Captret - Perpetual Light with Dead Batteries

[ibpointless2]

After reading some things about capacitors "abnormal" effects, This could be a possible solution:

1. Charge 2 or more capacitors in series
2. Disconnect the capacitors from the battery
3. Use the energy stored in the capacitor(s) using the +/o poles
4. Connect the capacitors in parallel and then discharge them into the same battery, using the classic connection (+ and -)

In some websites, we can read that if you charge 2 capacitors in series and discharge them in parallel into the same battery, the battery could be self-recharged. This is done using the + and - poles of the capacitors, not the alternative poles (o and +).
I want to explain that if the battery can be self-recharged using the classic poles of the capacitors and performing the technique described above, and use the alternative poles of the capacitor to perform work before discharging the capacitors in parallel to the same battery, it would be possible to create a very efficient energy generator. But tests must be performed to confirm or discard this hypothesis.

Where are these websites that we can read at?

[Jbignes5]

It should flash for an incredible amount of time...

@all, Happy Thanksgiving!

@jbigness
Is this what you mean?

YouTube - Captret Forever Blinking

It seems like it would flash forever.

I know this by playing with this effect like you have described. I have not monitored the charge level on the +,- connections and someone should do that asap to see if it is reducing the main charge on the normal poles of the cap and what correlation it has with each other to see if we are tapping the source properly.

I have a sneaky suspicion that the negative plate is holding the charge of the positive when we use the 0,+ hook up. We have to look at this like there is two complete correlations here. One of the o,+(+,-) and the other of the o,-(+,-). Both seem to have a virtual capacitance between the hull. Albeit a small charge forms there it is the reason you see more voltage from the o,+ connection when referenced between the other 0,- and +,-. Lets say that the o,+(+,-) might read 10 volts when compared to the o,-(+,-) at 9.3 volts. There does seem to be a virtual diode there and even the best diodes we have today have a capacitance relation to the junction of the p,n material. With just this knowledge we can infer that the capacitance of the hull to +,- is why that virtual diode appears. I think in this case the minimum voltage to turn on this diode would be in reference to the electrolyte in the cap and how it forms a third plate so to speak between the real cap terminals of +,- and the new o terminals when negative is connected to the cap hull. I am still under the impression that induction plays a role as well in the real connection between this hull and each plate of the cap.

I see that in this case the non powered source of the cap itself would not pose a threat as in the constantly powered original captret because the forces would not be so high to push the plates apart from the constant pressure of the old source like a battery. I think this would only get better as the quality of the cap becomes higher since self discharge would be lowered in the higher quality caps like super caps or even Ultra caps. With the Utlra caps being our best example. This way we are not using the cap any different then the way it was designed to be used under normal charging rules. I would be interested to see if someone could get a cap to ramp up into higher voltages and see if this has an amplifying effect or stronger reaction to the hull tap.

Another avenue of exploration would be to inductively spike the cap between the battery and cap to raise the voltage into the cap and let it convert the negative to a positive potential which I think the cap does. If we switch to drive the negative side we should see if this does indeed change the polarity of the charge into a positive charge by tapping the hull to neg plate. If I am wrong then I am wrong but we might be able to use a buck boost circuit before the cap and let that charge the cap up and convert it through its natural balance feature of this junction between the three plates and might be able to access it through the positive plate and hull virtual diode or some combination there of.

[Magnethos]

here are the websites

Where are these websites that we can read at?

Bedini
THE TESLA SWITCH
scalar wave battery charger

Jean Louis Naudin

[ibpointless2]

So i'm testing out if you can take two capacitors in parallel with a battery and then disconnect them from the battery and hook them up in series to see if they will charge the battery. I'm charging two 10F 2.3volt super caps with a AA 1.359 volt battery.

First off what i notice is that the caps will drain the battery but as the caps fill up the voltage on the battery goes back up.

Of course before testing i shorted out the super caps. Will connect it in series to see if it will charge it. I'll post more later.

[ibpointless2]

So i'm testing out if you can take two capacitors in parallel with a battery and then disconnect them from the battery and hook them up in series to see if they will charge the battery. I'm charging two 10F 2.3volt super caps with a AA 1.359 volt battery.

First off what i notice is that the caps will drain the battery but as the caps fill up the voltage on the battery goes back up.

Of course before testing i shorted out the super caps. Will connect it in series to see if it will charge it. I'll post more later.

