Gray Tube Replication

[Guest]

In order to further explain my previous video, the following diagram
attached below is how the event took place.

The photos of how its built are [ here ].

[ Gray Circuit Event ]

[pranav2010]

trigger

Pranav

I'm seeing that you've built a series of diodes on the variac side to
punch the HV plasma into shorting out the LV side cap bank, impressive
as it appears to be four plastics in series.

Thank you for sharing, I hope in the future you will capture on
video what effect its output has on the cathode of a 12V battery used
to power it.

By what means are you triggering the event to take place?

hi geotron

i used scr triggering system in circuit which is very similar to aaron's circuit

already i post circuit diagram which i used please check

have wonderful day

[nat1971a]

I wasn't going to post this but what the heck. I want it on the record.

After spending considerable time reading up on thyratrons for my gray tube replication and checking several patents - It is my opinion that Telsa is the original inventor of the thyratron. Please don't ask me to post evidence as i won't. Makes me wonder why Tesla gave the information to Lee De Forest. Perhaps this was his way of hiding a key component that was critical to his later patents. It is starting to look like this may have been the reason.

The evidence is there in the Tesla patents and articles and someone else's patents if you know where and what to look for.

[Guest]

How does your circuit diagram look? The thyratron interests me, although
I've not yet had a chance to work with them, it seems that G.Magratten
has combined them together in his research system. I'd make a guess his
scheme shows an emitter diode rather than a blocking one.

[nat1971a]

geotron,

all you need on the grid is a capacitor. From what i understand so far from the information i have is this blocks any dc from getting to the grid but allows AC on the grid. I have information in my possession that states that either low frequency or high frequency AC (oscillating) should be applied to the grid. So i will be testing within the parameters of the tubes to see if i can maintain my earlier results without destroying them. You may want to experiment with applying the low voltage trigger AC voltage to the grid rather than the HV AC i applied. I only did this to get a quick answer not caring if i destroyed the thyratron. Now that i have seen what it does it is time to experiment further in this direction. I am hoping others will follow. In reading up on this some circuits contain 1Mohm resistor to bleed of the charge that accumulates on the grid. I am not sure if this is required or not. There is no mention of it in the information i have.

I havent been able to continue testing yet. Still waiting for my replacements to arrive.

And yes i am learning as i go as i have no experience with thyratrons...i have also discovered that it is destroying my bridge rectifier. So i have ordered some 15KV 6 amp diodes.$$$

There is possibly more to it than this but i want to test further before i release any further information. I also have a lead on the gas that should be in the thyratron but i won't be releasing this information until some time as i choose to do so

[nat1971a]

Geotron

I am aware of mcgrattens thyratron. Circuit. I have looked at it previously. My information is an indirect source from tesla in my opinion

[Guest]

drawing up a new potential

Aaron,

In thinking of my efforts to construct a working energy discharge system
with your plasma burst methodology, it has struck me that what it does
is nearly the same only opposite of how the patents describe how it should
work. With the HV plasma pulse being on the trigger and the LV bank sitting
as an open positive potential, this is a reverse situation.

Recently what I've been experimenting with is using a setup that is very
similar to the patent version, only instead of using 12V from a battery I've
boosted it with a mosfet driver feeding a small transformer into 400 or so.

The 3-point electrode setup as shown in my videos has been taken apart, and
without it I'm seeing negligable results so rebuilding it will be my next step.

In the meantime what I'd like to ask you to reconsider is how the HV plasma and
grid interact in your system. With a pulse from the coil going to meet with
the open LV side and subsequently cause the radiant discharge, it will be that
charged up cap bank being shorted out with the plasma as I'm sure you're aware.

What I'd now like to bring forth is that in the system patented by Gray, the
LV positive potential must pass through a charged HV capacitor in order to continue
on to the cathode of the battery, versus as I've just previously described
where it will only be encountering the airgap to the grid and the resistance
of the drive coil.

The proposition I would make at this point is that the AC being fed into the LV
cap bank be utilized by the likes of a cascade multiplier into charging up an
additional source of high voltage that will be coupled with the battery in the
position of the pickup grid. When the plasma burst hits the open LV-side diode,
it would then theoretically cause it snap shut as before and smack its way
through the new HV cap on the grid and drive coil (not shown).

