Hello All
in this thread we try to give answers to the aspects of physics which can not or only partially explained with conventional EM, and textbook physics.
If you find this information useful please consider a donation , which will be used for supplies and equipment for more interesting research. You can do it HERE:
your support is really appreciated.
Regards Vidura.
This document is a continuation of the investigation of the longitudinal magnetic field component.
And here in this work, which I found of special interest, Sergey give an analysis of the principal inconsistencies of textbook physics, and proposes a different model to explain the phenomena of wave propagation and ether environment.
This is a revised translation of the document about Registration of Radiant energy, for easier lecture. I believe that it is related to the effects we are looking for in many of the threads. Pay attention to the sawtooth waveform when the Radiant effect is present, Due to the size of the file it is divided in tree attachments. here the link for the original video from Sergei Deyna:
.jpg?width=20&crop=0,0,20,20 "fer123")
This is the newest of this serie, the video in Russian and a translated document attached.
Regards Vidura
Radiant Tesla test by Roman Karnouhov. Pay attention to the SAWTOOTH waveform when the Radiant effect is present !!
video:
https://drive.google.com/file/d/108bvbT9pkeDzDN1WEDYfdjHyvjCYV5YT/view
Hello all,
Firstly i wanted to remark that this thread is basically indented to share information , with the goal to get a better understanding of physical phenomena's and specially electromagnetic interactions. There is no intention to lead experimenters to any particular method or device. For this are other threads specifically orientated as guidelines.
Find attached a document about Selfinduction and backEMF en context with the ether environment. Chronologically this doc is previous to the one posted in the last post.
regards Vidura
Hello All!
As Chris has stated several times : we have to change our way of thinking. We have been told certain "facts" so many times that it becomes difficult to see the things from a different point of view. Might it be that we confuse sometimes what is the cause of a certain phenomenon, and what the effect? Here a paper that explains such a simple device as a capacitor in a different manner.
Vidura
Here a new released work from Sergei Deyna, a addition to the capacitor topic. I wanted to say that i found this investigations of Sergey by coincidence(?), as he dont publish in other languish but Russian. And is there where coherent explanations for many fisical phenomenon, which I could not understand before, I found this material worthwhile for reading and sharing. It would be good know some opinion of other readers as well.
Regards VIDURA.
Hey Vidura,
I have not pondered too much on the subject of a Capacitor, but I have wondered if the Capacitor Plates are truly of different Charges? I mean we say the Plates are Charged either Positive or Negative. But do different Charges exist and if so, how many different types?
We have some idea from this table that the Electron has a few flavours:
So, if it is Electrons that are the Charge on the Plates, then its Anti particle, that is considered Positive, that is if there are both Positive and Negative Charge distributed across the Plates of the capacitor, which Electrons are considered to be which?
Electron Positron Pairs annihilate according to Science, so is this a possibility?
Chris
Chris, agreed, it is consistent that in a world of dualism two polarities of charges exists. Also Floyd Sweet and Don Smith talked about two polarities in there theories, so does Sergei in this papers, assuming a ether environment of dipoles ,which separates and combines again, at a much smaller scale.
Vidura
Welcome dewetw! We squash Trolls here, so you're safe with us!
@Vidura, I agree. Isn't it crazy, we can fire particles around several Km's of circular EM Containment apparatus, but we cant explain Current in a Wire, or Charge on Capacitor Plates, at least with sufficient accuracy.
Some debate the legitimacy of Displacement Current, really, all moving Charge has a magnetic Field, so there is evidence to support Displacement Current, but also that does not.
Lets hope the material youre sharing sheds some light on these things.
Chris
Hello All!
I will share a experiment that i have performed during the testing of a new PWM signal tool. It is related to the topic of BEMF. It is stated in the textbooks that the BEMF is caused by a collapsing magnetic field, and the energy of this field transformes into a high voltage spike. So I was asking myself what would happen when I use a noninductive coil, is the BEMF present?
The setup is a simple hi side IGBT switch with a floating gate drive, in order to not only cancel the perpendicular "normal" magnetic field , but also the A-vector field(scalar magnetic) field I decided to use a noninductive pancake coil as inductor(Hooper coil).
The first test shows the scope shot of the BEMF with the bifilar coil connected as tesla pancake coil, the channel2 trace shows the driving pulse, channel 1 is 50 V / div :
The next test shows the same setup with same parameters , but the coil in non inductive configuration:
The voltage of the BEMF spike increased from 175V to over 400V and the puls duration decreased from 1us to 200ns !
Then I connected a cylindric bifilar coil with several hundreds of turns of a 0.7mm magnetic wire:
When connected as tesla bifilar coil I did not get a BEMF, due to the hi impedance and dc resistence of the coil, but in noninductive configuration there where still nearly 100V , although the pulse duration not that short as in the previous setup.
If it is not the collapsing magnetic field that causes the BEMF, what is it then?
Vidura
Vidura
My answer would be discharge of the dielectric field in an attempt to maintain the magnetic field. In the non inductive configuration the magnetic field is still there but infolded due to geometry and therefore not detectable.
Aetherholic - One truth, One field
Hey Vidura,
This is a fantastic Experiment, it is very worth while doing simple yet intriguing experiments like this!
I found some satisfying answers in Radio Electronics theory, in my experiments, in the same area. The Near Field is an intriguing thing to study!
Take special note; of the Interference Patterns in the Near Field.
Around an Antenna, the Near Field has been measured:
Which is almost exactly the same pattern as the Van Allen Belts:
As above, so below, as within, so without, as the universe, so the soul…
― Hermes Trismegistus
When researching this area, we get results like: "Probing near-field thermal radiation", with images like so:
My humble opinion is, all Coils that carry a Current, have an associated Near Field Radiation pattern, it is possible to create conditions where this Pattern can be made to Pump, to create a Forcing Function, where Near Field Radiation is sucked into the Coil in great quantities. This brings us back to Tom Bearden:
Yes, he was right, the great man was right.
So, Once the Field has been created, then Non-Inductive Coils, Inductive Coils, any sort of Coils, must react to the Field when it changes in Time! Its always going to occur! If one Coil has a Voltage, or a Voltage Difference in relation to the other Coil in the Non-Inductive case, then the Fields must Pump! This is the Lorentz Force, and Faraday all at the same time.
Non-Inductive Coils are HIGHLY Inductive at the RIGHT Frequency!
Isn't that ironic The Kiddies over at TrollHangout.com will argue with what I am saying all day long, till the cows come home! It is right and True! Saludos Chris
. Now WHERE did all that Amplitude come from? Parasitic, I think not!
Chris
Correct. There are different ways of explaining this but the result is the same, stimulation and hence increase of the Faraday static field outside the coil to discharge into it That's why Meyl's unification of faraday and maxwell is important. Maxwell only deals with a dynamic field. Unifying with Faraday gives both static and dynamic fields.
Aetherholic - One truth, One field
Aetherholic,
You have an excellent understanding of the subject matter, clearly very advanced in the field!
I guess, some unification could be seen as the full interaction of Opposing Travelling Waves, Standing Waves result, but not a new singular wave, instead we now have four waves, and of course this depends where one observes from.
Each wave is a result of the Equal and Opposite Law.
For each wave in, we have its equal and opposite out, from each side. but in the middle, the waves stand.
At-least, this is my opinion. I believe, if I understand your post correctly, this agrees with your meaning also?
An excellent series of posts, thank you gentlemen!
Chris
Chris
Yes, resonant wave interactions.
Aetherholic - One truth, One field
My Friends,
Some more info for those interested:
EM waves in vacuum are not force field waves as CEM prescribes; instead, they are oscillations of potentials and potential gradients. Potentials have a bidirectional EM wave-pair structure, where the bidirectional wave pairs are phaselocked in a harmonic series. In each wave pair, photons and antiphotons are continually coupling (into spin-2 gravitons) and decoupling. This is where gravitation and electromagnetics are unified.
Lets ask the question, what is a: "bidirectional EM wave-pair structure"?
A bidirectional EM wave is two waves, one in each direction, one in the Positive Direction, one in the Negative Direction.
We are looking at a Pair of these wave Structures, so we have Four Waves.
So we are right according to Tom Bearden. We have: THE FINAL SECRET OF FREE ENERGY.
