PopularFX
Home Help Search Login Register
Welcome,Guest. Please login or register.
2023-02-01, 06:58:34
News: Check out the Benches; a place for people to moderate their own thread and document their builds and data.
If you would like your own Bench, please PM an Admin.
Most Benches are visible only to members.

Pages: [1] 2 3
Author Topic: Alexander Graham Bell's Free Energy Device  (Read 2454 times)
Sr. Member
****

Posts: 331
Hi All,

Here's a curiosity from my files... Alexander Graham Bell's free energy device.
This patent is classified as H02K53/00 in the international system, "purported perpetual mobilia".
What do you think?

Fred
   
Newbie
*

Posts: 11
Hi All,

Here's a curiosity from my files... Alexander Graham Bell's free energy device.
This patent is classified as H02K53/00 in the international system, "purported perpetual mobilia".
What do you think?

Fred

Thank you so much Orthofield for sharing
BELL Patent No. 181553

It solves the trouble of Faraday Homopolar generator edge contact power transmission, and the current can be drawn from the shaft, and the friction is much smaller.

What's more:
   The permanent magnet N S, Fig. 4, may be set in rotation in the interior of a hollow cylinder of copper, so as to obtain the full inductive action of the magnet all around; and the copper cylinders of a number of similar instruments may be united in series for quantity or intensity in an analogous manner to the arrangements shown in Figs. 2 and 3. The currents induced in the copper cylinders, and the currents induced in the rotating magnets themselves, may be thrown into the same circuit, so as to produce a maximum effect.

In this way, the copper tube for generating electricity does not have to rotate, and it is very easy to connect the wire that draws the current.


PYM


« Last Edit: 2022-11-19, 09:13:17 by panyuming »
   
Group: Experimentalist
Hero Member
*****

Posts: 1807
It's the principle of the Faraday disk in generator mode. There is no free energy there, and Graham Bell does not claim it, energy is needed to make the magnet rotate.
This patent is of no practical interest, the voltage being too low for long line data transmission. I have never heard of it being used by the telegraph companies of the time.


---------------------------
"Open your mind, but not like a trash bin"
   
Newbie
*

Posts: 11
ok :)
« Last Edit: 2022-11-19, 10:36:45 by panyuming »
   
Sr. Member
****

Posts: 331
Hi Panyuming, F6FLT,

I can't speak to the overunity properties of either Bell's device, or the homopolar generator in general. I read a lot about many years ago but have forgotten most of it now. There doesn't seem to be any particular reason why it would generate energy in excess of what it took to drive it.

My main interest is in why the patent examiners chose to put the patent in this classification. They usually know what they're doing. There are thousands of patents in this class, and most of them are obviously free energy devices-- magnet motors, motors that drive generators that then drive the motor, and the like.

As you say, F6FLT, there is no claim of 'OU' in the patent, nor is there anything anomalous about its operation. Other homopolar generators and motors are in a different class than this one. Why was this one singled out? We'll never know, I guess...

Fred
   
Group: Experimentalist
Hero Member
*****

Posts: 1807
...
My main interest is in why the patent examiners chose to put the patent in this classification. They usually know what they're doing.
...

I really don't see what makes you say that. Moreover, sometimes the examiners have busy periods, and they work too fast to get it right.

Quote
There are thousands of patents in this class, and most of them are obviously free energy devices-- magnet motors, motors that drive generators that then drive the motor, and the like.

And not a single mistake?

Quote
As you say, F6FLT, there is no claim of 'OU' in the patent, nor is there anything anomalous about its operation. Other homopolar generators and motors are in a different class than this one. Why was this one singled out? We'll never know, I guess...

Fred

All homopolar generators work on the principle of this one. I don't even understand why it was patentable when Faraday has the anteriority of the idea since 1831!
Mine would be.  :)



---------------------------
"Open your mind, but not like a trash bin"
   
Hero Member
*****

Posts: 2391
Orthofield
Quote
Here's a curiosity from my files... Alexander Graham Bell's free energy device.
This patent is classified as H02K53/00 in the international system, "purported perpetual mobilia".
What do you think?

Good snag... that's an interesting patent.

AC


---------------------------
Comprehend and Copy Nature... Viktor Schauberger

We don't have an energy crisis we have an understanding crisis concerning what energy is and how it works... AC
   
Hero Member
*****

Posts: 2391
I don't think the patent is OU however there's a lot a keen mind can learn from the details of the patent. The devil is always found in the smallest of details.

