Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera

[marathonman]

Part G

Hanon;

Actually reviewing you post and staying up all night reviewing note and this and that i think your post about impedance has merit. if the entire system with all the cores wired up (whole system) even wired with low impedance/resistance like i think they should be as does Doug, the system should be matched as a whole. all wired with thick wire for low losses can still be impedance matched and still allow part G to do it's job.

part G controls the currant as i am sure every one knows by now but you have to realize Figuera chose his wording very, very carefully as to expose just enough to get the patent. you may not think the energy is recycled but i really don't care if you understand it or not because after all this time trying to explain it to you and you still don't get it you probably will never get it but i will one more time since your post was and is so valuable.

as the reducing primary is shoved out the secondary core power is produced so why not take advantage of this power produced and use it. now if someone decided to use this power from the receding electromagnet in a beneficial way, what then would be the best alternative to using that power .??? by reusing the power would be the best thing and not waist it so you have to ask your self what would be the best option to reinject power into the system. since part G has opposing field in it's core already and is fed a small portion of the output combining them together would give a slight boost to the increasing electromagnet so how and where would you do this.???? at the brush would be the most logical place to inject the power as the opposing fields act as a diode and allows part G to absorb the power and store it in the form of a magnetic field for later use. this very action is taking place every half turn of the brush so part G is fed power every half turn from both sources, the receding primaries and the secondary and will only take or absorb what power it needs.

I hope this helps to clear the fog a little if it don't then oh well, i tried.
PS. that post was the most intelligent thing you have posted in years, so yes, thanks for contributing.

Cifta;

I am sorry for posting like that, i am sure you are a valuable asset and will contribute highly to this device once understood correctly so i will refrain from posting negatively. thank you for your input. but i will ad that i am not the one that is confused about the recycling, you are. the power is reinserted at the brush not shuffled back and forth between the primaries and part G so your understanding of the system is still short but getting better.

Seaad;

Your completely useless with your stupid antics, grow up. we are suppose to be trying to help humanity not join a circus.

MM

[Ufopolitics]

The Figuera "Secret"...or "legacy"?

Hello to All,

After doing all my work related to all Figuera descriptions...I realized the BEST PART of the whole 1908 Patent relies on the preliminary understanding of his approach or could say "his idea" about "Mimicking" the Close, the Aligned and the Far Field.

And so all the "means" he uses, basically by Fluctuating the Currents, are all pure examples in order to "justify" his work...but in reality, NONE work as expected in reality.

If we vary currents by ANY means, the Voltage would be altered as well...and that is not good...it won't work.

Current can not be varied without altering voltage at some point, that is completely nonsense. Look at Ohms Law Equation...ALL Three Parameters are in complete DEPENDENCE upon each others, whether directly or indirectly proportional. Bottom line is that each parameter is in total function of the other two.

At low values this differences are almost not noticeable, however, when we try to increase speed over a current controlling path of any kind (whether by resistance or inductance) then impedance limits our Field Variation Scope, not allowing it to fully develop like Field does at low speeds....not good.

If we analyze a typical generator, the Exciting Magnetic Field is ON at all times, no variation of any of these three parameters (V, I, R) at all during operation, they are completely constant. All that changes is the displacement over time, or Space/Time.

And we all could do just the same thing with stationary coils...while keeping all three parameters constant.

All we need to change is each Coil Geometry and turn them on in a sequential way, back and forth.

Say we have 600 feet of a specific wire gauge...which have a fixed resistance...now, we could wind that wire in many shapes relating to geometrical volume, and using same iron core. Basically if we play with the Coil Length and Thickness, we will have different Magnetic Field Shapes, all wound same direction, meaning all same polarization...for different volumes...and this variation could only be a 10 mm difference and would radically change the Field shape projection, setting either closer or further away.

Anyways...This is what am working on now...and all preliminary testing have given me very positive results...and would be testing a full Model soon.


Regards


Ufopolitics

[hanon1492]

Current can not be varied without altering voltage at some point, that is completely nonsense. Look at Ohms Law Equation...ALL Three Parameters are in complete DEPENDENCE upon each others, whether directly or indirectly proportional. Bottom line is that each parameter is in total function of the other two.

If you connect a pipe to an elevated water tank or to the water network you will get a constant inlet pressure (voltage). The flowrate (current) is controlled by changing the resistance to the flow by opening or closing a valve (impedance).

