Understanding electricity in the TPU.

[wattsup]

I posted this in OU and also opened it here for you guys.

@GK and @all

Let me post this while it is still fresh.

OK, I have been experimenting since the last video, trying to see how to prepare my Video 6 because I found some great new effects, but I have stumbled on something, not something, a notion, while pulsing coils with a battery using the Tesla Ozone Method via an IRF840, and it hit me.

We have been pulsing coils with a battery, creating all sort of effects, producing secondary outputs and hoping flyback will return to source, etc. But we have never asked ourselves one major question regarding one of the main components we use in our OU arsenal. THE BATTERY.

What is a battery and what can it do. When can it do it. When can't it do it. And then it hit me smack. When you create major havoc by shorting a battery and then letting it loose into a coiling scheme, during the short, voltage drops to zero, then we open the short and hope the flyback returns to the battery. So how many things can a battery do all at the same time. Can a battery provide a short and a flyback at the same time. Can it provide a pulse and take back a flyback at the same time. No it cannot. So whatever we do, it is always one after the other and that shift is where we lose precious time to augment the output. The output knows we are only really working half the time,  but we cannot do any different otherwise we cannot pulse. So as soon as you start pulsing, you are in effect sort of doomed to fail.

But what if the system included not one battery but two batteries. While one is pulsed, the other is relaxed. The beauty of DC is there is no phasing problems. All outputs can be paralleled and all will be additive.

You know that when you put a transformer primary on a battery terminal and you then short the battery temporarily, voltage in the secondary rises tremendously. So you do this with two batteries and two transformers in alternating fashion, but not as in alternating current.

OK, then with this notion is view, I think of the damn center toroid again and under this idea, a center toroid with only two coils, either bucking or not seems to make more sense. Each output enters the toroid and is used as a trigger to flip/flip from one circuit to the other. Bing bang bing bang. That would also explain the highest amperage readings over the two LTPU toroids.

Also, now the need for two frequencies, one slightly off the other also makes more sense.

I don't have the complete scheme worked out but I wanted to put it out there.

Most everything in nature works in pairs. If we equated the quest for OU to the making of the automobiles, have you every seen a car engine with only one piston (besides any special cases)? You have 4, 6, 8 and 12 (major hogs) pistons working in succession.

So imagine working 2, 3, 6, 9 batteries, each taking their slice of a cycle.

What do you think about this.

We don't need to look at patents for days on end. The idea is very simple and should not require major rocket science. But I am getting almost convinced that any builds with only one battery will run into major problems and even consider it failed from the start. Especially if there is a mosfet inline, that integrated diode kills the flyback and even if you do some fancy flyback switching to bypass the mosfet at the right time, you are still only working with one battery so off times will kill the output.

Maybe I am totally wrong on this, but, these days, things have been coming to me in steps and mulching all this logically, this notion for me seems to be the best direction to add to the coiling, coupling, transfer, pulse, flyback, build types, etc.

So I think for now I will start a new video soon on this but hopefully by then others will catch on and this can spread out for not only TPU works, but all sorts of OU works like the JT guys should start working on a new symmetrical dual battery drive design. You might say, It's time to grow up and bring this to the next logical level. You can't pulse and get flyback at the same time.

Looking back at Tesla Patents, Tesla never said, build only one. He probably showed us the one and figured we would know to use more in tandem.

Imagine two systems, each in their own resonance, meeting in the outer coil/rings. SM saying two fields moving in two directions. Sort of fits.

[darkspeed]

wattsup - very interesting idea....

I had always assumed that the battery was only there to drive the logic and provide the initial few impulses to a primary > these impulses create an output that charges a drive capacitor to a HV potential > and the drive capacitor takes over for the battery in driving the primary ( feedback ). Anything above and beyond what is needed to sustain the impulses is considered output. At this point the battery would only be driving the logic. Placing a load on the output would lower the voltage in the drive capacitor and thus lower the GATE on the saturable inductor lessening the dampening of the impulse to the primary, allowing more power to be generated. A-la cruise control...

This is just my current thoughts and they seem to change daily  :

[Grumpy]

this is why some devices use two fields and this was first exposed by someone called "waterboy" on the OUPower forum:


Free energy devices can only do one thing - convert mass into the atomic energy contained within the mass. Cavitation is the process for doing that. During a cavitation, a hole is ripped in the ambient medium. The universe pushes back in every direction and is like a trillion tiny atom smashers all firing at a single point. Electron clusters are formed and explode back out causing electron cascade effect which converts mass into the atomic energy contained within the mass.

