Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera

[bistander]

bi,
You don’t see the image?

Now I see it. It says

"The amount of magnetic flux produced by an electrical current flowing through a conductor has no direct relationship to the electrical energy expended as watts "

It could be said better. He implies electrical energy carries units of watts.

In a magnetic circuit, the flux is dependent on the magnetomotive force (mmf) quantified as ampere turns (AT). So flux depends directly on current, which needs an electric circuit. As such, one might think a voltage drop across the conductor or coil would indicate power associated with the mmf, however this is dependent on the resistance. And the resistance of the conductor, or coil, can vary for a given current. The resistance of copper wire changing with temperature is a prime example. So as resistance changes, so does power. So the current is not directly (solely) dependent on power. And in modern times, superconductor coils have zero resistance, so obviously no direct dependence on power, so the mmf and flux require zero power in that case.
bi

[jettis]

bi have you watched any of Paul’s video’s? Contained within those videos are a wealth of information.

[bistander]

bi have you watched any of Paul’s video’s? Contained within those videos are a wealth of information.

I've only seen fairly short pieces but from those he turns me off. No incentive to watch more. Not impressed. Just not interested in him.
bi

[jettis]

I've only seen fairly short pieces but from those he turns me off. No incentive to watch more. Not impressed. Just not interested in him.
bi

The way I look at it is… People spend years doing research and development into a particular device and if they are a decent researcher they have figured out what works and what doesn’t, they should have explored all avenues leading to and from the device and they should have figured it out completely. Now if this researcher decides to share some of his path to success in the form of video presentation's, this is great, even if we only were to learn one thing new it still would be time well invested just to listen to that individual even if we did not like him or his presentation style.

If everyone did as you say bi we would never advance forward.

[bistander]

The way I look at it is… People spend years doing research and development into a particular device and if they are a decent researcher they have figured out what works and what doesn’t, they should have explored all avenues leading to and from the device and they should have figured it out completely. Now if this researcher decides to share some of his path to success in the form of video presentation's, this is great, even if we only were to learn one thing new it still would be time well invested just to listen to that individual even if we did not like him or his presentation style.

If everyone did as you say bi we would never advance forward.

Ya know jettis, when someone lectures me, I expect him to know what he's talking about. I haven't gotten that impression from him, so I lost interest.

Regarding your last sentence, I, and my teams, over my career, have advanced nicely. A big part of that has been the ability to separate science from bs.

BTW, what exactly is his success that you mention?
bi

[jettis]

How can you pass judgement when you have not heard what he is saying, you have to hear the messenger so to speak. You said yourself you have done what is the equivalent of judging a book by its cover. It is foolishness and there is no wisdom in that approach.
Plain and simple!

Instead of looking for mistakes in a persons delivery look at what the person is trying to say and see if what they are trying to describe has merit or not. Reason it out don’t ignore the point and hang your hat on their delivery.

How do you feel about others like Jim Murray, Peter Lindemann, John Bedini, Bruce De Palma, Joesph Newman etc.

[bistander]

How can you pass judgement when you have not heard what he is saying, you have to hear the messenger so to speak. You said yourself you have done what is the equivalent of judging a book by its cover. It is foolishness and there is no wisdom in that approach.
Plain and simple!

Instead of looking for mistakes in a persons delivery look at what the person is trying to say and see if what they are trying to describe has merit or not. Reason it out don’t ignore the point and hang your hat on their delivery.

How do you feel about others like Jim Murray, Peter Lindemann, John Bedini, Bruce De Palma, Joesph Newman etc.

Since you ask, I feel similarly about those other fellows, except for maybe Jim Murray of whom I know very little. I do know it is not a popular attitude around here, so I try just to avoid the subject. But since you ask, I answer. I consider it off-topic. I try to stick with science. I thought that was what you were after when you started this conversation.

There may be some occasions where I am too quick with judgement. I can change my mind about a person if I'm convinced I'm wrong about him. But, by and large, for topics within my realm of expertise, I can recognize bs very quickly and accurately.

