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

Poplamp

poplamp

CCTool

CCTool

LEDTVforSale

Magpi Magazine

Magpi Magazine Free Rasberry Pi Magazine

Battery Recondition

Battery Recondition

OverUnity Book

overunity principles book

Arduino

Ultracaps

YT Subscribe

Gravity Machines

Tesla-Ebook

Magnet Secrets

Lindemann Video

Navigation

Products

Statistics


  • *Total Posts: 489610
  • *Total Topics: 14407
  • *Online Today: 44
  • *Most Online: 103
(December 19, 2006, 11:27:19 PM)
  • *Users: 7
  • *Guests: 111
  • *Total: 118

Facebook

Author Topic: "Cold current" may be caused by novel magnetic subatomic interaction  (Read 22050 times)

Offline lancaIV

  • elite_member
  • Hero Member
  • ******
  • Posts: 1978
Re: "Cold current" may be caused by novel magnetic subatomic interaction
« Reply #15 on: September 06, 2013, 04:06:47 PM »

Free Energy | searching for free energy and discussing free energy


Offline MasterPlaster

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 462
Re: "Cold current" may be caused by novel magnetic subatomic interaction
« Reply #16 on: June 05, 2014, 11:13:10 AM »
I believe spin has a lot to do with this.

Current-induced spin polarization ....

http://arxiv.org/abs/0802.0366v3




Offline sparks

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 2533
Re: "Cold current" may be caused by novel magnetic subatomic interaction
« Reply #17 on: June 05, 2014, 06:56:48 PM »
   I would think that the temperature of a conductor carrying a current would be determined by the ratio of unbound electrons to bound electrons.   Your coldest currents would occur in a confined electron gas.   Even then this gas will become heated as electrons changing velocity will produce synchrotron radiation, which will irradiate the gas,  and increase the random motion of the electrons within the gas. 

Offline ALTECHLAB

  • Newbie
  • *
  • Posts: 12
Re: "Cold current" may be caused by novel magnetic subatomic interaction
« Reply #18 on: June 06, 2014, 05:32:35 PM »
seme interested video by I.Moroz is here....and can confirm some working model by the order: www.altechlaboratory.com
video: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=r4cbrjGJAOQ&list=UUVesA155Der2tRd5vpyYdJw


Offline kmarinas86

  • Full Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 156
    • YouTube - kmarinas86's Channel
Re: "Cold current" may be caused by novel magnetic subatomic interaction
« Reply #19 on: July 29, 2014, 12:55:30 AM »
There are two ideas in the previous post that will lead to confusion.

1.  There is only a right hand rule, there is no left hand rule.  It doesn't matter if it's conventional current or electron current, you still point your thumb in the direction of the conventional current to see the direction for the magnetic field lines.

Of course, convention says point your thumb in the direction of conventional current. The point is that you can think of electron current this way, but doing so requires you to use the left hand. I like to think of the actual particle which moves in the wire (the negatively charged electron current), so I like using a "left-hand rule" for this.

2.  The fingers don't represent the "circular orientation of the north pole."  That's a concept that doesn't make sense, there is no orientation for a north pole or a south pole when you look at the magnetic field around a wire.  The magnetic field around a wire is the classic example illustrating how there is no true north pole or south pole.  There are just magnetic field lines that have a direction and travel in closed loops.

Yes, there is no literal "north" or "south" position of the magnetic field around the wire, but there is a "north" or "south" direction of the magnetic field around the wire, which can be verified by a compass. You can assume that a pole refers to a position on a magnet, or you can assume pole refers to direction. Since the arrowhead is placed at the north end of a magnet, the arrowhead of a vector indicates the "direction of the magnetic field", which inside the magnet runs from the south to the north pole, and outside the magnet it runs from just outside the north pole to just outside the south pole. We can assume the local arrowheads are "inside virtual point magnets" distributed throughout space. The orientation of the "north pole" therefore means orientation of these "virtual point magnets" that make up the vector field representation of the magnetic field.

