PopularFX
Home Help Search Login Register
Welcome,Guest. Please login or register.
2019-10-20, 22:57:50
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 4 5 6 7 [8]
Author Topic: The Patent Of William Barbat  (Read 151062 times)
Group: Guest
...
If you place a bat magnet inside a solenoid coil, does this change the response of the coil when pulsed?

There are in fact two questions in your question.
A bar magnet has generally a permeability different from air. Therefore the response of the coil is changed with a bar magnet inside the solenoid.
But:
the fact that the bar magnet is magnetized or not, doesn't change the response of the coil (except if magnetizing the bar would have changed its permeability). The change of the response of the coil is not due to the constant magnetic field but to the bar permeability, as for any core of any material.

When I tested coils with magnet cores, something surprised me: one might expect the permeability of strong magnets to be high but surprisingly it is very low. The relative permeability of neodymium or Co-Sm is only 1.05!


   
Group: Guest
..
It's just that the CIA, NSA and others like Homeland Security look at everything! (they have the legal right),
...

 ;D   CIA and NSA control the world!
Not one OU invention in any country can escape from the big conspiracy of the men in black!
I'm very afraid, not because of them, but by the level of childishness of these assertions.

Even US diplomatic emails and classified documents have been published by WikiLeaks, but an inventor couldn't let know his genious invention?  C.C  
What a wishful thinking to avoid to face the reality: there are not yet OU devices!

Sorry to reply to this old post, I would have missed it in 2011!
   
Group: Guest
It appears William Barbat's website (Levitronics) is still up and running, but no new posts  or info there:

http://www.levitronicsenergy.com/science.htm

I tried to post to their blogspot to no avail. It appears only one person (one of the contacts) has posted there.

http://levitronics.blogspot.com/

Is this turning out to be vaporware?

Probably. One of the many sites that creates a buzz from mistakes or lies, and the next year, it's over, they found their mistake but don't say it, or they got the money that they were seeking.

   

Group: Elite
Hero Member
******

Posts: 1859
There are in fact two questions in your question.
A bar magnet has generally a permeability different from air. Therefore the response of the coil is changed with a bar magnet inside the solenoid.
But:
the fact that the bar magnet is magnetized or not, doesn't change the response of the coil (except if magnetizing the bar would have changed its permeability). The change of the response of the coil is not due to the constant magnetic field but to the bar permeability, as for any core of any material.

When I tested coils with magnet cores, something surprised me: one might expect the permeability of strong magnets to be high but surprisingly it is very low. The relative permeability of neodymium or Co-Sm is only 1.05!

All common knowledge but without the detail concerning whether or not the applied magnet saturates the core material.

Provided the magnet applied to the ferrous core saturates that core, all of the above is true and the apparent permeability of that core + magnet will be near 1.

If the applied magnet only brings the core to near saturation then you have a solenoid which will appear different to pulses of differing polarity.

This is in line with the fact that the permeability of ferromagnetic materials change with applied magnetic flux, the inductance of a coil with a ferromagnetic core will generally vary with current in the same way it will vary when a magnet is applied to the same core.

Imagine that.... a 1mH coil is only 1mH if the applied frequency and current is just right  :D


---------------------------
"As far as the laws of mathematics refer to reality, they are not certain; as far as they are certain, they do not refer to reality." - Einstein

"What we observe is not nature itself, but nature exposed to our method of questioning." - Werner Heisenberg
   
Group: Elite
Hero Member
******

Posts: 3635
It's turtles all the way down
Back to the meat of the thread: Has anyone had any luck in finding the English translation of this document?

E. Leimer (1915), Uber Radiumantennen, ), Elektrotechnische Zeitschrift, Heft 8, Feb. 25; English translation, (1916a) The Electrician, Apr. 21; (1916b) Scientific American Supplement No. 2127, Oct. 7.


---------------------------
"Secrecy, secret societies and secret groups have always been repugnant to a free and open society"......John F Kennedy
   

Group: Elite
Hero Member
******

Posts: 1859
Back to the meat of the thread: Has anyone had any luck in finding the English translation of this document?

E. Leimer (1915), Uber Radiumantennen, ), Elektrotechnische Zeitschrift, Heft 8, Feb. 25; English translation, (1916a) The Electrician, Apr. 21; (1916b) Scientific American Supplement No. 2127, Oct. 7.