Any mass can be cavitated in any state.

Plasma is not a state of matter, it is matter in a state of change.

...

ALL FREE ENERGY DEVICES USE CAVITATION TO DESTROY THE SCALAR WAVE THAT HOLDS ENERGY IN A SPINNING LUMP WE CALL MASS.

...

If a free energy device does not cavitate somewhere, it is not a free energy device - no exceptions.

If you want to do the opposite and convert energy into mass, then you use a scalar wave which is an INBOUND LONGITUDINAL WAVE superimposed over a OUTBOUND LONGITUDINAL WAVE which is slightly offset and that will compress and spin mass into a particle.

He made another interesting statement as "TheBuzz" on OU:

The energy we place into the process is focused on a much smaller area (the center of the cavity) and when the atomic energy was released from the mass, the energy released included our original input energy that created the cavity and any energy that was released when some of the mass was converted into the atomic energy contained within the mass.

This is very similar to a statement by "Spherics".


(When I looked into this before, compression was stronger than rarefaction.)

[wattsup]

Thanks for your replies.

@Grumpy

Yes, cavitation was discussed many times on the forums. I also remember The Buzz was on that. I think what is lacking in this discussion of cavitation, which for me is a physical process, is emphasizing more the electrical equivalent that guys can understand.

For me this means using damped waves that Tesla showed again in his Tesla Ozone Patent. The power first gets compressed in the coil of high inductance, then it is released into the working circuit. That compression and release is your analogy of cavitation and that is what has to be discussed more and more instead of just using the word cavitation. Otherwise it will remain a general idea without direct links to what we do here.

Just like what @darkspeed just mentioned and what most guys are doing is working with undamped waves and Tesla always said there is nothing to do with that. Once is is used, it is gone while damped waves provide more punch and can return to source because that more punch will create a higher flyback potential that can enter back into the source. If the source is reachable from where the flyback occurs.

That shrimp arm is compressing and releasing. It is dampening and releasing.

But even then, you would still require multiple systems working in tandem to produce a constant output otherwise the latent state will always win and be reflected in the output by not being able to sustain a motive usage that would require close to 100% duty cycle. So if a device is producing an output that has 50% duty cycle, you would require two systems to bring it back up to 100% duty cycle. But will it be unity or even overunity. There is nothing that stops from making an extra system just to make sure.

I will start doing some more tests with two systems and let you guys know. lol

[darkspeed]

wattsup - you are correct , for the single wave system, "damped waves provide more punch" however...

Tesla did some work with a multiple primary CW system where two un-damped waves were loosely resonantly coupled to a secondary slightly off frequency.
These two waves would chase each other and cross paths hundreds of thousands of times gaining energy until they crossed paths  A. directly opposed to each other and B . with enough energy to sheer each other. The result was the on demand production of fire balls, or what we call today ball lightning.

While damped wave systems are the quick fix dont underestimate un-damped potential in the right system.

DS.

[Grumpy]

undamped with two sheering waves (one delayed) is what SM used

[wattsup]

@all

Here is my last (most probably) video in the series Pulsing coils and lighting LEDS.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=P5zXe_iJzXc

I have noticed more and more that guys are using pick up coils with an led to see the energy moving around their devices. That is very great because this energy is very difficult to imagine using a scope and probe, and in many instances, the fact that the probe is applied changes the effect. Just use an led/coil near your device, light up the LED and then try to put a scope probe on it and see what happens.

There are many more effects I have found while doing these tests but in general, what I have shown is the basis.

For members here;

I am putting up a diagram I put up on OU but forgot to put it here.

This is what I plan on working on next but will surely need help from guys here that are more in the know.

The mosfet I am using is the IRF 9540 because I will be pulsing on the positive side of the circuit instead of the negative side like most guys are doing.

I will prepare the initial set-up and post it here so guys can help.

Added: Here is were I keep the pdf for the mosfet.
http://purco.qc.ca/ftp/Wattsups%27%20stuff/components/mosfets%20and%20ics/

[wattsup]

@Hi all (Late last night I forgot to post this here also.)

First of all @GK, I am sorry for not responding to your post and to your last build. I kind of had my head in one direction these days.

OK, here is my Video No. 7. I had to cut it up cause the master was too long for YouTube.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2thrf3kq8-E

I think I now know how SMs tpus worked.

Very simple indeed.