Chris
Hey Friends, this is becoming very interesting, four waves, or two waves and there reaction or reflection!
I would like to remark this (momentary) conclusion from Sergei's capacitor investigation:
1) reactive voltage is a wave of longitudinal deformation of the ether medium in the form of compression-discharge, which moves outside the conductor, which, by G. Nikolayev, is called a scalar magnetic field.
2) the reactive current is a wave of a transverse deformation of the ether medium, which propagates outside the conductor and propagates perpendicular to the surface, which is called a vector magnetic field by G. V. Nikolaev.
3) voltage is a real analogue of a reactive voltage, that is, a longitudinal wave of deformation in the form of compression-discharge, but in a conducting medium it takes the form of a spatial separation of real charges for their excess and deficiency.
4) the current is a real analogue of the reactive current, that is, a transverse deformation wave in the form of twisting-stretching, but in a conducting medium it takes the form of a spatial twisting - skin effect and movement of real charges in it;
Could it be that the reflected waves, travelling backwards along the waveguide are originated by the reaction of the "real charges" in the conductive material to the original waves? Lenz' law from another point of view?
Vidura
Hey Vidura,
There is a lot to absorb there!
I agree with Aetherholic, many ways to view the same thing, and end up with the same result. Depending on the interpretation of the above statements, knowing the very movement of Charge constitutes an Electromagnetic Wave, then I also agree with you, there is an element of Duality there, as we have discussed!
Tom Bearden has said about the E. T. Whittaker 1903 and 1904 papers, he has shared this image:
I have attached the document: On A Testable Unification Of Electromagnetics, General Relativity, And Quantum Mechanics.
Chris
Interesting material Chris, And as it is remarked on the header of every page, it is not "updated"- falsified still. Anyway I will try to keep the theory as simple as possible, ideally anyone should be able to understand the essential principle. A short while ago I believed that it is the potential that makes current flow, but a simple experiment disproves this: if I can connect a discharged capacitor to a AC source at the moment of zero potential and have maximum current instantly! The cause must be other then electric potential. What is producing the phase shift of current to one side or the other, depending what device is connected to the AC source? Why there is no phase shift when a resistive load is connected? The understanding of this simple interactions will help a lot I think. I will continue looking for simple experiments . Regards Vidura.
Hey Vidura,
A truly fascinating topic, Reactance!
What causes Phase Shift, or perhaps a better question, what causes Phase Shift to reduce to Zero when increasing a Load on a Transformer?
It took me a long time to gain an understanding of Reactance, Impedance and Resistance when dealing with Coils and Capacitors, but when I did, my world opened right up!
I don't want to fill your thread with content that you do not wish to be on here, but if you have any questions, I can try to answer to the best of my ability.
Voltage stays the same, Current stays the same, the properties in Space and Time are what's changed.
Chris
Thanks. Chris, For the moment I am trying to reflect and digest the information, in my feeling all points towards the magnetic waves and their timing (magnetic resonance). One more thing I will recall: in one his last papers Sergei Deyna stated the propagation velocities for the electric longitudinal and the magnetic transverse waves are different, and both far from the velocity of C assumed by CEM. I have asked him if this statements have been proven by experiments, and why the difference with the great speed measured in long transmission lines. He answered that the published information have been concluded by experimental results, and that the apparently high propagation velocities are related to torsion fields, that it is actually a signal , information which does not depend on velocity limitations. He told me that he is still investigating this field and will publish it when he got more results.
An interesting experiment Christian, I did never try with the Caduceus coil myself.As it is bifiliar it can be connected in inductive or no inductive configuration, I will search some information about it. It is ok if you post it here in this thread, as it could add new information related to this research, and I appreciate participation of other members. You can also post your own thread(s) for your experiments if you want to do so. Regards Vidura.
Thanks. Chris, For the moment I am trying to reflect and digest the information, in my feeling all points towards the magnetic waves and their timing (magnetic resonance).
Hey Vidura,
No problem, completely understand.
One more thing I will recall: in one his last papers Sergei Deyna stated the propagation velocities for the electric longitudinal and the magnetic transverse waves are different, and both far from the velocity of C assumed by CEM. I have asked him if this statements have been proven by experiments, and why the difference with the great speed measured in long transmission lines. He answered that the published information have been concluded by experimental results, and that the apparently high propagation velocities are related to torsion fields, that it is actually a signal , information which does not depend on velocity limitations. He told me that he is still investigating this field and will publish it when he got more results.
The Speed of Light ( c ), 299,792,458 meters per second, is a Constant, according to Science. The speed of Electromagnetic Waves depend entirely the speed of Light, however the speed changes depending on the Medium Electromagnetic Waves travel in.
Where:
V is not always 299,792,458 meters per second, it could be much less for Electromagnetic Waves depending on the medium they travel in.
For example, inside a Coaxial Cable, the speed is around 67% of the speed of light.
I am guessing, if Sergei's experiments have found a discrepancy of this nature, perhaps relooking at the experiment before publishing may be a good idea. Of course I am looking at this with an open mind, but a cautious one also.
I have a friend that has worked with Antenna, an electronics engineer, very knowledgeable guy and he taught me a lot about this stuff.
Chris
Chris
Yes the speed of light is dependent upon the resonant medium it propagates through. So the speed of light is in fact the speed of wave propagation and is also subject to em retardation, that is, light propagation has a finite distance. This is applicable to transverse em wave propagation. Longitudinal propagation is another story.....
Aetherholic - One truth, One field
Hey A,
I agree!
De Broglie Waves, a debate scientists still have not agreed upon .
Ref: Shubham Wagh
Did you read that: "Matter waves travel faster than light" - Now Normally, Enter the debate...
Personally, I have an opinion, and debating with others will not change my opinion as I expect you have much the same stand point, likely most of us do. That's why we all get on so well. But others, well, I have seen 12 - 15 years of the same debate on other forums. Round and Round in the same old Circles.
I am sure a few names of members of other forums come to mind right now .
Anyway, I do not wish to fill this thread with senseless chat, so I will leave it at that.
Chris
The last days we had a horrible weather, it was freezing cold in my workshop, and I caught a cold. So I was not able to advance with the planned testing's, but I took the opportunity to write down some things which I would like to share and discuss here.
Some reflections and thoughts about the creation and the physical universe and the consequences for some aspects of electromagnetic theory :
Modern astronomy came to the conclusion that about 99.9 % of the universe is constituted by a mysterious "dark matter" and according to their mathematic models this matter have a mass, and thus exists, although it is invisible. Of course it is nothing else but the "Aether" well known by ancient scientists who had taken its existence as granted. As well most of the known metaphysical and religious texts tell us that the first step of the creation was the Firmament, which is the same mysterious invisible matter again, which is bearing and sustaining all the other elements , objects and beings of the physical universe. There is a misconception in the apparently linear flowing of time as well, assuming a beginning and an end of time from the perspective of our perception. We should understand time more like a cyclic movement, a kind of wave or vibration. In this context the creation of the physical universe is a continuous process, it happens really in every moment and at all places , in every very atom or particle , they are continuously created from and reabsorbed by the primary element, the Aether.
The very knowledgeable Donald L. Smith has asked once the people of the audience how much electrons they think are moving from a electricity generation utility thru the transmission lines to their house. He gave them the answer: Not a single one! As some might have read Don Smith believed that electrons are made of pairs, combining one with more negative charge with one with less negative charge. The Russian investigator Sergei Deyna and some others presented a model where the electrons and other charged particles are formed by splitting in positive and negative domains the very tiny dipoles, which constitutes the Aether in its neutral state. It might be sometimes difficult to understand this things by using our analytic mind(left side of brain),but we can quite easy grasp the principals with analogies, and images( domain of the right side of brain). So here I will encourage to try to understand by analogies a widely spread misconception in electric and magnetic theories, the displacement of charged particles. Take as a comparison the transmission of sound in air or other mediums. Are the soundwaves carried by the molecules of the air? Yes! Does this movement implicit that air molecules have to move from the sound source to the ear? Definitively No!, although it could occur under certain circumstances like wind in the right direction. The same thing is applicable for waves in water, in this case, inside the medium we have longitudinal waves like sound waves, but in the interface of two mediums, air and water there are the superficial transverse waves. In all cases the water remains in its place or in its own movement patterns, but the waves propagates far away, and not even the strongest Tsunami event will displace water molecules from the tectonic movement to the distant shores. In the very same way we should threat the electric and magnetic currents as WAVES, propagating thru the invisible element of the Aether. As Nikola Tesla stated, if you want to understand the principals of the universe, you should think about in terms of vibrations, oscillations.
