Theory Discussions

Proof of Life - Shaped Attractors

2025-04-14T01:29:04.1000000

Hi, All!

Posting to demonstrate agency; I'm not historically a builder, but a forager of information. I'm paddling like mad through the required reading for Geometric Unity (in addition to Tesla, Maxwell) from every angle I can without losing the plot because I haven't been able to falsify a hunch regarding Dirac Sea phase symmetry, modulation instability and the protein folding problem. Main hurdle so far is the lack of knowledge, but free time permits more diligent study in the coming month. Any engagement is welcome!

The gist of this idea is that, just as an array of antennae can physically encrypt a transmission, and wave modulation can convert a repulsive force to an attractive one, and the reality of bioelectricity, there's no way that enzyme-substrate pairs are forming entirely thanks to Brownian random walk motion. Just as gravity and magnetism have attractive lines of force, and as attractors can form either as observables or in hyperspace, and that unifying theories like Geometric Unity necessarily unite quantum and macroscale effects, I've got a hunch that proteins are acting as "fuzzy quanta" and their "zitterbewegung" can take exotic shapes as a consequence of their constitution and conformation, and that this impacts their affinity for substrate molecules, binding partners, anything on which they effect their function in the densely-packed bio soup.

I'm not qualified to validate this with experimental simulation, but would be thrilled to swap ideas and perhaps tutoring with someone who is.

Grateful to be here, God Bless!

Energy Sovereignty NOW !

Nigel Cheese

2024-05-25T14:07:21.3730000

Hello to all...

I'm looking for information about Nigel Cheese's research and experiments... I guess a site about overunity is good place to ask... 😀

Nigel had a lot of his work published on the internet, most of it on Youtube and Linkedin, but also on other platforms and forums....

Good deal of his videos is still available on youtube and other video sharing platforms, but his linkedin page that had numerous articles and pdf books he shared has been deleted...

Since I can't find it there, I'm looking for the help from the members if they by chance have something saved up in their private collection....

If you have any of his work, I would be most gratefull if you could share it here.

Thank you to all and all the best...

Is It Possible Apply Positive + Newton III Motion Law as System at Motor Engine

2024-01-25T02:38:50.1530000

Is it possible to apply positive + in favor Newton III Motion Law as a dynamic system in a Motor Engine Device?

3rd Thermodynamic Law Applicate in a Power-Plant Device. The Reaction at From of the Action. New Torque Power. It’s a simple Plus Formula of the Interaction of the Two Powers: 1/Action, + 2/Reaction = Retrodynamic. / For every action there is an equal and opposite reaction. 2 Forces in 1 System.

RETRODYNAMIC Effect - Dextrogiro/Action => vs <= Levogiro/Reaction Phenomena Effect. / Rotor/RPM VS InFlow/Way. 3d Thermodynamic Law Applicate in a Power-Plant Device. The Reaction at Front of the Action. New Torque Power. It’s a simple Plus Formula of the Interaction of the Two Powers: 1/Action, + 2/Reaction = Retrodynamic.

"Changing rotation inside a mass makes it possible to change its inertial properties. It is the equation for a jet motion without rejection of any mass.” Albert Einstein.

The logic of creation of an inertial propulsion system is thus: Any motion is rotation ---- Rotation of a matter generates a space-time Torsion ---Torsion of space - time is described by Ricci torsion --- Ricci torsion is an inertial field-----the rest mass of any object is determined by its inertial field---- operating by fields and forces of inertia inside of mass we can create inertial propulsion system which moves according to the equation [m (t) dv/dt =-vdm/dt].

Newton's Third Law of Motion: III. For every action there is an equal and opposite reaction.

It is the sum of both (two) Forces - one to other / Are two Forces in one system.

The formula of the Retrodinamic effect is a simple mathematical summation. What is Dextrogiro plus Levogiro, gives the result of the sum, of what is the total, which is the retrodynamic effect. But keeps doing Exponential.

Retrodynamic Effect, are two Forces Actives in one system.

It's like when the Star Trek Enterprise Spaceship Accelerates into the depth of space but spinning 2Two Opposites Forces (Like the Ying-Yang Concept) on a Central Axis in a Rotary Manner Way.

http://stateoftheartnovelinflowtech.blogspot.com

https://padlet.com/gearturbine/un2slbar3s94

“A rotor spinning one Way/DesxtroGiro, and the inside rotor flow Goes VS in the other at front against contrary/LevoGiro"

But the Blades (with the Gear) move in favor at that circumstances. Thats why is possible. The Interaction of two forces to make One.

That Particular Mechanics Technique Goes increasing Two forces in One: Force1/Rotor-DextroGiro VS Force2/inFlow-LevoGiro. front to Front = Retrodynamic.

·RETRODYNAMIC Effect / Some Points of View:

I always explain it well, but another thing is that you don't understand it.

As if it were an everyday question.

And they don't take it as a disruption, which changes schemes.

Because they really wouldn't even know about it. Being a subject that nobody has ever really dealt with.

And also to you can see it as an encrypted information.

And I know the best translator, for sure.

And they don't take it as a disruption, which changes schemes.

Because they really wouldn't even know about it. Being a subject that nobody has ever really dealt with.

But the concept it's a simple sum, then keep going to increase the phenomenal interaction.

Let me make a simple caparison: One Turn is One step, OK, Well in this particular case.

When you do One Turn is One Step, And Then is another turn are gone to be Two Steps.

And in the next turn are gone to be Four steps, And the next Turn are gone to be 8 Steps. Etc...

Really too to be able to explain it, needs to invent a new Mathematical Signal. Brand New.

I Tell You. It’s Like That.

I'm going to explain them perfectly well. We are going to make a comparison that each turn of the Rotor (applied in my case/Gearturbine) is a Step. It's fine. And So now when the rotor rotates with the power of the mechanical drive (Action). And furthermore, it has the internal flow contrary to its rotation (Reaction), but in favor of the individual blade attached to the gear with planetary rotation that activates the Rotor. In such a case they are two forces in a single system.

Maybe it doesn't have the best translation, but that's something else, that's not the point. But that would in no way be something that could belittle his qualities and technical virtues. And at the end of the day, all the explanations you can have are in the operation of the system. And this could not be easier to appreciate, Summed up in a simple sum. And in this case of 2Two Forces: 1Action + 2Reaction Applied in a single cycle, and thus also a single system.

·A) 1Action VS/+ 2Reaction = ?

·B) 1DestroGiro VS/+ 2Levogiro = ?

·C)1Rotary Move VS/+ 2InFlow Way = ?

Note: ·I use the "VS" Because the dynamic interaction is front to front, that's why.

·And is Added force one to the other, that's why I use the Sume/Plus mathematical symbol.

·A, B, and C are the same situation with a different word, from a different, technical view.

Other Note: If somebody doesn't understand Cut be because of some reason. Not because my responsibility.

I deal with the Requirements of a new mathematical symbol, in order to explain the Retrodynamic Phenomenon Effect, that occurs in an invention that I am developing. It is called the "Retrodynamic Effect" and it is created by having a situation of an axis turning in the opposite direction in a rotating system and in this way a great force is created. And there is currently no mathematical symbol that can explain it.

The Mathematical/Physical Symbol. What is required for the Explanation and Application in the Formula of the Retrodynamic Effect. Which has the quality of being applied in the Gear Turbine Project. What would it be to join the Symbols of ·1- (+) Addition and ·2- (X) Multiplication. It would be a Symbol with 8 Eight Points: 4 four of the symbol of + addition and four of the symbol of X multiplication. This is because it is a sum that continues to repeat the 2 Two forces the Action/RightRotation and the Reaction/Levorotation. The 2 Two Forces uniting, increasing each other into one. And is called “MULTIPLUS”. And in this way increasing its Power considerably. a sum that is multiplied and/or a multiplication that is added. When Active of the Rotor/action of the system and the internal flow/reaction that does it in the opposite way (in favor at the Blades circular move. Thats Why) applying in the individual vane connected next to its partner Gear internally fit in a planetary way internally in the casing, in this way. This is because that is how it works, they are the union and interaction of two forces face to face, front to front and therefore two symbols. DextroGiro and/or LevoGiro. Action And/or Reaction. + and/or X.

It is not a single Force/Action to consider. But rather there are 2 Forces/Action and Reaction. And the interaction of one with/against another. With Opposite Directions, face to face/front to front. One against the other. And this interaction continues to increase progressively. One to other/Action to Reaction.

More than the question is the answer. Being that traditionally in a conventional system a single total power is considered. In this particular case there are two; action and reaction. And their interaction continues and continues to increase with each other. In such a way it would be that turning the force increases from 1 to 2, from 2 to 4, from 4 to 8, from 8 to 16, from 16 to 32, etc...

The system could not be simpler in its application and operation. Of what it already is. So does His verification. And what has been said here can be seen in the drawings presented. And the dynamics that the direction of the arrows indicates. This is The Rotation of the Rotor and its internal flow. / Dextrogiro VS Levogiro.

Good Documents on Free Energy

2024-01-15T13:20:22.0330000

Hello:

I think the link below has some good documents on free energy that need to check. I have some more, and I post it later time.

https://vixra.org/author/xiaodong_liu

MTKE

Unlimited Free Energy, Overunity With Solid State LC Resonant Circuit

2023-06-15T23:46:13.5430000

Unlimited Free Energy, Overunity With Solid State LC Resonant Circuit

First thing first, make a couple backup copies of this information, just in case it is censored and removed from the public.

The information below are being explained and released into the public domain, hopefully for the betterment of mankind. If you can, please do help to make this information a well known public knowledge. Ignore those who tries to claim to be the original author of this now public domain information, or rewording of this info. Ignore their claims to fame or whatever their motives...

In bits and pieces, all information below are already in the public domain. Basic principles and usage profile for each component are well explained in electrical circuit text books. The trick is to put them together in certain combination and applying basic circuit analysis, like pieces of a big puzzle.

----- ----- ----- ----- -----
--- WARNING !!! ---
----- ----- ----- ----- -----
"Electrical circuits Can Be Very Dangerous, even Deadly!!!" The electrical circuit setup below are operating with AC Voltage. Experiment at your own risks.
----- ----- ----- -----

----- Unlimited Free Energy, Overunity In Electrical Systems -----

The key to "Overunity", or "Free Energy" is to identify all possible components and subsystems that can be used to extract energy from (an electrical circuit, in this case.) Then reduce or eliminate inefficiencies for each of those components and subsystems. If possible substituting other components or subsystems that are more efficient. When the cost of running a component or subsystem is reduced to virtually zero, any energy output from it is practically free.

With text book theory, the LC Resonant circuit is using AC sine wave signal. Of course, experimenters can try with other AC wave forms, DC wave forms, DC pulse signal… Some of these wave forms and pulse signals may not be measured properly by regular multimeter, so perhaps oscilloscopes with fine enough scanning resolutions can pickup such signals, beware that some circuit conditions may damage an oscilloscope and/or its components.

Any component or subsystem that uses virtually zero Watts (zero power), and can give any power output, is a component, or subsystem that obviously does produce Free Energy, Overunity power output. So considering some components or subsystems that uses virtually zero Watts, zero power in theory (or very low Watts in practice), and some way(s) to extract energy…

A) Series-LC circuit is a case of Series-RLC circuit, where R is zero Ohms. In theory, with AC sine wave, Series-LC circuit at Resonant frequency becomes "Short Circuit", it behaves like a straight wire with zero impedance, zero resistivity (zero Ohms, consuming zero Watts), current flows freely through it. So voltage across Series-LC circuit at Resonant frequency is theoretically zero Volts. When tuning the subsystem for Resonant state, adjust so that the voltage across Series-LC subsystem is zero or as close to zero as possible, or current flow is as high as possible. Any wire carrying AC signal can be cut and inserting a Series-LC Resonant circuit, if its Resonant frequency matches the AC signal frequency, it would use up virtually no power, zero Watts in theory.