Hey, I'm all for experimentation with energy, especially involving electric machinery. A lot of folks here don't have much education and experience in the field. That's to be expected. One doesn't have to know what they're doing to experiment, although it helps. I just try to assist by providing bits of knowledge here and there. Most often I conclude by suggesting they "look it up", in other words, don't simply believe me, verify what I say, learn the truth.

What's wrong with that?
bi

[jettis]

Since you ask, I feel similarly about those other fellows, except for maybe Jim Murray of whom I know very little. I do know it is not a popular attitude around here, so I try just to avoid the subject. But since you ask, I answer. I consider it off-topic. I try to stick with science. I thought that was what you were after when you started this conversation.

There may be some occasions where I am too quick with judgement. I can change my mind about a person if I'm convinced I'm wrong about him. But, by and large, for topics within my realm of expertise, I can recognize bs very quickly and accurately.

Hey, I'm all for experimentation with energy, especially involving electric machinery. A lot of folks here don't have much education and experience in the field. That's to be expected. One doesn't have to know what they're doing to experiment, although it helps. I just try to assist by providing bits of knowledge here and there. Most often I conclude by suggesting they "look it up", in other words, don't simply believe me, verify what I say, learn the truth.

What's wrong with that?
bi

bi thanks for what appears to be an honest answer.

[citfta]

https://ugetube.com/watch/4b4pXFmNb8WIsHJ

My work on the Figuera device. For any more information go to OverunityMachines.com and look for my build. You might have to join before you can read it.

[Rakarskiy]

I also worked with a similar principle and dismantled Figueras. I think my little investigation will be useful to you

Your Electricity * Over Unity: GENERATORS CLEMENTE FIGUERA 1902 (rakatskiy-blogspot-com.translate.goog)

2023-12-04_151543.jpg

I've completed my research. There is a very logical version of Fieger's generator technology. The solution is so logical that Fieger's genius came up with this solution back in 1902. For the solution he had to find answers to simple questions: what is the difference between the operation of a generator (dynamo) and a transformer. What needs to be done to make a static structure work as a generator. It turned out that my article (link above) was missing one more element that must be present to perform Faraday's electromagnetic induction in a static version of a generator. There is no hidden knowledge of electromagnetic induction here, there is an ingenious engineering solution by Figueras and Dr Holcomb. Bonus is my suggestion on how to make the MEG work. The post is informational, that I've finally found the answers.

28565218.jpg
Wise Eye OverUnity: ANAPOLE MOMEN and ELECTROMAGNETIC GENERATOR (rakatskiy.blogspot.com)

[hermesatar]

Measurement error or Cold electricity:

Hi All,

Glenn Steckling director of the George Adamski Foundation:

https://www.adamskifoundation.com/

said in one of Rene Erik Olsen's Youtube conversations:

https://www.youtube.com/@wantingtoknow244

that the aliens use free energy generators with no moving parts. Take a ferrite rod and wind the turns of the father coil clockwise. upon it wind a child coil turns clockwise or anti-clockwise and upon it wind the turns of the mother coil anti-clockwise.

The Father coil and the Mother coil are the primary coils and can be connected either in parallel or in series. Remember that the north-south poles are reversed in the mother coil. The child coil is the secondary coil which is connected to a 1 ohm resistor. The frequency is 175 khz or more due to it being a ferrite rod with only one layer of each coil.

When I connected the primary coils in series I could load the child coil with a 1 ohm resistor and still get a 2 volt peak to peak voltage across the 1 ohm resistor. It will be 2 amps peak to peak, through the resistor. But the 1 ohm resistor which was 1/4 watt was cold. I have done many free energy experiments and always ended up using a decade resistor box 1 ohm-100 kilo ohm.

It is the first time that I get such a large output voltage, at such a low resistance. All other attempts have produced less than 100 millivolts. I use a frequency generator that is built into the oscilloscope and when I tested it by loading it without a transformer, it put out 25 volts peak to peak and about 20 milliamps. It gives an output power of max 0.5 watts. In the experiment with series-connected primary coils, the input voltage was 15 volts peak to peak. For lower frequencies, you can use transformer sheet metal as an iron core.

