Alexander Graham Bell's Free Energy Device

[Orthofield]

Hi Chief Kolbacict,

Probably a permanent magnet stepper motor.

Fred

[panyuming]

Hi Panyuming,


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).

Thank you Orthofield Senior Member for your guidance and discussion.

My own expression skills are poor, and I don't know English.     Without web translation, I wouldn't be able to learn and discuss here.
I'll just change some words.

Oh, and the number in Figure 8 is the number of the image attachment I used in this thread.
The W, mA I said is all under the premise of assumptions. I think it's for clarity.


There are two key points I want to make: it's also like one thing.
1. The ability of the receiver to receive radiated energy has nothing to do with the receiver's voltage (DC) to ground.
2. The receiver P is approximately an ideal current source, and the output current of P has nothing to do with the DC voltage of T.

It does not say to receive static electricity from the atmosphere. It is a situation in which a clear radiation source of receiver P is directed and aligned.
The radiation source S can be an ultraviolet lamp, an X-ray tube, or even the sun, rather than an omnidirectional like a radio station.
Assuming that the power of S is also indifferent, even if it is stronger than the sun. It just means that the radiation source causes P to generate an electric current.
Assuming 1mA, it is also completely indifferent to the value, and it is also within the achievable range.
Assuming that the power of 1000W from T is also to facilitate the introduction of COP=1000, I think the output of the solar receiver may be a thousand times larger than it is now.


These assumptions are also intended to illustrate the following two points:
1. In the case of getting the same current, increasing the output voltage at the same time can get more power output. (Although it is well known, it should be specifically noted here.) ）
2. If the voltage exceeds the critical value, it enters the OU realm.

----------------------------------------------------------------------
After the above explanation, I thought of another possibility.
The radiation cited by Nikola Tesla should be contained in solar radiation by its radiative properties.
The sun is a broad-spectrum radiation source, regardless of the sun's peak radiation distribution, the amount of radiation in line with the radiation spectrum that Nikola Tesla said is certainly greater than the illuminance of artificial radiation sources, especially in spacecraft.


Thanks
Panyuming

[chief kolbacict]

Probably a permanent magnet stepper motor.

No, no, definitely not a stepper motor, a commutator motor with brushes.
It has only two outputs, rotates when the polarity changes in different directions.
The rotation speed depends on the applied voltage.
For many years, no one can show a drawing of the internal structure.
It does not take apart on screws. It's a pity to break.

[panyuming]

Sorry
This thread was taken off topic by me, and went back to Homopolar Generator.

I continue the discussion, or hope that there will be an OU.

I think about the Faraday Homopolar Generator that rotates up and down the magnet, and the copper disk in the middle is fixed, such a structure.
In the absence of a leadwire, the magnet rotates, and there is a Lorentz force that drives the electrons acted on by the rotation of the magnetic field lines throughout the copper disk to move towards the edge of the copper disk.
The magnet stops spinning and the electrons return to their initial equilibrium state.
When the magnet rotates, the electrons driven towards the edge must have a force that attempts to restore equilibrium so that the copper disk has no potential difference, canceling out the Lorentz force generated by the magnet's rotation.
If the copper disc is removed, the magnet only rotates at a constant speed in the air, and all that is needed is bearing friction and air friction.
After adding the copper disk, the increased force required to maintain the original constant rotation is the Lorentz resultant force.

Without current elicitation, a Lorentz force is still required to drive the magnet to rotate.

Having said that, I understood why the typical Faraday Homopolar Generator is made into a structure where copper disks rotate with magnets. ------ copper disc has no cutting magnetic field lines, no Lorentz force, only air friction.
When the edge of the copper disc is connected to the brushes, the friction of the brushes is increased.
When current is drawn from the brushes, it is equivalent to the flow of electrons in a sector-shaped area where the brushes touch. The flow of these electrons requires the drive of the Lorentz force, which shows an increase in the driving force of the rotating magnet. Also shows not OU.

But how come the most promising and actual 'No Lenz effect' is not manifested?
How can I take advantage of the No Lenz effect?

