Has anybody tried to replicate this:
http://www.youtube.com/user/StifflerDr#p/a/u/0/-K5yyQgYdgo (http://www.youtube.com/user/StifflerDr#p/a/u/0/-K5yyQgYdgo)
GL.
Myself and Poynt discussed this earlier this evening. It doesn't smell right to me at all. I suspect that his "ground connection" is actually the power input, and the power source is another SEC off-screen. It's possible that there may be psychological factors at play here.
Along the same lines, there is always the option to take fine magnet wire and route power to the device. This will simply not be picked up by the camera. I actually thought that's what Mylow was doing. As we know, what he did was not done with fine electrical wires that couldn't be picked up by the camera, but it was done with fine fishing line that drove his rotors, and that couldn't (almost) be picked up by the camera.
I would not be so quick to claim smoke and mirrors on this guy.
He is doing a few things that signals he knows what he is doing.
Choke and carbon resistor to ground - gives the L1 / L2 a ground reference without dragging down the oscillation in the coils.
Variable air cap on the L1 ( I assume ) to fine tune to the inductance of L1
Parts are mounted above the pcb to remove the stray capacitance from screwing with the frequency until the design is perfected where everything can be locked down.
The problems I see are:
Lots of electronic equipment in the near field
Lots of AC in the near field
Dont know how clean that ground line is
Special custom transistor that requires no heat sink - everyone throws one of these in to discourage replicators
Other that the above - I like it..
Why do people have to make "cold current" sound so mysterious? It's everywhere, just not at vast amplitudes.
Any non-ionic current does not produce resistive heating since the particles are not flowing through a conductor. Polar dielectrics may heat up.
What would cause millions of haze lines in a block of acrylic?
I was surprised it was a transistor and not a tube.
I wonder what the Rtt is on the AV Plug - could use tubes there as well and get a better result - sorry... a more complete result.
Quote from: darkspeed on 2011.02.07, 16:13:22
Choke and carbon resistor to ground - gives the L1 / L2 a ground reference without dragging down the oscillation in the coils.
Variable air cap on the L1 ( I assume ) to fine tune to the inductance of L1
Parts are mounted above the pcb to remove the stray capacitance from screwing with the frequency until the design is perfected where everything can be locked down.
The problems I see are:
Lots of electronic equipment in the near field
Lots of AC in the near field
Dont know how clean that ground line is
Special custom transistor that requires no heat sink - everyone throws one of these in to discourage replicators
Other that the above - I like it..
If you assume that the output is feeding back to the input to charge the electrolytic capacitor via the avramenko plug, the you don't need an external ground reference. The ground of the electrolytic capacitor that allegedly supplies power to the circuit is a perfectly good stand-alone ground reference. There is a lot of misunderstanding and disinformation out there about grounds and ground references.
You can also assume that he needs the variable air cap to work with L1 to make a tank circuit that resonates with the external excitation signal which may be coming from what he is stating is his external ground reference line. In other words, it's just a standard "single wire" energy transmission system that needs to be tuned. I put "single wire" in quotations also because that in itself is a misnomer.
The "special custom transistor" is also a big red flag that should make you very wary of what Mr. Stiffler is saying here. If he said "specially qualified transistor" that would be a different thing, implying that he had to go through a batch of standard transistors to find one with performance characteristics that met his requirements. However, I even find that logic to be very weak. In my opinion there is almost no reason that the normal variability associated with a given transistor part number should pose a major problem for the type of stuff that he is doing. Finally, if you take the literal interpretation of "special custom transistor" at face value, then that doesn't make much sense either. Certainly no semiconductor company has made a "special custom transistor" for Mr. Stiffler because he would probably have to buy a million of them to get them to do a custom design just for him. So that leaves him finding a non-standard transistor at an electronics recycling place and calling it a "special custom transistor."
MileHigh
I can't see youtube, is he avalanching the transistor?
Last I looked at Stiffler's stuff it was the same basis as the Avramenko Devices.
Avramenko wrote a paper on the conversion of displacement current to conduction current (via the "plug"), but I have never been able to find a copy of this paper. Attached is his patent.
Grumpy:
In his clip it appears that he has a self-sustaining SEC-type circuit lighting up some white LEDs with a wire that ostensibly connects to an external gound.
I looked at the abstract for the Avramenko patent. Was it granted? I would be shocked if it was.
There is a simple explanation for the operation of the Avramenko plug. When the voltage is rising in the wire the diode that points towards the positive terminal of the load briefly conducts a puff of (positive) charge towards the positive terminal. When the voltage is falling the diode that points away from the negative terminal of the load briefly conducts a puff of charge away from the negative terminal. This is all due to stray capacitance. i = C dv/dt. With a very small C and a very large dv/dt you can still get a substantial amount of current flow. If the AC frequency is high enough then it looks almost like DC current and can run small electric motors or light LEDs, etc.
The stray capacitance is responsible for your displacement current and the substrate/ground plane forms the "second wire." There is no such thing as true single wire energy transmission and no electrical engineer would bat an eyelash at an Avramenko plug. They would take it as a given and not give it a second thought. In the real world you can't use high frequency AC for power transmission just like you can't use Bedini-style pulse motors as motors. All of this stuff produces ridiculous amounts of interfering high-frequency EMI radiation and you wouldn't be able to use your cell phones, radios, or televisions.
MileHigh
Quote from: MileHigh on 2011.02.07, 20:20:29
If you assume that the output is feeding back to the input to charge the electrolytic capacitor via the avramenko plug, the you don't need an external ground reference. The ground of the electrolytic capacitor that allegedly supplies power to the circuit is a perfectly good stand-alone ground reference. There is a lot of misunderstanding and disinformation out there about grounds and ground references.
MileHigh
Unless he specifically needed to change the coils from 1/2 wave to 1/4 wave in which you would need a true ground reference rather than just a virtual ground capacitance
Is there any indication that Stiffler is lighting the LEDs with the "cold current" or is it with conventional current? The common "cold current" demonstration is to light an incandescent lamp and the light will have broad-spectrum white output. The bulb will also attract conductive objects like a charged sphere does.
