FringeIdeas Non-Inductive Coil Experiment Replication

  • 4.6K Views
  • Last Post 20 February 2025
FringeIdeas posted this 07 May 2023

I'll start this thread more or less for my documentation and a bit of questioning. I've been reading a ton and going over the videos several times. However, I'm pretty sure I don't have this correct yet. And I'm pretty sure I'm starting to confuse myself. 🙂

L1 is the input, 20 turns clockwise of 0.8mm wire. It's wrapped over, the same direction clockwise, mutually inductive, to L2, which is 140 turns of 0.8mm wire. L3 is next to these, also 140 turns of 0.8mm wire, but wrapped counter clockwise. The lamp is on L2.

The pictures were taken at about 5.6 KHz, nevermind what the scope screenshot says, the counter was all over the place. I'm pulsing 12v from a power supply at 10% duty cycle. Yellow and purple traces are L2 and L3. L1 voltage is the blue trace.

The core makes horribly loud 8-bit video game music while I'm messing with frequency ranges, so I assume some bucking is taking place. But the scope shot doesn't look right, not sawtooth enough. I noticed comments on Madscientist's recent experiments about polarities and the exponential curve instead of sawtooth, but I believe I have my diodes correct. Still, not really seeing magnetic resonance I think.

Correct me here, I'm wrong somewhere I'm sure. The input coil raises the magnetic field, north pole to the left side as it's wound clockwise from the right. Current flows in L2, the same direction, and when L1 is turned off, what is left is the magnetic field which will want to collapse and create current the opposite direction, creating a north to the right side. But then the diode is wrong, as it would be blocking the current from the collapse. UNLESS, we see a flip of current polarity because of the magnetic resonance, Mr Preva. In that case, then we have the currents, and magnetic fields from L2 and L3 opposing, and we should see the sawtooth waveform. But I was under the, possibly ignorant, impression that the Mr Preva experiment worked because of the mismatch of coil turns, 7 to 11 I believe it was. But on these coils we want matching turns, in my case 140 to 140 turns, correct? Because we want matching magnetic fields when loads are applied, for a maximum fight against each other. Again, correct me if I'm wrong please.

So, again, I think I might be seeing a tiny bit of magnetic resonance, but not enough. I need to pick up a few new printed bobbins from a friend this week, but I will increase the turns on L2 and L3 to bring up the magnetic fields, maybe 200 or 250 turns to start. Also, I'll try to increase turns on L1 so more magnetic field is delivered. Maybe overdo that too a bit, so I can walk it down a few turns at a time to see what is best. In the meantime, any advice or pointers would be completely acceptable. 🙂

I'll update more soon. And this has been fun getting back to research, so thanks to everyone that has contributed.

Marcel

 

above-unity
Order By: Standard | Newest | Votes
Chris posted this 11 January 2024

Hey Marcel,

Thank You for sharing, very good work!

COP >= 1.3

 

How easy is it, to do, what the Morons, tell us all, we can't do! We are doing it, it's easy and its cheap!

You should be very proud of yourself My Friend! Well Done!

Everyone should be studding this intently, because this is yet another example of why we are Light Years Ahead of the others! There are a lot of Brainless Idiots out there that have no commonsense flowing! Here you have MORE EVIDENCE, of how far ahead we are!!!

Can you believe this comment:

solarlab posted this 19 hours ago

 

Hey Chris - over at aboveunity.com, 


You should quit worrying about everyone else's progress, and such, and 
get busy yourself studying and developing an "EE_TFG" excess energy device 
or a "LinGen." These are real devices and have real output capabilities! 

Everything you need to know is outlined in my posts on both the OverunityMachines 
and Mooker Opensource Free Energy Forum. See "solarlab" threads and posts; the 
concepts are actually new 'Excess Energy' discoveries and are "Light Years Ahead." 

They're already analyzed, tested, and easy to build without any exotic equipment or 
parts. Also, there are plenty of "back-up" attachments, etc.. 

Looking forward to reviewing your designs and discussions related to these systems,
or any others that you may have developed yourself, Hey - We're all in this together! 

But, just IMHO ... 

https://overunitymachines.com/ 
https://www.mooker.com/ 

Take care and have a good one, 

SL 

 

I banned this guy because he has no idea and was off on wild goose chases, and he lied to us all, making false claims about the BTG! He claimed he had 100% working BTG, and 100% working theory, with simulations supporting his amazing discoveries!!! WTF!!! All of it turned out to be Fake!

How embarrassing, this guy seems to dig bigger and bigger holes for himself! It is 100% Clear, he has no idea whatsoever! It is evident, he is making a concerted effort to distract, and draw people down Rabbit-Holes, filled with Lies and Propaganda, while we offer Truth and Proof, he offers NOTHING!!!

Now this guy, claims to be a guru? WTF! The truth is, he has no idea! No, we are not in this together! We have always struggled against these sorts of people, trying to mislead and confuse others with Lies and Propaganda and Perpetuated Plagiaristic Hoaxes! The Ignorance Ooozes! 🤡

We have given this technology, "new 'Excess Energy' discoveries", freely for about 10 Years! 🤪

We are Truth! All of these Independent Replications proves it! Marcel's 'Excess Energy' Replication, it is proof we have this Technology 100% Down and have shared it Freely for a very long time!