So far this is quite straightforward, but from the above mentioned analogies we could derive that wind and water currents also exists, although that the displacements manifested as waves would be more abundant. An intriguing question arises in this context, how would this analogy relate to DC currents? If I remember well in a paper from Tom Bearden(?) he had classified DC current in the same first category, as waves, originated by a dipole, and that the dipole supposedly is destroyed and recovered at a very fast rate, too fast for our currently available measurement equipment to be registered. For the moment I do not completely understand how the phenomenon of DC current could be explained with the theory of waves, If someone has more information and knowledge about , the contribution will be appreciated.
Vidura.
Hey Vidura,
Hope your cold passes soon without getting worse!
I agree with what you're saying!
Chris
Holy crap this is good, finally something on this site i can get excited about other than Figuera. thanks vidura on the downloads am reading the second one posted. thanks all as i to agree that there is a media at which to everything must propagate through and according to Wheatstone it is much faster then what Einstein predicted which was not his prediction only permanently borrowed.
density of Eather pressure modalities dictates speed or propagation there of.
Thank you for the goodies. lots of reading to so.
Marathonman
@MM, Vidura is very wise, for sure!
I see some behaviour, mostly over at Troll Heaven, at the point of outright ridiculous. All they do is criticise and debate worthless piffle, all with zero progress.
The shallowness of ones existing so-called complete understanding is a disability some are doomed to live with for the entirety of their lifetime.
I used to like this guys videos, until I saw this video. Now I think this this guy might be paid to shoot down others. Don't you think the boy deserves a little respect? He receives only Criticism!
When we Human's properly understand very simple EM Theory, and importantly how to properly apply Electrodynamics, machines that fit in your pocket that can power a small city will be possible.
I have to say it, the Clemente Figuera Machine, now some 100+ years old, will be merely a very small stepping stone for a much greater and boarder future. I always liked Figurea's quote:
PRINCIPLE OF THE INVENTION - Watching closely what happens in a Dynamo in motion...
Ref: Figurea
The Clemente Figuera machine shows a concept, the concept can be reached many ways, and with a much simpler approach.
It shames me how dumb we have been kept! How people are happy to think they know everything, and to shoot other great minds down, even when faced with evidence to the contrary.
The Magnetic Field, which is the result of Mass, carrying a Charge, at Velocity, is a concept that most do not understand properly!
Lets be honest, what is a Magnetic Field, what is Energy, what induced Energy, what function is required for Energy Flow. How does the Magnetic Field affect the localised Space-time? What is the localised Space-time?
The human mind is capable of much greater things, yet most of us are happy to be limited to the most simple mundane approaches to reality. At Troll Heaven, they are currently debating such approaches, they claim they have some of the smartest minds, yet I see nothing but a bunch of Dumb on a continual basis!
Any logical mind with a clear understanding of Lenz's Law and is open to new possibilities, will very quickly see huge potential for Energy "Generation" in ways we have not realised as a Human Race.
Chris
Thank you all for the positive comments on this thread, for those who like to study and understand natures secrets hopefully there is something valuable to grasp in this material. Find here attached another research from Sergey Deina, and the video of the experiments. Just skip the parts where he is reading the docs in russian, unless you speak russian of course
.
Hi all, I would like to share another work from Sergei Deyna, about shockwaves and magnetostriction, IMO really helpful to gain better understanding on this phenomenon and specially on the standing magnetic waves, in the attached translation there is a lot of good theoretical work besides the described experiments. Here is the video:
As I'm trying to upload the file from my phone it might take a little bit time to accomplish the task. Regards Vidura.
As i was thinking many times about magnetic waves , standing waves lately I will take the opportunity to share some ideas about this topic. To a certain degree we could use the analogy of surface waves in a liquid medium in order to try to visualize the properties of standing waves, although it is not a very accurate comparison. Those of you who took the time to read the latest document from I had posted about magnetic shockwaves and magnetostriction will understand that surface waves are only partially reflect the properties of magnetic waves, as the latter occurs in a contiguous medium, the aether environment and in virtually all practical cases they do not exist as purely transverse or purely longitudinal waves, but are composed by both types of waves to variable degrees. Maybe a better analogy would be the propagation of acoustic waves, the effects could be easily reproduced doing simple experiments.
In first place an observation regarding the term "standing wave". As the very existence of a wave implicit propagation- movement, no wave can actually stand still, it can only apparently remain in the same place. In order to produce the effect of a standing wave two waves in opposite direction are needed, this can be achieved by two separate sources of waves with the same frequency and opposite direction, or by a single source fed in a waveguide, and be reflected back at some distance by appropriated means. As an example we could use two speakers facing each other at a certain distance and feed an audio signal into both. Now we have only to sweep the frequency , or adjust the distance until we get a standing wave, we will find that on certain places the noise level gets very high- the antinodes - and at a little distance it cancels out virtually- on the nodes. The effect is produced because the two opposite waves always add there amplitude(positive or negative) at the same place, and subtract it at the nodes(neutral areas, where any value of one wave is cancelled by an equal value of opposite sign of the other wave ).
Note that the antinodes are not constant , but changing the sign at the rate of the applied frequency, otherwise as in our speaker example there would be no audible sound, only an increased pressure zone.
What does this imply when we are dealing with magnetic waves? As in our analogy with the speakers , the standing wave phenomenon will only occur if we have two magnetic waves of equal frequency and opposite direction- opposing fields! Also the distance and the wavelength have to match. This can be calculated using the frequency and propagation speed in a given material, similar to the soundwaves in different mediums. This part I will leave for others more skilled in math's if you don’t mind. In the before mentioned document about magnetic shockwaves there can be found a table with propagation speed of magnetic waves in some different core materials(it is still in Russian, as the translator can't handle the image files.)
Now a very important fact regarding the nodes and antinodes in a standing magnetic wave: very similar as in our acoustic example the antinodes are not constant, they are changing in sign at the applied frequency. This means that if we would tap the standing wave at the antinode area, we would load the source, damping the wave by extracting power this way. But the difference to the acoustic example lies in the nodes, where the opposed sign of the two signals cancels the magnetic field! And as stated by Floyd Sweet a doubled E-field arises( equivalent to the scalar magnetic field postulated by the Russian researchers) . And this is exactly where we can find a chance to tap the energy without damping the original magnetic wave, as it is perpendicular to its origin.
regards Vidura.
Hey Vidura,
A fantastic Post Vidura!
The 3D image I posted, took ages to build, explains some of this:
The Magnetic Field Components, two in total moving in opposite directions, cancel, they are still there, but the equal and opposite amplitudes cancel.
We still have 2x Current components, pointed out as you say by Floyd Sweet and others.
We must realise, the Magnetic Field Components are entirely dependant on Current, current through turns is the Magnetic Field.
There is a relative exponent there, for example with no load, no current can flow, so no effects are seen.
Chris
In continuation of this topic I wanted to add some more details. Please be aware that the analogy with acoustic waves is not perfect, as in the case of electromagnetism we deal with two different aspects of waves, longitudinal and transvers, or more accurate both together with variable predomination. So this way of explanation is intended only for easier understanding and visualization of the principals, and might differ in some aspects from actual EM waves. One aspect is how the reflection of the wave can be achieved, in the case that only a single source is used. We know well that in the case of soundwaves they can be reflected by a limit of two mediums of different state of aggregate or density, for example a wall or a water surface when the acoustic wave is travelling thru the air. This have its analogy in magnetic waves , which are reflected at the end of an open ferromagnetic core for example. But in EM waves we have another mean to reflect the magnetic wave, by using Lenz's law : we can employ a shorted or heavy loaded coil, ideally of a few turns of thick wire, when the magnetic wave reaches this coil, a current will start to flow, which give arise to an opposing magnetic wave to the original. This method gives us the advantage that we can use it as well in closed path cores or even in coreless coils.
