Use for the Tesla Switch

[John_Bedini]

Tesla Switch

Somthing for you all to think about

"...the missing concept of "open-paths" (the dual of "closed-paths") was discovered, in which currents could be made to flow in branches that lie between any set of two nodes. (Previously — following Maxwell —engineers tied all of their open-paths to a single datum-point, the 'ground'). That discovery of open-paths established a second rectangular transformation matrix... which created 'lamellar' currents..." "A network with the simultaneous presence of both closed and open paths was the answer to the author's years-long search." Gabriel Kron, "The Frustrating Search for a Geometrical Model of Electrodynamic Networks," Journal unk., issue unk., circa 1962, p. 111-128. The quote is from p. 114.

[erfinder]

Erfinder,

The switching frequency will be dependant on the rotor speed. You could use less trigger magnets than rotor magnets for lower switching frequency as JB did where he had 8 magnets on the rotor but only 3 magnets on the trigger wheel. I have a few thoughts of how to vary the duty cycle of each trigger pulse.

Reed switch - bringing the reed switch closer to the trigger magnet will keep the trigger on longer and vice-versa especially if you use the rotor magnets to trigger the reed switch. Can be easily adjusted while motor is running.

Hall switch - if you use rectangular magnets mounted radially on the side of your trigger wheel, then you can position the hall closer to the shaft for a longer duty cycle. Can be easily adjusted while motor is running. I think I saw REN do it this way on one of his window motors.

Opto switch - using two notched interuptor disks, you can vary the overlap of the two disks to increase or decrease the opto on/off time. Disadvantage is motor must be stopped to change disk overlap without some kind of additional complicated mechanism. You could use a V notch approach and move the opto closer or farther from the shaft but the optos don't have much of a reach to them. I suppose you could use 2 opto's in the same trigger notch (fixed notch width) with some AND logic and then you could vary the distance between the pair of opto's to control the duty cycle (it would only be only as long as both opto's are simultaneously on).

I might sacrifice an opto by cutting it in half separating the ir emitter side from the ir detector side. Hopefully the bridge between the sides is only a plastic body on the 4 pin opto devices.

The reed switch will have the lowest switching cost compared to the hall or opto.

Hope this helps,
Alex

Hello Alex,

Yes....this is most helpful... thanks for your insight.

Regards

[Aaron]

@John

Hay Aaron,
How are you doing?

Hey John, this Aaron?

Talked to Peter for couple hours tonight...everything sounds exciting.

Doing good, just swamped. Sorry been out of touch.

Will have to come out soon. I'll call you.

[nvisser]

No, it's patent number US 2008/0129250 A1.

Spoke to JB this morning, he told me to say that the caps are there for the solar panel. The batteries you saw in the video were frozen, Rick put them out the back because they were gone. JB pulled them inside and used them for the test, the load tester is rated at 500A. So it's also a great battery rejuvenator.John K.

If John uses this circuits which is similar to the ssg circuits where are the 5 coils or the wires going to the coils?
He also mentioned that there are pnp`s behind the heat sink and that he uses the bipolar switch. That also switch coils and it switch both positive and negative to the coils.
Again where are the coils?

[ldissing]

For the record

@JB,

Are you still saying that we do NOT need 6 devices for the switching? In the drawing that you made, you indicated only two devices would be needed for switching along with some diodes...are you still saying that this will work?

I'm trying to get my head around the negative part of the curve you hand drew (that goes 1 1/2 time negative vs. positive), and I know it involves the transistors. My mind is playing around with some switching scenarios, because just all on and all off doesn't fit, or everybody would have this working the way you are, the circuit is not that complicated.

That middle transistor/SCR needs to go negative for the impedance to match and if it were to go negative, then the positive of the battery above that transistor would effectively be at 36V (1 1/2 times 24V) for a short time until the diodes switch fully on and the transistor shuts fully off.

