Reactive Generator Research for everyone to share

[gotoluc]

Hi everyone,

you may have read that I've been saying this circuit is not creating energy. What I think is going on in this circuit is by causing a time delay between the TWO electricity components (voltage & current) you don't destroy the electricity (aka don't kill the dipole) by short circuit like typical everyday circuit we use.
When the electricity components are 90 degrees out of phase they can go through a circuit, do work and come back out with next to no losses if there is minimal resistance in the circuit.
However, you need something to receive the return and store it or convert it to something useful. I think this is what the Alternator Gen is doing. So timing is very important and I'm now starting to think that a permanent magnet alternator gen may not work as well as an exciter rotor field alternator gen like I've been using in my demos.

Let me explain, for the past 3 days I've been busy converting a DC permanent magnet motor to an AC permanent magnet generator. It's a big job but I got it done and I was testing it last night and found the effect is not as obvious or as good as using an exciter field rotor generator.
When my series cap circuit is connected to this PM AC gen it's like something is out of timing!... I see the effect a little but it's like it's kind of having a fight inside the gen, like a motor out of timing. So I'm starting to think that the exciter rotor gen causes more of a delay then a PM gen and it could be this delay that makes the difference in helping the gen rotor to be pushed at the right time when the reactive power is returned.

More tests need to be done but I though I would share this new information.

Luc


Also, at the OU topic, user name nilrehob has been doing a lot of experiments with what I have shared and has prepared 2 pdf documents.
Here is his post:

Hi Luc,

As You requested, since I get little time left for experimentation, I have written a short 3-page pdf about what i call "Reactive Impulse". This will be my next area of research. Maybe You (or someone else) will find this interesting and beat me to implement it.

https://sites.google.com/site/nilrehob/home/documents

/Hob

[Mario]

Hi Luc,

I don't know if it is the same but something similar happend to me when I tried to make the genny coils of a little monopole motor resonant. As soon as I connected the resonant cap it would suck the motor speed into the resonant lock. It was like the biggest load the motor would see... I'll explain. Let'say the resonance between coil and cap would happen at 3000 rpm. If I would start the motor with the cap connected to the genny coils the motor would slowly get up to speed until the gennys would get close to the resonant point. At that point it was impossible to go any faster and past that point, like a big break.

On the other hand, if I started up the motor without cap and let it speed up above the 3000 rpm, say 5000 o 6000 rpm, and then connected the cap to the generator coils and slowly decreased motor speed, it would slowly decrease, but when in proximity of 3000 (resonant point) it would quickly start to brake down until below 3000 rpm. It simply was not possible to hold it a resonance as it was the greatest load the motor could possibly see.
I still do not understand why that is in a rotored pm generator coil, as this doesn't happen if you excite the genny coil with a primary winding.

Actually, that's not totally true. If you tune a primary to the point where resonance in the secondary is at maximum it will reflect back to the primary big time! Even though current and voltage are 90 degrees out of phase.
But, if you go decrease the frequency just a bit you will find a resonant point (dip) which doesn't give the highest peak of the possible resonant rise on secondary (just a bit lower) but it will not reflect back to the primary.
I have never been able to do this on that rotored generator coil setup, maybe I should give it another go..

I could get the motor coils into resonance with tuned caps no problem though, there you can tune for the lowest consumption.

Another thing I know now after a few tests is that the core of a resonant coil has to be open, you can't use a normal toroid or closed transformer core.

regards,
Mario

[gotoluc]

Hi Mario,

yes, I don't know if we can compare your circuit to mine

But thanks for sharing and hopefully we will find answers for all this

Luc

[erfinder]

I'm not an expert, just someone who tries to think, build a little and reads. My musings for what it's worth...
Erfinder, If I understand you correctly, you are stating that proper impedance matching may be a viable or perhaps necessary precondition for resonance, particularly with conventionally designed circuits and motors. I believe Bearden says something about impedance matching as necessary for keeping the dipole open in order for a circuit to tap into the vacuum's abundant energy. If ...

I'm suggesting that by definition resonance is literally the matching of the capacitive and inductive reactance. I'm suggesting that resonance and impedance matching are one and the same. I'm suggesting that according to the textbooks when the capacitive and inductive reactance's are matched, circuit impedance is reduced to the DC resistance of the circuit, this value is under our immediate control.

