Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera

[hanon1492]

A good read for a weekend

Einstein relativity appeared to solve the unresolved problem of induction in homopolar generators under the Maxwell equations. Therefore it was a patch to correct a prior problem, surely due to an inconsistency of the Maxwell equations

Hertz presented a theory to solve the problem of the Maxwell equations without needing any patch. Always is better to correct the problem than create a patch to hide the real problem as Einstein did. Also the Hertz electrodynamic includes into it the Lorentz force equation, not as Maxwell which needs to use the external force equation to compute the force into generators. Well indeed the so called Maxwell equations are not the original Maxwell equation but a version postulated by Heavyside from the original Maxwell equations.

Hertzian electrodynamics

Lorentz's Force



Again we can see that the general equation shows two different phenomena for transformers , dB/dt, and for generators, v•B

[marathonman]

Equation

You are correct Maxwell's equation are all muxed up by Heaviside and Lorentz thanks to J P Morgan. you have to really wonder about those two greedy scientists taking bride money.
also the so called Lorentz force was in Maxwell's 1861/2 paper when Lorentz was only 8 years old, talk about plagiarism right next to butt head Einstein.
it was also correct up until H & L's doctoring.

Elcheapo;

quote
'I'm still a little skeptical on the functioning of that single layer toroid coil working at just 60 hz or less. Desperately hope I'm wrong."

And of course you read in the figuera patent that it's multiple layers and that variac's have multiple layers. good grief, what books have you been reading and why in the world would you think it wouldn't work.

quote;

"never ending attempts"

please enlighten me on my so called "never ending attempts."


MM

[bistander]

Variac

...
And of course you read in the figuera patent that it's multiple layers and that variac's have multiple layers. ...

Hi MM,

I think common variacs are a single layer winding on a toroid core. Can you provide a link to a reference showing or describing a multiple layer winding variac? Also can you give a link to his patent? I'd like to read it again (more thoroughly) and want to be sure I'm using the same translation as you are.

Thanks,

bi

[marathonman]

Single layer

bistander;

I was being slightly sarcastic. but not trying to make anyone mad. the Figuera device as well as Variac's are single layer, no need for anything else.

MM

[marathonman]

Previous post

Thank you marathonman and hanon,

The video was excellent in showing what I was thinking about. Makes things very clear with how this can be set up to vary the current to both primaries.
It is indeed surprising how slow it can be run to have the desired effect.
It appears that the faster this is run the less winding's will be needed in the G core.

A quote from Netica is exactly right, the faster this is run the less winding's will be needed in the G core. so figuera ran his at 2500 rpm i am assuming for 50 hz, in the US it would be 3600 rpm for 60 hz. that is the reason Figuera used thick wire with lower turn count.

no need to have multiple layers just a single layer. see Hanon's video if this is a concern to you.


MM

[Elcheapo]

MM,

You said to Cadman at post 1065.
Quote:
"Cadman;

part G has single layer only."

"Never ending attempts" was just complimenting you for your efforts in trying
to get the inductive part G to work.
Yes, I guess it should work with several layers and a good iron core.

[marathonman]

Part G

Part G will work no mater what, it is just the proper amperage i am concerned about relating to proper winding count. that is why i have fliers at three colleges for a math wiz to help calculate the proper winding, currant, core ratios. when i succeed at this i will post on here. i know i am close right now but i really would like to be exact.

it doesn't matter if using motor driven or transistor driven, the coil count on part G is not very large as my take from the patent. i see things a little different then most and can understand moving parts/field in my sleep. being able to visualize in real time has helped me immensely through out my life.

the video Hanon did on the variac proved my original assumption of low coil count. multiple layers are not required nor needed. as a personal reference, i have two variacs and several cores that i verified my assumption but did not produce videos as hanon had already produced but will provide if requested.

ps. thank you Elcheapo as this is my life long dream.

MM

[hanon1492]

can you give a link to his patent? I'd like to read it again (more thoroughly) and want to be sure I'm using the same translation as you are.

Hi bistander,

As far as I know there is only one published translation, posted as a pdf file in several different sites. Here I attach a link to the file:

https://figueragenerator.files.wordp...uera-44267.pdf

You may change the intensity to each set of electromagnets by changing the impedance. And this can be done by changing the resistance or the reactance.



While I think that toroidal variac part G may reduce most of the heat losses done by the resistors I am not so sure if it really may recycle back the energy of the receding electromagnets because I see that for that energy will be easier to be drained toward the battery ( at zero voltage) than returning back toward the toroid (at some positive voltage). If someone can explain how it can operate avoiding going to the battery I will be very grateful. Thanks.

[bistander]

Hi bistander,

As far as I know there is only one published translation, posted as a pdf file in several different sites. Here I attach a link to the file:

https://figueragenerator.files.wordp...uera-44267.pdf

Thanks hanon.

[marathonman]

Part G - Primary relationship

Hanon;
"If someone can explain how it can operate avoiding going to the battery I will be very grateful. Thanks."

Does it not say in the patent that the power supply (not specifically a battery) is removed and the device will run indefinitely. so if that's the case then how in the world can it "drain to zero".

you fail to realize just how much energy is shoved into part G every half turn, obviously enough to be self sustaining. part G then becomes the power distribution hub being fed by the receding electromagnets being shoved out of the secondary. second secondaries are there to replace losses occurred from heat, wire and core losses which amount to little.


MM

[hanon1492]

MM,

The patent says that part of the output power may be rectified with a mechanicsl switch go converted to direct current and power the small motor which moves the rotary brush and gor the continuous excitation of the electromagnets.

