Parametric Excitation

[h2ocommuter]

Thanks Eric for the guidance

How wonderfull it is to have you expose these things.

Energy and electricty is all to much conseptulized in my mind as majic; So I will be arround but I will be hanging out in the deep outfield.

If I can do anything for you Eric just let me know.
You are one of the greatest masters of all time, I want you to hear that!

Zane

[Raui]

Well first of all, welcome back Mr Dollard. It's great to see you've come back!! I was aware of some of the things you've said particularly 2-6. I think the analysis of the internals of a capacitor prove the notion that electrons aren't needed as 'charge carriers' of electricity, especially in regard to a vacuum capacitor. My analysis of parameter changes in electric systems have proven both positive and negative resistances appearing and therefore the destruction and synthesis of electrical energy. As for learning from the masters, I have compiled a list of publications by authors you've recommended and a few others I have found useful over the time I've been reading these documents. On your notion that power is not equal to energy I think this is a given by definition. I have always been under the belief that energy is a quantity and power is the rate of dissipation, at least that's the way I was taught it. In the video 'Free Energy Research' I noted when you drove your Tesla coils with the music of Bach that the discharge burned organic type structures in paper, I think you said particle board works better though. It indeed made me think of a plant as a discharge akin to how either you or Tom Brown described it! It seems like this comes in two parts, so I do eagerly await the second part and it is so great to see you around again!

@Armagdn03,
Thanks for the website, I'm reading it now and it's great!. I haven't learned about imaginary/complex numbers so my knowledge of imaginary numbers is essentially self-taught and this helps greatly with visualization

Raui

[Armagdn03]

I also think the following resource would be very helpful to many.

Even if you know what imaginary numbers are, and have used them frequently, unless you intuitively understand what they represent, then you really do not understand their importance in such areas.

A Visual, Intuitive Guide to Imaginary Numbers | BetterExplained

[Armagdn03]

I) The military concept does not offer praise but delegates higher order of responsibility. So let us begin:

1) Purge the mind virus, establish new thinking processes. Regular exposure to the music of J.S. Bach will help facilitate this endeavor.

2) Replace the concept of “free energy” with the concept of energy synthesis, that is the synthesis of energy from its component parts. Nothing is free in the free world except the freedom to pay, that is the law. Stay out of trouble.

3) Discontinue the practice of habitually exchanging the terms power and energy as if they are equivalent, they are not. Engines are not motors, etc.

4) Eliminate the notion that electronic particles convey electricity, they do no such thing. Electrons represent the dissipation of electrical energy and its conversion to noise.

5) Realize that the energy is not equal to mass times velocity squared. Electricity is mass free.

6) Seek in your experiments to develop a system that destroys energy, this as well as the creation of energy invalidated the notion of conservation of energy.

7) Return to the works of the masters, perform their calculations & experiments. Do not just read, but do. Attempting to invent anew before this effort only multiplies the confusion.

8) Endeavor to be in direct contact with nature while thinking on electrical ideas, the intrinsic archetypes of nature will provide answers to your questions. Social situations weaken this process. Keep your mind and body in good shape by avoiding adulterated food; living food for living people, dead food for dead people.

End part (I)

Ref.:

(1) Occult Ether Physics by William Lyne

(2) Survival into the 21st Century by Victor Klaus

Thank you for the insight.

I have really been focusing lately on the following concept

3) Discontinue the practice of habitually exchanging the terms power and energy as if they are equivalent, they are not. Engines are not motors, etc.

One of my latest run of circuits really takes advantage of this fact.

Imagine a circuit where action and reaction are separated by TIME.

The charge in the system is always conserved and stays the same, The work itself oscillates, causing a rise in potential and current simultaneously in the load.

You raise the energy state of the entire system and cause an internal imbalance. The system then seeks balance, and in so doing accomplishes work, over a set time. After equilibrium is reached, the system is at a higher energy state than in began at.

The amount of time dictates the power at a given moment. Then the system is allowed to return to its original lower energy state (the reaction separated by time), causing another internal imbalance, which takes TIME to equalize, again causing the same amount of work to be done as the initial impetus.