[Orthofield]

Hi Chief Kolbacict,

Then maybe some investigation of where the motor came from, any parts numbers, or looking for similar types of devices?
Google image search?
Figuring out who the manufacturer is?

As a patent researcher I can say that there are a lot of odd motors in the patent databases that rarely or never get used-- hybrids of commutated, stepper, permanent magnet, alternating current, even homopolar. There can be endless combinations of these.

However, with a very tiny group of possible exceptions (flux switching permanent magnet motors?) they are all under unity in output.

Fred

[Orthofield]

Hi Panyuming,

I appreciate the work you are putting in to machine translating our English here. I machine translate patents all the time, and it's not easy even with machine help. The Korean database is full of interesting looking patents but the translation is very poor.

I am amused by the irony of age and experience vs youth and inexperience. The young (and by young I mean younger than 70) are full of energy and enthusiasm, but often direct their energy into dead ends, or scatter it in a hundred directions, while the old know better than to waste their energy chasing after a thousand things that have already been tried, but don't have the energy to pursue what they know is important and meaningful. Ah, if only the young would listen to the old and stop wasting their enormous energy and talent...it will never happen LOL

In some ways we are talking past each other. There's no such thing as 'no Lenz'. Action and reaction are a hard law with no loopholes-- unlike some fishy stuff in thermodynamics, it cannot be violated.

BUT a reaction force can be caused to react against another reaction force, as in the transformers I sent you. This is like martial art where what seems to be opposition is made to help instead. Or caused to change its vector of operation, as in certain permanent magnet motors, and a few generators. Or displaced in time so that the reaction happens out of synch with action, as in some devices using domain wall movement. 

Now, many here will disagree with my latter statements, but as a historian of overunity reports/patents I can tell you that these methods have been used and been reported to be successful since the early 1920s-- at least-- so there's more than likely some substance to them.

At the same time, after searching my records, I find only four reports of Homopolar devices being overunity. Now five, if one counts the AG Bell patent. I will send you some of this info if you think it is worth it.

As to the Tesla radiant energy device, I think it quite possible that there is 'another energy' within sunlight that can be tapped. The Vedas and other ancient texts say that sunlight contains prana, and I believe that there is good evidence that prana, ki, chi, etc, are actually electromagnetic in nature, essentially small ball lightning particles that are absorbed by the chakras from sunlight. These particles are composed of EM knots where the E and B vector are parallel. Such parallel E and B fields are a common feature of solar electromagnetism and there's no reason to think that such particles could not be emitted by the Sun in vast quantities.
But that's all (informed) speculation on my part, and I don't know how to tap that energy...maybe you can figure it out..

Your idea of combining a current source and a much higher voltage sounds nice, but try it on your bench and see what happens. You don't need to use sunlight, just do it with a handy current source. Sure, one can take a current source and raise it well above ground potential, but when power begins to flow, that power has to come from somewhere. There's no 'virtual' power source that can power a real load.

Fred

[chief kolbacict]

Hi Chief Kolbacict,

Then maybe some investigation of where the motor came from, any parts numbers, or looking for similar types of devices?
Google image search?
Figuring out who the manufacturer is?

As a patent researcher I can say that there are a lot of odd motors in the patent databases that rarely or never get used-- hybrids of commutated, stepper, permanent magnet, alternating current, even homopolar. There can be endless combinations of these.

However, with a very tiny group of possible exceptions (flux switching permanent magnet motors?) they are all under unity in output.

Fred

This was used in Soviet reel-to-reel video recorders.  In the 70s.
It must have been copied from Western VCRs in the 60s. years.
So you must know this design.

[F6FLT]

Interesting reference. In the 1970s in the West, the general public had no idea of the techno used in the USSR. I see here that there was still such a device on sale in 2013, in new condition! I wonder what is the use of the two plugs that we see on one of the photos, protruding from the back of the device.

