Donald Smith Devices too good to be true

[Dwane]

If you investigate any ( or all ) of the various devices ( tesla, hendershot, moray etc. ) you'll see they all have one thing in common - they were all building receivers in one form or another.

Don Smiths table top device was modeled around a 1950's crystal radio receiver ( diagram below ) but used an input (nst) to drive L1 instead of a natural signal. This receiver was published in the "Boys book of crystal radio" in the early 50's and is quite amazing the amount of output you can achieve from a radio signal. It was also used by "Utility engines" in 1954 to explain the phenomenon in the Hendershot circuit. They sold plans showing that the receiver would power a small motor including a section on how to build the motor. These plans were removed from the market after Hendershot protested claiming they weren't correct - later admitting they were very close.

My personal opinion is that Don never really achieved his ultimate goal and never actually demonstrated a working model. The suitcase device he demonstrated was never opened to allow inspection - I suspect there was a reason beyond what he stated...

Drawing inspiration from those in the past is a necessity but to achieve something unique only comes from inside you.

Hi Dragon,

Thanks for the reply. I must admit I have a tendency to indulge in information trying to find what I think I want! When something works i then test it further. Quite natural I would think seeing some of the posts here.

Your comments are valid, and the transmitter receiver circuit a clever arrangement. Those boys in the fifties and earlier were very lucky. What we get these days is often reliant upon someone else chipset! Your comments regarding Don Smith echo a lot of others out there. However, in an earlier part of the 1998 Office interview, where he compares himself to Tesla, he pointedly remarks on the production of ozone: which is a by product of spark gaps and HV discharges; so where are these in some of his devices? So in a way, he moved to GDT's for safety or voltage control? I do think he produced something workable, although the extremely high output he suggests might not be achievable with the units he demonstrated. In the office interview part 2 to part 3 he actually contradicts his assessment, we are only looking at a difference of about 12KVA. So what? Even if he was getting the lower value that looked ok!.

I am currently building a unit in conjunction with the Resonance Energy device explained thread. Just have to manage the Resonance! I shall be posting a unit within a few days I hope will be working! Like don's it will operate on high frequency.

Regards

Dwane

Once again, thank you for your assistance

[ricards]

..don't get me wrong I don't have a device that generate more energy. I'm actually stuck. sourcing parts and building oscillator at mhz range controlled, and making my own caps. and I choose not to buy.. It breaks my learning process (also my wallet )..

I'm sure I am very clear in stating with where I am standing.. right now..

It seems you only pick want you want to read..
this conversation is starting to turn into an argument..
you don't seem to take my advice even though you're the one who ask it.
so I will stop.

[ilandtan]

ilandtan,

If you really wish to keep your slayer exciter. at least find its resonant frequency and build secondary coils according to that frequency.

let me say this.. sometimes manual is a lot better than automatics.. as It gives you absolute control.

I have seen numerous examples of multiple resonant coils based off the slayer, which is contrary to standard Tesla coils. They are less common to see multiple receivers.

[VIDEO]https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=CbqR8EpIP04[/VIDEO]

It appears you have to retune a standard Tesla coil similarly depending on the topload and other factors as well according to the Tesla build sites I have frequented. I have noticed my own proximity to coil changes the frequency I see that with my LCR meter.

You are right I don't know. I have only tried using my DC NST to drive the same coils I use with the slayer circuit, and I was able to generate plasma discharge.

However I will stick with the simple and cheap for now. You don't seem to be telling me it wont work at all... If I can prove over unity with a simple slayer, then I will consider different setups.

So I guess I have to remove the 800 lbs gorilla in the room so I can place your advice in context. Ricards, may I ask you if have you proven a operational system running with over-unity using your standard Tesla coils?

[ricards]

ilandtan,

It's not about your slayer exciter.. its about THE slayer exciter..
no relation to ground,..
maximum current is achieved by resonance where coils impedance is 0..
and I mean the secondary coil as well.. because it interacts with your primary is it not?...

your slayer exciter maybe in resonance. but once you introduce a coil that is vibrating differently, it will end up messing up the vibration of your "Auto Resonant Slayer" or whatever it is.. this will result in higher amp draw to your source. once you get them close to get more power from it.

your primary coil and secondary coil must be designed to resonate, your primary should have a matching capacitor, and your secondary as well. as much as possible keep a High Q Tank Circuit.. spaced out your turns well, not too close.

If your pushing a swing at certain intervals, and you have someone on the other side pushing it back at different intervals.. he will end up destroying your momentum.. same thing with your exciter.. It may be designed to be at resonance automatically.. once you introduce some other coil that is not it will mess it up..

here is a calc tool I use to calculate my wire length and Coil Inductance, given I use standard value capacitors.
Resonance_Calc.zip

If you really wish to keep your slayer exciter. at least find its resonant frequency and build secondary coils according to that frequency.

let me say this.. sometimes manual is a lot better than automatics.. as It gives you absolute control.