Tom Bearden says many things about the dipole. It's not what he says that gets my attention, I don't speak his language anyway. It's those "implied" things that I pick out from between the lines that motivate me. Specifically in an interview when asked about the dipole he made a loose reference to permanent magnets, and how the machines that he has seen work as his theories suggest they should, incorporate magnets, dipoles, which he says we cannot destroy! In the same light, he calls the batteries in systems he is familiar with dipoles as well, anywhere where you have a separation of charge you have a dipole. The language he uses when discussing the topics of impedance matching, Reguaging and dipoles in general leads one (me) to think that he is describing how dipoles communicate between one another.

I find comfort in viewing L and C as if they were dipoles. The dipole concept as presented by Tom Bearden seems incomplete to me, the link connecting the dipole to its source is never mentioned. Its here were the work of Eric Dollard fills this void. His concept of space and counter space and how they are linked to the energy storage mechanisms of L and C are brilliant philosophically and practically.

- this 90 degree phase separation between voltage and magnetic current is made possible by impedance matching (which I think Luc's videos demonstrate), and - if this in fact is a viable pathway to keeping the dipole open (which I believe Luc also says in one of his recent videos),

You're asking me to comment on something that I am not in total agreement with. As can be seen here:

Inductor AC Behavior

in an inductive circuit we find that the voltage leads the current by 90°, and here:

Capacitor AC Behavior

in the capacitive circuit we find that the voltage lags the current by 90°.

The idea presented by my hero is to bring L and C into a relation which would eliminate the effects of self induction. That condition we find here:

Resistor AC Behavior

So the whole concept of phase shifting for gain isn't really hitting home with me yet. The text, and patents from Tesla indicate one thing and this thread is suggesting something else. I am not qualified to say which is the sought after solution. In situations like these, not even the benched results can be trusted. My bench is giving me mixed results....

then, we may have the key in order for circuits to not only overcome their own reactive losses, but to access additional energy from the electrostatic environment, might we not?

I don't claim to know the answer to this one either. The only thing I can say for sure is that when I look back into the works of Tesla he specifically states that he adds capacitance to circuits to neutralize the effects of self inductance, that's it. I find it interesting that Tesla didn't refer to inductance like we do. We find him constantly referring to self inductance and its relation to capacity and frequency.

Quote:
I have found that in every coil there exists a certain relation between its self-induction and capacity that permits a current of a given frequency and potential to pass through it with no other opposition than that of ohmic resistance, or in other words, as though it possessed no self induction.
Coils For Electro-Magnets
End Quote.

So what I am after is what Tesla presented, the ability to neutralize the effect of self-induction for a given frequency. Self-induction = Lenz. I believe we are already extracting energy from the so-called electrostatic environment.

Good point about the transverse EM wave's possible role in the resistance to change in both L and C. Perhaps Eric Dollard's references to the instantaneous nature of longitudinal EM transmission (i.e., unimpeded by resistance to change) in Tesla's work have something to say to this situation now unfolding in this thread. I find it interesting that Tesla's series wound bifi pancake coil and its mutual cancellation of magnetic inductance between windings gives rise to instantaneously propagating longitudinal EM waves capable of broadcasting electricity without losses. Perhaps the 90 degree separation between voltage and current is another pathway to accessing the longitudinal wave/scalar vector phenomenon.

A properly wound bifilar coil will neutralize the effects of self induction for a given frequency, or in the case of this particular winding type, several frequencies. The neutralization of the effects of self induction shouldn't be confused with neutralization of magnetism. The magnetism is still present, if it weren't a bifilar series solenoid would make a lousy electromagnet, we find the opposite to be true, according to the aforenamed patent, the purpose of the coil is to function as an electromagnet. So where is the magnetism? How is the magnetism moving about the wire in a bifilar wound series connected coil?



In a single wire wound coil we find that the flow of magnetism around turns produces repulsion between turns, this can be seen in the image. If the coil in this image were a bifilar wound series connected, we would find that the flow of magnetism around turns would produce attractive forces between turns. Attraction doesn't mean cancellation, this lesson is learned while playing with permanent magnets. We know that when we pull two magnets in attraction apart that the magnetism is still there. If what Eric Dollard states regarding the relation of magnetic and dielectric lines is true, and we find the two at 90° to each other, then more magnetic flux circulating between turns equates to more dielectric flux being present between turns. All of this is speculation on my part and should be taken with a grain of salt.