Impedance...I still think that is the issue again and no one knows, except you, Peter, and one or two other folks, how to match the impedance between the two sides, but one day 30 - 100 years from now, someone will figure it out again.

Frustrated as always but unwilling to let it go,

Leroy

[Tehnoman]

Hello to ya all, with new year!

As I can see this thread had exploded since JBedini joined the fight. Nice to see that. Happy to see some encouraging results too. Yet I have one question in relation to Tesla switch (TS) / Mueller report.

Basic devices to see/detect these unconventional physical effects seems to be fairly simple, assumption based on Mueller report. Yet I haven't seen anyone to try substituting batteries with capacitors. I have seen some experiments with charging / discharging them, but as far as my understanding goes - not one directly related with TS.

So, there is the question - has anybody tried swapping batteries with caps in TS system?

My intuition says, that there definitely would be different parameter values (faster switching need, higher current?), but it should be doable. Of course, if chemical batteries doesn't hold the key to this process. As far as I know, caps are just a small capacity batteries with low inner resistance.

I am planning to test TS effects with caps for switching speeds from few hundred Hz up to some MHz, but I wanted to ask. If someone has already done it, it may help a bit (or stop me from wasting my time). Why caps? Simpler description than with chemical batteries. Unfortunately if the key holder is chemical battery, my interest will be significantly lower in this system.

[Plazma]

Deterministic vs Adaptive

Hi All,

Maybe the impedance balancing thing between the two sides of the TSw is not deterministic at this time because we don't have or are not using a correct model for the various "currents" that are circulating in our devices (big understatement).

A Glimmer of Hope . . .

From time-to-time someone posts some progress and it seems that in some of those reports the circuits used filament bulbs that are somewhat adaptive in that their resistance changes with current, maybe sufficiently so to partially compensate for other non-linearities in the overall system.

Timing vs Tuning . . .

Then there's the timing and a duality emerges there: a) the batteries seem to like a particular "on" time and then a "delay" or "off" time depending on the peculiar nature of the battery and its physical/mechanical state; b) the sharp edges of the timing pulses can evoke "blips" in impedance based on whatever capacitances and inductances there are distributed within the elements of the apparatus (at 0.5-10Hz these could/should be small, but are they really of no consequence? . . .).

THE BIG KAHUNA . . .

And then there is the SS switch - if/when it/they go into the negative region what is the effective impedance of the apparatus . . . negative?! If so, what would balance that . . . another identical SS switch turned on and in the positive region of operation? Or better, do the SS switches in the circuits (have to) run together in such a way so as to balance/null out the various other impedances in the circuit and thus drop into the "negative" region, together. If so, does this mean we have to very carefully match up all of our SSswitches as close as possible? . . . not sure.

The various potentials around the system either are or can be used (as gated through optos) to modulate the bases of the SSswitches. As those potentials change, the SSswitches react to those changes. Is that adaptive, and does that collective activity in the bases of the SSswitch(s) achieve the desired balance we are seeking? That is, which potential should be used to modulate which SSswitch (or SSswitches) so that together there is no interferance to the flow of "Radiant" energy?

Are we still having fun . . .

Plazma

[John_Bedini]

Tesla Switch

Tehnoman,
This has all been tried before, it's not part of the program. Capacitors do not react like batteries, and the group is going to waste time on this experiment. It's a four battery system so stick with four batteries until the switching works.

You can simplify the whole system, two switches and some diodes. The Mueller switch is mechanical, remember Mueller came to see me I did not go to him, He worked for NASA, and MR. Kent worked for Ford I remember it well and all the failures. If you make changes in this system it may not work at all.

Unfortunately the batteries work by moving Ions and the speed it not fast, it's a slow process. But in answer to your question, it has been tried before. The Tesla switch only uses two currents, and it is current between sides, one high and one low and this keeps switching.

The Patent is one half of the Tesla Switch, these two patents combine to make the Solar Kick. To make it work The impedance of the panel must be changed, by building up of charges to high potential.