This gives everyone a Baseline to gauge, them from Us, we are showing them up more and more everyday with their complete ignorance! The struggle to remain ignorant is evident and obvious!

Are you all tired of these sorts of people? Tired of the Trolls, the Fakers, the Hoaxers, the Plagiarists, and Liars?

We are Light Years Ahead of the others!

@Marcel - I am sorry for going off on a rant, but for others, they can see what we are up against, and we have seen a lot worse!

Thank You Marcel, for again showing how simple this is, and, how Dumb they are, another Independent Replication proves the Truth is HERE ONLY! www.aboveunity.com is the Home of Free Energy Machines! We are Light Years Ahead!!!

FACT: I have helped more people achieve Excess Energy Status, than anyone ever before in History! Do you think there is a reason for this? Hmmm, seems a little too obvious doesn't it! Dur! OMG some people are dumb idiots!

Best Wishes My Friend,

   Chris

Chris posted this 12 January 2024

Hey Marcel,

I would recommend adding a load to the shorted Lamp holder on POCTwo. Them measure and add to your Output.

Adding and adjusting the load, will give you an extra output, and when both outputs are approximately equal and as you have it, opposite, you will have nearly double the output for no extra input!

This is where Floyd Sweets E / 2 becomes E, because you now have E / 2 + E / 2 = E.

If the directions of the two signals are such that opposite H-fields cancel and E-fields add, an apparently steady E-field will be created. The energy density of the fields remain as calculated above, but the value of the E-field will double from E/2 to E.

Ref: Floyd Sweet - Nothing is Something

 

Just out of curiosity, what's your current CSA? Edit, dup, got it: 14 cm2.

Well done and good work My Friend!

   Chris

FringeIdeas posted this 13 January 2024

Ok, will do, I'll play around with loads. I think Monday I'll have a bit of time. I'll be sure to report.

Thanks,

Marcel

Chris posted this 15 January 2024

Thank You Marcel,

Its a fact, and you have kindly shown this, achieving Above Unity Results is not a hard feat!

COP = 1.3, in calculation, I got COP = 1.6, is a very good, a fantastic, Achievement!

We have shown many times, this same feat! A feat that so many dumb asses, seem to scoff at! They actively Plagiarize and miss-represent it, an act of Propaganda by Traitors! Being a Traitor is a crime punishable by Death, I believe!

Getting the oscilloscope to measure greater Output vs Input is an impossible task, only REAL Machines, that have a greater Output over the Input, does this task become an easy task to achieve, and we do this all the time!

 You know, you have seen this work, and you know how easy, how cheap, and how much knowledge is required to gain the title you now have achieved, as Achieving Above Unity!

I want to thank You Marcel, for being a good, honest person, helping the world see the Light!

Light Up The Darkness!

 

Best Wishes,

   Chris

FringeIdeas posted this 16 January 2024

Chris, you are welcome, glad I can help. And thank you for providing the information in the first place, quite a task you have accomplished.

Concerning my setup, I got a little time yesterday to play around.

Adding identical loads on the POC coils, 55V 3W lamps, at that frequency of 5.8 KHz or so, instead of shorting POC2, results in more of an exponential drop and the voltages and currents are about 1/3 on POC2 of what they are on POC1. That alone is a bit confusing due to the fact that I have my diodes setup so that the input first interacts with POC2, then POC2 interacts with POC1.

From here, I noticed I could either play with different loads, or drop the frequency until the voltages and currents seemed to match. Dropping the frequency, down to about 2.1 KHz or so, just made the decay faster, more exponential. And I'm guessing I'm getting away from any resonance in the coils, so I stopped experimenting with that.

I then played around with different loads. I got a decent voltage and current match, at around 4.9 KHz, which if you remember was my open-end resonance frequency of the POC coils. So with a 240V 20W on POC1, and a 240V 15W on POC2, voltages were about equal, but current on POC2 was still about 1/3 . And the decay again was more exponential.

POC1 is blue(V) and purple(A), and POC2 is green(V) and yellow(A).

The input coil:

In this configuration input was around 2.14 W mean, POC1 1.5 W rms, and POC2 800 mW or so rms. No real improvement just yet assuming my measurements were clean.

But I may have some faulty components. Looking at the blue and purple trace above,  they swing negative quite a bit which I'm sure adds to the rms value of POC1. I took a scope shot, closeup, of the input current (yellow), POC2 current (green), and POC1 current (purple). This is the order that I have them set up to interact with each other.

 

The X cursors are the input time of 4% duty 4.9 KHz. So when the input fires off, POC2 in green should be climbing and it's not. POC1 in purple (which has the input wrapped around it) is being pushed down. On the other screenshot above it shows both V and A are negative. I would imagine the diode should be doing it's job here.

Anyhoo, sorry for the long post that really went nowhere lol 😂

I'm running to the hardware store later today to get a few new bulbs. Tomorrow I'll double check the hardware and give it another go.

Thanks!

Marcel

Chris posted this 16 January 2024

Thanks Marcel,

Thank You My Friend!

