Donald Smith Devices too good to be true

[AetherScientist]

She could be referring to this type of arrangement by Smith.



See page 5-11. That's page 5 dash 11, not pages 5 through 11.

http://www.free-energy-info.com/VladimirUtkin.pdf

Utkin says the diagram is rough and is lacking in detail and says the device won't perform correctly without some kind of back-electromagnetic force suppression.

Maybe he's referring to this:
Don Smith's experiment with Avramenko line and ambient magnetic energy
Smith2005_0001.wmv - YouTube


And this:
Однопроводный ВВ тран��форматор - YouTube


If you look in the second video, there is a transformer where the primary coil is 1-wire (similar to Avramenko).

Making a single device based on the 2 videos above, we will have the picture configuration of above.

[sinergicus]

original picture found

Sorry thats the only image I have. on the left it start out 10000v range with (72) 10meg resistors in series. I put them on a small circuit board.Then 10000v range with 7 10 meg resistors in series. Then 1000v range (2) 3.3 meg + (1) 560k resistors. I put these two on another small circuit board all these where in series with 1/4 plugs and resivers to change the voltage range The diode brige is byv28 500v 6a 50-60ns. The resistor in thehorizontall circuit is 100k. The spark gap for over loads I use a reed switch.Vapacitor is 1uf 200v.And 2 diodes byv28. Then a cheap multmeter that you can cut the leads with 1-2" left to hook to the circuit. And then use the lect over leads for the groud on the curcuit and the + lead for the 1/4 inch or somering small plugs. I used 1/4 in radio plugs but I wish I had used smaller connections. This all I know and it works.

Regards

I found original picture taken from here High_voltage supplies


and a more clear picture:

[AetherScientist]

Here you've another great experiment.
Resonance single wire power transmission



That is a variation of Smith experiment where he shows that electricity is obtained from ambient background.
The video that serve as a guide is this:
Resonance Single Wire Power Transmission - YouTube

Instead of using continuous single-wire transmission line, I added the Smith experiment where he puts the 3 plates (metal, dielectric, metal) and proves that energy comes from background.

[jimboot]

Triang Power supply

Not sure if this is helpful but I thought I'd share the vintage power supply I use.
It gives far greater plasma effects and light via one wire a incandescent 25w bayonet cap (not ES) 240v lamp. I probably should post this in joule ringer & variant but it it may help here as well. It has two outputs 12vdc & 17VAC. The weird thing is with the dc output is that the wave form is sinusoidal with flat peaks & troughs. I was told by a friend it was from an old train set. He also said the DC is really a combination of DC AND AC, hence the weird waveform.

Here is a link to one that looks exactly the same.
vintage scalextric triang power supply boxed BUSSLETON | Antiques & Collectables | Gumtree Australia Busselton Area - Geographe
Anyway I thought someone may have an ahaa moment with that info

[AetherScientist]

Another circuit that could induce to someone to get better ideas:



Uploaded with ImageShack.us

It's based in a scalar induction device. It's the same as the electromagnetic induction coils, but using longitudinal waves. The input of each coil is a scalar field.
The inductive coils can be also pancake coils (flat coils).

[soundiceuk]

I thought cold electricity is when a bulb can be inserted in water with bare hands. Try and do it with ignition coil, bulb will go out. As for putting my fingers in there. Pass.

[AetherScientist]

cold electricity does not have back emf.

Zilano,

Cold electricity has not back-emf. Of course.
But think about Thane Heins. He said that when you've a transformer, you're using reactive power in the primary. The back-emf of the primary induces energy in the secondary. And the back-emf of the secondary changes the power factor of the primary, causing the primary to consume active power.
He resolved this problem blocking the back-emf to the secondary, so no reflection of the secondary in the primary means that primary's power factor is not altered. Since primary's power factor is 0 (pure reactive), it keeps the same: zero. Remember that reactive does not consume watts. So you're not depleting the energy source.

If you use 2 ignition coils (one transmitter and one receiver), the back-emf of the 2-wire coil of the receiver will cause a longitudinal wave to come back to the transmitter ignition coil via 1-wire.
If you use a diode in the single-wire, then you block the reflection to the source.

I think that is the think the other user was referring to.

[usu]

Another circuit that could induce to someone to get better ideas:



Uploaded with ImageShack.us

It's based in a scalar induction device. It's the same as the electromagnetic induction coils, but using longitudinal waves. The input of each coil is a scalar field.
The inductive coils can be also pancake coils (flat coils).

Hi All!

I suspect this is tesla invention. It's tesla 2 coil. Direct and backward.
Also I suspect that a spark gap is not needed. Just direct connection.

Unfortunately they got cool electricity again. And this is the reason why Donald can't do the feedback sourse. Isn't it?

Is there any other assumptions?

By the way.

This is the best replication Donald device that I have known:

Новое творение Динатрона. - YouTube

The motor 220V 5A.
The consumption of device is ~ 100W
Also there is video with explanation of theory.
Of course it is in rus...

Best regards,

Sergey.

[AetherScientist]

Hi All!

I suspect this is tesla invention. It's tesla 2 coil. Direct and backward.
Also I suspect that a spark gap is not needed. Just direct connection.

