COP 20.0 (2000%) Demonstration

[hartiberlin]

I posted a basic circuit diagram over here:

COP 20.00 (2000%) Times, Reactive Power Energy Source Generator,


Regards, Stefan.

[hartiberlin]

Circuit diagram with timing diagram:

COP 20.00 (2000%) Times, Reactive Power Energy Source Generator,

[Aaron]

overunity.com

Stefan,

My firefox and opera browsers both lock up when I go to your page. It's not an ip block or anything, but just freezes. It doesn't do that on other sites. Any ideas?

[SilverToGold]

Stefan, you are 100% correct. It was revealed to me weeks ago, it's very obvious from the original video from Jim what was going on.

Your circuit is wrong in one point (though it still would work but it's not the original circuit Jim used), there are only 3 switches, not 4. You just put in an electrical time delay between switching. There being only 3 switches was a dead give away to me that they were switching between parallel charging and series dumping through the load.

You can't tell anything from Paul's machine and pics but in Jim's it's very obvious what he was doing.

Count them, there are 3 switches, the exact number needed to go between series and parallel.

[BroMikey]

Great update

Circuit diagram with timing diagram:

COP 20.00 (2000%) Times, Reactive Power Energy Source Generator,

Thanks again Stefan

[SilverToGold]

I don't understand this self runner concept? How can it self run when it's connected to the grid? The machine is already inherently a "self runner" if you apply the correct generator and circuit, it would self run.

Also, there is still a relationship between current and voltage that is affected by the caps. The load may be limited to a resistive load only... unless you take the added inductances and capacitances into account and change the timing for that specific load. Even in the Lockridge device, it only ran resistive loads. That's why they use light bulbs here. Adding L or C changes the circuit.

People seem not to have really caught on to what Jim was saying in the video... when he said that the wind generators would go twice as fast... he was really saying that the reactive generator was now powering those wind "generators" to be motors. They needed NO wind to run. The circuit looped the power to those wind generators and now they were "self running" motors... just like the Lockridge device.

So the feedback circuit instead of lamps idea is not really needed... just the right generator and reactive circuit would work... and the Lockridge device did it all with mechanical switching... some caps and an inductor. So a "self-runner" already is inherent in the circuit concept itself.

As you need only around 1 Watts of real input power, it is now easy to build
a 60 Hz sine wave oscillator only needing 1 Watts of input power and
use this to drive this Babcock Murrray circuit and then do a feedback circuit instead of the lamps
and get a selfrunning system.

[hartiberlin]

Hi SilverToGold,
yes, you are right.
if you modify the switching phase , so that there is more negative
power coming out during the series cap discharge than the positive power
going in, you could really drive wind generators as motos.

The only question I still have is, as you charge up the 2 caps in parallel
you need the energy 0.5xCxVoltage^2 to get them fully charged up to the peak
voltage of the sine wave.

Putting the caps then in series will not deliver more energy out... Maybe they then just modify the lamp resistance by putting the 2 lamps in parallel so they
get more current out in the back discharge current pulse ?

Or they use the additional transformer coils there to further shift the phases ??

Regards, Stefan.

[hartiberlin]

@SilverToGold
you are absolutely right regading the 3 switches only.
I just realized that my 4th swith S1 is redundant unnecessary,
as when you open all my switches S2, S3 and S4 the circuit is already
disconnected !
So no need for S1 !
Then we really only need 3 switches...
The only questions I have not yet pondered about is the
state of charge after the charge and after the discharge cycle.. Hmm
do they really discharge all the charge in the caps and do they really
fully charge the caps of the peak of the sine wave or could this
be varried with their switching control circuits ?

Any ideas ?
Regards, Stefan.

