• Fringe look at a complete core input coil and impulse pressure waves

Fringe look at a complete core input coil and impulse pressure waves

  • 1.2K Views
  • Last Post 3 weeks ago
FringeIdeas posted this 21 June 2024

Hey everyone,

So my experiments for the study of the A Vector Potential, Fringe look at the A Vector Potential and rotating magnetic fields, are on hold for a bit while I acquire a few things and build a coil winding rig. It's well planned, I just need some time to make it happen.

In the meantime, I thought I could look into a few other relevant ideas. The input coil arrangement, and impulse discharges like that of a spark gap. Both of these ideas come from this part of this thread here, where Chris shows the output coils combined with the push pull input and GDT (gas discharge tube), and asks about what would happen if he wound a 7 turn input coil on the outside of the POC coil arrangement. And I am assuming Chris you mean on the outside around both output coils at the same time.

Originally here: Chris's Non-Inductive Coil Experiment

Continued a bit here:  Partnered Output Coils

Wrapping the input coil around both output coils has been used before by many, for example Don Smith.

 

This is interesting to me because, to me, having the input coil wrapped around only one POC seems unbalanced. Though I could be wrong. And there seemed to be quite a fight against the input during the regauge period which I believe can be minimized by arranging the input coil differently. Again, I could be wrong. Experiments will help clarify this for me.

The impulse discharge input has been used by many. Tesla, Tariel Kapanadze, etc. The disruptive nature of it is interesting, and for example the harmonics involved. I can't help but think this would be a good way to regauge the system.

Ok, so this is what I have so far..

The coils each have 3 layers of 16 turns = 48 turns of 0.4 mm speaker wire (copper itself is about 3mm).

The core is an AMCC800B.

The input coil will be roughly 12 turns of the same wire, as I intend to put a bit of focus on ¼ wavelength, near field, all of that good stuff. It will be wrapped around the whole core, both coils at the same time, like in the Don Smith picture.

I'll mess around with only pulses and push pull input at first, and then move on the GDT and possibly even a real spark gap.

So we know that POC coils provide us a way to apply a steady pressure on the electrons, to get them free/moving and accelerate them, pumping current, while also giving us a way to collect that energy. Or rather we are creating a condition to have nature do this process for us, we just set it in motion and collect the output.

So if I'm not mistaken, the next step would be to figure out a way to really knock a lot of electrons loose so we can really get some good action going. High magnetic fields, maybe some sharp jabs to the electrons. Hopefully these experiments, alongside my A Vector Potential experiments, will lead to learning.

More coming soon, thanks!

Marcel

Order By: Standard | Newest | Votes
FringeIdeas posted this 21 June 2024

Chris, I do have one quick question.

The POC coils have diodes. So only one direction of input is actually going to wind them up and get their currents moving. A magnetic field in the opposite direction will be just a waste I assume.

So are we only wanting the GDT or spark gap to fire on one part of the AC cycle?

For example, the cycle starts and positive swing is used to ramp up the tank circuit voltage, but not yet reaching that breakdown area of the GDT. And then the negative swing further ramps up the tank circuit, this time reaching the breakdown voltage. So the spark would only fire on the negative swing.

I'll admit, I'm not familiar enough with how this spark gap idea works.

Thank you!

Marcel

Gucio posted this 21 June 2024

Very interesting. I once played with a choke with a bifilar winding from an ATX power supply. The phase-connected windings cause the magnetic fields in the core to attract each other and stay locked in the core. I connected the windings in parallel in antiphase, which forced the magnetic field to radiate outside the core and powered the Bedini motor. A diagram of what it looks like is shown below.

This bifilar coil worked very well as a drive for the Bedini engine.

I have this Bedini engine, still waiting for development

I was very wondering where such a strong impulse comes from in such a bifilar coil.
My colleague raised a very interesting topic. Please keep up the great work.

 

Grzegorz

Chris posted this 21 June 2024

Chris, I do have one quick question.

The POC coils have diodes. So only one direction of input is actually going to wind them up and get their currents moving. A magnetic field in the opposite direction will be just a waste I assume.

So are we only wanting the GDT or spark gap to fire on one part of the AC cycle?

For example, the cycle starts and positive swing is used to ramp up the tank circuit voltage, but not yet reaching that breakdown area of the GDT. And then the negative swing further ramps up the tank circuit, this time reaching the breakdown voltage. So the spark would only fire on the negative swing.

I'll admit, I'm not familiar enough with how this spark gap idea works.

Thank you!

Marcel

 

Hey Marcel,

Typically one polarity works better than the other, yes.

Best Wishes,

   Chris

FringeIdeas posted this 02 June 2025

Hey!

