Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera

[hanon1492]

the core's polarization gets reversed by the earth magnetic field.
The electric energy that is output during this reversal is free.

Hi marxist,

But the Earth magnetic field is very weak so the free electric energy with this method should be very small. Maybe I am wrong with this statement.

We are looking for huge energy gain. Do you think that it is possible with your proposal?
Maybe you could try to use magnets in each side to enhance the external magnetic field.

[marxist]

@Beamgate

you are right: the last image I published shows both primaries of one assembly supplied with maximum current at the same time. This is contrary to the configuration specified in the patent (quote from hanon's translation of the patent text):
Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE Reply #213

... when the electromagnets N are full of current, the electromagnets S are empty, ...

I have tried to alter my illustration (see attached image) to represent the configuration as intended by Figuera/Buforn.
The new illustration depicts a resulting shifting of the Bloch wall.
Others have previously speculated that this is the special principle in Figuera's setup.
In this case the earth magnetic field is not involved, as far as I understand.

Thanks for your comment, as it made me realize that the shifting of the primary field's LOCATION in the core and the secondary coil makes these setups distinctly different from the operational principle of normal transformers, where the Bloch wall stays at a fixed location and the generation of current in the secondary is based solely on the change of the primary field's INTENSITY.

@hanon
I think any principle that can result in an energy gain should be investigated, even if that gain is small.
But now I think my idea was wrong and Figuera's secret is in the shifting of the Domain wall (as others have said), and not in the interaction with the earth magnetic field.

[hanon1492]

@Beamgate

you are right: the last image I published shows both primaries of one assembly supplied with maximum current at the same time. This is contrary to the configuration specified in the patent (quote from hanon's translation of the patent text):
Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE Reply #213


I have tried to alter my illustration (see attached image) to represent the configuration as intended by Figuera/Buforn.
The new illustration depicts a resulting shifting of the Bloch wall.
Others have previously speculated that this is the special principle in Figuera's setup.
In this case the earth magnetic field is not involved, as far as I understand.

Thanks for your comment, as it made me realize that the shifting of the primary field's LOCATION in the core and the secondary coil makes these setups distinctly different from the operational principle of normal transformers, where the Bloch wall stays at a fixed location and the generation of current in the secondary is based solely on the change of the primary field's INTENSITY.

@hanon
I think any principle that can result in an energy gain should be investigated, even if that gain is small.
But now I think my idea was wrong and Figuera's secret is in the shifting of the Domain wall (as others have said), and not in the interaction with the earth magnetic field.

Hi marxist,
Could you elaborate a bit deeper why you think that a shifting of the domain wall (block wall) can produce electricity?

About Buforn patents, he claimed in the patents that both cores could be in direct contact OR both cores being close to each other. Buforn: "[the] induced, properly placed so that either both opposite sides of its core will be into hollows in the corresponding inducers and in contact with their respective cores, or either, being close the induced and inducer and in contact by their poles" . Maybe he claimed both configurations but just one work fine. The original patent from Figuera just located the cores close to each other but not in contact. I think that Figuera was the master and Buforn was an associate who continued with patent filing after Figuera´s death in 1908.

Regards

[marxist]

...why you think that a shifting of the domain wall (block wall) can produce electricity?

Hi hanon1492,
electromagnetic induction is usually shown to school children by moving a magnet into and out of a coil, see here:
Induction Coil with Magnet

So the electrical energy is created by two factors: the change of field intensity and the change of the field's location. The change of field location is achieved by MOTION of the magnet including the domain wall(s) THROUGH THE COIL'S WIRE LOOPS.

But the secondary coils of today's transformers are only subject to a change of intensity (by switching the primary coil on and off).
In today's transformers there is no change of location of the magnetic field inside and through the secondary coil; but in Figuera's machines there is.

[hanon1492]

Hi hanon1492,
electromagnetic induction is usually shown to school children by moving a magnet into and out of a coil, see here:
Induction Coil with Magnet

So the electrical energy is created by two factors: the change of field intensity and the change of the field's location. The change of field location is achieved by MOTION of the magnet including the domain wall(s) THROUGH THE COIL'S WIRE LOOPS.

But the secondary coils of today's transformers are only subject to a change of intensity (by switching the primary coil on and off).
In today's transformers there is no change of location of the magnetic field inside and through the secondary coil; but in Figuera's machines there is.

You are making me think about it …. !!

Therefore as you suggest a long bar magnet already inserted into a coil (by one of its sides) will keep on inducing a current while it is moved along until the other magnet side reach the coil plane. In this case the domain walls will cross the coil plane from one side to the other.Is this your propousal? I am not sure if this test will work, I doubt. We should test it.