Batteries are sources of voltage. If you leave voltage constant and just manipulate the impedance, the current will do what it has to do according to Ohm´s Law ( I = V/Z ). And current is the the only parameter of those three with influence in the electromagnet force ~ (N·I)^2


Everyone should take into account also that electromagnets create a filter to the input signal ( time constant = L/R ) and therefore the real output signal going along them is filtered and softened. A filter with a high time constant could eliminate partially the inlet signal waveform. And we are interested in the resulting outlet signal which is the one that will get the magnetism into the electromagnets.

[hanon1492]

MM,

Thanks. We all are in the same team. Everyone of us has different skills, ones with great building skills, other with great motivation and commitment (as yourself) and others with some background in physic principles. I try to help in those aspect that I have studied or I think that are relevant. We should join forces in order to put all our skills to crack the code.

I think that current science is not complete, and many things are still to discover or to be corrected, but we can always use basic principles (Ohm´s Law, Electromagnet Force, Inductance calculations,...) in order to understand this device. At the end there are just two opposite magnetic fields moving along a coil.

Good luck to all

[seaad]

Move

UFOP; This is not an attemt to step on your toes, Just come to think of it.

It seems that the entire coil (atoms) needs to be moved ( or core w. magnets) to induce voltage. Am I right? See pic.
Arne

[Ufopolitics]

If you connect a pipe to an elevated water tank or to the water network you will get a constant inlet pressure (voltage). The flowrate (current) is controlled by changing the resistance to the flow by opening or closing a valve (impedance).

Hanon,

By using your example above (an Elevated water tank), you are getting a Fourth Parameter at game...Gravity...why complicate things that much?

Batteries are sources of voltage. If you leave voltage constant and just manipulate the impedance, the current will do what it has to do according to Ohm´s Law ( I = V/Z ). And current is the the only parameter of those three with influence in the electromagnet force ~ (N·I)^2

Negative, current AND Voltage, BOTH makes Magnetic Field Changes, and NOT only Current.

What Do You think "N" or Number Of Turns do to Voltage?...The higher number of turns is in relation to higher voltage...and so the opposite.

Could You just forget about Math Formulas and base it on REALITY AND FACTS?

FACT IS that NONE of Us can manipulate Current by dialing our PSU's Amp Dial ALONE, without affecting by dropping or rising voltage, can you understand that fact?

If we all could do that...it would be another the "case"...but it is NOT POSSIBLE.

Have you ever played with a PSU?

Everyone should take into account also that electromagnets create a filter to the input signal ( time constant = L/R ) and therefore the real output signal going along them is filtered and softened. A filter with a high time constant could eliminate partially the inlet signal waveform. And we are interested in the resulting outlet signal which is the one that will get the magnetism into the electromagnets.

Electromagnets are just a Spatial Projector of a Magnetic Field.

And so, a given V & A Render a specific Spatial Magnetic Field...and the minute you alter either one, the other would change as well, no matter how much...the point here is that by changing any of those two parameters would give Us ANOTHER Magnetic Field of different characteristics/properties.

Generators Principle as Figuera's Main Idea which lead him to build his machine were based on using the SAME MAGNETIC FIELD, just closer and further away...BUT NOT about different Fields.


Ufopolitics

[Ufopolitics]

UFOP; This is not an attemt to step on your toes, Just come to think of it.

It seems that the entire coil (atoms) needs to be moved ( or core w. magnets) to induce voltage. Am I right? See pic.
Arne

Negative Seaad,

You do not need to "move" absolutely any physical mass of any kind at all.

All we need... is to move the "Non Physical Field" over Material Mass.

All efforts to alter/change the feeding Electromagnet Parameters (V&A) which projects the Spatial Magnetic Field have not worked out so far.

Which translated in plain English tells me we can not either "Weaken" nor "Strengthen" Field to reach OU...thinking or "expecting" it would give us the same exact "effects" as takes place by moving a steadily ON Field, same field...in the exciter system Rotor of any generator.

And do not take me wrong above, I meant successfully work out in order to reach OU...but we got demonstrated that Induction is possible even with weird Field Changes of any kind...but it is not an "organized" way...therefore it (induction) can not grow in an organized pattern above certain point of Induced Output.

We are almost there...patience please...we will crack that code...


Ufopolitics

[hanon1492]

Negative, current AND Voltage, BOTH makes Magnetic Field Changes, and NOT only Current.