This is the way I'd imagine it would be constructed -



Uploaded with ImageShack.us

[pranav2010]

plasma circuit

hi aaron

i complete your plasma ignition circuit when i triggered scr first time. i was

literally so scared, you can see this in video wow this circuit is awesome

please see video


YouTube - ‪plasma ckt‬‏


now i am going to add this is your three point system


have wonderful day

[pranav2010]

plasma circuit three point

hi aaron

please see my new video i think i done every think right please tell me is

everything is okay or not


YouTube - ‪plasma ignition aaron three point mixing‬‏


have wonderful day

[Spokane1]

Information about the EMA0

Dear Spokane1,

I thank you sincerely for your generosity.
And hopefully not too ennoy you with my new questions.

I 100 mm in diameter
- I had seen in your previous posts that your EMA0 was 3 "but I thought of a mistake like we all do, I do not thought that it was so small.

- From what I understand (because I'm not very fluent in English) was not EMA0 your wound when you bought it?

- Have you wounded so that your little EMA0 can turn, even a modest ? Or is it your comp for build a larger model on which you will study the rotation and torque ?

- That you have left it still fundamental to discover on this engine? (Aside degravitation.)

II Coil resistance
- don't you ennoy to measure low resistances : with the dimensions that you have just given it are easy to calculate.


III What is vocation the major-coil and his minor-coil (Together. And separately.)
- You did not say what is here the transformer function, this function is obviously essential. Can I have your opinion please ?

- Why the transformer function is not on the minor-coil ?

- What is the coil that really enhances the torque : the minor or major ?

Arker

Dear Arker,

Please pardon me for not responding sooner, I have been ill, but am recovering.

Addressing your technical questions as best I can:

Questions from Section I

-The EMA0 is 3" in diamter and about 4" long for the motor case proper. With the addition of the commutator and the transmission it is about 12" overall length.

-The EMA0 does not have wound electromagnets. At this small scale I really doubt they would work. However the size and location of all 48 electromagnets are shown to scale.

-The EMA0 does have a scaled rotor that is driven by a small hidden DC electric motor. The 4 each "D" battereis are in the mounting base. I don't plan to attempt to get this model to operate. Its scale is just to small to function in my opinion. It certainly would be nice if the non-classical physics would allow for this kind of size reduction.

-In my opinion the EMA0 only provided a few new clues to the E.V.Gray technology. We still have a long way to go.

Questions from Section II

- You are correct, I can calculate the coil resistance of my Cole Reproduction electromagnets from the length of wire that was used to construct them - since the number of turns is so small. However, I believe that these coils are wound with wire that is to large. Therefore I need to build another set of coil forms and go through the process again with #24 AWG wire.

Questions from Section III

- My present opinion on the function of the Cole electromagnets:

There are two distinct modes of operation for the EMA4 Free Energy Engine.

MODE I: Generation (and storage) of anomalous non-classical particles.
MODE II: Utilization of these particles for the production of torque.

Both electromagnets are used in the production of torque by shifting the magnetic repulsion axis several degrees to maximize torque.

The Major electromagnet is a voltage step-up transformer (at least on the stator). This is to provide a voltage high enough to strike an arc from the stator to the rotor. (estimate about 15 KV) or a 1:5 winding ratio. The high side of the secondary connects to the core of the electromagnet.

The Minor electromagnet is a wound as a simple inductor and is connected to the secondary of the Major electromagnet (low side) to act as a current limiter once the arc is struck. This is much like the layout of a florscent lamp ballist.

The core faces of the two opposing Minor electromagnets (Rotor and Stator) acts as the electrodes for the arc that is struck and stretched.

-I suspect that the reason that the transformer is not associated with the Minor electromagnet is due to size limitations. A full size Cole Minor electromagnet is only about 0.750" wide. If 0.250" of that width is allocated to the core that doesn't give you much room for windings unless one uses really small wire. However, these coils have to be able to handle some current. There is one photo that shows only two conductors are associated with each Minor electromagnet.