Parts, if not most of it, are on page 233 of http://books.google.com/books?id=dgA9AQAAIAAJ&pg=PA353&source=gbs_toc_r&cad=4#v=onepage&q&f=false


---------------------------
"As far as the laws of mathematics refer to reality, they are not certain; as far as they are certain, they do not refer to reality." - Einstein

"What we observe is not nature itself, but nature exposed to our method of questioning." - Werner Heisenberg
   
Newbie
*

Posts: 13
Here's the Leimer article from The Electrician, April 21, 1916


tak
   
Group: Elite
Hero Member
******

Posts: 3635
It's turtles all the way down
Thanks for the info tak22 and WW


---------------------------
"Secrecy, secret societies and secret groups have always been repugnant to a free and open society"......John F Kennedy
   
Group: Ambassador
Hero Member
*****

Posts: 3230
Bill seems to be out of contact [still checking other resources]
phone and Email disconnected.
unfortunately has been a few years [ 2015] since we talked ,I hope he is alright ?

here is his Book

https://books.google.com/books?id=7uu4BwAAQBAJ&pg=PA33&lpg=PA33&dq=Leimer+radium&source=bl&ots=ipXHkxlXb2&sig=KbIid9Og0YVgtIHH3NDb7WSN1lE&hl=en&sa=X&ved=0CCQQ6AEwAWoVChMIxpPby_m_xwIVyaOICh2pyAiC#v=onepage&q=Leimer%20radium&f=false
   
Group: Elite
Hero Member
******

Posts: 3635
It's turtles all the way down
Trailer for the book:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6SVLFiFdgMs


Quote
Published on Aug 3, 2015

We live in an age of trusting the "experts".  But what happens when the so-called experts are wrong? and their misinformation is allowing us to destroy ourselves? In Science Myths We Tell Ourselves, William Barbat demonstrates the incorrect reasoning behind "facts" we have been taught, including the Big Bang, instant creation, continental drift, and spreading sea floors. Skeptic's assertions that the climate is not changing are dissproven by Barbat's update of his 1973 climate study, which definitively proves that the world's desert belts are expanding pole-ward, like the expansion of the Sahara Desert of North Africa, which ended the Ice Age. The recent drought in the mid continental US, and the pervasive droughts in California and Brazil may be previews of climate disasters brought on by mankind, unless we can halt climate change by rethinking our energy protocols. We've been told that energy cannot be created in nature, or by man, but the stunning central thesis of Science Myths We Tell Ourselves is that the "law" on which this belief is based (Helmholtz's Energy Conservation Law) is completely untrue? in fact, it was rejected as "metaphysics" in 1847 by the Berlin Physics Society. Scientists unwilling to examine the facts continue to propagate this misinformation while ignoring the potential for unlimited, non-polluting energy from low-mass electrons. This enlightening and fascinating book will challenge what you think you know, as well as providing hope and direction for a different future.

https://www.amazon.com/Science-Myths-We-Tell-Ourselves/dp/1478747765

Amazon blurb:

Quote

The author debunks many science concepts like the Big Bang, Instant Creation, Continental Drift, and Spreading Sea Floors, which are shown to be really just myths. A Big Bang explosion would require an escape velocity for galaxies of 1,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000 times the speed of light. But more damaging to mankind is the myth that energy cannot be created in nature or by man. Few people know that Helmholtz's Energy Conservation "Law" was rejected as "metaphysics" in 1847 by the Berlin Physics Society, but that gullible scientists have accepted it anyway. So the extra energy from Low-Mass Electrons is wrongly attributed to mythical "lattice vibrations," yet it had generated electric power a century ago and could be used to avert climate change. The unappreciated creation of energy in nature is shown by Larmor's 1897 formula for photon radiation from moving charges. All orbiting electrons and spinning protons continually create photons, which possess heat and mass, and they can split into electrons and positrons to provide the building blocks of matter in stars. Larmor heat photons replace the myth of fusion energy as the source of all heat in stars, and Larmor heat photons make planets' interiors gaseous. Ultimately, a buildup of non-fusible iron at the core of a mature star cools and shrinks to separate the core from an expanding hydrogen envelope of a red giant star. This leaves a new planet to add to Dark Matter, and its Larmor energy becomes Dark Energy. The myths of Continental Drift and Spreading Sea Floors are replaced with an origin of Earth as a piece torn from Jupiter's Great Red Spot by a planetary collision. Pieces of Jupiter's crust with an ice coating formed continents around a ball of molten rock to form Earth, leaving meltwater to fill the ocean deeps. Ice comets also came from Jupiter's ice coating as shown by their planar surfaces. The myth that a dynamo causes Earth's magnetic field is replaced by a lost formula derived by Gauss for the origin of magnetic force, which also explains the origin of Earth's ionospheric radiation belts. Maxwell had suppressed Gauss's formula as "conflicting with the Energy Conservation "Law." The author updates his 1973 climate study predicting that Global Warming would expand Earth's desert belts poleward, like the Sahara grew with post-Ice Age warming. A CO2 increase accounts for the recent Mid-continent drought and the current droughts in California and Brazil, but a sudden decline in sunspot activity has started a cooling trend. In 1973 Barbat also debunked myths of the cause of the Population Explosion, but experts challenged him despite admitting his 99% statistical correlation of what really brings down high birthrates.