It would seem from this circuit that it is possible to create circuits in which time is the dominant factor in output to the load. Dare I say, it is possible to harness the action, reaction, and time is our "source".

[Dollard, E. P. (N6KPH)]

T-Rex Emergance:

I) The military concept does not offer praise but delegates higher order of responsibility. So let us begin:

1) Purge the mind virus, establish new thinking processes. Regular exposure to the music of J.S. Bach will help facilitate this endeavor.

2) Replace the concept of “free energy” with the concept of energy synthesis, that is the synthesis of energy from its component parts. Nothing is free in the free world except the freedom to pay, that is the law. Stay out of trouble.

3) Discontinue the practice of habitually exchanging the terms power and energy as if they are equivalent, they are not. Engines are not motors, etc.

4) Eliminate the notion that electronic particles convey electricity, they do no such thing. Electrons represent the dissipation of electrical energy and its conversion to noise.

5) Realize that the energy is not equal to mass times velocity squared. Electricity is mass free.

6) Seek in your experiments to develop a system that destroys energy, this as well as the creation of energy invalidated the notion of conservation of energy.

7) Return to the works of the masters, perform their calculations & experiments. Do not just read, but do. Attempting to invent anew before this effort only multiplies the confusion.

8) Endeavor to be in direct contact with nature while thinking on electrical ideas, the intrinsic archetypes of nature will provide answers to your questions. Social situations weaken this process. Keep your mind and body in good shape by avoiding adulterated food; living food for living people, dead food for dead people.

End part (I)

Ref.:

(1) Occult Ether Physics by William Lyne

(2) Survival into the 21st Century by Victor Klaus

[Michael John Nunnerley]

very very similar

This is the same as Dr. Stiffler's ECAT? Here's his page on it:
Energy Conversion by Articulated Transfer

Yes it is very similar but I use its natural frequency. I can get a 3X the input voltage going to the output transformer, so with 12v I get 36v into the primary. This can be increased but with current drop, I have increased the design on this circuit but as of yet not publicated it as I feel there is much more to do but have not had the time.

Running for more than three months 24 bright white leds with four 1.2v nicad batteries and the reed switching changed to a system of switching with a transistor as the reed does wear out after a few days of operating.

Mike

[SuperCaviTationIstic]

http://www.energeticforum.com/attach...cuit-video.jpg

Hi all, Use this circuit, it works and very easy to make, just put the output across two batteries in series and power from the front battery of the two only, have had it running for ever, run loads only from the back battery such as leds.

This is an on going investigation

Mike

This is the same as Dr. Stiffler's ECAT? Here's his page on it:
Energy Conversion by Articulated Transfer

[Raui]

Thanks for sharing your circuit Micheal, great work What kinda of rate of change do you achieve of the inductance in this circuit and what output do you get (just a rough estimation will do)

Raui

[Michael John Nunnerley]

Parametric inductance circuit STEAP

http://www.energeticforum.com/attach...cuit-video.jpg

Hi all, Use this circuit, it works and very easy to make, just put the output across two batteries in series and power from the front battery of the two only, have had it running for ever, run loads only from the back battery such as leds.

This is an on going investigation

Mike

[wings]

Cravens Wanlass, lot of patents relatet to parametric devices like:

pat. 3648206 CORE CONSTRUCTIONS FOR VARIABLE INDUCTORS

[Raui]

The best beginner text on this I have read would be found here; PARAMETRIC POWER CONVERSION - by JL Naudin with a little more information found here; PARAMETRIC POWER CONVERSION by JL Naudin I'll try summarize what I've learned. Parametric excitation involves the induction of electrical waves into a circuit due to parameter changes (example; capacitance).

It can be concluded using maths that if we change a capacitance by an amount over a period of time we get a conductance (G measured in seimens which can also be calculated as 1 divided by resistance). A large coductance is really just a very small positive resistance so nothing too interesting there. However if the change is from a higher value to a lower value and the change is a negative change then the result is a negative conductance and therefore using same reasoning above; a negative resistance.