-Both coils are used in the torque production phase. The magic is in the nature of the anomalous particles generated. It appears that they produce huge magnetic fields but can travel through metalic conductors with no resistance. The torque generated is the strength of the two oposing fields time each other times the angle between them. Unfortunatly in this design that angle is much less than 90 degrees, however if the intensity of the field is 1000 times greater than classical electron flow then the torque generated is a million times stronger. So that small angle starts to yeild some substantial torque. Once we figure out the method of particle production I'm sure we can improve upon the engine design.

Mark McKay

[Spokane1]

Additional EMA0 Information

Dear Spokane1,

IV "The laminated iron cores were electically connected in sets of four (4) electromagnets"
- On patent Grey/3890548 fig. 5, there are 9 major-coils and 9 minor-coils to the stator (and on the rotor 3 of each).

- Have you the same thing on the stator in your EMA0 ? And the rotor coils did you 9 or 6 ?

- When you say "connected by 4" you speak of the stator core only ? And these are 4 cores in a row ?

- In another post you said that the stator was mounted in 3 sets of 3 plates. I do not understand how these are articulated with the series of 3 sets of 4. The connection of the coils, and the connection of the cores, would be different ? Can you enlighten please ?

- About, do you know if the EMA tested in Crosby (EMA2 or "purple" according to your analysis) were minor-coils and major-coil s? (Or just 3 reels similar rotor and stator.)

- And also, for the stator, how did you wired each side of the delta : 3 primary consecutive in serie ?


V About delta
- In the delta configuration we must necessarily shift the 3 signals in time. A delay line should, therefore. In this case the mysterious coils wound around the motor perfectly fulfill this function. They should strengthen essentially your assumption of the delta. What do you think about dear Spokane1 ?

- If yes (delay lines dedicated to timing pulses in delta mode), then we enter a matching system, as I evoked in my post of may 11. And the trick of a transformer between the generator and its target becomes quite natural. (In this case the calculation of right values of the coils becomes much easier since there is 1° subject to the match of the impedances and 2° we know the equation of pulse transformers, delay equation, impedance equation.)


VI "We still don't know what diameter wire was used"
- During your interview Nelson Schläft, who has rewound to #14 (1.63 mm) engines acquired by Al. Francoeur, has not he precised if the wire was
. . . . rather kind of car ignition coil? (~ 7/100e mm)
. . . . or rather to 20/100e mm as in many small engines ?
. . . . or between 1/2 and 1 mm as thou hast chosen for your test ?

- Personally I tried magnetic firing with coils son of all sizes : from 1 mm to 4/100e mm. Those that work best to 3000-5000 volts DC with some µF capacitors are in thin wires. The main problem is of course the duration. You are working on this for 10 years, and you gave us generously open the path. Me it's only 3 years, I plod by varying the parameters. (But still classic approach. And I've already burned two oscilloscopes, one with memory, accidentally touching the bare wire high voltage of an PFN.)


VII "between 1 to 8 milliseconds"
- (For the less specialized readers of the forum, you must know that the discharge of a capacitor through an inductor is subject to a amortization that makes oscillating.
If the wire resistance of the coil is large it stopped flapping, it then there is only one alone pulse.)

- (Be aware that if the duration of a magnetic shot is very brief, it becomes extremely powerful : under P=E/t, 1 joule gives easily megawatts. However the rotor will not move because of mechanical inertia.)

- If I look at a speed of 1100 rpm, and I calculate the time during which a stator core is opposite from its counterpart to the rotor, I found ~ 2.5 milliseconds. (This in the simple configuration 3 rotor coils / 3 stator coils.)

- I deduce that this size range already permitted a overunity to Marvin Cole, and a torque. (But taking many coils I'm drowning at the moment.)