[Allcanadian]

Orthofield

There's no such thing as 'no Lenz'. Action and reaction are a hard law with no loopholes-- unlike some fishy stuff in thermodynamics, it cannot be violated.

That's not true and it depends on the context.

To be clear, Lenz Law only applies when one magnetic field induces a current and a second magnetic field which opposes the first. This is all Lenz ever claimed and to suppose it should apply in any other context is incorrect.

Many like to put words in Lenz mouth supposing the law applies to action/reaction and the conservation of energy in general which is false. Do you see the problem?, these people are applying circular reasoning determining the answer they want first then cherry picking facts to support it. On the other hand Lenz simply described the effect in question then warned everyone not to read more into it, which they obviously did anyways.

So of course there is such a thing as "no Lenz". No Lenz is any effect which doesn't use one magnetic field to induce another which opposes the first. There are literally thousands of examples of this happening in nature.

AC

[Orthofield]

Hi Allcanadian,

I assumed the context was understood to be electrical machinery. As you said before, there are all sorts of natural processes that don't involve Lenz's law.

And now that I think about it, even in electrical machinery there are exceptions, a Hall plate being a good one. Applying a voltage to the edges of a Hall plate doesn't cause a current to flow. It's nonreciprocal.

So I'll retract that statement altogether. Maybe there is such a thing as a 'no Lenz' electric motor/generator/transformer.

Fred

[chief kolbacict]

I wonder what is the use of the two plugs that we see on one of the photos, protruding from the back of the device.

This is a wired remote control.

[Allcanadian]

Orthofield

So I'll retract that statement altogether. Maybe there is such a thing as a 'no Lenz' electric motor/generator/transformer.

It's cool and your statement just stood out among the others.

Early on I found it odd that many were taking Lenz Law out of context. They were applying it as a be all end all to justify action/reaction and the conservation of energy which is wrong in my opinion. Then when I actually read Emil Lenz work in his own words I realized many were making it out to be much more than it actually is. It begs the question, how can we understand Lenz if we don't know what he actually said?.

On a no Lenz motor/generator/transformer it's debatable. I have found it's never a black and white proposition more so shades of gray. For example, the Tesla hair pin circuit can produce an energy transfer which has little or no measurable magnetic field. It can light a 100 watt bulb through a wire as big as a human hair which proves it has almost no current/magnetic field. Of course Lenz Law would apply to any current producing a magnetic field however were only talking about a very small fraction of the total energy present.

AC

[partzman]

Orthofield
It's cool and your statement just stood out among the others.

Early on I found it odd that many were taking Lenz Law out of context. They were applying it as a be all end all to justify action/reaction and the conservation of energy which is wrong in my opinion. Then when I actually read Emil Lenz work in his own words I realized many were making it out to be much more than it actually is. It begs the question, how can we understand Lenz if we don't know what he actually said?.

On a no Lenz motor/generator/transformer it's debatable. I have found it's never a black and white proposition more so shades of gray. For example, the Tesla hair pin circuit can produce an energy transfer which has little or no measurable magnetic field. It can light a 100 watt bulb through a wire as big as a human hair which proves it has almost no current/magnetic field. Of course Lenz Law would apply to any current producing a magnetic field however were only talking about a very small fraction of the total energy present.

AC

This statement is interesting!  Do you have a link or paper for this demonstration?

Regards,
Pm

[Orthofield]

Hi Allcanadian,

I tried to find an English translation of "On the Laws which Govern the Action of a Magnet upon a Spiral" by Lenz, and was unable to find one. But if you do a search for the exact phrase on Google, you turn up a book "The Contributions of H.F.E. Lenz to Electromagnetism" and you can read the paraphrase of that author.
Lenz himself didn't see any association with a conservation of energy law, which didn't exist yet, and had a more empirical and mechanical understanding of his experiments. Helmholtz apparently used Lenz's observations as an example in his formulation of that law some fourteen years later.

I didn't see any indication that he warned others of making too much of his principle, but it's clear that he saw it as simply an empirical observation that appeared to hold true in every case he had seen. He seemed to be an admirer of Ampere's original force law, and something of a detractor of Faraday, although he replicated many of his experiments.