Is the light the same as if connected to a common DC supply? Or is it broad spectrum indicative of some sort of deceleration radiation producing visible photons? (like Bremsstrahlung)
Avramenko mentions improved efficiency, but he doesn't say it runs with gain or adds energy in any way.
I guess he could have killed the transistor " failed open " and is using it for a micro calibrated gap.. would that work?
Quote from: darkspeed on 2011.02.07, 22:27:44
Unless he specifically needed to change the coils from 1/2 wave to 1/4 wave in which you would need a true ground reference rather than just a virtual ground capacitance
It sounds to me like you are talking about antenna theory. Why would that be applicable here unless I am missing something? BTW, the wavelength in free space for 9.3 MHz is 32.26 meters. The only issue from what I can see is that if there is indeed a self-powering oscillator in his setup then it needs a source of DC potential difference and that comes from the capacitor that is allegedly being recharged from the oscillator output. This implies that energy has to materialize out of nowhere if what he is saying is true.
Grumpy:
All that you can see are white LEDs being powered. Beyond that I don't believe in the concept of "cold current." That concept only exists in the realm of free energy and whenever I have seen a demonstration clip of "cold current" it was clearly conventional current in action.
MileHigh
I noticed that Stiffler uses the two diodes like Avramenko, but not the capacitor between the diodes and the load (placed in parallel). Avramenko also used HV, and had a gap across the capacitor.
So, if I understand this correctly, Stiffler is saying that he has a circuit that generates "cold current", this is converted to conventional current by the diodes, then this is fed back to power the circuit.
Where is the mechanism for "gain"?
There would have to be a greater amount of current in the portion of the circuit after the transformer, where the "cold current" starts. So, maybe not all of the cold current is "converted" to light, and enough is left over to power the circuit. hmmm....
In one of his old articles that I saved, he measured a variable currnet of 105mA to 450mA in the ground connection (earthed). He felt this was very interesting at the time. This was back in 2007.
EDIT:
If Stiffler has "gain", why hasn't he scaled this up for a more impressive display?
Someone passed on this message to me:
Quote"The transistor the Doctor is using is not commercially available. The unit was designed in-cooperation with a semiconductor company to construct a unit that improved on the factors present in the MPSA06 that allows a Negative Resistance operation. These units are extremely expensive as the design and production of only one-thousand units for initial research was done. If the work is allowed to progress the transistors may go into a normal production mode by this company - although may be of limited number.
Some basic parms are the average unit has an hfe of 400-750 and a Vbe of as low as 0.17 volts. The units will display an equivalent negative resistance of 0.7 ohm for a voltage of 8.5 volts. As the Doctor states one should stay tuned to what may be coming and again conditions can change this outcome"
He assured me that Doc Stiffler is involved in the development of this transistor. The Joule Thief enthusiasts will be happy if this ever becomes available.
.99
Too many people equate negative resistance with something for nothing, and it sounds so "Beardenesque"...
On other fronts, I am finding that space can store a lot of energy if you can keep polarizing it. Like an active capacitor.
HELOO TO ALL oh sory my caps lock again ;)
beacouse i dont have ansfer on yuotbe from stifleri liketo ask ask him here i to this .. i see spektrum analiser tha has and he say no inputs rf. did is posible to make anthere test out of his test room if is working then he has something BUT is no true explane how much we whill have energy from somerf. transmiters or lets say we hve 1 waat rf transmiter in on room place and then we have 1000000 recivers whitout batery only on coil and two diodes and tune to that transmiter and pick up enrgy more then the rf transmiter give as im very interesthing what stifler thing is posible whit 1 waat rf transmiter to have more then 1 waat to all recivers there if his on reciver there make to light leds there then let make 10 recivers to see did whill have able tolight more leds.
Some Brand New, Very informative Movies from the Doc!
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=TXYY7TqS380
Ben Is very excited about recent developements,
K4Zep
Quote
Well gang, there are 3 more Stiffler videos on YouTube that pretty well show how he does that 3 coil version. My Hat's off to him for giving everyone this guidance. Schematic, tips, really first rate information. Emphasis on isolation, position, etc.
Only thing he doesn't mention but once is that it has to be excited to start it, then it runs, if that is the way I heard it. I have everything to build it, test it, just have to wind 3, 22uH coils and match them at their approximately 25mhz self resonant frequency. It appears that the better you match the three coils, the better it will work. Then too, why not excite the 3 coil system with a SEC board operating in low power mode, feeding power back into the SEC via the AV Plug. As voltage and power loops back to the power rails and increases, it should then click into high power mode if kept on the right frequency and you have the best of both worlds. Just thinking out loud.
Right ON,
Ben
------------------------------------
And
MH appears to be famous over here,
http://www.overunity.com/index.php?topic=3457.2895
Seems Like Wilby wants to "learn" Him a few tings?
Chet
Quote from: ramset on 2011.02.25, 11:07:39
MH appears to be famous over here,
http://www.overunity.com/index.php?topic=3457.2895
Seems Like Wilby wants to "learn" Him a few tings?
Chet
Yeah I followed the link! WilbyInebriated has been reading me faithfully for years! He is a fan! It's so funny because it's a total
spin zone sometimes.
Mornin MH,
Stiffler Lights any more Leds in that Vid he's Gonna Get a sunburn! [maybe some other kind of Burn]
I Still can't hear vids ,Hows he say he's doing it?
Thanks
Chet
PS
I sure would Love to hear LTbolo's take on this,seems like the Doc is doing Lt's theory?
Quote from: ramset on 2011.02.25, 11:29:01
Mornin MH,
Stiffler Lights any more Leds in that Vid he's Gonna Get a sunburn! [maybe some other kind of Burn]
I Still can't hear vids ,Hows he say he's doing it?
Thanks
Chet
PS
I sure would Love to hear LTbolo's take on this,seems like the Doc is doing Lt's theory?