Free Energy | searching for free energy and discussing free energy

Re: "Cold current" may be caused by novel magnetic subatomic interaction
« Reply #19 on: July 29, 2014, 12:55:30 AM »
Sponsored links:




Offline Bob Smith

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 680
Re: "Cold current" may be caused by novel magnetic subatomic interaction
« Reply #20 on: July 29, 2014, 05:41:02 PM »
Quote
By keeping the impedance of the back-spike larger (i.e. voltage higher and its current lower) than in the initial pulse, copper's reaction to the voltage back-spike can provide the same polarity of magnetic field as current going forwards. ... So where does the energy come from to restore the potential energy lost via alignment of the paratoroidic (magnetic) moments? Certain frequencies of electromagnetic radiation get absorbed by the (PARAtoroidic) arrangements of magnetic moments in the copper atoms, in effect, restoring their potential energy. When some of the moments fall out of alignment, others will follow suit.
@Kmarinas86
Would this "keeping of the impedance of the back-spike larger" be made possible with
 
- a secondary consisting of a series-wound bifilar coil, where mutually cancelling magnetic fields would be accompanied by higher voltage
- a shorted coil of high inductance?
 
Bob
or

Offline Bob Smith

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 680
Re: "Cold current" may be caused by novel magnetic subatomic interaction
« Reply #21 on: July 30, 2014, 03:04:31 AM »
Quote
By keeping the impedance of the back-spike larger (i.e. voltage higher and its current lower) than in the initial pulse, copper's reaction to the voltage back-spike can provide the same polarity of magnetic field as current going forwards. ... So where does the energy come from to restore the potential energy lost via alignment of the paratoroidic (magnetic) moments? Certain frequencies of electromagnetic radiation get absorbed by the (PARAtoroidic) arrangements of magnetic moments in the copper atoms, in effect, restoring their potential energy. When some of the moments fall out of alignment, others will follow suit.
One way to do this would be to send a pulse backwards through a step-down transformer.
Bob

Free Energy | searching for free energy and discussing free energy

Re: "Cold current" may be caused by novel magnetic subatomic interaction
« Reply #21 on: July 30, 2014, 03:04:31 AM »
Sponsored links:




Offline kmarinas86

  • Full Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 156
    • YouTube - kmarinas86's Channel
Re: "Cold current" may be caused by novel magnetic subatomic interaction
« Reply #22 on: July 30, 2014, 10:13:26 AM »
@Kmarinas86
Would this "keeping of the impedance of the back-spike larger" be made possible with
 
- a secondary consisting of a series-wound bifilar coil, where mutually cancelling magnetic fields would be accompanied by higher voltage
- a shorted coil of high inductance?
 
Bob
or

Both.

Example:

Current flowing in opposite directions through bifilar windings creates a cancelling magnetic field outside the winding, but between the windings, which consist of very narrow spaces, the magnetic fields will actually add, not subtract.

The opposite is true when you pass current in through bifilar windings in the same direction. The field adds outside the windings, but between them they subtract.

So imagine if you had two pairs of bifilar, for a total of four conductors. Let's say you hook three of the conductors in series with each other in a closed loop. Then you have one remaining conductor, and you feed power to it.

Let's say you open the switch. When that field collapses, it induces an EMF into the three conductors in series, and it tries to replicate the magnetic flux that is being lost by the fourth conductor. It will try to generate the same amp turns as before. Then lets say you feed that current backwards into the fourth conductor. The current in the fourth conductor will now be traveling in the opposite direction that it was earlier.

Note that two windings (conductors) will add to each other's external field, while the other two windings (conductors) will cancel each others external field. The converse is true for their internal fields. The result is that we now have a magnetic field both between and outside the windings, whereas before it was only outside.