Conversely if we change our inductance over a period of time from lower to a higher inductance the result is a positive resistance. Which again is certainly not excess energy to what we had so we have an extra resistance (which, by the way, might be considered destruction of electrical energy) however if our change is from a higher inductance to a lower one then we have a negative change and therefore a negative resistance! We can even defeat Lenz's Law using parametric excitation in a configuration where there is no flux coupling between the load circuit and exciter circuit because you don't need flux coupling for changes in inductance to occur.

If we have a positive resistance it's safe to assume that energy is being used so a negative resistance would be the opposite right? That is, energy being generated and available for work. There are two interesting ways of changing our parameters which result in high changes in our parameters with no Lenz Law effects.

The inductance method is exploiting core saturation. By attaching a magnet to an electromagnets core so that when no power is being fed to the coil the core is magnetically saturated and when we apply power it works against the core saturation and gives us a very large decay in inductance over a period of time resulting in a negative resistance. The capacitive method is to charge a set of capacitors in parallel and discharge in series as to achieve a rapid decrease in capacitance which as I said above results in a negative conductance.

This is all theory so far, Ltbolo is the only one who has done practical work ehre and he showed that we get energy transfer but no free energy. This may well be due to the fact his apparatus was a rotating transformer core. In rotating apparatus you have several factors working against you that you don't have in solid state devices. So my suggestion would be to start designing solid state solutions where a load is powered by a decrease in inductance or capacitance. There is also some theory to suggest that this only works at 2 times the resonant frequency or multiple thereof but I am not 100% convinced of this statement. I personally have started working on a solid state capacitance setup like the device mentioned above which charges capacitors in parallel and discharges in series. Once my experimentation starts I'll post the circuit. After that I'll be moving onto inductance Hope this helps in some way or another.

Raui

[uusedman]

hello everyone,

After glancing at this topic, I know I want to get in and try to experiment, HOWEVER, some words sound gerberish to me. I need help in getting to this stage of understanding of parametric excitation. What BEGINNER reads can you advise ?

Thanks in advance.

[kazm]

Re: PP-18/AR Voltage Converter

Come across this page in my searches, found the VIBRATORS section informative:

Repairing_Valve_Technology

VIBRATORS
Radios that have a power source of low voltage DC require some method to generate the HT voltage. A common method, is to use a transformer with a HT secondary, but with a low voltage primary and a device to generate the AC that the transformer requires. A simple electromechanical device uses a vibrating reed to generate the AC voltage. This device is called a vibrator. The vibrator comes in several types. First there is the voltage rating, which is commonly 6, 12, 28 or 32 volts. Next there is the reed type, which can be non-synchronous, synchronous, or split reed. Most vibrators are not sealed and therefore contain air, but there are some heavy duty vibrators that are filled with an inert gas.
The vibrator is normally mounted in a sound treated tube with a valve base, so it can be changed easily. There is a coil to energise the flexible reed and a set of primary contacts to switch the DC to the transformer windings. At power on, the coil is energised, which causes the reed to swing to one side, which breaks the coil contact, and so it swings back. The cycle repeats at a frequency of about 100 cycles per second. A set of contacts switches the DC to the transformer to generate an AC voltage. The reed is usually in the negative (earth or common) lead, and the positive (hot) lead is connected to the transformer centre tapped primary winding. The contacts earth each side of the centre tapped primary, causing current to flow each way in it, similar to AC. The difference is that the current is not an AC sine wave, but a square wave.
The centre tapped secondary of the transformer is connected to a full wave rectifier valve, in the normal way, and this rectifies the AC to generate the HT voltage, which is then smoothed and filtered. This method uses a normal vibrator (called a "non-synchronous" vibrator) and has 3 or 4 pins.

<vibrators-fig1>

The rectifier valve is not necessary if the vibrator contains a second set of contacts, which will switch the secondary voltage in synchronism with the switched DC input. This is a "synchronous" vibrator and usually has 6 pins. The HT is filtered in the normal way. If the radio design requires "back bias", then the secondary reed cannot be earthed, and must be brought out to a pin on the base. This is called a "split reed" vibrator and commonly has 7 or 8 pins.