For example, in the patent Fig 1 shows a standard homopolar generator setup but Fig 2 and 3 show the induced current moving inward/outward from the center.
Fig 4 then elaborates on this concept by showing counter rotating magnets about the center producing a unidirectional current in an induced copper tube.

Do you see the problem?, it all but proves there must be a "neutral point" at the center of the magnet where the magnetic field reverses it's spin/polarity.
Otherwise there would be no need to connect to the center outwards in Fig. 2, 3 or reverse the magnets rotation in Fig 4.

Many still might not understand what I just said so we can change the argument/perspective.
If as many claim a magnet is just a bunch of smaller magnets and all are unidirectional and uniform fields acting from South to North.
Then why does the patent show the center of the magnet(s) as the fulcrum from which all the forces and currents evolve?.
If there is nothing going on at the center of the magnet then why does this patent show everything proceeding from the center?.

In effect it's practically a slap in the face to all the supposed experts who claimed there is no neutral point.
Despite the fact there must be a change in spin/polarity near the center in order for a one polarity to transition to another polarity.

We could also make a rational argument asking how one condition or polarity is able to transition into another?. Does one pole just magically become
another because it sounds absurd. Normally every dipole looks like this N>>>>>>0<<<<<<S or (-)>>>>>>0<<<<<<(+).

Howard Johnson who supposedly built a working all magnet motor also depicted a split magnetic field. Below we can see the pattern is almost
identical to that suggested by Bell.

AC


---------------------------
Comprehend and Copy Nature... Viktor Schauberger

We don't have an energy crisis we have an understanding crisis concerning what energy is and how it works... AC
   
Group: Experimentalist
Hero Member
*****

Posts: 1597
A very simple experiment.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=F2JFDpTE_ls

Pm
   
Newbie
*

Posts: 11
Thanks again to Orthofield for sharing! O0
Homopolar Generator as I understand it:

Bell's patent is based on the same principle as Faraday's Homopolar Generator.
Bell's patent also gives a structure: the magnet rotates and the copper tube is fixed, so that the brushes or mercury pools of Faraday Homopolar Generator are not required, and the frictionless and no spark stable direct drawn current.
Similarly, the copper disc of a Faraday Homopolar Generator can be fixed, only rotating the magnet, and a steady current can also be drawn.
But there are important differences: in Faraday Homopolar Generator, a part of the sector near the copper disc connection lead wire is the effective power generation part, and the rest of the copper disc provides almost no current to the brushes. Bell's patent, the longer the fixed copper tube, the more efficient it is to use most of the cross-section of the copper tube.

The power generation principle of Homopolar Generator, is the most basic: wire cutting magnetic field line principle.

The most important characteristic of Homopolar Generator is that there is "no Lenzi Effect".
Homopolar Generator with brushes can be simplified to a situation where only one copper wire generates electricity: the secondary magnetic field generated by the output current is perpendicular to the magnetic field of the rotating magnet, and the Lenzi effect does not affect the rotation of the magnetic field.
There are articles that say that the COP=5 of Homopolar Generator.
Some articles say that Homopolar Generator can OU without the Lenzi effect, but the experimental results do not clarify the experimental device OU.

Homopolar Generator are not OU devices. because, although Homopolar Generator do not have the Lenzi effect, the rotating magnetic field during power generation needs to provide a Lorentz force to drive the offset of electrons. The more electrons are offset, i.e. the greater the output current, the greater the Lorentz force required.



Reducing the Lenzi effect, it is possible to OU, probably from the transformer principle.

Seniors introduced an asymmetric transformer:
 Figure 1


Many people experiment, it is true that there is no Lenzi effect, but there is no output either.



Can the Lenzi effect-free of Homopolar Generator be used in transformers?

Can the alternating magnetic field generated by the primary coil of the transformer be equivalent to the secondary coil cutting the magnetic field lines?
If yes, this is the key.
We wrap the secondary coil vertically around the place where the magnetic field lines of the secondary magnetic field are concentrated like a Homopolar Generator:
Figure 2


Is it possible to OU? C.C

This is only a schematic diagram and cannot be applied in practice.
Is it not possible to wind a suitable secondary coil in practice?

Thank you
Panyuming
« Last Edit: 2022-12-01, 21:09:55 by panyuming »
   
Newbie
*

Posts: 11
Find some materials:
Figure 3

It seems to have come up with a suitable structure:
Figure 4
No Lenzi Transformer?


Is it possible that Lorentz forces are still needed and cannot OU?
   