As an aside, he didn't seem to understand or use Faraday's concept of 'lines of force', and since I believe Ampere's original law didn't include the concept of a field, he might be called a follower of Ampere-- so today would probably be in the camp of Graneau, Parry, Moon and others who don't believe that the existence of a field is necessary to explain interactions between conductors, or between conductors and a magnet, which would be seen as a collection of circular currents. 

Fred

[chief kolbacict]

How will such a bifilar differ from the usual one with one rod?
If you choose the number of black and red turns, so that the total inductance is zero?

[Orthofield]

Hi chief kolbacict,

I think in order for the total L to be zero, the area of both coils would also need to be equal.
As to how it would be different, I don't know.. try it and let us know...

Fred

[Orthofield]

correction to my post about Lenz..

Parry Moon, and Domina Spencer

rather than Parry, Moon, and Spencer.

Two disbelievers in field theory who wrote extensively in the 50s and 60s.

Fred

[chief kolbacict]

Electric Machine Design Flow with ANSYS, Inc. Tools
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=N4_7j1pOpto

Simulating an Electro-Permanent Magnet (EPM) Using Ansys Maxwell
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KpO6OLXCSO4

Could you simulate my coil in your ANSYS ?
I don't even try to install these programs on my computer, it's not serious.

I think as long as there is no movement near the pole pieces, a balanced coil will have the properties of a classic bifilar.
And, accordingly, as a bifilar, it should not have the Lenz effect.

[Allcanadian]

partzman

This statement is interesting!  Do you have a link or paper for this demonstration?

The video's I saw seems to be missing in action however I have done all these experiments for myself.

It starts with a series of logical questions...
1)How do we light a 100w bulb through two very small wires when the wire cannot handle 100w?.
2)According to basic electrical theory it's not the voltage or power that limits the wire size it's only the current.
3)How do we limit the current in the hairpin circuit?, we make the capacitors very small and use two to block in the working circuit.
4)The capacitors will only allow a very small amount of current to pass on each cycle limiting the total current.
5)The total power in the circuit is then determined by the voltage and the frequency/wavelength.

I started with two diy 4"x4" plate capacitors made from aluminum roof flashing with 2mm plastic spacers. As Tesla said, make the capacitors very small and the inductance therefore voltage very high. The very small nF capacitors allow almost no real current to pass but the power can still be high if the voltage and frequency are high. So I started with very small capacitors then kept increasing the voltage/frequency until I hit the power level I wanted.

It's easier if we think of it this way, conceptually the real goal is to take a direct current and break it up into millions of smaller pieces alternating back and forth. It's technically the same current and only the way it's moving back and forth has changed. Hence the reason I built the capacitors first to set the amount of current then built the rest of the circuit around them to get the results I wanted.

AC

[forest]

Is this related ? http://jnaudin.free.fr/avramenko/avramenk.htm

[F6FLT]

...
And, accordingly, as a bifilar, it should not have the Lenz effect.

Whether bifilar or not, Lenz's law applies, the electronic coulombic influence being reciprocal.

[chief kolbacict]

Whether bifilar or not, Lenz's law applies, the electronic coulombic influence being reciprocal.

Probably you're right. I don't argue.
But it hasn't inductance.and field arround.that's certainly.

[F6FLT]

Probably you're right. I don't argue.
But it hasn't inductance.and field arround.that's certainly.

In theory you are right. In practice this is never the case because the magnetic coupling between the two wires is never 100%. If the coupling was perfect and the current in each wire was flowing in opposite directions, the inductance would be strictly zero, which is never the case.
For example, there will always be magnetic field lines around each conductor, passing through the gap in the insulator. It is enough to place a test coil connected to a scope to see the considerable leakage field produced by a bifilar coil.

[chief kolbacict]

Yes, nothing is perfect in real life. I agree.

[F6FLT]

Yes, nothing is perfect in real life. I agree.

Alas! Because a simple perfect diode would give us OU!