B) Parallel-LC circuit is a case of Parallel-RLC circuit, where R is infinite. In theory, with AC sine wave, Parallel-LC circuit at Resonant frequency becomes "Open Circuit", no current flow, uses zero Amperes, yet "electrons are actively flowing back and forth" between inductor L, and capacitor C. The subsystem still needs AC input at the Resonance frequency continuously applied to maintain the Resonant state, even though zero current (zero Amperes, consuming zero Watts) flows in/out of the Parallel-LC subsystem. When tuning the Parallel-LC subsystem for Resonant state, the current flow in/out should be zero Amperes, or as close to zero as possible, as-if the Parallel-LC subsystem is not there. So any two wire branches which have AC voltage signal, adding Parallel-LC circuit with Resonant frequency matching the AC voltage frequency would act like "Open circuit", which is infinite impedance, infinite resistivity, zero current, zero Amperes, consuming zero Watts in theory.

C) To extract extra energy from an electrical system, replace an inductor coil L with a transformer’s primary coil. Electron flow in the transformer primary coil will stir up the magnetic flux and induce current in transformer secondary coil. The more electron flow and the faster the frequency, the more magnetic flux is stirred up, inducing more electron flow in transformer secondary coil. This is virtually "Free Energy", or "Overunity", since Parallel-LC Resonant subsystem, or Series-RC Resonant subsystem use zero Watts, zero power at Resonant frequency in theory, or very low Watts in practice. Any amount of Watts output divided by zero (or very low) Watts input, result in the COP (Coefficient Of Power) for the LC Resonant subsystem. Of course, the higher the transformer efficiency, the better the COP for the LC Resonant subsystem.

D) Free Energy with spark gap. Same amount of current flow on each side of spark gap. Each side of spark gap can have one (or many) Series-LC Resonant subsystem(s), each has zero impedance and uses virtually zero Watts. Both sides of a spark gap can be the ends of one (or many) Parallel-LC Resonant subsystem(s), each has infinite impedance and uses virtually zero Watts.

E) Generate unlimited amount of Free Energy. In theory, at LC Resonant state, it costs zero Watts and should not interfere with the rest of the system, there is no limits as to how many LC Resonant subsystems can be added in the whole system. Multiple Series-LC Resonant subsystems can be added in series. Multiple Parallel-LC Resonant subsystems can be added in parallel with each other. Some people may say that multiple Series-LC Resonant subsystems in series just divide the voltage among these Series-C Resonant subsystems, thus lowering the voltage of each system. It is not the case with Series-LC Resonant subsystems. Remind those people that each of these are "Short Circuit", have zero impedance, zero resistivity (zero Ohms,) and voltage across each subsystem is virtually zero Volts, while the "full AC current" of the circuit branch is flowing in the transformer primary coil of each of these Series-LC Resonant subsystems. Note that AC current is flowing back and forth in the transformer, so 60Hz AC in transformer is equivalent to 120Hz PWM (pulse width modulated) DC in term of magnetic flux stirring, or magnetic movements, or power generation, power transfer by the transformer. The faster the magnetic movement, the more power generated. So for same voltage, same current, in the case of LC Resonant subsystem power extraction, Terra-Hertz are better than Giga-Hertz, better than Mega-Hertz, better than Kilo-Hertz, better than Hertz in LC-Resonant subsystem power generation or extraction. Be sure to check the transformer core (or air core) is working efficiently for a particular frequency range, by checking the power output of the transformer secondary coil, not losing too much power as heat in the core, or the wires.

F) Also, consider perhaps, having Series-LC Resonant circuit where one capacitor C and multiple inductor coils [L1, L2... Ln] connected in series as equivalent to one inductor coil, so need to re-tune for Resonant frequency, or Resonant state. Since the full current of the circuit branch is flowing in each inductor coil, replacing each with a transformer, will now yield multiple output with one capacitor, possibly reducing system components cost.

Output to bridge rectifier, then buffer, or filter, using simple capacitor C, or CLC in Pi configuration, or LLC, or LCLC… Or, look up various good-old (20 years or older to avoid any potential 17-yr Patent protection) AC to DC, or DC-DC power supply designs for smoothing DC output. Even for DC filtering sub system, experimenters may want to try using transformer instead of inductor to see if additional power can be extracted, books do not say much about DC voltage and transformers, however DC voltage will affect transformer output. Quick example of that is a simple Joule Thief circuit, even with DC power, a simple air core coil with a few turns of two-wires, it does give output in the secondary coil. Perhaps air core transformer will cut down on heat in DC voltage (power) transformers. Again, any energy can be extracted with a transformer in place of an inductor is literally free. In theory it may affect the phasing angle of the input and output signal, but for energy extraction, DC buffer and filter will make it smooth DC ouput anyway.

For a small system, it may be much harder to get Overunity, especially using just one transformer, because overhead cost of running the system may be proportionally higher. Transformer efficiency is also very important. The following simple examples are assuming transformer with only 60% efficiency, 10W in primary coil only produces 6W in secondary coil.

For example, let’s say the system main power source uses 15W of power to generate some 10W of power as AC signal, the main circuit loop send this 10W of power to a workload. Adding a single Series-LC Resonant subsystem, that is 10W of power in the transformer primary coil, assume a transformer efficiency of 60 percent, then 6W of power is extracted from the Series-LC subsystem. So the input power is 10W, and output power is 10W + 6W = 16W, perhaps less after conversion to DC, filtering... The system is within the COP < 1.0 to COP 1.06 range, which could still be argued as measurement error, or equipment inaccuracy, or operator error.

However, adding 5 separate identical Series-LC Resonant subsystems, as either direct wire connection, or as magnetic flux coupling, or as near-by wireless transmission, then the whole system can total power flows would be 5 x 10W from transformer primary coil(s). Again, assume a transformer efficiency of 60 percent, then 5 x 6W = 30W of power is collected along with 10W of power in the main circuit branch. Total power output would be 40W (less if converted to DC, filtering), total input power is still 15W, this would give COP of 2.66 or less after output conversion. Potentially, unlimited output power can be extracted, or generated by adding more LC Resonant subsystems.

Another example, for a more powerful system, let’s say the system uses 125W to generate 100W of power for AC signal in the main circuit loop. That 100W could be used to for a workload, adding one Series-LC Resonant subsystem would see 100W of power in the transformer primary coil. Assuming an air core transformer with 60% efficiency, the transformer secondary coil would get 60W of power, less conversion loss of 25W for transformer, so transformer net output after conversion is 35W

(output 100W + 35W) / (input 125W) = 135W / 125W = COP 1.08

many would brush off such gains as marginal gain, or measurement error… However, instead of adding just one Series-LC Resonant subsystem, adding two identical Series-LC Resonant subsystems, with 60% transformer efficiency, also have additional loss of 25W after transformer output conversion, so each ransformer net output after conversion is 35W

(output 100W + (2 * 35W)) / (input 125W) = 170W / 125W = COP 1.36

With better transformer efficiency, and perhaps less conversion loss in later stages, COP would be higher. So be mindful that high frequency, or RF transformer cores like ferrites, metglass, permalloy, even air core… may have higher efficiency in some frequency range. Of course if the cost of generating AC signal is lower, it would also yield higher COP.

Most experimenters are testing with just a single set of components, not factoring in the various inefficiencies in each subsystem, and general system overhead (i.e. power source, and signal generation&hellip And most experimenters are not having enough confidence that their arrangement could even possibly be Overunity, have been told such is impossible, so they never even try adding more energy extraction subsystems…

So now it is a given and documented fact, that LC Resonant subsystems are Overunity capable. Just have to make it highly efficient and add more subsystems if only to prove a point.

Other ways to improve system efficiency, or transformer efficiency will help. Like transformer winding wires side-by-side-wires bifillar coil, which is complete overlapped version of a similar two-opposite-physically-separated-windings bucking coil. Of course, few even consider, or mention, but it is possible to have partially overlapped version of bucking coil. Beside cylindrical, there are variations of toroidal shapes...

Of course, the cost of variable capacitor and transformer for each LC Resonant subsystem, and cost of associated conversion subsystems could add to the cost of the over all system. So experiment and wisely choose the most power efficient and cost efficient components.

----- WARNING -----
Beware of amount of current flow in wires, inductor coils, transformer coils. Especially with Series-LC Resonant circuit, make sure they are not overloaded, overheated… which can cause electrical fires.
----- ----- ----- -----

Make sure each LC subsystem output is at least partially isolated, not interfering, or feeding electrical power into any other subsystem output coil. Beware of how each additional subsystem may cause overload in its circuit branch in term of current flow (in Amperes) and having wires thick enough to handle such current flow.

A Series-LC Resonant circuit is probably more efficient for Free Energy extraction than a Parallel-LC Resonant circuit, because all the electrons flowing in that branch of Series-LC subsystem is stirring the magnetic flux in the transformer. However, Series-LC Resonant circuit needs to have a current limiting component, or subsystem, so not to cause a real Short Circuit and trip a circuit breaker, or cause electrical fires.

With Parallel-LC circuit, only the electrons within the capacitor and transformer combination are stirring the magnetic flux.

In theory, text books have formulas to calculate corresponding Parallel-LC, or Series-LC Resonant frequency, which is probably the best frequency to use. In practice, an LC subsystem may Resonate at not just one frequency, but multiple frequencies. People familiar with music Harmonics theory, or radio wave antenna theory would readily understand such possibilities and similarities. So, experimenters can try alternative frequencies in tuning for LC Resonant state, and decide if it has acceptable power output efficiency for that particular subsystem, or system.

With adjustable frequency AC input signal, adjust (varying, sweeping) the AC input frequency to get the Resonant state as mentioned in A, or B paragraph above about tuning an LC Resonant subsystem. Which is the lowest energy consumption for that particular LC Resonant subsystem.

With fixed frequency AC signal, use variable capacitor C, or variable inductor coil L (or transformer primary coil in this case) to adjust the LC Resonant frequency to get the Resonant state as mentioned in A, or B paragraph above about tuning an LC Resonant subsystem, looking for lowest energy consumption. Variable capacitor can be a combination of multiple fixed-value and variable capacitors. Similar options for variable inductor.

For Overunity subsystem designs, avoid using resistors as much as possible, since resistors simply waste energy as heat, reducing power output efficiency, or COP of the subsystem.

----- Explaining The Source of Unlimited Free Energy, Using Solid State Electric Generation -----

The Maths for Overunity, and Free Energy is just simple arithmetic. No Ph. D in Mathematics, or Physics required.

The Physics is also simple. Electric current is induced in a coil by the relative movements or interactions between magnetic flux and a coil. Get it done for free, or minimal cost, using transformer instead of inductor in LC Resonant circuit, then it is possible to produce virtually unlimited Free Energy, or infinite Overunity.

Alternators and magnetic electric generators primary function is to stir up the magnetic flux field to induce electron (or current) to flow in a coil for electrical output at the cost of rotational interaction between the coil windings and permanent, or electro magnet(s). The faster the rotation, the more power output generated.

With no moving parts, transformer is a solid state electrical equivalent to alternator, or electric generator. Current flow in transformer primary coil would stir up magnetic flux, inducing power output in the transformer secondary coil. The faster the frequency, or relative flux movements, the more power output is generated.

Of course, a full system may have:

A) Input signal generator subsystem,

B) Some general work that uses AC signal.

C) Any number of LC Resonant subsystems. Each LC Resonant subsystem also can have its own output subsystem, or connected to a shared output subsystem. Just make sure each the out subsystem can more than handle the power (Voltage and Amperes) output. Later chaining of output subsystem(s) could include: bridge rectifier, smoothing filter, energy storage, work load, feedback for self-looping or self-running...

That's all of it, just common sense. Free Energy, Overunity solid state electrical circuit explained as simple as that – stirring the magnetic flux field for free, or very little power consumption.

----- Some Additional Notes -----

Many of so called "Free Energy", or "Overunity" electrical devices have been described as operating at Resonant frequency, or Resonant state. Yet, the rest of their so called "explanation", "presentation", "questions and answers session" are just weaseling their way out of stating the simple facts mentioned above, about the source of, or how to obtain "Free Energy", or "Overunity". Which is stirring up the magnetic flux for free in theory, or very little cost in practice.

Tesla patents, including wireless transmission of power, are working with Resonant circuits.