Newbie
*

Posts: 11
Sorry
   
Group: Experimentalist
Hero Member
*****

Posts: 1807
...
Is it possible that Lorentz forces are still needed and cannot OU?

This is not a question of possibility, it is a fact, and the causes are obvious.


---------------------------
"Open your mind, but not like a trash bin"
   
Newbie
*

Posts: 11
This is not a question of possibility, it is a fact, and the causes are obvious.

Thank you  F6FLT!

I stop it。 :(
No OU,no study。
« Last Edit: 2022-12-02, 04:25:01 by panyuming »
   
Hero Member
*****

Posts: 2391
Panyuming
Quote
No Lenz Transformer?
Is it possible that Lorentz forces are still needed and cannot OU?

All Lenz Law claims is that if we use a changing magnetic field to induce a current in a conductor the induced magnetic field will oppose the field which induced it. Think of it this way...  changing magnetic field>>>>>>induced current<<<<<<opposing induced magnetic field.

However Lenz Law does not apply to all "generators". A solar cell can generate a direct current and Lenz Law does not apply. There is no changing magnetic field only photons causing excited electrons to jump a band gap. The solar cell also transforms the energy from the photons into the linear motion of electrons in a conductor. So we could call the solar cell a different kind of No Lenz energy transformer/generator.

It's best not to get caught up in too many different dogmas or narratives and concentrate on the primary cause of things. A moving electron is called an electron current and the only thing required to move an electron is a force. It doesn't matter how or why the force came about on the electron only that it does.

AC


---------------------------
Comprehend and Copy Nature... Viktor Schauberger

We don't have an energy crisis we have an understanding crisis concerning what energy is and how it works... AC
   
Sr. Member
****

Posts: 331
Hi Allcanadian, Panyuming,

I appreciate that you've found more in this old patent than I ever saw. I don't have an eye for details, only general principles that show up in many places. I consider that if multiple researchers have found anomalies in a certain area, then it's worth looking further into it. I'm more of a historian than an inventor.

I don't consider homopolar machines to be a fertile ground for experimentation. Sure, it's possible that something has been missed, but aside from the reports from Tewari, Palma, and Trombley, thousands of experimenters have played with these devices without seeing anything unusual. The American Journal of Physics has many articles showing variations of the motor or generator as high school science projects.

As a general rule, anything that can behave as a motor as well as a generator is out of the running for me. It is showing reciprocity of action. On the other hand, established nonreciprocal processes are of great interest.

I do have some rules of thumb as to where the goodies lie--developed out of looking at perhaps more than 50K patents/projects at this point--and I'll get into that in another post.

Panyuming, I do agree that a transformer configuration has a good possibility of, not *cancelling* the Lenz effect, which will always exist, but of actively *using* it to increase output. There are a great number of transformer type 'excess energy' devices that do this, including one that was installed in the LA power system for some time. References are Cobb, Murray, Alek, Jensen, and my own FNT. Among many others now forgotten. I consider it a proven fact that reaction forces can increase output under certain conditions.

Allcanadian, your point about solar cells is a good one. Even in rotating magnet generators there are cases where Lenz effect won't exist. For instance, a rotating permanent magnet attracting or repelling piezoelectric transducers attached to ferrous masses. Because magnetic force is being transduced to electric voltage directly, such devices are classically nonreciprocal. In other words, pulsing the PZ devices is not going to counter rotate the magnet (the masses move only slightly). This is an area where patents have been issued, but it hasn't been explored enough.

Also, I believe there is good evidence that *when there is a source of natural energy present* like ambient heat and light, using passive electric fields can increase the output of solar cells, thermoelectric generators, and possibly any sort of semiconductor with a substantial electron mobility. That's my current research interest.

Fred
   
Group: Experimentalist
Hero Member
*****

Posts: 1807
Thank you  F6FLT!

I stop it。 :(
No OU,no study。

Don't stop, otherwise you won't be able to do anything since all the laws of physics are incompatible with OU.

There is no OU anywhere yet, that's why we are looking for it. No one can say whether there will be OU here or there, since there is no theory of the OU except among the self-proclaimed experts of the free energy, those pretentious idiots and charlatans that you see everywhere.

The only method is to imagine new experiments that might show anomalous results or circumvent laws like Lenz's law, and test them. If it is absurd to repeat old experiments that nobody has ever succeeded in making work (because they cannot work, imho that's 99% of what we see in the field of FE), on the other hand we can always hope for revolutionary results in the fields not yet explored.

