COP 17 Heater | Rosemary Ainslie

[MileHigh]

> Basically with the Ainslie circuit, you can't help but to have free energy pouring out of your ears.

Bring it on! lol

[poynt99]

Aaron,

MH already alluded to the answer, and I believe I mentioned it quite some time ago as well.

When talking about and dealing with inductors, the root language is current. With capacitors it is voltage.

Capacitors and Inductors are analog opposites, but most folks have trouble getting their heads around inductors and how they operate. Most likely because inductors have a certain stigma and mystery associated with them.

An ideal charged capacitor with no load placed across its terminals has potential energy. If you place a voltage meter across its terminals, it will indicate some DC voltage. So the capacitor has a voltage across it and it is not supplying energy or power to anything, so therefore it has no current from its terminals.

It is again the same with an inductor. Before going ahead, one small thing needs to be distinguished and I am sure is responsible for much of the confusion, inductors do not get "charged" or "discharged". That is capacitor and battery terminology. Inductors are "energized" and "de-energized".

Another important fact that is being overlooked here: capacitors store "charge", while inductors store "magnetic flux".

So we "energize" an inductor. What does that mean exactly? It means we are "filling" it with current. Current is the language of inductors. The flux level around an inductor is proportional to the current "in" the inductor. Just as there is no current from a charged open-circuit capacitor, there is no voltage across an energized inductor, because and ideal inductor has no DC resistance remember? So how can you measure a voltage across a piece of wire that has no resistance? Aren't you going to measure zero volts? When was the last time you were able to measure any voltage across the ends of a 1 inch length of wire? That's essentially what an ideal inductor is, a piece of wire (coil) with no resistance.

(I know this is simplified MH, but trying to get the point home)

.99

[Aaron]

in time

> Basically with the Ainslie circuit, you can't help but to have free energy pouring out of your ears.

Bring it on! lol

There is a required sequence for everything.

Jetijs saw more current circulating in his circuit than what left the battery. Luc is showing the same thing.

There will eventually be HUNDREDS of videos showing this and eventually thousands.

It is hard to make it fail - unless the one doing experiments is the leader of a three ring circus.

[poynt99]

There is a required sequence for everything.

Jetijs saw more current circulating in his circuit than what left the battery. Luc is showing the same thing.

Aaron,

Have you ever needed or wanted to step up or step down an AC voltage for some reason?

If so, how did you go about doing it?

.99

[Joit]

Wouldnt it be better, to say, you move Currrent through a Coil instead filling?
Hole Flow
Because it has usual two Points or Potentials where it is connected to.

[poynt99]

Wouldnt it be better, to say, you move Currrent through a Coil instead filling?
Hole Flow
Because it has usual two Points or Potentials where it is connected to.

Yes Joit, you are exactly correct.

I am trying to keep things as simple as possible, and "speak" the language quite often used here, but I'm not that good at it I'm afraid. I guess I should stick to the correct technical terms, just as I was espousing above

.99

[poynt99]

Apologies. I'm way too prickly. Ok. If the simultor shows the spike ask the simultor if it could have come from the coil? EDIT or better still - ask the simulator what comes from the residual PD at the coil? Poynt - that's your real expertise. Do you make allowance for this moment?

Rosemary,

I don't understand what you are asking here. Also you mentioned a couple times that MH and myself (and the academics) are avoiding answering some specific questions of yours.

Could I ask you to please rephrase them here in a clear and simple way? What is it precisely that you are asking us?

.99

[Aaron]

coil charging

Aaron,

MH already alluded to the answer, and I believe I mentioned it quite some time ago as well.

When talking about and dealing with inductors, the root language is current. With capacitors it is voltage.

Capacitors and Inductors are analog opposites, but most folks have trouble getting their heads around inductors and how they operate. Most likely because inductors have a certain stigma and mystery associated with them.

An ideal charged capacitor with no load placed across its terminals has potential energy. If you place a voltage meter across its terminals, it will indicate some DC voltage. So the capacitor has a voltage across it and it is not supplying energy or power to anything, so therefore it has no current from its terminals.

It is again the same with an inductor. Before going ahead, one small thing needs to be distinguished and I am sure is responsible for much of the confusion, inductors do not get "charged" or "discharged". That is capacitor and battery terminology. Inductors are "energized" and "de-energized".