Unfortunately they got cool electricity again. And this is the reason why Donald can't do the feedback sourse. Isn't it?

Is there any other assumptions?

Best regards,

Sergey.

I only wanted to "prove" that induction using scalar fields is possible.
The blue line are not sparkgaps (sorry for drawing them). I tried to show that there is induction between the coils. Of course, you can also do it using direct connection.

I try to show again Smith's conclusions.

1. Scalar field induction is possible. Since scalar field is wattless, you can increase the "power". This power increase cannot be made while using electromagnetic waves.

A user prove the concept of Smith, where he shows that Oersted experiment is not valid if we use a Scalar Field (the compass doesn't move). This means the energy is not dissipated.

In the classic transformers, the back emf of the secondary affects the power factor of the primary. So the primary originally uses reactive power, but when the secondary coil induces the magnetic flux in the primary (reflection) the primary's power factor is altered and the primary now consumes active power.

In Smith system is different. Is almost similar to Thane Heins. The primary coil L1 induces energy in the secondary L2. But in the Smith's transformer, there is not reflection to the source (L1). So you're not consuming power in the L1 because you're only consuming reactive power (wattless).

Why this happens?
Because L2 in Smith transformer is a bifilar coil. A bifilar coil cancels the electromagnetic wave. It produces magnetic vector field and other thing I cannot remember the name right now.
This kind of energy doesn't produce back-emf, so no reflection is produced to the L1 and the L1 power factor is not affected.
Then, the capacitors are use to produce electromagnetic waves from magnetic vector fields.

[usu]

I only wanted to "prove" that induction using scalar fields is possible.
The blue line are not sparkgaps (sorry for drawing them). I tried to show that there is induction between the coils. Of course, you can also do it using direct connection.

I try to show again Smith's conclusions.

1. Scalar field induction is possible. Since scalar field is wattless, you can increase the "power". This power increase cannot be made while using electromagnetic waves.

A user prove the concept of Smith, where he shows that Oersted experiment is not valid if we use a Scalar Field (the compass doesn't move). This means the energy is not dissipated.

In the classic transformers, the back emf of the secondary affects the power factor of the primary. So the primary originally uses reactive power, but when the secondary coil induces the magnetic flux in the primary (reflection) the primary's power factor is altered and the primary now consumes active power.

In Smith system is different. Is almost similar to Thane Heins. The primary coil L1 induces energy in the secondary L2. But in the Smith's transformer, there is not reflection to the source (L1). So you're not consuming power in the L1 because you're only consuming reactive power (wattless).

Why this happens?
Because L2 in Smith transformer is a bifilar coil. A bifilar coil cancels the electromagnetic wave. It produces magnetic vector field and other thing I cannot remember the name right now.
This kind of energy doesn't produce back-emf, so no reflection is produced to the L1 and the L1 power factor is not affected.
Then, the capacitors are use to produce electromagnetic waves from magnetic vector fields.

Hi!
Excuse me.
I would say that we are not just from different planets but from different galaxies.
Just see my previous link.
This result based on completely different conclusions.
I have already tried to explain this point of view.
If you want I'll try to do it again.

There isn't any free energy in usual electricity.
Free energy doesn't come from nothing.
We have only one way to get it.
The goal is to use radiant energy.
This is energy from deep cosmos(Tesla call it radiant energy)
Isn't it familiar phrase for you?

In my opinion radiant energy = cool electricity.
There are a lot of methods to get it
(Tesla coil,board Donald Smith,Kapanadze device,Brovins kacher) but it is completely different eclectricity .
Traditional laws of electricity does not work at all.
For example you have high voltage on the load, but no current .
This is the reason why this electricity impossible to measure
using usual measuring devices.

I'll continue if you want.


sory

Sergey.

[AetherScientist]

Hi!
Excuse me.
I would say that we are not just from different planets but from different galaxies.
Just see my previous link.
This result based on completely different conclusions.
I have already tried to explain this point of view.
If you want I'll try to do it again.

There isn't any free energy in usual electricity.
Free energy doesn't come from nothing.
We have only one way to get it.
The goal is to use radiant energy.
This is energy from deep cosmos(Tesla call it radiant energy)
Isn't it familiar phrase for you?

In my opinion radiant energy = cool electricity.
There are a lot of methods to get it
(Tesla coil,board Donald Smith,Kapanadze device,Brovins kacher) but it is completely different eclectricity .
Traditional laws of electricity does not work at all.
For example you have high voltage on the load, but no current .
This is the reason why this electricity impossible to measure
using usual measuring devices.

I'll continue if you want.


sory

Sergey.

I'm seeing the video, but I understand Russian very little, not enough to understand all the information.

As you say, there is not "free" energy, there is not over-unity, etc...
All this is based in tapping energy from an unrecognized source (the scalar field of the space-time continuous). Free energy can be the windmills, the photo-voltaic cells, etc... Why not? their cop = infinity, because the energy input is zero and the output is the one you desire (more desired, more photo-voltaic cells).