So with almost no bench time for a while, limited study time, and a bit of burnout from working too much for too long, I have decided to temporarily put aside the Melnichenko stuff and revisit this setup, shown by Chris, links above in the opening comment of this thread.


 
There seems to be a lot of attention on this particular setup lately. Real videos, honest attempts, fake nonsense that YouTube seems to be pushing. I left this setup alone, for the most part, because I was a little shy of getting into the push-pull to spark gap type input, and tuning. But it seems I can't ignore it forever. And there seems to be a strong push to discredit or confuse this setup. Which means it's probably something we should be looking at. 😀

Drasko's build, here.
Adam's build here.

Guys, thanks for your contributions and the motivation to dig in.

 

And this guy here, among other YouTube videos I've found.

 

Now this dude, all due respect if he is visiting this forum, but I can't help but notice a couple red flags. The coils seem to be hooked up strangely. He says in the comments that the red POC is the input, black the output, and I'm not sure about the large black outer coil. In a few comments these coils were asked about, one comment even using the term partnered output coils, and the questions seemed to be sidestepped and redirected. And the explanations of the operation seem to be, well, I don't resonate with them. Anyway, I have not successfully built this setup yet so right now I'm just yapping. But enough about this guy, that's not the point of this post.

 

In about a week and a half my wife will take the kids to see family and I'll take a little time off work. Paint the deck, de-weed the yard, and throw on some Sublime or Bob Marley nice and loud while I wind coils. I should have about two weeks of bench time and no work. So I'm preparing now.

Mouser is shipping me a few things, and I'll start printing some formers in a day or two. My old build pictured in my first post is shelved. I have a slightly smaller core coming and different wire, mosfets, etc.

I started putting together a push-pull input, and thinking of alternate types of input, just to get the electronics in place and ready. My first question is in regards to "tuning". I'm guessing I want to first find the frequency where the POCs buck nicely and have the effect of aiding the input. Then I want to target that frequency when I'm designing the resonant point of my push-pull circuit, or whatever style input circuit I use. Correct? So the spark itself is at that frequency, not necessarily the frequency which builds the resonance rise.

 

BTW Drasko, I had just noticed your mosfet reading through your thread again, IXFN180N20. That's a beast!

So any advice at this point, while I'm in the design phase, would be appreciated. Building starts in less than two weeks. Finally, some bench time. I'll be sure to share.

Thanks!
Marcel

Chris posted this 03 June 2025

Hey Marcel,

I believe Perspective is a very important. 

A Coil of Wire, connected to a Globe, the Globe wont light, but wave a Permanent Magnet past the Coil of Wire fast enough, the Globe will Light.

We have some key words to think about:

  • A Coil of Wire
  • a Globe
  • a Permanent Magnet

 

and of course the rate at which the PM travels, we get Light!

The Perspective is key! Key to advancing this: 2025 - 1831 = 194 Year old Technology. We must take this very simple Perspective one step further, making this Asymmetrical, Breaking the Symmetry that has been enforced on us for so long, the Symmetry of Below Unity Machines, because the only way we progress, is to learn how to take advantage of Chiral Nature.

Let Each Force of each M.M.F, become a Functional Power Output.

Its all about Matching the M.M.F, POCOne and POCTwo must have equal and Opposite M.M.F or this does not work.

On the Spark Gap:

A spark gap transmitter doesn't just emit a single frequency; it generates a wide spectrum of frequencies, including harmonics. These harmonics are multiples of the fundamental frequency, meaning the signal contains the base frequency and frequencies that are 2x, 3x, 4x, and so on, of that base frequency. 

 

I was hoping someone would point this out, but no one has, so there are benefits to using a Spark Gap!

Best Wishes,

   Chris

FringeIdeas posted this 13 June 2025

Hey!

Thanks for the words of wisdom Chris. I was thinking something similar about the spark gap, but wasn't sure. Still little experience with them. There was something else you had said in another thread, and I'm sorry but I can't remember, nor can I find, where you had said this. But you mentioned in an inductive discharge the voltage is immediate and the current ramps up. With a capacitive discharge it's the opposite. The current is immediate and the voltage ramps up. I had never heard that before. And if we think of the current being the magnetic field, that is a rather important statement.

Anyway, slowly getting things together here. Front end build and testing starts next week. The core and wires are now ready.

Some details and a picture:

 

Core is an AMCC-320. I decided on a bit smaller core just because it's easier to work with. 3D printed the bobbins, 3mm thickness. Length is about 75mm windable space. Cross sectional area is 2.5cm x 5.5cm = 13.75cm2.

The wire is silicon power wire, 2.5mm2. This equates to a 1.8mm diameter wire core + 2mm insulation = total wire diameter of ~3.8mm. The black appears to be the copper type, while the blue appears to be the aluminum type. So the blue might have a slightly higher resistance, but on this short of length I'm not going to worry about it too much.