Normally I would say there is something wrong with your waveforms, but you already have shown, possibly due to the core, that the waveform can be a bit different and still get the same result.

Thanks for sharing the updated data!

Best Wishes,

   Chris

FringeIdeas posted this 25 January 2024

Hey Chris, looking for some advice.

I'd like to leave this thread as is, and move on to some other related experiments. But a few questions.

I was thinking of cutting my core to see if it makes any difference. But I'm wondering if you might know, or if there have been any experiments on, what difference it makes where the core is cut. For example, the Y axis in red under the coils, or the X axis in yellow equally between the coils.

I've read a little (somewhere) about where this bloch wall (middle of coils) vs the area where the fields meet (sides along X axis) might be, which is why I ask.

I'd also like to experiment with the input coil, different variations and positions. Not sure if I want to do this before or after the core cutting though.

Is there possibly something I should be looking at before I cut the core?

Appreciate the help as always, 

Marcel

Chris posted this 26 January 2024

Hey Marcel,

There is a lot to it, Core Reluctance, Magnetic Field Inverse Square Law and more.

Yes, if the Coils are closer together, then you have more Electromagnetic Induction occur, but the core, once cut may exhibit more core leakage... 

I would keep the core as is and experiment with another core.

Best Wishes,

   Chris

FringeIdeas posted this 26 January 2024

Ok sounds like a good plan.

Thanks!

Marcel

FringeIdeas posted this 23 September 2024

Hey!

So I've been re-replicating this experiment with my new AMCC800B core because there were some other details I'd like to get back to. And there were some things I wanted to share that might have helped out @madscientist, though from his last video it looks like he figured it all out.

https://www.aboveunity.com/thread/madscientist-s-non-inductive-coil-replication/?order=all#comment-dc21820f-695f-444f-85e4-b1e800ceca25

Nice! I'll share anyway, maybe it's the same thing he ran into. Maybe this will help someone else.

First off, the specs:

  • AMCC800B Core
  • POC coils are 0.8 mm, 410 turns.
  • Input coil 25 turns of 1.2 mm.
  • The effect shown is at a 16% duty cycle, 12.5 KHz
  • 12 V on the input.
  • Load is a 34 V bulb.
  • My setup, is again like last time, input coil opposing POC2, then POC2 opposing POC1. So POC1 assists the input, in this setup.

Input roughly 1W. Output roughly 1.2W on POC1. POC2 not measured.

The main purpose for this video was to show something else though. At one point Madscientist and I were both having this issue where shorting POC2 would cause the bulb to dim, rather than get brighter. And the input would go up, rather than go down. Chris mentioned check polarities of diodes, etc. But I found, and wanted to share, that the opposite effect that we were seeing could also be brought about by the wrong frequency and/or wrong duty cycle. Please see the video here..

I'm not exactly sure why this happens. My immediate thought would be that we are dealing with setting up oscillations. And either those oscillations work together, or work against, each other, depending on the duty cycle and frequency.

Anyway, I'll keep this short. I'm going to continue to play around with this and just have a closer look at a few things. At some point I'll start moving on to the input coil, possibly an input coil that surrounds both POC coils so they are more equal and opposite to begin with.

Hope this helps someone!

Marcel

Madscientist posted this 24 September 2024

Hei Marcel, interesting work, I have to clear something, I did not change the polarity of my diodes, i checked and confirmed it so I kept them as  in Chris's circuit.  I had seen different variations of this effect when connecting poc 2.

  • Sometimes input current goes up, and light brightens,
  • Sometimes input current goes up and light dims,
  • Sometimes input current drops and light dims,
  • Sometimes input current drops and light brightens.

The last statement is the correct effect Chris thanks for confirming that, so I have been concentrating on the last effect, Another thing, the effect on the bulb is more visible under a certain load range.   If I put a 12V  20W bulb, the bulb dims less when poc 2 is connected, I tried 1W, 5W and 10W bulbs, and found the 5W bulb to be the best at showing this effect. 

 

 

In the video above i am using a 12V 5W lightbulb I hope this info shines more light on this effect. Otherwise good work on everything there nice big core you got there, as Chris said CSA will give better results.  

Be safe.

  Madscientist.      

FringeIdeas posted this 24 September 2024

Nice video! And thanks for sharing, and confirming I'm not crazy 😂

I'd have to say, Madscientist, I like your persistence and work ethic. Keep it up!

Marcel

Chris posted this 24 September 2024

Hey Guys,

@MadScientist - As Marcel said, Nice Work!

In the video above i am using a 12V 5W lightbulb I hope this info shines more light on this effect. Otherwise good work on everything there nice big core you got there, as Chris said CSA will give better results.  

 

Yes, three things to improve this:

  1. Larger Cross Sectional Area
  2. Shorten the Length l, of the Partnered Output Coils POC.
  3. The above, 1 and 2, will give you the the ability to Reduce Turns N, and use thicker Wire Gauge AWG.

 

Keep in mind, we are Generating Voltages, and the Magnetic Fields Changing in Time t, is what makes this occur, so you need to stay around the 200 Turn mark.

My Friend, you are doing a really good job! Keep it up and don't give up, ever!