First the battery is used but only open ended. Next the pulse frequency is used but only open ended. Then the exchange between that and the Earths field charges an isolated pick up coil that is not open ended. The battery will never go down. The frequency pulse is only on one side, goes through to the other through the battery to the other side. Need more juice, you will need a bigger or more batteries to provide the greater north and south field biases. That's why he raised the LTPU center plate. He had batteries but they did not drain. Or if they did drain, it was taking so long that no battery known could do this, so he won the deal.

He said the 6TPU weighed 1.5 pounds. Hmmmmmm, That much wire would do the 120 volt thing.

It does not really matter what you build. if you use a closed system, you will be stuck to all the conservation of energy laws. But if you go open ended, what law will slam it down. Don't know yet but.............

After the above video, I made connections to a second coil via the free pulse generator ground lead and the free battery positive both going open ended just like the coil that's one the battery negative and pulse positive in the video, again they are open ended, and now............ the second coil is lighting up more LEDS. Amps on the pulse generator did not go up........... WTF man.

I will make a Video 8 but with Video 7, guys should understand the implications of this easily. I can only hope.

Monopoles do exist. You have two of them on each battery, inductor, capacitor, etc. We are the ones that are so bent on shorting them to get some work done.
Plus we have one major field whooshing around our buts day in and day out.

I think now that SMs vacuum tube analogy was to depict an open ended system. There is a space between the anode and the cathode. A vacuum tube is in fact a concentrated pinpointing on an open ended system. Pulse one side, bias the other and juice starts flowing.

Ottos ECD. He used some serious juice to pulse them. Not like my furty Pulse Generator in mA and uA. I think one day he started it and one of the leads was not connected making it open ended. The power supply ground did the same thing on one side as how it is being used it in the video. He hit the frequency from the other side and bingo, Bright's your Uncle. lol

Remember the small coils I wound on the coil ends shown at 2 minutes in Video6? Ottos' CC's did the same thing but even more concentrated, pin point like in three vectors. Man oh Man. I will have to dust off my ECD build..

I will have to make a diagram to explain it but in general.

Use a pair of wires to wind a first coil.
Battery negative on one wire.
Pulse positive on the other wire.

Use a pair of wires to wind a second coil.
Battery positive on one wire.
Pulse negative on the other wire.

Or, regardless of what you build, find the coupling wires and do the same thing. Put one on one and the other on the other. Pulse around and have fun.

[Grumpy]

how does a capacitor work?

[Grumpy]

SM said the TPU exhibet properties of inertia, such as resistance to movement and reorientation.  If that is indeed the case, then there should be some effect when the TPU is placed on a platform that is free to rotate.   Funny that no one ever mentioned that.

http://hyperphysics.phy-astr.gsu.edu/hbase/tord.html

http://hyperphysics.phy-astr.gsu.edu/hbase/rstoo.html#sm

http://hyperphysics.phy-astr.gsu.edu/hbase/gyr.html#gyr

[Peterae]

Grumpy

I was once a tv engineer, and the degause wands we used would sometimes feel as if they had a gyroscopic feel to them the moment they were switched on, shame i dont still have it to play with, being driven from mains 50Hz i never gave it much thought at the time but seems strange now i think of it.

Peter

[Grumpy]

Many concentrate on electron charge, precession is totally ignored.

Precession makes it's own fields separate, which are compound fields interacting with other fields.  Similar to static fields, but different properties, such as non-cancelling and non-shielding.

I venture a guess that the precessional fields of element 116 extend out of the material sufficiently to access and manipulate.  Probably never get my hands on that to find out though.

Gravity is produced by this precession, as you can guess, and I'm pretty sure this is the crux of force field work.

I am just starting to get into this now and don't understand enough of it yet.   The MRI stuff was a good clue, just took me a few years to get around to looking at it.

[Hoppy]

@ all

Wattsup's LED video 7 reminds me of my experiment with a Dr. Stiffler 'one wire working'15-3 SEC tower circuit where I had an ammeter in line avramenko plug feeding an LED panel. I measured the current with both an analogue and digital meter and both showed a very low microamp reading whilst the diodes appeared brightly lit, as in his video. I was also monitoring the input current to the circuit, which was consuming on average, 50mA from a 24V supply. I found it quite easy to reduce the current reading on the LED string to just a few microamps, simply by altering the balance of loading on the AV plug. Whenever the load current varies by a few microamps, I observe a proportional change in input power level to the SEC exciter.

In the case of a signal generator being the only source of power feeding the circuit, its clearly the power in the signal waveform that is lighting the LED's. At the very high frequencies involved, its very difficult using ordinary multimeter's to get an accurate idea of the real power being consumed by the LED's and I have found that brightness to the eye is not a good indicator of this.

Hoppy