Cookies-law

Cookies help us to bring you our services at overunity.com . If you use this website and our services you declare yourself okay with using cookies .More Infos here:
http://www.overunity.com/5553/privacy-policy/
If you do not agree with storing cookies, please leave this website now. Many thanks for your understanding.
Amazon Warehouse Deals ! Now even more Deep Discounts ! Check out these great prices on slightly used or just opened once only items.I always buy my gadgets via these great Warehouse deals ! Highly recommended ! Many thanks for supporting OverUnity.com this way.

FireMatch

FireMatch

CCKnife

CCKnife

CCTool

CCTool

Magpi Magazine

Magpi Magazine Free Rasberry Pi Magazine

Battery Recondition

Battery Recondition

Arduino

Ultracaps

YT Subscribe

Gravity Machines

Tesla-Ebook

Magnet Secrets

Lindemann Video

Navigation

Products

Statistics

  • *Total Members: 82043
  • *Latest: brf69

  • *Total Posts: 494072
  • *Total Topics: 14521
  • *Online Today: 44
  • *Most Online: 103
(December 19, 2006, 11:27:19 PM)
  • *Users: 3
  • *Guests: 80
  • *Total: 83

Facebook

Author Topic: ENERGY AMPLIFICATION  (Read 2015744 times)

Offline Magluvin

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 5647
Re: ENERGY AMPLIFICATION
« Reply #8265 on: October 22, 2017, 04:19:07 PM »

Uh.....I am not speaking in code....  no riddles.... I am not offering hints, or clues.....

Ok. I get it dude. Gees..

Mags

Free Energy | searching for free energy and discussing free energy

Re: ENERGY AMPLIFICATION
« Reply #8265 on: October 22, 2017, 04:19:07 PM »

Offline hoptoad

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 1000
Re: ENERGY AMPLIFICATION
« Reply #8266 on: October 23, 2017, 08:33:17 AM »
Just a word here from the unwise. Whether you are making an actual Tesla Ozone Generator replica or a simile solid state circuit based on its switching principle, be very careful of the transformer secondary. It bites!

Offline Erfinder

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 992
Re: ENERGY AMPLIFICATION
« Reply #8267 on: October 23, 2017, 09:14:37 AM »
Just a word here from the unwise. Whether you are making an actual Tesla Ozone Generator replica or a simile solid state circuit based on its switching principle, be very careful of the transformer secondary. It bites!


You are far from unwise...your page was the cause of many sleepless nights....  I wish you would allow me to return the favor.

Offline Belfior

  • Full Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 132
Re: ENERGY AMPLIFICATION
« Reply #8268 on: October 23, 2017, 02:10:00 PM »
Just a comment on charging a cap higher than the supply. It seems video displays that:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=EVK84Z8BSnc

I was wondering would it be hard to use a transistor to do the switching and if you guys might have a schematic ready for the circuit?

Would it even require a transistor or maybe just a zener that shorts to the battery negative, when voltage rises in the cap enough?

Offline hoptoad

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 1000
Re: ENERGY AMPLIFICATION
« Reply #8269 on: October 24, 2017, 12:01:26 PM »
...your page was the cause of many sleepless nights....
Sorry I interrupted your slumber, I didn't mean to deprive anyone of their sleep. :(
Quote
I wish you would allow me to return the favor.
I like my slumber,  :P  and pictures and diagrams, especially schematics, with lots of descriptive words. I'm a visual toad. ;)
Quote
You are far from unwise
Hmmn, I'm not so sure about that....

A recent experience reminded me that safety comes first. I made an unwise bare skin contact with open secondary terminals. I made a stupid assumption about the secondary voltages being reasonably low, so I relaxed my usual HV protocol of 'disconnect the source' first before changing something. Why did I expect the voltage to be low? Because I substituted the low impedance primary / high impedance secondary step up transformer with a higher impedance primary / low impedance secondary step down transformer. The transformer's primary impedance/inductance was still small compared with the series choke used. I also only used a 2uf ceramic cap.

The rectified Stepped Down secondary voltage (unloaded) was still 49 VDC (according to my cheap digital meter). My supply source for the circuit was a run down 12v battery delivering 11 volts to the whole circuit when in operation.

The raw spikes that I felt on contact with the open terminals were likely to be 2 orders of magnitude higher in voltage, but without scopes etc, I can only judge by previous HV shock experience, which proves I didn't learn properly the first time... or the second time...!.

So, be wise all : be careful when experimenting with potentially high voltage circuits. Don't assume your safety and make an ass out of U like I did to me. Cheers.