[SilverToGold]

Hi Stefan,

The large transformers could have 2 purposes as I see it, 1) just an isolation transformer for correct power measurements [having isolated grounds through the transformer to connect them to the measurement machines - like using a plugged into the wall scope to measure a circuit which is also plugged into the wall, you have to be aware that the ground of the scope is the same as the ground of circuit and if connected incorrectly you will get a short circuit or a wrong measurement] or 2) to move the I & V curves to the correct relationship for the switching to be most effective. I don't know which it is but suspect it's the first.

Traditional "motors" and "generators" are actually both. A motor and a generator and these functions can't be separated. It operates in both modes at the same time. When the turbine turns, it acts more as a generator than a motor... the reactive circuit returns the power to the generator to turn it - making it more of a motor than a generator and then cycle continues IF the power being returned is more than went in. When the system balances out, the power of the generator equals the power of the motor and it reaches a set speed.

So basically, you connect an AC "generator" to the reactive circuit, give it a turn and the "generator" will keep turning with no more power input while powering a resistive load. A self running motor that powers a resistive load. You could connect this generator-motor to another generator and get traditional power. So that's how it could work.

How does this all work? I don't know. The power of charging a cap in parallel and then discharging it in series from traditional science does nothing but loses energy. So something else is going on that you're not going to get from college physics.

But where has this worked before? 1) Tesla switches & 2) Eric Dollards flux capacitor. 3) Bedini capacitive discharge circuits work on a similar principle.

When you get sharp gradients, things change.

I would be very skeptical of this working at all if it was not for Jim's demonstration. But there it is and it works. And it's so simple when you see it and just study Jim's video, it gives it all away for the most part.

I think the resistance is important, so they probably tuned it all to get the best results.

Hi SilverToGold,
yes, you are right.
if you modify the switching phase , so that there is more negative
power coming out during the series cap discharge than the positive power
going in, you could really drive wind generators as motos.

The only question I still have is, as you charge up the 2 caps in parallel
you need the energy 0.5xCxVoltage^2 to get them fully charged up to the peak
voltage of the sine wave.

Putting the caps then in series will not deliver more energy out... Maybe they then just modify the lamp resistance by putting the 2 lamps in parallel so they
get more current out in the back discharge current pulse ?

Or they use the additional transformer coils there to further shift the phases ??

Regards, Stefan.

[SilverToGold]

Hey Stefan,

I thought about this also. I am not really sure about how to maximize the power. I have my ideas but the only way to know is to experiment with the timing.

If you build this circuit it is important to make the timing as flexible as possible so you can tweek it. You will definitely need a circuit that can read the voltage and react to it. This is probably beyond most people's ability but not difficult for anyone who applies himself.

In the original video by Jim, he turned only 1 knob to change the COP... if you listen closely to it, he shortens a time and the COP drastically increased. So he changed 1 timing to get his results. You've got to be able to detect the peaks and change your timing.

People really need to STUDY the original video and not be lazy (not directed to you Stefan). Lots of answers in there. I'm surprised it took this long for someone else to post the answer to how it works.

@SilverToGold
you are absolutely right regading the 3 switches only.
I just realized that my 4th swith S1 is redundant unnecessary,
as when you open all my switches S2, S3 and S4 the circuit is already
disconnected !
So no need for S1 !
Then we really only need 3 switches...
The only questions I have not yet pondered about is the
state of charge after the charge and after the discharge cycle.. Hmm
do they really discharge all the charge in the caps and do they really
fully charge the caps of the peak of the sine wave or could this
be varried with their switching control circuits ?

Any ideas ?
Regards, Stefan.

[SilverToGold]

Stefan,

I will say this, I believe that Paul's and Jim's timing are a little different. Looking at the graph Paul posted, he seems to have more off time for the caps in the circuit.

I like Jim's original video, the timing is clearer and he just switches between series and parallel. You can see the transitions in the upper voltage curve where the line voltage gets a hick-up when the caps are switched.

Looking at Paul's setup and timing, I think it would be a lot harder to work out. Which is why I would look at the original Jim video and study that.

I have a question for you Stefan, what MOSFET switching circuit did Jim use? You need to know this to build it and the answer is in the video.... but who has even posed this basic question?