Top of the morning to you. He doesn't say that much about how he is doing it. He just says it's an extension of the previous clip where he is now lighting more LEDs. I think it must be smoke and mirrors!
http://www.liveleak.com/view?i=b4e_1298528078 (http://www.liveleak.com/view?i=b4e_1298528078)
Yikes!
Thanks MH
Yikes is right!! Yeesh too!
I didn't need sound for that one!
Chet
PS
You Don't think The Doc "edits" too??
Ben says
IT WORKS!!
Quote:
Hi Gang,
Stiffler's 3 coil circuit works. Checked Spectrum analyzer after video and it is Osc. all over the place, seems to amplify all the signals over
a 2-300mhz band. IF it locks in on a strong(just a few microvolts!) enough local signal, lights led.
My coils are a bit smaller in inductance in the L1-3 coils of stiffler and open resonance is almost 50 mhz instead of the 26 to 28 mHz of his but
it definitely works. Right on Dr. Stiffler. Enjoy.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SLl0Vs-vO0w
Ben......from the worlds smallest lab....
--------------------------
And MH
Just for the record,I value your opinion on this!
Chet
Ben posted another vid
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kAXP-gnjATM
Ben says "High current!",Time to loop
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=IUhLyrDE2qw
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=IUhLyrDE2qw
Chet
Those that have followed OU Know the Frog [Hoptoad].
He don't take wooden Nickles! EVER!
The Docs Stock is climbing by the minute!
And Ben ,He's all about open source!
Chet
Hi All,
It's my 1st post here. Permit me a little digression. I have duplicated today the Stiffler's experiment of electrolysis with a diode immersed in a water tube and an external ring electrode powered by HF. It works. My frequencies were in the range between 3 and 24 Mhz, using a radio transmitter. The minimum voltage was 100v. I could even get it from a LC circuit powered by an ordinary 12v/1W generator. For me it is a conventional setup. The gradient of voltage in the water creates a difference of potential at the terminals of the diode, which rectifies the current.
Power is provided by the generator. It is not free. Nevertheless this put me in a certain degree of confidence in Stiffler's matter, so I'm now on the way to duplicate his 3 coils stuff. But English is not my mother tongue, so I have some problems to fully understand the comments of the video.
Can some one explains what is the difference between the black coil and the two others?
Thanks in advance
Here is my setup with the 3 coils connected as in K4ZEP video and powered by a HF generator around 16 Mhz. Nothing new: the 3 coils act as a single LC circuit, they don't much influence one each other, they can be moved and then the frequency has only to be a bit readjusted for resonance.
My explanation: the current is drawn from the generator. It finally flows from the LED to the ground via the terminal capacity that constitutes the LED, which is like a single capacitor plate coupled to the environment. Even though this capacitor is very weak (order of some pF), the high frequency and high voltage due to resonance is enough to light up the LED. The reason of resonance is that each coil constitutes a LC circuit due to the capacity between wire turns.
Next step: the 3 coils connected as stiffler did.
Welcome to the forum Exnihiloest!!! I have read your postings in Over Unity and I can tell that you really know what you are talking about. I am sure that you will make a valuable contribution to the discussions around here.
At least on this forum there is an opportunity to see both sides in the debate express their opinions. Most of the time the debate is civil also. If you read some of my recent postings addressed to Jeff, a.k.a. "Bit's-and-Bytes" the comments have gotten a bit tough. The rhetoric is a bit strong there but that's not normally the case for me personally or for this forum in general. In that particular debate there is some history related to Bedini's 10-coiler device.
Anyway, with that disclaimer out of the way, welcome to the forum and have fun!
MileHigh
Quote from: MileHigh on 2011.03.07, 10:03:37
Welcome to the forum Exnihiloest!!! I have read your postings in Over Unity and I can tell that you really know what you are talking about. I am sure that you will make a valuable contribution to the discussions around here.
...
MileHigh
Thank you very much, Milehigh.
I have been recently banned without notice from overunity.com after having criticized Ainslie's stuff and also Aspden, for lack of experimental evidence.
I searched for a better place and found out this forum yesterday. From what I read here, there are more serious people, having interesting discussions with a skeptic but open mind, i.e using questions, hypotheses, logic and real knowledge, which is for me the right method to progress about the different matters under study. So I'm pleased to be here.
Still "playing" with the 3 coils, I have not been able to light the LED without a generator. But if there is an ambiant EM field, the LED light up even though the 3 coils are not connected at all! A simple 15cm antenna connected to a transmitter and placed near the coils light up the LED (see photos).
The power was set to 5W, frequency around 24 Mhz, but the real radiated power is surely much less, because the antenna is very short and not tuned, and the AGC of the transmitter reacts by lowering the excitation to protect the PA.
Now in such a setup, the measurement of the in/out power seems to me quite impossible.
I have tried a configuration with a single coil and 2 diodes+LED connected at one end of the coil, the other end remaining open.
A near antenna provides the HF signal. Because of its proximity, it is capacitively coupled to the coil.
At the resonance, the signal level from the generator (at the antenna) is weaken. This is a proof that current has to be provided to light the LED, and the voltage decreases due to its drop in the internal output impedance of the generator (50 ohm).
The system works in the same way when the signal is directly connected to the end of the coil (that one which was open). Only the resonance has to be adjusted.
So my conclusion about Stiffler's circuit is the same as that from K4ZEP. A ground wire carries HF noise or spurious signals and when it it connected to the coil, these parasitic signals power the LED. We must remember that a ground wire never gives a real "zero" ground level for HF, because at high frequencies it has a not negligible impedance and can even constitute itself a resonant line at some frequencies, reinforcing signals from the power network or from EM waves for which it can act like an antenna.
In a last setup (see photo), 2 coils are put in series to make one with higher inductance, tuned with a ferrite around 30 Mhz, and 3 LED are connected at one end, the other is open. There is not much difference in the luminosity of the first LED when the two others are added. Rather than claiming FE :D, I guess that in this case, more current is drawn from the generator but this has to be carefuly measured (not time to do it now).