Each POC is 20 turns x 2 layers = 40 turns. One clockwise the other counter clockwise, traditional POCs.

The input coil in blue, same specs. There are 10 total turns which would be ¼ the wire length of both POC coil lengths together. In the center at 5 turns I have a tap. This is ¼ the wire length of one POC. I just threw that in there to play with.

I have purchased new mosfets, a few capacitors, a new small core for the push pull circuit etc. I'll probably get to that on Monday. I had messed around with a few configurations last week and had a nice little push pull resonating 10V up to around 140, triggering the GDT rated for about 104V I believe. But I didn't have the coils built yet, so I had used a temp input coil to play with, and resonance was around 45KHz. So I want to play with that, maybe bring it down a bit.

Also Adam had chimed in on Drasko's thread with this.. Here

Now this is the part I think most don’t see:
Then the series resonant circuit building up must be in sync with the primary discharge circuit or so to say the two resonant circuits must be in resonance with each other.
Two resonant circuits resonating at the exact same time!
Otherwise they will hit each other trying to charge the same cap in reverse polarity at some point costing lots of input energy.

So, a bit to think about while designing the front end.

Anyway, small steps forward, let's see where this goes. I'll post my progress.

Thanks!

Marcel

Plasmonic posted this 14 June 2025

Hey Marcel,

Awesome build, as usual!

I reread your first post on this thread and I agree with your following statement.

FringeIdeas:

This is interesting to me because, to me, having the input coil wrapped around only one POC seems unbalanced. Though I could be wrong. And there seemed to be quite a fight against the input during the regauge period which I believe can be minimized by arranging the input coil differently. Again, I could be wrong. Experiments will help clarify this for me.

  I remembered an experiment where I used the same core you've seen me use in the past, I believe it's an AMCC 200, maybe 100.  I had wound 45 turns in a single layer of about 20AWG magnet wire, one coil on each leg and wound a 12AWG primary around the entire core, I believe 6 turns.  I didn't spend a ton of time with it because I completed the setup I was going for that you have also seen using the typical setup you point out in the first sentence.

One thing I noticed though while swapping things around that I find interesting because of my current line of thinking which is around Kapanadze style devices using floating LC resonance, Avremenko plugs (single wire transmission and rectification) but taking it a tad bit farther based on some research I have come across.

So my point!  I was doing some precursory experiments (I didn't get to test much with it on a scope), so I don't know much more than what I'm about to say, which is, I was trying to drive the coil as we normally try to do here and trying to get my output power up so I could use light bulb output for discovery before putting the scope on it.

I disconnected one of the POCs with my bare hands while it was running (NOT WISE!).  When I did it though, the coil I disconnected basically turned into a tesla coil with soft white and blue sparks and a light blue field around them, the sparks coming off the terminals would go through the magnet wire insulation to complete it's connection, if the wires were parallel the sparks would fairly evenly distribute themselves along the wires based on their proximity.  They would actively spark between the wires with a gap of up to about 10mm.  Some of this stuff I saw is not wildly different from some precautions you may hear about transformers like the voltage being able to exceed it's rating if it's open circuit on the output of the transformer but it's always been interesting that it basically turned into a tesla coil with very few turns of wire.

In my case I didn't feel a single tingle from all of the electrical action despite at least 1 hand basically being involved with the sparks, I didn't touch the sparks but was holding one of the wires to move it around and see what I described.  I should have been shocked.  There was an impressive voltage rise which is something I'm very keyed in on atm because of the single wire floating system I'm working on that is based on displacement current. 

(DONT TRY THIS AT HOME KIDS!)

I appreciated re-reading your first post as it's given me something I should go back and explore applying to the experiment I'm working on now.  May make a very nice upgrade from my vehicle ignition coil I picked up for some preliminary testing. Which I hope to do in the next couple weeks.

Just so I don't add too much mystery in my diatribe of why the quote stuck out to me.  I'll share this.

Avremenko plug basic (tesla style):

 

The one I'm working on:

 

Current goal is to base feed a floating 3rd coil via a spark gap which would (hopefully) supply a strong oscillation to the antenna connection to have a displace current oscillation between the antenna and the #2 conductive body.  While using the circuit above in series with the oscillation.

Deep breath

Hope I made enough sense, that was a sorta spontaneous uncontained post, but Awesome work!  I'll hopefully have some things to share soon but be careful with those connections, but there may be some interesting things that I think are hiding in what you're soon to be using.  I look forward to it!  Be safe.