Cold electricity is simply a non-dissipative manifestation of electrical energy. Wattage is a dissipative form and it dissipates in the form of heat and/or light.
Watts are necessary to run our appliances, but it's not the only kind of manifestation that can induce a function in an electrical device.

Like you say, radiant energy comes from the space. I don't know if this is from ions, from cosmic energy, from the time domain, etc... But it exists.
It's quite similar (but different) to ordinary electricity.

For example in this video (A Floating Magnet Weighs What? - YouTube) you can see how the top magnet is making a force opposed to the gravity because it's floating. It hasn't any power input, but it's constantly producing an energy similar to gravity but in opposite direction.
Where that energy comes from? from the ambient background.

You know magnets can create transverse energy and they look like an unlimited source of energy. So we could use energy in a different way we do actually and perform uncommon tasks that we don't make today.

[dragon]

I struggled, for a long time, trying to answer the question of the coils polarity. Still do to a lesser degree. If we think of the coil as a transformer where coils and turns are the key factor we can easily get lost in theory and calculations but what is really taking place. The transformation is simply the result of pulsing it from an external source. So then, what is the polarity of the coil during this transformation and why does the energy want to flow from one side of the coil to the other ( such as a discharge spark )... I believe it's because we've created an imbalance in the coil called a charge separation. The coil is simply a way to determine the amount of separation based on it's parameters. If we treat it as a charged object instead of a coil we can develop a "feel" for it's polarity. If we place the polarity correctly in nature, it will feel the need to attract opposite charges and neutralize it. When we remove the artificial force we've placed on it what we have left is a charged object. ( unless it's connected to earth or other leakage ) There have been several occasions where I've shut down a system and touched a coil that gave me a considerable bite - it continued to hold the charge until I neutralized it ( because it wasn't grounded ). We want our loads to interact with what nature is providing - not the artificial input.

When woopy was lighting the bulb through his body capacitance and showing the amperage noting there was little to no change, we saw that the circuit required 1/2 amp to operate regardless of the bulb lighting or not. So what energy was lighting the bulb? He provided a path to neutralize the plate - the bulb was simply in the way and lit.

If you go outside and feel the wind in your face, it's simply natures way of filling a void - high pressure to low pressure. If we put a wind turbine in it's path we have a means of collecting the energy. The void will still be filled regardless of what is in it's path.

[AetherScientist]

As you know, magnetism is a natural occurring force.
To a material to be magnetism it needs basically that its magnetic domains points at the same direction at the same time.
This is based in spin rotation. If the spins are rotating in the same direction at the same time, it's magnetic.



Don Smith explains that wattage is an unnatural manifestation of energy because in active power all the electrons spins are rotating in the different (corrected) direction at the same time, producing a huge energy dissipation.
In reactive power current lags/leads voltage. That means the spins are rotating in the same direction at the same time like in a magnet.
Then he adds that depending the spin rotation, the electrons put out electric or magnetic waves. The half part of a magnet spins cc, and the other half spins ccw.
That is the thing we call North polarization or South polarization. All of that depends on the direction of rotation of spins.



Smith's theorems:


This is the same theory that Howard Johnson also discovered:
http://www.cheniere.org/images/Johnson/P25a.jpg


All is based on spin rotation at unison. Wattage is not unison, it's chaotic. Chaotic is dissipative. You cannot get gains in a dissipative system of losses.
Reactive power has all the spins rotating at unison. In that system you can have "power" gains.
It's critical to understand this to understand Smith's theorems.

[Zardox]

I have followed this and other threads for a long time and I build circuits quietly in my little corner. I just find it interesting how every time that with the help of some people like zilano, dragon and others. People like woopy and mr.clean build devices that start to show some promise and suddenly several others show up with a bunch of new (untested and unproven drawings and theores) wanting to discuss and maybe distract from the work that is already being done. The whole time blasting those people that got us this far for not showing their devices. You guys are really good at cut and paste (thumbs up).

As I don't have anything to offer in the way of constructive help I will go back into my hole and wait on the edge of my seat for your next debate.

[AetherScientist]

I have followed this and other threads for a long time and I build circuits quietly in my little corner. I just find it interesting how every time that with the help of some people like zilano, dragon and others. People like woopy and mr.clean build devices that start to show some promise and suddenly several others show up with a bunch of new (untested and unproven drawings and theores) wanting to discuss and maybe distract from the work that is already being done. The whole time blasting those people that got us this far for not showing their devices. You guys are really good at cut and paste (thumbs up).

As I don't have anything to offer in the way of constructive help I will go back into my hole and wait on the edge of my seat for your next debate.

I make a small debate because If I decide to build a device I have to spend some hundred dollars. As you know, I prefer that other more experienced in electronics build the circuits because they've more skills and more electronic equipment at home than me.
My profession is not related with anything electrical. I've electricity like a hobby that I practice very little.

As you know, some of the theorems exposed here like the one about compass and scalar currents, has been proven (by woopy). And I'm sure that other theorems are correct too.

So, for your good or bad news, I will keep posting theorems and people will keep proving that some of the theories I expose are true. Not because I say that, they have been discovered more than 100 years ago, but they are very little known. So start being more comfortable with my posts because I'll write more.