Best Wishes,

   Chris

Chris posted this 26 September 2024

Hey Marcel,

My Friend, I am sorry, I missed your post Here.

I have now caught up and have left a comment on the video. This is excellent work and an excellent Build! Very nice My Friend!

I would keep this Build exactly where it is, do not change a thing, and just experiment here. Don't change Coil Turns or anything, leave it all where it is, and just document Diode Polarity Configurations.

You are right, the Propagation Delay in the Core can play a role.

In some posts I talk about the Rise over Run, the Rise Time and the Decay Time on the Mosfet, we can adjust this and this can help in the POC Voltage Generation!!! Tom Bearden told us this:

 

@10:13

if I want to get a little bigger E Fields I make a sharper rise time and a sharper decay time I get an E Field one direction one time and the other and what happens is the space here I can have as many coils wound on this core as I wish.

 

You can see here, by observing the Slope:

 

Or we can focus on a specific Frequency and use a Half Sine Wave to do the same thing, covered in the thread: Utilizing a Single Shot Sinusoidal Pulse, to make this work. This is what Floyd Sweet did, making the VTA operate at 60Hz.

Remember: A Voltage is "Generated" and a Current is Pumped. 

The Voltage is Generated via Faradays Law: E.M.F = -N ΔΦB / Δt which is, again, as Tom Bearden said: "if I want to get a little bigger E Fields I make a sharper rise time and a sharper decay time" because its all about the Change in Magnetic Field.

Best Wishes,

   Chris

FringeIdeas posted this 26 September 2024

Ok, nice, that sounds like the direction I was thinking of going. I was just stumbling on the input coil again.

I need to check my switching a bit first. My highside driver TC4431, when on load, the duty cycle drifts smaller as I go up in frequency. Strange issue, I've never seen this before, but I'll figure this out and get back to machine.

As always, thanks for the information and direction!

Marcel

FringeIdeas posted this 03 October 2024

Ok, a little investigation into polarities.

I made a video and here are some points I cover.

I have mentioned before a few times that I feel I have something backwards, because it seems to me that my input coil during the rise time is interacting with POC2 and not POC1. And that with the way I have it configured it's the collapsing field interacting with POC1, then POC1 engaging and fighting with POC2. So in the video I just try to explain why I'm thinking this.

More importantly I wanted to show that depending on the direction of how the field from the input coil engages with the POC coil, a different input and output can be seen. The same idea as in the some coils buck and some coils don't experiment. https://www.aboveunity.com/thread/some-coils-buck-and-some-coils-dont/

So in the video I show one configuration where the induced voltage is positive on the outside layer of the POC coil. The output was about 1.15 W. I then switched the direction of the input coil, and the wires across the diodes on both POC coils. So essentially the same exact setup. The only difference being the induced voltage appears now at the inside layer. The output went up to around 1.25 W. Not a lot, but enough to show what I mean.

I did also forget to show in the video that the input drops in the better configuration. So we see better interaction between the coils, depending on how they are configured to function.

I think next I'll be playing with the rise time, trying to tune a bit.

Ok video, and I need to run. Thanks!

Marcel

Chris posted this 03 October 2024

Hey Marcel,

Again, a fantastic Post and Video, Thank You for Sharing!

Here you show the Importance of Polarity and understanding Polarity! Wistiti was the first to show the importance:

 

Here, we can see, more Output for less Input, when one achieves the correct Polarity, a very important concept!

My Friend, Wistiti, never scaled up his efforts, even after my advice and encouragement, he never really took his successes to the next level, sadly.

I was not going to do this, but I feel it will help others, and maybe useful for yourself also. Analysis is important, understanding some very simple things is important and will give you a big step forward once basic understanding is achieved!

 

Scope Analysis:

Polarity One, shown in the video at approximately: 2 : 07.

This configuration uses the Input Coil Collapse to Generate a Voltage in the POC, and you can see, this is not an ideal Configuration, with Input being: 14.02 Volts and 0.307 Amps, roughly: 4.30414 Watts.

 

Polarity Two, shown in the video at approximately: 4 : 53.

This configuration uses the Input Coil Ramp Up to Generate a Voltage in the POC, and you can see, this is an ideal Configuration, with Input being: 14.02 Volts and 0.130 Amps, roughly: 1.8226 Watts.

 

Rise over Run

The Rise over Run is the POC Slapping Together, this is where the POC Generate each others Voltage, this is the Time Rate of Change of the Magnetic Fields! Faradays Law dictates that this is how an E.M.F is Generated, via the Equation: E.M.F = -N ΔΦB / Δt, where the: ΔΦB / Δt is equivalent to the Time Rate of Change of the Magnetic Fields in this Machine!

 

Waveform that is hard to explain

Why do we get this Waveform? What causes it? Are both POC's doing this? If not, why not? There is a lot to be learned here! 

With no Configuration changes to any of the Coils and Circuits, we must assume a Negative Resistance for a short period, because the Voltage goes negative, you can do the Math and analysis here for yourselves, but I would like to ask, Post your analysis, don't be shy! 