Another detail I wanted to remark is that our exciter coils are bidirectional, they transform current into magnetic waves in the medium and vice versa. In our acoustic speaker experiment this means that the speakers can convert a current into a sound wave , but as well can operate backwards, inducing a current when it is hit by a soundwave. How we can use this to our advantage? It would be straightforward that with a correct timing and tuning of the wavelength the source can be assisted by the reflected or opposing wave, and would reduce considerably the energy required to sustain the standing wave. This is actually a resonance effect, which will push or pull on the exciter coil exactly at the right moment to assist it. As you can imagine, at elevated frequency and short wavelength the adjustment needed might be quite narrow, and also the physical length of the waveguide or core have to match for good results.
Please if you find that I'm mistaken in any aspect, your comments or corrections are always welcome.
Hopefully this helps some,
Vidura.
Standing waves and their relationship to "cold or radiant energy"
First I will share a small experience that I had when I was testing the Driver power supply of the modular switching tool:
in the first version the primary coil for the output transformers was a single wire which was wound with 9 turns around each toroid, that means four primaries in series. When I made measurements on the four outputs, unloaded and loaded , to my surprise I had a big difference of voltage and power. As we would assume from conventional Physics the same current, the same secondary's and cores and the primary being a single wire for the 4 transformers there should be the same output?? If we think in terms of electrons flowing thru a conductor, it should be equal, but the bench prooves this wrong.
But if we start thinking or trying to visualize in terms of waves it becomes understandable.
Here you can see a replication of a simple experiment(simple but requires accurate circuit tuning):
It is a experiment suggested by Hector D Perez Torres (ARK Research) in his booklet "How to build a ZPE research lab at your home". You can find it attached below and also the simplified circuit (tuning coil and capacitor not shown) .
Note that the LEDs are lit without voltage( or better electric waves canceled and magnetic wave doubled), it is the cold end of the oscilatory circuit , the Ampere or current node at the place of the load exactly.
Regards Vidura.
In the following video you can observe the presence of an E-field in an inductor, when a pulse is applied.
In the testing the instruments didn't show a current draw of the circuit.
Vidura.
This video is a correction and continuation of the last experiment.
Vidura.
Nice Video Vidura!
My friend, the Scope Probe at 90 degrees does not show the same waveform's on the Scope, I wonder if you are up for more investigation of this, showing the difference between the E-Field and the B-Field.
I am of the opinion that many may not realise the difference?
These experiments are important for Understanding! Propagation of the Wave in the Core and the Interactions this Wave may have with another Equal and Opposite Wave.
Great work Vidura!
Chris
Hi,
Long ago, I got info from inventor that it is always better to pulse systems in double rail mode - i.e. switching coil/motor from + and - in sync. Then you need to have 2x diodes (one going and one coming) to the capacitor, where you collect the CEMF and so on. About radiant energy principle of work it was important to switch this way and 3-5x better than single rail (pulsing negative side as Bedini, Adams, etc).
(some even claimed better effects when pulsing from + rail only, don't know if that is true)
For this half-bridge module you need an half bridge mosfet driver that has the same voltage isolated power supply.
Imagine - you pulse the motor - the central dipole from battery - to coil center and then to capacitor center. All in line. RE = RF.
In pulsed system you may need to design things better for dipole symmetry - in AC systems you can play with V & A nodes to have interesting things manifesting there (much tuning as said).
If the energy is cold type then you cannot loop it directly back to source (that is why H bridge is not good). However - there is an exception to the rule - if you are pulsing many motor phases - and you have cold CEMF coming from one coil you need to pulse the second coil to direct cold CEMF to other coil so it does not go back to the source. Or when cold energy is bouncing thru the L or LC once - it gets transformed and then it is capable to match the source again.
If you are working with high frequency or fast spiking systems, then this info applies. When your device is working on other principles (saturation asymmetry, stochastic or ferroresonance) - you can you H-Bridge, single rail etc.
And true is - we do not know exactly what electricity (magnetism) is. 
Hey raivope
just out of curiosity and because it is so easy with the modular switching tool i did the test you proposed:
switches and diodes on hi and lo side:
Hi side switch and diode:
And finally low side switch and diode:
really I would encourage all members which have the possibility to join, get some basic equipment if you do not already have , and do experiments, test all your ideas, share, discuss the effects. This is the best way to gain knowledge and discover more aspects of EM and physics.
Vidura
Hey Vidurra Raivope!
This arrangement is already in use. At the beginning of the video you can see it on the circuit board drawn on the drive box.
Hey Atti, this is an excellent experiment, I have managed to translate the labels with google.
@ All : Note that the analougos PWM is really a great advantage for this kind of experiments, as you can adjust the pulsduration and frequency individually. (Unless you have a high end SG which can do the same).
Thanks for sharing
Vidura
Let's learn and understand more! In the following video you can see some experiments related to the magnetic wave propagation and the E-field in a core:
Vidura
Hello Friends,
Here are some things to share. The experiment is based in a circuit proposed by YoElMiCrO for investigation of an effect which is present in many AU machines, It is a circuit which make an inductor work in the negative slope of hysteresis.
This is the circuit used in the experiment , with some minor modifications of Yo's basic circuit:
The basic operation: the 1.5uF capacitor in the off state of the Mosfet is charged to Vdc , in the moment of opening the switch in the secondary( with greater turns ratio) a current will be induced in the oposite sign of the capacitors charge. This will cause an instantaneous rush in current, equivalent ,including mayor to a short circuited coil, and lead to a immediate saturation of the core. Then a reversal of current in the secondary will reflect to the primary and transfer the energy stored in the magnetic material back to the source, in this part of the cycle the permeability falls back to Br , using the negative slope of permeability. Yo will explain and back up with calculations in a dedicated thread. Now in practice there are occurring some unexpected phenomena, on which I will post a hipotesis later.
This is the used inductor extracted from a common mode choke.
and here is the video:
regards Vidura
Hello Friends,
as the observed phenomenon is really strange, and will hardly be accepted by most trained EE, there arouse some doubt about if the mosfet was switching off properly. To bring more clearness on this I did a couple of tests more. But first I will put here some more data, if someone would like to join this investigation. There are some requirements of the hardware setup, In first place the switch has to be very fast. Sergei talked about rise -fall times of <20ns, the steeper the pulse , the stronger is the effect. I use a SIC from CREE which performs very well. The other requirement is the core. It should ideally be a material with almost quadratic hysteresis. NO AIRGAP. first I used a flyback core , it worked , then I changed suggested by Yo to a common mode choke core, which is much better.
The effect is present in a certain frequency range, it is not as defined as in LCR resonance, but very sensible to the puls duration.
It has been stated that the current trace only react on CTR scopes on this effect, but I'm not sure about that , Yoelmicro will do the test comparing with both scope types soon.
If you replicate I strongly recommend to install the varistor on the Mosfet, in three occasions it was exhaling smoke with a frying noise, without any reasonable cause, as the BEMF always has been recycled to the positive rail. But the presence of the MOV likely saved the live of my CREE.
Here is the video:
in the next post my hipotesis.
Vidura
We have seen in the last experiment some effects which likely cannot be explained by conventional EM theory or textbook physics. We saw, that in the experiment in the off time of the mosfet a huge current was flowing thru the switch. I will for clarity repeat the parameters of the measurement setup: a 0.1 ohm shunt of SS rod was used between the mosfet source and ground, the connected scope channel was set at 0.5v / div. in the first video I connected a blocking diode between the source and the shunt to discard backwards current thru the body diode. In the second video the diode was moved to the drain, because Yo suspected that the switch was not turning off properly, due to the interaction of the diode. In the second part the voltage on the source is displayed on the scope, where the change of potential in the moment of switching can be observed correctly.
Those who have read the posts and attached documents from the beginning of this thread, might already have an idea what is going on. In the work from Sergei Deyna titled "Registration of radiant energy" he has observed a similar behaviour of the oscilloscope trace in a different setup, but with the same principal of a negative inductor. He used a toroidal inductor with a 1 turn secondary, which was shorted. This produces the same thing , a very fast saturation of the core, followed by a relaxation cycle where the magnetic hysteresis return to Br. Note also the similitude with the asymmetrical regauging machines, where one of the POC is shorted in a certain part of the cycle. The other publication refers to the topic of charge splitting, and this can shed some light on the strange effects we saw. In this series of experiments was shown how the charges in different noninductive coils where separated, and different loads like lightbulbs , LEDs and even a dc motor could be powered connected to this coils. The effect is supposed to separate the charges, of negative and positive sign! The effect occurs only when the current (magnetic field) have a very steep and fast pulse, and this is achieved when the secondary coil in the inductor is shorted, or an equivalent effect is produced with a capacitor. Charges of negative and positive signs, most semiconductors are designed to operate upon the electron currents, and virtually nothing is known how they respond to positive charge carriers. But in my guess , and regards to the observed effect a n channel MOSFET is not capable to block a current of positive charges. This would also explain why DSO do not register this effect. A lot of investigation is needed to gain more understanding of this phenomenon and to learn how to use this other kind of current.