- I always hesitate to take a big wire, increasing then the capacity in order to increase the duration, because with 3500 volts /1 uF is already paying 3500 * 3500 * 1 / 1000 000 = 12 joules for 1 shot 1 coil. This is far above the price paid among Crosby ... (but we touch here to the mystery)

- Perhaps the disposal delta of the rotor and stator allows to increase the duration of the arc ? I don't know, I don't understand what is the use of this delta here, it is a new information for me this connection. (I know that in the classic sinusoidal voltage, the current and the consumption are 3 times larger.) If you think to 85% that the rotor and stator are 2 deltas : I will try to make a montage delta end of june.

Arker

Dear Arker,

Questions from Section IV

-The stator of the EMA0 is composed of 9 each aluminum blocks. In the full size EMA4 these are about 1" thick, 6" wide" and 18" long. There are 4 each electromagnets mounted on each bar, 2 Major and 2 Minor electromagnets. It appears that all of the laminated cores are embedded into this aluminum base plate. The rotor has only three of these assemblies that mirror the construction of the stator base plates. They are also composed of 4 each electromagnets with 2 Major and 2 Minor electromagnets in each cluster of four.

- It appears that the design of the EMA0 is the same as the EMA4. In my opinion I believe that the EMA0 was constructed from scaled shop drawings for the EMA4. Therefore there are 9 sets of electromagnets on the stator and 3 sets on the rotor - just like the photos of the EMA4 show. However there are no photos of the actual EMA4 rotor.

-The electromagnet arrangement is as follows for each set of 4. The 2 Major electromagnets are mounted end to end (front and back electromagnets). This pair is then mounted parallel and next to 2 Minor electromagnets. This provided a total of 4 electromagnets in a set.

-This is not correct. There are 9 base plates (or sets) with 4 electromagnets each on the Stator. If I have said anything different in the past - then I was in error.

-We do not know what Free-Energy Engine was tested by Crosby Research. Peter Lindeman suspects it was the EMA2 model. We have no photos of that design so we can't say. The phots of the EMA3 show a 9 pole model. Historically, the only operating prototype avaliable at the time of the Crosby tests (May 1973) was the EMA4. So it is uncertain if Crosby Research tested a 3 pole or a 9 pole engine.

- I still haven't figured out the delta wiring topology or how it was used.

Questions from section V

- The delay line employed was only about 60" (5 feet) long. That is a very short delay time - about 100 nano seconds or less for RG-11 coax. (unless a special high inductance center conductor was used). No doubt that three power pulses were applied to the rotor at the same time - at least this is what the mechanical drawings in the patent display. The problem with the delta configuration is how is current flow established with three equal potentials applied at the same time? There has to be ground return somewhere or else there are only two applied poteitials at any one time. I don't know what was going on in Mr. Coles Design with the little information I have at the moment.

- All of these classical circuit element analysis can be used if we understand the true purpose of the delay line and how it worked with the electromagnets. Your proposals are just as good as anybodies. I suspect that the delay lines were used to store the non-classical particles generated in MODE I operation to be later used in the MODE II operation. But this is just pure speculation

Questions from Section VI

-About all that Mr. Schlaft recounted about the original electromagnets was that the magnet wire was much smaller and that it was potted in a brown waxy substance. This observation has a lot of room for intrepertation. Was the wire #24 or #32? Was it copper or copper coated iron? Mr. Kenneth Hawkins claims it was iron. He seems to have been somehow involved with reproduction effort in Kansas in 1979.

-That is an unfortunate loss of an important instrument. Working with high voltage pulses has its risks. The knowlege that one needs to apply proper instrument technique to this kind of work is generally much more advanced than classical hobby electronics. But we need to forge on in spite of these difficulties. As long as we continue messing around with classical high voltage currents we are going to have problems. Only when we determine how the non-classical particles were generated and stored are we going to acheive some measure of sucess.

Questions from Section VII

-Yes, This is true, however it appears that both a unidirectional DC pulse and an RF oscillation are required - my speculation. During the arc event we have the DC pulse with a certain high energy front in pulse followed by a medium duration constant current tail. This tail is abruptly quenched (due to the streatching). This leads to the remaining energy in the secondary of the Major electromagnet to oscillate with its internal parasitic capacitance (with frequencies on the order of 150 KHz). This applies an RF (and HV) electrostatic field to the residual cool plasma. I suspect that something interseting happens under these conditions. Hopefully it will be the production of a pleathra of non-classical particales.