So my first attempt didn't work well. The super caps take to long to charge and i was using a non rechargeable battery.

My second attempt was more promising. It was a very crude setup so i can't confirm yes or no yet. This time i used 220uF 50 volt caps with a rechargeable battery. I performed the test by hand and got what seem like a result. The battery was at 1.298 volts and after performing connecting it in parallel with capacitors and disconnecting it to put it in series many times i got the battery up to 1.299 volts.

I'm going to make a wheel that turns on switches so i can control it better and more importantly faster!

[ibpointless2]

So my first attempt didn't work well. The super caps take to long to charge and i was using a non rechargeable battery.

My second attempt was more promising. It was a very crude setup so i can't confirm yes or no yet. This time i used 220uF 50 volt caps with a rechargeable battery. I performed the test by hand and got what seem like a result. The battery was at 1.298 volts and after performing connecting it in parallel with capacitors and disconnecting it to put it in series many times i got the battery up to 1.299 volts.

I'm going to make a wheel that turns on switches so i can control it better and more importantly faster!

One other thing i would like to point out when messing with the 220uf caps to see if they would charge a battery, is that they never dropped the battery voltage. Never dropping the battery voltage can also be useful.

[Jbignes5]

yeah

It's called surging. The caps tend to dump the voltage faster then it takes to charge the cap. Ronald Brandt used this to run a load and maintain the charge on his batteries. Although this is the Tesla switch which he used I think he used caps to temporarily hold the charges then shuttled them back twords the battery while running his load.

The problem with Brandts system is that it was reported to have strange field effects if it sat still any amount of time. It seems this field is a dampening field and was based on negative pressure or voltage. This is not the direction I wanted to go and I doubt you want to either since a dampening field tends to affect even humans. It makes all transfers of energy with a depleted base of charge.

The reports were very vague but one was of one of the people next door could not get out of a trailer because they could not move when they entered the field which was at the edge of the trailer. Ronald was out working on his car and had it running while he worked. It seems to me that there was a field of low energy or a depression in the local energy field that his car was sucking from.

That was the report. If it is true then you can see why I stopped my replication attempts and started on other avenues.

[gravityblock]

The problem with Brandts system is that it was reported to have strange field effects if it sat still any amount of time. It seems this field is a dampening field and was based on negative pressure or voltage. This is not the direction I wanted to go and I doubt you want to either since a dampening field tends to affect even humans. It makes all transfers of energy with a depleted base of charge.

The reports were very vague but one was of one of the people next door could not get out of a trailer because they could not move when they entered the field which was at the edge of the trailer. Ronald was out working on his car and had it running while he worked. It seems to me that there was a field of low energy or a depression in the local energy field that his car was sucking from.

That was the report. If it is true then you can see why I stopped my replication attempts and started on other avenues.

Sounds like the "Invisible Electrostatic Wall" at 3M adhesive tape plant.

GB

[Jbignes5]

yup... rofl

Sounds like the "Invisible Electrostatic Wall" at 3M adhesive tape plant.

GB

Yeah ok... I don't know what it was all about I read a report about his adventures with his car and that was one of the weird happenings. Another was that the batteries seem to change just like with the cromwell device. They would not take a normal charge for weeks after being taken out of the system he used. He loaned a battery to a neighbor because they needed it. When put into the car it started and ran but it blew the alternator. After two replacements the shop would not cover the replacement cost because the battery would keep blowing the alternator. The batteries would not take a charge via traditional charging methods. It is akin to the Bedini method and radically changes the batteries internal energetic structure.

We need to change the point at which we draw the energy. Ronald's point was the batteries which I think is not a good idea because it creates this dampening field around the batteries.

[Magnethos]

Small capacitance caps could be better

So my first attempt didn't work well. The super caps take to long to charge and i was using a non rechargeable battery.

My second attempt was more promising. It was a very crude setup so i can't confirm yes or no yet. This time i used 220uF 50 volt caps with a rechargeable battery. I performed the test by hand and got what seem like a result. The battery was at 1.298 volts and after performing connecting it in parallel with capacitors and disconnecting it to put it in series many times i got the battery up to 1.299 volts.

I'm going to make a wheel that turns on switches so i can control it better and more importantly faster!

In the website, the guy says 22,000 microfarads, a supercap of some farads didn't work as well as the suggested ones.

Maybe using some mechanical switch it could be better. I have thought about relays. Your idea about the wheel is also useful.
Maybe it could work also with solid state switches, but its not sure.