Negative, electromagnet's magnetic force just depends on current. The current which transverse its windings. The voltage is just the driving force to push that current along the electromagnets, but the electromagnet does not care if you use 12 volts or 100 volts as long as you could move the same current.

Just tried to help.

If you are interested I have never used a PSU. Figuera never used those. He played with batteries.

[seaad]

You do not need to "move" absolutely any physical mass of any kind at all.
All we need... is to move the "Non Physical Field" over Material Mass.
Ufopolitics

I know that. I have tried many combinations according to the pic below and similar, both thru and over material-mass/ output coil(s). Different signals 90o , 180o , NN, NS half sinus (rectified) signals. Step I then II or sliding I to II. With DC-bias and without. Open rod(s) and closed cores. Best result N=60%-80%. (As an ordinary transformer closed core >= 90%.) But in all cases/combinations I see all the familar behavoir of a transformer, including that the secondary always affects the primaries.

Regards / Arne

[bistander]

B vs V

Negative, current AND Voltage, BOTH makes Magnetic Field Changes, and NOT only Current.

Negative, electromagnet's magnetic force just depends on current. The current which transverse its windings. The voltage is just the driving force to push that current along the electromagnets, but the electromagnet does not care if you use 12 volts or 100 volts as long as you could move the same current.

Hi guys,

I've been through this before with Ufo. The magnetic field is independent of voltage. The mmf depends only on the net current passing through the surface (area) enclosed by the flux per Ampere's Law.

Yes, in the non-superconductoring world, the current in a coil which produces the mmf is dependent on the voltage applied to the coil per Ohm's Law. However the voltage to mmf or flux relationship is purely coencenedence. Easy proof is to maintain constant current in the coil as it heats up. You must increase applied voltage as the resistivity of the copper increases. But the field remains unchanged with this voltage change.

Note in the Ufo quote above that he includes "field changes" which further confuses the subject by mixing a statement about a static field with a condition of a changing field. And yes Ufo, a changing magnetic field defines a voltage, or in other words, there is dependence of voltage on field change. But that is not the same as the static field dependence on only current and not voltage.

Regards,

bi

[Ufopolitics]

Negative, electromagnet's magnetic force just depends on current. The current which transverse its windings. The voltage is just the driving force to push that current along the electromagnets, but the electromagnet does not care if you use 12 volts or 100 volts as long as you could move the same current.

Just tried to help.

I am sorry but you are NOT helping here if You are not using your logic at all, as you keep contradicting yourself above.

What I really do not understand is that you are even writing everything above to come up with the right Logical Conclusion...and still you deny it to your own self

It is NOT absolutely the same to have 12V driving 10 amps...as having 120 Volts driving same 10 amps!!

And basically to what I am referring here is to the Magnetic Field strength value. However, this basic knowledge applies to every single application out there.

Using your water and pipe analogy...You could have compressed in a HORIZONTAL pipe (so Gravity does not act upon water directly based on column weight) a very high volume of compressed water (high amperage)...and If You don't get the right amount of DRIVING FORCE (Voltage) to propel that water to the required distance along the contiguous empty pipe....it absolutely, would NEVER happen.

If you are interested I have never used a PSU. Figuera never used those. He played with batteries.

I knew that...that is the main reason why all your writings are only based on airy (inflated) mathematics...since your practical experience bolts down to zero...Oh, excuse moi...I forgot about the moving piece of clear paper...and the Variac and two bulbs deal...

And If Figuera would have had access to a PSU...plus just a couple Diodes...am very sure he wouldn't have used a commutator to convert AC to DC, nor a battery...to self sustain his machine...


Ufopolitics

[Ufopolitics]

Hi guys,

I've been through this before with Ufo. The magnetic field is independent of voltage. The mmf depends only on the net current passing through the surface (area) enclosed by the flux per Ampere's Law.

Yeah, right Bistander...and also depending on the A/T remember?...but what does Amps Turns actually means?...Voltage remember?

Yes, in the non-superconductoring world, the current in a coil which produces the mmf is dependent on the voltage applied to the coil per Ohm's Law. However the voltage to mmf or flux relationship is purely coencenedence. Easy proof is to maintain constant current in the coil as it heats up. You must increase applied voltage as the resistivity of the copper increases. But the field remains unchanged with this voltage change.