---------------------------
"Secrecy, secret societies and secret groups have always been repugnant to a free and open society"......John F Kennedy
   

Group: Tinkerer
Hero Member
*****

Posts: 3106
tExB=qr
What is his source for this statement?:
"Few people know that Helmholtz's Energy Conservation "Law" was rejected as "metaphysics" in 1847 by the Berlin Physics Society, but that gullible scientists have accepted it anyway."

This reference doesn't agree:
https://books.google.com/books?id=tb5WFYlNbeAC&pg=PA11&lpg=PA11&dq=1847+berlin+physics+society+energy+conservation&source=bl&ots=fdLA1uUCuv&sig=vBmNUUZeX5xaIvitO7HULQsp76o&hl=en&sa=X&ved=0ahUKEwi96fz33ezRAhWqv1QKHdBSAXIQ6AEIKDAC#v=onepage&q=1847%20berlin%20physics%20society%20energy%20conservation&f=false
   

Group: Professor
Hero Member
*****

Posts: 1475
here is his Book

https://books.google.com/books?id=7uu4BwAAQBAJ&pg=PA33&lpg=PA33&dq=Leimer+radium&source=bl&ots=ipXHkxlXb2&sig=KbIid9Og0YVgtIHH3NDb7WSN1lE&hl=en&sa=X&ved=0CCQQ6AEwAWoVChMIxpPby_m_xwIVyaOICh2pyAiC#v=onepage&q=Leimer%20radium&f=false
Seems simple to verify whether the magnetic flux generated by a coil is also dependent on the material that its windings are composed of.
InSb wire is not unobtanium
   
Group: Ambassador
Hero Member
*****

Posts: 3230
Very good news
Just had a nice Chat with one of Bills assistants ,very nice indeed .
I will be speaking with Bill when I get back home in a few days.

seems a new direction / idea is to be sorted.
@Grump
I will ask Bill that question.
@ Verpies
Hopefully we can get Bill here for some clarity and possible direction for experiments .

Thanks
Chet
« Last Edit: 2017-02-02, 02:44:06 by Chet K »
   

Group: Professor
Hero Member
*****

Posts: 1475
Regardless whether you buy the radiative nature of electromagnetic induction, that arrangement of 3 (or 4) coils in these geometric proportions should be tested.

I can get the chemicals to coat a cylindrical coil former but I am not equipped to machine a helix in it nor make pressure/spring connections with it.
   

Group: Professor
Hero Member
*****

Posts: 1475
The question to ask Bill's assistants is "What is the advantage of a semiconductor coil/helix over a semiconductor sheet ?".
   
Group: Ambassador
Hero Member
*****

Posts: 3230
I have not called him yet ,recovering from eye surgery[detached retina] and its been a bit ruff
hopefully the next few days will be better

thanks for the suggestions
   

Group: Professor
Hero Member
*****

Posts: 1475
I have not called him yet ,recovering from eye surgery [detached retina]
Aaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaa!   That is very serious!  I hope you caught it in time...
Is your monitor laying on the floor yet?
   
Group: Ambassador
Hero Member
*****

Posts: 3230
Just got back from the surgeon [he operated last Tuesday]
all is good and holding tight ,and yes the monitor has been on the floor.

Sigh
no more MMA or Bull riding .....

for at least a cpl Months 

 :o
   

Sr. Member
****

Posts: 490
Believing in something false doesn't make it true.
Hi Chet,

Glad to hear your recovery is coming along OK.

Carroll


---------------------------
Just because it is on YouTube does not make it real.
   