So in summary, we need to find new phenomena that are compatible with the laws of physics, for example a source of energy that is still unknown, or apparently incompatible and that will require theories to evolve or new ones to be found, but only when the facts are well established. The laws of physics are with us, we must use them rather than stupidly fight them, as in those martial arts where we use the strength of the opponent against him.

The hardest thing is to find really new ideas, which are certainly not on youtube when you search on "free energy". Just rely on yourself.



---------------------------
"Open your mind, but not like a trash bin"
   
Sr. Member
****

Posts: 331
Panyunming,

Take a look at the attached patent. This is a good place to start, in my opinion.

The Cobb Energy Conservation Circuit was installed in all the factories in an industrial district of LA under the auspices of the city government, and reduced their electric bills by an average of 15%. Since normal transformers are quite efficient, this indicates a small OU performance. Surprisingly, nobody has investigated further, although the device is of simple design.

Another good example with at least two replications is the Jensen Unidirectional Transformer. Jensen's original description as a well as a more recent replication with full power balance are attached.

In both these devices, one secondary flux reacts on another one.

Fred


   
Newbie
*

Posts: 11
Thank you, Allcanadian Orthofield F6FLT Senior Members, and thank you to everyone who followed this thread.
Thank you for your guidance.

Okay, don't stop. Thank you F6FLT for your encouragement. Indeed, it is impossible to explore free energy if we follow the existing laws.

Thanks to Orthofield for introducing three more important documents. It turns out that transformers also have surprises for people.

I used to have a very naïve idea about solar energy: solar power can be thousand times greater?
I am using the analogy of a regulated power supply, if a small load resistor is connected to the output of the regulated power supply, the regulated power supply will enter a current limit state.
The current output of the regulated power supply is obtained on a small resistor, but only a small voltage is obtained. Then the power obtained by the load resistance is also very small.
To get more load power, you should increase the voltage obtained while getting the current.
The presently solar cell seems to only get the 'light flow' of the sun, and does not use the 'light pressure' of the sun's light?
Solar researchers must be working on materials to maximize the output voltage of solar cells. But that's just studying how the voltage of the PN junction increases due to 'optical flow', which seems to have little to do with 'light pressure'.
Can the radiation energy patent given by Nikola Tesla guide the method of using 'light pressure'? C.C

Thank you.
Panyuming
   
Newbie
*

Posts: 11
I'm not sure if the Homopolar Generator principle I mentioned earlier is equivalent to transformers.

Go back and look at Homopolar Generator to envision a structure:
Figure 7
Whether a higher voltage output can be obtained?

In fact, the key is: to increase the current output, does the force to maintain the rotation speed of the magnet also increase?
I haven't done experiments with Homopolar Generator and don't know the actual situation.
« Last Edit: 2022-12-04, 03:19:41 by panyuming »
   
Sr. Member
****

Posts: 331
Hi Panyuming,

I think I get you about voltage vs. current in a solar cell.
The losses in the cell are mostly I2R losses. I reasoned that if the output of a solar cell was 'all voltage', the output would be increased due to a reduction in thermal losses. A solar cell is a capacitor. So use sunlight to charge a series string of cells, then discharge them, based on the time constant of the string, dumping the voltage into another capacitor through an inductor (to reduce losses-- a resonant transfer circuit).
I don't know about 'thousands of times', but this should allow operation of the string at near maximum power point all the time.

Fred
   
Newbie
*

Posts: 11
Hi Panyuming,

I think I get you about voltage vs. current in a solar cell.
The losses in the cell are mostly I2R losses. I reasoned that if the output of a solar cell was 'all voltage', the output would be increased due to a reduction in thermal losses. A solar cell is a capacitor. So use sunlight to charge a series string of cells, then discharge them, based on the time constant of the string, dumping the voltage into another capacitor through an inductor (to reduce losses-- a resonant transfer circuit).
I don't know about 'thousands of times', but this should allow operation of the string at near maximum power point all the time.

Fred



Let's take a look at the picture of Nikola Tesla:
Figure 8

Hypothesis, S in Figure 8, which consumes 1W of power and generates a radiated current, which is received by P, causing p to T to generate 1mA.

From the use of radio receivers, we know that the ability of the radio to receive signals has nothing to do with the location of the radio. At sea, in the mountains, on high-voltage transmission lines, the radio's ability to receive signals is the same. The distance between the radio station and the radio, the reception efficiency and interference noise are not discussed. Only one principle is derived from this: no matter how high the voltage (DC) of the radio receivers to ground, it does not affect the radio to receive the broadcast signal.