Vidura
Hi Vidura,
Of course the term Short used in this situation is not really Correct, not the best term. For two reasons:
I truly don't like the term: Radiant Energy, all energy radiates, there is no specific separation or isolation, to assume so is not correct. Also, a shorted turn by its self is not enough to make this work, I can assure you of this.
Chris
Hey Chris,
Please note that this thread is indented for research , to gain a better understanding and looking for explanations of observed effects. It is not a guideline to build working AU machines, but should lead to the required knowledge , so that anyone who is interested can put it in practice by his own criteria. The only reason I referred to the asymmetrical regauging techniques Is the possibility to reach huge values of Dphi/DT with the method of saturating a core , by shorting a coilsection or similar other ways.
Regarding the "radiant energy" I agree with you , there is a lot of misleading information using this term, and Sergei himself has changed to use other more specific descriptions. But as the video with the experiments that I wanted to refer had this title I used it.
The latest Posts are specifically focused on the observed effects, and for the moment there is no claim that any of this setups would produce excess energy. The Goal is to understand what is going on, and where the conventional science do not have answers, I might risk to present a hypothesis or opinion how it could possibly be explained.
Regards Vidura
Hey Vidura,
You are very wise and your experiments are first class!
For every Action there is an equal and opposite Reaction and for every Reaction there is an equal and opposite Counter-Reaction:
If Science only accepted it has thrown away half of all Magnetics since at least Heavyside. We ignore the Reaction of the Secondary, because in a Symmetrical system, the Secondary Reaction must be Countered by the Primary Action, a very inefficient way to deal with Force or MMF.
Ref: P.23 Resonant_Energy_Systems_by_Don_Smith
Vidura, I believe I have more than explained in the Threads I have posted, the exact, very detailed explanations of what we see.
Chris
Hey Friends
i always have been puzzling how the input waveform- voltage in Graham Gundersons MIT was generated. lately I found in an experiment from Sergei Deyna the answer. here is the replication, with some additional testing:
here the schematic of the setup:
and a scopeshot :
Regards VIDURA.
Here I will share another experience, related to the topic of the resonant parallel LC circuit. It was a bit obvious that a similar effect could be achieved by manipulating the capacitor branch of the circuit.
Regards Vidura
bobinas bucking, efecto casimir al reves, hacia arriba, panqueque de tesla, la cosa es tener dielectrico y magnetico, cargando y descargandose, con giros iguales y opuestos al mismo tiempo, circuito resonante LC, la onda escalar de tesla, el orgon de reich, si somos el reflejo, entonces esa energia es la proyeccion, mosfet canal N y armonicos puros parece que es lo mejor, el universo resuena en armonicos puros, hay que ver cual melodia va mejor con nuestro dispositivo resonante, en los exp de chris y los demas tambien sucede esto, y se ve ese efecto en todos los dispositivos que abren el muro de bloch, la onda es 180° es auto cancelante, es como acostarse a dormir y tener un viaje astral, ese tipo de dimension se usa, atemporal, infinita, ahi la energia es infinita, aca el espacio, alla el tiempo, por eso la vibracion y todo lo demas, resistencia negativa, pulso radiante, lo magnetico es radiante y lo radiante es magnetico, todo es igual, abrazo
Hey Chocolate Blanco,
¡estás en lo correcto! Estoy de acuerdo con tus declaraciones!
Chris
chris, leyendo una revista de radio del 1900 sale lo que vos decis de la energia, que va del negativo al positivo, ahora se entiende ja, todo lo que hablamos sobre la energia ahora, se lee en las revistas de radio amateur, hablan de retro alimentacion negativa, bobinas auto oscilantes, de todo, abrazo
Mira esa patente de Henry T. Moray, bajando una señal y trabajando con bobinas bucking
y miren eso de Russell como la onda va subiendo y el pulso sube su frecuencia y se hace mas corto, mas rápido, menos espacio, mas tiempo, pienso en las pirámides
Mira esas bobinas de Russell, en conos, como las de Tesla, como en la patente de tesla, que habla que tiene que ser igual y contraria al mismo tiempo, bucking coils, miren esas bobinas de conos en serie y miren los armónicos de los números, todos con 3 6 9, 3 en la tierra, el pulso mas bajo, 9 en el aire el pulso mas alto, y en el medio el 6, el equilibrio de los dos, la naturaleza
chris, leyendo una revista de radio del 1900 sale lo que vos decis de la energia, que va del negativo al positivo, ahora se entiende ja, todo lo que hablamos sobre la energia ahora, se lee en las revistas de radio amateur, hablan de retro alimentacion negativa, bobinas auto oscilantes, de todo, abrazo
¡sí, la vieja escuela estaba más adelantada que la actual en muchas áreas! Es una vergüenza!
Best wishes,
Chris
Hello Friends, I have made some experiments on magnetic interaction with spinning metals, and found that there might be inconsistencies in textbook physics. Here is the link of the video:
Some comments about the observed phenomenons: First the mild steel cylinder, there is no side drag on the magnet, because the magnetic field is bent in parallel to the moving cylinder cause of the high permeability of the material. In the virtually non magnetic stainless steel disc the side drag is present, and the magnetic field passed across it. Not surprising at all the produced strong drag on the magnet when the Aluminium disc is spinning, but the behaviour of the magnetic field is not what we might have expected. If I remember correctly, textbook physics tells us that the cause of the drag is that the induced current in the metal produces a magnetic field which oppose the field of the magnet. But the compass is showing that this is not what's happening. We can't detect any reverse field, and the field deflection in the case of the aluminium disc is relatively small in relation to the strong force appearing on the magnet. I have tried to hold it in my hand, which is not recorded in the video. The drag is the strongest when the magnetic axis is in right angle to the metal, and diminishes gradually if inclined in any direction and disappeared completely when the axis is parallel to the disc surface. Also a repelling force away from the disc can be felt. In one occasion the magnet slipped of my hand and was smashed violently at the wall of my workshop, leaving a cm deep mould. I do not believe that such an acceleration in the short length of interaction with the disc would be possible by magnetic repulsion .
My tests have been inspired by experiments performed by David Lowrance which can be found here : http://www.resonantfractals.org/Magnetism/SpinningCylinder.htm
Soon a hypothesis will be presented regarding this effects,as I believe it is important for understanding what is going on in our coils also.
Vidura.
Hey Vidura and all,
Not sure I should post this? I will delete if you like?
You will note: The value of Conduction affects the Drag!
Magnetic Field distortion is well known. Of course Drag or Eddy Currents have been quite well explained here on this forum and in many Videos online.
One of our main Videos, I have shared on this forum for many years, is this one:
Recently, the following Video was shown in some of my Videos, as Clips:
Of course, the defining Drag effect was shown in the above video.
In the above Video, is is shown a few times that the Magnetic Field is distorted depending on Load an Rotor Drag.
It is great to see you have an expanded thinking on the Drag of the Magnetic Field!
If you look, then you can see, if you choose not to look, then one can not see, we must have an open mind and accept the actions and results we see in Experiment! The textbook is not your teacher, experiment is!
M.M.F to M.M.F, the Action Reaction Pairs are important, and it is important to understand properly! That's why I have said in the past, Lenz's Law is not technically right, there is a gaping hole in Electromagnetism! The Negative Sign in Faraday's Law if not enough to explain the Drag on the "Generator" Shaft alone! The Drag on the "Generator" Shaft is a Magnetic Field Effect, currently not explained by Science! Lenz's Law only Predicts the direction of the Voltage, none of the Equations predict the Current, except Ohms Law! Even then, Ohms Law does not predict the Direction of the Current!