-I agree, the pulse power levels are high if classical electrons were employed. I maintain they were not. The anomalous torque was generated via non-classical means. Anything else would have generated way to much heat.

-I agree, I base my calculations on 500 RMP (rather than 1100 RPM) since this was the minimum operating speed. I come up with a maximum pulse width of 8.3 milliseconds. But your calculation is correct also.

-I'm sure that Mr. Cole was able to acheive OU operation with pulse widths anywhere from 8.3 milliseconds down to .3 milliseconds.

-12 Joules per capacitor discharge is not out of line with my analysis. You see it took a long time to charge up the capacitor bank from zero. It took at least 30 seconds. There were 18 each 30 watt vibrators employed. If they were operating at 50% capacity and there were 18 capacitors then we are looking at an initial charge of around 150 Joules each (accounting for losses). Once the engine started these capacitors were recharged every revolution or about every 50 milliseconds at 1100 RPM -and even faster at higher speeds. These capacitors were no longer being re-charged from the onboard power supply but from a different process. I suspect the capacitors were recharged from an electrostatic harvest process. But this is pure technical speculation.

-That delta configurataion has me confused as well. I though it made sense in the beginning then as I analyzed the circuit in greater detail all of my initial theories fell apart. Best of luck in composing your own ideas on this subject.

Mark McKay

[Arker]

Your posts n° 2365 et n° 2366

Dear Spokane1,

Thank you for your generous explanations in sections I to VII of my post n° 2345. I'll translate in my language and sober reflection.

To my point VIII, I saw meanwhile your drawing : "Arc Stretch Illustration.pdf" (page 19 of the forum) that contains the answer. I guess in your experiments you connect your EMA4 like "Arc Stretch Illustration.pdf".

As for my point IX it is based on a mistake (I'm french and it's not easy for me to understand technical english) : I thought you were talking about a dielectric bonded to the poles of the cores ... Meantime, in reading your posts of previous years on this forum, I realized that the insulating material between the cores is not between their poles but between their sides.

I thought previously that these teflon blocks were vulgar wedges (for it is certain that the cores undergo significant mechanical stress). But now I understand you consider these wedges as attractors of electrostatic charges. The EMA4 would be a kind of testastika.

A priori I thought that the bow licking the teflon prohibits the storage of electrons, but I am ignoramus to 100% in electrostatic machines.
So here I'll make a break during few weeks to study the intricacies of electrostatics.

All the best.

Arker

[pranav2010]

my circuit

hi aaron

this is my circuit

have wonderful day

[Aaron]

@Pranav

Looks good Pranav, congratulations! I saw the vids when you posted
them - looks very stable.

Are you going to do tests with the coil punching a magnet?

[Guest]

Well guys, in my previous experiments with the CDI ignition and variac
method of charging up the LV side cap bank, apparently the limiting factors
in producing negative results on charging the battery were -

1) The CDI ground from the (-) ignition coil was not on a spark gap to
the cathode of the battery. The Ground wire on the 3rd point ought to
have been on a gap with the CDI ground on the other side away from the battery.
Not doing so was bumping the current draw.

2) The various operating parameters of the variac and inverter were drawing
extra current to stay operational while also powering the coil-driver circuitry.

Aaron, I've rebuilt your system once again, this time completely by the use
of the pulse-width modulated 555 & 393 mosfet circuit designed by the RM Cybernetics
team. The outlay of the entire thing is identical besides the use of a variac and
inverter.

The results I've obtained in this manner are quite promising.

Attached is the matching diagram, and might I convey that while it was working there
was an unmistakable charging effect on the battery.

Due to what I believe is a fault in the circuitry for driving transformers the
system did not last more than 5min before frying the mosfets without overheating
them, while also disabling a number of timer & pulse-width chips. I've hence
rewired a diode to be positioned across the MOT primary to subside any spikes
that might be causing the problem and it has unfortunately worked to reduce the
output to a minimal value.

How indeed I might progress to rebuild it to stay running is almost