Group: Elite
Hero Member
******

Posts: 3635
It's turtles all the way down
Godspeed your recovery , Chet


---------------------------
"Secrecy, secret societies and secret groups have always been repugnant to a free and open society"......John F Kennedy
   
Group: Professor
Hero Member
*****

Posts: 1258
I recently had a message from tac22 asking for my comments on Barbat's patent.  Here is my first response.

Having just now browsed through that thread I can not see me adding anything useful, other than to note that the subject matter is not a granted patent, it is a patent application.  Poynt made the comment that it appears to be based on theory, and that Barbat may not actually have something working.  In view of the 13 years that have passed since that application was made, there is no sign of a patent being granted, and Barbat has not hit the headlines with a demonstration of his system, I think it likely that his low mass electron theory is flawed.  In particular I would comment that (a) near-field magnetic coupling is not a photonic effect, you can't use classical photons as the carrier, (b) the time derivative of magnetic vector potential is the driving field on the electrons in the receiving coil which create force by rate-of-change of (hidden or EM) momentum qA, not classical momentum mv.  Although conduction electron mobility will determine the resultant electron velocity of any induced current, that value of current is independent of mobility but is determined by the load on the receiving coil.  A superconducting coil (highly mobile electron Cooper pairs) would produce the same load current (small number at high velocity) as a normal conductor (large number at low velocity).

On further consideration I realize that my comments relate to classical transformer induction where the induction comes only from a time-changing A field.  There is much controversy over another form of induction where the electron is moving through a non-uniform A field and effectively "sees" the A field change with time because of that movement.  In that case the induction relates to the electron velocity.  Barbat's coupled coils are not coaxial as would be the case for transformer induction, so his receiver coil are within a time-changing circular A field that reduces in magnitude with distance from the primary coil's axis.  The A field along the secondary coil conductor is not uniform.  Hence his coil obtains classical transformer induction related to the time-changing flux through the coil, then there could be additional induction along the conductor given by the convective derivative (v.del)A.  Electron mobility would contribute to that additional induction, so Barbat's ideas could bear fruit if that additional induction could be made to enhance the classical transformer induction.  IMO just coating the wire uniformly with semiconductor material will not work as I think that additional induction would be zero around each turn.  But having each turn only partially coated could create the wanted effect.  This would require coating as indicated in the attached image.

The presence of an electric field can draw conduction electrons to the surface, and IMO those surface electrons will have greater mobility hence will travel faster than those within the bulk material.  Such a two-channel form of electron flow is already recognized.  So here is another means of obtaining greater drift velocity that could perhaps help enhance the semiconductor coating effect.  It requires an insulating coating over the semiconductor material and conductive electrode coating over that, with the electrode held at high positive voltage DC.  Also to help eliminate the slower conduction channel skin effect could be employed.

Smudge   
   
Group: Ambassador
Hero Member
*****

Posts: 3230
Tak is "good people"

Bill did get some sort of Patent years back , I believe I spoke to him the day it arrived
However ...he said it was from China ??

Did try to get him some help with replication .. but apparently it was
 felt the effort [big costs ?]would not yield results ?

I had spoken with his daughter a few years Back [Bill is in his 90's ? now and not easy for him to interact at times.
will see if I can find her number first...she is a wonderful person ... don't want to Bother Bill if he is not well.





   
Group: Professor
Hero Member
*****

Posts: 1258
A quick experiment could use wire thickness to change the drift velocity.  If the receiving coil were made of a series of semi-circles with alternating wire gauge connected together as shown in the image, it might show some slight effect.  A 10:1 ratio of wire diameter would give a 100:1 ratio of drift velocity.  Still quite low velocities though so the effect would be small.  Might be worth a try.
Smudge
   
Newbie
*

Posts: 13
Thanks Smudge, your perspective on this is very much appreciated, especially in that you've given us a non-exotic experiment to try using a coil with alternating wire gauges. Anyone willing to propose a test circuit (coil specs, physical layout, power input, output/load, measuring procedures, etc) as a starting point?

As I told Smudge, I'm setting up a project list and priorities for my 'hands on' experimenting season, which for me is usually November through April. I always like to revisit the Barbat theory as it seems to never leave my mind.

I'm digging through my old Barbat correspondence and have found a few more tidbits of information which I'll post here in a day or so.

And thanks for the thumbs up Chet!

tak
   
Pages: 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 [8]
« previous next »


 

Home Help Search Login Register
Theme © PopularFX | Based on PFX Ideas! | Scripts from iScript4u 2019-10-20, 22:57:50