Keep it all open source so somewhere those not a part of the team can give input to it.
In my view there needs to be a guiding council that identifies the overall task as well as important sub-tasks that lead to the "goal". Each sub-task will be posted and a call for volunteers with specific talent in that area. The project leaders of each of the sub-tasks would assemble teams that concentrate their activity in certain areas of the project.
e.g "Presently Seeking Project Leader for Video Restoration"
Project Description: "Assemble and lead a team to perform forensic video enhancement of SM's FTPU video. Restore to highest possible quality videos pertaining to this unit, including stills etc., using the latest restoration and frame merging software."
This is only one sub task, there are many that could each have a project team leader.
Task specific project targeting gives everyone a chance to contribute to "the goal" according to their unique capability.
ION, Yes I agree it may be a very good way to move the ball forward without everyone being all over each other. There would be much less duplicated work and it would be a much straighter route to the finish line. There could be a board of directors (voted on by site members). This could be taken a long way and be the basis of a whole new way to operate a bussiness that doesn't have a goal of making money but a goal of freeing the world of oil or providing an energy source not currently used.
QuoteION, Yes I agree it may be a very good way to move the ball forward without everyone being all over each other. There would be much less duplicated work and it would be a much straighter route to the finish line. There could be a board of directors (voted on by site members). This could be taken a long way and be the basis of a whole new way to operate a bussiness that doesn't have a goal of making money but a goal of freeing the world of oil or providing an energy source not currently
used.
I didn't want to use the term "Board OF Directors" because it has so many negative associations in the real world. I chose "Council" as I thought it had a more "benign" ring to it.
I also fear this concept would be difficult to establish in an existing forum, but might work as a fresh start in some other medium.
ION Yes more questions then answers right now but that is how all new things evolve. You can make up all new names for positions if you want, but many of the familiar company jobs will still be needed whatever they are called. Bussinesses have evolved to where they are for reasons that work, it's just that all bussinesses are in bussiness to make money, products or services really don't matter. We are talking a bussiness that is geared to making a product as opposed to money. Open source, volunteer, world wide I believe enough people could be picked up to do it.
Quote from: Room3327 on 2010.09.30, 20:44:46
...it's just that all bussinesses are in bussiness to make money, products or services really don't matter.
Ouch. Having been in business now for 18 years, I can empirically state that is false. Many small business owners do what they do for the love of it, myself included. I could make similar assertions about people that work for businesses...they just do so for the money, what they do and who they serve don't really matter...but I know that is false as well. Sorry, sore subject. The culture of class envy that has manifested as a distrust of anyone in business is really quite destructive. Most folks in business are just like the people that work for them...except for a couple of key differences. I work about 70 hours a week and I'm the one awake at night worrying about how I am going to keep the 22 people that work for me employed during this depression. They make less money than I do, but they work about half as many hours and go home blissfully stress-free.
<Rant mode OFF>
Quote from: LtBolo on 2010.10.09, 04:51:40
Ouch. Having been in business now for 18 years, I can empirically state that is false. Many small business owners do what they do for the love of it, myself included. I could make similar assertions about people that work for businesses...they just do so for the money, what they do and who they serve don't really matter...but I know that is false as well. Sorry, sore subject. The culture of class envy that has manifested as a distrust of anyone in business is really quite destructive. Most folks in business are just like the people that work for them...except for a couple of key differences. I work about 70 hours a week and I'm the one awake at night worrying about how I am going to keep the 22 people that work for me employed during this depression. They make less money than I do, but they work about half as many hours and go home blissfully stress-free.
<Rant mode OFF>
LtBolo, Please do not take offense to my words, I too am a small bussiness owner for the past 22 years and I hear everything you are saying. I could have said what I did in a better manner, I mean no offense when I say bussinesses are in bussiness to make money but they are. No money no bussiness no money lots of stress no money no employees, without the money you can not have a bussiness, first and foremost businesses are in bussiness to make money. Yes many of us are proud of the products and services we provide I can attest to that. In this case I am merely saying this could work like a bussiness but without the need for the bussiness to make money. No employees to pay no overhead no insurance costs, just a dedicated group working together like a bussiness for a common goal but maybe thats asking to much as the great size of the ego's in this field may make it a disaster.
But why do we work at all? For money? Everyone that works a job is in business at some level. My beef...especially with folks on free energy forums...is that there is a very strong bias that paints business owners in the worst possible light. It is sheer hypocrisy when people rail against businesses for making money, while half of the ones doing so would change jobs for 50 cents more an hour.
Sorry for my knee jerk. You certainly weren't doing so, and I really didn't take it that way, but I have been hatefully attacked on a half a dozen different occasions for stating my business interest in free energy. This stuff really won't happen in somebody's basement, not beyond prototype form. It will take the financial, design, and manufacturing resources of businesses (hopefully small ones...the good guys ;)) to get products to the world that needs them.
So, what's it gonna take to build this beastie?
LtBolo, Agreed! It is not poor people that create jobs, when was the last time a skid row bum offered you a job? Poor people can't build factory's it takes money to do so. No company's no bussinesses, no jobs. But we in the West all have the same opprotunity to work and create something for ourselves, please don't get me ranting! I love people that have the moxie to start and run their own bussinesses as many in my own family have.
I am not attacking you in any manner, infact I applaud you for the moxie to take a bussiness into the free energy arena, all we need now is free energy.
Quote from: LtBolo on 2010.10.09, 17:47:28
So, what's it gonna take to build this beastie?
This is what we have been discussing in this thread possibly doing it as a volunteer nonprofit, open source, on line business. All the details of construction have been presented already, some of the unknowns are voltages, frequencies, and pulsed DC vs AC. Basic operation is a static magnetic field, with an imposed rotating field that entrains the aether into an aether vortex, hopefully causing electrons to flow in the collector wires. I hope I have this right. Grumpy can certainly tell you more.
I was offered a 20millionUSD piece of property for this purpose, free of charge as a Menlo park type clone. I have been doing business with these guys for 30 years and they know my disclosure. They both agreed that, based on the parts I just bought, that the project is way beyond a suburban bedroom bench. :o
They are willing to open the building and watch what goes on. My plan is take the GK4 as a model and alot of site links to them to show good faith.
I mentioned Tesla and their eyes lit up! I will introduce them to the rest of the team. The primary of Keely, Shaumberg, Tesla, Rife, Dotto, Dollard, Steven Mark. I explained the Kunel process in a linear form and they understood.
The 2 gentlemen I mentioned want 'REAL' change not just political change.
The city of Denver. Just like in Battlefield Earth.
I will see where this goes.
We all have aspirations...
Quote from: giantkiller on 2010.10.10, 03:00:32
The city of Denver. Just like in Battlefield Earth.
Well, good luck Jonnie Goodboy Tyler. Decent book, BTW, but an oh-my-gosh-how-bad-was-that movie. Sorry if you liked the movie... ;)
What is keeping peole from building this device?
This could be one of the greatest things you have ever done in your life.
This could be your one chance - Are you gooing to let it pass you by?
Grumpy
Where the heck are you??
Chet
Quote from: Grumpy on 2010.09.14, 23:31:40
References are made to Nikola Tesla's Radiant Energy, Cold Current/Electricity, and the TPU Device invented by Steven Mark.
The validity of this information is left as an exercise for the reader.
This concept also brings to my mind the work of Dr. Stiffler, since he investigated "cold electricity" as well. Does anyone else think so? Just putting the thought out there.
--Lee
Quote from: tao on 2010.09.19, 02:58:35
OK guys, as promised, here are the simulations and pictures that I sent to 'spherics', and also included is a text file with his commentary on said sims and pics.
Should help you to better visualize just what might be happening in 'spherics''s design.
ENJOY!
(had to break up the files, forum wouldn't allow anything more than 1mb...)
I have to borrow a computer, so there's no 'zip' file software on the hard drive. Practically all computers for the public have commercial the PDF Adobe Acrobat.
Sorry to say, the zip files are unreachable to me.
--Lee
Lee, Please tell us where the Zip File is & one of us can download it for here.
Thanks.
.
I posted this a few of years ago and it did not garner much interest. Some may notice some striking similarities between what Patrick Flanagan says and what Spherics said. I believe scalar magnfication occurs in OU devices, I just can't prove it.
OMG!
I cannot believe this got missed!
Quotecoil of twin lead like speaker wire
QuoteA "traveling" standing wave is generated by causing a slight
phase difference between two phase canceled carriers. By
varying the phase, the standing wave scalar field can be
caused to "walk" or move... at least it looks like it is in
motion.
Same idea proposed by Bibhas De:
QuotePatrick: This is true the ability of scalar fields to travel
through water and earth enables these signals to be
transmitted over great distances where EM fields would be
lost. They do travel faster than Maxwellian fields because
they are not Maxwellian and obey different laws. I am really
surprised that EM signals are being used for submarine
communications because scalar waves will do the job in two
way communications for a fraction of the cost. I think that
UFO's or ET's communicate with scalar signals and all the
work being done with radio telescopes will never get any
results. Scalar signals may be used to modulate inter
dimensional or inter-galactic waves being generated by
stellar phenomena. Radio communications is outmoded by
advanced technology.
The scalar field description that is around the body equates very closely to the aura of Kirlian photography.
The water transmission is the same process I posted about Coral Castle process.
Leedskalnin used an AM radio.
This sounds like SM read or wrote this.
This a friggin' gold mind. ;)
@Grumpy,
If no one else reads this they are fools. :'(
Dwarves are good at mining gold nuggets ;)
(Pat also said that this had never been published before.)
Same for the AVEC CCU coils, making the scalar move. With the static mag field present, your pulse increases energy density at the scalar level, which magnifies the magnetic field. Then you rotate this denser stuff, and it is like rotating a very strong magnetic field.
I must be a dwarf. Never called myself a mental giant. ;D
Quote from: Patrick_FlanaganMany years ago, I showed Dr. Walter Stark of Lugano, Switzerland a phenomena I had discovered. If you make a coil of twin lead like speaker wire, you have two wires side by side. The only connecting link is the insulation between the wires. If you connect a battery in series with one wire and ground and then connect the other wire to an electrometer, the coil acts as a capacitor. The electrometer will measure the "leakage" current through the insulator. The current will probably be in nanoamps. If you then bring the coil in the vicinity of the body, the current will increase by several orders of magnitude. This is due to the scalar field around the body.
Quote from: Patrick_Flanagan
Comment by Patrick Flanagan on September 20, 2009 at 9:06am
The movement of the electron around the nucleus results in the generation of scalar (longitudinal) waves from the atom in all directions. The hydrogen atom in its ground state emits these waves in golden ratio harmonics. When the hydrogen atom takes on a second electron and becomes the H- hydride atom, the second electron distance from the nucleus is PHI x the first electron radius. H- ions emits a very healing GR chord longitudinal wave. Chandrasekar received the Nobel Prize for discovering that ALL light emitted from stars results from the formation of H- ions on the surface of the star. The light that we receive from our sun is from H- ions on the surface of the sun. In fact there would be no light, no life without the H- ion. This is the basis of all our work at phisciences.com.
Comment by Patrick Flanagan on September 20, 2009 at 8:56am
By the way, ALL SOUND waves are longitudinal pressure waves in the air. The living system is more responsive to longitudinal waves and transverse waves.
Comment by Patrick Flanagan on September 20, 2009 at 8:54am
Ed, Electrostatic charge, because of its "apparent" simplicity has been overlooked and misunderstood. The "charge" is a scalar field. Scalar fields are propagated longitudinally. When wiggled one way, electrons generate longitudinal fields which are scalar oscillating fields and are NOT electromagnetic fields.. When wiggled another way, electrons generate transverse fields which are radio waves. Longitudinal fields are like oscillating gravity waves. Transverse fields are electromagnetic. Longitudinal fields are gravitic. Gravity is a scalar field.
In 1974, I made a very simple scalar oscillator that transmits oscillating scalar fields in longitudinal waves that cannot be shielded. Interestingly, fish and ocean mammals generate scalar oscillating fields the are used for communications. I made a very simple "fish finder" that can locate families of fish at any distance underwater. I did not patent it, or try to commercialize it because it would devastate the oceans. In 1974, I demonstrated an underwater and through the earth scalar wave communicator for Tom Valentine, a reporter and writer who published the interview in hundreds of newspapers and magazines. Ordinary electromagnetic waves are transverse waves and are what is used presently in all radio communications. Transverse waves can be shielded. Longitudinal waves cannot. In the early days of radio, transverse waves were developed, and antennae theory was optimized for transmission. The mathematics of longitudinal transmission are distinctly the opposite of those for transverse wave propagation. I know that longitudinal waves are used by advanced technological off planet beings as they appear instantly throughout the universe. Tesla was well versed in the properties of longitudinal waves. They are at the core of his discoveries. The mistake in analyzing Tesla's work is because all modern radio theory and antenna design focuses on the transverse wave. For example, an ordinary dipole radio antenna transmits transverse radio waves parallel to the antenna and also emits weaker longitudinal waves co axially to the antenna. The geometry of current antenna design suppresses the longitudinal scalar wave and reinforces the ordinary transverse. It is a relatively simple task to reverse the situation and suppress the transverse. When properly designed, the system can become a scalar wave (longitudinal wave) transmitter and receiver. I have not produced longitudinal devices since 1976 because they could be misused in a number of ways. However, that said; I think we are entering a phase of human history where such discoveries will be used for the benefit, rather than the detriment of all sentient life.
QuoteChandrasekar received the Nobel Prize for discovering that ALL light emitted from stars results from the formation of H- ions on the surface of the star.
ALL light from ALL stars?
I suppose he traveled to all the stars including our sun and performed experiments that were so convincing about how light is created, before he published his findings.
Or maybe and more realistically the Nobel committee has lost it's bearings, or perhaps the person making that statement is under a spell and does not realize what foolishness he is uttering.
Or maybe I just woke up on the wrong side of the bed and did't realize the planets have aligned while I was asleep.
EM
Meanwhile, on the surface of our local star...
QuotePowerful magnetic waves 'baking sun's corona and driving solar wind'
...powerful magnetic field ripples, called Alfven waves, might be driving the solar wind and heating much of the corona.
...
http://truthdive.com/2011/07/28/Powerful-magnetic-waves-baking-sun-s-corona-and-driving-solar-wind.html (http://truthdive.com/2011/07/28/Powerful-magnetic-waves-baking-sun-s-corona-and-driving-solar-wind.html)
QuoteMcIntosh said Alfven waves are waves that travel up and down a magnetic field line much the way a wave travels up and down a plucked string.
Shows up like Barkhausen noise.
Quote from: AllPhase on 2011.04.06, 20:38:04
Lee, Please tell us where the Zip File is & one of us can download it for here.
Thanks.
.
Okay, I can try to do that if I can think of it. I do have the use of a computer that's strongly filtered as to specific uses, but it does actually have a .ZIP software package on the hard drive.
I'll keep what you said in mind, though. Thanks.
--Lee
I looked at Roberto's old "bench" thread on IronHead's forum to see what he actually tried regarding the AVEC. That thread is 36 pages long, but looking it over quickly, he initially used a lower voltage of 500v and IRF840 MOSFETs, then SSRs later at 1kv.
At other times he used 1.2kv, but I'm not sure what he doing as he could pulse ccu1 at 1kv but ccu2 had a re-triggering issue above 400v. There are 6 ccu's total.
He had his controller 15 to 25cm from the coils. Hmm, he had some hash he could not get rid of...no matter what he did.
He was pulsing all 6 at 600v, but no sign of the comp field or usable output.
At one point he used 6kv for 3 ccu's at 3khz and no results.
In summary, we cannot say that the information from Spherics has been disproven or not, based on the results Roberto posted on that forum.
It's the speed at which the coils are sequentially switched that's the problem, 3kHz is not good enough, i found this with the Tetra, i needed at least 1MHz rotation speed.
Quote from: Peterae on 2012.04.27, 12:42:24
It's the speed at which the coils are sequentially switched that's the problem, 3kHz is not good enough, i found this with the Tetra, i needed at least 1MHz rotation speed.
My point is that the information has not been disproven, yet everyone is of that opinion, based largely on hearsay and assumptions.
Not everyone...
the following information on build accuracy was not included in the original PDF of compiled AVEC information. I found this with Google adn I don't recall where. Interesting insights.
QuoteE-mail from XXX
April 2008
I'm away on a course so this is a quick reply. With pulses although we talk of a phase shift we are talking of the time between the start of one pulse and the start of the next pulse as being the same between each successive pulse, in an ideal world. If you are using the same type of drive components and type of mosfets, have high tolerance resistors and capacitors, and keep wire lengths between components as short as possible but consistent between each driver circuit, mitigating impedance and capacitance effects of the wires, the delays to all three coils should be almost identical. So even if there is 50 nanosecond delay, if it's the same delay to each coil then it's not a problem. Even a difference of 10-30 nanoseconds between coils will not dissappoint in terms of output energy and cold elec effects.
Let's take a typical poor-build. Each coil has different widths out by 1/8inch or more. The coils are wrapped until either the spool is empty or it just seems the right height. The length of wire between coils varies by 15-20% at least. These coils will require independant delays of hundreds of nanoseconds and increases in pulse width of hundreds of nanoseconds to get a *consistent* output. But even without adjustment they'll get output, however the amplitude of that output will come in waves and not be as high as it could be, and the amount of input energy used will be much higher due to the much longer pulse widths. They will be unlikely to get a consistent cold energy output, the lightbulbs in the SEP circuit, may ebb and glow slightly. It may or may not be overunity but possibly only by 10%. All exciting stuff but it's not a setup that is going anywhere. It is not really utilising any flow of cold electricity, just bursts here and there. i.e. because the pattern is not building up, it is occuring only in waves, and is relatively feable, i.e. there is no 'resonance' in the ether.
In answer to your question if you build your coils carefully and locate them precisely and rigidly, I would not bother with the delay line components. At a later date for reference:
These are useful for pulse width:
http://www.datadelay.com/datasheets/3d7608.pdf
These are useful for delay lines as you use a screwdriver:
http://www.datadelay.com/asp/variable.asp
Switch mode power supply chips can be useful for driving 3 or 6 coils as 3 pairs. Such as:
http://ww1.microchip.com/downloads/en/DeviceDoc/70178C.pdf
>Hi XXX,
>
>I'm still working on the control circuit for the coil and had a couple
>of questions to ask you. Exactly how accurate does the phase-shifting
>for the rotating field need to be? The controller circuit that I am
>building uses some shift registers to divide the clock input and produce
>the three output phases 120 degrees shifted. Below is the circuit that I
>have come up with so far. The way it is setup, you can use the pulse
>width of the input clock to control the pulse width of all three output
>channels simultaneously:
Page 71
>I found that the circuit could run up to at least 5 MHz without
>glitching and allows us to use a single pulse width control component
to
>control the outputs for all three channels simultaneously. However, I
am
>concerned about the phase-shift/delay fine-tuning.
