Use for the Tesla Switch

[Inquorate]

Electret effect of capacitors

As some of you will know, I've spent a lot of time researching and experimenting with the Electret effect of a dielectric.

JB himself said he's experimented with exposing liquid glass to high voltage while it sets, and has gotten shocks.

I'm sure he investigated Electrets after seeing conditioned capacitors exhibiting self charge. I may be wrong; I researched Electrets first and then saw it happening temporarily in conditioned caps.

Imho there's something to this.

@ Lamare - I know your concern; will the charging of the cap's dielectric (in opposition to the temporary stress and thus voltage polarity of the dielectric) by the tesla switch - which would lessen the tension of the dielectric - cause a degenerative relaxation of the dielectric's stress?

One has to visualize the dielectric's changing stresses via the voltage difference between any two points, not the supposed electron flow.

consider the TS with 4 capacitors. 2 join in series, 12v of tension in the dielectric of each. 2 others join in parallel, each with 12v of tension in the dielectric.

24v to 12v, for enough time so that the tension equals by a volt. Now 2 caps have 11v and two have 13v.

The ones receiving 'charge' actually have more stress, enhancing the Electret effect of the dielectric.

The 11v ones will spring back 10% to 11.12v, and the 13v ones will likely stretch more easily; perhaps 13.1v.

I'm picking numbers out of the air, but experiments I've done confirm each step. I've yet to put it all together, and yet to use the tesla switch as the drive battery in a bedini oscillator, which even when destroying the dipole of the drive battery, can as shown by gotoluc be 70% efficient at recovering energy from coil collapse voltage spike.

Combine the TS with bedini radiant charger and it should work.

I wish I could show more experiments to back up what I'm saying, and to check and verify.

That will come soon.

The batteries in series

[Inquorate]

Ignore ''the batteries in series'' in above; can't edit.

[Inquorate]

Electret effect of a dielectric

The Electret effect is additive in both directions. Gravity is additive in one direction. Throw something up and it starts downward acceleration immediately. Throw something down, it accelerates down immediately.

If the conditioned caps behaved like this we would have a problem.

But a conditioned capacitor accepts charge more easily, behaving like it has less capacity when being charged.

On the discharge it takes longer, behaving like it has a higher capacity.

When sitting, it loses charge slower than an unconditioned capacitor.

The only explanation is that the conditioned capacitor is receiving energy from an outside source, that flows in at no cost to us.

Namaste

[ldissing]

Editting

Ignore ''the batteries in series'' in above; can't edit.

Sometimes only the advanced edit works.

Leroy

[Bit's-n-Bytes]

Update from the "Battle Field"

Hi team I am
finally able to join the ranks in testing. Take a look;
YouTube - TeslaSwitch Test1.MPG

Here is preliminary data using the “Digital Circuit”;
Time Batt1 Batt2 Batt3 Batt4
Start 8.75 9.54 8.73 5.01
1 Min 8.61 9.54 8.74 5.02
5Min 8.52 9.54 8.75 5.04
15Min 8.43 9.54 8.77 5.08

[blackchisel97]

Looks Great!

Hi team I am
finally able to join the ranks in testing. Take a look;
YouTube - TeslaSwitch Test1.MPG

Here is preliminary data using the “Digital Circuit”;
Time Batt1 Batt2 Batt3 Batt4
Start 8.75 9.54 8.73 5.01
1 Min 8.61 9.54 8.74 5.02
5Min 8.52 9.54 8.75 5.04
15Min 8.43 9.54 8.77 5.08

Hi Bit's Very nice job I knew you'll get this done

Meanwhile I got a bit carried away during my SC experiments. Changed transistor connecting caps and used previous spool with #26 wire as a load. Now I can get some current to go through parallel light bulb. I tuned and placed glass bowl over my coil. Now I can barely concentrate on the subject -


Vtech

[Bit's-n-Bytes]

Hi Bit's Very nice job I knew you'll get this done

Meanwhile I got a bit carried away during my SC experiments. Changed transistor connecting caps and used previous spool with #26 wire as a load. Now I can get some current to go through parallel light bulb. I tuned and placed glass bowl over my coil. Now I can barely concentrate on the subject -


Vtech

That is to cool

Bit's

[ldissing]

Maybe it's an idea to add an extra opto-transistor circuit to control the inductor separately?