Best wishes, Hermes

[hermesatar]

Hi Everyone,

Now I have measured my ET transformer. I used the Voltcraft 632 FG 30 MHz Oscilloscope to measure the voltage from the frequency generator built into the oscilloscope as well as across the 1 ohm resistors. The frequency was measured with a TES 2208 Multimeter and the inductance of the transformer coils with a Voltcraft LCR-9063. The direct current resistance in the inductances is a maximum of 0.1 ohm.

Best wishes, Hermes

[hermesatar]

Kone wrote:

Hi Hermes

Wow thats pretty good!
What is the resistance in ohms of the father, the mother, and child coil?

- 0.1 ohm in each coil

How many turns in each?

- don't know. I just used 1 of 2 flyback transformer cores from an old TV.
Actually I have many flyback transformers from a surplus store.

What is thickness of wire?

- it's 0.75 mm

Is it just one layer?

- Yes one layer each coil.

Is it a ferrite core? How long and what diameter?

- Yes a ferrite core from an old TV. The core was wind 3 cm long and 1.5 cm diameter. You will find a photo of the transformer core from an old TV at:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=e2p58tWIxNc

- I used 1 of 4 parts of the core. It has no magnetic loop. I just wanted to test it similair to a ferrite rod with open ends.


Really good!
Maybe those ET ****ers really do have something going on haha

I watched that Adamski video part one and two pretty interesting I always thought he fake but I have read too much garbage on internet (like wikipedia)

I did not hear where he described this transformer design in parts one and two at least.
Where did you hear about it?

- I might remember wrong on the videos, but I do remember that Glenn Steckling said that the ET secret of free energy is to use two input coils - one clockwise wind
and the other anti clockwise wind. It was up to me to figure up what he mean.

I liked the blown up photo of the alien hiding behind hill - spooky....

I would like to try this at 60hz with laminate steel core from a MWOT instead of ferrite- maybe U-shaped?

- just remember after winding the "father coil" clockwise on the laminate steel core. You have to wind the "child coil" clockwise over (upon) the "father coil" and the "mother coil" anti clockwise over (upon) the "child coil".

Also could be awesome motor coils with "counter direction" induced pickup winds sharing core with motor coils as described last post.

- I have no idea if it could work, maybe you can try. And I have no idea why the inductance differ between the coils. I just wind the coils a layer each. I have a suggestion. Because the voltage was so small (0.8 volt) from the "child coil". You can wind the "child coil" with more layers, maybe 4 to 7 layers more than the "father coil" and the "mother coil" Maybe it works the same as the transformer theory with different primary and secondary windings?

- Best Wishes, Hermes

- And I want to correct a mistakes I did on the et_transformer drawing. It should be 3 volts input. Not 5 volts. I have no idea why it loads down the voltage output of the frequency generator when lowering the frequency from <1MHz.

Kone

[hermesatar]

From https://www.mooker.com/showthread.php?tid=142

magluvin Wrote:
thanks for the info. is it that the mother coil needs to be wound counter clockwise, or could it be clockwise and connected oppositely?

Hello magluvin. I have not tested winding the mother coil in the same direction as the father and child coils. Bad news is that, when connecting a capacitor in series with the child coil for resonance, the circuit is not above unity: 7.5 kHz Input power: 50 mA*6 volts = 0.3 watts. Output power: 400 mA*0.4 volts = 0.16 watts. I think it is phase shift in the transformer. It is inductive but the load is resistive.

But considering that the child coil is wound with the same number of turns as both the father coil and the mother coil and consumes more milliamps, maybe the et_transformer can be used as a motor coil in a permanent magnet motor? Like the Robert Adams electric motor?

http://gratisenergi.se/adams.htm

Best wishes, Hermes

P.S has anyone built a motor that consumes reactive power? I mean ampere turns?

P.S 2 all three coils must be wound on the same ferrite rod or on the same transformer leg. They must be wrapped over each other. The father coil is wound on the core, the child coil over the father coil and the mother coil over over the child coil.