Free Energy | searching for free energy and discussing free energy

Re: ENERGY AMPLIFICATION
« Reply #8269 on: October 24, 2017, 12:01:26 PM »
Sponsored links:




Offline TinselKoala

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 13558
Re: ENERGY AMPLIFICATION
« Reply #8270 on: October 24, 2017, 04:22:08 PM »
Just a comment on charging a cap higher than the supply. It seems video displays that:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=EVK84Z8BSnc

I was wondering would it be hard to use a transistor to do the switching and if you guys might have a schematic ready for the circuit?

Would it even require a transistor or maybe just a zener that shorts to the battery negative, when voltage rises in the cap enough?

What?
It's easy to charge capacitors to "higher than the supply". Using a switched inductor as in that video you can in fact charge the capacitor (if it can take the voltage!) to a voltage just under the maximum voltage of the inductive spike when the coil is disconnected. You just need a fast, high voltage diode to "trap" the spike voltage on the capacitor. The higher the capacitance of the capacitor the longer it will take to charge up, but using a small capacitance like 1 uF you can charge to the spike voltage very quickly.

What you can then do with the charged capacitor energy is up to you.


Offline wattsup

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 2617
    • Spin Conveyance Theory - For a New Perspective...
Re: ENERGY AMPLIFICATION
« Reply #8271 on: October 24, 2017, 06:15:02 PM »
What?
It's easy to charge capacitors to "higher than the supply". Using a switched inductor as in that video you can in fact charge the capacitor (if it can take the voltage!) to a voltage just under the maximum voltage of the inductive spike when the coil is disconnected. You just need a fast, high voltage diode to "trap" the spike voltage on the capacitor. The higher the capacitance of the capacitor the longer it will take to charge up, but using a small capacitance like 1 uF you can charge to the spike voltage very quickly.

What you can then do with the charged capacitor energy is up to you.

@all

Exactly. So where's the diode in the Ozone or Ignitor Patent?

Also, how is the capacitor in the ozone patent across the battery? Oh sorry, it is not.

So here is a small bench or brain test for all of you if you want to start considering some other answer to the function.

Take a 12vdc battery and put a 12 vdc bulb across it. Take the simplest volt meter and put the probes across the battery and measure the voltage you are reading. Now switch the probes around and read it again. Now write how the volt meter is connected and those two values down and date and sign the paper so you cannot forget what it was. If you want to be very complete, switch the bulb around as well and do it a second time.

Now if you have a clamp on or inline DC ammeter, you can take a reading from each side as well and include those numbers as well.

Then explain with EE standard electron directional flow theory how you got to those values. No formulas. Just think of the forward electron travel being directional like all those animated circuit programs will show you and explain how you got each one of those Very Simple Readings. So simple one will mock the question but just try it if you can.

So what is the first step to answering this? Yes, how does a simple hand held of VU volt meter really work? That's good. Get that info and make that volt meter operational logic work with the electron flow theory. Good luck to those who try this test.

Start your explanation with something like;

Because dc electricity is electrons that travel in a wire in one direction out from one polarity and into the the other polarity of the battery this is how each reading works in this test........

wattsup

Free Energy | searching for free energy and discussing free energy

Re: ENERGY AMPLIFICATION
« Reply #8271 on: October 24, 2017, 06:15:02 PM »
Sponsored links:




Offline Erfinder

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 992
Re: ENERGY AMPLIFICATION
« Reply #8272 on: October 25, 2017, 07:59:02 AM »
@all
 
 Exactly. So where's the diode in the Ozone or Ignitor Patent?


Wake up..... You don't need a diode.....this is not a demonstration of accumulation over several cycles....it is a demonstration of the immediate production and utilization of the self-induced..
 
 
Also, how is the capacitor in the ozone patent across the battery? Oh sorry, it is not.


Teslas's genius is seen in his command of the subject of impedance.  I am not going to get into what I mean by this and how it applies to that which you don't see because, it will result in a response taking the form of another useless 50,000 word monologue.... 

Fact is, the capacitor is across the supply, all the time, you don't know why...  I find that entertaining....  Things can be changed up by adding a second switch, this addition, one which you keep suggesting, if added, would change the entire dynamic of the system.  Build it like the man said, don't change anything.

Offline wattsup

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 2617
    • Spin Conveyance Theory - For a New Perspective...
Re: ENERGY AMPLIFICATION
« Reply #8273 on: October 25, 2017, 03:07:37 PM »
@Erf

The supply in the ozone patent is Terminals A and B. The capacitor and primary are in series with the fan motor so they are not across the supply since the fan motor adds two high induction stators plus a commutator plus rotor field coils being switched in and out but always having at least two in contact.