Bistander, the changes according to temperature in a coil related to resistance increase, therefore voltage increase are completely insignificant compared to what we are talking about here.

Note in the Ufo quote above that he includes "field changes" which further confuses the subject by mixing a statement about a static field with a condition of a changing field. And yes Ufo, a changing magnetic field defines a voltage, or in other words, there is dependence of voltage on field change. But that is not the same as the static field dependence on only current and not voltage.

Regards,

bi

Yes, Bistander, but I was not referring to what you are writing above which is EMF as a resulting voltage...nope, not referring to that relationship as a result...but as the voltage required to drive X Amps on a given coil from the Input point of view to the coil.

So...You do not think there could be a Static Coil "Assembly" (assembly meaning two or more coils within same core) driven by DC...where we could have a "Changing Magnetic Field"...without changing the feeding Current...nor any other Input Parameter to Coil Assembly like Resistance nor Voltage?


Regards


Ufopolitics

[Ufopolitics]

I know that. I have tried many combinations according to the pic below and similar, both thru and over material-mass/ output coil(s). Different signals 90o , 180o , NN, NS half sinus (rectified) signals. Step I then II or sliding I to II. With DC-bias and without. Open rod(s) and closed cores. Best result N=60%-80%. (As an ordinary transformer closed core >= 90%.) But in all cases/combinations I see all the familar behavoir of a transformer, including that the secondary always affects the primaries.

Regards / Arne

Ok, let's say you have a "slight" idea on what I am referring to...but still far away.

See your S1 and S2 as your N1 and N2 are identical GEOMETRIES...Not good....and that was one...second, by placing then one after the other...you are just reinforcing field strength when you turn on all four...to then turning just one pair...the only problem is that by coils having same topology...they form N/S-N/S Chains between them...not good, because it interferes with the Repulsive Field...meaning if you had a N<>N then right in between you turn on a S/N-S/N<>N/S-N/S...then the Repulsion Field looses strength.

You are lacking to Visualize the Magnetic Field but concentrating on the coils positioning...all coils could be within same space Volume...and still Field would move...

Keep trying to "guess"...maybe one day you will hit it...

In a temperature ratings scale to getting closer to what am talking about being "hot"...you are still very cold...ok, let me be nicer...say a bit, but just a bit warm...



Ufopolitics

[bistander]

No idea

Yeah, right Bistander...and also depending on the A/T remember?...but what does Amps Turns actually means?...Voltage remember?



Bistander, the changes according to temperature in a coil related to resistance increase, therefore voltage increase are completely insignificant compared to what we are talking about here.



Yes, Bistander, but I was not referring to what you are writing above which is EMF as a resulting voltage...nope, not referring to that relationship as a result...but as the voltage required to drive X Amps on a given coil from the Input point of view to the coil.

So...You do not think there could be a Static Coil "Assembly" (assembly meaning two or more coils within same core) driven by DC...where we could have a "Changing Magnetic Field"...without changing the feeding Current...nor any other Input Parameter to Coil Assembly like Resistance nor Voltage?


Regards


Ufopolitics

Ufo,

I just have no idea what you're talking about. You obviously don't understand Ampere's Law. And it looks like I am unable to change that. I was reluctant to try again here bit gave it another shot. As to that last part, I don't understand the question if there is one.

Regards,

bi

[Ufopolitics]

Ufo,

I just have no idea what you're talking about. You obviously don't understand Ampere's Law. And it looks like I am unable to change that. I was reluctant to try again here bit gave it another shot. As to that last part, I don't understand the question if there is one.

Regards,

bi

Bistander,

Please let's forget about "Laws" and let's use a simple Black and White example.

Say we have a Coil-Core which wire gauge and number of turns configuration allows a Max Input rating of 175V and 2 Amps during operation ...and so it produces a measurable X Magnetic Field...and so based on what Hanon and you are saying...is that since only Amperage (Current) is what generates the Magnetic Field Strength (understood Volume as well) and not Voltage whatsoever...

Resuming, what you two are saying is that the same Coil above...just using 12 Volts and the same current (2 Amps) would produce exactly the same "X" field strength and volume as when it was fed by 120V/2 Amps?

And yes, we are talking about straight DC here...no pulsed DC, no AC.

Is that what you are saying Bistander, by backing up whatever Hanon wrote?

About previous question...just forget about it...you will see soon what I meant.


Regards


Ufopolitics