Devices from Tesla, Don Smith, Kapanadze, Andrey, Akula, and perhaps Floyd Sweet, Steven Mark... are most likely variations of the same theme with different input modules (subsystems), different voltage, frequency, choice of transformers, output subsystems, physical grounding or not, spark gap or none, single or multiple input signals, and/or optional loop-back for self-running. Each device uses is own techniques and circuit design choices in fine-tuning the system for some particular level of power gain, or operating efficiency. None of the device demonstrators seem to wear any Lead plates, space suits or other radiation protective gears. So they know there is nothing exotic or particularly dangerous about the source of Free Energy, or Overunity in those devices.

There was a video of some one demonstration of an old car, converted to show it running with an electric motor, probably self-looping, self-running. Color video and grainy and low resolution video was probably from VCR recording days (1980’s ???)

Tesla was reportedly driving a self-powered (electric ???) car one time, he deals mostly with electrical experiments, so most likely it is a self-powered electric car.

Most people probably assume that to get more power output, perhaps a new system need to be designed, or using a more powerful combination of capacitor and transformer. Some of them may not even realize that it is possible to simply add multiple LC Resonant subsystems in the same system to gain additional output power, and can potentially scale up for unlimited output power in one system. It is because each subsystem consume zero Watts in theory, or very little power in practice.

----- Don Smith, Kapanadze, Andrey Devices -----

Be forewarned, there are many mentions of "Suppression" of knowledge, information, technology relating to "Overunity", "Free Energy", "Perpetual Motion Machine". One more fairly recent mentioning,

"Dr Steven Greer｜ Zero Point Energy and The Reason Tesla's Technology Suppressed!"

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dxqUpOvg5Is

On Don Smith work, in video titled

"1 Don Smith Resonance Energy Crafting Systematic Index 1994",

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BHr3eDELyHk

at 4:50,

"We are talking about in Resonant Circuit, that your impedance, or resistivity, or whatever you want to call it, which take the place of Ohms, become zero, and therefore you are at Superconductor condition at that point . . . "

" . . . but basically what it means is that your system resistivity become zero at Resonance. Which means that you are at superconductor condition at that point, at room temperature."

Apparently, Don Smith refers to Series-LC Resonant circuit, at Resonant frequency, which behaves like a "Short Circuit", or a (room temperature) superconductor wire. He refers to mostly inductors or coils in his presentation, although the physical demo circuit boards clearly show air core transformers. No one had previously publicly put the puzzle pieces together, in full context, to obtain Free Energy, or Overunity.

Also note that, Don Smith demonstrations showcase multiple transformers in his devices, which should help raising the COP for the devices. Although not sure they should be used as wireless pickup coils, or magnetic coupling, or should really be wired in as explained in E), ane F) above for better power generation, extraction.

As for Kapanadze devices, here is Andrey from Russia reproduce a similar demonstration:

"FREE ENERGY SOLID STATE DEVICE Andrey from Russia Kapanadze 1kw English subtitles"

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=z2uLBWqqzok

Andrey used a standard 9V battery, just tap-touch briefly, to start the device.

Andrey also emphasized the important point, that "Resonant" state, or condition being the key to getting Overunity, or Free Energy. Just like most people who have been learning from the modern electrical text books, Andrey could not clearly explained the facts of "Short Circuit" from text book to mean zero Ohms, or "Open Circuit" from text book means zero Amperes, and really means consuming zero Watts, or zero power consumption at Resonant of LC circuit.

So, "Resonant" state, and using a high-efficiency transformer substituting for inductor coil in LC Resonant circuit, are the two most important factors to achieve Overunity and get Free Energy.

Generally, most systems will need a kickstart, from a power source of some kind, or a hand crank generator like in Emergency Flash Light, or Emergency Radio. Can also consider using a battery with the system, even with self-looping, self-running, and use the term "Energy Saving" device.

Take a clue from the makers of CFL and LED light bulbs, stay out of controversy. CFL and LED light bulbs attained "extra energy" output as light, outperforming traditional incandescent light bulbs lumen output, but not publicly claimed, or marketed as such, just advertised as "Energy Saving" light bulbs..

Using energy from these Resonant devices at very low cost to operate HHO cells would outperform traditional electrolysis in term of cost.

----- General Observation -----

The truth has been very well hidden, right in public by mass psychosis and disinformation tactics, take full leveraging from repeating the lies that "It’s impossible" and citing the bogus "Law of Energy Conservation".

What, "Law of Energy Conservation", and "Perpetual Motion is impossible"? All atoms, electrons, the Earth, Sun, Moon, planets, galaxies, universe(s)… don’t care about those BS’s, simply never heard of those, had no comments, been ignoring those, not spilling the beans, and have been spinning their tiny, or massive weights for millions or billions of years, uh... forever, without electrical wires, with no apparent power input.

Infinite number of electrons, and planets, Suns, solar systems, galaxies have been moving non-stop for eternity. Yet they keep ignoring that, and keep repeating the lies that "Perpetual motion is impossible", "Free Energy is impossible", "Overunity is impossible".

Perhaps electrons are not real particles either. May be electrons are like whirlwinds, vortices, or tiny version of magnetic flux tornadoes, or mini version of a galaxy, moving around an atom, just like tornadoes moving around the surface of the Earth, or Solar storms on the Sun surface. Power source is like a wind tunnel, water stream, or waterfall for electrons.

About that Big Bang Theory relating to Law of Energy Conservation, where did all that infinite amount of energy come from, to cause the Big Bang? Who and how all that energy was collected and placed at that one location in space before the Big Bang? Who or what causes the Big Bang, was it an accident, or was it deliberate, or preplanned? Those Law of Energy Conservation worshipers conveniently ignore such things.

The "Law of Energy Conservation" does not apply to Resonant LC circuits; Nor does it apply to CFL, and LED light bulbs; Nor does it apply to magnets;

Hydro electric dams are also "Free Energy" harvesting mechanism. So are Solar panels, wind power, surf (water wave) power…

It’s just a matter of perspective, only if one dares to imagine the possibilities of "Free Energy", and "Overunity".

Energy can be extracted from Magnets, or Lodestones, more powerful than the force of gravity. They weasel their ways around explanation of magnetic flux.

They come up with all kinds of B.S., uh... equations, about the cost of splitting water via electrolysis into Hydrogen and Oxygen atoms and try to say "It is impossible" to split water for any less cost (in term of electrical power). If using similar logic for incandescent light bulbs, then "It is impossible" for CFL and LED light bulbs to provide the same amount of light (lumen) for less than the cost of lighting using incandescent light bulbs.

Below is a video showing water electrolysis, using very little electrical power to start. Here is someone splitting water with just a quick start from a 12V (???) battery, then the process is self-running, self-sustained, and can generate electricity, just by having the gas flowing in a coiling tube. Similar to a transformer, using electrons from gas flow.

"Free Energy Generator from Splitting water - Zografos power generator"

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=C_QIQ3azOl4

Those who say "It’s impossible" to have "Free Energy", or "Overunity" are really just "Impossible people". Ignore them. Tell them to go figure out basic math of "any positive power output divided by zero power input, the result is the COP for that subsystem", then they can go and take a hike with that result.

Lenz law on POC

2021-08-28T09:30:46.3670000

Hello friends,

In below picture we have Square pulse generator with 10% DC

We have two coil L1 Primary and L2 Secondary with R load and diode.

I marked question mark in the second table, so what is happening on that stat?

if something wrong in pictures , Please let me know.

Please help to understand it

Regards
Amin

Concepts of above unity devices

2021-11-09T11:11:07.4000000

In first place I want to give credit and express my gratitude to Sergei Deyna, a brilliant Researcher from Russia. He has made a huge number of experiments in diverse areas of physics, and published many papers from which I have used some parts for posting in the forums with his kind permission.In this thread we will have a look on some basic concepts and principles of AU devices. It is well known from Newtons theory about termodynamics, that energy can not be created or destroyed. But it can be transformed in different forms, and it can be collected for our purposes. So if we want to understand, or replicate, or design such a machine, in first place we have to ask two key questions: 1.) Where does the surplus energy come from? 2.)How does this happen, what are the involved physical principles? Let's take as an example a well known and accepted AU machine, the heat pump. I think most of you know about this device, which is widely implemented in refrigerators, heating systems, or reversible air-conditioning devices which can operate in both directions. It is well known by engineers, that a modern heat pump can have a COP up to 6( for heating systems with liquid medium temperature exchanger's) . That means for one unit electric power , six units of thermal energy can be obtained. Refrigerators use the very same system, but the obtained heat energy is just wasted without using it. For the first question it is quite obvious that the extra energy comes from the termal background energy of the environment (air,water,earth ). The second question is also not very difficult if someone has some basic information about termodynamics. Anyway a detailed analysis will help us for better understanding and give some inspiration for other less known and accepted machines. We have two main parameters, temperature and pressure. Under normal circumstances they will have proportional relationship, any increase in pressure will rise the temperature and vice versa. This relates to a closed system, which does not interchange Energy with the environment, and is also called an adiabatic process. To get a non adiabatic process, which is of our interest, some specific conditions have to be present. Of course the temperature exchangers on the hot and cold side are required in hardware, as well as a closed circuit filled with a medium. It can be any gas in our case, but for better performance special refrigerant is used, which will experience a change of its state of aggregate from gas to liquid and back, which increases the heat transfer by orders of magnitude. Then we need to create a difference of pressure inside the circuit, usually a compressor will provide the propulsion of the medium, and a release valve will help to divide the circuit into two zones of different pressure. A heat exchanger will be placed in in each zone of pressure. This setup produces a shift of phase between pressure and temperature, and this is what is making the process non adiabatic, and allows to transfer heat energy from a lower temperature level to a higher one, making possible all the before mentioned practical implementations of this devices. In order to be able to draw analogy to electric machines, the thread will continue ...

Switching Tool Users Guide

2019-08-29T10:18:18.9300000

This Thread is intended as users guide for the Modular Switching Tool. Also basics on switching and considerations for practical implementations in experiments will be covered in the thread. As first orders for the Switching Tool have been placed I beginn to release the users guide , although it is still not finished. If somebody whish to order a Toolset or some Modules please contact me by PM, for the moment I will not publish in Ebay for the uncertain economic situation in our country. The thread will be locked in order to keep it as clear and short as possible. If there are any questions , or suggestions for editing they can be posted in:

Developing a modular switching tool

I will be happy to answer and add contents if required.

Vidura

MagnetiCalc - Magnetic field calculation with Python

2020-10-30T15:58:52.5500000

Hello everyone!

This forum drew my attention some while ago, when I was researching about the "Mr. Preva" experiment, which -- by the way -- was discovered some hundred years earlier by nobody less than Lord Rayleigh! (Link: https://archive.org/details/s05philosophicalmag22londuoft/page/498/mode/1up ; notice this sentence here: "[...] and there can be no doubt that the smaller branch current largely exceeded the main current."). But this is a topic for another thread.

Anyway, back to the main reason I'm posting here today: Very recently, I released a little software called "MagnetiCalc" which allows the user to create arbitrary loops of wire and calculate the resulting magnetic flux density.

As you gentlemen -- like myself -- seem very interested in magnetic fields and coil arrangements, I think you will really like this software.

Here's the link to MagnetiCalc's GitHub repository: https://github.com/shredEngineer/MagnetiCalc

Finally, I attached a screenshot of MagnetiCalc in action, showing the field of two pairs of opposing coils. This and more screenshots are available at my personal website: https://paulwilhelm.de/magneticalc/

Let me hear your thoughts on this. I hope this will be useful to you all and your studies!

Cheers, have a good one!

- Paul

Recommended Scientific Method

2020-09-09T05:53:17.9830000

I found this presentation to be a good start for scientific method:

https://www.sciencebuddies.org/science-fair-projects/science-fair/steps-of-the-scientific-method

Also,

A scientific theory is a well-tested, broad explanation of a natural phenomenon. In everyday life, we often use the word theory to mean a hypothesis or educated guess, but a theory in the context of science is not simply a guess—it is an explanation based on extensive and repeated experimentation. - dictionary.com

Some humble thoughts I'll share ... like marbles rolling in one's hand (or in my head).

The hypothesis is a perceived goal. It's not the theory, which is a sound, repeatable process.

It's important for an experimenter to define what to look for at each step. A chemistry lab sign said, "Know what you are stuffing, and stuff it."