Also, Tesla took the time to stress in his drawing that the wires from Terminal A and B are thick, same wires through the cap/primary but look at when it gets to the fan motor shows thin wire meaning even higher resistance to the supply. So when the switch closes, there is resistance in the fan motor but there is also one thick wire going to the primary then the cap. That high amp potential is your primary pulse coil rebias (first pulse). There are other effects that happen yes but minor.

Then in the patent he states "The device hereinafter described is especially designed for direct application to and use with existing circuits carrying direct currents, such as the ordinary municipal incandescent-lighting circuits".

Direct Currents (plural), not direct current (singular). He did not stipulate the + as A and the - as B. He could have connected the device either way and it would have worked the same way with the only exception that the fan blades would need to be angled the other way.

It was only years later that EE decided that DC "flowed" in one direction and still today we have people saying it flows from + to - and others that swear it flows from - to +.  But we use diodes to force our directionality whereas Tesla saw both potentials as currents both having their own character and he never talked about directional flow. For Tesla both the + and - feed the circuit. That's why the battery terminals are said to HAVE POTENTIAL. Both terminals and not just one.

If a battery negative never left the battery but always saw the positive potential leading into it, then how is the negative a potential? A potential for what? A potential dumping ground?

Both leave the battery to then try and connect together and basically blow something up. That's what batteries love to do. We just tamed them with our diodes giving only the positive a direction or a path of no return. But they still both leave the terminals and head into the circuit. Once you use this as a base of reading circuits, you will see the circuit is OK, how it works, why it works. So if some can say - to +, others can say + to - and if this divergence does not create the biggest worldwide EE debate of the century, then why is it so hard to then say BOTH + and - leave the battery and get "consumed" at their point of highest inductance=resistance in this case inside the fan motor. You take that perspective, simple and sweet and work the patent functions and it fits perfectly whereas directional DC flow DOES NOT. The patent never says "field collapse". No field collapse. It is only the center point of "contact" between the + and - that meet inside the fan motor that shifts from center (commutator)(when the switch is closed) to a point inside the coil F (when the switch opens) because now the positive potential is resisted by the capacitor thus permitting the negative potential to advance from fan motor center to a point inside coil F. When that advance occurs, it also advances an impulse through the primary (second pulse now conveyed against the first pulse - damped pulse) then into the capacitor as an expansion point but then fed back to the battery. The battery provides two potentials but it accepts potentials as well. The rotary switch connection spike comes from the battery and should not be confused for a capacitor discharge since that capacitor will always bleed back to source making the system very efficient which is what Tesla wanted to hide. Two pulses, conveyed in opposite direction from the positive only, returning power back to the source of both polarities. That is not written in his patent because he could not say anything about the wheelwork in a patent.

Just like the little simple test I previously posted will prove that to all of you once and for all. So now you can prove it for yourself and not take my word for it. So you want to know how the Ozone Patent works, maybe start by knowing how DC works first.

Yes I am long winded because the damn concepts are not easy to describe and they mean our present concepts are faulty. None of that is easy to put on paper. We just are lucky that Tesla put up patents before the modern day electron flow  illusions took hold. Also, what I have written compared to what is already written as our EE laws is peanuts. I am just starting.

OK, another point. Just put a steady DC on the primary. What happens to the secondary? Nothing. No output. Keep the DC connected and soon enough the primary will blow somewhere in the center point. But the current is supposed to be flowing from + to - in the primary so why is the secondary just doing nothing? What kind of current is it that flows but does nothing? Or does it flow? Ahha! Does it really flow as they say in a loop out one terminal, through the primary and back to the other terminal, because if it is as they say, then there is no reason for no secondary output.

Keep the DC on the primary and it heats up. What causes the heat? Electrons crashing? No. Vibration hence friction causes heat. What vibrates? The copper atoms? No. They are too busy holding the wire together. What vibrates hence creates friction hence creates heat is the copper atom nuclei. If the nuclei can heat by vibrating, IT CAN CONVEY a vibration down the line as our electricity conveyance works. Electricity was born by conveyance not by magical fields and electrons.

And do not confuse this DC with AC because they are not the same animal. So when the primary is connected, both polarities enter the coil and if it remains connected, the potential quickly seizes the nuclei in the copper atoms holding them in quasi stasis vibration so there is no change hence no output, only heat. Look, give me science that makes sense. Don't just take science at its word because it is pulling a fast one over our eyes. All of our eyes, not just me. I am just the guy that is ringing the alarm bell because I worked it all out during many years so it is not my fault. If the EE construct was not so full of holes, this would not be an issue with me.