Exnihiloest:
K4ZEP demonstrated that he could light just a single LED to a very low illumination level. That makes sense with respect to your comments about picking up ambient RF energy, etc.
In contrast, Mr. Stiffler managed to light up a very large matrix of white LEDs to a very high illumination level indicating quite high power levels. I suspect that his "ground lead" was an active power source in this case.
That would imply intentional deception on his part. Assuming that I am correct I have no idea why he would do this. Certainly in this realm he has many willing and receptive viewers that will believe him. There could be some psychological factors at play.
It makes me think of this new Ismael Aviso business with the "nearly free energy" electric car and his "MEG." I watched him last night on an Internet video talk show being interviewed, and I watched the text chat at the same time. He has no credibility and barely knows what he is talking about. I could sense that he was improvising his responses to various technical questions. The people in the text chat were mostly fanboys and they didn't seem to have the same impression as me. I think that he is just a money scammer soliciting PayPay donations.
I don't get a sense that Mr. Stiffler wants people's money. However for both of them I suspect that there are psychological factors at play with respect to notoriety and being the center of attention.
MileHigh
Quote from: MileHigh on 2011.03.11, 15:48:13
I don't get a sense that Mr. Stiffler wants people's money. However for both of them I suspect that there are psychological factors at play with respect to notoriety and being the center of attention.
MileHigh
Stiffler's a strange one. My only experience with him was not a particularly good one... in fact it ended rather badly.
I get the impression that he likes to be in control, he like to be the provided the explanations and the answers. So when I explained the operation of
his wireless electrolysis, he was not at a happy chappy. All I did was offer a scientific explanation for how his wireless electrolysis was working, and too be honest I think I was spot on, but he didn't take kindly to my input. Initially he just blanked me, which I found a little puzzling, then he became all cocky, clearly displaying his arrogance.
He insisted that only hydrogen was being produced - I insisted it wasn't. He insisted that it was due to some magical energy originating from his SEC - I insisted it wasn't. In fact I and others went on to create exactly the same effect with a basic Joule Thief! Needless to say I eventually got under his skin and he through a real wobbly.... and I told him where to stick his SEC! :) Yet another, 'his way or the highway' personality.
Quote from: MileHigh on 2011.03.11, 15:48:13
Exnihiloest:
K4ZEP demonstrated that he could light just a single LED to a very low illumination level. That makes sense with respect to your comments about picking up ambient RF energy, etc.
In contrast, Mr. Stiffler managed to light up a very large matrix of white LEDs to a very high illumination level indicating quite high power levels. I suspect that his "ground lead" was an active power source in this case.
That would imply intentional deception on his part. Assuming that I am correct I have no idea why he would do this. Certainly in this realm he has many willing and receptive viewers that will believe him. There could be some psychological factors at play.
It makes me think of this new Ismael Aviso business with the "nearly free energy" electric car and his "MEG." I watched him last night on an Internet video talk show being interviewed, and I watched the text chat at the same time. He has no credibility and barely knows what he is talking about. I could sense that he was improvising his responses to various technical questions. The people in the text chat were mostly fanboys and they didn't seem to have the same impression as me. I think that he is just a money scammer soliciting PayPay donations.
I don't get a sense that Mr. Stiffler wants people's money. However for both of them I suspect that there are psychological factors at play with respect to notoriety and being the center of attention.
MileHigh
Hi MileHigh
I share your opinion about Aviso and Stiffler. I have a bad impression about Aviso. His explanation (energy from ambiant EM fields in the 900 or 1800 Mhz range) is absurd both theoretically and related to his setup whose none component are designed to deal with such high frequencies. Then the experimental evidence has not yet been provided: we only see a light car powered by a battery. The fact that the energy supply for the motor, made by Aviso, has perhaps a better efficiency than a conventional one, doesn't prove there is OU. We have not even the exact method used by the DOE to test the machine.
Stiffler is very different. I think that Stiffler has only a little theoretical background, but a good practice, original ideas and he surely do not want people's money. He seems respectable. I enjoyed his electrolysis at a distance. It is a very beautiful idea and it works, even if the explanation is fully compatible with conventional physics. Now what is going wrong with his "LED powered by ground"? One hypothesis is that there is an AM radio transmitter or other HF source in the vicinity. There is also the possibility of a current between two different ground points (for example I have some voltage between the ground of my probe, which is provided by the earth connection of the oscilloscope, and an other direct earth connection that I use for my radio transmitter).
On my side, as I'm not able to light up a single LED from the ground only, I will try soon to increase my number of LED, see how many I can light up with my generator radiating near the coil, and check the relation with the current that is drawn from my generator.
Quote from: Farrah Day on 2011.03.11, 18:44:47
...
He insisted that only hydrogen was being produced - I insisted it wasn't. He insisted that it was due to some magical energy originating from his SEC - I insisted it wasn't. In fact I and others went on to create exactly the same effect with a basic Joule Thief! Needless to say I eventually got under his skin and he through a real wobbly.... and I told him where to stick his SEC! :) Yet another, 'his way or the highway' personality.
I confirm, Farrah Day, you are right. Oxygen
and hydrogen are produced. I also experimented his funny electrolysis and I clearly saw bubles on both diode electrodes. In my setup I used a generator powering a resonant coil.
I'm disappointed to hear that Stiffler doesn't accept with kindness, obvious experimental evidence that one can let him know.
Quote from: exnihiloest on 2011.03.11, 21:16:11
I confirm, Farrah Day, you are right. Oxygen and hydrogen are produced. I also experimented his funny electrolysis and I clearly saw bubles on both diode electrodes. In my setup I used a generator powering a resonant coil.
I'm disappointed to hear that Stiffler doesn't accept with kindness, obvious experimental evidence that one can let him know.
What Stiffler didn't realise - and wouldn't accept - was that the oxygen was immediately bonding with the tin coating of the one diode leg and so produced an oxide rather than evolving as gas. This was quite obvious really as a precipitation was clearly evident, dropping off the leg and to the bottom of the test tube.