Much more that I want to say, but I realize the discussion needs to stay focussed. My apologies if I've drifted things off course.Bob

I feel you on that, I could speculate all day on the different aspects of all of this, but then folks would be justified in demanding that I put up or shut up. I apologize for the tangent.


Regards

[Bob Smith]

Erfinder,
Thanks for your thoughtful reply.
Bob

[barbosi]

From Hob:
Hi Luc,

As You requested, since I get little time left for experimentation, I have written a short 3-page pdf about what i call "Reactive Impulse". This will be my next area of research. Maybe You (or someone else) will find this interesting and beat me to implement it.

https://sites.google.com/site/nilrehob/home/documents

/Hob

@Luc,
In my opinion you should really stop reminding every one that we are not creating energy, simply because energy cannot be created, nor destroyed. By making distinction between energy and power, in my understanding the people looking for “free energy” are looking for [free] electrical power production. So using a different terminology, everyone in this game can come out of the woods with their chin up. There is no shame as they are looking for alternative solutions, the same as the big players on the market.

@Hob,
I started to read your documents, and I stopped at the page 1 of basic-ac-theory.pdf where you state:

If You connect a capacitor of 2.4 μF into 50 Hz AC
it will act as a resistor of … 1.3 kΩ
… but it will not get hot, no energy is consumed.

You are right the energy is not consumed (and I may add nor created), but the power is consumed. If you look at the graph P(t)=U(t)*I(t) you will see how much real power (active power) is consumed. Very interesting observation though, that the capacitor will not get hot. And here it is my own interpretation on phenomena, that up to present moment I cannot find somewhere else. Without getting into the relation between “energy” and “power”, my belief is that the power consumed by the capacitor is used to do some work. Which is … to divide the two components, tension (V) and current (I). This is where the phase shift is coming from.
As from today, I am not aware of any study which describes where this phase shift is coming from, nor what is the power consumed by doing this work, because it is work. Up to this day it is just a statement that phase shift is occurring, but why is this happening and what is the cost of it, nobody explained it. We take this for granted from the text books. And this is the case for both, the inductors and the capacitors.

If there is any scientific document or anyone can bring more to the debate table, I am more than willing to contemplate to the opinions.
Until then, great work and great ideas to everybody involved in this along with my best wishes.

[Michael John Nunnerley]

@Luc,
In my opinion you should really stop reminding every one that we are not creating energy, simply because energy cannot be created, nor destroyed. By making distinction between energy and power, in my understanding the people looking for “free energy” are looking for [free] electrical power production. So using a different terminology, everyone in this game can come out of the woods with their chin up. There is no shame as they are looking for alternative solutions, the same as the big players on the market.

@Hob,
I started to read your documents, and I stopped at the page 1 of basic-ac-theory.pdf where you state:


You are right the energy is not consumed (and I may add nor created), but the power is consumed. If you look at the graph P(t)=U(t)*I(t) you will see how much real power (active power) is consumed. Very interesting observation though, that the capacitor will not get hot. And here it is my own interpretation on phenomena, that up to present moment I cannot find somewhere else. Without getting into the relation between “energy” and “power”, my belief is that the power consumed by the capacitor is used to do some work. Which is … to divide the two components, tension (V) and current (I). This is where the phase shift is coming from.
As from today, I am not aware of any study which describes where this phase shift is coming from, nor what is the power consumed by doing this work, because it is work. Up to this day it is just a statement that phase shift is occurring, but why is this happening and what is the cost of it, nobody explained it. We take this for granted from the text books. And this is the case for both, the inductors and the capacitors.

If there is any scientific document or anyone can bring more to the debate table, I am more than willing to contemplate to the opinions.
Until then, great work and great ideas to everybody involved in this along with my best wishes.

Hi All,

the reason why there is a phase change is due to the time factor for the capacitor to charge with voltage in relation to the current passing straight through. This is why the phase angle changes depending on 1. frequency and 2. value of capacitance. With an inductor it is in reverse, voltage passes straight through and the current charges the inductor, values of frequency and inductance apply to phase angle here.

Here is a little something that should be studied, video and pdf of a mit lecture:-

Kirchhofs law does not apply with non- conservative fields.