Discovery may alter your expected result/hypothesis. It may expand your perceived realm of possibilities.The creative mind will wander. Be careful that ambition does not confuse your initial goal. Make side notes of new ideas as you progress, but stay focused.

As some have said, they got off track, likely from discouragement, or possibly, diversion/ambition. We can control antisocial discouragement here, but ambition is a self-governed activity. One cannot go in all directions at once and achieve any one goal. Focus.

No one at AU has disdain for beginners. Start small and progress at your own pace. Read every blog @AU from the beginning. It makes reinventing the wheel a much quicker process.

Incremental device construction and testing will yield definitive results. Some experimenters @AU share valuable building block circuits/designs. Some techniques can prevent damage to your equipment.

Conceptual knowledge and experiencial knowledge are two different things.

Once you've been bit by high voltage, warnings become folklore. Be very careful.

A clean and orderly working environment reduces confusion and clarifies demonstration.

Documentation is critical to show progress and build a solid foundation.

Ask yourself why you are interested in over-unity. What will be its practical application when you achieve your goal? Lighting, battery charging, electrolysis and ventilation have been realized with entry level experimentation. High power systems are either proprietary, suppressed or perhaps faked.

Listen to all advice and consider that beneficial constructive criticism comes in all forms. Language and cultural formalities can disguise earnest advice. Be slow to take offense. Overlook a perceived insult.

// end philosophical subroutine

return (NULL);

-A-

The E-field and electron acceleration

2020-07-11T20:28:39.6930000

Hello

Cause of a damage that occurred to my scope I was looking for some information about the CRT screen. This Inspired me to an interesting hypothesis about acceleration of electrons with electric fields, static or also oscillating. If we look at the construction of an cathode ray image tube we find different parts, a heated cathode, various other electrodes for the purpose of guiding and accelerating the electron beam inside the evacuated tube. A rough description of the principle would be that a heated cathode when reaching a threshold temperature will emanate "free electrons", in a gas like form, which are retained by another cylindric electrode surrounding the cathode, with a more negative potential than the heated cathode. The former has a small concentric orifice in the direction where the electron beam exit. At a greater distance there follow the anodes, attracting and accelerating the electrons, which are behaving as particles with mass and inertia. This is the reason why they don't merge into the positive anodes, but moving further thru the orifice of the anodes as a concentrated electron beam. This particular behaviour I found most interesting for our purpose of research, as there is a constant acceleration, without destroying the dipole, very similar to gravity, which is exercising a constant force to matter, making possible functioning hydroelectric power utilities.

Here a drawing of a CRO tube:

Some of the fast models have an additional metallic grid near the phosphorescent screen(not shown in the above image), as at high frequencies the traces become very pale, this grid provides secondary electrons which are dragged by the original beam, providing more brightness.

So far the theory of the CRO tube. Now, if we thing a bit about this principals, If we could disregard losses to a certain degree, such a device would not waste energy for the acceleration of the charged particles, only for the heater to free the electrons from the environment, or the matter, whatsoever. Nevertheless It becomes clear from most basic physical principals, that an accelerated particle has more energy than a "stationary" one. And the dipole responsible for the acceleration would not be destroyed, could theoretically continue accelerating particles as long as the potential difference is present. Similar as gravity in our hydroelectric plant.

Now the next step we would ask if this is only possible with static electric potential. I am convinced that basically a static or an intermittent E field are the same thing, even if the polarity would change the same forces apply. In the CRT the brightness of the image can be adjusted by the applied voltage on the accelerating anodes. It also could produce an intermittent ray with the according signal. A changed polarity of the E-field would presumably not be desirable for our task of energy harvesting, as a deceleration of electrons would be the effect.

We can see clearly that there are two different principals occurring in order to produce the beam:

producing or detaching the electrons; 2. accelerating and concentrating them.

This leads me to the hypothesis, that it should be possible with the correct arrangement and parameters, to produce this effect, namely the acceleration of charged particles in an electric circuit loop, using conductors instead of an evacuated tube. As in the former example of the CRO tube, we would need to produce the same two principals. In first place detaching or setting free the charged particles, and second accelerate them using the E-field without destroying our dipole.

We have already some hints how to free electrons in a conductive circuit, as Chris has quoted Floyd Sweet:

"To free enough electrons to effect conversion would require magnetic forces approaching infinity."

A strong magnetic field(varying in time) can free the electrons. Also the incidence of light-radiation on certain materials can do the same. High temperature in case of the evacuated tubes also, there might be other ways.

Once we have "generated" the electrons in our circuit, we should be able to accelerate them by means of the E-field. Actually we are doing this all the time, but mostly we destroy the source dipole by the way. So the basic Idea in this hypothesis is that it should be possible to use the force of the E-field without depleting it's source.

In this place I will recall the basic principles of electrostatics:

1.Charge separation by an electric field(electrostatic).

2.Discharge of negative charges to ground:

The object remains charged positive:

Now the positive charges are drained to ground:

Note: at both discharge cycles a load can be connected and thus work is performed. Some might have doubts about the existence of positive charges, but this is not the subject of this discussion, you can also imagine that positive charge exist as lack of electrons and these return into the object from ground at the second discharge.

Here an experiment performed by Sergei Deyna which can be watched in the following video at minute 20:09, I want to give credit to Him for his excellent research on the subject.

Here some images from the setup:

Электростатика - 3. Принцип использования свободной энергии:

https://youtu.be/sCn870sH49U

There was an earlier experiment where the test was performed manually, and after a couple of discharges the audience was asked how many times the discharges would be repeatable with a single charge of the plastic ruler. So as an answer this setup was built, and actually it works for indefinite time until the static charge of the ruler vanishes.

Now we could go a step further and think about how we could employ this principal in an oscillating resonant circuit, in this case our E-field of course would have to be intermittent in phase with the resonance frequency. We know various methods' to produce E-fields of great intensity with a very low expense of input power, as examples Tesla coils in the lower power range, such as slayer exciters, or also parametric oscillators with opposing magnetic fields(remember: cancel H and get 2E). Also BEMF pulses could likely be suitable to setup the required E-field.

Earlier I have posted some theory about the principals of some of Akulas and Ruslans devices here.

Hopefully this thread will shed some more light on this.

Regards Vidura.

Aboveunity described in terms of poynting flow

2020-04-23T21:44:57.5930000

Poynting flow can be described as the energy that flows into or out of a circuit as a result of the electromagnetic field. The general form of this is S = E x H. That is, the cross product of the electric and magnetic field vectors results in a vector S which describes energy flowing into or out of the circuit.

Based on this, we must conclude that an above unity device must include a component which produces an E or an H vector which is zero.

Let's assume there are two "source components" and one "receiving component" to the device. If the source components each produce a pointing flow S₁ and S₂ then the induced pointing flow can be (at most) -S₃=(E₁+E₂)x(H₁+H₂).

Now let us say H₂ = 0 (that is the second source is an electric field with no net magnetic component). Then S₃ can now have more power than S₁ and S₂ combined.

Thoughts?

NOTE: Small edits for clarity.

Inductors, how do they work?

2019-05-27T21:02:11.0470000

Hello everyone, as I comment in another post I will try to give my point of view to the
devices that work sparkgap, it should be noted that I have not done tests
of any kind about these devices, I only apply the theory of how they could
operate them using electromagnetism.

First we define what is an inductor, although a common transformer has
primary and secondary inductance, is not the same.
I explain…

We all know that transformers obey long-defined rules
time, as the tensions are proportional to the ratio of turns, that the current is inversely proportional to the relations of turns, things of those.
But they are really just impedance couplers.
The reflected resistance of the secondary to the primary is Rl' and its value is SQR (Np / Ns) Rl.
It should be noted that always in a direct sense, the energy passes from the source to the load
during the magnetization cycle through magnetic induction.
Now, flyback topologies do not work in direct mode, because
there is no current reflected to the primary during the magnetization cycle.
The magnetizing current stores energy equal to the square of the current
for the inductance divided by two, this is E = (Ipk ^ 2Lp) / 2.
More clear…
Imagine a primary of 10 turns and secondary of only 1, let's see what happens ...
Suppose we apply a voltage and time of Ton in such a way that the current remains at 1A.
All good…
It turns out that the secondary current will be 10A, no matter the load!
Since the inductors operate in current, this indicates that 1A * 10Tp = 10A and this
Current ratio should remain constant at all times.
Well and the question that follows ...
What happens with the voltage on the secondary side?
This will obey Ohm's law in every rule.
If we put a load of 1 Ohm on the secondary the voltage will be 10V, if the load is 10 Ohm
the voltage will be 100V and with 100 Ohm of 1000V.
But we can not forget that the output voltage is reflected to the primary in Vds = Vs * (Np / Ns) + Vdc
due to live magnetic induction.
Let's see what happens according to the applied load ...
For the first case, load of 1Ohm, the voltage that would have to support the switch would be
100V plus the voltage that feeds it, in the second case it will be 1000V plus the supply voltage and in the third case of 10000V plus the supply voltage !!!
There is no current technology in the power switches that support such voltages.
But if a Sparkgap.
The previous case would be for the transformer with air core that forms the receiver device within the global circuit that composes it.
What does this mean…
If you look at the devices, they use a transmitter coil and a receiver, the first
in step-up and the second in step-down, but always through sparkgaps.
In the transmitter, a capacitor is charged at such a voltage that just when the medium is ionized
content between the electrodes sparkgap this causes a spark gap that in turn energizes the primary winding of few turns.
The current flowing through said primary is high and short time due to the low primary inductance.
On the secondary side of the same transformer to have a very low ratio (Np / Ns) the current will be reduced in the reciprocal of its ratio of turns 1 / (Np / Ns), but as the impedance of the medium that communicates said secondary with the primary of the receiver is high (another sparkgap), the voltage between the electrodes will be very high, this will reflect a voltage on the primary side extremely high, voltage that the sparkgap can support on the primary side perfectly.
From this study it is deduced that the instantaneous power transmitted from one point to another is high,
(between the two transformers to air core).
Only by adjusting the load value of the receiver side, number of turns of the transformers and looking for the auto-resonant frequency of the two transformers to be the same could be seen
if there really is gain in the system that involves it.
It is essential that the volt-seconds ratio be asymmetric, this is achieved if the system
works in resonant mode, the inductors should remain linear all the time, that's why
they are built to air core, since the permeability of the vacuum is constant.
I think it is the best approach to which these devices could work.
It would be necessary to physically prove the exposed thing here and to verify its operation.

Study of Transformer Resonant Overvoltages Caused by Cable-Transformer High-Frequency Interaction

2018-12-23T19:20:01.2600000

Here's an interesting paper.

It shows that for an 11kV:230V 3-phase mains (50 Hz) step-down transformer, with two of its 3 high-voltage phases grounded, if you put a 1V voltage perturbation on the high voltage side, you can get as much as a 2V perturbation on the low voltage side, at high frequencies. The effect becomes more pronounced as frequency increases.

That's a 47.826:1 step-down transformer acting as a 1:2 step-up transformer due to resonance.

Has anyone done any of their coil-shorting experiments with wye-connected 3-phase coils? I would think that rather than just shorting two of the phases to ground as above, putting diodes on those phases so they can pull electrons in from ground but not allow any out to ground, would lead to some interesting results.

Magnetic Flux Routing

2018-12-04T21:59:34.1000000

Hi, all.

I'm still waiting for some of the equipment I've ordered to be delivered, but I'm very near the point where I can start experimenting.

I had a flash of what some might call genius and others madness, and thought I'd put my thoughts down in print for later reference.

Ok, let's say we have a Motional-EMF device like this:

Nothing is to scale, and I have no artistic ability whatsoever, so sizes and distances are not set in stone.

Imagine regular solenoidal coils on the legs marked "Output Coil".

The device is like a see-saw... the magnetic flux wants to flow both directions equally, so getting the flux to become unbalanced is simple, just as unbalancing a balanced see-saw is simple. Just a bit more force on one end and it tips, just as a bit of reluctance on one flux path will tip the magnetic flux toward the other flux path.

Now, we have to figure out some electrically-economical means of shifting that flux.

I've got two that I'll be experimenting with.