Now let's say you disconnect the three conductors from the fourth and you maintain both as closed loops. Now hook up the battery to the fourth winding again as before and repeat the process. Every time you open the circuit (pulse DC), you discharge this magnetic flux to the other windings, you can feed back some of that power to the batteries.

Note that the fourth conductor will have one-third the resistance of the first three conductors in series, but it will have less than one third the inductance (in fact, about one-ninth of it). As this means that it's L/R constant is (1/9)/(1/3) = 1/3 as much, it takes 1/3rd the time for the current in the fourth winding to reach its maximum current. As the maximum current in the fourth winding is 3 times more for the same voltage than with the three conductors in question, its current rises 9 times faster, with 1/3 as many turns. So it generates amp-turns 3 times faster.

Again, once you break the circuit, it doesn't take long for these amp turns to discharge into the three series windings. The current in the three series windings is not drawn from the battery, and yet it is still capable of doing work just as it would if it were drawn from the battery.

Now here is the very interesting part. Let's say you have a motor and you want to reverse this field every half rotation in order to power a large bar magnet during both halves of a rotation. This time you do something different. You now want to feed back all the magnetic flux that you induced into the three windings into fourth conductor and then cut off all current flow in those three conductors. You can hook up a capacitor across the three conductors to insure that most of the magnetic flux gets there. At this point immense current should be flowing through the fourth winding if you close it quickly enough after briefly hooking it to the first three windings. Then you want to hook up the battery to this already existing current. The difference is this time you have much more initial current at the beginning in the second half-cycle than you had in the previous. Each time you do repeat this process, you will be able to increase the initial current of each half-cycle to a magnitude greater, and greater. Before you know it you are switching currents at slew rates (A/s) greater that what the inductive time constant L/R predicts is possible. This corresponds to greater reactive power that what should theoretically happen.

Inductive reactive power feeds stored energy in the magnetic field. That energy does work on a magnet which then rotates to induce back-emf. However, consider the back-emf that is induced the three windings does not act against the battery, as it is simply a closed circuit of three wires in series which stores some magnetic with every pulse of the fourth conductor. So you have a magnetic field than when acted against does not limit the power delivered by the batteries (except for the emf it induces in the fourth winding). When you hook up these three wires in series with the fourth conductor, hooking it up backwards, the back-emf that you induced adds power to the fourth winding in the same direction that the battery does during that half-cycle. You want to discharge energy in these three windings into the fourth winding several times per half cycle. You want to completely do so at the end of each cycle, but in the reverse direction, to start the next half cycle, beginning with from the int( I' dt ) achieved from the previous cycle, instead of starting from I=0 again like you would if you simply used ordinary brush switching.

You want to be sure that you energize the fourth conductor enough prior to the moment where the magnet induces back-emf the greatest, to ensure that more amp turns get generated in the fourth conductor first before enough emf is induced in the three conductor winding group to exceed this.  So when you open the circuit between pulses in a given half-cycle, the back-emf of the collapsing field of the fourth winding, which first generated the current in the three series windings opposes (negates to some degree) the back-emf of the rotating magnet which responds to the magnetic field. If you switch off the fourth conductor, you force this current to "teleport" to the three series conductors (due to the tendency to preserve magnetic fields / magnetic flux / amp turns) despite the back-emf of the collapsing coil and the rotating magnet being opposites (rivals) of each other. So current is maintained better during switching, while at the same time we are able to reverse it quicker than normal. If you imagine flow of power as a vector, you could say that instead of alternating the magnitude and direction of a current sinusodially over the cycles, we are only alternating the direction, while the magnitude builds up with each cycle. Most importantly, much of the reversal of the current is done via magnetic induction into the other conductor and back in the opposite direction instead of directly reversing the applied electric field to the same conductor as typical of AC power. So it is a very different process! Therefore, in a sense the inductive reactance increases because of greater resistance to changes in the current (the magnitude component), as when if you increase current at a constant rate, the stored energy goes by the square of time, and thus if you induce (the catalytic input) power at a constant rate, then instead, the current should increase with the square root of time (or number of half-cycles / half-rotations passed).

