Home Help Search Login Register
Welcome,Guest. Please login or register.
2021-10-19, 19:05:38
News: Registration with the OUR forum is by admin approval.

Pages: [1]
Author Topic: My crazy project  (Read 2899 times)

Group: Elite Experimentalist
Hero Member

Posts: 4409

Buy me some coffee
Using 3 old smartdrive stators,i will be conducting test in regards to pulling down the collapsing magnetic field during the flyback portion of each cycle. Already found one interesting thing along the way-why dose the LED get brighter,and stay on longer when i touch the positive side of the LED onto the laminated core of the stator?.The stator core is completely isolated from the windings -checked and double checked.


Never let your schooling get in the way of your education.
Hero Member

Posts: 520

I saw your same thread at overunity.com.......
but decided to post this here to not risk derailing anything over there.

1) Does the LED light only when you touch the center of any stator core stem, or will it still light if you touched the stator core on the ring that joins all the stator core stems?

2) What happens if you touched two or more core stems at once that come together and go to the LED? Will the LED brightness change or will it stay bright over a greater frequency range?

Here is my take on this according to my new model of atomic construct and Spin Conveyance (SC).

You are basically showing that the core is not moving flux as one would think is normally happening in coils with cores. Depending on the applied frequency, it is the copper atom nuclei that are swinging back and forth at certain frequencies or spinning at other frequencies. This copper atomic swing or spin is conveyed to the laminated core atoms and from there is sent to your LED at varying intensities depending again on the applied frequency. Question #1 would help answer this one, especially if the effect is not seen when you touch the core ring but seen on the core stems.

Now, if you put two or more LEDS in parallel instead of only that one LED, will they all light up just as bright when you only touch one center core, and, will they light up brighter if you touched several center cores at once?

Under SC, the worst thing anyone can do when working in OU devices is wind coils where each turn is tightly wound against the previous turn, then layers are tightly would over previous layers. Under SC, you are playing the numbers game when this happens because each turn encompasses high levels of inter turn cancellation. That is why things work at certain frequencies (or range of frequencies) and not at others. You can test this by taking your other virgin core and wind one coil of many many turns and other with thicker wire but just enough turns to cover the core stem and have spaces between each turn and only one layer. Then pulse each identically and try your wire on the center cores of each to see if your LED will light more or less. hahahah

One side example of this tightly wound coiling is the standard Tesla Coil (TC) set-up where you notice the primary (TCP) is horizontal with few turns and widely spaced between turns (great), but then Tesla uses a tightly wound secondary (TCS) tower as the output (not as great). But I am sure if the TCS had a space between turns, it will output more power at higher amps since under SC, speed of copper atom core spin = voltage and the total number of copper atom cores spinning (or swinging) = amperage. So when the turns are to close together, one turn spins and influences the next turn but not in the best form since a great percentage of all this spin will generate atomic spin cancellation or simply look at it as an atomic seizure. If the TCS had spaces between turns, it will produce the same voltage (speed of spin) but now there will be less or no turn-to-turn cancellation hence more copper atoms will be spinning in the same direction and increase the overall amperage output.

In your case, this is great because you are feeding off the laminated core that should never produce any output since what is in the core should be flux and under Standard EE, flux is not directly attributed to voltage and/or amperage, but needs to transfer to a wound coil for that to occur skin-to-skin and not via an exiting conductor wire off the laminated core itself as you are showing. hahahahahahahaha

Just great indeed. Thanks for the vids.

As I am perfecting my model with time, I see more and more of these effects that counter the Standard EE model of "electrons, electron flow, flux, magnetism and magnetic fields and even field collapse" as being truly nonexistent because all these effects can now be explained by SC as non etheric and by doing so puts the onus back on the atom and its many attributes that we have not discovered or ignored, so the story goes way deeper then SC and I still need some time to polish it up to a level that will be more easily understood or less prone to misunderstandings as I am sure this isolated post may engender for readers. Sorry for that.


Group: Guest
Here is my take on this according to my new model of atomic construct and Spin Conveyance (SC).

wattsup, is this "Spin Conveyance (SC)" similar to, or the same as Dr. Myron Evan's Spin Connection Resonance (SCR)?

I see a lot of similarities there and wonder where you found the Spin Conveyance terminology.

I do agree, most if not all EE designed devices have significant cancellation.  I've been looking into alternate geometries in hopes of finding a simple, straightforward means to avoid cancellation so the spin differences can be optimized.

Anyway, good post.  Lots of food for thought.
Pages: [1]
« previous next »


Home Help Search Login Register
Theme © PopularFX | Based on PFX Ideas! | Scripts from iScript4u 2021-10-19, 19:05:38