I mean, if the inductor is creating the spikes that do the magic in the battery, then this magic should be much easier to control if you separate the "spiking timing" from the series/parallel switching timing. For the creation of a spike, you only need a very short "on" time, while the switching between the battery's role can be very low frequency.

While this might be tricky to control using analog circuits, it should be a piece of cake with the micro-controller version....

If the spikes really are the magic, then this would be very important to know, because then the battery switching could then be done at such low frequencies that there wouldn't have to be any problems to do that with relays. And that would mean you could really draw serious amperage from the batteries without voltage drop and without needing unaffordably heavy transistors.

If you want to do that, why don't you just place a diode to bypass the inductor/bulb parallel combo? Maybe I don't understand what, where or when you want to separate.

Leroy

[lamare]

If you want to do that, why don't you just place a diode to bypass the inductor/bulb parallel combo? Maybe I don't understand what, where or when you want to separate.

Let's first try to explain the basic principles involved here. First of all, let's look at where the energy is coming from that we are utilizing. I have virtually no doubt anymore that this is coming from the electret effect. High voltage spikes create a non-permanent electret inside a cap or battery.

For the sake of the argument, let's suppose we'd have a permanent electret in between two capacitor plates or somehow internal in a battery. That would mean, we could draw current for ever and be done, right??

No:

Electret Q&A - 02/07/01 :

QUESTION Can the Electret effect be used to generate power directly?

ANSWER The general concensus of the experts is no, but there are some new techniques that raise doubts about their certainty. One new technique is to mix ferrite granules into the dielectric when it is formed. A magnetic field applied at a right angle to the resulting electret's field has a dramatic effect in maximizing and recharging the electret effect.

There is very little doubt, however, that the electret is much more effective in generating power indirectly by using it's field to move and trap existing electro-static charges. A prime example of this are reports from amateur radio operaters of the static charges collected by coaxial cables.

An electret can create an electric field, but not an electric current. So, you have to think of some way to use this field to make electrons move, to use this field to create some current.

That means, you have to use this field to get electrons from somewhere and move them somewhere else, and meanwhile make them do useful work: power a load.

In other words: the electret gives you a field (voltage) source, but you also need an electron source, somthing that can gives you electrons to play with...

If you would place an electret in between capacitor plates, you would have a charged capacitor that would be able to provide you with some electrons, some current, but sooner or later the plates run out of electrons and the party is over.

In other words: the conservation of charge law kicks in and gets you into trouble.

Now suppose you would take four of these theoritical capacitors and switch them the way you're doing in this circuit. Then you would have these electrets that give you free power to put electrons into movement with, while you wouldn't run out of electrons, because you recycle them back and forth between your two cap banks. That would solve our electron-source problem, right?

How fast would you have to switch them back and forth?

Well, that depends on how fast you run out of electrons, right?
When you would be using caps with an internal electret, that would be pretty fast, when you would be using batteries with an internal electret, the chemicals inside would be able to provide a whole lot of them, so it would take considerably longer.

But the bottomline is: the switching timing that is related to countering the conservation of charge law has nothing to do with the energy source we're utilizing: this permanent electret inside our theoretical cap/battery.


However, in practice, we don't have caps/batteries with permanent electrets inside (or at least not of a decent capacity, so we're not counting electret microphones).

But, JB has found something very close: you can create a non-permanent electret inside a cap or battery by feeding it high voltage pulses, spikes. In other words: if we spend a little bit of energy every now and then to feed our caps/batteries a high voltage spike, we basically get the same thing. We create a permantent electret inside a cap/battery. Not because it is permanent by itself, but because we keep it alive with our HV spikes.

It may be clear that this has nothing to do with solving the problems arising from the conservation of charge law. So, we should not mix these up in our circuits.

So, I think we have to understand what is what and carefully keep this apart!

We should optimize the coil timing such that we get the optimal spikes to keep our electret alive, while we should optimize the series/parallel switching to get the optimal amount of current out of our caps/batteries.

[nvisser]

Help

John
We need some more tips and ideas on this scalar charger
I reached the end of the street.
Lots of spikes but no unity
Vissie

[John_K]

Great post lamare!