@SilverToGold
...
The only questions I have not yet pondered about is the
state of charge after the charge and after the discharge cycle.. Hmm
do they really discharge all the charge in the caps and do they really
fully charge the caps of the peak of the sine wave or could this
be varried with their switching control circuits ?

Any ideas ?
Regards, Stefan.

[hartiberlin]

I think it is most important to just only switch on the caps for a short moment
during the first quadrant and not the fill 90 degrees.

Also it could be good to match the TAU values of the charge and discharge, so
Tau1=Tau2 = R1xC1=R2xC2

So during charging, you half the load resistor ( 2 lamps in parallel) and during
discharge you put the 2 lamps in series..


Is nobody here, who was at the conference and wittnessed Jimīs presentation ?
Were there any block diagrams shown ?

I bought today the Dynaflux video
Dynaflux Alternator by Jim Murray
but it only has another demonstration to
the older dynaflux generator ( which by the way is also very interesting !)
and the SERPS circuit video shown is the same
as the free video posted by Aaron.

I hope Aaron will soon have the presentation video ready from the conference.

[hartiberlin]

Stefan,



I have a question for you Stefan, what MOSFET switching circuit did Jim use? You need to know this to build it and the answer is in the video.... but who has even posed this basic question?

I have not yet seen the presentation of the conference, so I donīt know...

Hopefully a few guys, who were at the conference could report this ?
Is Jim Murray also here on this forum ?
Maybe he can also answer a few questions ?

Well a guy has run a simulation and posted this on my forum,
COP 20.00 (2000%) Times, Reactive Power Energy Source Generator,

but he used different parameters and did not get any overunity.
But he used the full first quadrant 90 degrees to charge the caps.
which is probably wrong...

Also I think it will probably only work in full overunity mode,
if there is also an inductance in the circuit, so I am looking forward
to the video of the conference demonstration.

Regards, Stefan.

[SilverToGold]

The conference demo was Paul's version with his own timing and his own proprietary switching scheme. Which we will not get.

In Jim original video, Jim used mosfets. I am asking what mosfet circuit did Jim use to switch the caps. You need to know this.

Also, Jim used the full 90 in the beginning of the test. You can tell this by looking at the scope shots. So it will work just fine.

The switch timing may be counter to what most people think. If you look at the original video of Jim, you can tell when the caps are being charged and when they are being discharged.

I have not yet seen the presentation of the conference, so I donīt know...

Hopefully a few guys, who were at the conference could report this ?
Is Jim Murray also here on this forum ?
Maybe he can also answer a few questions ?

Well a guy has run a simulation and posted this on my forum,
COP 20.00 (2000%) Times, Reactive Power Energy Source Generator,

but he used different parameters and did not get any overunity.
But he used the full first quadrant 90 degrees to charge the caps.
which is probably wrong...

Also I think it will probably only work in full overunity mode,
if there is also an inductance in the circuit, so I am looking forward
to the video of the conference demonstration.

Regards, Stefan.

[BroMikey]

Keep Going

I don't want to stop you guys, so by all means keep going on this discussion.

Here are the scope shots. How would a circuit turn up and down the waves of course going away from the basic pattern you have posted?

Maybe DELAY,INVERT,PHASE SHIFT????

Great conversation

http://flyer.thenetteam.net/images/20X.JPG

http://flyer.thenetteam.net/images/20X1.JPG

http:
//flyer.thenetteam.net/images/20X2.JPG

http://flyer.thenetteam.net/images/20X3.JPG

http://flyer.thenetteam.net/images/20X4.JPG

Also these waves are 2. Two waves shifted and intersecting waves. Very very complex process. Or does it just look like 2 waves and this is a single wave in two parts, front and back??

You know like scopes display a single wave in two pieces?? Or is that at Least two separate waves? I am not going to be any help building circuits this complex but I feel these are valid questions to answer so everyone is on the same page.

Cheers,Mike