But what I found odd for someone that creates some great experiments and seems so thorough, was his rather shaky grasp of the science. He even told me that the science was of no interest to him and was unimportant! Given he thought he'd discovered some great new way of producing hydrogen extremely efficiently and indeed was telling everyone to download his video and save it so the government could not block and hide it, I found his attitude a little puzzling to say the least. But it's a funny old world, ain't it!
Quote from: Farrah Day on 2011.03.12, 16:27:10
What Stiffler didn't realise - and wouldn't accept - was that the oxygen was immediately bonding with the tin coating of the one diode leg and so produced an oxide rather than evolving as gas. This was quite obvious really as a precipitation was clearly evident, dropping off the leg and to the bottom of the test tube.
Same observation, especially when the voltage is high. I reduced the current when I saw the phenomenon, to not destroy the electrode wire with the oxidation.
Quote
But what I found odd for someone that creates some great experiments and seems so thorough, was his rather shaky grasp of the science. He even told me that the science was of no interest to him and was unimportant! Given he thought he'd discovered some great new way of producing hydrogen extremely efficiently and indeed was telling everyone to download his video and save it so the government could not block and hide it, I found his attitude a little puzzling to say the least. But it's a funny old world, ain't it!
I share your impression!
Quote from: Farrah Day on 2011.03.12, 16:27:10
...
But what I found odd for someone that creates some great experiments and seems so thorough, was his rather shaky grasp of the science. He even told me that the science was of no interest to him and was unimportant! Given he thought he'd discovered some great new way of producing hydrogen extremely efficiently and indeed was telling everyone to download his video and save it so the government could not block and hide it, I found his attitude a little puzzling to say the least. But it's a funny old world, ain't it!
Yes, it is indeed.
Have you noticed how certain truly brilliant people have
great difficulty with simple things? It's almost as if their
minds are wired differently from the common folk.
Or, perhaps it is lack of real world experience; living in
a self constructed cocoon of fantasy.
Does anyone know what Stiffler's social life is?
Introvert? Extrovert? Secluded? Geek?
@FarrahDay
QuoteHe insisted that only hydrogen was being produced - I insisted it wasn't. He insisted that it was due to some magical energy originating from his SEC - I insisted it wasn't.
Wow that sounds like there was a whole lotta "insisting" going on in that conversation, how did that turn out for you?
QuoteIn fact I and others went on to create exactly the same effect with a basic Joule Thief! Needless to say I eventually got under his skin and he through a real wobbly.... and I told him where to stick his SEC! Yet another, 'his way or the highway' personality.
Personally if I spent days developing a precision tuned circuit which may or may not produce precise field interactions having specific geometric relations and then someone threw together a JT circuit and called it the same thing, implied I was delusional and did not understand and then insisted I was wrong --- well yes I might get a little annoyed which is understandable don't you think?.
Regards
AC
@Dumped
QuoteHave you noticed how certain truly brilliant people have
great difficulty with simple things? It's almost as if their
minds are wired differently from the common folk.
Or, perhaps it is lack of real world experience; living in
a self constructed cocoon of fantasy.
Does anyone know what Stiffler's social life is?
Introvert? Extrovert? Secluded? Geek?
Do you believe these personal insults and insinuations directed at Dr.Stiffler are in any way relative to a rational scientific debate of the technology?. Wow this forum is going downhill in a big hurry, I wonder when it will hit bottom?.
AC
Quote from: allcanadian on 2011.03.19, 00:03:51
@Dumped
Do you believe these personal insults and insinuations directed at Dr.Stiffler are in any way relative to a rational scientific debate of the technology?. Wow this forum is going downhill in a big hurry, I wonder when it will hit bottom?.
AC
Those questions are not intended to be demeaning
in any way; rather they are simply put forth as
possibilities which have been observed in some
who tend to exhibit odd and eccentric behavior.
This is not to infer that those are any less worthy
souls than those who are considered to be of the
"normal" behavior category. All are worthy even
with their stark behavioral differences.
People are a most interesting scientific study.
Does not rational include oddities and their sources?
Some may be unsettled by such questions but there
is no rancor, no intent to demean. Scientific curiosity.
Quote from: allcanadian on 2011.03.18, 23:55:02
...
Personally if I spent days developing a precision tuned circuit which may or may not produce precise field interactions having specific geometric relations and then someone threw together a JT circuit and called it the same thing, implied I was delusional and did not understand and then insisted I was wrong --- well yes I might get a little annoyed which is understandable don't you think?.
Regards
AC
For certain behavioral types "annoyed" is understandable;
but not necessarily appropriate or indicative of mature
emotional response.
It would seem that his speculations were incorrect.
Hopefully he's recovered and come to his senses*.
[* Stable, emotionally healthy state of mind absent all
resentment. Capable of making sound observations and
arriving at sensible conclusions.]
@Dumped
QuoteIt would seem that his speculations were incorrect.
Hopefully he's recovered and come to his senses*.
If you could point me to information regarding the the Stiffler circuit, it's exact replication and data to something resembling scientific standards I would be glad to review it and give my opinion on what is speculation and what is not.
Regards
AC
You are unfamiliar with Stiffler's work and his website?
Quote from: allcanadian on 2011.03.18, 23:55:02
@FarrahDayWow that sounds like there was a whole lotta "insisting" going on in that conversation, how did that turn out for you?
Personally if I spent days developing a precision tuned circuit which may or may not produce precise field interactions having specific geometric relations and then someone threw together a JT circuit and called it the same thing, implied I was delusional and did not understand and then insisted I was wrong --- well yes I might get a little annoyed which is understandable don't you think?.
Regards
AC
Yep, there was a lot of insisting going on, and of course it didn't end at all well. :)
AC, as per usual you take things far too personally, and you really have to have been there to understand the situation. Once again you see insinuations and insults where I just see facts and straight-talking. Is it really an insult to engage in conversation in an attempt to correct something that is plainly wrong or misleading? If we were all as politically correct, polite and pussy-footing as yourself, no one would ever say what was on their mind or what they really thought!