Here is an explanation


http://ocw.mit.edu/courses/physics/8...s/lecsup41.pdf


and here is a video lecture of which go to minute 33 onwards, it will open your minds "or blow them as the case maybe" Cool


Lecture 16: Electromagnetic Induction | Video Lectures | Electricity and Magnetism | Physics | MIT OpenCourseWare

Now I have posted that as an item of measurement in our experiments and not to be fuffled by thoughs that think they are simply right or are there to control the few that do find these things or anomilies.

I have seen cop>1 many times and always has boiled down to keeping current and voltage separated (don't kill the dipole). There are different ways of doing it, but always it is the separation of voltage and current. We have been blinkered all our lives to P=IV which is right, the dipole is dead because P consumed all it's energy (sucked it dry).

Using the mains supply is no good as the whole system is closed with other users and so the goal posts will move as others plug in an inductive or capacitive load. Using a home generator is the way to go where you generate your own power and can keep the separation of reactive and active power, that separation has to be thought out very well, and I leave that for you to think about, but remember, the supply converted (90 degree phase difference) must not see the FINAL LOAD (which will consume real power) or it will not work.

regards

Mike

[barbosi]

Thanks for the links, I studied them as you said I should and in the end I got this great inspiration from you:

Kirchhofs law does not apply with non- conservative fields.

Therefore I am pleased to anounce (and I claim the origin of):

Barbosi's law - lectures are informative and do not apply with non-conservative minds.

Thank you for the offer but I feel that repeting statements learned as truth without understanding the mechanisms behind them, keeps me in the "Groundhog Day". And I want out because I just learned that storks have no involvement in kids making process. At all, can you imagine that?

As always I'm looking forward for inspiration from great souls. Might be any relationship between E field and B field being orthogonals and the phase?

Something pretty much like this: Magnetics demonstration | Atmospheric Ionization Research What he forgot to mention is the loop is also bent at 90 degrees (or almost)

Regards.

[gotoluc]

@Luc,
In my opinion you should really stop reminding every one that we are not creating energy, simply because energy cannot be created, nor destroyed. By making distinction between energy and power, in my understanding the people looking for “free energy” are looking for [free] electrical power production. So using a different terminology, everyone in this game can come out of the woods with their chin up. There is no shame as they are looking for alternative solutions, the same as the big players on the market.

Yes, I agree!

It's a copy of a post I made at the OU topic where someone has posted that I'm claiming to create energy. Just posted it at all topics to set the record.

Thanks for your help

Luc

[Mario]

Hi Luc and all,

Luc your generator is an exciter generator and from what you show in your videos and your not so good results from permanent magnet generator (which I can confirm) it seems that an exciter generator is the way to go.
Here's my question: are exciter generators the same as induction generators?
And what type of generator do normal (portable) gas electric generators use?

thanks,
Mario

[Michael John Nunnerley]

Inductive generators

Hi Luc and all

from what I understand, in inductive generators the exciter only uses reactive power, and these generators love to absorb reactive power as long as it does not get saturated, at which point the output power stops.

This is just an observation from reading up on inductive generators.

regards

Mike

[citfta]

Exciting generators

Hi Mario,

After the very rude and disrespectful way you were treated on another thread here I hope you don't mind if I try to answer your questions about generators. All of the portable generators that I have worked on were exciter type of generators. I don't know of any reason there couldn't be a portable permanent magnet generator but I haven't seen one. The old type of generator used on cars before the modern alternator were also exciter type of generators. Even the modern alternator is an exciter type of generator although it produces first a 3 phase AC power which is converted into DC by the internal rectifiers (diodes).

I am curious also as to why you and Luc seem to be getting different results when using a PM generator as opposed to an exciter type of generator. I will be watching your efforts to see what you come up with. The only difference from a conventional point of view is that the output power of an exciter type generator can be controlled by the exciter current whereas the output power of a PM type of generator is only controlled by the speed of rotation and the load it is driving.

To give you a little more information that may or may not be any help to you, the output voltage of a portable generator is determined by the speed of rotation. The output current is determined by the load and the ability of the engine to maintain the rotation speed. In other words for the AC power to remain at the 60 Hz power for use in the US the speed of rotation has to remain constant. So what happens when we add more load and draw more current? The engine governor senses the loss of speed and opens the throttle slightly to allow more fuel into the engine to maintain the power necessary to maintain the speed of rotation for the generator.