Figure 8 Similarly, P's ability to receive radiation from S is independent of the DC voltage at T.
That is, P is an ideal current source.
When P begins to receive radiation from S, the voltage of T to ground begins to increase linearly.
Using modern circuit technology, it is possible to start drawing 1mA continuously and stably when the voltage VT=1000V. That is, the load gets 1W of power. If the voltage reaches 1000000V, and then start to draw 1mA, the load will get 1000W of power. It can also be said COP=1000.
I don't know where the extra energy is coming from. But receivers are such principles.

Nikola Tesla did not say what properties the radiation of S was.
Current theory says that all kinds of radiation are waves, with different wavelengths and different names. Alpha ray; X-ray; Blue light; Infrared.. And it has 'wave-particle duality'.
If S radiates mainly particles, it is easy to understand: particles reach P, are trapped by P and form an electric current.
If S radiates waves, I don't understand: waves, which are positive and negative for a while, should cancel each other out after p captures.

If there is a plate that functions as well as P in Figure 8, it receives optical radiation. We got a thousand times more solar energy than we have today.

Thanks all
Panyuming
   

Group: Professor
Hero Member
*****

Posts: 1739
Bell's figure 4 is not a homopolar generator and I think it doesn't exist in reality.  The magnetic fields from the magnets come from electron spins that have enormous rotation rates and spinning the magnets about their axes does nothing to the magnetic field.  That is why in the classical Faraday disc homopolar device it matters not whether the magnet moves with the disc.  It is the spins of the electrons that create the field, not the spin of the device carrying those electrons.  So I can't see it working.

Smudge
   
Sr. Member
****

Posts: 331
Hi Panyuming,

This is famous patent US685957.

I'm confused by your references.

This is fig. 3 in the patent, not fig. 8

There are no mentions of Watts or mA in the patent. Nor does Tesla ever specifically define any input or output characteristics in any patent, as far as I know. He does in the Colorado Springs notebooks.

The source S is described as "an arc arc emitting copiously ultraviolet rays" so Tesla is indeed defining the nature of the source--although of course he believes the source emits energetic particles. (Tesla didn't believe in Hertzian waves).

Aside from artificial sources like this, the voltage at the height of P is set by the voltage differential between the Earth and Ionosphere, about 300 V/m as I recall. So positing a million V at P is pleasant to contemplate but has no relationship to reality.

It's quite possible to draw 5 W of power from an antenna or low balloon, as Oleg Jeffimenko did, but without some active means of drawing power down from the upper ionosphere, that's very likely all that will happen. There are some patents that use cold emission or ionizing laser beams or such to create a pathway that electricity can flow down. I would hesitate to develop these because what is essentially tapping lightning for power might have big ecological consequences. We are still dealing with Tesla's choice of 60 Hz for the power grid based on the diameter of the ionospheric cavity-- it 's very close to Schumann frequencies that entrain magnetic particles in the pineal gland, and not particularly good for us, disrupting sleep patterns in particular.

Tesla himself says that "energy is generally supplied at a very slow rate to the condenser" which implies that it is collecting electrostatic energy.

In the time period when Tesla patented these devices, there were many many attempts to gather electrostatic energy from the atmosphere. Many were far more ingenious than Tesla's, but now forgotten.

I haven't found any replications of these Tesla radiant energy devices that got more output than you would expect from atmospheric electricity. Nor does Tesla indicate anything more than that.

But by all means, try it out! Maybe everyone has missed something.

I do suggest as a general rule, as F6FLT said, that inventive ideas that everyone has examined extensively (for a hundred years in this case) are the *least likely* place to find new energy sources. But it is a natural phase we all go through when we start this work-- raking through other people's projects, seeing possibilities, and getting enthusiastic about them.

Eventually though, we need to think beyond what mythologized inventors have done, and either look for unknown or forgotten projects and principles, as I've done, or come up with our own projects and principles.

BTW, Tesla was completely right about wireless power transmission. We tested it and sent 5 W several hundred meters through a single wire with no loss of power. Instituting this concept in the power system would save a lot of power now wasted as heat!

Fred
   

Jr. Member
**

Posts: 89
How is this motor arranged inside?
Obviously this is a collector motor with permanent magnets and a tachometer for speed loop.
It was used in reel-to-reel video recorders for direct tape advance.
Distinctive feature, low turns without reducer.
   
Pages: [1] 2 3
« previous next »


 

Home Help Search Login Register
Theme © PopularFX | Based on PFX Ideas! | Scripts from iScript4u 2023-02-01, 06:58:34