Author Topic: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE (Read 2353341 times)

RandyFL · « **Reply #2295 on:** June 30, 2015, 02:49:09 AM »

Yeah...
step on a few toes today...did I

What I remember reading was " The enigma of Clemente Figuera "...
http://www.alpoma.net/tecob/?page_id=8258
It has the patents on there...

Did I say you " wrapped a coil around a nail...
Did you bother to read the " Last " line...
btw...jerking around with Led s.......................... " when the Led s Light "...you know something is working... just sayin.

ATOM1 · « **Reply #2296 on:** June 30, 2015, 01:24:53 PM »

Forget that patent its crap .... IS CRAP WHAT YOU WANT TO BUILD

?

I have a self running 5kw mega bucks mind blowing kick arse motor ... who want s to race it in E formula 1

Or r u going to jus t play with a dumb stupid dynamo

ATOM1

bajac · « **Reply #2297 on:** June 30, 2015, 01:45:26 PM »

ATOM1 went nuclear and exploded! This person really got some crack into the brain and is posting on all treads! How do we report this destructive conduct?

RandyFL · « **Reply #2298 on:** June 30, 2015, 02:05:04 PM »

I would ignore it...

Bajac,
Solid cores or cylinders filled with smaller solid cores...
or no difference...?

All the Best

ATOM1 · « **Reply #2299 on:** June 30, 2015, 02:08:49 PM »

I CHALLANGE YOU !

Let us compete ! I am angry I put up here my unified field oscillator for the OU prize they sent it to there government and changed the rules to the prize ,,,,,

why

And you want to insult me

why

because I am real

I dnt play games !!!

ATOM1

bajac · « **Reply #2300 on:** June 30, 2015, 06:45:51 PM »

Quote from: ATOM1 on June 30, 2015, 02:08:49 PM

I CHALLANGE YOU !

Let us compete ! I am angry I put up here my unified field oscillator for the OU prize they sent it to there government and changed the rules to the prize ,,,,, why

And you want to insult me why because I am real I dnt play games !!!

ATOM1

Randy,
I do not know if understand your question but I am building the cores from laminated sheets. I have a roll of silicon steel sheets that were part of the 45 KVA transformer. I am cutting the pieces and putting them together to form the cores. See the attached sketch.

Atom, just show your work!

ATOM1 · « **Reply #2301 on:** June 30, 2015, 07:05:42 PM »

I PRESENTED MY UNIFIDE FIELD OSCILATOR FOR THE OU PRIZE ! THAN THEY SENT ME AN EMAIL AND SAID THEY HAD TO GIVE IT TO THERE GOVERNMENT .... Now they block all my schematics of it ... Its funded by the uk government meaning I am the only man on the planet with a working free energy technology with government funding .... It can power a city ........

Dnt knock me down email me for the plan and re post it ,,,,,,,,prtoneutrons@aol.co.uk

ATOM 1

RandyFL · « **Reply #2302 on:** July 01, 2015, 02:47:53 AM »

Bajac,
The pdf shows sheets...from the pictures ( that were too big... ) I assumed you were going to use solid round iron cores. Looking thru our msgs you stated you were using solid iron cores... why change to laminated silicon sheets...?
Since electric ( silicon ) steel comes in sheets I suspect you are using cad to draw your design on. Patrick is in the camp, of the design at the end of chapter 3... I'm still on the fence about that...
If Figueras wasn't a Professor I would have been leery from the start about this whole apparatus...In a previous post Kehyo answered my questions and stated His work looked promising... I went back thru our msgs and I thought I asked you the same questions but maybe I didn't... what were your results before you disassembled your apparatus... ( forgive me if I am repeating myself )

Atom1
show us your work

Nobody's going to bother you here unless you make a mistake about when you read the patern of the Clemente or decide to wrap a iron nail around a coil... or God forbid you used an Led " a " jerking ... a simple fact.

ATOM1 · « **Reply #2303 on:** July 01, 2015, 11:31:50 AM »

I presented my work to the admin here some time ago as to the OU prize! They replied they had to send it to there government than changed the rules of the prize .... I am not happy !

Its the world first unified field oscillator a replica of the NASA secret ufo ... ok ! and a real one ! in fact the only one ever built by a human ...... What is your technology like

??