Godspeed,

Matt

 

FringeIdeas posted this 14 June 2025

Hey Plasmonic,

Thanks! And I do remember the Avremenko plug thing from way back in the day. I never did mess around with it all that much. I did have some success with the one wire transmission using the Tesla coil type setup. Quite a bit of experimenting with that back then. But the output always seemed to push back on the input. There was some dude by the name of EMJunkie back then. 😉 But I didn't get a chance to study the partnered output coils. I had a nasty divorce and put down the studies for a decade. Wish I would have kept up with it, I wouldn't be paying 600e/month right now for electricity.

As far as this setup is concerned, I'm not going high voltage with it just yet. I have gas discharge tubes rated for around 100V to start. After that if I feel I understand the tuning and concepts of the spark gap, I have another set of GDTs rated at around 300V. Also a couple beefy thyristors and SRCs I might throw in the mix at some point. I think that should be sufficient to prove out concepts. But let's see.

Marcel

  • Liked by
  • Chris
  • Plasmonic
Chris posted this 15 June 2025

Hey Marcel and other readers,

My Friend, you have some good points and the conversation with Matt has bought up some really good thoughts.

Lets touch on some of the points:

Quite a bit of experimenting with that back then. But the output always seemed to push back on the input.

 

Yes, this is true, and yes a Voltage can only be "Generated" if the Magnetic Field is aloud to move! If the Magnetic Field is Held Steady, then No Voltage can be "Generated". The Common Mode and Differential Mode Chokes show this. Delay the Conduction, switch in at say 12.7 Volts, and then the Voltage in the System will be Regulated by Magnetic Field Means.

 

There was some dude by the name of EMJunkie back then. 😉 But I didn't get a chance to study the partnered output coils.

 

Haha yeah some Crazy Guy, with Crazy ideas, and so many people tried to Shoot it all down, until it was shown that it worked exactly as I was telling people:

Many here laugh at, and mok EMJ, but the fact is , he is basically right in what he is trying to put forward.

http://overunity.com/15395/partnered-output-coils-free-energy/msg460945/#msg460945

 

 Everyone is looking only at the electrical output of my device,and seem to be ignoring the mechanical output that is also there.
 They also dismiss EMJ's shorted coil theory,and although he hasnt shown a working device yet,and he messed up the scope measurements,his theory is sound.

http://overunity.com/15395/partnered-output-coils-free-energy/msg453458/#msg453458

 

 

   PM

 How closely do you think this is starting to resemble EMJs partnered output coil setup?,as i am seeing some resemblance here.


 Brad

http://www.overunityresearch.com/index.php?topic=3319.msg57155#msg57155

 

 

I think it is time Grum,to answer this question once and for all.

For every action,there is an equal and opposite reaction--and then there is the counter reaction

Open the topic,and lets get ION on the scene ,as he knows his way around calorimetry setup's,and i believe this is the way to show PMs doing useful work.


Brad

http://www.overunityresearch.com/index.php?topic=3319.msg56743#msg56743

 

 


How did I know? Hmm, well, sometimes one has to Break the Water in the Pond before Jumping in, or one may break their back on entry. So many before me failed to start others on the True Path.

 

I had a nasty divorce and put down the studies for a decade.

 

Oh man, I am sorry to hear!

 

As far as this setup is concerned, I'm not going high voltage with it just yet. I have gas discharge tubes rated for around 100V to start. After that if I feel I understand the tuning and concepts of the spark gap, I have another set of GDTs rated at around 300V. Also a couple beefy thyristors and SRCs I might throw in the mix at some point. I think that should be sufficient to prove out concepts. But let's see.

 

Think Force in terms of MMF, as each POC Bucks the other, the Force of the Bucking, Opposition, is what Pumps Current. To have MMF, you need a Voltage First.

Voltage is the direct Change in the Magnetic Field of the Source, from T=0 to T=CurrentPeak, of the Source, and the Turns, Voltage is multiplied by each turn, E.G: 1 turn = 1 volt, then 100 turns = 100 volts. This you all know, but putting this all together, these relationships are very tight, intimately related, and as we see in a transformer, we see direct opposition, from Output to Input, and as the Load Resistance Decreases, we see the Currents Go Up, and the Impedance Drops, allowing for the increase in Current, well the same occurs in the POC, the Impedance drops as Load Increases.

At perfect Resonance, Voltages are generated in the POC, or we can use other means to make this occur.

Do you remember the Story of the Vacuum Cleaner I told you guys? I lost about 1.5Cm's of 0.8mm wire in one experiment. So be careful.

Best Wishes,

   Chris

FringeIdeas posted this 19 June 2025

Hey!

I've been slowly messing around with this setup for a few days now. Here is a pic of the mess.