<vibrators-fig2>

Old vibrators that are not sealed, can be easily opened and cleaned. The contacts are usually hard tungsten, and can be cleaned with emery paper or a file. After cleaning, check with an ohm meter to ensure that no emery cloth is caught between them. The contacts can have burnt during use, or vapor from the internal padding can have deposited on them over the years. The fibre base can arc over and burn due to dirt. Remove the carbon with a rotating hand tool, and seal with silicone rubber. Re-adjust the coil contacts, so that it buzzes correctly, and starts properly (under load as well). Re-adjust the primary contacts so that they switch properly, and that they are a "break-before-make" contact.
There are several capacitors that should be inspected and changed. The HT filtering capacitors should be checked, and changed if necessary. The timing capacitor should be ALWAYS renewed. The capacitor is in the order of 0.0068uf and 1000 volt rating. This is important, as this capacitor determines the time constant (oscillation or "ringing") that occurs when the contacts open. Sometimes there is a resistor in series with the capacitor to get the correct time constant. The value is chosen with regard to the transformer inductance and vibrator frequency (and to a smaller extent the load components) so that the voltage decay coincides with the next contact closure, and (if perfect) there will be no voltage across the closing contacts, so there is no arcing or burning and consequent RF noise. This capacitor may be located on the primary or secondary winding. A cheap source of the the timing capacitors are old CRT computer monitors, as there are normally three 1000 volt capacitors in the EHT section. There are RF noise filtering capacitors in various places, the primary winding to earth, the secondary windings to earth, and possibly some input filter chokes as well. These capacitors are often mica capacitors and seldom fail.