Another important fact that is being overlooked here: capacitors store "charge", while inductors store "magnetic flux".

So we "energize" an inductor. What does that mean exactly? It means we are "filling" it with current. Current is the language of inductors. The flux level around an inductor is proportional to the current "in" the inductor. Just as there is no current from a charged open-circuit capacitor, there is no voltage across an energized inductor, because and ideal inductor has no DC resistance remember? So how can you measure a voltage across a piece of wire that has no resistance? Aren't you going to measure zero volts? When was the last time you were able to measure any voltage across the ends of a 1 inch length of wire? That's essentially what an ideal inductor is, a piece of wire (coil) with no resistance.

(I know this is simplified MH, but trying to get the point home)

.99

I understand what you're saying.

But tell me when is voltage not in forward movement over the coil's windings?

When the switch goes off? For one small blip of a time unit? At the point when it transitions from forward to backwards?

Then the voltage is moving in backwards movement over the coils windings.

The very term of a coil being energized implies the active process of potential moving across the coil and potential can't move unless there is a potential difference.

I'm not sure if we're even discussing the same thing anymore.

This goes back to the nonsense of seeing no voltage across the mosfet when it is on and I already mentioned way back then it is the same as putting the volt meter on the same piece of wire side by side. Of course there is no potential difference, but in reality there will be mv's, but I agree with this.

But...

The little test I just did.

I have nothing applied to the coil (1000 turn trifilar), I find 0.8mv...what one would expect with no power applied to the coil. That is the measurement of voltage potential across the leads of the coil.

I connect a 24v bank to the coil I charge...kept the power to the coil...it is "energized", there is a strong magnetic field as I can feel it repelling the magnet above it very strong.... and I read 24v across that coil while it is charged. Not zero voltage.

That is 24 volts of potential difference across the coil - while it is energized.

And coils don't get filled with current, they have current moving through in the opposite direction of voltage moving thru them.

The only time I can prove with actual test that there is no voltage potential on the coil is when

A. There is no power applied

or

B. After disconnecting power from an energized coil and the voltage goes to 0 then carries on to negative. Then of course, it will eventually get back to zero.

Am I missing something? I'm honestly asking. Where does this zero voltage business come from because I can't find it except examples A & B above.

[Aaron]

step up and down

Aaron,

Have you ever needed or wanted to step up or step down an AC voltage for some reason?

If so, how did you go about doing it?

.99

Typical 2 coil transformer. One with more windings than the other usually with smaller wire. With ac it is the turns ratio to help determine up or down voltage.

Microwave transformer for example. 110v in and 1000v out... of AC of course.

[witsend]

Following quotes from .99 intended for Aaron
Do you mind if I put in my tuppence worth again?

When talking about and dealing with inductors, the root language is current With capacitors it is voltage.
Both as repositories of potential difference? Then I agree.

It is again the same with an inductor. Before going ahead, one small thing needs to be distinguished and I am sure is responsible for much of the confusion, inductors do not get "charged" or "discharged". That is capacitor and battery terminology. Inductors are "energized" and "de-energized".
What nonsense is this Poynt.99. They are indeed energised and de-energised, as you put it. But with what? Have they been energised with something that is not potential difference that is then discharged as something that is also not potential difference? If, indeed they are the same thing - then is that not potential difference - now called a state of being energised? Is this a form of energy that has entirely eluded any definition within the scientific framework perhaps?

So we "energize" an inductor. What does that mean exactly? It means we are "filling" it with current.
Indeed. And simultaneously we are forcibly extruding those magnetic fields. Which means that filling it with current also establishes the voltage that also establishes the potential difference availabe if required, if allowed, through the switch.

The flux level around an inductor is proportional to the current "in" the inductor.
Spot on. That flux is the potential difference that you, for some reason, need to refer to as an 'energised state'.

... there is no voltage across an energized inductor, because an ideal inductor has no DC resistance remember?
What are we saying here? There is voltage across an energised inductor. This is evident in the extruded magnetic fields that are always found where current flows. The electromagnetic interaction. Always the one with the other. Never apart. The only time they're separate is when there is no path to discharge. Then it's referred to as potential difference. You refer to it as 'energised'.