 

 

The push pull input circuit is a ferrite E core, simply so I could gap it to help increase the output voltage. The two coils on the left are both 20 turns of 1.2mm wire, and the output is 40 turns 1.2mm wire. So a 1:2 step up. While in resonance with the cap I can get the voltages up to roughly 250-300 Vpp, depending on the cap that I use. I'm playing around with the 1uF microwave cap and some others I had purchased, ranging down to 15 nF. So with a peak resonance value of 125-150 Vp it's enough to jump the gas discharge tube which is rated for 100 V (maybe 90 actually, but let's say 100).

For the primary on the output coils, I've been using only the 10 turns, not the 5 turn tap. The two POC coils I have in series going into a 3W bulb. It's interesting to see the resonance build up. Single trigger shot here..

 

 

And a zoom in, with cursors, where the spark discharge happens and the resonance build's up again. The trumpet wave.

 

 

Now, something I'm struggling with.. There are two different spark gap configurations that have been mentioned. A couple links for fun:

ARRL: How Spark Transmitters Work

Tesla Colorado Springs Notes, go to about page 56 (in the text).

 

 

Maybe I'm holding it wrong, but I can't get the GDT to trigger with configuration A. Even with a 300 Vpp (150 Vp) which is well over the GDT rating of 100V. The trumpet wave scope shots above are from configuration B. 

Tesla, in the Colorado Spring notes, mentioned that configuration B had a tendency to dampen the waves rather fast, so he went on to a configuration similar to A. But to my understanding so far, we want one sharp discharge in one direction. Like with the single pulse into the non-inductive coil experiment setup. We are not looking to build LC oscillations in the output primary. So I'm heavily leaning towards configuration B. Please correct me if I'm wrong.

Interestingly enough though, with both configurations, removing the load from the POCs has little to no effect on the input power. 

So, I'm still playing around here. Moving rather slow. It seems there is a lot to learn for me. Where to next.. Adam had mentioned, and this makes total sense to me, to configure the spark gap so that the trumpet wave matches the regauge plus the output time periods. And I'm going to use his picture. Plagiarism! Muhaha! Kidding, thanks Adam for laying out your thoughts! Link to your thread, starting about here.

 

 

So adjusting the coil and/or cap parameters, we can probably achieve this pretty easily. I'll steal Adam's pictures again. 😈 Finding the open end resonance like this.. My current POC setup has an open end resonance of 230 KHz.

 

 

Then calculating the ¼ wave time period, like this, which would give me a quarter wave time period of 1 uS.

 

 

We should have a good idea of what our rise time (input on time) should be for the POCs. Then that correlates to our spark period. My push pull is running at roughly 10 KHz. My whole time period, from spark-> re-resonate-> spark is roughly 1 mS. I think that is way too long. 

Question, is it possible to adjust the actual spark time? Is this spark time "on" directly related to how much energy is stored in the capacitor? Smaller cap = smaller spark time.

My issue is, with the non-inductive coil experiment setup, I always had to just sweep around, shorting and un-shorting one of the POCs to find that frequency and duty cycle where the POCs started working together. I never did find a mathematical correlation between the ¼ wave open end resonance of the POCs, and what frequency/duty cycle I ended up with in the end.

So.. more to learn here. Sweeping around to find the correct time period of the trumpet wave isn't going to be so easy if I'm having to change caps and add/remove coil turns all the time. I think I will revisit the math, and maybe I can narrow down what frequencies I'm looking for.

Also, I may be experiencing what Adam had talked about, where the cap when it discharges, wants to charge in the opposite polarity and stuffs the next resonant cycle. When the spark gap starts firing, I do notice a rise of input. Sometimes it's quite large, for example, from 2 amps to 5 amps.

Ok, enough blabbering, I'll be playing around a bit more with the math and cap sizes for now.

Thanks!

Marcel

Plasmonic posted this 21 June 2025

Man, Marcel,

Don't stop!

I've been thinking about this a bit and I wanted to share some ideas that came to me.   If you want a faster discharge you may be able to use lower voltage GDTs (73V is the lowest I have come across) and run them in series.  GDTs may have the same effect as a normal series spark gap like is used in the Tesla coil community, I think it was something Tesla used for a time as well.

Also it may be an option to lower your capacitance and increase your trigger voltage.  You would be able to keep the energy quantity the same but should have a faster discharge rate, not a perfect solution but maybe better?

I'll keep thinking about this, nice work btw!

Stay Awesome,

Matt

Drasko posted this 21 June 2025

Hey Marcel,

Looking good, glad to see progress and experimentation.

Regarding this Question:

Question, is it possible to adjust the actual spark time? Is this spark time "on" directly related to how much energy is stored in the capacitor? Smaller cap = smaller spark time.

Do some research on Magnetic Quenching by Nikola Tesla.