----------

The first method is a flat coil of iron wire filling the gaps marked "Drive Coils". When the Drive Coils are not energized, the iron wire (being ferrous) will align its magnetic domains with the magnetic flux from the magnet. But when energized, the domains in the iron wire will realign, effectively blocking the magnet's magnetic flux through the coil, forcing the magnet's magnetic flux through the opposite flux path.

If a single flat coil in each gap is insufficient to block all the magnet's magnetic flux, I'll wind two (or more) flat coils and electrically connect them in series.

I'll buy square iron wire, so the coil winding is most efficiently packed.

----------

The second is capacitive blocking by placing capacitor plates in the gaps labeled "Drive Coils".

Below is an image of a capacitor being charged:

The counter-clockwise Amperian Loop is shown in blue, the Amperian Surface in pink. The opposite would occur when the capacitor is being discharged (the Amperian Loop would be clockwise).

This displacement current-induced magnetic field would tend to block the permanent magnet's magnetic flux, forcing that flux through the other flux path in the device in the image above.

Just as a wire carrying a current produces a magnetic field circulating around the circumference of the wire, its strength dependent upon the current in the wire, a charging or discharging capacitor produces a magnetic field circulating around the circumference of the plates, its strength dependent upon the rate of charge or discharge.

When the capacitors are not being charged or discharged, the Amperian Loop in each capacitor disappears, and thus the magnet's magnetic flux would tend to want to flow equally through both flux paths.

So this would be a "rising-edge and falling-edge" type device. The only time the permanent magnet's flux would be hindered from flowing through a flux path is when the capacitor was either being charged or discharged.

Because of this, we have to offset the charging and discharging times of the left-hand and right-hand capacitors in the device above, or they'll both block and allow permanent magnet flux at the same time.

         Cap1   Cap2   Flux1   Flux2
0          +         =         0            1
90 == +         1            0
180      - == 0            1
270      =         - 1            0

Where:
'+' means charging the capacitor
'-' means discharging the capacitor
'=' means the capacitor is discharged
'==' means the capacitor is charged
'1' means permanent magnet flux can flow
'0' means permanent magnet flux cannot flow

I like the capacitive blocking method because we're not actually consuming any electricity (as we would be doing in a coil), we're merely shuttling the charge from one plate to the other using a parametric resonance charge pump. So we'd consume very little power (essentially we'd put into the drive circuit just enough to drive the charge pump and make up for resistance losses and any capacitive leakage).

I'm envisioning two capacitor plates in each gap, separated by a thin plastic insulator. The gap in this case would be extremely small. I'm unsure at what rate the plates will need to charged and discharged, that'll take experimentation. I'm purchasing a gaussmeter for the experiments, and I'm attempting to model the device in ViziMag.

Ron Brandt battery-switching circuit

2019-03-04T01:37:23.1600000

Here's a mock-up of Ron Brandt's dual-battery circuit (he got it from his friend Nikola Tesla) that he put into a small car, reporting that it greatly extended the range of the vehicle. You'll note it looks (and operates) a lot like the Dickson charge pump I detailed in a prior post.

My mock-up is set initially so the bulb (representing the load, whether it be an actual bulb or a motor) is set to take ~1 HP worth of power, but the slider allows it to go up to 270 KW, or approximately what a Tesla automobile would take at full throttle. The total battery voltage delivered to the load is approximately that which a Tesla uses, as well.

I've created a separate circuit beside the first, with the same resistance and load, to show the power draw from the batteries for a direct-connected circuit, versus the battery-switching circuit. The resistance in the second circuit is an approximation of the resistance in the first circuit. Once the light bulbs representing the load level out, you can see that they're both drawing identical power.

The direct-connected circuit draws 192.7 watts from each battery. The battery-switching circuit draws an average of 77.08 watts from each battery. Part of this is due to the fact that the battery-switching circuit has twice the number of batteries than the direct connected circuit, and accounting for this gives 154.16 watts if the battery switching circuit had the same number of batteries as the direct-connected circuit.

This leaves 38.54 watts per cell which is recharging the cells. This means that with double the number of batteries, the battery-switching circuit is sending half the power (38.54/77.08) back to the batteries, without impairing the resultant voltage at the load.

Here's a screenshot of the circuit:

And here's the falstad.com circuit emulator code:

$ 1 1.0000000000000001e-7 1.9265835257097934 11 5 50
v -128 160 -128 256 0 0 40 96 0 0 0.5
v 0 160 0 256 0 0 40 96 0 0 0.5
v 128 160 128 256 0 0 40 96 0 0 0.5
v 256 160 256 256 0 0 40 96 0 0 0.5
v 256 480 256 384 0 0 40 96 0 0 0.5
v 128 480 128 384 0 0 40 96 0 0 0.5
v 0 480 0 384 0 0 40 96 0 0 0.5
v -128 480 -128 384 0 0 40 96 0 0 0.5
d -128 352 -128 384 2 default
d 0 352 0 384 2 default
d 128 352 128 384 2 default
d 256 352 256 384 2 default
d -128 288 -128 256 2 default
d 0 288 0 256 2 default
d 128 288 128 256 2 default
d 256 288 256 256 2 default
w -128 288 0 288 0
w 0 288 128 288 0
w 128 288 256 288 0
w -128 352 0 352 0
w 0 352 128 352 0
w 128 352 256 352 0
d -128 480 -128 512 2 default
d 0 480 0 512 2 default
d 128 480 128 512 2 default
d 256 480 256 512 2 default
d 256 160 256 128 2 default
d 128 160 128 128 2 default
d 0 160 0 128 2 default
d -128 160 -128 128 2 default
w -128 128 0 128 0
w 0 128 128 128 0
w 128 128 256 128 0
w -128 512 0 512 0
w 0 512 128 512 0
w 128 512 256 512 0
w 256 512 384 512 0
w 256 128 384 128 0
d 384 160 384 128 2 default
d 384 480 384 512 2 default
w 256 352 384 352 0
w 256 288 384 288 0
d 384 288 384 256 2 default
d 384 352 384 384 2 default
v 384 480 384 384 0 0 40 96 0 0 0.5
v 384 160 384 256 0 0 40 96 0 0 0.5
159 -176 352 -176 320 0 0.001 10000000000
159 -208 320 -208 288 1 0.001 10000000000
w -128 256 -176 256 0
w -176 256 -176 320 0
w -176 352 -128 352 0
w -128 288 -208 288 0
w -128 384 -208 384 0
w -208 384 -208 320 0
w -192 304 -160 304 0
w -160 336 -160 320 0
w -160 304 -160 320 0
159 -64 192 -64 224 0 0.001 10000000000
w -64 192 -64 160 0
w -64 160 -128 160 0
w 0 256 -64 256 0
w -64 256 -64 224 0
w -160 320 -80 320 0
w -80 208 -80 320 0
w 48 208 48 320 0
w 64 256 64 224 0
w 128 256 64 256 0
w 64 160 0 160 0
w 64 192 64 160 0
159 64 192 64 224 0 0.001 10000000000
159 192 192 192 224 0 0.001 10000000000
w 192 192 192 160 0
w 192 160 128 160 0
w 256 256 192 256 0
w 192 256 192 224 0
w 176 208 176 320 0
w 304 208 304 320 0
w 320 256 320 224 0
w 384 256 320 256 0
w 320 160 256 160 0
w 320 192 320 160 0
159 320 192 320 224 0 0.001 10000000000
w -80 320 48 320 0
w 48 320 176 320 0
w 176 320 304 320 0
159 -64 416 -64 448 1 0.001 10000000000
w 0 384 -64 384 0
w -64 384 -64 416 0
w -64 448 -64 480 0
w -64 480 -128 480 0
w -80 432 -80 320 0
w 48 432 48 320 0
w 64 480 0 480 0
w 64 448 64 480 0
w 64 384 64 416 0
w 128 384 64 384 0
159 64 416 64 448 1 0.001 10000000000
159 192 416 192 448 1 0.001 10000000000
w 256 384 192 384 0
w 192 384 192 416 0
w 192 448 192 480 0
w 192 480 128 480 0
w 176 432 176 320 0
w 304 432 304 320 0
w 320 480 256 480 0
w 320 448 320 480 0
w 320 384 320 416 0
w 384 384 320 384 0
159 320 416 320 448 1 0.001 10000000000
159 464 192 464 224 1 0.001 10000000000
159 464 416 464 448 0 0.001 10000000000
w 304 320 448 320 0
w 448 320 448 208 0
w 448 320 448 432 0
R 448 320 480 320 0 2 900 10 0 0 0.5
w 384 128 464 128 0
w 464 128 464 192 0
w 384 512 464 512 0
w 464 512 464 448 0
w 384 480 576 480 0
w 384 160 576 160 0
w 464 288 512 288 0
w 512 320 512 288 0
w 464 352 512 352 0
w 512 352 512 320 0
d 576 320 576 288 2 default
d 576 320 576 352 2 default
370 576 288 576 256 1 0
370 576 352 576 384 1 0
w 576 256 576 160 0
w 576 480 576 384 0
181 512 320 576 320 0 300 745.7 375 0.001 0.001
v 656 368 656 400 0 0 40 96 0 0 0.5
v 656 336 656 368 0 0 40 96 0 0 0.5
v 656 304 656 336 0 0 40 96 0 0 0.5
v 656 272 656 304 0 0 40 96 0 0 0.5
181 720 272 720 320 0 300 745.7 375 0.001 0.001
w 656 272 720 272 0
w 720 400 720 320 0
w 464 288 464 224 0
w 464 416 464 352 0
r 656 400 720 400 0 1.182
o 125 64 0 12289 0.0001 0.0001 0 2 125 3
o 128 64 0 12289 0.0001 0.0001 0 2 128 3
o 7 64 1 28931 0.0001 0.0001 1 1 0.0001
o 131 64 1 28931 0.0001 0.0001 1 1 0.0001
o 132 64 1 28931 0.0001 0.0001 2 1 0.0001
o 136 64 1 28931 0.0001 0.0001 2 1 0.0001
38 131 0 745.7 270000 Nominal\sPower
38 136 0 745.7 270000 Nominal\sPower

Vyacheslav Gorchilin & Chris Sikes - 2"nd order Magnetic Field Resonance

2018-11-22T16:10:01.2600000

What is 2"nd order Magnetic Field Resonance and how to make it easy. Theories of Vyacheslav Gorchilin & Chris Sikes complement each other and both independent researchers need to be read for clear and sharp understanding what is 2"nd order Magnetic Field ? and what is the resonance of this field ?, and why this slow magnetic field can't be calculated using Tomson equation for transverse mag. field resonance.

This 2nd order field field, depend from many parameters, like lenght of wire, duty cycle, inductance, resitance, capacitance, self capacitance, impendance of power source, Q-factor, shotening factor of conductor and many more.

Chris work is already on this forum, but Vyacheslav work isn't. So start readinf this thread with visiting Vyacheslav's site and read about his research, experiments and conclusions.

Slow magnetic field wave in λ/4 coils.

http://gorchilin.com/articles/coil/magnetic_wave?lang=en

Coil L2 is wounded by 2mm wire diameter at plastic frame diameter of 50mm. The number of turns is 150. The wire length λ/4 is 23.5 m. Frequency generator G1 to get 1/4 wavelenght in this coil needs to be ~3.2 MHz. But for slow magnetic field wave the frequency of the generator must be reduced at only 15kHz.

Distribution of transverse Magnetic H and Electric field E in full wavelenght coil (pic 2.3) and distribution of 2'nd order magnetic field H and 2nd order Electric field (longitudinal wave) in the same coil (pic 2.4.), called by Vyacheslav Gorchilin "Slow magnetic wave".

http://gorchilin.com/articles/coil/magnetic_wave?lang=en

http://gorchilin.com/articles/coil/magnetic_wave_2?lang=en

http://gorchilin.com/articles/coil/magnetic_wave_5?lang=en

http://gorchilin.com/articles/coil/magnetic_wave_resonance?lang=en

ps: Keep in mind his site is google machine translated, not live translated by man so the main sense of theory could be changed due to machine used of inappropriate words.

for example : Google translated is "The main difference from a long line concentrated is the distribution of loops of voltage and current along it."

and should be "The main difference of lumped from distributed line is in spatial distribution of nodes and antinodes by voltage and current along the line."