[ilandtan]

ilandtan,

1. maximum current.
2. measure your volt and amp through that load, that is the real power in your circuit.
2a. when you measure without a load you can only measure its maximum voltage..
2b. when you short out the coils (or diode bridge) you can measure its maximum current..

If you still have the same measurements or less but still more than that 6w input, I'll gladly replicate your setup to verify that.

So forget about 2. Lets talk about 1. Are you saying because I am not using an RF ground on L2 on the slayer, I wont be seeing maximum current?

[ricards]

ilandtan,

1. maximum current.
2. measure your volt and amp through that load, that is the real power in your circuit.
2a. when you measure without a load you can only measure its maximum voltage..
2b. when you short out the coils (or diode bridge) you can measure its maximum current..

If you still have the same measurements or less but still more than that 6w input, I'll gladly replicate your setup to verify that.

[ilandtan]

hi dwane,
I have not tried to mess around with winding the secondary to CW or CCW as I see no point in it if they are not mutually coupled.

ilandtan,

firstly, get away from the slayer exciter If you wish to do Don Smith experiments, they are good to experiment with, but are NOT a replacement for 'calculated wire length and controlled frequency' there are some effects that you're not seeing.

Instead rely on these facts:
1. you can generate energy by spending energy.
2. you CANNOT get more energy than what you put it.
2a. but you can get the environment to input so you can have more.
3. you can use the same energy more than once to generate more energy.
4. there is no free energy rather than the freedom to generate it.

Ricards,

Thank you for your response.

1. What effects am I not seeing with the slayer

2. With my configuration harvest coil I have measured 300 watts when my slayer is only taking 6 watts - maybe I'm doing something wrong? With no load I am measuring across my bridge + and - getting 300VDC at 1A

When I put a load through V and I both drop significantly, so it seems reactive?

Anyway, I think there is something I am not getting.

Thanks!

[dragon]

If you investigate any ( or all ) of the various devices ( tesla, hendershot, moray etc. ) you'll see they all have one thing in common - they were all building receivers in one form or another.

Don Smiths table top device was modeled around a 1950's crystal radio receiver ( diagram below ) but used an input (nst) to drive L1 instead of a natural signal. This receiver was published in the "Boys book of crystal radio" in the early 50's and is quite amazing the amount of output you can achieve from a radio signal. It was also used by "Utility engines" in 1954 to explain the phenomenon in the Hendershot circuit. They sold plans showing that the receiver would power a small motor including a section on how to build the motor. These plans were removed from the market after Hendershot protested claiming they weren't correct - later admitting they were very close.

My personal opinion is that Don never really achieved his ultimate goal and never actually demonstrated a working model. The suitcase device he demonstrated was never opened to allow inspection - I suspect there was a reason beyond what he stated...

Drawing inspiration from those in the past is a necessity but to achieve something unique only comes from inside you.

[Dwane]

Hi ricards,

Thank you for your detailed explanation. That was partly what I was trying to discover. I have already mentioned in an earlier post to ilandtan, I think, that this particular set up, http://www.energeticforum.com/redire...%3DEsKoAu_X25A, was acknowledged by Don as being designed to show people what they think they wanted to see. From that statement, I took it to mean that it was never intended to work in that particular configuration. Therefore, it was a "Teaching Aid".

Although I have spent some time on this, perhaps I am number 310001 to have had their patience tested by it. And, I can see that you are someone with greater skills than I with Don Smith electronics, who has also had their patience tested! However, I think my original question was about the ambiguity i saw in the description of the two Tesla Coils and the location of the capacitor. Combined with my small knowledge, and Don's specificity of dual electron spins, I felt the need to try and qualify your statement. No other intention was implied. In fact, for myself and the search for the Don Smith "Grail", I find that just when I think I am on the right track, something pops up to direct me to further developments!!! Probably as it should be. Learning is a curve that requires straightening.

At the present time, I am still of the opinion, that Don has stumped us with his method that is in plain site, so to speak: the best camouflage! He is using Tesla methodology at its most fundamental point of discovery, which we might be overstating and complicating the solution we seek.

Thank you for your comprehensive reply. There are some very fine contributions on this thread and another thread, that make one want to seek and understand more.

Ref: Don Smith 1998 Office interview Pt 4, 7min 25secs. Where he states putting things in because people expect to see them!
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=PT6Hmq5Uo4Q

Regards

Dwane

[ricards]

Hi ricards,

Thank you for the reply. As we are discussing Don Smith, and you use a parallel coils joined with capacitor, calling these Tesla coils, where is the issue? Don specifically states a duality of electron couplets (my definition) of which when separated each electron travels a different direction of spin. Why, if discussing Don not hold to his theoretical notions.

Regards

Dwane

hi dwane,

Im not sure if I understand you question correctly..
ill try to respond..