Using a strong magnetic field and inserting the spark gap between it will affect the "on" time.

This is directly from google:

In Tesla coils, magnetic quenching refers to using a strong magnetic field to quickly extinguish the spark in a spark gap, allowing for faster and more efficient oscillations. This is achieved by placing magnets near the spark gap, so that the magnetic field interacts with the arc, disrupting it and causing it to collapse. This rapid quenching enables the capacitor to recharge and the cycle to repeat more quickly, leading to higher spark rates and better overall performance

Spark Gap

I believe by adjusting the distance of the magnets will influence the rate at which the spark gap is extinguished which in turn changes the "on" time. The image above is the actual apparatus. The "M" is mica insulating paper to ensure spark doesn't spark over to the magnets. N and S being the two magnetic fields attracting each other. A and B are the terminals of the spark gap.

Opposing magnetic fields may work as well, but will have to get to this step before experimenting with it, just a theory.

Also posted by Chris on my post:

Follow the Ideas in Nikola Tesla's Spark Gap Discharges and you'll go a long way!

 

I'm currently experimenting with the setup I posted using just a Mosfet(yes the beast lol) and seeing the effects and trying to understand them before going to the next step. I will post some data as I find time. Been a bit hectic the last few weeks/months. And apologies to all who I haven't replied to on my original post. Every time someone makes a post it leads to hours/days/weeks of research and experimentation.

Hope this helps!

Thanks,

Drasko.

 

Edit:

Good read.

https://waveguide.blog/teslas-spark-gaps-literature-review/

Adam posted this 22 June 2025

Hello,

 

Remember you have two separate cores the first core is resonating your voltage up until the spark gap jumps. Now on the second core the primary fires and the two POC coils buck but as soon as the two coils buck they are also sort of bucking the primary which reverse charges the capacitor. Remember at the same time your first core is still resonating and wants to charge the shared capacitor at the same moment the primary on the second core wants to reverse charge that same capacitor. So we have a bit of a conundrum here, how do we get both cores to charge the shared capacitor in the same polarity at the same moment in time on the first pulse after the spark gap discharge?

 

If we don’t get this to happen then each core will try to charge the same capacitor in reverse polarity and basically buck each other’s input charge resulting in huge input power consumption and disaster.

 

But if we do get this to happen correctly then the primary over the POC coils will reverse charge the capacitor 2/3 of the way full and your first core can finish the 1/3 charge in resonance very easily and cheaply with almost no input.

 

Both cores have to charge the same capacitor at the same moment in time in the same polarity on the first pulse after the spark gap discharge. This is the key !

 

Chris, how do you feel about this explanation please feel free to chime in.

 

Adam.

FringeIdeas posted this 22 June 2025

Hey, sorry, been busy the last few days catching up on some house work, painting, whatnot. And we just had mid-summers here in Finland. But glad to see a few comments and discussion!

@Plasmonic Thanks man! And yes, I have been playing with putting the GDTs in series, parallel, etc. I think mine are actually rated for 90V. I'm not sure I want to go much lower than that. The lowering of capacitance is what I'm going to mess with next. But like I mentioned before, I'm not exactly sure in what time period I want the discharge to happen.

@Drasko Magnetic quenching was in my mind as well. I had noticed that while going through some of Tesla's writings. I wasn't sure I wanted to mess with that just yet, as I'm still very new to the spark gap, but it seems like an interesting idea to experiment with, so I'll add it to the list. Thanks. Interested in seeing your progress, thanks for the link on the spark gaps I'll check it out, and thanks for the comments.

@Adam Very clear description thank you. And, while struggling with a bit of brain fog today due to mid-summers activities (beer) here in Finland yesterday, I would like to throw a thought out. If the reverse charge from the POCs begins when the spark discharge ends, then we could simply time where the reverse charge begins by changing the length of the spark discharge. So.. for example, make sure the spark discharge is ¼ the length of one input resonant cycle. So the discharge ends at the 0 crossing. Not sure if ¼ would be correct, again brain fog, but I hope you understand what I'm saying. Again, thanks for jumping in, I appreciate the thoughts. 

So.. it kind of looks like the discharge time should be looked at closer. Not just the time, but with respect to the oscillations of the resonance. When I get some time, today or tomorrow, I'll get back to that. 

Thanks everyone!

Marcel

Chris posted this 22 June 2025

Hey Guys, this is great to see!

@Adam, re:

Chris, how do you feel about this explanation please feel free to chime in.

 

My Friend, I have always appreciated you and your hard work. I can be a Bull Headed Prick sometimes, and for that I am sorry.

Thank You to all of you!