[interdesign21]

labyrinth

confusion cocktail
Two permanent magnets with opposed poles facing = attraction.(both fluxes meet at center coil)
Two electromagnets in same situation DC feed= attraction.
Two electromagnets in previous situation, one DC pulse= 1 attraction+1 attraction by CEMF ?
In this case, voltage polarity reverses and magnetic too accordingly. (not the current)

So, two electromagnets in same situation: step A):1 strong pulse in N, simultaneously weak in S (through R)
step B):1 strong pulse in S, simultaneously weak in N (through R)
step A +step B= 4 attractions ???

Is it any movement at all here, or it is about a geometrical change of flux density-intensity ???

Mind is spreading out of the box and entering the labyrinth.
cheers

[Hrothgar]

Correct me if i'm wrong...

Hi hanon1492,
electromagnetic induction is usually shown to school children by moving a magnet into and out of a coil, see here:
Induction Coil with Magnet

So the electrical energy is created by two factors: the change of field intensity and the change of the field's location. The change of field location is achieved by MOTION of the magnet including the domain wall(s) THROUGH THE COIL'S WIRE LOOPS.

But the secondary coils of today's transformers are only subject to a change of intensity (by switching the primary coil on and off).
In today's transformers there is no change of location of the magnetic field inside and through the secondary coil; but in Figuera's machines there is.

Doesn't the field of a magnet differ from a transformer coil in that the transformer's field is organized by orbiting the coil?

[marxist]

....Therefore as you suggest a long bar magnet already inserted into a coil (by one of its sides) will keep on inducing a current while it is moved along until the other magnet side reach the coil plane. In this case the domain walls will cross the coil plane from one side to the other.Is this your proposal?

Hi hanon1492,
I hope I understand your question, otherwise please rephrase it.

Yes, if you pull a bar magnet out of a coil after you stuck it in, electricity will be produced while you pull the magnet out.
And yes, I think Figuera created this motion in his coil arrangements.

Doesn't the field of a magnet differ from a transformer coil in that the transformer's field is organized by orbiting the coil?

Hi Hrothgar,
according to my understanding the main difference between the two is, that in a transformer all the field lines created by the energized coil are contained in the core, as opposed to the field of a bar magnet, where the field (lines) pass through the air. However, even in a bar magnet the field lines are "orbiting the magnet" in the sense that they are closed (uninterrupted) lines with kind of elliptic shapes, traditionally made visible with iron filings.

[Hrothgar]

Hi Hrothgar,
according to my understanding the main difference between the two is, that in a transformer all the field lines created by the energized coil are contained in the core, as opposed to the field of a bar magnet, where the field (lines) pass through the air. However, even in a bar magnet the field lines are "orbiting the magnet" in the sense that they are closed (uninterrupted) lines with kind of elliptic shapes, traditionally made visible with iron filings.

To clarify I was referring to the way a permanent magnet always has a conical dispersion, while the coil corkscrews around the wire. We physically move a magnet to induce the corkscrew, where as a transformer produces a corkscrew then carries that ordered motion to the secondary.

[hanon1492]

Hi all,

Buforn in his 1914 patent (Patent No. 57955) included another arragement to increase the output from the generator. I haven´t traslated until now because it was just an optimization but not required for the design of the original device.

Translated from Buforn patent 57955 (year 1914)

" This way we will have taken advantage of the two poles of each inducers, except for the first and last inducer where only one pole will be used. There will be as many induced coils as inducers but one. Therefore this arrangement will produce ,with the same use of force, a very considerable increase in the current production.

You can also take advantage of the internal part of the induced coils in which you can place another induced coil of small size, and, longer or equal length than the core of the big induced coil, and, in those small induced coils will be generated an electric current which may be sufficient for the consumption in the continuous excitation of the machine. "



Have you noted that Buforn did not use a circular configuration to improve at maximun the design of the original generator? Please comment.

[JohnStone]

Hi,
I'd like to add some thoughts that could be important - or not.

1.
The value of those resistors at Figuera patent might be of importance. Those guys at rotoverter sites claim that impedance maching is a must in order to get gains. They apply knowledge from HF rules but reuse themat 50/60 Hz circuits.

2.
Both halves of electromagnets at exiting side are steadily interconnected by resistors. So they might interact with changing and / or opposing states. Vladimir Utkin focuses at some pages on multiple coils along short circuit and impedance matching. He shows what strange effects can be observed in his circuits.