Hi lamare,

That was a great thought provoking post.
It also fits in with my way of thinking of what "Radiant Energy" or "Negative Energy" is.

I'm not sure if this should be more in the "RE theory" thread, so someone belt me over the head or move it over there if you please.

When I was lucky enough to spend a couple of days with JB last year he said to me to think of a battery as a box of magnets, rather than electrons. We don't need electrons to fill a battery, we need more magnets. So instead of thinking of electrons as the "effect" of conventional electricity I generally associate "electrons" with magnets, or to be more precise, particles of magnets. This is what I think is the true raw form of all energy as we know it. Without getting too deep, it is this energy that powers all of our circuits, as well as keeping all known life forms alive. (Trees, animals, humans etc.)

My theories, which were inspired by JB and Tom Bearden, go more along the lines of Leedskalnin and especially in his 1945 booklet, Magnetic Current.

How does this relate to the Tesla Switch? My thoughts are pretty much the same as any of JB's inventions which are designed to harvest "RE" by creating circuits that generate HV spikes with no current, without using closed loops. This causes an imbalance which nature tries to correct by adding a surge of "magnetic current" to correct the balance. The effect is further magnified when using components that exhibit "negative resistance", or "negative impedance" properties. I think this confuses the heck out of nature, so she doesn't know how much "magnetic current" to add to the system, so you always get a bit more than you needed to maintain the balance. Kind of like filling as glass of water blind-folded - you don't when it's full until you feel water spilling over the sides.

But to maximize the effect, we also have to design circuits that use the least amount of "conventional" energy as possible, JB does this very cleverly by using a few well known concepts, such as impedance matching, difference of potential and resonant frequencies. (Audio engineering principles coincidentally).
When all of these concepts come together, we are in the "sweet spot" where RE harvesting is at its greatest and conventional energy usage is at it's lowest. This when we start to see a COP>1 or a "self-running" system with a COP=infinity.

Just the way my weird mind works...

John K.

[StevanC]

The interesting stuff I like here

Lamare I like few points You made:

(snip)
...

What the magic really does, is to boost a well known process known as "dielectric relaxation". I've posted about this quite a lot. This process can be seen with any normal capacitor. Charge a dielectric capacitor, an elco, short it out very shortly, wait a few seconds and measure the voltage. It should read something in the order of up to 10% of the voltage it was charged with before you shorted it out.

What causes is, is the way the capacitor works. In between the plates, there's a dielectricum, a material that can be polarized, charged internally. This charging, this polarization is indendent from the amount of current you put in the capacitor, since the dielectricum is an insulator. It depends on the electric field inside the capacitor, which depends on the applied voltage. Now once this dielectricum is polarized, it cannot de-polarize instantaneously. It takes a little while. That is this "relaxation" effect.

So, when you have a polarized dielectricum, either inside a battery or inside a cap, your capacitor/battery becomes like a vacuum cleamer, suckimg up any charge it can get, even from the surrounding air if you just let is sit on your bench. That is the spontaneous recharging effect some of you have seen.
...
(snip)

What exactly You consider the dielectricuum in the battery?

A. The electrolyte (conducting)
B. The plates (lead) (conducting)
C. The crystaline structure on the surface (conducting)
D. *someting* elese

We all know the dielectricum has to be an *insulator*?

But You surely stepped *on* to something here:

The battery seems to get into a state of "sucking up" branching currents all over the place (space?) into it self! As if electrons "come to birth" (just like stars get born) within it self(for free) and suck up charge (getting spin?) from arround space.

As the electrons come to life (=spin) they seem to "become real" and able to do work - they are no more "free"?

For this to become true, *somewhere* in the battery is a boundary of neither wet nor dry matter - a borderline between solid and vacuum - is it the bondary of electrolite against the crystal's surface?

There is potential (stress) so big, electrons can be brought to existance?

Just my 2c (all mixed up )

Stevan C.

[ldissing]

@Lamare & @John K:

Both are excellent posts and I can understand from where you both are coming. We also have to remember that batteries contain ions, which capacitors do not (unless you want to consider an electret a type of ion).

In JBs early 1984 stuff, he talks about the ions which are much more slow moving than electrons themselves. If you can get the ions moving in recharge mode and shuttle a few electrons out of the battery while the ions are still moving in recharge mode, then the battery can give you some "conventional" energy without "losing" it's potential. The dipole in the battery is not broken in this scenario.