Common vibrator faults are, open circuit coil, faulty contacts (burnt, dirty, mal-adjusted). Other faults can be, burnt or open circuit transformer, shorted or open timing capacitor, faulty HT filtering components, faulty noise filtering components.

~~~

Also found this one with a section about 1.5v->90v vibrator circuit:

Silicon Chip Online - Vintage Radio

Around 1940, the Americans experimented with an even lower voltage vibrator power supply. It was designed to run from a 1.5V No.6 cell and provided 90V at 9mA for a set using the relatively new 1.4V filament valves. Interestingly, an article on this appeared in "Radio & Hobbies" at the time.

Whether or not these 1.5V vibrator supplies were ever put into production is unknown. In fact, the "Radio & Hobbies" article expressed doubts about the viability of running a vibrator supply from a No.6 cell.

That's because the vibrator supply and the filaments in a 4-valve receiver would draw around 1.2A from the cell, assuming that the vibrator supply had an efficiency of 65%. A No.6 cell has an amp-hour capacity of 17-30Ah, depending on the load. And that meant a battery life of just 10-20 hours, depending on the usage per day.

Although the article stated that the supply was "quite free of both mechanical and electrical hum", no mention was made about vibrator hash interference. The circuit, shown in Fig.3. was quite basic and had virtually no RF filtering, so it was probably capable of causing significant interference to the receiver.

<1.5_to_90v_vibrator.jpg>

[Raui]

PP-18/AR Voltage Converter

A friend of mine gave me these documents and said post them here. Not sure if the friend wants a whole heap of fuss in his direction I'm sure he'll post here sooner or later but for now he's an anonymous friend. I think a few of you out there will see these for the goldmines they are!

The documents contain information about the PP-18/AR Voltage Converter, for those who are unaware of what I am talking about it is the device Eric Dollard uses to power the electronics in his car. The first couple of images are picture of the device and the last image is of the wiring diagram!

Imageshack - img20851.jpg
Imageshack - img20861.jpg
Imageshack - img20871j.jpg
Imageshack - img20901.jpg
Imageshack - img20951.jpg

Also I have an explanation of it from Eric himself (attached). I didn't find it too helpful but maybe that's just me. I knew how the device would have operated the problem is seeing how this results in extra energy. I do believe I know how this works though and I think it proves you don't need a nice sinusoidal variation of parameters because in this case a plot of the variation per unit time results in a square wave type signal.

I have shown in earlier posts that a change in capacitance over time results in a negative conductance which is basically a negative resistance but only when the parameter variation is going from a higher value to a lower value (say 10mF -> 5mF). Therefore when they are charged in parallel they have a higher capacitance and when they are discharged they are done so in series and therefore have a lower value for the overall capacitance. So when they are discharged they are discharged through a negative resistance and this is where the excess energy comes from.

I have also been thinking that a solid-state device would be easier to get going than a rotative device which was confirmed by my friend because there are too many variables in rotative devices. By use of this method or the use of specific configurations of magnetic amplifiers I think it would be quite easy to achieve parametric excitation and as long as the energy used to change the capacitance is less than it generates we have energy to power a load.

The variables in a rotation type apparatus that make the it harder to obtain the effects we are after are numerous. For example in a magnetic style which rotates to achieve a changing inductance per unit time we have the problem of Lenz's Law. This was noted by LtBolo in his research. In a solid state apparatus we can excite an external circuit without Lenz's law through use of inductors wound on a common core with no flux coupling only parametric coupling. This is not so much of a problem in a rotating capacitor type setup because of the geometry of dielectric field lines. However phase is a critical issue in both of magnetic and capacitive type setups. The change needs to be done at the correct time in contrast to input signal. This is a lot easier to control electrically than mechanically.

In the PP-18/AR our modulation rate is quite high (max capacitance - min capacitance divided by max capacitance + min capacitance) and it's a lot easier to achieve higher modulation rates in solid state than in rotating setups since the space it would require would be large. So when November rolls in and I finally finish my exams I know where my first avenue of experimentation will be.

Raui

[Raui]

After thinking and thinking about my question above last night I thought I'd goto bed and think about it in the morning only to realize the trivial error I had made. I was only considering when the change of the parameter was positive, that is from say 5uf to 5.5uf, and not the situation when the parameter change was negative, say 5uf to 4.5 uf. Re-analyzing this situation brings much different result.

When our change of capacitance is positive (lower capacitance to a higher one) we get a resultant conductance given by the equation dC/dt = I/V = G or conductance which is basically a resistance since it is the inverse of R. For those not too great with mathematics that basically means that if conductance = 1/R or otherwise known as the inverse of R then if we have a very large positive conductance we have a very small positive resistance or hence the apparent destruction of electrical energy. When our change of inductance is positive we get a resultant resistance calculated by dL/dt = V/I = R. Hence again we have the apparent destruction of electrical energy.

If however the rate of change of our parameter is negative (higher capacitance/inductance to a lower one) we get a different situation, the opposite one at that. If we have a negative change of our parameter over a unit of time we must then append the equations used to calculate it. If our change of capacitance per unit of time is negative then our equation for calculating the result is dC/dT = -I/V or a negative conductance which is what Eric said was the result. The same applies to dL/dT = -V/I or a negative resistance both of these both indicate synthesis of electrical energy which explains the Mandelstam/Papaleski apparatus.

I checked this with both my maths and physics teachers. My physics teacher said the maths was right but he didn't like it because of the implications but said it was interesting. I double checked with my math teacher to make sure my analysis was correct and he agreed it was correct.

Also, while browsing for information pertaining to parametric excitation I found the following image of JL Naudin's website.

Now if we do a dimensional analysis on that equation we find that to be true (both the flux coupling and parametric coupling terms have the dimensions of volts). If anyone needs proof of this I can write a proof up and put it on youtube. This also means that our dielectric induction equation can be written as;
I = C(dV/dt) + V(dC/dT)
We need to get a mathematical model together to describe what's going on it's easier to relay the information to each other. We now have a more complete understanding of the equations to work out results from magnetic and dielectric inductions plus the result of a changing inductance/capacitance over time. I think a review of the Mandelstam report "Report on Recent Research on Nonlinear Oscillations" wouldn't do much harm.


EDIT: I just went over this thread and noted something LtBolo has said;

It appears to work backwards from what the Russian paper suggests. *sigh*

The current decreases when we add inductance, and the current increases when we remove inductance. This is completely consistent with the swing example. As you lean back and raise your legs during increasing velocity (current) you are shortening the pendulum arm (decreasing inductance). To shorten the pendulum arm, you are counteracting centrifugal force (loading the motor shaft).

This is completely consistent with the math I have posted earlier in this post. It would be great if Eric or someone in the know would come and help us out. The math in the papers is a little above me, I understand a fair bit of the notation I just don't know the meaning of it all, otherwise I might be able to help out more.

Raui