Best regards

Aloha

Potential means of altering magnetic properties of ferrous wire

2019-02-24T07:55:08.5000000

I was wondering if, other than annealing, a means could be found of altering the magnetic properties of ferrous metals, especially nickel.

I found one such means... hydrogenation. Hydrogen has a strong affinity for nickel (and iron and cobalt).

Nickel adsorbs molecular hydrogen (which attaches to the surface) and absorbs atomic hydrogen (which then tunnels into the bulk of the metal), which reduces nickel's magnetic dipole moment. It does this by changing the band structure and density of states of the valence electrons, leading to a decrease in the spin-majority density of state and an increase in the spin-minority density of state.

This reduces the hysteresis of the metal, in effect making it more paramagnetic.

Desorption of the hydrogen occurs for molecular hydrogen at ~350K (170 F) and for atomic hydrogen at ~200K (-100 F).

The tradeoff for a reduced magnetic moment is an increased electrical resistivity of the hydrogenated metal. Depending upon the intended usage, this could be detrimental or beneficial.

Some reading material:

https://skemman.is/bitstream/1946/4449/1/Pavel_Bessarab_fixed.pdf

https://scholars.huji.ac.il/sites/default/files/ronniekosloff/files/prb10952.pdf

Dickson charge pump

2019-02-12T01:58:35.7570000

Below is a Dickson charge pump which charges a capacitor bank.

This is used, for example, in particle accelerators and in magnetizers. It's also handy to drive a MOSFET gate with a two-stage Dickson charge pump if you need just a bit more voltage than your circuit can provide, rather than using a DC-DC converter.

The advantage of a Dickson charge pump is that you don't need bulky high-voltage transformers to build a high voltage.

Here's a screenshot of my version of a Dickson charge pump:

It has a few features that I added.

The circuit is driven by 120 volt RMS (169.71 volt peak) voltage (as you'd get from your wall plug) at 60 Hz. The two 100 watt light bulbs act as current limiters. When starting it up, you'd have the switch open so only one bulb lights. This prevents popping a breaker. Once voltage builds a bit and current thus decreases, the switch can be closed to increase the speed of capacitor bank charging.

All the current that is fed into the capacitor bank is pulled from ground. I had a version in which the 120 V_rms voltage also fed the charging capacitors, but this seems safer, as the capacitor bank is isolated from the charging capacitors, and the charging capacitors are isolated from the wall voltage.

The capacitor bank is isolated from wall current twice... once by the transformer and again by the charging capacitors.

The zener diode and resistor on the center-tap of the transformer secondary is because as capacitor bank voltage builds, the voltage on the other side of the charging capacitors increases, which decreases efficiency. So we bleed that excess voltage build-up to ground so we get a full voltage swing on each half of the sinewave.

The transformer is a 2x step-up transformer, acting as both an isolation transformer and a step-up transformer. It's sized to form a resonant tank circuit with the charging capacitors at the 60 Hz driving frequency.

The inductor on the capacitor bank sets up a separate tank circuit which also oscillates at the 60 Hz driving frequency. The reason for this is explained below.

Here's the falstad.com circuit emulator code for it:

$ 3 0.0000010000000000000002 2.0940114358348603 18 5 50
w 688 360 688 320 0
w 624 360 624 320 0
w 688 72 688 112 0
w 624 72 624 112 0
w 608 320 624 320 0
w 608 112 624 112 0
w -32 360 32 360 0
w -32 72 32 72 0
l 624 288 624 144 0 0.14072 0
w 688 320 688 216 0
p 624 360 688 360 1 0
c 624 320 688 320 0 0.00009999999999999999 0.001
w 624 288 624 320 0
w 624 144 624 112 0
w 688 112 688 216 0
c 576 152 576 112 0 0.0000049999999999999996 0.001
c 576 320 576 280 0 0.0000049999999999999996 0.001
d 480 112 512 112 2 default
d 512 112 544 112 2 default
c 512 152 512 112 0 0.0000049999999999999996 0.001
c 544 112 544 72 0 0.0000049999999999999996 0.001
w 480 72 544 72 0
d 480 320 512 320 2 default
d 512 320 544 320 2 default
c 512 320 512 280 0 0.0000049999999999999996 0.001
c 544 360 544 320 0 0.0000049999999999999996 0.001
w 480 360 544 360 0
w 512 152 576 152 0
w 512 280 576 280 0
w 448 280 512 280 0
w 384 280 448 280 0
w 320 280 384 280 0
w 256 280 320 280 0
w 192 280 256 280 0
w 128 280 192 280 0
w 64 280 128 280 0
w 0 280 64 280 0
w 448 152 512 152 0
w 384 152 448 152 0
w 320 152 384 152 0
w 256 152 320 152 0
w 192 152 256 152 0
w 128 152 192 152 0
w 64 152 128 152 0
w 0 152 64 152 0
w -80 280 -32 280 0
p 624 72 688 72 1 0
c 688 112 624 112 0 0.00009999999999999999 0.001
d 544 320 576 320 2 default
w 416 360 480 360 0
c 480 360 480 320 0 0.0000049999999999999996 0.001
c 448 320 448 280 0 0.0000049999999999999996 0.001
c 416 360 416 320 0 0.0000049999999999999996 0.001
d 448 320 480 320 2 default
d 416 320 448 320 2 default
d 384 320 416 320 2 default
d 352 320 384 320 2 default
w 288 360 352 360 0
w 224 360 288 360 0
c 352 360 352 320 0 0.0000049999999999999996 0.001
c 320 320 320 280 0 0.0000049999999999999996 0.001
c 288 360 288 320 0 0.0000049999999999999996 0.001
c 256 320 256 280 0 0.0000049999999999999996 0.001
c 384 320 384 280 0 0.0000049999999999999996 0.001
d 320 320 352 320 2 default
d 288 320 320 320 2 default
d 256 320 288 320 2 default
d 224 320 256 320 2 default
w 352 360 416 360 0
d 544 112 576 112 2 default
w 416 72 480 72 0
c 480 112 480 72 0 0.0000049999999999999996 0.001
c 448 152 448 112 0 0.0000049999999999999996 0.001
c 416 112 416 72 0 0.0000049999999999999996 0.001
d 448 112 480 112 2 default
d 416 112 448 112 2 default
d 384 112 416 112 2 default
w 352 72 416 72 0
d -64 320 -32 320 2 default
d 0 320 32 320 2 default
d 32 320 64 320 2 default
d 64 320 96 320 2 default
d 96 320 128 320 2 default
d 128 320 160 320 2 default
d 160 320 192 320 2 default
d 192 320 224 320 2 default
d 576 320 608 320 2 default
c 96 360 96 320 0 0.0000049999999999999996 0.001
c 0 280 0 320 0 0.0000049999999999999996 0.001
c 64 320 64 280 0 0.0000049999999999999996 0.001
c 32 320 32 360 0 0.0000049999999999999996 0.001
c 128 320 128 280 0 0.0000049999999999999996 0.001
c 160 360 160 320 0 0.0000049999999999999996 0.001
c 192 320 192 280 0 0.0000049999999999999996 0.001
c 224 360 224 320 0 0.0000049999999999999996 0.001
w 32 360 96 360 0
w 96 360 160 360 0
w 160 360 224 360 0
d -64 112 -32 112 2 default
d 0 112 32 112 2 default
d 32 112 64 112 2 default
d 64 112 96 112 2 default
d 96 112 128 112 2 default
d 128 112 160 112 2 default
d 160 112 192 112 2 default
d 192 112 224 112 2 default
d 224 112 256 112 2 default
d 256 112 288 112 2 default
d 288 112 320 112 2 default
d 320 112 352 112 2 default
d 576 112 608 112 2 default
c 384 152 384 112 0 0.0000049999999999999996 0.001
c 96 112 96 72 0 0.0000049999999999999996 0.001
c 0 112 0 152 0 0.0000049999999999999996 0.001
c 64 152 64 112 0 0.0000049999999999999996 0.001
c 32 72 32 112 0 0.0000049999999999999996 0.001
c 128 152 128 112 0 0.0000049999999999999996 0.001
c 160 112 160 72 0 0.0000049999999999999996 0.001
c 192 152 192 112 0 0.0000049999999999999996 0.001
c 224 112 224 72 0 0.0000049999999999999996 0.001
c 256 152 256 112 0 0.0000049999999999999996 0.001
c 288 112 288 72 0 0.0000049999999999999996 0.001
c 320 152 320 112 0 0.0000049999999999999996 0.001
c 352 112 352 72 0 0.0000049999999999999996 0.001
w 32 72 96 72 0
w 96 72 160 72 0
w 160 72 224 72 0
w 224 72 288 72 0
w 288 72 352 72 0
d 352 112 384 112 2 default
v 440 184 344 184 0 1 60 169.7056274847714 0 0 0.5
w -88 152 -32 152 0
g -64 112 -64 128 0
g -64 320 -64 304 0
w -80 72 -80 280 0
w -88 152 -88 360 0
c -32 320 -32 360 0 0.0000049999999999999996 0.001
d -32 320 0 320 2 default
w -32 360 -88 360 0
d -32 112 0 112 2 default
c -32 72 -32 112 0 0.0000049999999999999996 0.001
w -80 72 -32 72 0
w -32 152 0 152 0
w -32 280 0 280 0
169 440 184 512 184 0 2.25152 2 0 0 0 0.99
g 584 216 600 216 0
w 512 184 512 152 0
w 512 248 512 280 0
181 344 184 344 248 0 300 100 120 0.4 0.4
w 344 248 440 248 0
z 584 216 552 216 2 default-zener
r 512 216 552 216 0 1000
181 296 248 296 184 0 300 100 120 0.4 0.4
s 296 184 344 184 0 1 false
w 296 248 344 248 0
g 688 216 704 216 0
o 130 64 1 28938 0.0001 0.0001 0 1 0.0001
o 46 64 0 12546 0.0001 0.0001 1 1
o 10 64 0 12546 0.0001 0.0001 2 1

There's an equation which can pretty accurately predict the output voltage of a Dickson charge pump:

V_out = ((N+1) * V_dd) - (N * (I_Load/C*Freq)) - ((N+1)* V_diode)

The first part of the equation is the voltage increase, the second part is the voltage loss due to a load, and the third part is the voltage loss due to the diode forward voltage drop.

Where:
V_out = output voltage
N = number of pump capacitors
V_dd = input voltage
I_Load = load current
C = pump capacitor size
Freq = pump frequency
V_diode = diode forward voltage drop

In the example above, we have two parallel banks of charge capacitors to take full advantage of a sinewave input. Each bank has 20 capacitors.

Plugging all the data in, the equation predicts that the circuit above should top out at approximately 7127.82 volts ideally (disregarding losses). This is double the predicted voltage due to the step-up transformer.

We can disregard the second part of the equation because the circuit isn't feeding a load, it's charging a capacitor bank. We can disregard the diode forward voltage drop because as the capacitor bank voltage increases and thus the current being fed to it decreases, the diode forward voltage drop decreases.

But I've had this circuit higher than the ideal voltage. How do we beat the equation above?

We use a tank circuit on our bank capacitors to oscillate the voltage in them at the same frequency as the driving frequency.

This lets the circuit push current into the bank capacitors at a lower voltage than the median voltage, thus allowing the capacitor bank to ultimately build to a higher-than-ideal voltage.

Active Antenna At Exceedingly High Frequency

2019-01-31T07:19:23.1670000

An active antenna tuned to a high enough frequency to pick up the high frequency energy permeating the universe.

http://www.think-aboutit.com/energy-sucking-radio-antennas/

By manipulating the EM fields, we can force an electrically-small receiving antenna to behave as if it was very, VERY large. The secret is to intentionally impress an artificial AC field upon the receiving antenna. We’ll transmit in order to receive, as it were. Conventional half-wave antennas already do exactly this because their electrons can slosh back and forth, generating their own EM fields. For example, the thin wires of a half-wave antenna are far too thin to block any incoming radio waves and absorb them. However, the current in such an antenna, as well as the voltage between the two wires, these send out large, wide, volume-filling EM fields which have a constant phase relative to the incoming waves. Because of the constant phase, these fields interact very strongly with those incoming waves. They create the lobes of an interference pattern, and this pattern has an odd characteristic: some of the incoming energy has apparently vanished. The fields produced by the antenna have cancelled out some of the energy of the impinging EM waves.