However, the point is that a simple JT was capable of producing exactly the same wireless electrolysis effect as Stiffler's fancy SEC. What I'm alluding to has nothing at all to do with the difference in complexity of electronic circuits (or indeed anyone calling a JT a SEC), rather simply the fact that both were capable of achieving the very same effect.
As clever as Stiffler may be with his electronics, when it came to the chemistry, he made a lot of very wrong assumptions. And when I tried to discuss this with him he got all arsey - simple as that!
Quote from: exnihiloest on 2011.03.11, 21:05:10
On my side, as I'm not able to light up a single LED from the ground only, I will try soon to increase my number of LED, see how many I can light up with my generator radiating near the coil, and check the relation with the current that is drawn from my generator.
You may wish to try grounding one side of your VHF spike generator through ........ maybe the scope and scope probe shield circuit.
Then, ground one side of your simple radio signal detector (AV plug with LEDs acting as diodes). If grounding one side doesn't work just connect one or both sides to a common poor conductor, like water, which has some volume or mass (increased capacitive coupling).
If the LEDs don't have enough current to light they should light simply because they are in a strong RF field. After all, electrophosphorescence only requires being within an electric field. It doesn't always require current flow. It depends on the LED type and design.
Has anyone seen him light LEDS of other colors or types?
I just blow-off any such experiment displaying results with blue, blue-white or so-called 'white' LEDs. You can cut the leads completely off and most will still light while in a strong RF field.
An OLED of any color should work this way to some extent but the ones which also produce ultraviolet light, blues to white types, are most sensitive to changing electric fields.
After playing with all sort of resonant circuits and increasing up to 6 my number of LEDs is series (2 green+ 2 red + 2 yellow), I observe that in any case, the cause of the effect is a capacitive coupling between each coil end and either the generator or the ground. The longer the coils, the wider their conductor surface and their ability to capacitive coupling. In any case, despite the appearance of an open circuit, the circuit is closed.
Current is drawn from the generator. When a resistance is placed in series with the generator output, the voltage drops.
It is easy to measure the power drawn from the generator by connecting 2 probes to this resistance terminals, measuring the voltage drop by using the oscilloscope in differential mode. From the voltage, we get the current with I=dU/R (dU being the voltage at the resistance) and the power by P=U*I. The power in the LEDs is always less than that provided by the generator.
I analyse such a device as an impedance adapter. The very high impedance at one end of the coil allows a very weak displacement current in air by capacitive effects, but due the high voltage and frequency (I can get up to 400V from a 15v generator) this current is enough to pass a power able to light several LEDs.
Last experiment
The higher the Q of the circuit, the higher the effect. So I had the idea to use a quartz crystal instead of a LC circuit. A quartz crystal has a much higher Q than an ordinary LC circuit.
An aluminum plate plays the role of the ground (it can be also directly connected to the ground, with just a little shift of the resonant frequency. On the photos, it is not). A quartz crystal of 2150 Khz is connected to this plate, and on the other side, to the classical circuit with 2x 1N4148 and the LED (see photo QuartzLed1.jpg). As there is no coil and the quartz is small, we lost the wide conductor surface acting as a capacity and have only a narrow separation between the two ends of the circuit, so I had to add a terminal capacity which is an iron sphere painted in blak (see QuartzLed2.jpg).
The signal from a transmitter is provided by a short "antenna" (which is not really an antenna), near the sphere capacity. It is to be emphasized that radiated HF is negligible due to the inefficiency of the antenna wich is far from being tuned to the wave length (around 20 cm, when a quater wave length of a tuned antenna would require 37 mtrs). So we work in the quasistatic approximation, meaning there is no propagation phenomena in air or along the conductors whose dimensions are too small in comparison with the wavelength, no plane wave, only an electric field.
We see that this setup lights also a LED. The signal must be very stable. A shift of +/-500Hz switch off the LED. In brief, I didn't see any anomalous results.
@FarrahDay
QuoteAC, as per usual you take things far too personally, and you really have to have been there to understand the situation. Once again you see insinuations and insults where I just see facts and straight-talking. Is it really an insult to engage in conversation in an attempt to correct something that is plainly wrong or misleading? If we were all as politically correct, polite and pussy-footing as yourself, no one would ever say what was on their mind or what they really thought!
You know us Damn Canadians, we are so neutral it verges on the absurd sometimes but this is not always a bad thing. I also have a keen interest in psychology and etymology as simple words in the right context often define a thought or intent. For example here were some words Dumped used in a prior post-----
QuoteOr, perhaps it is lack of real world experience; living in
a self constructed cocoon of fantasy.
Does anyone know what Stiffler's social life is?
Introvert? Extrovert? Secluded? Geek?
Now we can pussyfoot around the issue all we want and claim these are simple questions not directed at anyone in particular but I think all of us know better than that, we understand perfectly well the silly word games some people play myself included. To say otherwise is simply an insult to everyones intelligence, the intent was perfectly defined by the words that were chosen and the context. Which is odd isn't it? that a person has to degrade or demean others to justify their point of view rather than have it stand on it's own merit.
QuoteHowever, the point is that a simple JT was capable of producing exactly the same wireless electrolysis effect as Stiffler's fancy SEC. What I'm alluding to has nothing at all to do with the difference in complexity of electronic circuits (or indeed anyone calling a JT a SEC), rather simply the fact that both were capable of achieving the very same effect.
My point is simple as well, you say the JT was capable of producing exactly the same wireless electrolysis effect as Stiffler's fancy SEC but was this based on simple observation, that is the fact that a circuit can produce bubbles in water, or science? What was the waveform produced by each circuit, what is the difference between them, what was the electrode material, what was the cell material, what was the geometry of the apparatus, what role did field interactions play, what was the field measurement in each, what was the electrode potential, what was the potential across the cell, what gasses evolved, what was the gas composition, what was the volume of gas?. You see when a person tells me they can produce some bubbles in water just like someone else this tells me very little if nothing and does not constitute scientific method in my opinion because there are no real facts other than that we have some bubbles at an electrode in some water. I guess one question we could ask is that if we hold all others to the rigid standards of scientific method and concrete facts should we not be bound to these same standards? If you could provide me with your technical procedure and all the data you have collected I am sure I might think otherwise but until that time Im not inclined to believe you have proven anything conclusively.