Best Wishes,

   Chris

Adam posted this 23 June 2025

Thank you Chris,

I really appreciate all your hard work and all of the free information you have given out to us over the many years. Not many people in the world would be willing to do that. In Fact you are the only one. lol

 

Well, I suppose in regards to understanding the principle of how the full system works the cat is out of the bag. lol  minus the grounding so you can pump!

 

I think we know that the number of turns between the primary wrapped over the bucking coils it somewhere around ¼ of the turns to 1/3 turns. Meaning quarter wave as Don states. It always seems to be a few more turns than 1/4 for me.

 

I suppose the next question people should look at is. How do we determine the number of turns of wire on core one “the resonance core” versus  the primary turns on core two “the bucking core” ?

 

Maybe Chris has found an easy answer to this question?

 

Have fun

Adam.

 

 

Chris posted this 24 June 2025

Hey guys,

@Adam - Your Query:

I suppose the next question people should look at is. How do we determine the number of turns of wire on core one “the resonance core” versus  the primary turns on core two “the bucking core” ?

 

Maybe Chris has found an easy answer to this question?

 

As we know, the "Pumping" Property, ( of Fundamental Charge ), is, in itself the Bucking of POCOne and POCTwo, and yes, we do sometimes have to have a Ground, which we learned from back in the Akula days, needs to be approximately the same length of both POC.

The answer to your question, unfortunately is: Trial and error.

Best Wishes,

   Chris

Chris posted this 25 June 2025

Hey Guys,

The POC Voltage, as we know, the difference in Potential from Terminal One and Terminal Two, is the Total Electromotive Force: E.M.F.

Why the ground and why the same length?

The Wave on the Grounding point, will be Zero Potential relative to ground. So one side of the POC has a Ground Zero Potential, and the other terminal can become any Potential X, above or Below the Ground Potential.

Why do we have very Little Voltage Generated?

Back to the Common mode / Differential mode Chokes situation...

We all know, if POCOne and POCTwo are both Loaded at all times, very little Voltage can be "Generated" unless we have perfect Magnetic Resonance!

So how do we get around the Ground?

Well, this is the trick! By Allowing the Voltage to go up, and switching in at a specific time, more on this soon, but in the meantime, Imagine the two pieces of wire I have been showing for a long time now, this representation of POCOne and POCTwo :

 

 

So, POCOne gains a voltage of 12.0 Volts, The Load is applied, POCTwo must the automatically carry the same Current, if we have Magnetic Resonance, because Electromagnetic Induction does actually work, even though those dumb ass*s over on the other forums have Zero Understanding of it, and we have a Pump, where Charge is freed and Accelerated down the wire, like we saw in the Mr Preva Experiment!

 

I hope Readers understand what I am saying here!

Best Wishes,

   Chris

 

FringeIdeas posted this 4 weeks ago

Hey! No real update on this build just yet, still playing around. Just wanted to post something more for fun.

I spent a bit of time last night before bed trying to find some of the old free energy videos on YouTube, partially because Netflix is a huge waste of time, and partially because it's interesting to go back and see if I can spot information that I have learned on the forum here.

WITTS came up. And I'll be honest, WITTS, the way they present themselves, has always seemed to me kind of snake oil salesman-ish.. Kind of like Denis Lee. BUT, regarding both of these parties, if one looks closely enough, they seem to have enough evidence to show that their technologies were/are the real deal.

WITTS for example, and this was just strange because we have a few people now, including myself, working on this spark gap primary setup. Recent talk has been on the trumpet waveform and the use of a proper ground. This WITTS replication of the split flux transformer, video here

There are several interesting things that can be noted in the video, but the kicker was at the end..

 

Now don't go throwing any money at WITTS. I'm just posting this because the timing of me finding this video was just interesting.

Marcel

Forelle posted this 3 weeks ago

Hey everyone,

So my experiments for the study of the A Vector Potential, Fringe look at the A Vector Potential and rotating magnetic fields, are on hold for a bit while I acquire a few things and build a coil winding rig. It's well planned, I just need some time to make it happen.

In the meantime, I thought I could look into a few other relevant ideas. The input coil arrangement, and impulse discharges like that of a spark gap. Both of these ideas come from this part of this thread here, where Chris shows the output coils combined with the push pull input and GDT (gas discharge tube), and asks about what would happen if he wound a 7 turn input coil on the outside of the POC coil arrangement. And I am assuming Chris you mean on the outside around both output coils at the same time.

Originally here: Chris's Non-Inductive Coil Experiment

Continued a bit here:  Partnered Output Coils

Wrapping the input coil around both output coils has been used before by many, for example Don Smith.

 

This is interesting to me because, to me, having the input coil wrapped around only one POC seems unbalanced. Though I could be wrong. And there seemed to be quite a fight against the input during the regauge period which I believe can be minimized by arranging the input coil differently. Again, I could be wrong. Experiments will help clarify this for me.