Rather than relying upon the wiggling electrons in the wires of the large half-wave antenna to generate EM fields… what if we used use a power supply instead? If an antenna is 1/10,000 wavelength across, we should be able to force it to behave as if it’s huge; perhaps 1/3 wavelength across. We simply have to drive it hard with an RF source. We must drive it at the *same* frequency as the incoming waves, then adjust the phase and amplitude of the power supply to a special value. At one particular value, our transmissions will cause the antenna to be best at absorbing the incoming waves.

Take a loop antenna as an example. If we want our little loop-antenna to receive far more radio energy than it normally would, then we need to produce a large AC current in the antenna coil, where the phase of this current is locked in synch with the waves we wish to receive, and is lagging by 90 degrees. The voltage across the antenna terminals stays about the same as when an undriven antenna receives those waves. However, since the current is much higher in the driven antenna, the energy received per second is much higher as well. This seems like engineering blasphemy, no? How can adding a larger current increase the RECEIVED power? And won’t our receiving antenna start transmitting? Yet this actually does work. Power equals volts times amps. To increase the RF power received from distant sources, we increase the antenna’s amperes intentionally.

Think like this: how large is the diameter of the antenna’s nearfield region at 10KHz? Around 10 kilometers? What if we could extract half of the incoming energy from that entire volume?!! In theory we can: half can be absorbed, and the other half scattered. In theory a tiny loop antenna sitting on your lab bench can intercept just as much energy as a longwire 1/2-wave antenna which is 10KM long. Bizarre, eh?

At resonance, the 10pF capacitance of our metal plate effectively vanishes. At resonance, an ideal parallel-resonant circuit behaves like an infinite resistor. If the LC circuit is exactly at resonance, and neglecting the resistance of the wires involved, how high will the voltage on the metal plate rise? It rises to ten megavolts!!!! The resonant circuit will continuously accumulate EM energy until the voltage at the antenna-plate rises to the same value of voltage as the transmitter. Weird!

Keep in mind that this device is a relatively small affair sitting in your back yard. It’s not a 1KHz quarter-wave dipole tower 25 miles tall. There’s no huge antenna, so we would not expect to find any huge level of electric power appearing in the circuit. If we weren’t aware of the mechanism behind this, all we’d see is a passive LC resonator which seems to burst into oscillation of its own accord, and the voltage grows higher and higher until the darned thing suffers a corona outbreak or something. Lightning bolts shoot out! The EM fields near the metal plate grow FAR STRONGER than the weak fields already present in the environment. The device in our back yard resembles an impossible “perpetual motion” machine, which might make physicists suspect a hoax.

I envision a device with two loop antennas. A circuit alternately charges (and discharges) each loop antenna at a resonant frequency with a high voltage, and the loop antennas are sized such that they are electrically 1/4th wavelength of the frequency used, and are spaced apart by 1/4 wavelength.

Thus we use very little current (we're just sloshing electrons back and forth between the antennas). With a high enough frequency, the antennas would be relatively small.

The resonant frequency used will expand the electromagnetic footprint of the antenna, making it appear electrically much, much larger than it physically is. Thus the EM waves from the antenna will intercept any radiation of an identical frequency.

This is somewhat akin to winding a coil and putting it beneath a high-tension wire to pick up the high-tension wire's EM field... except we'd be picking up the radiation ubiquitous throughout the universe... the quantum vacuum.

Now here's where it gets exciting... the higher the frequency (the shorter the wavelength), the higher the power of the received energy and thus the more efficient the circuit is. Get it up into the GHz range and you're talking some serious energy.

So we'd do an analysis of what available high-frequency wavemodes are highest energy, and tune the circuit to that frequency.

But this energy is exceedingly diffuse, which would require a high voltage on our antennas.

- So -

A permanent magnet's bound electrons are orbiting their nucleus at a certain rate and thus have what is known as electron cyclotron resonance.

The angular frequency of this electron cyclotron resonance is derived via the formula:

f = q B / 2 π m

Where:

f = cyclotron resonance frequency (Hz)

q = particle charge (1.602176634×10⁻¹⁹ Coulombs)

B = magnetic field (Tesla)

π = (3.1415926535897932384626433832795)

m = electron mass (9.1093835611×10⁻³¹ kg)

For a 1 Tesla (10,000 Gauss) permanent magnet, it would have an electron cyclotron frequency of 27992490303.8 Hz (27.9924903038 GHz).

For an exceedingly weak 10 Gauss (0.001 Tesla) permanent magnet, it would have an electron cyclotron frequency of 27992490.3038 Hz (27.9924903038 MHz).

You can calculate the frequency here:

https://www.fxsolver.com/browse/formulas/Cyclotron+resonance++frequency

So if we could tune the circuit to the electron cyclotron frequency of a nearby magnet, we'd be able to extract energy from the magnet, whereupon the bound electrons would regain energy from the quantum vacuum.

The permanent magnet would be the 'active antenna' to the wavelengths necessary to maintain the bound electrons in their orbits, and the permanent magnet concentrates that wavelength such that our antennas don't need much energy sloshing back and forth in order to pick up that wavelength.

Spin flipping and current flow

2019-01-19T04:30:52.9470000

My last post jogged my brain cells a bit, and I got to thinking about current flow through a ferromagnetic material.

Now, we know that a magnetized ferromagnetic material has intrinsic spin to its field, thus electrons which have the same spin can easily flow, whereas electrons with opposite spin will undergo spin flip scattering (where the electron is reflected), leading to a higher electrical resistance. Usually the electron undergoes spin flip scattering, flips its spin, and then re-enters the ferromagnetic material, whereupon it can flow with little resistance.

So as I was doing more research, I came across a diagram for a SQUID (Superconducting Quantum Interference Device):

Look familiar?

So I got to wondering... what if we used a setup like above, but rather than putting just magnetism through the round part, we put actual current flow?

Follow me here, it gets a bit complicated. Rather than using a solid core as we traditionally do, we use a bifilar coil of ferromagnetic wire. The electron's entrance to the bifilar coil's windings would be within the influence of the magnetic field, whereas the exit of the bifilar coil's windings would be outside the influence of the magnetic field... this forces segregation of the electrons into spin-up and spin-down, each going into their respective coil winding, but once through the coil, the spin current flow doesn't recombine until it's outside the magnetic influence.

What does this get us? Well, the electrons with spin-up will easily go through one of the windings of the bifilar, whereas the electrons with spin-down will easily go through the other winding. So we've subdivided the current flow into only-spin-up and only-spin-down electron flows, otherwise known as spin polarization.

In my Understanding and Exploiting Physical Phenomena thread, I mentioned the Spin Hall Effect, which is exactly what this is.

What does this get us? Very low resistance.

http://www.rpi.edu/dept/phys/ScIT/InformationStorage/magres/magnetism_b.html

When the superlattice is placed in a magnetic field, however, the magnetization of all layers will align with the external field, creating the situation depicted below. Now only conduction electrons with spins toward the left of the page will experience the higher scattering rate. Thus the resistance of the material decreases in a magnetic field.

So we're using a bifilar coil as our 'superlattice', and we place it in a magnetic field. The bifilar coil is wound such that spin-up electrons and spin-down electrons are equally influenced by the applied magnetic field. Thus we get very little spin flip scattering once the electrons are in the bifilar coil (although at the entrance to the bifilar coil there will be spin flip scattering and electron segregation as spin-up and spin-down electrons flow into their respective windings of the bifilar coil).

Thus the conduction electrons of both spin-up and spin-down experience lower scattering rates inside the bifilar coil, and thus the resistance of the bifilar coil should be very low. This is the inverse of Giant Magnetoresistance (GM)... and we know GM can result in as much as 100x higher resistance than normally exhibited. So the resistance in the bifilar coil should be very low indeed.

Spin-up and spin-down currents circulate in opposite directions under a static magnetic field (and thus they usually cancel when within the same wire, which is why we don't get a current flow under a static magnetic field), so with proper winding of the bifilar coil, we can force them to flow in the same direction (toward the bifilar coil's exit wires) under influence of the magnetic field. Thus we get an additive spin current flow. We're taking electrons which normally would go in opposite directions under a static magnetic field, thus cancelling the voltage effect of that magnetic field, and we're getting them to go in the same direction, generating an additive voltage.

Potential idea for induced-superconductivity voltage pump

2018-10-06T06:43:29.0830000

Here's an idea:

{EDIT: updated as my brain cogitates this}

4 wires, three of which carry current in one direction, with the 'back-haul' current going through the bottom wire.

The center two wires are connected together with a very thin (super?)conductive strip (colored red in picture above). The wires have to be very small for the effect to work.

What does this get us?

Well, the electrons in the left-hand and right-hand wires will push upward on the electrons in the top wire. Action/reaction... the electrons in the top wire will increase in energy and push downward on the electrons in the left-hand and right-hand wires.

At the same time, the relatively more positively-charged bottom wire is exerting a downward force upon the electrons in the middle wires.

This creates an energy profile (shown in blue in the image above). Two energy hills and an energy well.

What does this get us?

We get energy 'hills' on the left-hand and right-hand wires, and an energy 'well' on the connector between those two wires. This tends to push the electrons in those wires together (into the energy well)... rather than repulsing each other, they should combine, forming Cooper pairs.

The Cooper pairs migrate to the central conductive strip between the two middle wires.

What do Cooper pairs get us?

Well, if the wires are small enough and the voltage high enough (giving a highly-sloped energy profile sufficient to form Cooper pairs), that gets us room-temperature forced superconductivity. Usually, superconductivity is a result of electron-phonon interaction (with the phonon being the collective motion of the positively-charged metal lattice), requiring very low temperatures so that the electron-phonon interaction isn't disrupted by thermal energy (the interaction is very low energy, and easily disrupted). The effect described here doesn't suffer such limitations... as long as current of sufficient voltage flows, the electrons have no choice but to pair.

At the same time, we should get a voltage magnification effect in the top wire because of that energy profile pushing the electrons in that wire into a higher energy state, while in the bottom wire there is a lower energy state for the same reason.

It's an induced-superconductivity voltage pump... the electrons in the middle wires combining into Cooper pairs cause the electrons in the upper and lower wires to reach higher and lower energy states, respectively, increasing the voltage.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cooper_pair

Cooper showed that an arbitrarily small attraction between electrons in a metal can cause a paired state of electrons to have a lower energy than the Fermi energy, which implies that the pair is bound.

The Fermi energy is the difference between the highest and lowest energetic states, and can be thought of as the average energy.

That "lower energy than the Fermi energy" leaves some energy which must be transferred elsewhere... it is transferred into an increased voltage between the upper and lower conductors.

Understanding and Exploiting Physical Phenomena

2018-09-25T05:22:25.1000000

Sorry if this is in the wrong topic, feel free to move it if need be.

Ok, let's discuss magnets. Most of this everyone will know, but I'll start at the beginning so newbies can come up to speed.

Magnetism is a purely quantum mechanical phenomenon. Classical physics cannot account for diamagnetism (and hence cannot describe the underlying mechanics of the existence of invariant-mass matter), as Niels Henrik David Bohr showed in his doctoral dissertation in 1911, which is known today as the Bohr-van Leeuwen theorem.

THE TINIEST MAGNETS IN THE UNIVERSE
----------
First, we'll discuss the tiniest (electro)magnet in the universe... the electron. A bound electron being a point charge undergoing (angular) acceleration (the two requirements for the emission of virtual photons, known as Larmor radiation... which manifests as a magnetic field), bound electrons produce a magnetic field having a magnetic moment along the axis of rotation.

The spin of electrons (free or bound) also produces a magnetic moment along the spin axis (and in fact, the primary contribution to the bulk magnetic field of a permanent magnet is due to electron spin), so even free electrons emit Larmor radiation, but we'll stick with bound electrons because they reveal some very important details about how the universe works.