Regards
AC
exnihiloest,
Careful!
I imagine you know that IC-751 doesn't like badly matched loading.
Also, your analysis is spot-on, in my opinion.
Quote from: WaveWatcher on 2011.03.19, 15:12:54
exnihiloest,
Careful!
I imagine you know that IC-751 doesn't like badly matched loading.
Also, your analysis is spot-on, in my opinion.
At 2Mhz, a 20 cm "antenna" is like an open circuit. The AGC reacts due to a heavy level of stationary waves, and reduces the power to the minimum. No risk, this transceiver is extremely robust. I have it for many years and never burnt the PA in spite all sorts of mismatches.
I could also light the LED with an ordinary HF generator (1W), but mine is not synthetized so it is not stable enough to lock the signal onto the quartz frequency.
@all
Okay, first of all, the degree to which Dr Stiffler has been attacked personally in this thread is astounding.
As I mentioned on another thread, I have six SEC Exciters from early in Dr Stiffler's research which I purchased from him. They have an interesting display of anomalous behavior, and are certainly not 'fake' as suggested by certain individuals. I've tested them myself, and they appear to produce the effects displayed in Dr Stiffler's videos.
Groundloop, I will send you one if you want. Just PM me.
@exnihiloest
Interesting results... what circuits / schematics did you use as a basis for your tests? I want to make sure we are talking about the same phenomenon , and not just generic RF in megahertz range.
Thanks,
Feynman
I find myself in agreement with Farrah Day.
Some "see" what is not there.
This trait is not unique to Canada.
Quote from: feynman on 2011.03.19, 19:16:25
@all
Okay, first of all, the degree to which Dr Stiffler has been attacked personally in this thread is astounding.
Feynman
Personally I'm astounded that you think he has been 'attacked'! I think, like AC, you're over-reacting to comments born from real experience and interaction with Stiffler himself. Blimey it appears after all AC's input, he isn't even familiar with Stiffler, spatial coherence, or his SECs. I simply stated my experience with the guy. And from my experience with him, he can be quite arrogant, stupidly stubborn, and indeed not open to further debate or discussion. If that's your idea of a personal attack, you've got issues... or perhaps of course I'm just plying my trade as a misinfo Big Oil agent. C.C
Some of you people really do need to wake up and get to grips with the real world, because it's nowhere near as warm and fluffy as many of you seem to think it is!
I tried today to measure the output current to power my qartz-LED circuit (see http://www.overunityresearch.com/index.php?topic=718.msg12210#msg12210). The goal is to evaluate the transfer of energy between the generator and the load and to check if there is anomalous results.
I put a 10 Kohm resistance in series with the antenna and measure the HF voltages (for easiness, peak to peak values read from the oscilloscope) :
(1) at the output of the transmitter, there is 48v pp.
(2) after the 10 Kohm resistor (at the connection resistor-antenna), I measured 18v pp.
(3) when the frequency is tuned exactly on the quartz frequency, there is a drop of only 0.3v pp (17.7v pp at the antenna).
It means that around (48-18)/10= 3 mA pp current is permanently provided by the transmitter under voltage 48v, i.e. a power of 134 mW pp = 17 mW.
At the antenna, the voltage being 18v, the maximum available power is therefore 3*18=54 mW pp = 7mW (which is enough to light a LED).
But remember that 7 mW is still dissipated even when the frequency is not accorded with that of the quartz and the LED is not lit, because we have always around 18v at the antenna. I suppose it is absorbed by the environment. When well tuned, the voltage drops by 0.3v pp, meaning that an extra current of 0.3/10=0.03mA pp is consumed, which represents a power of 18*0.03=0.54 mW pp = 0,07 mW which is too weak to light a LED.
It follows that this measurement is not conclusive. The extra power that is provided when I tune the frequency on that of the quartz, is not enough to light a LED. But we can suppose that, when the frequency is well tuned, a part of the energy which was previously wasted in the environment, is now redirected to our resonant circuit. It is likely but I don't know how to be sure of that. An idea?
Quote from: MileHigh on 2011.02.07, 06:01:16
Myself and Poynt discussed this earlier this evening. It doesn't smell right to me at all. I suspect that his "ground connection" is actually the power input, and the power source is another SEC off-screen. It's possible that there may be psychological factors at play here.
Along the same lines, there is always the option to take fine magnet wire and route power to the device. This will simply not be picked up by the camera. I actually thought that's what Mylow was doing. As we know, what he did was not done with fine electrical wires that couldn't be picked up by the camera, but it was done with fine fishing line that drove his rotors, and that couldn't (almost) be picked up by the camera.
This is not that far fetched. I have seen some similar (but much weaker) results from some of my tests. I have been down and out for a while now but give this a chance. Lets see it mounted and replicated.
Quote
"The transistor the Doctor is using is not commercially available. The unit was designed in-cooperation with a semiconductor company to construct a unit that improved on the factors present in the MPSA06 that allows a Negative Resistance operation. These units are extremely expensive as the design and production of only one-thousand units for initial research was done. If the work is allowed to progress the transistors may go into a normal production mode by this company - although may be of limited number.
Some basic parms are the average unit has an hfe of 400-750 and a Vbe of as low as 0.17 volts. The units will display an equivalent negative resistance of 0.7 ohm for a voltage of 8.5 volts. As the Doctor states one should stay tuned to what may be coming and again conditions can change this outcome"
I believe that "small signal transistors" can have these parameters. Has anyone tried any?
Tesla
Yes, certain small signal transistors will operate
in inverse mode as a thyristor like device.