It wont need any external battery but the system is self looped through a return of a fraction of the power produced as output. It does not mention that the system feed itself internally.

Also if the electromagnets are charged from the the battery but later they are charged from the toroid then the current is flowing in reverse direction from/to the toroid in each case and therefore the polarity is reversed in the electromagnets in the case of charging and in the case of recycling energy from the toroid, and this a capital sin in this device. I can not understand the operation with a simultaneous battery ( with one pole at zero voltage) and a toroid recycling back energy unless this toroid may develop a voltage lower than zero!. Also take into account that the same current that you insert into the system for the losses must be extracted from other part of the circuit, because that current is wasted as heat losses and others losses but the charges remains in the system. This is the law of consevation of charge. And we are here to break the law of conservation of energy but not to break the conservation of charge Sorry but I can not understand it. This is not a destructive comment, I am doing my best to understand it but I can not see how the energy can be move back and forth from/to the toroid taking as reference the flow of current to the lowest potential point and without reversing direction of fhe current (and thus reversing polarity in the electromagnets). Thus why I posted before that I see the toroid as a better system to reduce the resistor heat losses but I can not see the recycling energy concept. If someone can help me I will be very grateful.

[Solarlab]

Hi Hannon,

Re: "A good read for a weekend" Nice work and thanks for sharing the links, especially Lorentz's Force. The author presents an excellent [very useful] Lab demo/teaching tool!

Have a great and productive day...

SL

[marathonman]

non understanding

where do you think the energy goes from the primary basically being shoved out the secondary knowing it has retained 80 to 90 % of its power in reduction. the little power fairies certainly didn't take it away so through sound reasoning and the obvious connection to part G, the power is shoved into part G when the brush is opposite from it. that becomes a low spot because the field is always flowing to the brush and rotates along with the brush. the second secondary is used to replace what was lost in this process and through heat, core and wire losses.
i really don't know what else to tell you as you have struggled with the device for years and i hope someday you understand it. having a pretty web site means nothing if you can't even grasp the basic concept of it's parts working as a whole.
sometimes you have to think outside the box on things that do not operate according to stupid false man made ideas. most of mans concepts of electricity and magnetism are completely wrong including every book in our education system so what we are stuck with is a device that acts like no other, thus requires a little imagination and ingenuity in the operational department and this is the area you seem to be struggling with from the start.

all i can say is keep studying the patents, observe what is being posted and try to visualize the fields moving inside of the core. visualize the primary getting pushed out the secondary into part G.
if the energy does not get recycled and you have to constantly feed the device then it will NEVER be self sustaining and will be in the same class as a transformer.
i hope you get it soon.

MM

[hanon1492]

In fact I understand perfectly the principles of Figuera device. The only part that I do not see is your proposal for energy recycling in the part G. Actually I was expecting a technical answer to the two main doubts I have about the energy recycling idea:

1. How can an electromagnet " get filled and emptied " of current coming from/to the toroidal part G using just one wire without reversing its polarity? (in my mind this is impossible) This device must be fed with a current always in the same direction to mantain always the same polarity in the electromagnets without reaching a reversal
   
   
2. How can the current stored in the toroid return to the electromagnets (to get recycled) instead of going to the battery which is at zero voltage? (if so that mean a current flowing against voltage)

For clarity of other users I post below an sketch that MM posted in OU dot com forum some months ago.

if the energy does not get recycled and you have to constantly feed the device then it will NEVER be self sustaining and will be in the same class as a transformer.

I guess your previous quoted sentence is just an oppinion. You have been posting that you got 300 W output using 100 W input exciting the electromagnets with RESISTORS, or wound resistive wire, which is the same concept. What is the true statement, the one about your 300 watts, COP 3 device, or the one I quoted before? Plese be coherent. I think it is not fair to transmit people that just the part G works, which is your personal oppinion, not a fact. I tell everyone that the key is to move the fields in unison , NO MATTER THE METHOD YOU USE TO GET IT (remember that Buforn device was producing 20 KW with just 0.1 KW input. Who cares at this stage if you use 0.1 or 0.5 KW to excite the electromagnets with a better or worse method? )

In fact the patent just describes that the self looping is done externally taking a fraction of the output and using it to run the motor which rotates the brush and to excite the electromagnets. The patent does not mention any internal recycling energy device as you are proposing. I have studied your part G and I think that it may be one good method to avoid heat losses to excite the electromagnets but I can not see the energy going from/to the toroid to/from the electromagnets back and forth. And the patent does not say anything apart from the next literal quote from the patent text itself:



If someone can solve my two technical doubts please post it. I think that they are two easy questions for anyone who understand its operation.

[marathonman]

lessons

You are the most ignorant person i have ever come across in my life.
the pic you posted was not completed and does not show the self loop but the pic is correct.
lets see how much more defensive you can get you big baby.

and for the recycling, sorry baby that is fact from the horses mouth. so run your mouth some more because it only proves you are a baby and an ignorant ass.

my suggestion, grow up and learn to read between the lines and while your at it try posting something new for a change in stead of the same crap for years getting no where by yourself.

this Bs you always pull is getting really tiresome and i'm really tired of trying to explain things to an 10 year old mind. YOU are the only one that does this except the brain dead on OU, D1 excluded.
i really don't even listen/read to your post any more cuz 1. all you do is ramble. 2. all you do is argue. people like you is what is holding this thread back.

MM