That is one of the notion of Don smith that I could not clearly understand..

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=EsKoAu_X25A
when he was talking about that amps and volts thing about a coil he might have been talking about the series and the parallel resonance of that particular secondary coil..

If you would observe closely the upper portion of that coil has a capacitor in it.. since it is center tap I see 2 circuit..

the upper portion is a parallel tank. voltage increase at resonance
the bottom is a series tank. amperage increase at resonance

But I've tested this and found very little difference I might have overlook something...

basically I'm replicating that table top device by don smith, I've manage to have it in resonance at 12v upto 48v until it broke the oscillator. (overvoltage). learned from that and that's it I moved on to other projects so its not complete so that observation is still only a theory for now. theories are no good until proven.

[Dwane]

hi dwane,
I have not tried to mess around with winding the secondary to CW or CCW as I see no point in it if they are not mutually coupled.
...........

Hi ricards,

Thank you for the reply. As we are discussing Don Smith, and you use a parallel coils joined with capacitor, calling these Tesla coils, where is the issue? Don specifically states a duality of electron couplets (my definition) of which when separated each electron travels a different direction of spin. Why, if discussing Don not hold to his theoretical notions.

Regards

Dwane

[ricards]

hi dwane,
I have not tried to mess around with winding the secondary to CW or CCW as I see no point in it if they are not mutually coupled.

ilandtan,

firstly, get away from the slayer exciter If you wish to do Don Smith experiments, they are good to experiment with, but are NOT a replacement for 'calculated wire length and controlled frequency' there are some effects that you're not seeing.
Do as per Don Instructed. calculate your wire length by dividing speed of light to your desired frequency, in case this will result in impractical wire length, work out in harmonics.... that is divide/multiply your desired frequency by 2 until you get your practical wire length.

ex. 30khz will result in 9,993m wire length, 30.72Mhz is 11th harmonic frequency of 30khz and will result in 9.76m wire length which is practical to use now..
If you will make this 9.76m into an Inductor, calculate its inductance by its geometry.. that is number of turns and diameter,
properly spaced each turns so It will be high Q.
there are many calcs online... and match with a capacitor so that It will be a resonant circuit at 30khz... and make another coil same procedure but different number of turns, adjust caps to match 30khz freq.. and pulse it at 30khz.. and see a loose magnetic coupling coils become like they are wound around the same iron core.

you really have to do some engineering.

I see it as you are trying to get "The Energy". tap "The Energy" like literally.. "The Energy" is not something that exist literally. I used to believe in that and really did tried my best to GET More Energy of course I failed.

Instead rely on these facts:
1. you can generate energy by spending energy.
2. you CANNOT get more energy than what you put it.
2a. but you can get the environment to input so you can have more.
3. you can use the same energy more than once to generate more energy.
4. there is no free energy rather than the freedom to generate it.

I've reached the point where in I choose not to believe magic energy, that few watts in kilowatts out.. If that were possible It would have been because the energy has been accumulated and is being used many times.

don't get me wrong I don't have a device that generate more energy. I'm actually stuck. sourcing parts and building oscillator at mhz range controlled, and making my own caps. and I choose not to buy.. It breaks my learning process (also my wallet )..

[Dwane]

.......................
try to see it this way.. 2 inductors are in series and connected parallel to a single capacitor where 1 Plate is the topload of Teslacoil 1 and the other is the Topload of Teslacoil 2.. this is a.k.a in eric dollard/steinmetz/Faraday as Di-electric lines of force...


the Information Don Smith provided are good but based on my own research and experimentation not all are true.

Hi ricards,
just an observation. The only way I can seem to connect your two Tesla coils and a capacitor is to have a common earthing point and the capacitor straddles the top plates. If this is correct, would one of the Tesla coils have to be counter wound to the other?

Thanks for your insightful input to the discussion. Absolutely, tell ilandtan where his mistake is!

Regards

Dwane

[ilandtan]

ilandtan,

That is where resonance comes into play, If you would notice tesla coil secondaries are made of large number of turns (large impedance).. at resonance these coils impedance is zero, because you're inducing at the right time..
current at the secondary would be at maximum..

I'm not against your theory.. its just that I see where this is going..
but I will leave that up to you to figure out since this is your work..
I just wanted to somehow communicate and tell a bit of what I already know (based on failures)...

good luck with your work.

Please tell me what you've learned ricards, I would rather someone tell me where they have failed, and save me time which is precious. I can take it, please be honest.

[ricards]

ilandtan,

That is where resonance comes into play, If you would notice tesla coil secondaries are made of large number of turns (large impedance).. at resonance these coils impedance is zero, because you're inducing at the right time..
current at the secondary would be at maximum..

I'm not against your theory.. its just that I see where this is going..
but I will leave that up to you to figure out since this is your work..
I just wanted to somehow communicate and tell a bit of what I already know (based on failures)...

good luck with your work.