Here are some links for research:
Simplest LED Flasher (http://www.cappels.org/dproj/simplest_LED_flasher/Simplest_LED_Flasher_Circuit.html)
Negative Resistance Differential Oscillator (http://jlnlabs.online.fr/cnr/negosc.htm)
Alan's Lab (http://www.vk2zay.net/article/157)
Deutschland (http://homepages.internet.lu/absolute3/tronic/oscspec.htm)
and some other possibilities
Home made Zinc Oxide device Dead Link Now removed
Iron Pyrites device Dead Link Now removed
It's nice to know about these kinds of devices.
With a little imagination and creativity some
very useful applications come to mind...
Quote from: 4Tesla on 2011.04.23, 05:48:05
I believe that "small signal transistors" can have these parameters. Has anyone tried any?
Tesla
I did. The 2N2222 is well known and works well for this effect. I was able to let it oscillate by connecting only the collector and the emitter (as on Naudin's schematic given by Dumped).
Now, a negative resistance effect is just around a particular V/I point. Then when one increases V, I decreases. There is a dynamical gain, but at the expense of the static energy we need to polarize the component.
Here is a simple 9 MHz oscillator (10-30mA) based on Dr Stiffler's SEC circuits. It will run 4-10 LEDs via an AV plug or up to 40-50 LEDs if you add Dr Stiffler's "L3" coil.
MPSA06 Transistor (ignore the PNP symbol.. it really is NPN):
http://www.mcmelectronics.com/product/MPSA06&CAWELAID=220730365
8.2uH Choke:
http://www.jameco.com/webapp/wcs/stores/servlet/Product_10001_10001_372162_-1
9-50pF Trimmer:
http://www.jameco.com/webapp/wcs/stores/servlet/Product_10001_10001_136979_-1
If you would like to replicate Dr Stiffler's "L3" coil:
1/2" PVC pipe
23 AWG magnet wire
70 turns
Quote from: exnihiloest on 2011.04.23, 11:00:35
The 2N2222 is well known and works well for this effect. I was able to let it oscillate by connecting only the collector and the emitter (as on Naudin's schematic given by Dumped).
...
I played yesterday with negative resistance oscillators and found out a much better transistor for this purpose: 2N2369. It was used in the 70's in UHF TV tuners. All my 2N2369 work much better than the 2N2222: wider range of input voltages, much wider range of frequencies (up to 10 Mhz). Among them I have some with improved characteristics, able to oscillate up to 16 Mhz. I tried many other types of transistor but those working as negative resistance are rare.
You don't even need the L1C1 circuit (see http://jlnlabs.online.fr/cnr/images/negoscdg.gif). Only a capacitor in parallel with the resistance is needed. The L1C1 circuit adds a time constant different from R1C1. Both together don't work as one RLC circuit. They lead to bizarre signals in which periods of the highest frequency driven by LC spike during each half-period of the lowest frequency driven by RC. They synchronize but we see two effects as if RC and LC circuit act partly separately.
An adjustable power supply is very useful. The voltage has low and high thresholds for the oscillations to start, and the frequency is voltage dependant.
I have been impressed by the power of the oscillations. They are very strong, even when charged.
Quote from: exnihiloest on 2011.04.30, 09:11:46
You don't even need the L1C1 circuit (see http://jlnlabs.online.fr/cnr/images/negoscdg.gif). Only a capacitor in parallel with the resistance is needed. The L1C1 circuit adds a time constant different from R1C1. Both together don't work as one RLC circuit. They lead to bizarre signals in which periods of the highest frequency driven by LC spike during each half-period of the lowest frequency driven by RC. They synchronize but we see two effects as if RC and LC circuit act partly separately.
What is L1 in your circuit? Do you use a 1k pot to adjust the frequency? AV plug working?
QuoteOnly a capacitor in parallel with the resistance is needed.
In series?
Thanks,
Tesla
Quote from: 4Tesla on 2011.05.01, 01:33:12
What is L1 in your circuit?
Whatever inductance works. It is not at all critical.
Quote
Do you use a 1k pot to adjust the frequency? AV plug working? In series?
I use a power supply adjustable from 0 to 32 v. I adjust the frequency by adjusting the voltage or by using a variable capacitor (around 20pF -> 1000pF) either in series with the inductance or in parallel with the resistance when the inductance is removed.
You can also replace R1 by a variable resistor from 0.1 to 4.7 Kohm and adjust the frequency with it (choose preferably a 10 turn pot).
Without inductance, oscillations are now obtained up to 23 Mhz. The system is strongly non linear, with rich harmonics. A quartz crystal in parallel with the resistance makes the system to oscillate on the crystal frequency, and the LC circuit can be tuned to any harmonic. I was also surprised to be able to tune the LC circuit to half the crystal frequency: the oscillations were at half the crystal frequency and locked at this frequency due to the crystal synchronized onto the first harmonic. It is the first time I succeeded in locking an oscillator onto a "sub-harmonic" of a crystal with such a simple circuit.
Note that all the stuff is conventional; funny but no OU can be expected.
What amazes me is how efficient these oscillators are. I'm interested in trying to make the most efficient LED driver possible for use in a LED lantern.
Quote from: 4Tesla on 2011.05.01, 17:40:20
What amazes me is how efficient these oscillators are. I'm interested in trying to make the most efficient LED driver possible for use in a LED lantern.
Then you would not be interested in a Dr. Stiffler SEC oscillator. The better path would be to experiment with three variables: 1) How intensely you light the LED (how much voltage (or current) you light the LED with) without damaging it. 2) How long you keep the LED on. 3) How long you keep the LED off.
Note that 2) and 3) above define the LED energizing frequency and duty cycle.
Almost certainly your optimum LED flashing frequency will be somewhere between 60 and 70 Hz. At least that's my preliminary guess. How long it is on and how intensely it is lit when its on are the unknown variables that can be played with to find the most efficient LED driver solution.
Hm... could the specific frequency referring to the Larmor frequency. It would varies based on the static field. This is not an LC circuit frequency. So I guess as C approaches zero, we would see this frequency after a pulse.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7aRKAXD4dAg