Of course, one would have to generalize inductive reactance for arbitrary waveforms due to imperfection of the "sinusoid" due to pulsing, geometry, current reversals, etc..

Offline Bob Smith

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 680
Re: "Cold current" may be caused by novel magnetic subatomic interaction
« Reply #23 on: July 30, 2014, 04:00:28 PM »
Kmarinas86,
Thanks for the detailed response.  If I understand correctly, you have a closed loop series-wound trifilar coil alongside a shorted single strand coil.
You DC pulse the shorted single coil, inducing bemf into the trifi, and send the mag flux from the trifi back to the single stranded coil.
 
If you do this pulsing in rapid succession, say with a jfet, are you not going to get a flux buildup in the single coil resulting in a standing wave? 
Quote
Let's say you have a motor and you want to reverse this field every half rotation in order to power a large bar magnet during both halves of a rotation. This time you do something different. You now want to feed back all the magnetic flux that you induced into the three windings into fourth conductor and then cut off all current flow in those three conductors. YouYou can hook up a capacitor across the three conductors to insure that most of the magnetic flux gets there. At this point immense current should be flowing through the fourth winding if you close it quickly enough after briefly hooking it to the first three windings.
Okay, you've placed a cap in parallel with the trifilar coil. But now it seems you've changed the coil arrangement. In the first instance, the shorted single stranded coil and the closed loop trifi were separate and "communicating" by induction.  Now you're allowing the single coil to briefly make contact with the trifi to capture the trifi's bemf?  Or are we still operating on induction?
 
Quote
Then you want to hook up the battery to this already existing current. The difference is this time you have much more initial current at the beginning in the second half-cycle than you had in the previous. Each time you do repeat this process, you will be able to increase the initial current of each half-cycle to a magnitude greater, and greater. Before you know it you are switching currents at slew rates (A/s) greater that what the inductive time constant L/R predicts is possible. This corresponds to greater reactive power that what should theoretically happen.
I understand this. How do you prevent too much power from getting back to the battery?  Would you use a zener diode?
 
Quote
Inductive reactive power feeds stored energy in the magnetic field. That energy does work on a magnet which then rotates to induce back-emf. However, consider the back-emf that is induced the three windings does not act against the battery, as it is simply a closed circuit of three wires in series which stores some magnetic with every pulse of the fourth conductor. So you have a magnetic field than when acted against does not limit the power delivered by the batteries (except for the emf it induces in the fourth winding). When you hook up these three wires in series with the fourth conductor, hooking it up backwards, the back-emf that you induced adds power to the fourth winding in the same direction that the battery does during that half-cycle. You want to discharge energy in these three windings into the fourth winding several times per half cycle. You want to completely do so at the end of each cycle, but in the reverse direction, to start the next half cycle, beginning with from the int( I' dt ) achieved from the previous cycle, instead of starting from I=0 again like you would if you simply used ordinary brush switching.

You want to be sure that you energize the fourth conductor enough prior to the moment where the magnet induces back-emf the greatest, to ensure that more amp turns get generated in the fourth conductor first before enough emf is induced in the three conductor winding group to exceed this.  So when you open the circuit between pulses in a given half-cycle, the back-emf of the collapsing field of the fourth winding, which first generated the current in the three series windings opposes (negates to some degree) the back-emf of the rotating magnet which responds to the magnetic field. If you switch off the fourth conductor, you force this current to "teleport" to the three series conductors (due to the tendency to preserve magnetic fields / magnetic flux / amp turns) despite the back-emf of the collapsing coil and the rotating magnet being opposites (rivals) of each other. So current is maintained better during switching, while at the same time we are able to reverse it quicker than normal. If you imagine flow of power as a vector, you could say that instead of alternating the magnitude and direction of a current sinusodially over the cycles, we are only alternating the direction, while the magnitude builds up with each cycle. Most importantly, much of the reversal of the current is done via magnetic induction into the other conductor and back in the opposite direction instead of directly reversing the applied electric field to the same conductor as typical of AC power. So it is a very different process! Therefore, in a sense the inductive reactance increases because of greater resistance to changes in the current (the magnitude component), as when if you increase current at a constant rate, the stored energy goes by the square of time, and thus if you induce (the catalytic input) power at a constant rate, then instead, the current should increase with the square root of time (or number of half-cycles / half-rotations passed).
Now here's where I'm not completely clear.  You are hypothetically using this coil config to power a motor with reactive power buildup in the single stranded coil?
 