The impulse discharge input has been used by many. Tesla, Tariel Kapanadze, etc. The disruptive nature of it is interesting, and for example the harmonics involved. I can't help but think this would be a good way to regauge the system.

Ok, so this is what I have so far..

The coils each have 3 layers of 16 turns = 48 turns of 0.4 mm speaker wire (copper itself is about 3mm).

The core is an AMCC800B.

The input coil will be roughly 12 turns of the same wire, as I intend to put a bit of focus on ¼ wavelength, near field, all of that good stuff. It will be wrapped around the whole core, both coils at the same time, like in the Don Smith picture.

I'll mess around with only pulses and push pull input at first, and then move on the GDT and possibly even a real spark gap.

So we know that POC coils provide us a way to apply a steady pressure on the electrons, to get them free/moving and accelerate them, pumping current, while also giving us a way to collect that energy. Or rather we are creating a condition to have nature do this process for us, we just set it in motion and collect the output.

So if I'm not mistaken, the next step would be to figure out a way to really knock a lot of electrons loose so we can really get some good action going. High magnetic fields, maybe some sharp jabs to the electrons. Hopefully these experiments, alongside my A Vector Potential experiments, will lead to learning.

More coming soon, thanks!

Marcel

Hi Marcel and everyone

Do you know Genady Markov Alexandrovich Pat.EP 0844626A1 ?

https://patentimages.storage.googleapis.com/pdfs/c1bfd5a0b0186c858067/EP0844626A1.pdf

It works best if all 3 windings are on the same coil.Be carefull because with a 1:1:1 Relation you get really high voltage.

Good Day

We're Light Years Ahead!
Members Online:

No one online at the moment

Past Visitors: 0 | Live Visitors: 0

3D globe widget by: Chris Sykes

Our Above Unity Machines:

Asymmetrical EMI

Wistiti's Bucking Joule Thief
Non-Inductive Coil Experiment
CD's Non-Inductive Coil Rep
Baerndorfer's Experiment
Captainloz's A-R-E
Aetherholic's COP>4.0

Resonant EMI

Yo's Ferro Resonance
Jagau's Non-linear Resonance
Ferrite at work
Recomended Protocol:
Measurement
Switching System
Measurement Block
Current Observation
Current Sensing Resolution
What is a Scalar:

In physics, scalars are physical quantities that are unaffected by changes to a vector space basis. Scalars are often accompanied by units of measurement, as in "10 cm". Examples of scalar quantities are mass, distance, charge, volume, time, speed, and the magnitude of physical vectors in general.

You need to forget the Non-Sense that some spout with out knowing the actual Definition of the word Scalar! Some people talk absolute Bull Sh*t!

The pressure P in the formula P = pgh, pgh is a scalar that tells you the amount of this squashing force per unit area in a fluid.

A Scalar, having both direction and magnitude, can be anything! The Magnetic Field, a Charge moving, yet some Numb Nuts think it means Magic Science!

Start Here:
Help with using the Forum.
Message from God:

Hello my children. This is Yahweh, the one true Lord. You have found creation's secret. Now share it peacefully with the world.

Ref: Message from God written inside the Human Genome

God be in my head, and in my thinking.

God be in my eyes, and in my looking.

God be in my mouth, and in my speaking.

Oh, God be in my heart, and in my understanding.

We love and trust in our Lord, Jesus Christ of Nazareth!

Your Support:

More than anything else, your contributions to this forum are most important! We are trying to actively get all visitors involved, but we do only have a few main contributors, which are very much appreciated! If you would like to see more pages with more detailed experiments and answers, perhaps a contribution of another type maybe possible:

PayPal De-Platformed me!

They REFUSE to tell me why!

We now use Wise!

Donate
Use E-Mail: Chris at aboveunity.com

The content I am sharing is not only unique, but is changing the world as we know it! Please Support Us!

Thank You So Much!

Browse by Category:
Weeks High Earners:
The great Nikola Tesla:
N. Tesla

Ere many generations pass, our machinery will be driven by a power obtainable at any point of the universe. This idea is not novel. Men have been led to it long ago by instinct or reason. It has been expressed in many ways, and in many places, in the history of old and new. We find it in the delightful myth of Antheus, who drives power from the earth; we find it among the subtle speculations of one of your splendid mathematicians, and in many hints and statements of thinkers of the present time. Throughout space there is energy. Is this energy static or kinetic? If static, our hopes are in vain; if kinetic - and this we know it is for certain - then it is a mere question of time when men will succeed in attaching their machinery to the very wheelwork of nature.

Experiments With Alternate Currents Of High Potential And High Frequency (February 1892).

Close