"Generator" Shaft Drag, is an Effect, it is not the Cause, of the "Generation" of Electrical Energy! It comes after the fact! "Generator" Shaft Drag is a By Product of Energy "Generation"!
Thank You for sharing! It is good to see you have this important Understanding!
Vidura, I hope I have not offended you, by showing that what you are now seeing is something we have presented here for a long time!
I merely want others to see, that all this comes down to, is an Understanding!
Best wishes,
Chris
Hey Chris, Of course there are involved some well known effects, no doubt that a current flows in the discs, which will produce an associated magnetic field, but the point I wanted to remark is the coupling between the different perpendicular fields. IMO the small deflection and polarity of the magnetic field is not consistent with the explanation of a counter magnetic field causing such a strong drag in the case of aluminium or copper. There is likely a third field component involved, which is perpendicular to the B and E. I will try to get more clarity on this. Regards Vidura
Hello,
Hey Vidura. I hope this is in the spirit you intend for this thread. Or at least close to it. The term 'radiant' seems to be a bump in the road.
It was Tesla... He coined the term 'radiant'. Bedini used the term 'radiant' because he was a solid fan of Tesla. Terminology.
The equation dĀ/dT = -E. E has a negative term as it is inbound instead of 'radiating' away. Bedini made the statement Once, as far as I've seen or read or heard, as to where the Radiant comes from. He said, "it comes in when the magnetic field collapses". A straight forward statement with no ambiguity.
The easiest way to visualize this is by using a sponge as a stand in for the magnetic field. When a dry sponge, (man made type), is placed into water it expands. This is the magnetic field growing, expanding. Water is standing in for the Virtual Particle Flux, (Magnetic Vector Potentials à and Ā). After expanding as much as it's physically able, the sponge is full. Squeezing the sponge releases the water, the magnetic field collapsing. Easier to see if the sponge is removed from the water. So we want to see it of course but we need something to collect it. We use a bowl to keep it from dispersing into the ground, keeping it from being wasted. The bowl will stand in as an output coil.
Bedini used a magnet(s) to activate his coils, to 'expand' them. As we know his units worked solidly but didn't have the high output that is ultimately desired here, and everywhere actually. The thing he didn't do, as far as I know, was separate the two Magnetic Vector Potentials, à and Ā, from each other. Ā is magnitudes greater than à and is being missed by almost everyone. Paradigm's are strong. Especially when incorrect ones are shoved down our throats from the beginnings of our education.
So yeah, the term Radiant is misleading but as long as it means the same thing to everybody it really doesn't matter.
It's my opinion that everyone wants to build a unit that doesn't have the need of batteries,(maybe a 9 volt to fire it up). Less cost, no hydrogen gas, no dangerous acids for the children to come into contact with. No potential explosions should the batteries become shorted out. Not to mention the space they take up.
Have a good day everyone,
Dale
Hey Dale
Participation on the thread is welcome as always. Let's try to keep things simple, simple experiments, and pay attention to small details. We know that there are three vectors in three dimensionas space associated to EM phenomenon's., all ortogonal to each others. This is represented in Flemings Right and Left hand rule for motors or generators:
The three vectors are related to each other, but each have different qualities. A force is applied to a generator shaft, a magnetic dipole established , resulting in a current flowing thru a conductive loop. Now this interactions are happening in an invisible medium, the Aether(or however you like to call it). We dont need to postulate such a thing as action at distance, it is thru the medium where the interactions are linked together. Non of the above shown fields or qualities are perceptible in steady state, in equilibrium. When this equilibrium is disturbed, a dipole is created, and the other two ortogonal vector forces are also affected. We know pretty much about the qualities of magnetism and electric currents, but the third force? It seems to be so obvious, that we leave it aside , not paying attention to it's qualities. We usually threat the electric and magnetic vectors as if they would exist separated , only interacting between each other, and as if the involved third force would be something separate, something linear only altered from the first two forces. In a holistic view we should consider this force as a third field, inseparable linked to the others, with different qualities. Only a few researchers have payed attention to this aspect, and coined it the T-field , a torsion field or tempic field, which is neither electric nor magnetic. It seems to be directly related to inertia, gravity and motion, and is always present in electromagnetic phenomenon's , although in different gradients. As we dont have the means to detect it directly, it is most commonly ignored by science, much the same as the Aether. I think it could be a principal component in the operation of motors, generators and other machines, and that the piezoelectric and the magnetostrictive effects are points of interaction between this forces. Well, have some food for thought's here. Of course this is for the moment hypothetic, could we elaborate a model where this three forces can be linked together as functions of standing waves in the Aether?
Your Feedback is apreceated.
Vidura
Hey Vidura, excellent post and I agree 100%
I am extremely pleased that you have come to this understanding, and that you have come so far in such a short time! At least it appears from where I stand! Your recent experiments, on other things, have obviously given you great insight into the area of interest that we have looked at for so long.
I have tried to stay away from terms that may lead to scientific controversy as you know! Things like Radiant, I mean all energy Radiates, so I have made an effort to stand in the middle, so I don't sound like a Cook and people actually take what I am sharing seriously. This does not mean that there is not more there! I have said there are gaping holes in Electromagnetism and that we have a lot more to learn!
The fact that the Magnets falls many times slower in the Copper Tube is significant, it shows effects not explained by Science!
The following table will give you some idea on how the Elements will behave:
Ref: Elements Electrical Conductivity Reference Table
Starting at the bottom, we can see why Copper and Aluminium are much more affected by this phenomena! Conductivity, the phenomena we take for granted so often, over looking the basic properties and effects.
I am so pleased you can see the great importance of this, these effects, and how important observing the small effects in the most simple experiments are, that are normally ignored!
A proper Understanding is Key!
Best wishes,
Chris
My Friends,
Some may not understand what it is, we are attempting to clarify, to further understand... This is super Important!
Conduction ( G ) is equivalent to the inverse of the Resistance: 1 / Resistance ( R ). Ohms Law gives us, I = V / R, thus we can rewrite: I = V / ( 1 / G ). Current I is the Key, Current is directly related to the Conduction! As we have shown.
Is there another, new, unknown Field, the Torsion Field existing here? What is the definition of the Torsion Field?
A torsion field is a feature of pseudoscientific proposals that the quantum spin of particles can be used to cause emanations to carry information through vacuum orders of magnitude faster than the speed of light. This theory is the basis of a number of unfounded claims and scams.
You may now see why I do not talk about these things?
Whats the difference between the Current and the Torsion Field? Is there any difference? Or are we looking at the same thing from another point of view? E and B are the angles of observation of the same phenomena, its a convenience to view each thing with difference, but E and B can be one and the same things.
What if, honestly, what if the Current we see as standard well known Science, is simply the Path of Current, Charged Particles moving in a Magnetic Field:
Look, I really don't want to get into pseudo science that is viewed upon as fake nonsense, I only want others to think of things a little more broadly than we have in the past. It only makes sense to open our minds a little more so we can accept new things currently undiscovered in Science.
The Current we see, regardless of its real vs speculated path, is critical to making these machines work. With no Current Flows, these machines do not work! The Machines must be loaded, therefore Current Flows, therefore the Interactions of the Currents, thus the Magnetic Fields, make these machines work as we have laid out, heading towards a decade now.
The Current Flows, and the Change of Currents in these Machines are very Important Phenomena to Understand!
All of this has been covered here, on my forum, before. All here following, paying attention, will already understand all this already!
Best wishes,
Chris
Hello All,
I really don't want to be negative here. However incorrect graphics muddy the waters.
Right hand for generators, Left hand for motors. The difference between them is whether the conductor is receiving the force, (generator), or the conductor is supplying the force, (motor). From Wikipedia of course. The problem is that once a graphic gets into your perception it guides your thoughts. Basically these rules were for determining the direction a motor would turn. We have to remember that all motors were DC until Tesla came along... The left and right hand rules made it easy to correctly hook up the motor to the power supply so it would rotate in the desired direction right off.
Force is not a field it is an effect of fields. There are no piezoelectric effects in a motor or generator. Unless of course you add a piezoelectric device to the shaft so as to know the RPM's of said motor. A Hall sensor is more effective.