It's already proven to work in a two battery bank as shown. Peter has seen these machines in operation along with Aaron, both who come to my shop all the time. Faster switching speeds only take place in the oscillator, not in the charge circuit. When it works Resistance in the system means nothing. I will find another Quote and post it for the group, from Gabriel Krone.

“When only positive and negative real numbers exist, it is customary to replace a positive resistance by an inductance and a negative resistance by a capacitor (since none or only a few negative resistances exist on practical network analyzers).”

“...the missing concept of "open-paths" (the dual of "closed-paths") was discovered, in which currents could be made to flow in branches that lie between any set of two nodes. (Previously — following Maxwell — engineers tied all of their open-paths to a single datum point, the 'ground'). That discovery of open-paths established a second rectangular transformation matrix... which created 'lamellar' currents...”
John B










Tehnoman,
This has all been tried before, it's not part of the program. Capacitors do not react like batteries, and the group is going to waste time on this experiment. It's a four battery system so stick with four batteries until the switching works.

You can simplify the whole system, two switches and some diodes. The Mueller switch is mechanical, remember Mueller came to see me I did not go to him, He worked for NASA, and MR. Kent worked for Ford I remember it well and all the failures. If you make changes in this system it may not work at all.

Unfortunately the batteries work by moving Ions and the speed it not fast, it's a slow process. But in answer to your question, it has been tried before. The Tesla switch only uses two currents, and it is current between sides, one high and one low and this keeps switching.

The Patent is one half of the Tesla Switch, these two patents combine to make the Solar Kick. To make it work The impedance of the panel must be changed, by building up of charges to high potential.

It's already proven to work in a two battery bank as shown. Peter has seen these machines in operation along with Aaron, both who come to my shop all the time. Faster switching speeds only take place in the oscillator, not in the charge circuit. When it works Resistance in the system means nothing. I will find anothe quoit and post it for the group, from Krone.

John B

[blackchisel97]

SC

Hello John Bedini and team,

I'm still "fighting" with SC. I don't want to abandon this project and go back to TS, before I'll make it work. From my understanding and results with 50W bulb reported by John K. it is workable, doable etc. I got 6,800uF/35V caps and SG switching from 2Hz - MHz, with d.c control working and small "dead time". When I increase d.c towards 50% I can get 5W bulb glow. By changing timing cap for SG I'm trying to find sweet spot but no luck so far. Battery drops faster/slower but drops. Yesterday (unintentionally) I end up with no cap, just capacitance of two soldering posts. Oscillator went up in to microsec. range and bulb remained dimly lit. I could see the waves which I didn't see before and hear "switching" in my small AM radio nearby. Changing d.c produced different, new waveforms. I put small (pF range ) cap to hold freq. steady and watched for a while. I also placed smaller load (3 grain bulb in series) and measured 5 -12V across them. Battery didn't drop as fast as before. Probably this isn't important observation but it was interesting to watch. I'll try to get MJL tranny's. I don't know what I'm doing wrong otherwise or which way to go. At one point I recognized the wave posted by John while ago. I tried to find again this post but I can't. It was hand drawn BTW. Battery is LA, motorcycle, 10Ah.


Vtech

[ldissing]

Tehnoman,

...

You can simplify the whole system, two switches and some diodes. The Mueller switch is mechanical, remember Mueller came to see me I did not go to him, He worked for NASA, and MR. Kent worked for Ford I remember it well and all the failures. If you make changes in this system it may not work at all.

“When only positive and negative real numbers exist, it is customary to replace a positive resistance by an inductance and a negative resistance by a capacitor (since none or only a few negative resistances exist on practical network analyzers).”

“...the missing concept of "open-paths" (the dual of "closed-paths") was discovered, in which currents could be made to flow in branches that lie between any set of two nodes. (Previously — following Maxwell — engineers tied all of their open-paths to a single datum point, the 'ground'). That discovery of open-paths established a second rectangular transformation matrix... which created 'lamellar' currents...”
John B

I've heard and read (on your pages) these quotes many times. Nobody has ever tried to explain what they mean. I do not pretend to be bright enough to know what they mean, but I'll have a go at it just for the sake of discussion.