The great thing about this is once this clicks in your mind, it will forever change your view of electricity as being nucleic potential that is conveyed from one atom to the next down the line hence you have potential to create inductive imbalances which is what Tesla is playing with in both direction on the primary and not this crazy notion that electricity flows in a circuit in one direction and therefore homogenizes its presence throughout the circuit. That is a crock indeed. That little test I mentioned will prove it to you and I cannot think of anything simpler to try and see it. A simple VU meter and a resistor will prove electricity cannot travel in a wire but is conveyed at varying degrees depending on the components.

wattsup


Offline Erfinder

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 992
Re: ENERGY AMPLIFICATION
« Reply #8274 on: October 25, 2017, 07:13:02 PM »
@Erf

The supply in the ozone patent is Terminals A and B. The capacitor and primary are in series with the fan motor so they are not across the supply since the fan motor adds two high induction stators plus a commutator plus rotor field coils being switched in and out but always having at least two in contact.

Also, Tesla took the time to stress in his drawing that the wires from Terminal A and B are thick, same wires through the cap/primary but look at when it gets to the fan motor shows thin wire meaning even higher resistance to the supply. So when the switch closes, there is resistance in the fan motor but there is also one thick wire going to the primary then the cap. That high amp potential is your primary pulse coil rebias (first pulse). There are other effects that happen yes but minor.

Then in the patent he states "The device hereinafter described is especially designed for direct application to and use with existing circuits carrying direct currents, such as the ordinary municipal incandescent-lighting circuits".

Direct Currents (plural), not direct current (singular). He did not stipulate the + as A and the - as B. He could have connected the device either way and it would have worked the same way with the only exception that the fan blades would need to be angled the other way.

It was only years later that EE decided that DC "flowed" in one direction and still today we have people saying it flows from + to - and others that swear it flows from - to +.  But we use diodes to force our directionality whereas Tesla saw both potentials as currents both having their own character and he never talked about directional flow. For Tesla both the + and - feed the circuit. That's why the battery terminals are said to HAVE POTENTIAL. Both terminals and not just one.

If a battery negative never left the battery but always saw the positive potential leading into it, then how is the negative a potential? A potential for what? A potential dumping ground?

Both leave the battery to then try and connect together and basically blow something up. That's what batteries love to do. We just tamed them with our diodes giving only the positive a direction or a path of no return. But they still both leave the terminals and head into the circuit. Once you use this as a base of reading circuits, you will see the circuit is OK, how it works, why it works. So if some can say - to +, others can say + to - and if this divergence does not create the biggest worldwide EE debate of the century, then why is it so hard to then say BOTH + and - leave the battery and get "consumed" at their point of highest inductance=resistance in this case inside the fan motor. You take that perspective, simple and sweet and work the patent functions and it fits perfectly whereas directional DC flow DOES NOT. The patent never says "field collapse". No field collapse. It is only the center point of "contact" between the + and - that meet inside the fan motor that shifts from center (commutator)(when the switch is closed) to a point inside the coil F (when the switch opens) because now the positive potential is resisted by the capacitor thus permitting the negative potential to advance from fan motor center to a point inside coil F. When that advance occurs, it also advances an impulse through the primary (second pulse now conveyed against the first pulse - damped pulse) then into the capacitor as an expansion point but then fed back to the battery. The battery provides two potentials but it accepts potentials as well. The rotary switch connection spike comes from the battery and should not be confused for a capacitor discharge since that capacitor will always bleed back to source making the system very efficient which is what Tesla wanted to hide. Two pulses, conveyed in opposite direction from the positive only, returning power back to the source of both polarities. That is not written in his patent because he could not say anything about the wheelwork in a patent.

Just like the little simple test I previously posted will prove that to all of you once and for all. So now you can prove it for yourself and not take my word for it. So you want to know how the Ozone Patent works, maybe start by knowing how DC works first.

Yes I am long winded because the damn concepts are not easy to describe and they mean our present concepts are faulty. None of that is easy to put on paper. We just are lucky that Tesla put up patents before the modern day electron flow  illusions took hold. Also, what I have written compared to what is already written as our EE laws is peanuts. I am just starting.