>
>You mentioned that the phase-shift has to be accurate for the rotating
>field to be setup correctly. Coming out of the shift register, the
>timing for each channel is accurate to within 0.5 ns. but by the time
>the signal goes through the driver ICs and input lines to the coils,
>there could be significant delays of 10s of nanoseconds. My questions
is
>how precise is precise enough for the effect to work without destroying
>the effect? If we need to fine-tune the output delays, I found some
>8-bit delay line ICs that can adjust the the delays to within 0.25 ns of
>the output up to a max delay of 80 ns. But before I toss these onto the
>circuit, I thought i would ask you to see if this is really necessary or
>simply overkill. What methods did you use to design the timing circuitry
>for your controller?
:)
Wasn't Roberto abducted by Chava 8)
Quote from: Peterae on 2012.06.17, 21:10:07
Wasn't Roberto abducted by Chava 8)
Mark Snoswell made a post that stated Roberto had accepted an offer from Chava, Roberto stated he had not, but that he would if one were offered.
Last I heard, Chava still doesn't have much of interest. Doesn't really matter one way or another.
I came to the conclusion that Spheric's set of doco was a sequence of progressive steps. I don't think there was any deliberate obfuscation.
The sequence I derived was he started his information after a spark gap design. That the compwave generation scheme was just that, the specific setup to generate the specific protocol in a specific geometry. A correct physical setup, coils, magnetic fields, angles to coerce the movement of aether. Aether being the view of a swirling magnetic field. This [event by effect] is mentioned also in the Alchemical document also as a [correct coersion]. It has to be done specifically otherwise the process dissipates. Somebody in black oops(mispelling bypasses the filters) has the measurement tools. Spherics gave detail of geometry as the tool to see the effect. It's the [Chicken or egg] analysis. You can't have one without the other but where does one start? His first page had the photo of nu-clear detantotion (mispelling bypasses the filters). He expressed geometry and protocol in a way that made the process and the scheme public without self infliction.
Photons... :D
Quote from: Grumpy on 2013.03.25, 17:51:59
Photons... :D
Wow a short statement. "Photons... Smiley"
Does that complete the "full disclosure" ?
Quote from: ION on 2013.03.25, 20:36:59
Wow a short statement. "Photons... Smiley"
Does that complete the "full disclosure" ?
Finally figuring it out, so it's just the beginning, rather than a completion.
The coils emmit photons when pulsed. This is what Spherics meant by:
Ether pulses are emitted from the input coils which you may like to think of as charged +ve and -ve particles, or perhaps encapsulated waveforms of very high frequency. If they hit a copper wire a flow can occur on the surface of the wire between the wire and the insulation of the wire.AND
It's like an extremely high frequency wavefront going out in all directions. You can think of this as
Tesla's radiant energy, or think of them as particles that have both electric and magnetic properties combined within the one particle. As they stream out they are undeflected by anything, affect everything they touch, and reduce affect according to inverse square of the distance from source. The magnetic field, which is a pattern in the ether, of the SEP is altered as the wave passes through. It creates ripples in the ether which because of the existance of the SEP appear like ripples of electric and magnetic fields; i.e. increases and decreases. As one pulse fires after the other, the ripples interfere into a series of wavefronts that rotate round.This ties into to a lot of other things as well, like: going through objects, charging objects, splitting at a dipole, cold current effects, etc.
G, thanks for that insight and refresher. Very interesting.
Tachyons?
They are mentioned in the SAWS document of the US Patent web site, under a class of invention that cannot be patented in the name of National Security. :o ;)
Mags
And of course there is the low mass electron ,or photon to electron Hubbard coil /Barbat theory?
A magnet is similar but you have to move it. It's photon field is already polarized in a way that will induce a current, but it's static and no energy can be transferred.
By separating the force carriers (photons) from the source (coil), you don't have to move the source. Of course once you apply the pulse, the force carriers are gone, so you have to keep firing again. You want this separation between the source and force carriers, so the shockwave approach is a requirement until a better way is found, if there is one. The photon carriers have angular momentum and supposedly are perpetual.
Firing a cannon is a better analogy and the radio one - SM used both.
Consider that light waves have an electric and magnetic field, perpendicular to each other (EM waves - duh...)
@Grumpy
I have always found these kinds of depictions of waves to be very confusing and similar to what we see on our oscilloscopes. We see a sine wave then people start calling a simple polarity reversal negative electricity or negative currents at which point nothing makes sense any more. Then they throw math and vectors into the mix and we are left with a representation of something which does not exist in reality however many people reading the textbooks believe it must be real. It's a mathematical quagmire building one misrepresentation on another and no where in nature will we see anything even remotely close to the pictures posted.
The most common mistake is seeing a polarity reversal and then thinking the current has reversed when in fact what we are seeing on our scope is a measure of the Voltage, which is a measure of the difference in potential, which is a measure of the difference in charge concentration in one area versus another which is relative. Don't even get me started on the concepts of power or even worse energy because to most people these things verge on black magic. I have went all through this including the math, over and over, and the result is always the same in that we will always end up right back where we started. I think we need a new model which better represents what is actually happening in reality however I have yet to see it, Russel had a good start but I think his terminology messed up a lot of people, lol.
AC
Quote from: Grumpy on 2013.03.25, 21:43:07
Finally figuring it out, so it's just the beginning, rather than a completion.
The coils emmit photons when pulsed. This is what Spherics meant by:
Not new. Any accelerated charge emits photons.
Quote
It's like an extremely high frequency wavefront going out in all directions. You can think of this as Tesla's radiant energy, ...
You can also think of this, with more relevance, as ordinary EM waves.
"Tesla's radiant energy" doesn't radiate, it's not distinguishable from quasi-static E/M fields. But with a high rise time, the wavefront is composed of high frequency components whose the wavelength becomes of the same order or less than the conductors length, and so the conductor becomes like an antenna and radiates a small part of the energy. In fact it's a real antenna. We escape the quasi-stationary case, but only a small amount of energy is concerned, because the phenomenon of photons generation lasts, or is significant, only during the rise or fall time.
Quote from: exnihiloest on 2013.03.26, 07:53:04
Not new. Any accelerated charge emits photons.
You can also think of this, with more relevance, as ordinary EM waves.
"Tesla's radiant energy" doesn't radiate, it's not distinguishable from quasi-static E/M fields. But with a high rise time, the wavefront is composed of high frequency components whose the wavelength becomes of the same order or less than the conductors length, and so the conductor becomes like an antenna and radiates a small part of the energy. In fact it's a real antenna. We escape the quasi-stationary case, but only a small amount of energy is concerned, because the phenomenon of photons generation lasts, or is significant, only during the rise or fall time.
Exactly. It was always misinterpreted as some new, secret phenomenon.
If Spherics, Steven Mark's claims are true, how did they apply this to drive a current greater than the energy expended to create the pulses?
Did they somehow use the inherent angular momentum of the "particles"?
http://physicsworld.com/cws/article/news/2010/jul/07/efficient-nano-motor-cleverly-harnesses-light
the light mill...
Some of the interesting things that Spherics mentions that are hard to attribute to accepted understanding:
1. you can place two copper rods in the rotating field region and measure substantial voltage and current
For the two copper rods to work as claimed, the "rotating field" is able to appear as a dipole source such as a charged capacitor or battery, yet it is said to be rotating. Is a group of small things rotating together or are small things rotating in a static position?
2. "cold current" will produce a white full spectrum light from incandescent bulbs and it will charge capacitors and batteries
The light produced could be emmision from something slowing down, speeding up, or something excited by something else.
3. you can short the output coil, place a copper plate on the top and bottom of the coil (coil is bare and toroidal) and then measure DC between the two plates.
Again, the rotating field appears as a dipole even to a shorted collector. It could be that the rotating field drives current from one plate, through the wires of the toroidal coil and then through the other plate. So, the two plates are like our two rods above and the shorted coil does not represent a true short, but rather a conductor between the plates. So, it makes more sense, but what is driving the current?
The properties of the device that Spherics describes make almost no sense if you haven't read all of the information. Even when you have read it, it doesn't appear plausible.
The rotating field will drive a current through empty space.
Good to see you back on this and inspiring us to take another look.
Some of the claims of "cold electricity" have always puzzled me. I have seen many talk of this, but where is the definitive test setup to create it. (not talking about hairpin circuit and underwater bulbs).
Spherics claims do seem to point to something new.
Quote from: ION on 2013.03.27, 00:01:03
Good to see you back on this and inspiring us to take another look.
Some of the claims of "cold electricity" have always puzzled me. I have seen many talk of this, but where is the definitive test setup to create it. (not talking about hairpin circuit and underwater bulbs).
Spherics claims do seem to point to something new.
Spherics describes a method of charging a capacitor, across a short distance, without contact. He describes another experiment with one of the coils he describes, that increases the voltage on a battery connected to the outer coil. I think he meant that these are both are cold current effects, but the more ineresting results are from the completed device which he claims that the cold current will replace the need for the bias batteries.
High energy photons are know to split into electrons and positrons (pair production). Our energies are far below this, so if this is occuring, it is a new way of doing so. Something much more subtle may be occuring, utilizing finesse rather than brute force, splitting the photons filling all space.
If the universe is indeed full of "spinning constituents that facilitate our forces" then they might be used if we learn how to manipulate them. Since they have angular momentum, they can transfer momentum if aligned properly to couple to something that can recieve the momentum. Much like gears meshing in a transmission.
Recall too, that Spherics said if you stop the rotation, then the output stops, but if you drop the bias magnetic field, the device can explode due to the energy released that is in the bias field. Sounds like the bias is a containment field or "organizing structure". He also said that the amplitude of the magnetic bias field determines how much energy(?) is converted to electric current. Without the rotation you don't get a current in the output coil.
So, it is the combination of bias field and rotating pulses that produce the current, and this is synonymous with a moving magnetic field, but with an additional "cold current". Yet our magnetic field is aligned parallel with the toroidal output coil (considering all bias coils), and our pulsed electric field is perpendicular to the output coil. So, it is not our bias field that is rotating or varying.
Whatever is rotating is moving perpendicular to these two fields.
Photons? I suppose that's possible...
Use for DSRD? Laser Pulse generators. Apparently if you pulse high voltage you can produce photons?
(Drift/[there's some other D word I've seen] Step Recovery Diode). Some would say they are ultra fast recovery diodes for high voltage; but in their relaxaction phase they generate a higher voltage pulse. And this pulse is certainly low current. So I got as far as page 4 of this document that's been resurected from history to compare the design to the dally generator. Was coming over to see if I could talk with Itsu about his experiments.... Because he's testing the effects devoid of the whole process.
I've been playing on-and-off with that Dally generator/Kapagen-like thing (http://www.overunityresearch.com/index.php?topic=1530.0). The peices, in isoation, behave differently than when built in as a system. It's hard to isolate the parts.... At one assembly point, the resonant flywheel coil was resulting in a nice square wave back to the original pulse generator...
But, The uhmm bias... Eventually some of it can float, but... Like the resonant flywheel coil has a leak point with a pointed connected to the capacitor, eventually, it will overall have be a positive circuit, but it wouldn't really bias the whole thing in a direction.
It's interesting that a ground between two coils in series acts as a diode and only permits a single direction of current through the coil...
But uhmm...
I didn't make it through this document, just got to page for that descirbes the operating characteristics that I observe in my replication.
I made this for a pulse shaper]https://www.circuitlab.com/circuit/2spe6k/mosfet-mosfet-driver/]pulse shaper (https://www.circuitlab.com/circuit/2spe6k/mosfet-mosfet-driver/)... so I can take a wider (250+ns) pulse and take the leading edge (30-40ns minimum). Have to make sure the caps are sufficiently small to keep the current short(to drive the mosfet gates), yet large enough to generate a solid high voltage ON condition.
(https://www.circuitlab.com/circuit/2spe6k/screenshot/1024x768/)
And was trying to find a simulator that works to see the results of
(https://www.circuitlab.com/circuit/qb8znp/screenshot/1024x768/)
www.circuitlab.com/circuit/qb8znp/oscillators-joule-thief-signal-generator
I do have a simulation in LT spice that works pretty good... but I don't think it includes aether effects (or photon generation) :) At least to see what this set of coils really does interacting with itself... But it suggests that decreasing the capacitance on the coil-capacitor closed loop (resonant flywheel) circuit increases the voltage in the fly wheel; because it is driven by the original input, and then left to relax. But overall there is a large combination of factors that control the frequency, so tuning this sub-circuit to some specific frequency becomes self-defeating, because it should be close-enough, then tuned for highest voltage instead.
-----------
(continued) Hmm, the designs and are somewhat orthagonal to each other, since dally is a tube design (which I guess would be a segment of the toroid)
Nope; this is entirely the wrong thread, other than the theory... really I think dally's thing works in the same idea as the theory here... (but I didn't find that thread until I posted here, and referenced it)
Quote from: Grumpy on 2013.03.27, 01:22:36
Spherics describes a method of charging a capacitor, across a short distance, without contact.
...
Have you a link? Thanks.
Quote from: exnihiloest on 2013.03.27, 07:59:30
Have you a link? Thanks.
here's the content... 'how to see the ether effect'
-----------------------------
Sorry AAA, don't have everything with me to refer too. For the CCU, how do you see "it"
on a scope? I understand that you pulse the inner and the outer has the DC for the
steady field. Do in need to wrap a coil around the ccu to see "it"?
BBB
Reply:
If the steady field is from a battery you'll be able to see on the terminals of the
battery.
OR
Charge a 100V cap to 50V. Cut two separate pieces of wire around 8 feet long that has
Page 17of 34
The Aether VortexEnergy Converter:
AVEC
Revision1.0
good insulation. Connect one wire to one terminal and the other wire to the other
terminal - no circuit!. Curl the wires up into two rough cylinders, diameter unimportant.
Place near the CCU. Now pulse the coil whilst measuring the voltage on the cap, and
scoping the cap. On the scope it looks like a very short burst of sustained oscillation.
voltage on cap will steadyly rise. Cut wire down to get best pulse definition.
AAA
Quote from: exnihiloest on 2013.03.27, 07:59:30
Have you a link? Thanks.
See first post in the beginning of this thread:
http://www.overunityresearch.com/index.php?topic=369.msg5360#msg5360
Quote from: Grumpy on 2013.03.27, 13:38:26
See first post in the beginning of this thread:
http://www.overunityresearch.com/index.php?topic=369.msg5360#msg5360
Could you be more specific (doc/page? there are 7 documents, exceeding the Mb).
Quote from: exnihiloest on 2013.03.27, 21:30:48
Could you be more specific (doc/page? there are 7 documents, exceeding the Mb).
the first two files:
http://www.overunityresearch.com/index.php?action=dlattach;topic=369.0;attach=2235
and
http://www.overunityresearch.com/index.php?action=dlattach;topic=369.0;attach=2236
Before you read it and comment, understand that I have heard every possible explanation to discredit the information and I am totally undaunted. My very basic, initial experiments, lacking all understanding, were enough to indicate that this information is credible.
Maybe I am wrong and my faith in this information had been misplaced. Do you want to look back on this, decades from now, and wish you had tried the simple experiments before turning away?
If anyone attempts to build this device or to perform the experiments described in the document and has any issues, please discuss it. So many people have said that they built it and it didn't work or that they tried the experiments and they didn't work - without any proof of building anything.
Now the information is tainted, and eveyone thinks it's a hoax, so they won't even give it a second look. I accept blame for the tainting. I have not handled the information well at all.
Quote from: Grumpy on 2013.03.27, 22:56:50
Do you want to look back on this, decades from now, and wish you had tried the simple experiments before turning away?
Grumpy,
As a daily reader, and infrequent poster to this forum, I want to thank you for reminding me why I have continued to pursue my interests and work on my experiments for the past ten years.
Mookie
G said:
QuoteNow the information is tainted, and eveyone thinks it's a hoax, so they won't even give it a second look. I accept blame for the tainting. I have not handled the information well at all.
Not everyone, G
and no blame, you have done well. ;)
QuoteQuote from: Grumpy on 2013-03-27, 23:56:50
Do you want to look back on this, decades from now, and wish you had tried the simple experiments before turning away?
Quote from: Mookie on 2013.03.28, 00:31:27
Grumpy,
As a daily reader, and infrequent poster to this forum, I want to thank you for reminding me why I have continued to pursue my interests and work on my experiments for the past ten years.
Mookie
I have to concur...
Hoaxes are in the eye of the deceived. I hope this sounds right...
The following may not make a lot of sense right now, but it will later after you explore the device yourself.
The way I view the operation is as follows:
1. The bias fields align the photons the same direction, and affects the density of the field.
2. The pulsed coils vary the density of the photon field in a local region. This also imparts a force across the density variation. Radial in this case, and I have shown this several times, years ago.
3. The pulse coils have to be sequenced as the photon field does not induce if homogenous. If you pulse all of the coils at the same time, then the field is homogenous. It needs to vary perpendicular to the collector - like moving a magnet across a coil. By sequentially pulsing the coils (and you can pulse opposite coils at the same time) you create a repeating change in density and hence a second force in a circular direction.
4. We know the density changes as the angular momentum is constant and changes in velocity must change the radius to maintain the angular momentum - hence the density changes.
5. If the bias field of the two main SEPs are the same polarity (N up, for example), you will not have the proper force distribution for conventional current, as two opposing forces are operating. However, you still have a rhythmic change that will pump polarization in a dielectric. So, you have your cold current. (You'll still get both, but in a different ratio than the other way.)
6. If you use electric field bias, you align half of the photons one way and half the other way - similar to (5), you get mostly cold current.
Transparent materials tend to be dielectrics and they transmit light, so I suspect some similarity between cold current and light, but haven't explored it yet.
By using the inherent rotation of our photons, we use changes in potential to produce the necessary force to drive a current.
(If anyone sees any blatant errors, please point them out.)
Quote from: Grumpy on 2013-03-27, 02:22:36
Spherics describes a method of charging a capacitor, across a short distance, without contact.
...
Quote from: Grumpy on 2013.03.27, 22:16:58
the first two files:
http://www.overunityresearch.com/index.php?action=dlattach;topic=369.0;attach=2235
and
http://www.overunityresearch.com/index.php?action=dlattach;topic=369.0;attach=2236
I don't see any method here to charge a capacitor across a short distance, without contact.
Quote from: exnihiloest on 2013.03.28, 07:26:16
I don't see any method here to charge a capacitor across a short distance, without contact.
From page 17 and 18 of the pdf at the first link: (I cleaned it up a little and made the capacitor charging portion
BOLD)
=============================================================================================
Message 10ABBB_AAA_correspondence (date deleted) – how to see ether oscillation (also called "it" or "kick")
Sorry AAA, don't have everything with me to refer too. For the CCU, how do you see "it" on a scope? I understand that you pulse the inner (coil), and the outer (coil) has the DC for the steady field. Do in need to wrap a coil around the CCU to see "it"?
BBB
Reply:
If the steady field is from a battery you'll be able to see on the terminals of the battery.
OR
Charge a 100V cap to 50V. Cut two separate pieces of wire around 8 feet long that has good insulation. Connect one wire to one terminal and the other wire to the other terminal - no circuit!. Curl the wires up into two rough cylinders, diameter unimportant. Place near the CCU. Now pulse the coil whilst measuring the voltage on the cap, and scoping the cap. On the scope it looks like a very short burst of sustained oscillation.
Voltage on cap will steadily rise. Cut wire down to get best pulse definition.AAA
======================================================================
Some things to keep in mind are:
1. A CCU is a large air-core coil wound from at least 1000 feet of insulated wire in a "Brooks" configuration, and then an additional winding (hundreds of feet) are wound around the outside of the Brooks coil (same winding direction), and 24V DC is applied to this outer winding. The Brooks coil is connected to a high voltage dc pulser, capable of generating short pulses, with very fast rise-time in excess of several hundred volts and preferably 1500v or more.
2. capacitor is initially charged to 50v
Brooks coil formulas:
http://www.nessengr.com/techdata/brooks/brooks.html
Quote from: Grumpy on 2013.03.28, 15:05:45
From page 17 and 18 of the pdf at the first link: (I cleaned it up a little and made the capacitor charging portion BOLD)
=============================================================================================
Message 10A
BBB_AAA_correspondence (date deleted) – how to see ether oscillation (also called "it" or "kick")
Sorry AAA, don't have everything with me to refer too. For the CCU, how do you see "it" on a scope? I understand that you pulse the inner (coil), and the outer (coil) has the DC for the steady field. Do in need to wrap a coil around the CCU to see "it"?
BBB
Reply:
If the steady field is from a battery you'll be able to see on the terminals of the battery.
OR
Charge a 100V cap to 50V. Cut two separate pieces of wire around 8 feet long that has good insulation. Connect one wire to one terminal and the other wire to the other terminal - no circuit!. Curl the wires up into two rough cylinders, diameter unimportant. Place near the CCU. Now pulse the coil whilst measuring the voltage on the cap, and scoping the cap. On the scope it looks like a very short burst of sustained oscillation.
Voltage on cap will steadily rise. Cut wire down to get best pulse definition.AAA
======================================================================
Some things to keep in mind are:
1. A CCU is a large air-core coil wound from at least 1000 feet of insulated wire in a "Brooks" configuration, and then an additional winding (hundreds of feet) are wound around the outside of the Brooks coil (same winding direction), and 24V DC is applied to this outer winding. The Brooks coil is connected to a high voltage dc pulser, capable of generating short pulses, with very fast rise-time in excess of several hundred volts and preferably 1500v or more.
2. capacitor is initially charged to 50v
Brooks coil formulas:
http://www.nessengr.com/techdata/brooks/brooks.html
Wasn't entirely sure if that's how the CCU was.
Just a note of no significance; That coil configuration is similar to the one used for magnetizing SEG rollers (although the DC is on the high windings, and an AC pulse on the outside.
But; the 24 Volt charged coil; that's not a flowing current? Just a high potential?
In the beginning he says non-bifilar, but then later... there's a bifilar with a delay line between mentioned... like page 18 of 34 ... where is that?
Quote from: d3x0r on 2013.03.28, 20:03:34
Wasn't entirely sure if that's how the CCU was.
Just a note of no significance; That coil configuration is similar to the one used for magnetizing SEG rollers (although the DC is on the high windings, and an AC pulse on the outside.
But; the 24 Volt charged coil; that's not a flowing current? Just a high potential?
In the beginning he says non-bifilar, but then later... there's a bifilar with a delay line between mentioned... like page 18 of 34 ... where is that?
The 24v provides a magnetic field bias, so current is flowing in this coil. If you have sufficient cold current, in the complete device, the batteries for the bias can be removed and the coils will continue to function.
He says "non-bifilar" in relation to the two wires on the capacitor leads for charging from the field. The bifilar with delay is in reference to Steven Mark's method of pulse comrpession used to create a HV pulse in his devices.
Quote from: Grumpy on 2013.03.27, 23:16:26
...Now the information is tainted, and eveyone thinks it's a hoax, so they won't even give it a second look. I accept blame for the tainting. I have not handled the information well at all.
Don't blame yourself. To the few of us that were presented the information live, in order, it was easy to differentiate between Spherics' prose concerning SM's TPU, the simple experiments, the OU posted tetrahedron design, and finally, the secret six CCU design. Spherics dropped off the face of the planet before the first builds were completed, (with un-reviewed deviations.) He was not around to answer any questions about tuning, (or correct spec' deviations.)
If a new reader is not careful then it is easy to get the details of one design mixed-in with any one of the other designs or experiments also described. Add to this that trolls, I submit, would be less concerned with differentiation of the details and be more apt to point out contradictions [design differences.]
Overall, the six-CCU design is a complex and costly affair. Many opportunities to take shortcuts and go off spec'. Many did and posted no results.
I do admit that I only vaguely recall the stand alone experiments. I recall them being in reference to the SM design. I might look into them. Then again, I might not.
I just cannot get over the feeling that I was constructing a big [stupid] complicated air core transformer requiring a few batteries to power the various SEP coils, (eight coils I think it is: six around the CCUs, one main, and one CB SEP,) and another battery to make the HV pulses on the six CCU cores. After financing this whole affair I now need to run out and buy more test equipment to show 'extremely economical' [OU] operation -OR- my batteries die, whichever comes first. I just felt like my time would be better spent lurking for new information.
I must say that I am really liking the Thunderbolts Project and the Electric Universe model. I could continue to follow a dead-[like] guru but knowing exactly where we fit in the inter-galactic circuit may go a long way to constructing and
understanding successful new energy generators. Safety first!
Quote1. The bias fields align the photons the same direction, and affects the density of the field.
2. The pulsed coils vary the density of the photon field in a local region. This also imparts a force across the density variation. Radial in this case, and I have shown this several times, years ago.
3. The pulse coils have to be sequenced as the photon field does not induce if homogenous. If you pulse all of the coils at the same time, then the field is homogenous. It needs to vary perpendicular to the collector - like moving a magnet across a coil. By sequentially pulsing the coils (and you can pulse opposite coils at the same time) you create a repeating change in density and hence a second force in a circular direction.
4. We know the density changes as the angular momentum is constant and changes in velocity must change the radius to maintain the angular momentum - hence the density changes.
5. If the bias field of the two main SEPs are the same polarity (N up, for example), you will not have the proper force distribution for conventional current, as two opposing forces are operating. However, you still have a rhythmic change that will pump polarization in a dielectric. So, you have your cold current. (You'll still get both, but in a different ratio than the other way.)
6. If you use electric field bias, you align half of the photons one way and half the other way - similar to (5), you get mostly cold current.
So I liken this to a similar setup of John Hutchison's experiment where he has objects between 2 Tesla coils and he makes them jump by shooting them with a transducer. The transducer alone can not move the objects. But by encapsulating the objects in a resonant bias field he excites the bias causing the alignments of chaotic shifting. Exciting a bias has always been the answer. 8)
And the TPU is the same process. Put a bias on the horizontals and pulse it with the verticals. 90 degrees does work.
Quote from: Grumpy on 2013.03.28, 15:05:45
From page 17 and 18 of the pdf at the first link: (I cleaned it up a little and made the capacitor charging portion BOLD)
...
Are you talking about this:
"Charge a 100V cap to 50V. Cut two separate pieces of wire around 8 feet long that has good insulation. Connect one wire to one terminal and the other wire to the other terminal - no circuit!. Curl the wires up into two rough cylinders, diameter unimportant. Place near the CCU. Now pulse the coil whilst measuring the voltage on the cap, and scoping the cap. On the scope it looks like a very short burst of sustained oscillation. voltage on cap will steadyly rise. Cut wire down to get best pulse definition"?
Why charging the capacitor if it charges itself? What kind of "rough cylinders"? Conductor, insulated?... If they are conductor, they can act as antennaes and as they are capacitively coupled to the wire, non linearities in the capacitor which can especially occur if the capacitor is electrochemical can lead to a signal rectification (is it electrochemical ? it's not even specified.)
If a scope is connected to the capacitor, then the capacitor is not insulated and can be charged by induction currents in the probe and so on...
These vague descriptions provide no evidence of anything nor the operational means to get one, by lack of technical precise details.
insulated wire
non-electrochemical capacitor
non-electrolytic capacitor
You cannot do this test without a coil like the CCU arrangement
Quote from: Grumpy on 2013.03.29, 13:24:43
insulated wire
non-electrochemical capacitor
non-electrolytic capacitor
You cannot do this test without a coil like the CCU arrangement
The paper you gave is totally insufficient to know what are the results and how the experiment is made.
What you say is irrefutable, I see nothing concrete.
If you still affirm that a capacitor can be charged at a distance without non linear component such a diode, you should show us the experimental evidence by making yourself the setup. If for some reason you are prevented to do it, affirming anything based on so weak elements like those you presented here is a pure profession of faith.
Quote from: exnihiloest on 2013.03.30, 10:54:50
The paper you gave is totally insufficient to know what are the results and how the experiment is made.
What you say is irrefutable, I see nothing concrete.
If you still affirm that a capacitor can be charged at a distance without non linear component such a diode, you should show us the experimental evidence by making yourself the setup. If for some reason you are prevented to do it, affirming anything based on so weak elements like those you presented here is a pure profession of faith.
The affirmation was made by the person that provided the information. I am just a messenger passing the information to others.
Eric Dollard made this same affirmation and demonstrated charging of a capacitor held near his Tesla Transformer demonstration. This video is available free on the internet.
Ex what do you make of these scope shots.
Note the scope probe is not connected to anything other than having a 100K resistor wound around it's tip pin and earth shield
The scope probe is laying next to the coil i am pulsing, and sniffing the resulting rf noise.Also note the scope Chanel is set to DC
http://www.overunityresearch.com/index.php?topic=272.msg11217#msg11217
In the least, I expect a thorough lecture on the the work required to separate charges. This is the accepted explanation applied when charging a capacitor, complete with ample supplies of theory, experiment, and mathematics. It's obviously irrefutable.
Curiously, an iceskater can increase her rotation velocity by lowering her arms. O0
Quote from: Peterae on 2013.03.30, 16:14:10
Ex what do you make of these scope shots.
Note the scope probe is not connected to anything other than having a 100K resistor wound around it's tip pin and earth shield
The scope probe is laying next to the coil i am pulsing, and sniffing the resulting rf noise.Also note the scope Chanel is set to DC
http://www.overunityresearch.com/index.php?topic=272.msg11217#msg11217
It's easy to charge a capacitor at a distance: a transmitter, a distant antenna with a diode or some nonlinear component (any conductor can act as an antenna), and a capacitor. This is very common, I made it myself. I don't challenge this point. RF energy can charge a capacitor at a distance.
Now the alleged effect that Grumpy let's know wouldn't involve any rectifying component. Nevertheless as an apparently linear component can be nonlinear (for example an electrochemical capacitor), the phenomenon could be real but still conventional. Unfortunately there is no precise technical description of the alleged extraordinary phenomenon and so the phenomenon should be discarded until proof of the contrary. As Grumpy spoke of this phenomenon as an objective fact giving credibility to the rest of the paper, and the fact is not established, then the whole paper remains as doubtful as this alleged phenomenon.
Exnihiloest
I suppose this may come as a surprise to you,perhaps not...... this thing that Grumpy discusses here [SM device]was never offered up at any point in its history to these forums or the public by the inventor.
quite the contrary actually.
There is much here that intrigues ,too many parts and pieces of the story consistently "taunt" at the mind !
All I would ask is a bit of respect for men who have experimented and continue to be intrigued by this device in its different forms.
I know we have a language barrier,and I know men in some countries take for granted the need to be blunt,what may seem rude to me in NYC may just be "the way it is" in France??[we don't have many French men]
I can deal with that,what I have a problem with is this "helpless" state.
You help less and less ,there are so many positive things that could be added to the dialogue that The Grump has put forth to the community
The Photon can be played with in so many ways ,from light to electricity to gravity the whole Gambit.
This group is the last stronghold of the TPU,it never got the chance it should have from a group effort,I no longer believe this venue
inappropriate for organized replication or for a simple vetting process of a particular alleged anomaly.
the Talent available to do this is here ,the technology to experiment grows better every passing day,our knowledge and access to data is as never before in human history.
who knows what we may find when the talent, the knowledge ,technology and purpose can focus ?
It just needs a good test protocol and a bit more cooperation between interested parties.
thx
Chet
Ps
And just for the record ...this "model of cooperation" regardless of what may ultimately be the DUT
Is the perfect storm ~~
Quote from: ramset on 2013.04.01, 02:30:21
Exnihiloest
I suppose this may come as a surprise to you,perhaps not...... this thing that Grumpy discusses here [SM device]was never offered up at any point in its history to these forums or the public by the inventor.
quite the contrary actually.
There is much here that intrigues ,too many parts and pieces of the story consistently "taunt" at the mind !
All I would ask is a bit of respect for men who have experimented and continue to be intrigued by this device in its different forms.
I know we have a language barrier,and I know men in some countries take for granted the need to be blunt,what may seem rude to me in NYC may just be "the way it is" in France??[we don't have many French men]
I can deal with that,what I have a problem with is this "helpless" state.
You help less and less ,there are so many positive things that could be added to the dialogue that The Grump has put forth to the community
The Photon can be played with in so many ways ,from light to electricity to gravity the whole Gambit.
This group is the last stronghold of the TPU,it never got the chance it should have from a group effort,I no longer believe this venue
inappropriate for organized replication or for a simple vetting process of a particular alleged anomaly.
the Talent available to do this is here ,the technology to experiment grows better every passing day,our knowledge and access to data is as never before in human history.
who knows what we may find when the talent, the knowledge ,technology and purpose can focus ?
It just needs a good test protocol and a bit more cooperation between interested parties.
thx
Chet
Ps
And just for the record ...this "model or cooperation" regardless of what may ultimately be the DUT
Is the perfect storm ~~
this got me going no offense intended...
Many times the window was open but who wants to have hot tubes every where and rad doses from high voltage mistakes?? No body that's who.
everybody wants to do it their way an NOT take the advice from the inventor ..his effort and mine ,was to point you in the right direction to have the opportunity to discover the phenomenon. One that should not exist so ..how can any body already have an idea???
I dont blame any body for NOT doing it . I understand the will to live a healthy and long life and it is stronger than the need for something we are not ready for , not by a long shot . Hedron collider experiments hardly raised an eyebrow around here .. go figure!
xrays from tape? nah cant be rellevant can it ?! .
Oh that's right ......this is all just a diversion from what you really think is happening .... I hope you see the point .Or rather the pointlessness.
Will I say it again.................. use effing bottles and find out why .........
Time Has run out now for the help that was once available as far as I know ..............
want the self contained units whats in the videos??? good luck with that
now lets all see how much we can get out of a 1.5 volt flat battery useing a different measuring protocol ...much safer .
Quote from: exnihiloest on 2013.03.30, 10:54:50
If you still affirm that a capacitor can be charged at a distance without non linear component such a diode, you should show us the experimental evidence by making yourself the setup. If for some reason you are prevented to do it, affirming anything based on so weak elements like those you presented here is a pure profession of faith.
Ex-i don't understand as to what is so hard about charging a capacitor wirelessly without a diode?.A cap can be charged with a dc voltage wirelessly without a diode-and that is any sort of capacitor.I have not been able to achieve any where near 50 volt's,but my system is very small(just a small slayer exciter).But 1.5 volt's DC is no problem.And the direction of current can simply be reversed by moving the circuit closer to the tower.All you need is a small neon bulb,a resistor and cap.
@ramset and gridbias
Your replies are very mysterious for me, as could be replies coming from an extraterrestrial culture :).
You should understand that I respect everybody, but that I have not to respect as absolute truth what the people present here and there, even if it's the result of long works and efforts.
Neither the hardness of a work, nor the good will of persons to let it know, nor the sincerity of the author, guarantee its content. We have to respect the people, we have not to respect their convictions if we don't share them nor their affirmations if we consider that they are false.
I'm interested by the facts. Only new facts could lead to overunity but for that, they must be real facts. I see no fact supporting the assertion that a capacitor would be charged at a distance (without nonlinear component). So I say that I see no fact supporting the assertion that a capacitor would be charged at a distance, and I say why. If a so simple method should be discarded, we wouldn't be no more in the field of science but of sectarian faith.
I don't blame anybody. I consider that Grumpy present us on this forum relevant matter that he finds on Internet and that is generally well related to the topic that is discussed. It's a worthy contribution. Nevertheless in the present case, I challenge the point that "a capacitor would be charged at a distance" would be a fact. And if this point is the cornerstone of the presented matter and it's not a fact, then the whole work is doubtful. I say no more than that.
The contradiction is about what is said, not against whom says it, not against Grumpy himself who moreover, only reported the point! It's not because you would challenge the theory of relativity that you would blame Einstein or that you wouldn't respect him! C.C
Quote from: tinman on 2013.04.01, 10:15:42
Ex-i don't understand as to what is so hard about charging a capacitor wirelessly without a diode?
...
It's what I said above.
Read more carefully: the point is about the possibility to do it without diode (or any nonlinear component of same kind).
If there is a diode, then it works but it's a conventional fact that doesn't show anything new.
If there is no diode, then it could work because there would be another nonlinear component to be identified. Still conventional.
In other cases, no sufficient elements are provided to show evidence of a charge without nonliear elements.
Quote from: exnihiloest on 2013.04.01, 11:12:33
It's what I said above.
Read more carefully: the point is about the possibility to do it without diode (or any nonlinear component of same kind).
If there is a diode, then it works but it's a conventional fact that doesn't show anything new.
If there is no diode, then it could work because there would be another nonlinear component to be identified. Still conventional.
In other cases, no sufficient elements are provided to show evidence of a charge without nonliear elements.
Is neon gas nonlinear ?.So a quiz for you Ex,can a neon bulb and a resistor pass more current in one direction than it dose in another using wireless transmition.The other part of the puzzle is that it dosnt matter which way the neon bulbs are hooked up-the bulk of the current flow is still nonlinear in the same direction.And as i stated above-it will work with any type of cap.
Quote from: tinman on 2013.04.01, 11:23:55
Is neon gas nonlinear ?.So a quiz for you Ex,can a neon bulb and a resistor pass more current in one direction than it dose in another using wireless transmition.The other part of the puzzle is that it dosnt matter which way the neon bulbs are hooked up-the bulk of the current flow is still nonlinear in the same direction.And as i stated above-it will work with any type of cap.
I think that a neon gas tube has symmetric electrodes, so it should not rectify signals (to be verified).
But the question is: what was the exact configuration of the experiment? Was there a nonlinear component or not?
If there was a nonlinear component, it's doesn't a matter what it is if it's not symmetrical for the current, it's a conventional phenomenon that doesn't indicate something new.
Quote from: exnihiloest on 2013.04.01, 11:59:03
I think that a neon gas tube has symmetric electrodes, so it should not rectify signals (to be verified).
But the question is: what was the exact configuration of the experiment? Was there a nonlinear component or not?
If there was a nonlinear component, it's doesn't a matter what it is if it's not symmetrical for the current, it's a conventional phenomenon that doesn't indicate something new.
The system is as i stated two comments ago.I am using a slayer exciter to transmit wireless energy to the neon bulbs.I am now using 2 neon bulbs hooked in series with a resister and cap,so our series circuit is from cap to neon to neon to resister to cap.I am uploading a video now,so i will post it here when it's done.I do have a theroy as to how this work's,but i will wait and see what you have to say about it.
Here is a video of a cap being charged with a DC current wirelessly,without the use of nonlinear component's.The components used are-2 neon bulb's which can be hooked up in either direction(nonlinear) 1x resistor,which of course can be hooked in any direction(nonlinear) And 1x AC cap of any type-which of course can also be hooked in any direction(nonlinear) In the video you will see that i also charge a 100uf 160 volt electrolytic cap from the ceramic cap in the circuit.This is to show that the DMM on the ceramic cap is reading correctly.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mrHCjRCzGgg
Quote from: gridbias on 2013.04.01, 08:52:42
this got me going no offense intended...
Many times the window was open but who wants to have hot tubes every where and rad doses from high voltage mistakes?? No body that's who.
everybody wants to do it their way an NOT take the advice from the inventor ..his effort and mine ,was to point you in the right direction to have the opportunity to discover the phenomenon. One that should not exist so ..how can any body already have an idea???
I dont blame any body for NOT doing it . I understand the will to live a healthy and long life and it is stronger than the need for something we are not ready for , not by a long shot . Hedron collider experiments hardly raised an eyebrow around here .. go figure!
xrays from tape? nah cant be rellevant can it ?! .
Oh that's right ......this is all just a diversion from what you really think is happening .... I hope you see the point .Or rather the pointlessness.
Will I say it again.................. use effing bottles and find out why .........
Time Has run out now for the help that was once available as far as I know ..............
want the self contained units whats in the videos??? good luck with that
now lets all see how much we can get out of a 1.5 volt flat battery useing a different measuring protocol ...much safer .
I don't use tubes as I see no reason to. Also, no one using them has shown anything of interest.
With my avalanche pulsers, I can vary the pulsewidth at will, and it always shuts off like it is supposed to (unless it shorts...), and they are cheap and easy to use. Tubes are probably more robust, but tubes in the KV range are out of my reach.
Anyone suggesting the use of tubes, should have a good reason, and that reason should be easy to explain with a simple schematic with the accompanying text that supports the good reason and the tests that support the reasoning.
We agree that tubes have some interesting characteristics, such as "transit time" whereby fast moving isolated packets of electrons speed to and collide with the anode.
I have thousands of tubes, all types on hand , I am a willing experimenter and also willing to share my findings.
I respectfully implore gridbias to share what he may have discovered in a scientific manner. That's what we are here for.
Spherics stated the basic process and the basic protocol in the AVEC document much clearer in design than SM did about the TPU. But we have demos from SM where none from Sperics. And herein starts the discourse. SM stated alot of process steps but did not really tie them together in a format that we as engineers could readily grasp but not connect. Because Sm did not connect them or did he? I, often now as in the past have erupted in to thinking about these devices continually as I and we have been left to our own devices. 'Haunted' is the one thing that we all agree on. If you're not, then leave now. What I have noticed is that everybody makes known their ability with componenents, devices and processes and that this sparks thinking that the reader attaches to their own process development. Sometimes some one mentions something that I can use in this thinking effort and I hope I have offered too. But nowhere has any body stated their particular idea of the process of a device to the public. They start in the weeds an stay in the weeds. When somebody looks over the weeds that only causes silence or diversion. So until each can state their process idea then the submitted information from them can be of little use because without a destination the readers just are pulled about and off course. Or have I missed something along the way?
Quote from: giantkiller
'Haunted' is the one thing that we all agree on. If you're not, then leave now.
This is in reality closer than you may have
intended to where it's actually coming from.
Which also would account for its elusiveness
and why only a "few" are able to bring it forth.
If it was a truly scientific phenomenon then
there would be a logical and reliably replicable
process/explanation.
QuoteThis is in reality closer than you may have intended to where it's actually coming from.
I am fully aware of the environment of the next step.
So when does one decide to don the suite of E.V.Gray or Gerald Bull?
Tis best to make this decision now than have naivety handed back to you.
Creative forces perhaps, but not spiritual.
Aye, in the beginning we have that sort of
optimism. Until we make "contact."
Those who are in the deepest levels of the
Black Projects (the color is significant)
are well aware.
Quote from: tinman on 2013.04.01, 13:35:47
Here is a video of a cap being charged with a DC current wirelessly,without the use of nonlinear component's.The components used are-2 neon bulb's which can be hooked up in either direction(nonlinear) 1x resistor,which of course can be hooked in any direction(nonlinear) And 1x AC cap of any type-which of course can also be hooked in any direction(nonlinear) In the video you will see that i also charge a 100uf 160 volt electrolytic cap from the ceramic cap in the circuit.This is to show that the DMM on the ceramic cap is reading correctly.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mrHCjRCzGgg
Is it possible the DMM is rectifying the induced AC ? Or adding non symmetrical properties to the circuit.
What I seen with Eric Dollard's experiment was that he was switching the oscillator on and off, is it
possible to shut off the oscillator and leave the cap with a residual potential one way or the other ?
...
Quote from: tinman on 2013.04.01, 13:35:47
Here is a video of a cap being charged with a DC current wirelessly,without the use of nonlinear component's.The components used are-2 neon bulb's which can be hooked up in either direction(nonlinear) 1x resistor,which of course can be hooked in any direction(nonlinear) And 1x AC cap of any type-which of course can also be hooked in any direction(nonlinear) In the video you will see that i also charge a 100uf 160 volt electrolytic cap from the ceramic cap in the circuit.This is to show that the DMM on the ceramic cap is reading correctly.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mrHCjRCzGgg
Interesting test, tinman. Could you provide schematics?
Possible objections:
- A voltmeter or ampmeter can have non linearities or introduce DC from their input, for example due to protection diodes rectifying AC voltage. They shouldn't be connected during the operation (the AC voltage can be >> to the DC and so the voltmeter be saturated while the DC limit is not reached). For example, see at mn 3:00 how a measurement can be falsified by an ambient high frequency field: the voltmeter is showing a voltage but it is not even connected (http://www.overunityresearch.com/index.php).
- An electrolytic capacitor is not linear so it must not be involved in any way in the process.
- We must ensure that neon bulbs are linear
Could you disconnect each measurement apparatus, try with a big AC cap carefully discharged before the operation (for instance 2µF), and measure it after the test, just after having stopped the AC and disconnected the capacitor from the circuit?
Quote from: exnihiloest on 2013.04.02, 07:18:46
Interesting test, tinman. Could you provide schematics?
Possible objections:
- A voltmeter or ampmeter can have non linearities or introduce DC from their input, for example due to protection diodes rectifying AC voltage. They shouldn't be connected during the operation (the AC voltage can be >> to the DC and so the voltmeter be saturated while the DC limit is not reached). For example, see at mn 3:00 how a measurement can be falsified by an ambient high frequency field: the voltmeter is showing a voltage but it is not even connected (http://www.overunityresearch.com/index.php).
- An electrolytic capacitor is not linear so it must not be involved in any way in the process.
- We must ensure that neon bulbs are linear
Could you disconnect each measurement apparatus, try with a big AC cap carefully discharged before the operation (for instance 2µF), and measure it after the test, just after having stopped the AC and disconnected the capacitor from the circuit?
I will run the test as you suggested,and will video the result's and post here soon.I will also draw up a quick schematic as soon as i can.
Just an FYI about linearity/non-linearity as related to the charging of a capacitor, wireless:
Most electronic components have non-linearity and many are not well known.
Example... The Ne-1 & Ne-2 are well known for such functions and were used as negistors in early test equipment by HP. Yes, they can and do rectify but only within a narrow range of their operating curves.
Electrolytic capacitors with oxide based dielectrics also have rectification abilities when reverse polarized slightly above the allowable applied reverse voltage.
So, yes, you can charge a capacitor wirelessly. If you wish to find something new, try charging a PP type (polypropylene) at a distance.
This may help....
http://electronicdesign.com/archive/use-nonlinear-devices-linchpins-next-generation-design (http://electronicdesign.com/archive/use-nonlinear-devices-linchpins-next-generation-design)
So, I can believe that reverse charging a 100 V electrolytic to 50V and then following the rest of the instructions would work. I wouldn't suggest allowing that ever increasing voltage to go too far. The cap may explode. ;)
One other thing....
I can see where even a capacitor without an oxide based dielectric could be charged wireless. Trim one of the lead's coils differently than the other.
The above is one of the reasons I stopped experimenting with the AVEC device.
A real nostalgia trip to see all the old names and information again.
xxx, why don't you toss in your magnifying dipole antenna as it's relevant and may help people along? I could post it if you want to obscure the source - let me know.
Peter (aka Spherics) was right -- the temptation to say something is -- annoying in the least.
The serious development also comes with serious funding and secrecy. However, and contrary to popular belief, we are constantly posting more information on www.chavascience.com The intention is to release a lot more information soon -- truly astounding advances in our understanding of the fundamentals with simple experiments that everyone can replicate.
Apologies for being so cryptic -- I'd encourage people to experiment and do their own thinking. Docs from Spherics, SM et all (there's lots more available)... look closely and you'll see it's information that all appears to be strongly linked to the same source and technology -- I would advise that you all to remember that these jumbled sets of information are incomplete, contain errors and are loaded with misinterpretations -- all what you would expect from poorly understood reversed engineered tec... So -- be inspired by it all but do you own experiments and thinking.
OU mechanism may be related to fusion. Fusion reactor may have achieved OU but not sustainable. Plasma heating part in this article resemble many aspect of what we're doing. I think it's a good time to joint quest.
http://www.splung.com/content/sid/5/page/fusion
Temperature, plasma, voltage... I think there is a connection.
Quote from: WaveWatcher on 2013.04.02, 10:24:38
Just an FYI about linearity/non-linearity as related to the charging of a capacitor, wireless:
Most electronic components have non-linearity and many are not well known.
Example... The Ne-1 & Ne-2 are well known for such functions and were used as negistors in early test equipment by HP. Yes, they can and do rectify but only within a narrow range of their operating curves.
...
I agree. It's the likely cause of the capacitor charge.
I have verified that the neon bulbs seem to be hightly nonlinear. The V/I graph is given at http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Neon_lamp. We see the severe non linearity and the area of negative resistance.
Equally interesting is Spherics claim regarding the tetrahedral unit that was first released on OU:
To complete the picture the intercept coil can be an air-core toroidal coil placed in a horizontal plane halfway between the top coil and the bottom three coils sized so that the outside of the toroid would touch, but not overlap, the imaginary planes of the tetrahedral pyramid sides. The diameter of the toroid hole should be the same as the diameter of the toroid windings for optimum results but quite frankly you could stick two solid 1 cm diameter 3/4 circle copper bars into the field and measure substantial voltage and current.
Quote from: Mark Snoswell on 2013.04.02, 12:40:52
A real nostalgia trip to see all the old names and information again.
xxx, why don't you toss in your magnifying dipole antenna as it's relevant and may help people along? I could post it if you want to obscure the source - let me know.
Peter (aka Spherics) was right -- the temptation to say something is -- annoying in the least.
The serious development also comes with serious funding and secrecy. However, and contrary to popular belief, we are constantly posting more information on www.chavascience.com The intention is to release a lot more information soon -- truly astounding advances in our understanding of the fundamentals with simple experiments that everyone can replicate.
Apologies for being so cryptic -- I'd encourage people to experiment and do their own thinking. Docs from Spherics, SM et all (there's lots more available)... look closely and you'll see it's information that all appears to be strongly linked to the same source and technology -- I would advise that you all to remember that these jumbled sets of information are incomplete, contain errors and are loaded with misinterpretations -- all what you would expect from poorly understood reversed engineered tec... So -- be inspired by it all but do you own experiments and thinking.
thanks for the link Mark, I'll have to check that out.
Since Grumpy fired up this topic again, I might as well chime in as well.
Here's my opinion:The TPU is a different technology then what Spherics describes.
There are similarities, but the differences are what differentiate these technologies. The TPU is a radio that is tuned to a low 5500 Hz frequency, while the Spherics device intends to "spin the aeather" with fast pulses.
There are two difficulties with the Spherics approach from a scientific view point.
1) there is no aeather (but there is space time)
2) you can't "spin" space time
I think Spherics is a guy that experimented a lot with the SM TPUs in the first wave (1990's) and fizzled out. Later when Lindsay Mannix revived the topic with fresh info from SM in 2005, this guy came back on the scene to "pump-up" the interest.
He's probably a smart guy but from what he says I judge it to be a different technology and IF it functions and produces certain "results" as he claims, his explanation of those results certainly strikes me as fanciful and very imaginative.
On the other hand, I have high confidence in Steven Mark and his TPU, because he shows videos, respectable people witnessed the technology, and he explains things very intelligently without resorting to sci-fi.
Spherics should show us a device if its so simple to build, but instead he claims suppression and interference. C.C
EM
Quote from: EMdevices on 2013.04.03, 04:34:41
...
On the other hand, I have high confidence in Steven Mark and his TPU, because he shows videos, respectable people witnessed the technology
...
Unfortunately not OU.
Fortunately very much OU, which is why I got pulled into this effort. It has been a great journey that has led me to wireless power transfer, same place it led him, as exemplified by what he said and by the fact he hired Jack Durbin to expand the technology.
Gridbias,
the only relevance of the tubes is the "kick" that he observed. He worked on TVs as some of you have, and as we all know, they had tubes in the old days. What did he do with the kick? Well, he learned to make lots of them and fast enough to resonate his coils. Later on he realized he can start the oscillations with just a swipe of the magnet, and feedback amplified and sustained the oscillations at the operating point.
When properly understood, his technology is quite ordinary, and he did mention it operates very much like a superheterodyne radio receiver, so the main point to all of it: tune to a certain magnetic frequency and convert its energy.
Do you have a magnetic frequency at your location? If not, don't bother, why build a radio if there's no signal to receive?
EM
Quote from: EMdevices on 2013.04.03, 07:02:03
Fortunately very much OU, which is why I got pulled into this effort. It has been a great journey that has led me to wireless power transfer, same place it led him, as exemplified by what he said and by the fact he hired Jack Durbin to expand the technology.
"Very much OU" ;D
The ones who see OU from others, never possess at home an OU machine that works and which would be duplicable!
Affirming before verifying is an astonishing but useless and counterproductive method.
The TPU fits my definition of OU, if it does not fit your definition, then I guess you won't experiment.
And by the way, I do have many OU devices around the house. example: solar cells, and tuned tank circuits, that receive a small amount of free energy, yes small amount but OU never the less.
EM
Quote from: EMdevices on 2013.04.03, 23:10:40
The TPU fits my definition of OU, if it does not fit your definition, then I guess you won't experiment.
And by the way, I do have many OU devices around the house. example: solar cells, and tuned tank circuits, that receiver a small amount of free energy, yes small amount but OU never the less.
EM
Sounds more like FE in the sense of a "passive renewable energy collector" rather than an OU device.
To me, an OU device would start with its own energy source (battery, charged cap, magnet swipe etc.). Then it produces more than it uses.
Quote from: exnihiloest on 2013.04.03, 06:44:59
Unfortunately not OU.
Ex, your skepticism is well placed.
Many of us have followed this device since Lindsey first brought it to the attention of the other OU forum, several years ago. The inventor of the TPU was in contact with Lindsey for some time and provided a great deal of information and always stated that could not explain directly how the devices worked and why he could not.
Some time passed and several people got upset, many left the forum, and a few kept trying to figure it out.
More time passed and then spherics came forward with two messages on that forum, explaining how the TPU worked and how to acheive the resutls we desired. This was followed by a large sharing of information with a handful of people, now shared with everyone.
When you have followed it all from the beginning and are familair with all of the supporting information, it is easy to believe that the TPU was indeed an electrical generator, with no apparent power source. The AVEC device, described in the pdf at the beginning of this thread is not proven or disproven, as far as I know.
I'll attach a document that includes the posts by Spherics, explaining TPU operation, to the post at the beginning of this thread:
In the Energia Celeste Patent they claim 20kw equivalent shaft horsepower with only 0.84 watts input.
Grumpy,
I disagree regarding whether spherics explained the TPU operation, as in my opinion, he did not. Rather, he spent a great deal of time trying to explain some variant supposedly based on the TPU technology.
Had spherics actually explained the operation of the TPU's we've seen in the videos (even a fundamental concept), we would not be having this conversation.
It is most unfortunate that the folks who were in contact with spherics for that short time (I was not), did not in fact query him strictly on the TPU's in the videos. In my opinion, that would have been far more valuable than the information we did receive.
I must say that after my first reading of the information provided by spherics, I was rather disappointed about the direction it went, with so little focus on SM's devices themselves.
Quote from: poynt99 on 2013.04.04, 00:25:55
Grumpy,
I disagree regarding whether spherics explained the TPU operation, as in my opinion, he did not. Rather, he spent a great deal of time trying to explain some variant supposedly based on the TPU technology.
Had spherics actually explained the operation of the TPU's we've seen in the videos, we would not be having this conversation.
It is most unfortunate that the folks who were in contact with spherics for that short time (I was not), did not in fact query him strictly on the TPU's in the videos. In my opinion, that would have been far more valuable than the information we did receive.
I must say that after my first reading of the information provided by spherics, I was rather disappointed about the direction it went, with so little focus on SM's devices themselves.
It's hard to say what anyone would do until they are faced with a situation. You want to ask questions, but he can leave at any time and never be heard from again, which is what did happen. He answered some of our questions, but he was primarily trying to get enough out in a short amount of time to produce results. I feel there are enough details to get either of the three devices to work with enough thought and experiment.
What would you do? If you have an hour to explain how something works, are you going to explain an older version or the newer one that is more refined?
As far as I know, SM has never commented on this information. No confirmation, no dispute. I think that if it was total BS, SM would have said that.
Poynt99
QuoteTo me, an OU device would start with its own energy source (battery, charged cap, magnet swipe etc.). Then it produces more than it uses.
if that is the definition a simple solar cell would not meet this criteria, but a radio can. For example, I can start with a little bit of charge in a cap, which will be used to start the regenerative process that increases the Q of the tank circuit and brings in more energy from the radio waves, or generally the electromagnetic fields surrounding its antenna, be it near fields or far fields (i.e. propagating waves).
The biggest challenge to a regenerative receiver is that it will either have too much gain or not enough. Too much gain makes it an oscillator and it will drift relative to the signal it tries to receive. But if set just right, the gain of the receiver can be superb, with a Q in the 1000's, but at the same time it can be too selective, meaning the bandwidth is very narrow so it has to be tuned just right. (because BW = f/Q)
On the other hand, regarding solar cells, I'm wondering, what if we apply a voltage to a solar cell that is higher then the level produced by the light intensity? Do we get more power? In other words, we set a high potential and the photons release charge into a higher potential so more energy. This concept is the same for regenerative radio and other devices like windmills. For example, generally speaking, if there is a "flow" of something it becomes energy only if it flows against a potential. A mass that moves by at a certain velocity, has lots of kinetic energy but we can't extract it unless we put up some resistance to it. This resistance can be thought of as the initial energy we inject into a device so that it can begin to receive energy at a greater rate.
EM
Quote from: Grumpy on 2013.04.04, 00:42:08
What would you do? If you have an hour to explain how something works, are you going to explain an older version or the newer one that is more refined?
If I was spherics I would have described the older simpler version that most everyone was already familiar with and had discussed ad nauseum. I would also, or perhaps only have discussed the basic operational concept in enough detail to understand and design one. That was not done.
If I was one of the guys that had access to spherics for that time, I would have asked for the basic concept until it was understood well enough to design and build one. Then if necessary, and time allowing, I would have asked specifically how one of the actual devices worked, probably the FTPU.
Once you understand the basics you can design and build the exotic. spherics and his audience went straight for the exotic, and unfortunately the basic operational concept never came to light.
Do you guys believe that Spherics was/is SM?
I don't
No, I don't think anyone believes that he was.
Quote from: poynt99 on 2013.04.04, 01:00:35
If I was spherics I would have described the older simpler version that most everyone was already familiar with and had discussed ad nauseum. I would also, or perhaps only have discussed the basic operational concept in enough detail to understand and design one. That was not done.
If I was one of the guys that had access to spherics for that time, I would have asked for the basic concept until it was understood well enough to design and build one. Then if necessary, and time allowing, I would have asked specifically how one of the actual devices worked, probably the FTPU.
Once you understand the basics you can design and build the exotic. spherics and his audience went straight for the exotic, and unfortunately the basic operational concept never came to light.
We did not go straight for the exotic. We took what was offered. Initially this was the bifilar method (one wire delayed) with DC bias. Then this then this quickly shifted to the later design.
The basic concept IS there, few have experimented with it, and they stopped after some initial sucess.
Quote from: Grumpy on 2013.04.04, 01:15:47
We did not go straight for the exotic. We took what was offered.
Go back and read all the questions that were posed, maybe two or 3 pertain to SM's devices. No one expressed any real interest in the old versions.
Quote
The basic concept IS there, few have experimented with it, and they stopped after some initial sucess.
And what would you say your understanding of that basic concept is?
Quote from: poynt99 on 2013.04.04, 01:21:53
Go back and read all the questions that were posed, maybe two or 3 pertain to SM's devices. No one expressed any real interest in the old versions.
And what would you say your understanding of that basic concept is?
I will gather all the pertinent detials for a TPU into a single document for you. There is enough there should you wish to build one.
The basic concept is that a sudden HV electric impulse into a conductor, within a static magnetic field, changes "space" in such as way as to produce an electromotive force in said space.
Quote from: poynt99 on 2013.04.03, 23:25:53
To me, an OU device would start with its own energy source (battery, charged cap, magnet swipe etc.). Then it produces more than it uses.
Though this is what desire, I think it's an incomplete way of defining it. A piece of paper would fit into this definition. Once ignite, it will produces more than the ignition. But this process will stop at some point. I think an OU device defines as converting useless energy into a more useful form. Once we have the useful form, then it would produces more than it uses.
Quote from: Grumpy on 2013.04.04, 01:28:19
I will gather all the pertinent detials for a TPU into a single document for you. There is enough there should you wish to build one.
The basic concept is that a sudden HV electric impulse into a conductor, within a static magnetic field, changes "space" in such as way as to produce an electromotive force in said space.
OK, looking forward to it.
An EMF can not be produced in "space". An E or B field can be produced in space, an EMF (or emf) can be produced in a conductor.
I had 2 very short encounters with Spherics. He caught hold of me about the heterodyning. I didn't want to ask questions because at that time the perceived knowers of knowledge would just run away complaining that we were just copiers and not thinkers. At least this is what I saw at that time. I didn't want to ask specific or dumb questions. That is the time when I asked OU about the two young guys in the tpu cut apart vids. They appeared again in the 2004 vids standing by the door in the hotel room demo. I never got an answer the way I would have perceived it.
We have stumbled upon the greatest puzzle ever on this planet. And the side issues alone in the quest are enough to make us all very wealthy people.
Iron wire core, heterodyning vectors, stun gun drivers, audio feedback loops, companion wave generation, Tesla's patents.
Apply this to the TPU:
http://www.555-timer-circuits.com/metal-detector.html (http://www.555-timer-circuits.com/metal-detector.html)
Replace the speaker with a coil and place the output coil next to the input coil. Play with the configurations of the coils, the cores, the right frequency.
Simplicity has always been the one thing that has stood out and taunted us all...
Quote from: poynt99 on 2013.04.04, 01:38:28
OK, looking forward to it.
An EMF can not be produced in "space". An E or B field can be produced in space, an EMF (or emf) can be produced in a conductor.
Typically, but then electrons travel across space in tubes.
According to Spherics, from what I remember, the basic circuit that triggered the discovery of the TPU, was a bifilar coil with an extra iron delay coil in series. What was observed I don't remember.
However, this information contradicts with the "kick" discovery that SM mentions as the basic OU principle that he exploits in the TPU, so we see that the two stories don't agree with each other, which is why I don't place much faith in Spherics information.
EM
Quote from: EMdevices on 2013.04.03, 23:10:40
The TPU fits my definition of OU, if it does not fit your definition, then I guess you won't experiment.
And by the way, I do have many OU devices around the house. example: solar cells, and tuned tank circuits, that receive a small amount of free energy, yes small amount but OU never the less.
EM
Your definition doesn't make sense. There is no OU when the source is known and is reduced by an amount equal to the "over"-energy. "Overunity" means "more than 1": more than 1 output energy unit for 1 input energy unit. A solar cell doesn't output more than 1, in the best cases it's rather less than 0.15.
Quote from: EMdevices on 2013.04.04, 05:14:32
According to Spherics, from what I remember, the basic circuit that triggered the discovery of the TPU, was a bifilar coil with an extra iron delay coil in series. What was observed I don't remember.
However, this information contradicts with the "kick" discovery that SM mentions as the basic OU principle that he exploits in the TPU, so we see that the two stories don't agree with each other, which is why I don't place much faith in Spherics information.
The TPU is became a "Spanish Inn". It's the translation of a French expression, meaning that it's a place where everyone brings along the food they wish to eat.
There are not well specified schematics, there are a lot of versions, there is not a single duplicable proof of concept.
Or has someone here a TPU that shows OU and might he publish the schematics?
Quote from: exnihiloest on 2013.04.04, 07:09:43
Your definition doesn't make sense. There is no OU when the source is known and is reduced by an amount equal to the "over"-energy. "Overunity" means "more than 1": more than 1 output energy unit for 1 input energy unit. A solar cell doesn't output more than 1, in the best cases it's rather less than 0.15.
The only definition OU could possibly have is more energy out than energy "we" put in.
I think we all know that we cannot get energy from nowhere, so what comes out must go in, logically.
Given that the logic that energy cannot be created is correct, then there is either no OU or the definition of more energy out than energy "we" put in is OK.
I'm OK with either as long as I know what people mean.
Are you saying the only definition of OU is to "create" energy from nothing ?
Another definition of OU is two or three and so on.
I've never had a "TPU" in front of me to test, so I'll not say they are OU.
Cheers
HHMMMM
A spanish Inn......
How sweet
I see the Speed Of light and Gravity on the Menu tooo
Bon AppeTeeet
Quote from: EMdevices on 2013.04.04, 05:14:32
According to Spherics, from what I remember, the basic circuit that triggered the discovery of the TPU, was a bifilar coil with an extra iron delay coil in series. What was observed I don't remember.
However, this information contradicts with the "kick" discovery that SM mentions as the basic OU principle that he exploits in the TPU, so we see that the two stories don't agree with each other, which is why I don't place much faith in Spherics information.
EM
The kick is just the HV pulse interacting with the magnetic field - anyone can see it if they try. Find Jason's "dancing magnets" video, for example. If you say that they cannot interact, then you are totally wrong.
Quote from: Farmhand on 2013.04.04, 07:57:33
The only definition OU could possibly have is more energy out than energy "we" put in.
I think we all know that we cannot get energy from nowhere, so what comes out must go in, logically.
Given that the logic that energy cannot be created is correct, then there is either no OU or the definition of more energy out than energy "we" put in is OK.
I'm OK with either as long as I know what people mean.
Are you saying the only definition of OU is to "create" energy from nothing ?
Another definition of OU is two or three and so on.
I've never had a "TPU" in front of me to test, so I'll not say they are OU.
Cheers
Hi Farmhand
I did open a thread on-what is OU to you?-although i cant seem to find the thread now.
I believe the end result was-a device is only considered OU until we discover the power source.It then becomes a new found power source-just like the solar panel was some time ago-but hopefully it would work day or night.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mUJza3l8rmU
Stay with it till the "money shot"
Chet
What is interesting is the vibration is not in synch. It varies depending on the saturation level.
Quote from: EMdevices on 2013.04.04, 05:14:32
According to Spherics, from what I remember, the basic circuit that triggered the discovery of the TPU, was a bifilar coil with an extra iron delay coil in series. What was observed I don't remember.
However, this information contradicts with the "kick" discovery that SM mentions as the basic OU principle that he exploits in the TPU, so we see that the two stories don't agree with each other, which is why I don't place much faith in Spherics information.
EM
Yes. But with the low iron wire core the saturation level aids the flux concentration around the wire which is the bias. This is the medium that gets pumped. Both SM and Marco harped on this. The iron wire core in the GK was too big. Would a copper core create a bias that is easier to manipulate?
The magnetic field, associated with the DC current in the wire, produces the bias field. That makes it easy to adjust.
Quote from: Farmhand on 2013.04.04, 07:57:33
The only definition OU could possibly have is more energy out than energy "we" put in.
...
The definition of OU is a question already stated, see http://www.overunityresearch.com/index.php?topic=1675.msg28825#msg28825 and following posts.
According to this definition, solar energy is not OU.
QuoteThat makes it easy to adjust.
Hmmm. 2 volume controls on LTPU that SM did not clarify. The GK4 was mobiusly wound which means I was shocking a very slim bias aided by the iron wire. The timing was uncontrollable in certain facets of the protocol.
Quote from: exnihiloest
According to this definition, solar energy is not OU.
From our vantage point on Terra Firma
that is certainly true. Whether the Sun
itself is an OU device is still up in the air. ;)
At what point does entropy disqualify overunity?
Quote from: exnihiloest on 2013.04.04, 17:05:34
The definition of OU is a question already stated, see http://www.overunityresearch.com/index.php?topic=1675.msg28825#msg28825 and following posts.
According to this definition, solar energy is not OU.
I didn't mention solar energy in my last post. And your definitions of OU don't make sense either.
An APPARENTLY Closed system, what does that mean anyway, either it is closed or it isn't.
I can't even think of an example of a "closed" system except the Universe itself.. Can you give me an example of an apparently closed system and
a closed system ?
So in your opinion if an apparently closed system showed you your definition of OU would it be creating energy from
nothing or would it actually be an open system that appears "closed".
An actual closed system would have to be unity by default would it not ?
If I have any more replies, I'll make them there, but because I didn't mention solar and you brought it up I thought I'd post here.
Cheers
Quote from: ramset on 2013.04.04, 12:54:37
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mUJza3l8rmU
Stay with it till the "money shot"
Chet
This was a great video, good music too. When he first posted it I remember thinking that with all the technological advancement around us, it's easy to get callused towards simple and basic physical phenomena like the repulsion of two magnets. This video breaks through that calus and makes you want to dance with excitement for we are surrounded with awesomeness! :o
exnihiloest,
Bring your own dish, there's plenty of room at the TPU Inn.
Grumpy
Yes there's lots of interaction
EM
Quote from: EMdevices on 2013.04.04, 20:54:16
Grumpy
Yes there's lots of interaction
EM
how did you test it?
Spherics documents contained metadata with the authors name in it -- it's not Steven Marks -- the authors name is Peter David.
<Author>Peter</Author>
<LastAuthor>David</LastAuthor>
<Created>2004-02-22T08:37:17Z</Created>
<LastSaved>2008-04-06T16:59:02Z</LastSaved>
too may candidates to know which Peter David -- Peter David Barnes http://www.physicstoday.org/1.2701525 perhaps?
Perhaps it was the famous inventor Peter David Gammack from Great Brittan and associated with Dyson... who knows?
Yes -- I know SM's company was Spheric Audio Laboratories Inc -- https://www.google.com.au/?tbm=pts#hl=en&safe=off&tbm=pts&tbm=pts&q=inassignee:%22SPHERIC+AUDIO+LABORATORIES,+Inc.%22&bav=on.2,or.r_qf.&bvm=bv.44770516,d.aGc&fp=557d4f81707c8f72&biw=1656&bih=950
I bet his co-worker and inventor David F. Doleshal could tell us some interesting stories about SM. ... this all happened just up the coast from Grumpy's employer but perusing that line wont get anyone anywhere.
...and while we are revealing things SM did not invent the TPU -- privately he has admitted that it was reverse engineered from working technology we was made privy to. You can learn a little more from the rantings of Brian Collins http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=W_fRKxz_UNo -- Brian is a first class wanker and often liar -- but the idiot gives far too much away about the original function of the tec.
To give him credit SM took a technology that consumed energy to generate thrust against the fabric of space and turned it into a circulating space thrust that could frame drag electric current and thus generate "free current" -- horribly inaccurate words to describe the phenomenon but I am sure you all get the idea.
A little more on the real timeline:
In 1994 Steven Mark was busy working on his Spheric Audio Labs inventions and filing patents -- the last of which was Method and apparatus for generating audiospatial effects http://www.google.com.au/patents/EP0653897A2?cl=en&dq=%22Spheric+Audio+Laboratories,+Inc.%22&hl=en&sa=X&ei=43FeUcqlCJCTiAeG7oGoBg&ved=0CDUQ6AEwAA (http://www.google.com.au/patents/EP0653897A2?cl=en&dq=%22Spheric+Audio+Laboratories,+Inc.%22&hl=en&sa=X&ei=43FeUcqlCJCTiAeG7oGoBg&ved=0CDUQ6AEwAA) This was a joint invention of Steven Mark and David Doleshal. It was filed on 25th October 1994 and was the last invention of Steven Mark for Spheric Audio Labs Inc.
1994 was a very busy year for Steven at Spheric Audio labs -- he didn't have any time for other activities. If your interested about the company -- Spheric Audio Labatories was a subsidiary of PCBC Portacom Wireless Extreme Technologies, subsidiary of Portico Dwyer Corporation, incorporated in Turks and Caicos Islands (Netherlands), with bank account in Hong Kong.
It appears Steven then teams up with Brian Collins (inventor of the Collins engine) right at the end of 1994. Collins then starts promoting the TPU to investors as of January 1995. You can read about the angry investors conned out of their money here -- reproduction of article in Perth newspaper http://www.searlsolution.com/members/documents/STbook03.pdf (http://www.searlsolution.com/members/documents/STbook03.pdf)
So we see that the window of time Steven Mark had for "developing" the first TPU was about 8 weeks at the end of 1994... after which there is a long and nasty trail of investor cons.
You can trace a bit more of the fraud behind the scenes here http://groups.yahoo.com/group/FE-OU-FraudVictims/message/20 (http://groups.yahoo.com/group/FE-OU-FraudVictims/message/20) which introduces Paul Steem to the story. There is an excellent summary here http://www.padrak.com/ine/SMARK.html (http://www.padrak.com/ine/SMARK.html) -- note that the characters involved, including Steven Mark, have a history of cons...
If it went for the original source of the technology verified through other channels it would be reasonable to dismiss everything about Brian Collins and SM and the TPU as a con. It still is an open question as to just how much SM managed to replicate/develop -- did he really get it working or did he just effectively steal the tec and use it just enough to perpetuate the con?
Quote from: Farmhand on 2013.04.04, 20:52:16
I didn't mention solar energy in my last post.
Don't think that you would be personally concerned by every reply that I post! C.C
Follow the thread:
"I do have many OU devices around the house. example: solar cells..."
EM, reply#183
This was the point I challenged when you begun to reply me.
Quote
...
And your definitions of OU don't make sense either.
An APPARENTLY Closed system, what does that mean anyway, either it is closed or it isn't.
I can't even think of an example of a "closed" system except the Universe itself.
...
What don't you understand in:
apparently closed system?
A circuit with a capacitor and a resistance inside a Faraday cage is an "
apparently closed system" when we deal with currents and voltage. The fact that the ZPE, the heat, or any fairy dust could interfer with the system is not false but not relevant. Once the system is defined, if you observe the capacitor charge while there is no energy source in your system, you may say there is "OU" and then search for the source outside.
We define arbitrarily what we call our closed system. The fact that it is not really closed is an irrelevant objection. At the contrary, it's the key point to be able to define OU when we consider that energy creation is impossible (which is your viewpoint). When the system is defined and only if it is operationally defined, you may say if the system produces more energy that it consumes. If it produces OU, you may say that it is probably not really closed. And from your specifications of the system, you know the interface with the outside, and so you may search for an energy flux crossing the frontier.
Your definition that OU is only when there is "
more energy out than energy "we" put in" is a complete uselessness if you don't specify to which system it is relative in order to be able to qualify what is "in" and "out"! Mine, which is also that one arising from EM's post (http://www.overunityresearch.com/index.php?topic=1675.msg28825#msg28825) and following is operational: you can use it experimentally. Yours is a nonsense by lack of precision and by absence of operational relevance, it's not even a definition but an unexpoitable fuzzy banality.
In this sense, when EM says that there is OU in solar cells, he is right if he excludes the sun from his system.
Now, once the energy source is well known, imho we must include it in the definition of our system when the system use it, and so the system becoming "solar cells + sun", it's not OU. OU is relative.
Mark Snoswell
Did you leave out Jack Durbin on purpose?
Here's the conclusion of the TPU so far
In 2009, I was fortunate enough to discover the actual address where the TPU videos were filmed, at the so called 'mansion', a very nice house, and I paid him a visit. I confirmed the location with scenes from around his house that are shown in the video when he walks outside to test the smaller TPU. I stood at the exact spot. To my surprise, a huge high voltage power line passes within meters of his house, which supplies a portion of Southern California with electricity. Based on audio spectral analysis of his videos, I further confirmed the strong Power Line Harmonics (PLH) signals, which are harmonics of the 60 hz frequency and measured them with a sensor right at the spot. All of this evidence, along with what he said about it being a radio and needing tuning to a frequency, makes it very clear in my mind that it feeds off the near fields of the electric grid ( not necessarily 60 hz). The process of conversion he talked about is akin to the heterodyne radio architecture, meaning a few frequencies are injected and they mix, producing other frequencies that are coincident with the frequency of interest. Once it's tuned, the high Q of the tank circuit amplifies the circulating induction currents to very high levels, as witnessed in the video.
Some people resist the idea of where the energy comes from, because it robs the device of some of its mystery, and if we know where the energy comes from then some tell us it's not OU, but the device doesnt care what definition anybody applies to it, it simply works delivering lots of energy in quite a compact form, and quite lightweight as well.
In my opinion, the real mystery of the TPU is how it is built to achieve the high Q tank circuit, how feedback is used, and the circuitry for keeping it tuned on frequency, so it does not drift, along with the revolving magnetic field and DC current production without diodes. The main mystery is the use of ferromagnetic wire in its construction.
Anyway, this device can keep one experimenting for a long time, and I find it extremely fascinating, so many principles involved, not to mention the orientation behavior and the gyroscopic effects due to its vibration, and of course the washboard effect.
I experienced these effects with two tuned coils where I allowed the flowing currents to build up to over 10 amps, such that the magnetic repulsion between coils became noticeable when holding the coil in my hand.
If there's a device that we should endevour to understand, this is it.
EM
Quote from: Mark Snoswell on 2013.04.05, 05:11:55
Spherics documents contained metadata with the authors name in it -- it's not Steven Marks -- the authors name is Peter David.
<Author>Peter</Author>
<LastAuthor>David</LastAuthor>
<Created>2004-02-22T08:37:17Z</Created>
<LastSaved>2008-04-06T16:59:02Z</LastSaved>
too may candidates to know which Peter David -- Peter David Barnes http://www.physicstoday.org/1.2701525 perhaps?
Perhaps it was the famous inventor Peter David Gammack from Great Brittan and associated with Dyson... who knows?
Yes -- I know SM's company was Spheric Audio Laboratories Inc -- https://www.google.com.au/?tbm=pts#hl=en&safe=off&tbm=pts&tbm=pts&q=inassignee:%22SPHERIC+AUDIO+LABORATORIES,+Inc.%22&bav=on.2,or.r_qf.&bvm=bv.44770516,d.aGc&fp=557d4f81707c8f72&biw=1656&bih=950
I bet his co-worker and inventor David F. Doleshal could tell us some interesting stories about SM. ... this all happened just up the coast from Grumpy's employer but perusing that line wont get anyone anywhere.
...and while we are revealing things SM did not invent the TPU -- privately he has admitted that it was reverse engineered from working technology we was made privy to. You can learn a little more from the rantings of Brian Collins http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=W_fRKxz_UNo -- Brian is a first class wanker and often liar -- but the idiot gives far too much away about the original function of the tec.
To give him credit SM took a technology that consumed energy to generate thrust against the fabric of space and turned it into a circulating space thrust that could frame drag electric current and thus generate "free current" -- horribly inaccurate words to describe the phenomenon but I am sure you all get the idea.
I asked Spherics about the name "David" when I saw it in the one of the excel file, and he said there was no connection. He used several different names in his emails, such as "Hamlet". While he sounds British, his slang is east coast USA. "Peter David" is the author of "Fantastic Four: What Lies Between", and several Star Trek novels.
When did SM state that he "reverse engineered" the technology? To whom did he say this? Was it actually SM that said it?
EMdevices said:
Quote"Here's the conclusion of the TPU so far"..(.and following text)
You should rephrase that to read: "Here is
my conclusion of the TPU so far"
There is no group consensus on the operational mechanism of the TPU. The text that followed your statement is strictly
your opinion. There are those that might strongly disagree with your conclusions. You may have cherry picked supporting information for the "power line theory", and conveniently ignored evidence that does not support it. (see note 1)
Note 1: Gyroscopic properties, stiction effect, tested at UC labs far away from SM's home and at other locations(no close proximity HT overhead power lines), non directionality of some units.
I have an idea how this might works. Let's imagine we have an oscillating source of 1 pV, infinite amps and 1 pA with infinite volt. Let's further assume that this is an inexhaustible energy source. The power they can put out is P=IV. This means we can extract MW with no problem. How does this energy effect us? Let's say our sensory has 1 Ohms.
V=IR
For a 1pV source, we feel a 1pA. For a 1pA source, we feel a 1pV. Practically, we can walk through this energy unaffected.
QuoteIn a world that excludes the ether, these coils are overunity. If the world took into account the ether, then the coils would not be thought of as overunity.
I believe everyone is correct. If we exclude the power line frequency and only include the ambient magnetic bias then we will get energy from everywhere as long as a magnetic field is around. This is why it works in a plane as SM stated it did. So the TPU creates a field that will attach to other magnetic fields and use that flux also.
The statement that iron can not be used pertains to the quantity most of us employ. Like I stated before maybe low saturation also works. This begs the test of producing the compwave test then bringing varying amounts of iron wire into varying proximities to exercise the result.
@Mark, thanks for the history.
@Grumpy, thanks for the pdf. Affirmation is the best drug.
Defeating entropy with transmogrification. Pure genius...
Quote from: ION on 2013.04.05, 13:45:18
EMdevices said:
You should rephrase that to read: "Here is my conclusion of the TPU so far"
There is no group consensus on the operational mechanism of the TPU. The text that followed your statement is strictly your opinion. There are those that might strongly disagree with your conclusions. You may have cherry picked supporting information for the "power line theory", and conveniently ignored evidence that does not support it. (see note 1)
Note 1: Gyroscopic properties, stiction effect, tested at UC labs far away from SM's home and at other locations(no close proximity HT overhead power lines), non directionality of some units.
I don' need group consensus for the truth. I'm stating facts, and what SM said himself, and yes some opinions which I noted.
You and others keep mentioning that fact that it was tested elsewhere, and that does not invalidate anything, because no matter where he went he was within the influence of the grid. In fact the papers you posted on the free energy radios in my other thread, run off of stray fields from the power grid as noted in the article.
The electric power grid is probably the most extensively polluting electromagnetic contraption on earth.
EM
Quote from: EMdevices on 2013.04.05, 16:44:24
I don' need group consensus for the truth. I'm stating facts, and what SM said himself, and yes some opinions which I noted.
You and others keep mentioning that fact that it was tested elsewhere, and that does not invalidate anything, because no matter where he went he was within the influence of the grid. In fact the papers you posted on the free energy radios in my other thread, run off of stray fields from the power grid as noted in the article.
The electric power grid is probably the most extensively EM polluting contraption on earth.
EM
SM claimed the units had been tested at 15000 feet in an aircraft and they continued to work as claimed. Last time I looked up, there were not powerlines near 15000 feet.
He also stated that he US Navy had similar tech since the 1950's - this in an email from SM posing as Mercury Melendez (spelling?).
Aether Vortex technoilogy can be traced back to 1928 with the work of Hendershot. Marco traced it back further, the the early 1900's, as I recall. Hendershot taught a group in Maxico how to build his device. Mark Snoswell has visited them. The letters from Korcsmaros to Hendershot indicate that others have known about and developed this technology.
Perhaps it is all a fallacy, but it sure makes for a lot of fun!
EDIT:
You could all finish it this year. Sooner if you work together.
I personally consider tapping energy from the power grid to be a "bottom feeder" technology. Even if it were possible and if I could do it, I probably would not.
There are many ethical problems that would arise that need to be thoroughly considered.
I try to look at each potential technology from the standpoint of "would it be good if we all did it".
Once, many years ago, for a nice sum, I was asked to design a power supply for an "electric glove" that one could wear anywhere somewhat clandestinely for personal protection.
I imagined myself on a bus where everyone was suspiciously viewing the adjacent person as a potential attacker, and they all wore these "electric gloves".
I turned the handsome sum of money down, because I did not wish to contribute to a technology where everyone would be wearing one of these, a world of fear and paranoia.
There would be others for hire to do this, but it would not be me.
http://www.gizmag.com/go/2357/
well maybe we could just make the "Bikini"??
NNaahhh...
Grumpy
QuoteAether Vortex technoilogy can be traced back to 1928 with the work of Hendershot.
Hendershot's latest two coil designs is more of the same technology as I'm experimenting with, a receiver for EM fields and energy, be it 60 Hz or 100 MHz, but as I pointed out before, his motor velocity was 3600 RPM or close to it, which indicates it is fed with frequencies related to the power grid.
I'm not even sure what
Aether Vortex Technology means for you, but if it embodies a concept that you have, by all means work it and show us how it's done.
All these technologies are related and feed off of the "modern" power grid with its many stray fields and/or radio waves from high power radio stations.
Hubbard
Hendershot
Hans Coller
Morray
TPU
and others
EM
Quote from: EMdevices on 2013.04.05, 20:35:33
Grumpy
Hendershot's latest two coil designs is more of the same technology as I'm experimenting with, a receiver for EM fields and energy, be it 60 Hz or 100 MHz, but as I pointed out before, his motor velocity was 3600 RPM or close to it, which indicates it is fed with frequencies related to the power grid.
I'm not even sure what Aether Vortex Technology means for you, but if it embodies a concept that you have, by all means work it and show us how it's done.
All these technologies are related and feed off of the "modern" power grid with its many stray fields and/or radio waves from high power radio stations.
Hubbard
Hendershot
Hans Coller
Morray
TPU
and others
EM
I don't know how far are you right now, from the transmitter which feeding your brain with power, but I'm pretty sure you left the near field region long ago, and the power from the signal is dropping irrevocably. Turn back EM! :D
It's too late for me Chef, too late! :D
Guys, here's some correspondence from Steven:
My Dear Friend,
I hope this finds you well.
Since I feel as though I have absolutely no future any longer, I would like to make one admission to you.
I have made a statement that I have not necessarily believed to be the absolute truth.
I and my colleagues noted the rather maximum magnetic factors involved with the devices in operation. IE, there is always extremely strong magnetic fields at frequency, at close and distant proximity.
We were never able to actually understand what came first... The fields or the power. Are the fields just a coupling mechanism from a power source converted from? Or is the power source that the unit couples just the earth's magnetic field pure and simple?
We were coached to come to a decision and maintain that it is the Earth's magnetic field which is the source of the power which is converted by the power units while in operation.
Well, I tell you now Lindsay that actually we never found out what the absolute provable source of the power is. Our founding was cut off. The powers that be assumed we had a marketable item and that money would be available for future research. we would find out all the secrets of the universe, etc.
However, that was not to be.
So here we are..... I tell you that I honestly do not know for sure where the actual source of the power comes from.
I hope that you will not think less of me for my admission to you.
PS, remember the promise I made to you, I will not forget when the time comes.
Sincerely,
Steven
stay tuned, I'm looking for another email ...
Here's an email that sheds light on the vibration of the units, we explored magnetostriction phenomena a while ago.
Dear xxxxxx,
I hope this letter finds you well and in great spirits when you receive it.
I am doing somewhat better now. I am glad that i have made a decision to move forward.
I happened to come upon a letter you sent to me on the twelfth, which I have previously missed.
I am sorry about that, and so i shall attempt to address some of your questions now.
Your wrote and asked:
"What is the heat in watts in relation to the output? Is there even a relationship? "
The output of heat is NOT proportional to the energy output of the unit. We found that very interesting because it goes against everything we have been taught. The units heat up gradually and logarithmically to an accelerated point of self destruction. They heat up at an identical rate regardless of load. It is almost as though the energy output is some byproduct of the units operation....
"What actually happened in the water experiment?"
This is also very interesting...... as you may recall, the units vibrate or pulse when in operation, well.... when you submerge them in water they exert physical movement against the body of water. The amount of hydraulic pressure they can develop is HUGE ! I can not emphasize this point enough. Now think about the associated problems... ?
When the units are operated in the open air or held in the hand there is no problem because the air acts as a spring or cushion. in the water, however, the units have a solid substance to act against. Can you imagine what can happen?
"Do the conductors degrade quickly when under higher loads? Do they degrade at all?"
The answer is: NO.
I also thought of collecting the heat output and recycling it as energy. The problem is... no matter how much you try to SINK the heat, the units put out more heat.... the rise time is so fast you cannot control it.
When I said that the heat problem is something to be worked out, I meant it quite seriously!
I bet the Scientists who read the web site would have a brain melt down with the thought of what I have just told you. Ha, Ha...
Take care,
Sincerely,
SM
OK, I found the email I was looking for:
Dear xxxx,
I hope this letter finds you well and in good spirits. I am feeling a little better today.
I have something here that you may want to post on the web site.
I hope that you will be able to forgive the folks on the web for not wanting to believe.
I say that because I believe it is not that we could ever prove to their satisfaction that the technology works. It is simply that they don't want to believe. It is too hard on their basic belief system. Anything they do not have the capacity to understand is not worth accepting in their book.
About the person who came by asking you about the device and was wondering if perhaps I was only tuning into overhead power lines.
I hope you told him that, If I was only tuning into overhead power lines, that trick alone is worth about a Billion dollars!
Imagine the possibilities for that technology alone? Gosh, cars, trains, portable computers.
Hey! Perhaps we have touched on something here!!! Why don't we tell everyone that you finally found out what my trick is, that I only found a way to tap into overhead power lines. Then everyone would believe and we could market the technology as such and make billions of dollars and everyone would be happy because they will all think that they were correct about my technology being a fake. Of course they may start to wonder about the fact that no one ever gets a power bill... But that will come up much latter on when it doesn't matter.
You know, that reminds me of the first time we demonstrated the technology for an engineer from Union Carbide company. He was the chief engineer of their battery division.
We told them that we had a new battery to show them because no one would send anybody to see our technology because, everyone knows that what we say we have is impossible.
So they sent their head of engineering and we gave him a demonstration of the power unit.
WELL!!! He saw just ten minutes of our lighting a single 100 watt 120 volt light bulb with our 4" unit and HE WENT BALISTIC!!! He became very excited and asked every question in the book. He began to stutter and etc. It was all quite humorous. The down side was when we eventually had to explain that it wasn't a battery and that we only told them that to get them to come so that we could show them our generator technology that things fell apart.
No one from the company wanted anything to do with a power generator because everyone knew that was impossible.
I often joked that we should just make small units and sell them a fantastic new batteries that never go dead! Everyone would go crazy buying them and not stop to think why they never go dead.
Well that was one of my ideas, anyway, Ha, Ha!
About the collector, ask me questions and I will see if I can answer them individually. I cant find your last few e-mails and I have forgotten what you wanted to know.
UEC is going crazy about anything I may write to you. I have been forbidden to send you any drawing or diagram of any kind, so that will limit some of my contribution at least physically at the moment. I am also forbidden to talk to you on the phone, although I can't see why. What we are doing here is just about the same thing.
Anyway, thank you for your kindness and concern. I hope that we can do some great things together some day. I believe it is possible.
I do not know if I should tell you this but here goes anyway. I am making arrangements to see to it that you receive very complete drawings and engineering documents including all the white papers on the technology...... if something should happen to me. All I need is a permanent address for you and that will be done.
It is the only way I can be sure to get the technology passed on to someone of value when I die.
I hope you are flattered with my sincere desire to give you this knowledge no matter what.
Sincerely,
SM.
SM says he does not know exactly where the power comes from, because they ran out of time and funding to find out, but I think he knows quite well it is the overhead power lines just doesn't want to admit it because then he gets in trouble with the power companies. Notice in the previous emails that he was "coached" to maintain and say the energy comes from the magnetic field of the earth. I wonder who did the "coaching"? probably Brian Collins, the unscrupulous marketeer.
People can put their heads in the sand all they want, like an ostrich, to avoid he truth, but it won't change it.
EM
Sorry EM, I still have a very hard time buying into the overhead power line theory.
I think SM was quite tongue-in-cheek when he was talking about it. :P
"Space" is the storehouse of momentum (or aether if u prefer). Space curves per Einstein, varies in density per others. The difference is where the energy resides.
J.J. Thompson first proposed it. Poincare and a few others developed theories along this line.
I do not believe for one second that SM was just harness the ambient waste of power lines. If this is the only way you can explain it, then, please, take a walk on the wild side.
Look back at history. We were on a roll until the World Wars started. Then it all went down the crapper.
Edit:
Helmholtz was the only one to believe that the aether could be set into motion.
It looks like it is rung with one pressure but oscillates at another.
It's like arguing about what station he was "listening" to. I heard the "the song" and it was a 60's classic by PLH :P
Anyway, we can all build the same TPU "radio" but yet tune into different frequencies and collect. However, the build of the radio indicates a low frequency of operation.
The build is quite simple, according to SM:
Horizontal collector coils, wrapped by vertical control coils.
The control coils are wrapped in sectors, so that each sector can be fed one single frequency.
The secret is what frequencies to use.
Why does it work? Because the collector coils are ferromagnetic and are biased magnetically to a nonlinear operating reagion, so that the multiple frequencies can mix together inside of it.
Once a mixing product coincides with the acoustic resonant frequency of the collector, it begins to ring violently in a particular mode that involves revolving waves. These revolving waves, accompanied by magnetic fields, induce currents back in the control coils, of course at a different frequency, and when separated becomes the output. Or as he said, just use another control coil wrapped over the whole thing.
The physical transducing mechanism enabling the motion and vibration of the collector coil is called magnetostriction. Since magnetic domains are flipping very fast, the hysteresis losses are significant and the wire heats up. This is accompanied by I^2 R losses as well, but SM seems to indicate the former is the real nuisance.
One principle I don't fully understand is what happens to currents that flow through the ferromagnetic collector wire, while it is magnetized and vibrates, etc. Does the current become spin polarized perhaps? Hans Coller was doing the same thing back around WWII, meaning flowing currents through magnetized conductors.
Anyway, once you build your radio you can "listen" to whatever you want. But listen to the wrong "music" and "they" will crack down on you.
Em
Grumpy,
This post (http://tech.groups.yahoo.com/group/KeelyNet_Interact/message/1905) might be of interest to you.
I am going to Phoenix on Monday for a week. Anyone know of some great places to visit at Sedona? Supposed to be a great energy vortex there.
I heard there's some mysterious rock somewhere in the desert that ages people real quick if you get near it, so much so, that you can age and die right on the spot within a few minutes. See if you can find out where that is, or if its true. (somebody told me about it after seeing a documentary on TV)
also bring your AVEC along to power up your electronics! :P
Quote from: EMdevices on 2013.04.06, 19:28:35
See if you can find out where that is, or if its true.
:P
Quote from: EMdevices on 2013.04.06, 19:28:35
I heard there's some mysterious rock somewhere in the desert that ages people real quick if you get near it, so much so, that you can age and die right on the spot within a few minutes. See if you can find out where that is, or if its true. (somebody told me about it after seeing a documentary on TV)
also bring your AVEC along to power up your electronics! :P
EM,
Do you realize that your statement and request is like saying - I heard fire is so hot that it could set you ablaze and kill you. Please see of it will set you ablaze and kill you.
I'll let him borrow my TPU for the trip if he is willing to confirm what you heard ;)
Just don't get close to it and you'll be fine. I heard birds fly into the "zone" of influence and collapse. Kind of dangerous but if true it's worth investigating. Should be somewhere on an Indian reservation.
I also wonder if there is a gravitational anomaly spot somewhere around there. Those are always fun to visit.
QuoteI heard there's some mysterious rock somewhere in the desert that ages people real quick if you get near it, so much so, that you can age and die right on the spot within a few minutes. See if you can find out where that is, or if its true. (somebody told me about it after seeing a documentary on TV)
also bring your AVEC along to power up your electronics! Tongue
Don't tell me, no one has ever survived a visit and therefore no one knows exactly where it is ;D
Good Luck on your travels Darren O0
Quote from: EMdevices on 2013.04.06, 19:28:35
I heard there's some mysterious rock somewhere in the desert that ages people real quick if you get near it
...
It's a phenomenon of resonance. Did you consider this point?
The resonance in mysterious rocks modifies the space-time around. When we walk in the desert at nightfall, we hear clicks here and there. It is the sound of insects dying prematurely, their exoskeleton explodes.
Here is the proof, photo made in an oasis:
(http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/7/7d/Dragonfly-nymph-exoskeleton.jpg)
Tesla predicted it, see its resonant transmitter.
I experimented it myself. I spent a night in the Sahara with the young beautiful daugther of the Bedouin Chief, and when I wake up, I found an old woman at my sides. No, I had not drunk! Tesla is great. Why have I not been affected by the mysterious rocks? Surely because I had in my pocket a chain‑key in form of pyramid. Pyramid is negative energy. It absorbs resonant energy from mysterious rocks. It is not a coincidence if the Egyptians built pyramids in the desert! Never walk in the desert without a pyramid !
;D
Quote from: Peterae on 2013.04.07, 06:21:43
Don't tell me, no one has ever survived a visit and therefore no one knows exactly where it is ;D
Even some photon escaped black hole. I wouldn't take Poynt any less. lol
Quote from: exnihiloest on 2013.04.05, 10:28:59
Don't think that you would be personally concerned by every reply that I post! C.C
Follow the thread:
"I do have many OU devices around the house. example: solar cells..."
EM, reply#183
This was the point I challenged when you begun to reply me.
You Quoted me and informed me solar cells are not OU so why shouldn't I reply that I didn't mention solar ? You follow the thread, if someone else made the comment quote them not me.
Quote from: exnihiloest on 2013.04.05, 10:28:59
What don't you understand in: apparently closed system?
A circuit with a capacitor and a resistance inside a Faraday cage is an "apparently closed system" when we deal with currents and voltage. The fact that the ZPE, the heat, or any fairy dust could interfer with the system is not false but not relevant. Once the system is defined, if you observe the capacitor charge while there is no energy source in your system, you may say there is "OU" and then search for the source outside.
We define arbitrarily what we call our closed system. The fact that it is not really closed is an irrelevant objection. At the contrary, it's the key point to be able to define OU when we consider that energy creation is impossible (which is your viewpoint). When the system is defined and only if it is operationally defined, you may say if the system produces more energy that it consumes. If it produces OU, you may say that it is probably not really closed. And from your specifications of the system, you know the interface with the outside, and so you may search for an energy flux crossing the frontier.
Sounds like a "
Pseudo closed system to me". Any system that allows energy out of the system is not closed, it is that simple.
It's not that I don't understand what apparently means. I wanted you to give a real life example, you can keep your fairy dust in your fairy pouch, no one mentioned it but you.
Are you a fairy ? You keep mentioning fairy dust for some reason.
Quote from: exnihiloest on 2013.04.05, 10:28:59
Your definition that OU is only when there is "more energy out than energy "we" put in" is a complete uselessness if you don't specify to which system it is relative in order to be able to qualify what is "in" and "out"! Mine, which is also that one arising from EM's post (http://www.overunityresearch.com/index.php?topic=1675.msg28825#msg28825) and following is operational: you can use it experimentally. Yours is a nonsense by lack of precision and by absence of operational relevance, it's not even a definition but an unexpoitable fuzzy banality.
In this sense, when EM says that there is OU in solar cells, he is right if he excludes the sun from his system.
Now, once the energy source is well known, imho we must include it in the definition of our system when the system use it, and so the system becoming "solar cells + sun", it's not OU. OU is relative.
I didn't say that was my definition I said it was the only one that can make sense, which is true in my opinion especially considering there are only
pseudo closed systems.
A closed system by definition cannot allow energy out or in, when a system fits that description it is closed in my opinion otherwise it is
open as it must be if energy is leaving.
Two is OU. so is three. Practically all our energy comes from the Sun anyway.
Can you give me an example of an actual closed system where no energy can leave or enter the system ?
Anyway you can define your systems, but I will define mine. All my systems are open.
Over unity meaning over 1, can have the valid meaning of over the amount we put in we get out, over 1, ummm, get it ?
Now that is my definition, maybe others as well. If asked I can clarify anytime without being sarcastic or trying to put people down.
In my opinion a closed system would be almost impossible, except for the entire Universe.
You might be a very smart individual Ex. but you are so far up yourself you get dirty fingers when you stroke your own ego.
I'm sorry but I think you serve no purpose here but to put people down. You continually try to put words into peoples mouths
and attribute to them things they did not say or mean, you seem to have some kind of problem.
Get off your high horse, or can't you find the ladder you used to get on it ?
Simple question. Can you give me an example of an "actual closed system", one that does not allow energy to leave or enter the system ?
You affirm there is such a thing as a closed system the burden of proof is with you, describe a real life example of an actual closed system.
..
Quote from: poynt99 on 2013.04.06, 19:18:39
Grumpy,
This post (http://tech.groups.yahoo.com/group/KeelyNet_Interact/message/1905) might be of interest to you.
can't get to it
Yahoo says I'm not accepting cookies
Quote from: Grumpy on 2013.04.08, 00:20:56
can't get to it
Yahoo says I'm not accepting cookies
OK, it was a post by John Berry (aether22)
QuoteFor what it is worth, I have recently discovered a major part of Clem and
Schauberer and others.
Rotation of small diameter vorticies creates an aether drag field that
expands out, so if the linear velocity of the fluid (or rotation of a
solid) is 1 meter a second and the vortex is just 1cm in diameter, then an
aetheric drag field expands out keeping the same RPM but a much higher
linear velocity.
This moves the aether far faster than the physical motion would otherwise
cause.
Additionally I have found that interference can occur between drag fields
to cause even greater velocity.
I have found this to be the effect behind Nathan Stubblefields coils with
parallel steel and copper wires.
The 2 wires convey impulses (electrical and aetheric) at different speeds
causing a single frequency to self interfere.
John
Quote from: poynt99 on 2013.04.08, 01:22:48
OK, it was a post by John Berry (aether22)
sounds good
Grumpy,
In all your experiments on those other closed forum groups, did anybody perform the basic bifilar coil experiment suggested by Spherics? (with the iron delay coil in series)
Did you notice the "kick"? or anything unusual?
Quote from: EMdevices on 2013.04.08, 02:31:21
Grumpy,
In all your experiments on those other closed forum groups, did anybody perform the basic bifilar coil experiment suggested by Spherics? (with the iron delay coil in series)
Did you notice the "kick"? or anything unusual?
Only Peter. He used low voltage. The delay causes pulse compression and .99 was able to show it in Spice. I.E. you get a increase pulse amplitude that is shorter than the original pulses.
Unusual? Explosion sounds. Like a discharge but no flash of a spark. I got those as well, but at 10kv they were like the crack of a rifle.
It's all quite real, despite anyone's personal preference.
Kick -- yes. exactly as SM describes. With a very fast scope you can observe the kick -- we traced it back to the reverse recovery of the diode in circuit. Look up diode pulse forming.
@Grumpy .. SM did admit that the tec was not his and it was reverse engineered -- voice communication only -- not on any forum or in any public context. This was the most private secret -- the tec was not his. I figured it hurts no one to know what SM said now so long after the fact.
Mark,
how did SM communicate this? to whom? I thought he only emailed LM. :-\
To be honest, I doubt he reversed engineer the TPU. He explains his discovery process in his emails quite extensively. I think somebody was trying to confuse everybody.
BTW, what is a "tec"?
Quote from: Mark Snoswell on 2013.04.08, 07:46:58
Kick -- yes. exactly as SM describes. With a very fast scope you can observe the kick -- we traced it back to the reverse recovery of the diode in circuit. Look up diode pulse forming.
@Grumpy .. SM did admit that the tec was not his and it was reverse engineered -- voice communication only -- not on any forum or in any public context. This was the most private secret -- the tec was not his. I figured it hurts no one to know what SM said now so long after the fact.
"tec" = technology
http://www.overunity.com/4728/is-lindsays-sm-a-fraud/390/#.UWKalErPLWc (http://www.overunity.com/4728/is-lindsays-sm-a-fraud/390/#.UWKalErPLWc)
Quote from: Mark Snoswell on 2013.04.08, 07:46:58
Kick -- yes. exactly as SM describes. With a very fast scope you can observe the kick -- we traced it back to the reverse recovery of the diode in circuit. Look up diode pulse forming.
@Grumpy .. SM did admit that the tec was not his and it was reverse engineered -- voice communication only -- not on any forum or in any public context. This was the most private secret -- the tec was not his. I figured it hurts no one to know what SM said now so long after the fact.
"Reverse4 recovery of the diode"? What diode are you talking about? Avalanching one makes sense, but you don't have to use a diode. Use of one does make an avalanche transistor stack shorter, and they are very repeatable and reliable.
When "SM" said this, was it actually SM or some imposter? There were several people back then on the forum saying that SM had stolen the tech from the military and that we shouldn't persue it and all that.
a few unusual things i noticed about nS pulses phased delayed
Strange Ghostly noises picked up 6 feet away by electrolet microphones.
Crackling noises from within the wire
on the second pulse at certain delays the coil has an enormous appetite for current, much more than the wire would take using specs, a sharp magnetic pulse emanates from the length of the coil, A high voltage sharp pulse seems to get reflected back to the fet which damages it.
The second pulse varies in amplitude at all delay settings, it's amplitude varies depending on the time from the first pulse to the second , for instance if we have a coil that's natural resonant frequency is 15MHz then if we send the first pulse and wait 66.6nS then the second pulse amplitude seems to be maximun, the amplitude of the second pulse is larger at harmonic delay timings as well.
There are delay pockets where computers start crashing, although i have never had something damaged.
SM did not elaborate much on what he meant by his statements regarding tuning to closely to the exact frequency (as he called it), and the amount of energy converted destroying the device.
Quote from: WaveWatcher on 2013.04.08, 10:27:41
"tec" = technology
http://www.overunity.com/4728/is-lindsays-sm-a-fraud/390/#.UWKalErPLWc (http://www.overunity.com/4728/is-lindsays-sm-a-fraud/390/#.UWKalErPLWc)
thanks, I never know anymore what people mean by acronyms. I'm all "acronymed out" at work, you know you've been there. Maybe I'll invent a new acronym for the first 4 words in my previous sentance:
IAAO :D
Quote from: Peterae on 2013.04.08, 19:38:46
a few unusual things i noticed about nS pulses phased delayed
Strange Ghostly noises picked up 6 feet away by electrolet microphones.
Crackling noises from within the wire
on the second pulse at certain delays the coil has an enormous appetite for current, much more than the wire would take using specs, a sharp magnetic pulse emanates from the length of the coil, A high voltage sharp pulse seems to get reflected back to the fet which damages it.
The second pulse varies in amplitude at all delay settings, it's amplitude varies depending on the time from the first pulse to the second , for instance if we have a coil that's natural resonant frequency is 15MHz then if we send the first pulse and wait 66.6nS then the second pulse amplitude seems to be maximun, the amplitude of the second pulse is larger at harmonic delay timings as well.
There are delay pockets where computers start crashing, although i have never had something damaged.
very interesting, I might give it a try.
Did a snubber circuit help?
I reread the paper again. Are there SM emails is addition to the public ones? Does anyone have a copy?
Quote from: bte on 2014.09.24, 21:43:08
I reread the paper again. Are there SM emails is addition to the public ones? Does anyone have a copy?
Just so you know, guys, the 'Web address above won't run on this borrowed library computer I'm using. Something about the file name or possibly data format is incompatible with the operating system of this desktop terminal.
Also, I don't have more time to look through all the posts on this thread, but can a wiring diagram be provided by anyone?
--Lee
Quote from: bte on 2014.09.24, 21:43:08
I reread the paper again. Are there SM emails is addition to the public ones? Does anyone have a copy?
which paper?
I don't think all of the SM emails are public. As far as recall, SM never gave up anything definitive and exact, except for stating that Tao "has the secret" when Tao was talking about Tesla's Radiant electric discharges. SM stated from the start that he could only share info by analogies and no exact info.
Quote from: the_big_m_in_ok on 2014.09.24, 22:13:30
Just so you know, guys, the 'Web address above won't run on this borrowed library computer I'm using. Something about the file name or possibly data format is incompatible with the operating system of this desktop terminal.
Also, I don't have more time to look through all the posts on this thread, but can a wiring diagram be provided by anyone?
--Lee
Which web address are you referring to?
Look at the first post that I made in this thread on page 1. This post has several files, download all of them.
There are 3 wiring and assembly diagrams. The main pdf has these.
Spherics showed a basic schematic with snubber for using MOSFETs to drive the coils. MOSFETs are not required.
Electrons are small magnets. If you think about long time you will realize TPU was not a rocket science.
Quote from: Grumpy on 2014.09.24, 22:27:45
Which web address are you referring to?
Look at the first post that I made in this thread on page 1. This post has several files, download all of them.
There are 3 wiring and assembly diagrams. The main pdf has these.
Spherics showed a basic schematic with snubber for using MOSFETs to drive the coils. MOSFETs are not required.
Well, okay, I agree. We're (possibly?) looking at different things, I think?
This was probably what I thought I meant:
http://www.overunity.com/4728/is-lindsays-sm-a-fraud/390/#.VCSfB1dCzAl
And, it loads and runs as it should.
Now, as to your posted thread starter .PDF's...
I did download and view some of them and the basic thing I see is what I like about Don Smith's research efforts: Namely, the use of 'daughter' pickup coils around a central main, power transmitting driver coil, as depicted in...
* M9_nanosecond scr switch.pdf
...the above .PDF file in your original post. If you look at the diagrams, you should see what I mean by what I refer to above. Pg. 1 has a transformer with power secondary coils on the other side of the primary coil, as shown on Page 1, Figure 1 of the .PDf
Smith merely separates the pickup coils from the transformer coil and sets it off a short distance from the primary. Here's what I mean, exactly...
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=CXZoaznnuhg&list=FL46LHvaXTY6u2pHFYpfdtgw&index=1
Don Smith was researching the same principle, I think. If so, I agree. Any number of coils can be set off from a central transmitting coil and power taken(tapped) from the outlying coils. So they might not be overunity? Fine, but the concept works in the video and should work with distinct wire coils.
That was me original point of this set of posts I'm uploading.
--Lee
The AVEC is quite different from anything else you will find. Essentially, it utilizes another mode of induction to induce a DC current in the collector coils. This mode of induction, lacking the inherent limitations of conventional Faraday induction, can be adjusted to run with gain. I had hoped to release more about it this year, but with the commitments of home, work, and school I don't have a great deal of free time.
The Radiant Induction effect seems to provide a sort of coupling effect even when it shouldn't be possible given the angle. I've heard that it "pushes" and "pulls" electrons through the wire via the abrupt discharges, causing a slight heating effect. I'm not sure how the gain mechanism works, but given a cascading pattern, it appears. It appears easier with a DC solenoid wrapped around the device.
I think that this is really the only way to get a serious alternative energy source. I'm rebuilding my controller box to deal with the different configurations. (AVEC, flat TPU coil(s), Tetra). I have two 0-500v DC supplies for bifilars, pulse wdith and delay timing for each winding, and I can drive up to 20Mhz if I replace MOSFETs with a better driving mechanism, say avalanche transistors.
Several people made very nice assemblies of the coils. Some even had coils wound by a winding shop - sweet stuff indeed.
But they never finished building it.
I'd love to see a bifilar at 500v with Peter's controller....As I adjusted the delay by picoseconds, the whole house vaporized! (joking...)
Quote from: bte on 2014.09.26, 23:40:44
I think that this is really the only way to get a serious alternative energy source.
I agree.
My new homemade controller has 4 channels for the tetra with an extra delay channel per main channel to drive a bifilar (flat SM coil) configuration. The power supply for it was tough to design, I wanted it to be stiff for high frequency driving. I have 8 separate adjustable 500 volt DC-DC converters (one per coil winding) and 8 MOSFET driving DC-DC converters. The controller can wind up to 20Mhz, I used RF MOSFETS. I really want to up the voltage, 500 volts seems like a low target.
A very capable Italian researcher with username "ronotte" which was short for Roberto Notte did in fact very carefully build the full device as outlined by Sperics. I believe he also worked closely at one point with user "OTTO" on the ECD.
AFAIK, his results were inconclusive. He has a very well equipped lab and his build was very professional. You may still be able to find his videos for this device on youtube or maybe someone else saved them.
some info here: http://www.overunity.com/2240/ronottes-amazing-tpu-experiments/nowap/
This is some early TPU experiments, pre-Spheric. Search his username for more leads.
I may have archived some of the photos, will have to look.
regards, ION
EDIT: OK just checked, I have archived a lot of "Ronotte's photos of his Spheric's (AVEC) build. I have 31 MB of Ronotte's photos and other stuff, where can I post them? Don't want to use up too much server space here.
Looking at some of the photo's, his was an amazing build complete with custom routed aluminum enclosures for the pulse drivers.
I believe Mark Snowswell was also involved in replication, as some of the pulse circuitry was contributed by him.
That's a great start. You can follow the testing that Roberto did. He is still around and you may want to contact him. Before the big falling out with the group on the builders forum, Roberto had created a large document of his work on the spherics TPU. As I recall, his max voltage was just under the minimum to meet the 1500v drop requirement.
I use EMCO DC-DC converter bricks for power supplies, and an old adjustable 1000v dc-dc converter (only 1 ma) for transistor testing.
Another approach might be to put a call out to everyone with an uncompleted unit, and there are several, and perhaps send them controllers or at least a good schematic and parts list for one. The controller was the limiting factor for most people. The 1500v requirement put it at the top of the MOSFET range.
Rosphere has a very nice assembly.
At the time that Roberto was building and testing, I was using a 10kv setup with a sparkgap and all sort of wierd charging and arcing was occurring - just as Elihu Thomson and Joseph Henry had first witnessed, referenced by Tesla, and later replicated by him and further developed. I could feel the field around coils that I impulsed out to 3 feet.
I think the CCU wiring schematic has an error, and the capacitor isolation switches should be on the vertical lines going to the capacitor, else they disconnect the CCU's from the battery.
Also, I used DPDT switches for all three switch groups, but have not updated the schematic for this yet.
I have a massive buffer capacitor in place across the bias coil(s). It takes about 3 seconds to discharge completely at 2 amps. To ensure the bias field winds down somewhat slowly. To top off the capacitor that feeds the system I have a double buffered capacitor setup for feedback. As long as the output never directly feeds the input, it's stable. I haven't tried a direct approach because I have not tested how fast the runaway event occurs. I assume it is immediate so I simply never allow it to happen.
Quote from: bte on 2014.10.14, 02:15:03
I have a massive buffer capacitor in place across the bias coil(s). It takes about 3 seconds to discharge completely at 2 amps. To ensure the bias field winds down somewhat slowly. To top off the capacitor that feeds the system I have a double buffered capacitor setup for feedback. As long as the output never directly feeds the input, it's stable. I haven't tried a direct approach because I have not tested how fast the runaway event occurs. I assume it is immediate so I simply never allow it to happen.
I use a 500uF poly cap.
What do you mean by: "To top off the capacitor that feeds the system I have a double buffered capacitor setup for feedback."
I would stay away from a direct approach. We don't want to read about you in the news.
Quote from: Grumpy on 2014.10.14, 14:29:15
I use a 500uF poly cap.
What do you mean by: "To top off the capacitor that feeds the system I have a double buffered capacitor setup for feedback."
I would stay away from a direct approach. We don't want to read about you in the news.
Input cap -> Switch A -> Buffer Cap -> Switch B -> Buffer Cap -> Switch C -> Output
It's a chain of PWM switches with some safety logic to ensure they never bridge the input to the output at the same time. I think I overcomplicated it.
I agree on the direct approach.
Is that decoupled from the output?
If you use a separate power source for the static coils (i.e. batteries) then they can never be directly connected. Cold current will keep the batteries charge, if present.
I use one power source. That rough circuit description is the decoupling mechanism to keep the capacitors charged without connecting the output back to the input. I made a mistake in the description, swap input and output. I have protection diodes and overvoltage circuitry that trips the rotation circuit in the event the switches fail in a closed state for some reason.
One new CCU control box finished. Will try to get the other one finished this weekend.
I've got some new delay boards I'm having fabricated currently.
that's a good idea.
Bellow is a re-post of Spheric's comments on build accuracy:
Question posed to Spherics:
>Hi XXX,
>
>I'm still working on the control circuit for the coil and had a couple
>of questions to ask you. Exactly how accurate does the phase-shifting
>for the rotating field need to be? The controller circuit that I am
>building uses some shift registers to divide the clock input and produce
>the three output phases 120 degrees shifted. Below is the circuit that I
>have come up with so far. The way it is setup, you can use the pulse
>width of the input clock to control the pulse width of all three output
>channels simultaneously:
Page 71
>I found that the circuit could run up to at least 5 MHz without
>glitching and allows us to use a single pulse width control component
to
>control the outputs for all three channels simultaneously. However, I
am
>concerned about the phase-shift/delay fine-tuning.
>
>You mentioned that the phase-shift has to be accurate for the rotating
>field to be setup correctly. Coming out of the shift register, the
>timing for each channel is accurate to within 0.5 ns. but by the time
>the signal goes through the driver ICs and input lines to the coils,
>there could be significant delays of 10s of nanoseconds. My questions
is
>how precise is precise enough for the effect to work without destroying
>the effect? If we need to fine-tune the output delays, I found some
>8-bit delay line ICs that can adjust the the delays to within 0.25 ns of
>the output up to a max delay of 80 ns. But before I toss these onto the
>circuit, I thought i would ask you to see if this is really necessary or
>simply overkill. What methods did you use to design the timing circuitry
>for your controller?
Spherics's answer to question:
April 2008
I'm away on a course so this is a quick reply. With pulses although we talk of a phase shift we are talking of the time between the start of one pulse and the start of the next pulse as being the same between each successive pulse, in an ideal world. If you are using the same type of drive components and type of mosfets, have high tolerance resistors and capacitors, and keep wire lengths between components as short as possible but consistent between each driver circuit, mitigating impedance and capacitance effects of the wires, the delays to all three coils should be almost identical. So even if there is 50 nanosecond delay, if it's the same delay to each coil then it's not a problem. Even a difference of 10-30 nanoseconds between coils will not dissappoint in terms of output energy and cold elec effects.
Let's take a typical poor-build. Each coil has different widths out by 1/8inch or more. The coils are wrapped until either the spool is empty or it just seems the right height. The length of wire between coils varies by 15-20% at least. These coils will require independant delays of hundreds of nanoseconds and increases in pulse width of hundreds of nanoseconds to get a *consistent* output. But even without adjustment they'll get output, however the amplitude of that output will come in waves and not be as high as it could be, and the amount of input energy used will be much higher due to the much longer pulse widths. They will be unlikely to get a consistent cold energy output, the lightbulbs in the SEP circuit, may ebb and glow slightly. It may or may not be overunity but possibly only by 10%. All exciting stuff but it's not a setup that is going anywhere. It is not really utilising any flow of cold electricity, just bursts here and there. i.e. because the pattern is not building up, it is occuring only in waves, and is relatively feable, i.e. there is no 'resonance' in the ether.
In answer to your question if you build your coils carefully and locate them precisely and rigidly, I would not bother with the delay line components. At a later date for reference:
These are useful for pulse width:
http://www.datadelay.com/datasheets/3d7608.pdf
These are useful for delay lines as you use a screwdriver:
http://www.datadelay.com/asp/variable.asp
Switch mode power supply chips can be useful for driving 3 or 6 coils as 3 pairs. Such as:
http://ww1.microchip.com/downloads/en/DeviceDoc/70178C.pdf
I should note that my two current builds are:
3 phase flat SM style coil with four SEPs (two bifilar windings) and an output coil.
The tetra TPU with encompassing SEP coil.
My tetra coils are not identical due to the automated winder I had.
These are the batteries I have:
http://www.batterymart.com/p-12v-7ah-sealed-lead-acid-battery-f2.html
Got to figure out some delay elements.
I was looking at these, but they are like $50 each:
http://www.datadelay.com/datasheets/1503.pdf
I'll have to look at the inductor and capacitor values for the 1 to 100ns range and see if I can use some small trimmer caps and small inductors (or even wind some).
This may work:
http://www.rhombus-ind.com/dlcat/app1_pas.pdf
Quote from: Peterae on 2012.04.27, 12:42:24
It's the speed at which the coils are sequentially switched that's the problem, 3kHz is not good enough, i found this with the Tetra, i needed at least 1MHz rotation speed.
What happened at 1MHz?
There was talk at the time that 60MHz was needed, i could not get the tetra working but what was interesting was the center toroid did pick up what appeared to be switching spikes from the sourounding switched coils.
just spikes or oscillations?
just spikes
You say you could not get it working; what did you try?
Did you try the outer SEP coil?
at the time i was not privy to a lot of the stuff you guys were getting, strange really as i was the only one trying to build the tetra that i know of.
The Tetra had 4 coils, 3 around the bottom triangular formation pointing towards the center each pulsed sequentially and the 1 top coil pointing to the center that was pulses with each of the other 3, maybe that would be your SEP coil.
The SEP is an additional 6th coil that goes over all the other ones. It allows you to lower the pulse rate considerably, as low as 3kHz.
Quote from: Grumpy on 2014.10.21, 20:54:10
The SEP is an additional 6th coil that goes over all the other ones. It allows you to lower the pulse rate considerably, as low as 3kHz.
It should amplify any results you were getting, the tretra alone, with no outer SEP coil, requires extremely high frequencies to cause the fields to interact in the correct way.
These delay arrays are about $7 or $8 each, much better than $50 each.
G it's only a 5 tap delay, the DS1023 is 256 tap.
so i would need 52 of those chips to equal the ds1023 O0
How do you program the 1023?
It uses parallel load or serial data stream, i have used 8 dip switches before on the circuit for the tetra, i used 2 DS1023, one to adjust the phase delay and the other for pulse width, the circuit is in my bench.
The DS1023 = 5V
DS1123 = 3.3V
they come in 250pS steps, 500pS steps, 1nS , 2nS & 5nS and each has 256 binary selections so the 1nS version goes from 0-255nS
They are now obsolete chips and are getting harder to find.
I am currently building a digital mono that uses this chip, just had the PCBs made.
http://www.overunityresearch.com/index.php?topic=2599.0
CCU power boxes (permanent ones) are done.
Working on a permanent controller now.
Built the "more permanent" controller board this morning. Still got to put it a for caps on the power leg and put it in a box, but almost there.
My goal this next week or two is to test all the new stuff and put everything back together. Hoping for an exciting 2015!
Will post some pics when I find my camera.
As far as I can remember, no one used the mica board. It has some interesting uses aside from heat resistance. My unit is easy to disassemble if I decide to test it later.
EDIT:
Controller is built.
Looking for the camera.
Start testing the boards tomorrow.
Started a proper mechanical construction of this. Getting parts CNC machined, long lead time though. I went with the 6.90" SOL diameter.
Driving with sine waves for this one. Low-ish frequency, as low as I can get it. I can drive a 3 phase transformer to get the volts with a low frequency.
Frequencies:
54Hz - Easy, but not enough wire or reactance at this frequency given my wire diameter and length.
324Hz - Almost doable, not much buffer room, assuming 30AWG as a length as per the calculation sheet, my reactance is around 1100 ohms at this frequency. I could drive up to around 1.1kv (including offset DC) without exceeding the current limits of the wire.
1944Hz - Much better, sqealing would get annoying
11664Hz - The iron cores in the transformers would probably start to lose efficiency at this frequency
69984Hz - Same as above, I could switch to air core at this point though, the coils should appear as a very high resistance at these frequencies.
Above this is gets hard to generate a sine wave without going through a mixer and an RF amplifier.
Thoughts?
sine waves?
One of the ways to drive is via sine wave instead of pulse. With a sine wave I can simply step up the voltage to the level I want.
Sine waves will have to be biased and this was for use without a separate bias field.
Right, I'm planning on doing both. What grabbed me about the sine wave setup was that I could drive the voltage up arbitrarily high using conventional transformers if I kept the frequency low enough (maybe a few kHz), and used a bit more bias current. I have a saturable reactor core that I'm using to limit and control the voltage to the CCU coils. The only difficult part is the 3 phase sine wave generation circuitry. Digital PWM at a constant frequency, I have a mixer I can use to increase it as need be (after the transformer). Another saturable reactor acts as a magnetic amplifier and boosts the small PWM signal to one capable of driving the signal to a step up transformer.
The other SEP supplies are similarly controlled with saturable reactors (AC through the reactor then rectified).
I've read up a lot on saturable reactors. I'd like to eventually see if I could make an oscillator with one. (Without a transistor or vacuum tube)
With a larger space for more wire, I could probably bump the voltage up higher, right now I'm aiming for 1kv with a 500v bias (bottom of the sine wave is ~500v, top at 1.5kv)
It would make sense that SM would have used a saturable reactor to limit the feedback, the output would be high frequency DC pulses, and a saturable reactor would block all of that with no bias.
I have a resonant LC oscillator I'm tuning at the moment, three phases with a PLL.
The voltage is adjustable up to around 1kv using the tank circuit at resonance. I could probably go higher with beefier transistors.
The circuit resonates at the LC frequency automatically. A problem was making this easily adjustable so that I could use the oscillator as the VFO stage in the Phase Locked Loop.
Usually only the C variable in the LC circuit is varied, but with a saturable reactor as the L portion, you can now vary the inductance and hence the frequency, with voltage, making it easy to integrate into a PLL.
I'm quite excited about this, I really needed the PLL to keep the other two oscillators locked on, 120 degrees out of phase.
So it _should_ be stable, especially if I use an external stable reference oscillator with minimal drift, PLL the primary LC oscillator off that, and PLL the other two off the primary.
So then I run the three phases through a decoupling capacitor, add in the HV biasing current, and viola, a 1kv DC offset 1kv sine wave. The AC reactance at high frequency limits the RF current, and the DC resistance of the wire limits the bias current, Im using 44 AWG wire (and it was a huge pain to wind, even with a coil winder!)
Im still running a SEP around each coil, just in case it's needed.
Doing it this way, keeps the components fairly generic and easy to come across, even if it's a bit more complicated than a pulsing setup...
Sounds great!
How is your own progress coming?
I only work on it intermittently as I am busy with everything else. After searching and pounding through literature and false leads for several years, I sort of ran out of energy - pun intended.
Yeah, this is tough work, mentally and physically. I've wasted a lot of time and money on it, but I'm thinking it's worth it. It's all about getting up after falling, after all.
missed chats
build accuracy
Update for 2022:
After setting this aside for a few years, I working on it as much as time allows.
New topic started here:
https://www.overunityresearch.com/index.php?topic=4335.msg100238#msg100238
Being stuck on the road I don't have a lab/shop to perform actual experiments, so I spent some time designing a new HV pulse controller for the dual purpose of having a 1-4 phase HV controller onhand for AVEC work as well as the dual-pulse experiment and some related coil tests. :)
The controller is rated to 1500-1700v, at least 100w per channel, with what should be a decent switching speed and repetition rate. Nowadays I like to use metal oxide varisters across the source-drain to help prevent spikes+surges. It forces some derating but tend to make the FETs last indefinitely.
It is designed as a lowside driver but swapping a battery or isolated source for the gate driver will turn it into a highside driver.
Each iteration of these is a bit of a lessons-learned as small variations in trace size/width, filtering, etc all have an impact on systems like this.
Many here have the same dream of a fast isolated system for these experiments .
My approach is using fibre optics for drive isolation of all kinds . 10 metres is no problem .
It not without its challenges but cheap toslink rx and tx is what I am using .
In theory and practice it has some great advantages where stray voltages and sharp transitions have far fewer unwanted paths .
It also allows the minimium of components near the hot spots.
The main problem is that all parts these days are end of run and quality is variable .
And my brain is ageing in an undesirable manner .
Quote from: Hakasays on 2022.11.10, 02:38:58
Being stuck on the road I don't have a lab/shop to perform actual experiments, so I spent some time designing a new HV pulse controller for the dual purpose of having a 1-4 phase HV controller onhand for AVEC work as well as the dual-pulse experiment and some related coil tests. :)
The controller is rated to 1500-1700v, at least 100w per channel, with what should be a decent switching speed and repetition rate. Nowadays I like to use metal oxide varisters across the source-drain to help prevent spikes+surges. It forces some derating but tend to make the FETs last indefinitely.
It is designed as a lowside driver but swapping a battery or isolated source for the gate driver will turn it into a highside driver.
Each iteration of these is a bit of a lessons-learned as small variations in trace size/width, filtering, etc all have an impact on systems like this.
This sounds good for the Tetrahedral Spherics device, which is only 3 phases (channels), and a minimum of 300v pulses.
If using MOSFETs for the AVEC, you may want to use a higher voltage range. The slower the switching time, the higher the voltage has to be to have a voltage drop of at least 1000v across the coil. At these voltages, a damper (I use RC and a flyback diode) is a must and I had to determine values manually.
You will also have to contend with the Miller Effect with the switched HV trashing your gate pulse. This bad effect doesn't happen at the same parameters for each device. I had two of six channels that were perfect, four were trash. I could slow down the MOSFET, but that is opposite of what you want for the pulse effect.
I was using around 2500v with the 4.5kv MOSFETs that I tried to get the 1000v drop across the coil. This is well above the 1500v that Spherics used as an example. Note that he used SCR's, and not MOSFETs.
Regarding the wattage, you only need the minimum current to make it work. More like 10W or 20W than 100W.
I only recommend avalanche switching devices for the AVEC.I hope to have time this weekend to test my avalanche transistor pulser at 2kv... O0
Note for HV o-scope probes: look at the frequency de-rating chart! BK Precision is OK to 2KV, above that look at LeCroy probes for 4kv and 5kv. I use the 1000:1 40kv BK Precision HV DMM probe, but Cal Test probe looks the same.
Spherics said HV is cheap, and it is to generate, but the test equipment and components are not cheap at all!
Quote from: 3D Magnetics on 2022.11.10, 05:26:16
Many here have the same dream of a fast isolated system for these experiments .
My approach is using fibre optics for drive isolation of all kinds . 10 metres is no problem .
It not without its challenges but cheap toslink rx and tx is what I am using.
Boy don't I know it C.C.
I kinda want to get my hands on some thyratrons/ignitrons or similar as they seem like the ideal solution to smoke-free high-voltage nanosecond impulses. But that's a whole new learning curve by itself.
I have a couple soviet GU5b's but they are not rated for impulses so I suspect the grid might dislodge/arcover from a very large pulse.
Quote from: Grumpy on 2022.11.10, 15:16:24
This sounds good for the Tetrahedral Spherics device, which is only 3 phases (channels), and a minimum of 300v pulses.
If using MOSFETs for the AVEC, you may want to use a higher voltage range. The slower the switching time, the higher the voltage has to be to have a voltage drop of at least 1000v across the coil. At these voltages, a damper (I use RC and a flyback diode) is a must and I had to determine values manually.
You will also have to contend with the Miller Effect with the switched HV trashing your gate pulse. This bad effect doesn't happen at the same parameters for each device. I had two of six channels that were perfect, four were trash. I could slow down the MOSFET, but that is opposite of what you want for the pulse effect.
I was using around 2500v with the 4.5kv MOSFETs that I tried to get the 1000v drop across the coil. This is well above the 1500v that Spherics used as an example. Note that he used SCR's, and not MOSFETs.
Regarding the wattage, you only need the minimum current to make it work. More like 10W or 20W than 100W.
I'm not directly focused on AVEC so I wanted something fairly versatile. I have a couple configurations that I think may be able to show a similar effect in iron/ferrite. Would need higher current but switching speeds could be much lower.
Quote
Note for HV o-scope probes: look at the frequency de-rating chart! BK Precision is OK to 2KV, above that look at LeCroy probes for 4kv and 5kv. I use the 1000:1 40kv BK Precision HV DMM probe, but Cal Test probe looks the same.
Nowadays for early work I find it's easier to just leave the probe dangling in another part of the bench. Anything over 1kv seems to show up just fine via capacitve coupling alone.
Quote from: Hakasays on 2022.11.10, 15:47:05
I kinda want to get my hands on some thyratrons/ignitrons or similar as they seem like the ideal solution to smoke-free high-voltage nanosecond impulses. But that's a whole new learning curve by itself.
Speaking of thyratrons, have you seen Kerry Wong's Experiments with a Hydrogen Thyratron (http://www.kerrywong.com/2019/03/03/experiments-with-a-hydrogen-thyratron/) blog post?
I've been in contact with someone in Serbia who was selling some heavy duty Soviet hydrogen TGI2-400/16 thyratrons, but I decided not to buy them as I don't think my wife would have tolerated them in addition to the mess of cables and components in our garage! The price was actually quite reasonable, $200 for two.
Quote from: lfarrand on 2022.11.10, 21:34:43
Speaking of thyratrons, have you seen Kerry Wong's Experiments with a Hydrogen Thyratron (http://www.kerrywong.com/2019/03/03/experiments-with-a-hydrogen-thyratron/) blog post?
I've been in contact with someone in Serbia who was selling some heavy duty Soviet hydrogen TGI2-400/16 thyratrons, but I decided not to buy them as I don't think my wife would have tolerated them in addition to the mess of cables and components in our garage! The price was actually quite reasonable, $200 for two.
Thanks for the link. Looks like a pretty simple setup for Thyratrons, and easily adapted from a vacuum tube supply. I think I'll order one and hope I can find a free weekend to play around with it. >:-)