Just an idea - might be trush or a penny to add.
John Stone

[Duncan]

Great stuff John .. from little acorns .. you see clearly that the group has recommended very different sets of teaching information right from the outset .
A little thought shows why .. from the early 1900s the trades of “electricity” have been totally divided .. and as necessary subdivided again.
This has been done at the behest of tptb (the powers that be) in order to control knowledge and information. So although engineers in various fields of the subject that is broadly “electrics” believe they are knowledgeable the organised curriculum stops them seeing the entire picture. This is what makes people who have crossed “the divide” and trained in RF, HT grid work as well as electrical engineering such a threat , The differences stand out like a sore thumb and they tend to investigate and exploit them.
I think here of the likes of Hector,Dollard, Mayer .. after all do you really think all the principles of one subject drop away at a certain frequency or voltage ?
Now and again electrical engineers come across statements that are simply ridicules learn them and write them down in order to pass the exam … here is one such quoted unthinkingly as a “law”which is IMHO relevant to this machine.

Back emf is always in phase and of the opposite polarity of the applied voltage. When a motor first has power applied to the armature there is no back emf. But you will see arcing of the brushes if the motor is under a load when starting.

I have taken the liberty to copy and paste from this members post. (although of course its pretty standard diatribe)

http://www.energeticforum.com/renewa...tml#post239717

In phase and yet in opposition ? How does that happen? … Let me digress briefly and explain how high voltage grids used to be interconnected .. an engineer stood by a big switch “breaker” watching rings of lights connected across phases .. when the lights lined up .. closed the breaker
This is a rather more updated version of that contraption …



At best it used to be a nerve racking business Indeed blown to kingdom come comes to mind. .. the contemplation that there could be even the vestige of a chance that something could be “In phase” and in “total opposition” certainly would be liable to cause a twitchy rectum ! So which theory is right? Not surprisingly the motor and the armature theory is correct ! The switching grid principle works … most of the time. However now and again , for no apparent reason , at various points in a system this sort of thing happens.

Unknown location Arc Flash while racking a breaker - YouTube

The truth is quite apart from volts, amps and power factor there is another way of separating and using “electric”, Its “Musical”... Harmonics and Overtones. As you point out the rotoverter guys are using RF principles (and then some) and why not?
Even RF engineers are really only taught Harmonic resonance (and the transverse wave)
Overtones, Stochastic resonance, (and the linear wave) is taught only on a “need to know” basis
although of course the technology is used by hundreds of millions of people daily .. after all things would be very different if mobile phones could only use the harmonic (even frequencies) and not the odd overtones!
Here then is a possible indication of why an armature is required.Like Xtals It is capable of dividing the essence of what we call electricity. It also goes some way to explain why most classical engineers don't comprehend and can't begin to understand the effect and prefer
to cling to known dogma. In an effort to comprehend what practically occurs in COP>1 electrical systems.
It may be of Interest to you John that the line of investigation was triggered by a post you entered long ago in reply to me on the Don Smith thread .. It involved the ringing of a bell with a rope or a rod … If you recall, Still you react quite correctly It could have relevance (or not). I am certainly not involved in trying to convince folks things are happening that they will or cannot see. Neither do I care very much if they totally ignore what I write , after all if the situation was reversed I probably would myself. ..
folks spend their own money and time doing their own experiments regardless of what I may write. All that said John you have obviously taken some time to absorb a deal of what Hector and that dedicated group achieved I hope you can see a way to make it fit here ! Resistance obviously effects the phasor addition real power, apparent power, reactive tower … so of course the “stochastic resonant point. IMHO that is the object of the adjustable resistance .. so worth 10cents (or not) It perhaps gives you another aspect to consider as you ponder this particular machine.
Best wishes Duncan

[Michael John Nunnerley]

Parametrics!

Has anyone thought of this being parametrics? the coils have capacitance as well? is this a parametric LCR setup?

Have to run but I will post a link later when I have found it

Regards

Mike

[erfinder]

Has anyone thought of this being parametrics? the coils have capacitance as well? is this a parametric LCR setup?

Have to run but I will post a link later when I have found it

Regards

Mike

I have...

Its been my experience that we don't connect coils in our circuits correctly. Coils in generators should be configured so that the wave forms that they generate when current is flowing is SQUARE! That's right gentlemen, and ladies, if there are any present. An AC generator which produces Square waves.

Sine to Square - YouTube

Square wave generation forces us to rethink our present understanding about LCR resonance......we are no longer dealing with a single resonant frequency. We are creeping up on infinite resonant harmonics...


Regards

[MonsieurM]

sorry for intruding on your discussion but wanted to bring to your attention the following :

rota / introduction to the work of Louis Rota

During one of these experiments he touched the Stabilisiteur and received an enormous electric shock which rendered him unconscious for 50 minutes. Rota said that the voltages and currents used in the machine were very small and he could not understand how a potential of such a large magnitude build up. The search for a solution, ultimately lead him to the discovery of the Universal Current. This unknown energy, he thought, had amplified the small electric current used in the machine.