Now, quite obviously, the emission of virtual photons means that a bound electron is constantly emitting energy (photons being force-carrying bosons which mediate the EM fundamental force). How does the bound electron avoid 'spiraling in' to the oppositely-charged proton(s) in the nucleus of the atom to which the electron is bound? It obtains energy from the non-zero expectation value of the quantum vacuum.

In particle physics, any dipole (as is a magnet) is a broken symmetry in virtual energy exchange between the quantum vacuum and the charge(s) forming the dipole. Thus quantum physics classifies magnetism as a pseudovector to ensure that electromagnetism does not violate parity symmetry under reflection . I'll discuss this further below.

It should be noted that some physicists consider a bound electron in its ground-state orbit to be in a 'net zero emission' state... but that's tricky-wording the issue. The word 'net' implies that emission is perfectly balanced by absorption of energy, which is what Boyer et. al. showed all the way back in 1975, and revisited the topic in 2015:
https://journals.aps.org/prd/abstract/10.1103/PhysRevD.11.790
https://arxiv.org/pdf/1511.02083.pdf

Cole and Zou also addressed the topic:
http://www.bu.edu/simulation/publications/dcole/PDF/DCColePhysicsLettA.pdf

As did Haisch and Ibison:
https://arxiv.org/ftp/quant-ph/papers/0106/0106097.pdf

As did Hal Puthoff:
https://arxiv.org/ftp/arxiv/papers/1204/1204.1952.pdf

As did NASA:
https://ntrs.nasa.gov/archive/nasa/casi.ntrs.nasa.gov/20150006842.pdf
"A thing to note is that the integral of the perturbation of the quantum vacuum around the nucleus for a given atomic number Z and quantum number n is exactly equal to the energy level of the electron in that state. The energy level of the electron is a function of its potential energy and kinetic energy. Does this mean that the energy of the quantum vacuum integral needs to be added to the treatment of the captured electron as another potential function, or is the energy of the quantum vacuum somehow responsible for establishing the energy level of the "orbiting" electron? The only view to take that adheres to the observations would be the latter perspective, as the former perspective would make predictions that do not agree with observation."

Really interesting series of videos

2018-12-31T00:13:14.7770000

I was at a bit of a loss as where to categorize this series of videos, I hope you find them as interesting as I did.

A great way to wet your appetite for the rest of the series I feel as it relates a lot to what is discussed on this forum is actually to start at Series 1, Part 4/7 you'll understand why after watching it (no spoilers).

https://youtu.be/uxIBL0fyVZE

Here's the link to the rest of the series, I really hope you enjoy the ideas presented here.

Happy New Year to All for tomorrow. And a HUGE thank you to Chris for not only creating this incredible forum/resource but for all the work he does on a daily basis maintaining & administering it.

https://www.youtube.com/channel/UCjBe55XpYzc0HzkK-8lgQtA/videos

Cellulose Acetate and supercapacitors

2018-12-27T06:08:01.6270000

Carbonized cellulose acetate has tiny pores... so tiny that they perform better than graphene or carbon nanotubes as a supercapacitor medium.

Where can you get cellulose acetate? You can make it... get a fine-grained wood and grind it to a fine dust. Then "de-lignify" it with a basic solution and heat/pressure.

Or use a brown paper bag, which is made of wood pulp and contains nearly no lignin. The binders in a brown paper bag (if any were added) might throw a wrench in the works. I've not tried it yet, but a gentle rinse in acetone should rinse out the binders. Let it dry before proceeding.

Then apply acetic anhydride. You'll have cellulose diacetate. If you used wood dust, it'll be in powder form. If you used a brown paper bag, it'll be in a sheet.

Then (if you've used wood dust) apply acetone and form the powder into whatever form you like (wafer, etc.).

Then place your wafer or whatever shape you've made into a pure nitrogen environment and heat it to 500 F for a few hours. It'll carbonize.

The carbonization process creates the tiny pores which give cellulose acetate its super supercapacitor properties.

Place your new supercapacitor medium between the plates of a cap and test it out. Be gentle with it, it'll be brittle.

Alternatively, you can grind it up into a fine powder and put it into a regular capacitor liquid dielectric or a thick oil to form a thick slurry, then paint the cap plates with the slurry.

Here's some South Korean researchers who use cigarette butts to do the same:

https://gizmodo.com/old-cigarette-butts-can-be-used-as-material-for-superca-1616437331

Spin Polarization and the Barnett Effect

2018-10-08T04:55:54.0830000

Imagine you have a heavy flywheel composed of lead or bismuth, wrapped in fiberglass or Kevlar so the flywheel won't fly apart under the apparent centrifugal force when being spun at high RPM.

Now imagine you have an identical flywheel right next to (within ¹/₁₀₀th inch of) the first, aligned so both have the same axis of rotation. The two flywheels are not touching or connected in any way.

Now imagine you attach a motor capable of high RPM to the first flywheel, place a vacuum bell over the whole thing and evacuate the bell to a high vacuum.

Now you spin up the motor to ~25,000 RPM. Mysteriously, the second flywheel begins rotating (although at a lower RPM), too!

"Weird,", you may think, "there must still be some air in the vacuum bell and it's dragging between the two flywheels."

But the second flywheel is rotating in the opposite direction of the first flywheel, so it can't be air drag causing the rotation.

Why does this happen?

It's a weird quantum effect called the Barnett Effect, where an uncharged body (in this case, the first flywheel) undergoing angular acceleration experiences spin polarization of its electrons, thereby generating a magnetic field.

"But why does the second flywheel rotate opposite to the first?", you ask.

Well, that's another weird quantum effect known as the Einstein-deHaas Effect (conservation of angular magnetic momentum). The Barnett Effect and the Einstein-deHaas Effect are two sides of the same coin.

How can we exploit this phenomenon?

Well, if the two flywheels were mechanically connected such that they could still rotate in opposite directions, but the second flywheel was geared to spin faster than the first, it would create an imbalance between the two spin-polarized fields.

This imbalance results in a spin differential between the two flywheels any time they're rotating, which should result in a vector force attempting to push the flywheels to spin faster in attempting to conserve angular magnetic momentum. If the vector force is sufficient to overcome system friction, the flywheels should accelerate, and the faster they spin, the faster they try to spin.

We've essentially created a mechanical analog of a permanent magnet. The same effect occurs in a permanent magnet by dint of electron spin, which is why domain flipping occurs (as explicated in the thread, 'Understanding And Exploiting Physical Phenomena') via the exchange interaction to minimize the internal energy of the magnet.

This has implications for permanent magnets... it implies that one pole (one predominant magnetic moment direction) must be stronger than the other (as Howard Johnson wrote about in his book 'The Secret World of Magnets', to wit: "The north element (vortex) is dominant, and has proven to be the stronger vortex with higher gauss ratings."), since the vector potential A field is induced by the external magnetizing field, causing a rotoreflected B field with one predominant magnetic moment direction, then domain-flipping occurs (a reflection of the rotoreflection) after the external field is removed, creating a second predominant magnetic moment direction to minimize the magnet's internal energy:

http://www.aboveunity.com/thread/understanding-and-exploiting-physical-phenomena/?order=all#comment-10076212-cc32-42dd-8afc-a970005258be

So we have a vector (the induced vector potential A field (A_induced)), a pseudovector (the rotoreflected B field... B_{rotoreflected}=curl(A_induced)), a pseudovector of that pseudovector, the reflected B field (B_reflected ≅ B_{rotoreflected}, which isn't a vector because it's a similarity transform (a flipping of domains) rather than a rotoreflection) and a vector (the rotoreflected vector potential A field... A_{rotoreflected}=curl(B_reflected)).

Which pole is dominant depends upon the conditions during magnetization. For modern magnets, it'll likely be a very small difference (since the crystallographic lattice of permanent magnets are easy-axes aligned prior to sintering, thus there are only two directions in which magnetic moment can be aligned and result in the lowest internal energy; and there's nothing stopping half the domains flipping due to the exchange interaction because the cubic crystallographic lattice of the magnetic material isn't unidirectionally magnetostricted, it's bidirectionally magnetostricted).

Cold Electricity Poll

2018-11-30T03:57:43.5300000

Everyone, please help by voting and sharing your current opinion regarding cold electricity. There are no wrong opinions here, and no one is expected to have a permanent position on this. Opinions based experience, ideas, and theories are all welcome. If you have a quote from a famous inventor, or a book from an author that you feel provides real insight, by all means share.

Longitudinal Current Induced by Dielectric Field Impulses

2018-11-22T21:11:59.4930000

https://youtu.be/MF1lVtAgzVM

Single Bucking Coil

2018-10-08T08:07:52.6900000

Here's an experiment for Chris to try.

An external magnetic field in opposition to the magnetic field of a solenoidal inductor will delay magnetic saturation of that inductor and thus increase the inductance, while also changing the time constant curve of that inductor.

Now, what happens when the inductor moves closer to that magnet as it's being energized, and farther away as it's being deenergized? We also get a generator effect!

So the coil, sliding upon the core and biased with a lightly-tensioned spring, acting against a permanent magnet, can have its inductance and time constant curve tailored to fit any application by substituting a stronger or weaker permanent magnet, and a stronger or weaker spring.

In addition, since the permanent magnet's bound electrons are inherently undergoing virtual photon exchange with the quantum vacuum, and thus can receive energy from the quantum vacuum, this opens up interesting possibilities for extraction of energy from the quantum vacuum.

How much power is contained in a magnet?

2018-10-07T05:59:01.0900000

So, I'm sure you've wondered just how much power is contained in a NdFeB (Neodymium-Iron-Boron) permanent magnet. To know that, we'd have to nearly instantaneously destroy the magnetic domains and measure the output power.

Fortunately for us, there are scientists just crazy enough to do just that. It's formally known as 'shock depolarization of ferromagnetic materials". It involves explosives.

Analytical Model for Explosive-Driven Ultracompact Shock-Wave Ferromagnetic Generators

It was experimentally demonstrated that miniature explosively driven shock wave ferromagnetic generators (FMGs) containing Nd2Fe14B hard ferromagnetic elements possessing high (BH)max generate output currents with amplitudes up to 5 kA [6, 7, 9] and output voltages with amplitudes up to 50 kV [7, 10, 11].

This occurs over ~6.2 nanoseconds.

50,000 volts x 5,000 amps = 250,000,000 watts

6.2 nanoseconds is 0.0000000000017222222 hours.

So that works out to 0.00043055555 watt-hours.

An Energizer AAA battery has ~1.87 watt-hours capacity.

What does this mean? Well, the Motional-EMF devices (Gunderson, Sweet, Flynn, etc.) cannot be getting their energy from the magnet itself... and that leaves only one other place they can get that energy... the quantum vacuum.

Rogue waves and negentropy

2018-09-17T20:17:06.4400000

Here's an interesting article:

http://iopscience.iop.org/article/10.1209/0295-5075/120/30008/meta

Apparently, ocean entropy production hovers around zero, yet rogue waves (considered a negentropic event) still occur.

What does this mean? Well, it means that apparently there's some sort of correlation between the production of entropy and negentropy!

The 2nd Law of Thermodynamics states that total entropy (disorder) always increases over time in an isolated system... the system cannot spontaneously increase its order (negentropy) without also decreasing order (entropy) elsewhere in the system. The inverse, apparently, also holds true.

You'll note the researchers state that the entropy of the system (the ocean) doesn't cause rogue waves, it's the entropy of the individual paths of the waves which constructively interfere to create the rogue wave!

How can we exploit this? Well, we're already researching constructive interference as means of achieving overunity. The rogue wave phenomenon is considered random in the ocean because we can't track the trajectory of each individually contributing wave, but in our systems, we can. Thus we can generate negentropic "rogue waves" at will by correlating ambient energy to the energy we're putting into the system (or vice versa).

What are the hallmarks of negentropy? Well, besides an increase of order in the system, it also causes a cooling of the system. Where have we heard of that? In some of the systems we're researching!

Per Bak and Ilya Prigogine both researched self-organizing systems (Prigogine received the 1977 Nobel Prize for his work in this field). They both found that for systems far from equilibrium, self-organization and thus negentropy occurred. This is in apparent violation of the 2nd Law of Thermodynamics, until one considers that the negentropy produced in the system must be offset by an entropy increase of the universe overall.