Turning the shaft of a generator does not create a dipole. The first generators were called magneto's. Magnets make up the stator and a coil(s) are the rotor. It also works in the opposite arrangement but why spin a heavy mass of magnets when it's easier to spin the coil(s)? So the dipole already exists in the generator whether the shaft is being turned or not. Resistance to the shaft is merely the Lenz Law doing it's part. The Lenz effect is the same thing that is happening when the magnet is dropped through the copper sleeve as Chris has demonstrated for years. (It's still fun to watch that no matter how many times I see it.) The very first generator output AC but was rectified to match up with batteries which until then was the primary source of electricity. The Egyptian's had batteries so the paradigm had centuries to set in.
Sometime around 1964 magnetos were phased out and replaced by alternators. In this case the dipole is supplied by the field coils and is powered by a battery of course. Field meaning magnetic field since the magnet's had been removed. (The powers that be must have been afraid people would generate their own electricity!) When using a magneto there is no need for a battery. Give your vehicle a push start and it will continue to run until you run out of gas. Over the past few years magnets have been re-introduced to starter motors on cars. More reliable and smaller. Alternators are rectified to output DC to match up with the battery. Dipoles are either magnets or electromagnets. Each has a positive and negative end and AC will not make a dipole as the orientation is constantly being changed.
While I'm at it lets take a look at electrons travelling down the wire. They don't move as has been taught for years. Should the electrons actually move down the wire it would decompose as the atom would be de-stabilized and the friction would melt the substance almost instantly. It would cease to be copper or whatever element was being used as the conductor.
This part of a bigger graphic from Bearden which didn't want to upload or I just messed it up. Either way here is the link:
http://cheniere.org/images/EMfndns1/sm%20CktColleff.jpg
What goes on is that the Drude electrons move towards the surface of the conductor after the conductor has been potentialized. Charge behaves like a fluid, (This is what Tesla believed and so do I), and skims over the surface of the conductor. The Drude electrons basically act like ball bearings to aide the flow of the charge, give it a smooth path. If anyone has seen the Corona Effect demonstrated on transmission lines you saw the over potentialization of a conductor. A capacitor can only hold so much charge and overvoltage will make it explode as we all have seen I bet. Pressure blows it up like a water balloon. Charge occupies physical space and has volume.
Current cannot flow until the Drude electrons have moved close to the surface. If we really want to understand what is happening we have to dump the old paradigms. Using CEM and the Standard Model to try to describe what it does not allow within those models is getting us nowhere.
I read a tremendous amount of technical papers and I know how easy it is to accidentally merge different topics mentally. I constantly re-check myself to keep the picture clear. Much of the data is so similar, small differences at times make a large change to results. I am very sorry to those that may have been offended. That is not my wish. Just clear understanding is my goal and I have learned to not dance around the point and to just get to it. Most of my information is from, Bearden, Bedini, Sweet, Whittaker and Evans plus some others along the way.
So I'm done here until I have my stuff unpacked and set up. As I've said previously, humans are visual beings.
Have a glorious day All,
Dale
Edit: A generator only separates the charge collected by the dipole.
Hey Friends, Nice discussion, At this stage I would like to clarify a few things: I am well aware about the concepts of Induction and Lenz law. And for the moment I have presented this as hypothetical , this means I am not sure that the presented Ideas are correct, this will need more experiments to be performed. Regarding the observed effects, I do believe that a current is induced in the moving metal, but I do not believe that this is sufficient to produce the strong side drag on the magnet. If you hold the magnet in your hand you will feel two forces, one weaker repelling from the moving metal, and another, by orders stronger parallel to the surface. The former one is likely produced by the mentioned Lenz law effect. But for the latter this explanation is not consistent, as there should be observable a reversal magnetic polarity on the opposite side of the metal disc. @Chris, thanks for the table of conductivity, I was of course thinking about if the effect is directly related to conductivity, more tests will be needed to proof or disprove. I will see if I can get some more samples of other metals. @ Dale: thanks for the completed grafics. Regarding to term of field: These terms are used by convention. I am convinced that the Aether or space is the medium in which all forms of energy, forces and vibrations propagate, but it is likely labeled as pseudoscience in Wikipedia, so I will try to stick to the terms of convention. The magnetostrictive and piezoelectric effect could be present in all kinds of matter, in different graduands. Some experiments of Sergei Deyna points towards it, also one performed by Atti shows how a mechanical vibration on a ferrite rod induced a current in an attached coil. The torque on the shaft of the generator do not create a dipole, but is likely produced by one, as high pressure on one side of a piston , or the plates of s turbine, and low pressure on the other side. A mechanical dipole in that case, most kinds of mechanical force is caused by pressure (difference). In the case of gravity we have to be sincere that we know very little about, so it is postulated as field. Thank you all for sharing your thoughts. Vidura.
Vidura, Dale, excellent discussion! I agree.
I hope I have not offended anyone! Offending anyone was not my intention, I more so wanted to explain why I do some of the things I do, I have to be so careful, I really don't want to become the laughing stock, that's why I have tried so hard to stay away from pseudo science terms.
This is a very serious topic and we have discovered holes in this topic, not addressed anywhere in Science, thus the discussion.
Best wishes, and thank you for your participation on this topic!
Chris
Good stuff Vidura. You've given me much to think about the last day or so. I think it is worth investigating why the steel disc doesn't generate any apparent deflection. It is worth challenging the idea that the higher resistance of steel is enough to explain the effect. Looking forward to seeing more.
Zanzal, Vidura, Dale and others following,
It is worth challenging the idea that the higher resistance of steel is enough to explain the effect.
For sure! I agree!
Plotting the Conduction vs the Deflection Measured is well worth a full set of experiments. 1 / Resistance per CM, vs the Deflection, say the Magnet attached to a weight meter, is worth investigating!
I am more than happy to be wrong! It would be great to see experiments proving my experiments wrong for sure! Lets challenge each other to make our way to the Truth!
Best wishes,
Chris
If you allow me, I would add a few thoughts to it. Related to Vidurra's work (video).
I'm not saying, I'd rather show. The Neodymium magnet induced eddy current or induction.
The copper tube experiment does not surprise anyone. Acquaintance. However, in a lengthwise section, I haven't seen a presentation anywhere. It is also used in measurement techniques.
I thought I'd do it. As you can see, there is a slowdown. But not to the extent. Understandable.
If I wind a copper wire on a plastic pipe and short-circuit the wire, there is not as much deceleration as with the copper pipe alone. So I divide the tube not only lengthwise but also crosswise. We can understand it that way. However, it cannot induce such a current because the number of turns is low. (although the parameters are the same as the copper pipe. Copper pipe thickness 0.8mm length 300mm diameter 22mm. Winding wire diameter 1.2mm.)
I = V / R
If I use more speeds, the deceleration of the magnet is already understandable.
To connect different fields.
Voltage change due to current induction. That is, the more current, the more induced voltage. But only if the fields are properly interconnected. In the ferrite rod experiment, it can be seen (or audible) that the Led does not light up at all frequencies.
It can also be removed in this arrangement. When the two fields meet, the small light bulb lights up. Yet in the basic case it should not be. The "making music" of the sound is also interesting.
Good experiment Atti, The slotted copper pipe shows the drag where there should not be any eddy currents according to theory. Thanks for your contribution. Vidura.
My Friends,
In my opinion, the Cut in the tube shows what we should see:
Eddy current
Eddy currents are loops of electrical current induced within conductors by a changing magnetic field in the conductor according to Faraday's law of induction. Eddy currents flow in closed loops within conductors, in planes perpendicular to the magnetic field.
The Magnets falls faster, because the area where Eddy Currents can form are reduced. The Area around the Cut, the Currents can not form, but where there is no cut they can still form, so we have some Eddy Currents, but not as much as we had with no Cut.
Eddy Currents are a Localised Phenomena, forming in Circles around the Flux Lines, when able.
The Definition of Eddy:
a circular movement of water causing a small whirlpool.
I guess it depends on who one listens to and what definition that person has interpreted, as to what the end result should be.
The Valence Band, specifically, the Conduction Band gives us the answers we need to solve this problem.
Best wishes,
Chris
Hey Chris, This is certainly an aspect to be considered, the thing which is most puzzling to me , how do the repelling force away from the disc or cylinder fit into this theory, and why we can't detect the inverse magnetic polarity on the other side of the spinning disc? It might well be that the Eddy's pattern is actually there, but it seems to be relatively week compared with the field of the magnet. My Aluminium disc was spinning at about 2500RPM when I could not sustain the magnet with my hand, with such a force, if produced by contrary magnetic fields those should be in the same magnitude than the field of the magnet and clearly detectable on the other side of the disc. Of course it would be great to have more results testing some other metals and make exact measurements of the appearing forces, and compare to conductivity and atomic weight etc. Vidura.