Respectfully, Carroll

PS: The reason exciter types of generators or the modern alternators are used on cars is because by varying the exciter current the output can remain the same even though the engine speed may be changing over a wide range of speed.

[Mario]

Hi Carrol,

I won't waste one word about the other thread….. Thanks for the kind words and thank you for your explanations about generators.

All of the portable generators that I have worked on were exciter type of generators. I don't know of any reason there couldn't be a portable permanent magnet generator but I haven't seen one.

I would say that's good news since exciter generators seem to be the best choice from Luc's experiments.
I ran a few more tests with my little motor/generator setup. I have no explanation for it. If I take one of the generator coils (with resonant cap) off the rotor and feed it either directly with ac or even put a little power coil in place of the rotating magnet to simulate it I get resonance in the genny coil and can normally tune slightly under max resonance for minimum consumption in the little power coil. But with rotating magnets I can't get that "minimum consumption gap", it just puts drag on the rotor. I have tried this with "fat" coils and thin long high Q genny coils. Weird.

I would like to throw out a few ideas which come from experiments, mostly solid state, but seem to apply also to a setup such as Luc's with the exciter generator or grid, I think Luc came to the same conclusions. Please correct me if I'm wrong.

The core of such a setup is our resonant "reactor" or tank circuit, where the supplied energy is not simply burned up by a resistive load, but is shuttled back and forth between the coil and the capacitor. Our load is not directly connected to our dipole, instead it is placed in series between the cap and coil and runs mostly on the reactive power shuttling back and forth.
In a tank setup with no load in series (between cap and coil) very high power is reached, which is dictated mostly by the supply voltage, the resistance in the wires, Q of the coil and the specs of coil and cap.
From our supply's point of view we have a parallel tank circuit (maximum impedance) and consumes next to nothing, while inside the tank circuit we have a series arrangement developing max power. It's called reactive but if you stick your meters in there you'll be able to see it!
The problem is when we insert our load. The higher its resistance the higher its braking effect on the shuttling energy in resonance. This is why we need a high voltage supply and a low resistance load. The load won't see the total voltage, it will develop its own voltage dictated by its resistance. This is true even if we use an inductive load such as Luc's induction motor. It didn't have 240V across it, only about 100V.
The higher the supply voltage and the lower the load resistance(or impedance), the more reactive power we can get, and the lowest the reflection back to our supply will be.

We can also build such a setup in solid state, we can power the setup with ac or with pulses, the tank will still develop ac inside. Or we can simply use a transformer with low voltage primary supply with a high voltage secondary which will be the coil of our tank circuit. But remember, the core of the coil in the tank circuit has to be magnetically open, no conventional transformer and no toroid, else it won't work. This I learned from experiments, maybe someone else can confirm it.

So in order to respect these basic rules (I repeat please correct me if you think I'm out of my mind… ) what components could work well? Since Carroll confirmed that a genset uses excitation generators, we could like Luc find a used one, take off the gas engine and replace it with an induction motor.
It would be great to have a 3 phase alternator, so we could use one phase to power the resonant induction motor running our generator, and the other 2 for our external loads.
But let's say we only have a one phase generator at 240V, we need a low voltage induction motor, how can we find that? Does a car exciter generator work as a motor???

thanks,
Mario

[Matthew Jones]

@Mario

Just buy the motor.

You can find Compressor motors all over the place. 120vac at 3600 rpm.

Use a 240vac gen head which are easy to get as well that requires 1360 - 1600 rpm. 1 or 3 phase.

Caps aren't expensive.

And a big flywheel.

The point is, is you don't need that much to make it work you just the right combination.
Personally I am going to the repair shops and searching for Gen Heads. The gas motors go out all the time and thats the expensive part.

Also why would you use the remaining phases to run loads. Add capacitance and run the loads from the reactive side like you are the motor. That way the power gets returned to the source and all you have to pay for is the start up.

Once the thing is spinning you should not have any trouble keeping it going.

Matt

[Turion]

Matt,
here's some ideas for the other half. Way more than just one for sale on this link. Different sizes too
12KW St Generator Head 1 Phase for Diesel Gas Engine 50 60 Hz | eBay

Dave