So how can you measure a voltage across a piece of wire that has no resistance?
Why am I telling you this? You know the answer. if there is an extruded magnetic field you have voltage. But to measure voltage you need to refer to polarity. You cannot find the polarity unless you twist the wire into a coil. That is why ammeters cannot measure the polarity or direction of current. Ammeters are measuring with reference to (edited) magnetic fields

ALSO EDITED. I think this may be a valid distinction. Voltage is the measure of extruded magnetic fields that relates directly to potential difference and its polarities. Amperage is a measure of extruded magnetic fields that relates to current flow without the distinction of polarities? Maybe?

(I know this is simplified MH, but trying to get the point home)
Poynt. It is extraordinarily patronising and it's offensive that you assume more ignorance in your audience than is in fact. As a rule it just tends to expose ones own ignorance. There are readers of this little thread whose qualifications would intimidate the heavenly host, if not God Himself. They are considerably greater than your own. There are others without qualification who are well able to understand electromagnetic interactions at a level that is evidently as deep as if not deeper than your own. It is a really good thing to take pride in one's learning provided it still offers scope for revision - re-evalution - re-testing.

[Aaron]

meters

That is why ammeters cannot measure the polarity or direction of current.

And to take it further, the experts can't show a meter that measures current because they don't know what current actually is.

The amp meters only measure voltage drops across resistors to determine what the current "is supposed to be." LOL

Another assumption or speculation.

If there is "electron current" as indicated by the classical model why not build a meter that measures electron current?

They could I'm sure if they actually knew what current is.

The current meters are actually in effect doing nothing more than taking VOLTAGE readings and assuming the rest based on speculation.

[MileHigh]

Aaron:

Hopefully this will help. Various circuit components have very simple electrical models that describe their real-world behaviour. The simple electrical models consist of two or more idealized components.

For a real-world coil the simple model is a small resistance in series with an ideal coil. The small resistance models the resistance in the wire of the coil. So of course with your battery directly connected you will see a voltage across your "coil" but what you are really seeing is the voltage across the wire resistance. not the voltage across the coil, which is zero if the current is pure DC.

For your working with coils, you really should avoid putting them across a battery. Within a very short time the coil will be shorting out the battery. Depending on the coil and the battery something may start to burn up. A coil can easily get white hot.

MileHigh

[poynt99]

Aaron,

If you could get "inside" the inductor and separate it into it's lumped elements, then put your meter across only the inductive part, you would find that there is no voltage there. It is all across the resistive lumped element.

Typical 2 coil transformer. One with more windings than the other usually with smaller wire. With ac it is the turns ratio to help determine up or down voltage.

Microwave transformer for example. 110v in and 1000v out... of AC of course.

OK. Let's say you want to step down 120VAC to some real low value such as 0.12VAC, you can use your MOT connected 120VAC to the secondary and your 0.12VAC will appear on the primary. You already know this, just establishing the scenario.

But the question I have is this: What would the current read on the 120VAC input side (using your 60Hz AC current meter) and what would it be on the 0.12VAC output side (again measured with your 60Hz AC current meter), WITH THIS OUTPUT SIDE COIL SHORTED?

Let's take an example to make this easier. If you measured 1mA AC on the 120VAC side, what would the output side AC current meter be measuring?

.99

[witsend]

Rosemary,

...What is it precisely that you are asking us?

.99

Sorry Poynt. What I'm trying to get to is that your actual expertise appears to be with simulated programmes. The question. Do your simulations allow for a 'regenerated' cycle of current from collapsing magnetic fields during the 'off' period. And if not, why?

[poynt99]

Sorry Poynt. What I'm trying to get to is that your actual expertise appears to be with simulated programmes. The question. Do your simulations allow for a 'regenerated' cycle of current from collapsing magnetic fields during the 'off' period. And if not, why?

First of all, I do not consider myself and expert in simulation. It is a program that I am proficient at using, and considering all that can be done with it, I would consider myself an intermediate user level. I do not proclaim to be an expert at anything, not even electronics. I have much to learn, and I always am.

Second, what do you mean by "regenerated cycle of current"? If you are referring to the inductive kickback phenomenon exhibited by a disconnected energized inductor, then YES the simulator "allows" for this.

If that is not what you mean, then please explain it.

.99