Hey Vidura,
First, I would like to say, we should not rule anything out! So I believe in your investigation! Nothing should be over looked!
As I understand it, the Conduction Band is a very narrow region where the 'Fermi energy', the energy of the highest occupied state at absolute zero temperature, lies within an energy band. This is the Conduction Band, which is specifically related to Conduction and also Resistance.
This means, we can change the properties of the material, the Conductor, with an External magnetic Field or Fields. It is true, we take Conduction for granted! Don't forget, we have many different types of Magnetic Properties:
In an external magnetic field, the potential energy of those states whose magnetic moments are aligned with the field is reduced by the magnetic interaction energy, and those aligned against the field have a correspondingly higher potential energy. Therefore, the parallel aligned states are nearer the bottom edge of the band. This means that only magnetic moments within a range of kBT either side of EF can flip their orientation according to the magnetic field.
Floyd Sweet said:
Of all the known fields- electric, magnetic, gravitational and motional E-field, the only ones incapable of being shielded are the induced motional E-field and the gravitational field. The nature of the motionally induced electric field is quite unique; in order to understand it more fully we must start by parting with a few misleading paradigms. When magnetic flux is moved perpendicularly across a conductor an electromotive force (E.M.F) is electromagnetically induced "within" the conductor. "Within" is an artefact of the commonly used analogy comparing the flow of electric current within a wire to the flow of water within a pipe. This is a most misleading model theoretically. The true phenomenon taking place has little been thought of as involving the production of a spatially distributed electric field.
Conductor "Magnetisation" or the Electromagnetic Field emanation from a Conductor depends on the Parallel Aligned States of the Electrons. Each Electron having its own Magnetic Moment. Unfortunately, when we see Currents, this has the same properties, we see the same things occur. Parallel or Anti-Parallel Alignments.
The Electromagnetic Field emanation from a Conductor could be seen as the Shielding, Floyd Sweet was talking about.
Yes, I believe Star Trek Shields are possible, and I believe we already can make Shields today!
EDIT: I should point out, exactly what is occurring in the Metal, is the requirement for Electromagnetic Induction: This very Change in Alignment, Parallel or Anti-Parallel is the Magnetic Field Drag we observe. This can be the Source for Electromagnetic Induction after the initial creation, conventionally this is completely Ignored and your Input fights this M.M.F throughout the Cycle. What we see in the following image is directly related:
It may be worth reading up a little about Valance Bands if you wish to learn more about Conduction:
In solid-state physics, the valence band and conduction band are the bands closest to the Fermi level and thus determine the electrical conductivity of the solid. In non-metals, the valence band is the highest range of electron energies in which electrons are normally present at absolute zero temperature, while the conduction band is the lowest range of vacant electronic states. On a graph of the electronic band structure of a material, the valence band is located below the Fermi level, while the conduction band is located above it.
The distinction between the valence and conduction bands is meaningless in metals, because conduction occurs in one or more partially filled bands that take on the properties of both the valence and conduction bands.
Best wishes,
Chris
Hey Chris, This is certainly an aspect to be considered, the thing which is most puzzling to me , how do the repelling force away from the disc or cylinder fit into this theory, and why we can't detect the inverse magnetic polarity on the other side of the spinning disc? It might well be that the Eddy's pattern is actually there, but it seems to be relatively week compared with the field of the magnet. My Aluminium disc was spinning at about 2500RPM when I could not sustain the magnet with my hand, with such a force, if produced by contrary magnetic fields those should be in the same magnitude than the field of the magnet and clearly detectable on the other side of the disc. Of course it would be great to have more results testing some other metals and make exact measurements of the appearing forces, and compare to conductivity and atomic weight etc. Vidura.
The opposing field can only be as strong as the amount of charge moved through the field. Thinking about your problem has really helped me understand the implications of the Lorentz force equation and how it describes the forces the electrons experience in your experiment. Its still unclear why the steel didn't seem to produce the same effect. My only suggestion might be to try positioning the compass and the magnets a little further away so the magnet doesn't dominate so much. That or double the speed of the disc...
Hello All.
Some updates as I did some more tests with the rotating discs. I made one more of copper and one of pure zinc metal. In the latter the effect is much weaker, similar to the stainless steel. Copper seems to be strongest, although not too much difference with the aluminium. I didn't record a video as I performed the tests with both hands, scanning the magnetic field with a compass on the other side of the disc. So I made this graphics to illustrate the observations:
This configuration produces the strongest sidedrag
In config 3 when the magnetic axis is exactly aligned to the center and parallel to the disc surface the side drag disappears , while the repelling force is still present, a little bit weaker.
Scanning the field with a compass on the oposite side of the disc showed the usual patterns as if the disc would not be present. I tried different distance of magnet and of the compass, but no alteration could be detected. The discs are 200mm diameter and 1mm copper and zinc 1.5mm aluminium in thickness. I would like to make some measurements of the resulting forces, but I dont have an appropriated scale available.
Regards VIDURA.
Hey Vidura,
I had a similar idea.
Using a Drill, Circular Plates with a hole in the middle, a Tachometer, make sure the drill is doing the same RPM's spinning the Disks, put a Magnet on a Weight Meter, hang from a table, measure the weight of the Magnet, then of the drag, subtract the weight from the drag, then one has the drag on the Magnet.
Another problem is getting disks cut the same size and of lots of different types of Metals.
Of course, the magnet would need to stay on the same circumference to make this work.
Its a reasonable detailed set of experiments! I would be happy to donate to help out financially for this if you want?
Chris
Hey Chris,
Yes i thought about some possible test setups also, I think a lever arm with the magnet attached would be the most convenient, ti sustain it in the required position and angle, and measuring the force appearing on the lever. The difficulty at the moment is the delay of delivering of orders, as nearly the entire population is locked in their homes, roads are blocked and all this stuff. Smells a bit like a worldwide government strike all this, sorry the off topic. But I will place an order for a tachometer and a hook scale, for the moment i have 6 different metals to test, although not all the same thickness, but it could be compensated with math's.
Another thing, thinking in math's. I would like to calculate approximately how much current would have to flow in eddy currents in the part of the disc, which is exposed to the magnet, to aproximate the field strength of the neomagnet? I think with the law of Biot-Savart it could be calculated, although it is a bit complex(at least for me), as in a solid conductive plate two vortex shaped currents are supposed to be induced. But an approximation would give a hint already I believe. Hey Yoelmicro, if you could give a helping hand with the correct formula , would be much appreciated. Chris, thank you very much for offering a donation, but you have a lot of obligations already to keep the Forum running, It would be much better if others, who might have more than they need would contribute in that way. Thanks' a lot!
Vidura.
Hey Vidura,
We, this forum, we have something that is no where else! I do wish more would join in and share! Those not sharing, I wish would help all here out more, $10.00 is not a lot, but if every second reader donated, a lot more work could be on going!
I have donated $10.00.
Our forum is unique! We have zero Trolling, all here are safe, and every single page here has useful accurate information!
Please, if your'e reading this, please consider a small Donation to Help Vidura out in this very important set of Experiments.
The Math aspect is important, many wont understand the math aspect, I was one that used to over look the Math, because I didn't understand it. As time has gone on, I am grasping more of it. Others will also.
Chris Sykes
@Vidura, I have this video in my personal collection. You may want to see this, I think the effects you're seeing in your experiments are called "the magnetic river" by professor Laithwaite:
Edit: I've also donated $10 for helping with the experiments.
Hey Friends, Thanks so much for your donations, I have ordered a tachometer and a digital scale to perform a comparison with measurement of the latest experiments. Hopefully it will bring some more insight what exactly is going on. Best wishes, Vidura.
No one online at the moment
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!
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.
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:
They REFUSE to tell me why!
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!
Chris
290
Arya
100
Gucio_81
92
FringeIdeas
90
---open-tesla-research.jpg?width=20&crop=0,0,20,20)
akoteles
80
thaelin
50
skywatcher
20
anarsu
20
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).