I am not to play with wires or to talk to people that only wish to disturb my peace of mind and I am not alone here ! I have freedom to express my interest in everything ! Including my planet ect ect !

ATOM1

Doug1 · « **Reply #2304 on:** July 01, 2015, 01:44:28 PM »

Clearly Atom has assumed the difference between want and need, being an individual I dont need to power a town or city nor want . I build according to what i need that is enough to keep me plenty busy. We already have a centralized utility system. I see no purpose to repeat the same mistakes which eventually have the same results. Greed and foolishness is unavoidable. You Sir choose the wrong path Im sure you wont be alone.

hanon · « **Reply #2305 on:** July 01, 2015, 06:19:25 PM »

Quoting another pragraph from the patent from 1914 (Buforn) with some cryptic sentences:

"The way to collect this current is so easy that it almost seems excused to explain it,
because we will just have to interpose between each pair of electromagnets N and S,
which we call inducers, another electromagnet, which we call induced, properly placed
so that either both opposite sides of its core will be into hollows in the corresponding
inducers and in contact with their respective cores, or either, being close the induced
and inducer and in contact by their poles, but in no case it has to be any communication
between the induced wire and the inducer wire."

Why did he make reference to two cases: 1- when there is contact between the induced and inducers cores and, 2- when they are close together and in contact by their poles ? Which is the difference between contacting through the cores and contacting through the poles?

Why did he mention that "in no case it has to be any communication between the induced wire and the inducer wire" ? At first sight it seems to be a redundant feature, does it?

Please comment your thoughts about these sentences. I am not able to understand their real meaning. I do not understand why Buforn emphatize those details.

tak22 · « **Reply #2306 on:** July 01, 2015, 07:13:49 PM »

hanon,

I think he is just saying that the core of the induced can either be against or inset into the inducer core, and that in both cases the coils do not overlap each other (no coil on coil geometry). Here's a quick drawing of core segments/ends showing the core and coil relationships.

hanon · « **Reply #2307 on:** July 01, 2015, 08:51:17 PM »

Tak,

Exactly this is how I see it. I have used your original drawing to create the whole configuration with two inducers, as described in the 1908 patent. I hope you don´t mind for using your picture. If so tell me and I will delete it.

Note that also this configuration is the one used in the 1902 patent. I also attach an image from 1902 patent (Patent no. 30378): two straight solenoids (named "a" and "b") and the induced in the middle (named "c", not drawn in the patent, so not clear how to place it)

That why I always say to dig into the original sources.

Regards

tak22 · « **Reply #2308 on:** July 01, 2015, 11:25:53 PM »

Quote from: hanon on July 01, 2015, 08:51:17 PM

Note that also this configuration is the one used in the 1902 patent. I also attach an image from 1902 patent (Patent no. 30378): two straight solenoids (named "a" and "b") and the induced in the middle (named "c", not drawn in the patent, so not clear how to place it)

hanon,

I think you're mixing up the drawings, the 1902 Figuera patent did not use an induced core. Here's the timeline I use to chart the evolution of the Figuera design. Any corrections appreciated.

hanon · « **Reply #2309 on:** July 02, 2015, 12:56:50 AM »

Tak,

You have done your homework!! (Randy take note about studying in deep all the patents)

My guesses:

The 1908 speaks about an "inducer circuit" with soft iron core and an "induced circuit". It does not mention anything about the core of the induced. But in one sentence it said that there is no need to have any separation between both circuits. Therefore I tend to think that the induced circuit had also a soft iron core. But it is true that it is not really specified explicitly.

The 1910 patent refers to an electromagnet as induced coil (page 13). There I think that this patent requires also soft iron core. As this patent is almost an exact copy of the 1908 patent then this is a clue that the 1908 patent had also core in the induced circuit

About the patent 30378 (year 1902) there is no mention to any core in the induced. But Figuera stated that the distance betweeen both inducers has to be minimal. This could account for the possible lack of induced core.

The patent from 1913 in the second drawing shows already a feedback coil inside the core of the "y" coil.The first drawing does not include the feedback coil, but the text (page 20) and the 2nd drawing includes this feedback coil.

Good luck tak. You have done a deep and rigorous study of all the patents. Nice!!

News:

User Menu