In the picture is shown the basic idea. Then you need to develop a circuit to perform that operation automatically

Update #1
I've just added the second image where I show how to make the circuit to charge 2 capacitors in parallel and then discharge them in series into the same battery.
It can be done using only 2 mechanical switches (the relay could be the best option?)

Note: The circuit is not finished, it must be resolved the problem of the Capacitor 2.
When connected in parallel the + pole is upside and when the same cap is connected in series the pole - must be upside.

Update #2
Problem solved
In the picture number 3 I show how to make a simple circuit to charge the capacitors in parallel and discharge them in series into the battery. You can perform that action using a mechanical switch or other similar switch. Maybe you would need another small battery to close and open the switches. I don't recommend to use the battery shown in this circuit to open and close the circuits. The main purpouse of the battery shown in this circuit is to charge the 2 capacitors and then receive the energy stored in the caps. Nothing else.
This time the circuit is completed.

[ibpointless2]

So here's the order i think will work best.

Hooked in parallel.
Then completely off.
Captret in series and dumped into battery.
then completely off.
The capacitors in series and dumped into battery.
Then completely off.
repeat.



**Important things to note
Being series needs to last longer than being in parallel.

And having that completely off moment is key, if you don't they could short each other out and cause the battery drain.

And being off cause relaxation on the battery, also very helpful.


Goal
Charge the capacitors in parallel. Discharge through the captret part first while in series and then discharge through capacitor in series. Hopefully see a charging of the battery or non discharge while supplying a load.

What i have notice so far doing these simple test is that the batteries don't drain when given a simple load such as a LED. Ill see if i can make a video to show you what i'm talking about.

[Magnethos]

ok, try the test. I hope that works.
http://t1.gstatic.com/images?q=tbn:A...5TRGbE2aW639TA

you can try a manual mechanical switch like this one and perform some hundred of ctcles to see if there is an increase of voltage in the battery. good luck.

[ibpointless2]

So i performed the test to see if the captret drains the power of the capacitors + and -.

I'm happy to say that it doesn't. I've tested a 10F 2.3 volt, 10000 uf 35 volt, and 47uf 50 volt caps. All caps showed the same result, they all were not affected by the captret. I performed a dead short from + lead to case, the only thing that drained was the captret part but soon bounced back up as if it was a electret while keeping the + and - of the capacitor unaffected by the captret short.

Be careful with testing this out. The meter will drain the capacitor so don't let that trick you. Hook the meter up for a couple of seconds and monitor how fast the voltage drops and then check to see if that rate changes when you dead short out the + lead with the case.

So what does this mean?
It means that the captret makes one capacitor into TWO capacitors.
Why is this so important?
Because for the price of one charge to one capacitor you get two capacitors, and one of the capacitors (the captret) will stay self charge so long as there is power in the first capacitor. Two for the price of one.



I'll post a Youtube video of what i did soon.

[ibpointless2]

Video of the captret not affect the voltage inside of the + and - of the capacitor when dead shorted out.

YouTube - Captret dosen't drain capacitors power

[Magnethos]

one more step...

So i performed the test to see if the captret drains the power of the capacitors + and -.

I'm happy to say that it doesn't. I've tested a 10F 2.3 volt, 10000 uf 35 volt, and 47uf 50 volt caps. All caps showed the same result, they all were not affected by the captret. I performed a dead short from + lead to case, the only thing that drained was the captret part but soon bounced back up as if it was a electret while keeping the + and - of the capacitor unaffected by the captret short.

Be careful with testing this out. The meter will drain the capacitor so don't let that trick you. Hook the meter up for a couple of seconds and monitor how fast the voltage drops and then check to see if that rate changes when you dead short out the + lead with the case.

So what does this mean?
It means that the captret makes one capacitor into TWO capacitors.
Why is this so important?
Because for the price of one charge to one capacitor you get two capacitors, and one of the capacitors (the captret) will stay self charge so long as there is power in the first capacitor. Two for the price of one.



I'll post a Youtube video of what i did soon.

So, we know that we can recharge as many times as we want the captret part without affecting the +/- part (at least apparently).
Now the next step is building a "capacitive power source". I mean, to charge some capacitor in parallel (+ and -), put them in series (+ and 0) and discharge them to a load (light bulb, motor...).

In theory, the battery won't drop the charge.