“...the missing concept of "open-paths" (the dual of "closed-paths") was discovered, in which currents could be made to flow in branches that lie between any set of two nodes. (Previously — following Maxwell — engineers tied all of their open-paths to a single datum point, the 'ground'). That discovery of open-paths established a second rectangular transformation matrix... which created 'lamellar' currents...”

Closed paths: If you tie everything to ground...that is where the current will go...straight to the ground, i.e. no circulation, no sheathing of current, cuts the heavyside current to none (or a bare minimum).

Open paths: No "ground". Every potential difference can have a current flowing from it. If the potential differences are evened out, these currents stop, i.e. no potential difference. So, you keep moving the potential in the system and just before the current can stop, you move it again with switching so, it keeps moving.

The Tesla switch has no earth ground, but it does have low and high points of potential. I believe, based on your previous hand drawn graph of the potentials, that just as the potential reaches a maximum, we need to switch, but this is well before the ions have a chance to move, i.e. slow moving beasts that they are, therefore, I am in a quandary as to how the switch can be that fast, but yet that slow except to include dead time. During the dead time, there is nothing flowing, at least not conventional current.

I do not know what "second rectangular transformation matrix" means, except to say that currents can continue to flow in the open paths with potential differences that are NOT tied to the lowest potental while others have terminated at the lowest potential point in the system.

It's all I have for now and not very revealing. Just stating the obvious, hoping that JB will take pity on my ignorance and elaborate on those quotes

Leroy

[Mavrick23]

Vtech the post with the drawn waveform was #1051

[blackchisel97]

Vtech the post with the drawn waveform was #1051

Thanks That's the one I was looking for. Mine was upside down but this is just a scope leads inverted.

Vtech

[wings]

Bit's,
I cant say much as this is a company product, but when it finally dawns on what you just saw. you will know to keep working and you will get it. I do hope the best for the world.
But I will do everything one can do to get it out. its plain and simple no heat in the batteries at all. It's a Modified Tesla Switch Solar Charger, but can be used on the motors also.
53 watt in 148 out. here is the link. I won't answer the question you posted, but you guys are very close.
JB
YouTube - MVI_2378.AVI

what impresses is the difference of the size of cables

[Matthew Jones]

New thing Found Maybe..

I have been testing with the 4 battery 2 switch version. I got some 35 amp diodes but I still wasn't able to get the thing working as described with my relays. So I had to add in a switch. I am going to try some MJL's soon

The thing I have found that is different and hopefully worth reporting, is that if you pulse back and forth with a balanced load at 2 Hz , you can maintain your charge. in your batteries. But if you pulse 30 times to right then 30 times to left and continue this pattern you can get a charge to develop in the battery. Even with the load.

John K was mentioning maybe running longer from side to side and I have tried this but I get better results with a pulse. 1/2 second for both on and off. but I have to do it in the same direction multiple amounts of times before I switch direction. Then I start charging while running a load.

No numbers yet.

Just thought I would point that out.

Matt

[blackchisel97]

I have been testing with the 4 battery 2 switch version. I got some 35 amp diodes but I still wasn't able to get the thing working as described with my relays. So I had to add in a switch. I am going to try some MJL's soon

The thing I have found that is different and hopefully worth reporting, is that if you pulse back and forth with a balanced load at 2 Hz , you can maintain your charge. in your batteries. But if you pulse 30 times to right then 30 times to left and continue this pattern you can get a charge to develop in the battery. Even with the load.

John K was mentioning maybe running longer from side to side and I have tried this but I get better results with a pulse. 1/2 second for both on and off. but I have to do it in the same direction multiple amounts of times before I switch direction. Then I start charging while running a load.

No numbers yet.

Just thought I would point that out.

Matt

I found your report very interesting and something to think about

Vtech