 

Ohms Law gives us a clue here, if Voltage or Current goes Negative at any time, we must account for this: 

 

Playing with a few equations:

  • R = V / I = R = -10 Volts / 0.2 Amps = -50 Ohms so, a Negative Resistance is seen at Point X of -50 Ohms, at a rough guess/approximation.

 

Here, you can see, we have a machine that is behaving outside the realms of Conventional Science, its Simple and its Cheap! You only need to take some time to understand these very simple things, to do the study and work to understand what they decided not to teach you in Class!

 

Why does Conventional Science ignore this?

When your Input is turned off, the Output should also be turned off by default! Science is a real stickler for Symmetry, and yet this shows a more Asymmetrical configuration than anyone has ever seen before! This is big news, yet it is ignored by the masses of so called gurus, with a small g, because it completely confuses these Idiots with a Big I!

When you have a System that has an output, in other words, doing more work, than you put in, then you have achieved an amazing feat! Apparently this is impossible, according to the numb skulls that preach the Dogma Gospel, as about 40 names come to mind immediately!

 

My Brief analysis, shows more, here in one post, than all of the other forums have learned in all the years they have been open for business! Isn't that just amazing!

We are truly Light Years Ahead of the other Forums!

Best Wishes,

   Chris

FringeIdeas posted this 04 October 2024

Chris, thanks!

I always enjoy the analysis, forum and videos, when you present it like this.

I still need to sit and really mull over what is going on here. I would completely agree that the configuration 2, as you point out, is the one we want to focus on. However, my brain is still seeing it backwards in regards to the POC coils coming up with the input rise time, vs, POC coils coming up on the collapsing field. But with my history of senior moments, the possibility of me not seeing something right in front of my face is likely. 

Granted, I do see how in the scope shot in configuration 1 only POC1 (purple trace) is brought up, and POC2 (green trace) dies off. In configuration 2 they both come up during the input on-time. Anyway, porch time and a couple pints are scheduled. I'll handle it.

In regards to your question about what is happening during the rise time (config 2), "Waveform that is hard to explain".

My mind can't help but think about the reduced impedance effect. I'd be inclined to answer, yes both POC coils together cause this, but I'm not completely sure. So I'll put a bit of study into that again as well.

As always, much appreciated!

Marcel

ISLab posted this 11 October 2024

I have mentioned before a few times that I feel I have something backwards, because it seems to me that my input coil during the rise time is interacting with POC2 and not POC1. And that with the way I have it configured it's the collapsing field interacting with POC1, then POC1 engaging and fighting with POC2. So in the video I just try to explain why I'm thinking this.

....

when setting up the diodes so that POC1 reacts to the input and POC2 reacting to POC1, I could not find the sawtooth wave form.....

....

I think I might have had it configured so that the input pushes POC 2, then POC 2 to POC 1.....

Hi Marcel! What a wonderful job of documentation! Reminds me of how I was documenting things earlier, but then stopped because something went off for me in my results.

Reading your note reminded me of exactly the same problem that I've been struggling with, and pondering on your comments gave me the correct insight which I have documented in detail on my thread here.

In brief, your thinking that the input pushes POC 2 is wrong. Obviously it cannot push a coil that is farther away more easily than a coil that is next to it. Actually, it is the negative spike on L1 that is pushing your POC 1 (coil L2) because it is so much higher in voltage that your input pulse.

So wiring L1 in reverse has the benefit of driving your POCs with a much higher voltage for free using the negative spike to "tickle" the POCs rather than "driving" them!

The rest of the discussion is in my thread where I have also suggested how we can modify and tune this spike for best results.

I look forward to more interesting results from you! 😁

ISLab

Chris posted this 11 October 2024

Hey ISLab,

Marcel is completely correct in his Path Forward, although his way of thinking may be a little unsure at the moment?

The Path you're are heading down, is unfortunately a dead end. It does not give the correct Polarity for Maximum Action, and Maximum Input Reduction, you will see this in time.

Of course, proper, in depth Analysis of the data, defines the path forward, and it is very easy to see the best path forward, observing the data I have shown here.

Here you show the Importance of Polarity and understanding Polarity! Wistiti was the first to show the importance:

 

Here, we can see, more Output for less Input, when one achieves the correct Polarity, a very important concept!

My Friend, Wistiti, never scaled up his efforts, even after my advice and encouragement, he never really took his successes to the next level, sadly.

I was not going to do this, but I feel it will help others, and maybe useful for yourself also. Analysis is important, understanding some very simple things is important and will give you a big step forward once basic understanding is achieved!

 

Scope Analysis:

Polarity One, shown in the video at approximately: 2 : 07.

This configuration uses the Input Coil Collapse to Generate a Voltage in the POC, and you can see, this is not an ideal Configuration, with Input being: 14.02 Volts and 0.307 Amps, roughly: 4.30414 Watts.

 

Polarity Two, shown in the video at approximately: 4 : 53.

This configuration uses the Input Coil Ramp Up to Generate a Voltage in the POC, and you can see, this is an ideal Configuration, with Input being: 14.02 Volts and 0.130 Amps, roughly: 1.8226 Watts.