OK, another point. Just put a steady DC on the primary. What happens to the secondary? Nothing. No output. Keep the DC connected and soon enough the primary will blow somewhere in the center point. But the current is supposed to be flowing from + to - in the primary so why is the secondary just doing nothing? What kind of current is it that flows but does nothing? Or does it flow? Ahha! Does it really flow as they say in a loop out one terminal, through the primary and back to the other terminal, because if it is as they say, then there is no reason for no secondary output.

Keep the DC on the primary and it heats up. What causes the heat? Electrons crashing? No. Vibration hence friction causes heat. What vibrates? The copper atoms? No. They are too busy holding the wire together. What vibrates hence creates friction hence creates heat is the copper atom nuclei. If the nuclei can heat by vibrating, IT CAN CONVEY a vibration down the line as our electricity conveyance works. Electricity was born by conveyance not by magical fields and electrons.

And do not confuse this DC with AC because they are not the same animal. So when the primary is connected, both polarities enter the coil and if it remains connected, the potential quickly seizes the nuclei in the copper atoms holding them in quasi stasis vibration so there is no change hence no output, only heat. Look, give me science that makes sense. Don't just take science at its word because it is pulling a fast one over our eyes. All of our eyes, not just me. I am just the guy that is ringing the alarm bell because I worked it all out during many years so it is not my fault. If the EE construct was not so full of holes, this would not be an issue with me.

The great thing about this is once this clicks in your mind, it will forever change your view of electricity as being nucleic potential that is conveyed from one atom to the next down the line hence you have potential to create inductive imbalances which is what Tesla is playing with in both direction on the primary and not this crazy notion that electricity flows in a circuit in one direction and therefore homogenizes its presence throughout the circuit. That is a crock indeed. That little test I mentioned will prove it to you and I cannot think of anything simpler to try and see it. A simple VU meter and a resistor will prove electricity cannot travel in a wire but is conveyed at varying degrees depending on the components.

wattsup


my reaction to this post....it's a recurring reaction....


https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=31g0YE61PLQ

Free Energy | searching for free energy and discussing free energy

Re: ENERGY AMPLIFICATION
« Reply #8274 on: October 25, 2017, 07:13:02 PM »
Sponsored links:




Offline Magluvin

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 5647
Re: ENERGY AMPLIFICATION
« Reply #8275 on: October 25, 2017, 09:06:24 PM »

my reaction to this post....it's a recurring reaction....


https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=31g0YE61PLQ

Yeah them are some long posts. Sorry Watts, but the vid response was funny...

Watts

So in a crt tube say for a color tv..  what in your new electricity theory is it in the so called electron beam that scans the front screen to produce the picture?

Mags

Offline wattsup

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 2617
    • Spin Conveyance Theory - For a New Perspective...
Re: ENERGY AMPLIFICATION
« Reply #8276 on: October 25, 2017, 11:31:05 PM »
Yeah them are some long posts. Sorry Watts, but the vid response was funny...
Watts
So in a crt tube say for a color tv..  what in your new electricity theory is it in the so called electron beam that scans the front screen to produce the picture?
Mags

@Mags

hahaha. That was funny indeed, but to easy an answer.

As for color tv's, once you know the basic function of the beam source, what atoms are used there and on the screen, the sweep principle, then SC will answer all those questions given some time because the nucleic spin of atoms is common in most all atoms. So whatever it is, SC will answer it because it deals with the atoms inbred abilities and not outside fields and whizzing electrons. I know it's hard to accept but ask yourself, is the TV screen made of electrons or atoms? Are what you see on the screen pixels electrons or atoms reacting? If they are atoms, then discover the ability of those atoms because they each have their set of abilities and have no need for electrons and fields.

Also no more long posts since most is already out there and in docs enough to start grasping the concept.

wattsup

Offline Erfinder

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 992
Re: ENERGY AMPLIFICATION
« Reply #8277 on: October 26, 2017, 01:37:26 PM »
@Mags

hahaha. That was funny indeed, but to easy an answer.




How about a quick demo of your attempt at replicating the system presented in the ozone patent.....


.....added.....


using an off the shelf transformer..... since you cannot demonstrate actual ozone production..... film yourself probing the area around your transformer....  neons and fluorescent lamps are perfect for this as they should light up around the transformer, with you holding one of their terminals...  this could serve as an indication that you are operating at voltage gradients conducive for the production of ozone.....  if the indicators are lighting up, a quick sniff of the transformer should reveal ozone production...careful....you may hear crackling sounds....indicating..... well....you better know what the crackling sound means....




Also no more long posts ......


thank you!

 

Share this topic to your favourite Social and Bookmark site

Please SHARE this topic at: