What do Bedini, Tesla, Imhotep, and Heins all have in common?

[quantumuppercut]

Hi quantumuppercut,

I think I have to notice a few things before trying to answer your question.
My take on the case when you load the transformer with the empty capacitor is that you cannot recover 70% in that case but much less because the induced current now is divided between the transformer coil and the capacitor, hence a lower coil current will give less flux so the collapsing field gives lower voltage spike than earlier in the unloaded case. (Charging up an empty capacitor needs current that is the highest in the very first moment the voltage appears, then exponentially gets reducing as you surely know this.)

Another effect of the empty capacitor load when it is present on the transformer is that its load must reflect back to a certain degree to the magnetic field's source, i.e. the magnetic induction needs to provide more input energy now than it had to in the unloaded case. I assume you have to furnish in some input energy at all to create the induction energy which initiate the process at all: now more input energy is demanded from your source that you and not the enviroment started.

So in case you can solve the above two 'problems' then probably your equation above is validated.

IT is possible that these 'snags' I have mentioned can be circumvented and you already have some practical ideas. I am interested because solving the 'problems' would include circumventing Lenz law I suppose...

rgds, Gyula

Hi Gyula,

First, I apologize. I do not mean to pressure you on this subject. I noticed many of your past posts are conservative in opinions.

The senario I had was a yes or no question. If you said yes, then I would say that was my result. If you said no, then I would say that was my result and you can prove or disprove me on your own experiments. If you do not understand my equation and that's why you can't make a decision, then I won't force you.

Well, your analysis is very insightful. You should take it to a real experiment and see if your analysis is right or my result is wrong.

Comments on your analysis:

I agree as the load capacitor chaged up, it would take in less and less energy and stop once max induced EMF reached.
I agree as the load capacitor charged up, some refelects back to the magnetic field source, but that's pretty much same an unload condition. Even if it is higher, the furnish you need is voltage, not energy.

The most important thing you don't seems to notice or mention is the recovery capacitor. If it recover the same loaded or unload, we have a problem, don't we?

[quantumuppercut]

Hi again Gyula,

I don't think we're on same page.

My emphasis is not how much energy the load capacitor can capture. As long as there is a gain, we will have a problem because the recovering capacitor recovers the same amount of energy loaded or unloaded.

[gyula]

Hi quantumuppercut,

I do not think you pressure me on this subject, it was me who first reflected on your earlier post.
During the years I tried to understand, in some cases I tried to replicate and tried to ask people who have reported certain anomalies with their setup to tell the details and so far those anomalies turned out to be measurement errors. There were people who were not willing to tell any details on their setup showing the anomaly what I understood of course but I have never ever heard of them or of their devices any more. This may explain if I am as you say conservative. However I am open and confident even if it does not turn out from my posts: I hope I experience true excess energy in my life, coming from permanent and electromagnets interactions (this is I am mainly interested in, mainly but not exclusively in motionless setups).

To do experiments on your setup, I would need to know details on it. Of course I understand if you wish to keep details for yourself.

To answer your question: yes we would have a problem if we recover the same energy loaded or unloaded. I did not mention recovery in my previous post because I considered it as less recovery in the loaded case hence no excess, considering a continuos dynamic operation.

rgds, Gyula

Hi Gyula,

First, I apologize. I do not mean to pressure you on this subject. I noticed many of your past posts are conservative in opinions.

The senario I had was a yes or no question. If you said yes, then I would say that was my result. If you said no, then I would say that was my result and you can prove or disprove me on your own experiments. If you do not understand my equation and that's why you can't make a decision, then I won't force you.

Well, your analysis is very insightful. You should take it to a real experiment and see if your analysis is right or my result is wrong.

Comments on your analysis:

I agree as the load capacitor chaged up, it would take in less and less energy and stop once max induced EMF reached.
I agree as the load capacitor charged up, some refelects back to the magnetic field source, but that's pretty much same an unload condition. Even if it is higher, the furnish you need is voltage, not energy.

The most important thing you don't seems to notice or mention is the recovery capacitor. If it recover the same loaded or unload, we have a problem, don't we?

[gyula]

Hi again Gyula,

I don't think we're on same page.

My emphasis is not how much energy the load capacitor can capture. As long as there is a gain, we will have a problem because the recovering capacitor recovers the same amount of energy loaded or unloaded.

Yes I feel the same we are not on the same page mainly because I do not know you exact setup I am afraid and have to make conventional explanations...
To have a gain, energy must come from the environment indeed and I can accept your test results until proven the opposite. However it can come by replications only.

rgds, Gyula

[quantumuppercut]

To answer your question: yes we would have a problem if we recover the same energy loaded or unloaded. I did not mention recovery in my previous post because I considered it as less recovery in the loaded case hence no excess, considering a continuos dynamic operation.

rgds, Gyula

Hi Gyula,

YESS! This is exactly what I want you to acknowledge. I'm so happy now. I was unable to sleep last night thinking the nightmare of misunderstanding stretch further.

I am excited and frustrated at the same time because this is the first time I am able to quantify COP based on all my free energy theory. I am also a bit scare about you "didn't mention because considered it less in recovery" line, but this is the part where I have to hang on to my faith.

The bottom line is you do not think or saw it would be the same but my result claimed that it "could". I do have an theory what makes you consider or seen it couldn't but this is the begining and hopefully... the end to our belief (btw, i hope I win )

[gyula]

Hi quantumuppercut,

Honestly, I would be more than happy to see you win!

I have found two threads of yours from 2009 where you showed some schematics on your PM circuits. I wonder if they are still valid for your setup discussed now or you already did some refinements? Will study them tomorrow.

Thanks, Gyula

[pha3z]

nenergy:
"There are over 9 different types of electricity, We only use the primitive form of AC and no very little about DC. "

What are these 9 types of electricity to which you refer?

in the 1980s, Eric Dollard was teaching that there are "four types of current"

Direct Current
Impulse Current
Oscillating Current
Alternating Currnt

These are the types of current to which Tesla referred and worked with. Other energy forums should not have a direct bearing on Tesla's work.

Additionally your statement about Thane Heins LC circuit doesn't make sense. Thane is known for his motor and his bi-toroid transformer tech. He doesn't even utilize capacitors that I know of. If you read my article on my blog, you would see I was referring to his motor which accelerates under the load. He has an explanation but his explanation does NOT account for the assymetry in his system. Mechanically, he explains the system very well, but if you ONLY listen to what he says, then his system should be symmetrical which would make it slow under load.

In my humble but very carefully thought opinion, what he does not realize or bother to state is that energy is coming into the coil from the vacuum when the magnet approaches it. This means there is more energy in the coil than what the magnet induced aloned which is what results in a larger magnetic force pushing the magnet away than the Back EMF that should have slowed its approach. I could be totally wrong, but I have corresponded with Thane Heins directly about these issues and he completely blows me off and even states that he doesn't care about other theories or inventor's work. This tells me he isn't quite as serious about helping mankind as he claims to be. And this also tells me he isn't willing to consider that I may have a better understanding than he does.

I am not comparing apples to oranges. Especially on Bedini, Bedini himself states clearly that he bases his technology in the same principles of Aether energy that Tesla described. If you read Bedini's own explanations of how he gates the energy, it matches perfectly the CoP > 1.0 effect that Tesla observed in his Magnifying Transmitter. It is recieving any energy which fulfills the condition of resonance. This is why Konstantin Meyl's work is also using the same principle energy and way of tapping it.

[quantumuppercut]

Hi quantumuppercut,

Honestly, I would be more than happy to see you win!

I have found two threads of yours from 2009 where you showed some schematics on your PM circuits. I wonder if they are still valid for your setup discussed now or you already did some refinements? Will study them tomorrow.

Thanks, Gyula

Hi Gyula,

I don't feel worthy but thank you for the encouragement.

I stop thinking about that PM circuit when I realized that is no different than a resonant circuit.

About the recovery capacitor under load. I want to read your thinking of how it recovers less under load. I know you are correct and I also believe in my result, so there must be a factor in between. I am almost certain it's the pulse frequency, or the time constant. At lower time constant, it is more efficient to recover. As time constant approach zero, recovery approach unity. A spark came to me on how to calculate COP for oscillators, but I can't digest them yet.

Well, I'm a mechanic based. Before my free energy quest, the only thing i know is Omh's law. My more insight electrical knowledge derive mostly from Newtonian mechanic, but I love electrical because I can substitude wires and switches for pipe and valve. I think electrical is the future. Unfortunately, reinventing the wheel causing me pain as well as pleasure. I want to ask you a favor. Be my tutor/consultant. Show me the mainstream side.

QU

[gyula]

Hi quantumuppercut,

I have got a limited time now and maybe giving you some thoughts will start you exploring the setup better. I will continue in a couple of days.

What I think about your loaded case and can tell is just the general behaviour of inductances and capacitances when you excite them, maybe you use a switch to pass current into the coil periodically as you wrote.

So you have a transformer coil which is paralleled with a capacitor, right?

Without the capacitor the voltage can appear across the coil, however in the very first moment after the switch is closed, current just starts increasing from zero. See Figure 2-11 in this link ( L/R Time Constant ) how the current in a coil increases exponentially from zero to a maximum value in the function of time (curve GROWTH). Time is measured in multiples of the L/R time constant on the horizontal axis in seconds.
R means the total resistance in the closed circuit, including the supply voltage inner resistance, the switch ON resistance and the coil wire DC resistance; L means the coil inductance.
Suppose you have a 10 Henry coil that has 9 Ohm DC resistance, and for simplicity suppose the switch and the power supply has a series resistance of 1 Ohm, together. Now suppose you use a 100V DC source and switch it onto this coil then the current starts increasing exactly as the GROWTH curve shows with its second on the horizontal and Amper values on its vertical axis: L/R=10/(9+1)=1second, current increases to 6.32A from zero in 1 second (1 times L/R=1second), then current further increases to 8.65A in the 2nd second (2 times L/R=2second) and so on.

How do you know what the maximum (peak) current can be in this example: Ohm's Law for the steady state case can forecast it as 100V divided by the 10 Ohm, this gives 10A, you can see this value is approached pretty close (to 9.9A) in 5 seconds from the switch on, here the 5 sec happens to mean 5 times L/R.
For smaller coils like 100mH with 3 Ohm DC resistance (and all the other series resistors now assumed negligibly small for this example) the L/R is 0.1/3=0.0333 second i.e 33.3 millisec and 5 times of this 0.1666 sec, just show that in such a 100mH coil the current will be 99% of the maximum peak current value possible.

NOW what comes is how long pulse time you wish to use for this coil? Probably 3 or 4 times L/R, i.e. 3 or 4 second wide pulse because shorter than this the current may be too low at switch-off for establishing the energy content of the collapsing field. And longer than 4 sec long ON time will not give significantly more 'juice' to the coil's energy content I think.

HOWEVER, the question is how your capacitor may behave when placed across this 10H coil? Obviously the RC time constant is to be considered.

IF you place a capacitor across the coil and it has no initial charge in it, then practically it is a short circuit for a voltage source and the voltage source will be the coil here. You may wish to study the charging time for a capacitor and its RC time constant when a voltage source starts it charging up from zero volt. See this link to learn about it: RC Charging Circuit Tutorial & RC Time Constant

Further hints:

Universal time constant curves Circuit Time Constant - interfacebus

and Voltage and current calculations

So basically what you started to think on the pulse width and time constant, they are related of course. The pulse ON time (the width) and the OFF time together determines the pulse frequency, you need to choose the OFF time too so that the energy swings in the LC tank have enough time.

rgds, Gyula

[quantumuppercut]

Hi Pha3z,

Sorry for dragging your post around. Thanks for everything.

QU

Gyula, let's move out. lol