 

Rise over Run

The Rise over Run is the POC Slapping Together, this is where the POC Generate each others Voltage, this is the Time Rate of Change of the Magnetic Fields! Faradays Law dictates that this is how an E.M.F is Generated, via the Equation: E.M.F = -N ΔΦB / Δt, where the: ΔΦB / Δt is equivalent to the Time Rate of Change of the Magnetic Fields in this Machine!

 

Waveform that is hard to explain

Why do we get this Waveform? What causes it? Are both POC's doing this? If not, why not? There is a lot to be learned here! 

With no Configuration changes to any of the Coils and Circuits, we must assume a Negative Resistance for a short period, because the Voltage goes negative, you can do the Math and analysis here for yourselves, but I would like to ask, Post your analysis, don't be shy! 

 

Ohms Law gives us a clue here, if Voltage or Current goes Negative at any time, we must account for this: 

 

Playing with a few equations:

  • R = V / I = R = -10 Volts / 0.2 Amps = -50 Ohms so, a Negative Resistance is seen at Point X of -50 Ohms, at a rough guess/approximation.

 

Here, you can see, we have a machine that is behaving outside the realms of Conventional Science, its Simple and its Cheap! You only need to take some time to understand these very simple things, to do the study and work to understand what they decided not to teach you in Class!

 

Why does Conventional Science ignore this?

When your Input is turned off, the Output should also be turned off by default! Science is a real stickler for Symmetry, and yet this shows a more Asymmetrical configuration than anyone has ever seen before! This is big news, yet it is ignored by the masses of so called gurus, with a small g, because it completely confuses these Idiots with a Big I!

When you have a System that has an output, in other words, doing more work, than you put in, then you have achieved an amazing feat! Apparently this is impossible, according to the numb skulls that preach the Dogma Gospel, as about 40 names come to mind immediately!

 

My Brief analysis, shows more, here in one post, than all of the other forums have learned in all the years they have been open for business! Isn't that just amazing!

We are truly Light Years Ahead of the other Forums!

 

Some time back you had all this working, here, I recommend you go back to what you had and further study that after you have exhausted the current path your heading down.

Electrodynamics is entirely Symmetrical, the simplicity is: Output is equivalent to the Input minus Losses.

We have simply changed this equation!

If you go back to what you had, and study that, in more detail, we will help you, then you will see, the Input M.M.F does not define the Output M.M.F, the Input Rise over Run, Time rate of Change, defines the Voltage Generated in the Output Coils and if you have Magnetic Resonance, then the Input Current will be almost Zero!

I want to ask you, with respect, after you have finished your current path of investigation, return to where you were before and investigate that with more detail and more thoroughly with the Goal of Generating Higher Voltage in both your POC, then the Pumping of Current is more obvious. The POC Voltage is directly proportional to the Output Generated!

Best Wishes,

   Chris

FringeIdeas posted this 12 October 2024

Hey!

Chris, you said my "way of thinking may be a little unsure at the moment?". I think that is an understatement 😂

About ISLab's information.

I'll be completely open, I was thinking along the same lines as ISLab, and I am having trouble seeing it another way. Chris, when I read your scope analysis  above It's backwards from what my brain is seeing. This is what has been haunting me.

However, while reading through it a couple times, I noticed that you are not often referring to POC1 and POC2 individually, but often just say POC, like the two are one thing. My mind flashed to one of your videos, around 7:40, Understanding the Action, Reaction and Counter-Reaction in an Asymmetrical System.

You are referencing something Atti was doing, and you said that maybe it's a case of Atti not thinking about what the coils, currents, are doing as a whole. Related issue, or not, that got me thinking.

With that in mind, when I read your scope analysis, I do see in the bad configuration that the poc coils are not interacting together at the correct time. Only when the input coil collapses do we see both poc coils engage.

In configuration 2, the good one, I have no idea why L2 current drops negative like that.. I don't know yet anyway. With the diode in place that should not even be there.. BUT yes, shown by the traces, both poc coils are coming up at the same time, during the rise time. That cannot be argued.

So if we are looking at them as one system, then I would say your analysis does not look backwards to me anymore 😀

About the strange negative current

Again, I have absolutely no idea why this happens. And the current running in that direction, in my mind, should be impossible because of the diode. Either way, I've ran a couple quick experiments to get the ball rolling on understanding this.

At first my mind thought it was something the POC coils were doing together. So.. I started with a screenshot of the rise time, normal setup.

Input current (yellow), POC1 current (purple), POC2 current(green)

So there in purple we see POC1 having that strange negative kick.

In the next picture here, to see if it had anything to do with POC2, I completely removed POC2 from the core. So this is only with the input coil on top of POC1, nothing else on the core.

Input current (yellow), POC1 current (purple)

The negative drop is still there and almost identical. So, no, I'm now going with the idea that this negative kick is not part of the interaction between POC coils.

Then I took it a step further. I would a separate 20 turn input coil to the side of POC1, instead of using the one wound on top of POC1.

Input current (yellow), POC1 current (purple)

Still some oscillations, but the negative drop and steady climb, is gone.

So. Still.. no idea what is going on here 😂 But, this is interesting. It appears to be input coil related. Bloch wall collisions?

I need to run, not much time to give to the bench this weekend.