So, how high does the spike have to be, how often does it have to occur and what type of load and what size load do we need to get this to happen.

And the same questions apply if you want to say that we are creating electrets in the battery and cap, or you want to say we are allowing mother nature to insert magnetic currents into the system to stabilize the imbalances. And maybe it is one, two or three all at the same time. I'm guessing all three.

We all know that the maximum power transfer of power is when the load impedance matches the source impedance.

So, there are two loads in the scalar charger (or 4 battery TS). There is ONE load when the battery is the source, and there is a different load when the capacitors are the source, can we agree on that?

1. When the battery is the source, the load is the inductor and capacitors (in parallel) in series.

2. When the series capacitors are the source, the load is the inductor and the battery in series.

So, the load impedance must match the batteries in case 1 and the capacitors in case 2. Seems like two different loads would be necessary to maximize the power transfer in each of the two cases.

I do, however, think there is a third thing happening in the scalar or 4 battery TS. I believe that the one transistor that is "backward" (the series transistor) is going into the negative resistor region (negistor) when these high voltage spikes exist. Simultaneously putting the battery into an over potentialization and sucking some electrons from the battery before the ions can start moving out of recharge mode. Or you could say using the electret created in the battery before it can be destroyed, or you could say using the magnet current before it has a chance to disappear. This sucking of electrons from the battery, recharges and/or re-establishes the electret inside the capacitor, or again, does not allow the magnetic current to get to where it was trying to go, because we are keeping the system in a state of non-equilibrium.

I believe that, that backward transistor utilizes the "magic" of the spike. Creating whatever we want to call it...an influx of energy into the system that did not exist before and allowing the "tank" to continue to oscillate utilizing the same electrons that started it off in the first place. When the timing is done properly, then the system "runs" itself and we do not need to supply more electrons or "use" energy from the battery directly except in the "initial" startup.

Hope that makes SOME sense and I'm not the twilight zone.

Leroy

[lamare]

What exactly You consider the dielectricuum in the battery?

A. The electrolyte (conducting)
B. The plates (lead) (conducting)
C. The crystaline structure on the surface (conducting)
D. *someting* elese

We all know the dielectricum has to be an *insulator*?

I really can't say, perhaps the casing, perhaps some layer forms on the surface on the plates. See the pdfs by Dave Michael Rogers I reposted over here: http://www.energeticforum.com/renewa...html#post76537

Perhaps the theoretical discussion should be kept there as much as possible...

What matters in this thread is not so much how this works in detail, but how we can use this. And IMHO, that comes down to feeding your cap/battery with spikes in order to maintain the electret effect and to use the TS switching to provide the electrons to ping back and forth between the electret powered capacitor/battery plates.

[lamare]

@Lamare & @John K:

Both are excellent posts and I can understand from where you both are coming. We also have to remember that batteries contain ions, which capacitors do not (unless you want to consider an electret a type of ion).

In JBs early 1984 stuff, he talks about the ions which are much more slow moving than electrons themselves. If you can get the ions moving in recharge mode and shuttle a few electrons out of the battery while the ions are still moving in recharge mode, then the battery can give you some "conventional" energy without "losing" it's potential. The dipole in the battery is not broken in this scenario.

So, how high does the spike have to be, how often does it have to occur and what type of load and what size load do we need to get this to happen.

[..]

Hope that makes SOME sense and I'm not the twilight zone.

Yes, it makes sense. And yes, there may be other processes involved, so this theory might still turn out to be wrong after all. I don't think so, but I have been wrong before, so don't take my word for it....

However, IMHO this theory does has a lot going for it, if you consider the school-girl and other Bedini circuits also. Especially in the SG circuit, all you do is feed the battery with spikes. And John has reported that some strange changes happen then inside the battery that makes it hard to charge again with conventional chargers (an insulating layer forming on the plates???) and he reported that the batteries continue to charge themselves, sometimes half an hour after the power has been shut off.

I don't see any other way to explain that, but this theory. Please correct me if I'm wrong. And that's why I think we have to take this theory very seriously.

If you want a guess about how many spikes you need and how strong they need to be: well, the SG circuitry should be a good start....