And ISLab, thank you for sharing your information. Right or wrong or whatever, it's very valuable to see progression of others. I've been tripping up on this issue for a while.

Thanks!

Marcel

Chris posted this 12 October 2024

Hey Marcel,

If one studies the Electric Generator, the approach Phase, to TDC, Top Dead Center, the Right Hand Rule applies the same as POC, where each Right Hand Opposes each other. In other words, we have a Generator, using a single Phase, DC Output.

There are two Phases to POC, Rise to Peak Voltage, and Decay, from Peak Voltage to Zero Voltage, shown here.

 

The Green Phase, above, is the Voltage Generation Phase. Voltage is Generated in your POC, because of Faradays Law. That's why you must always have POC Loaded! More Voltage Generated, the more Current is Pumped on the Output.

The Decay Phase is the Pump:

 

The study of this is important, I have tried to encourage this study, for a long time, but no one seems to study this important criteria.

ISLab's work has always been important, but I have to be honest when I see something wrong, or I would not be doing my job. I respect ISLab and love to see his progress, and the same goes for all here.

It all becomes much more simple to understand when one understands the Electric Generator and how it works.

Best Wishes,

   Chris

Adam posted this 12 October 2024

Hello,

For some of the people that are struggling with the bucking you could try this. I have never had a problem getting this to buck its very easy every time. About 6000 hertz at 6 to 10 % Duty cycle. I show the core and all wire sizes and number of turns. Use the caps 1000uf 50 volts across both the bulbs it helps make the perfect sawtooth wave.

 

Once you get things bucking then it’s much easier to understand what’s going on and can change things around from there to experiment.

 

I hope this helps.

 

Adam.

FringeIdeas posted this 19 October 2024

Hello!

As suggested in Chris's last post, I think I'll be spending some time studying basic generator action. I still have a rotor with magnets from the old Bedini days, so I'll use that and just mess around for a while.

Before that though, in my last post in this thread I had started with the idea of trying to identify this negative dip on the POC coil. "About the strange negative current".

Chris's comments/questions were:

Why do we get this Waveform? What causes it? Are both POC's doing this? If not, why not? There is a lot to be learned here!

With no Configuration changes to any of the Coils and Circuits, we must assume a Negative Resistance for a short period, because the Voltage goes negative, you can do the Math and analysis here for yourselves, but I would like to ask, Post your analysis, don't be shy!

There were several ideas that came to mind. Chris's mention of the negative voltage/negative resistance, made me think possibly the POC coils were pushing back on the input coil for a quick moment. The reduced impedance effect also came to mind. Input coil placement. Bloch wall. Some ideas popped out of the memory because of things I heard in this video. This is a must watch video btw if anyone has not watched this. "The Free Energy Future - Here NOW"

Anyway, I wanted to start with simply the input coil position, maybe that would give some clues. Maybe not. Maybe I'm way off track ere. But here is the experiment(s).

All configurations have the POC coils set up in the standard way (opposing each other), with diodes standard, a load on POC1 with POC2 shorted. An input coil of 20 turns, being pulsed in the standard polarity, with the same 10V pulse, 3KHz, 4% duty cycle.

 

Configuration 1: 

Input current (yellow), POC1 current (purple), POC2 current(green)

Input coil wound standard over POC1. Note the negative dip, and the input current seem to interact together.

 

Configuration 2: 

Input current (yellow), POC1 current (purple), POC2 current(green)

Input coil in the same position but with POC2 removed from the core. This was to identify if the POC1 negative dip was caused by interactions with POC2. It seemed to make no difference with POC2 removed.

 

Configuration 3: 

Input current (yellow), POC1 current (purple), POC2 current(green)

Input coil moved to the outside of POC1, with POC2 placed back on the core. This, and the next configuration, kind of came from the idea of maybe there was something going on with the bloch wall of the input coil being in the same place as the bloch wall of POC1. With this input coil placement we do see the negative dip disappear.

 

Configuration 4: 

Input current (yellow), POC1 current (purple), POC2 current(green)

Here I continued the input coil to the other side of POC1 as well. So input coil on both sides with magnetic vectors pointing the same way. Like two magnets, NSNS. In theory, and I'm not up to par on my bloch wall studies, but this should have a bloch wall developed in the center of the POC coil, just as if the input coil was right on top of the POC. Yet, still no negative dip on this one.

 

Configuration 5: 

Input current (yellow), POC1 current (purple), POC2 current(green)

This has the input coil wrapped around the whole core, directly over POC1 and POC2. Just for observation, I was curious. And curiously enough, the negative swing comes up for both POC coils. And both seem to be interacting with the input coil in the same manner.

 

Configuration 6: 

Input current (yellow), POC1 current (purple), POC2 current(green)

I moved the input coil off to the side, again just for observation of anything interesting. The negative swing disappeared for both POC1 and POC2.

 

Trigger scope shot: 

Input current (yellow), POC1 current (purple), POC2 current(green)

This was just again for fun, observation. I wanted to trigger a scope shot on the first pulse going into the system when it's turned on, just to see if there needed to be a pre-established condition on the POC coils before this negative swing takes place. And it's a bit hard to make out here because I wanted to capture a few cycles, but it seems the negative dip is there on the first pulse, although maybe not as pronounced.

 

Thoughts:

So, with these configurations it seems that the negative swing is occurring between the input coil, and any coil that is skin to skin with the input coil. Parallel wire type interactions.

I'll leave it at that though, because I really don't have any deep thoughts on this at the moment. I'm not even sure if this is behavior that we want in the machine or not. Going to take some porch time with it.

Again, I hope this was not a waste of time. If it's in the correct direction then awesome. If not, then I know one more direction I should not go. 😀

Thanks!

Marcel

Chris posted this 19 October 2024

Hey Marcel,

Excellent work my friend! This is why you are so far ahead! Because you do the work and the study!

Any experiment to learn more about something is always a benefit! So what's a few minutes on the bench? For people like us, its easy and fun, for so many others its just too hard, sadly!

The Negative swing can often be seen in an Electric Generator, for example:

Ref: https://expeyes.in/experiments/school-level/em-induction.html

 

This is a tell tail signature of Electromagnetic Induction, a very easy way to see if the Coils are in fact: "Generating" Electrical Energy!

This swing is related to the Induction Cycle, and the phase that the Coil is Exposed to.

The question remains: "Is this what we are observing in our setup?"

Best Wishes,

   Chris

FringeIdeas posted this 20 October 2024

Hey Chris, thanks! It is indeed fun to get on the bench and figure stuff out.

And my initial answer to this..

The question remains: "Is this what we are observing in our setup?"

Would be.. no. I would assume if the negative dip that we are seeing is your example of passing the magnet through the coil, then we would see it on all the configurations I had shown. But of course I have not yet put enough time into this investigation.

I think I might have a bit of free time today for the bench. Let's see. I'll play a little more with this idea. And I'm still trying wrap my head around what is happening in the "induced circuit", as Clemente Figuera puts it, at top dead center. And how it would differ if we did have a POC type output.

Thanks!

Marcel

Chris posted this 20 October 2024

Hey Marcel,

Thanks, all good food for thought!

Would be.. no. I would assume if the negative dip that we are seeing is your example of passing the magnet through the coil, then we would see it on all the configurations I had shown. But of course I have not yet put enough time into this investigation.

 

We need to keep in mind, all voltages we observe on the scope, in our machines, are a function of the Time Rate of Change of the Magnetic Flux in the machine, so, the same analogy does still apply.

Best Wishes,

   Chris

FringeIdeas posted this 05 December 2024

Hey,

So I've now become mentally comfortable with my setup and how my input coil opposes L3, not L2 on which it is wrapped. I was reading one of ISLab's threads and found a post by raivope which was quite interesting. Here

I'll just leave it at that. Thank you raivope for putting thoughts to keyboard.

And for now, I'll detour from this thread for a bit, to work on some Melnichenko experiments.

FringeIdeas's Melnichenko's Effect Replication

The idea is to just look from a different angle, investigate the flyback and more importantly what other effects could be happening. More info on the new thread. And I'll get back to this thread at some point after my detour, as I definitely have unfinished business here on this thread.

Thanks!

Marcel

FringeIdeas posted this 18 February 2025

Chris! Here is a build update.

I was going to say that mine looks better than yours, but my 3mm 3d print started bulging a bit toward the end and the winding got a little out of control.. You got lucky.

So this is just a replication of what Chris had shown here, and later posts, https://www.aboveunity.com/thread/non-inductive-experiment/?order=all#comment-f5bd3052-e3a8-44e2-a463-b1fd00174a5a

I liked the gap and the large cross sectional area, and I have to start learning about what the magnets contribute to these machines, so I decided to at least start putting together this build for future experiments. Here are the specs:

  • 0.8 mm wire, each coil is 250 turns, CW and CCW wound.
  • 3 mm gap in between the coils.
  • 3 mm gap between each magnet and its adjacent coil.
  • CSA is about 54 mm x 105 mm.
  • Coils length is about 14 mm or so.
  • Magnets are 150x102x12 mm (I also have a few 150x102x25 mm magnets).
  • The core material is taken from a microwave oven transformer, hacked to pieces.
  • No input coil yet.

Here are a few pictures.

 

 

 

I still need to epoxy a few things together but it turned out quite nice I would say.

And like I said, this was just a build update. I don't plan on diving into this just yet, as there are a few things I'm still playing with over in the Melnicheko thread, in which I'll probably post some experiments soon. But I will get back to this as soon as I can, as well as the few loose ends that I still have in this thread. The wife took the kids on a short vacation to see family, so for the rest of the week I should be able to get some experiments done. Let's see.

Marcel

Chris posted this 20 February 2025

Hey Marcel,

Thats beautiful! Thanks for sharing!

This is a very valuable experiment! You can experiment with Open Cores, High Reluctance, No Cores, with the same Reluctance, and even use a C Core to close the Gap and reduce the Reluctance.

With Iron Laminate cores, the Frequency will need to be lower, but this is obvious!

I will share more with you soon!

Best Wishes,

   Chris

We're Light Years Ahead!
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
Members Online:

No one online at the moment

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:

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