I've seen a lot of toroids in computer power supplies that have three or four sets of windings. You'd think that you could hook three windings up in series as closed loop (with your parallel cap), and keep the fourth free as a shorted single-strand. You'd also have the toroid to store some of your flux.
 
Am I understanding you correctly?  It's a very interesting proposition, and seems logical.
Bob
 
 

Offline Bob Smith

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 680
Re: "Cold current" may be caused by novel magnetic subatomic interaction
« Reply #24 on: August 01, 2014, 03:11:24 PM »
Kmarinas86,
What if you were to put your shorted primary on the armature of a motor (as the primary winding). Would you be able to wind a series-wound bifilar secondary over top of it to pick up the cemf?  And if so, would you be able to harness its voltage?
Bob

Free Energy | searching for free energy and discussing free energy

Re: "Cold current" may be caused by novel magnetic subatomic interaction
« Reply #24 on: August 01, 2014, 03:11:24 PM »
Sponsored links:




Offline stupify12

  • Full Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 167
Re: "Cold current" may be caused by novel magnetic subatomic interaction
« Reply #25 on: August 01, 2014, 08:30:34 PM »
http://www.teslauniverse.com/nikola-tesla-patents-555,190-alternating-motor

Maybe that will help answer your question Bob.


Meow

Kmarinas86,
What if you were to put your shorted primary on the armature of a motor (as the primary winding). Would you be able to wind a series-wound bifilar secondary over top of it to pick up the cemf?  And if so, would you be able to harness its voltage?
Bob

Offline kmarinas86

  • Full Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 156
    • YouTube - kmarinas86's Channel
Re: "Cold current" may be caused by novel magnetic subatomic interaction
« Reply #26 on: August 07, 2014, 03:01:17 PM »
Kmarinas86,
Thanks for the detailed response.  If I understand correctly, you have a closed loop series-wound trifilar coil alongside a shorted single strand coil.
You DC pulse the shorted single coil, inducing bemf into the trifi, and send the mag flux from the trifi back to the single stranded coil.

Yes.
 
If you do this pulsing in rapid succession, say with a jfet, are you not going to get a flux buildup in the single coil resulting in a standing wave?  Okay, you've placed a cap in parallel with the trifilar coil. But now it seems you've changed the coil arrangement. In the first instance, the shorted single stranded coil and the closed loop trifi were separate and "communicating" by induction.  Now you're allowing the single coil to briefly make contact with the trifi to capture the trifi's bemf?  Or are we still operating on induction?

There is intermittent contact.

I understand this. How do you prevent too much power from getting back to the battery?  Would you use a zener diode?

Yes, just one of many options.

Now here's where I'm not completely clear.  You are hypothetically using this coil config to power a motor with reactive power buildup in the single stranded coil?

In this configuration, that's the idea.

However, one configuration I think is better is where you reverse the roles of the series-wound coil and the single-stranded coil from the aforementioned example. Essentially, in this other configuration, you pulse energy into the series-wound coil, which consists of a greater number of turns. You discharge the energy by induction into the single-stranded coil with a capacitor across the series-wound coil. This way the magnetic fields / magnetic flux / amp turns "teleports" to single-stranded coil. Now this time, do not discharge the single-stranded coil across the series-wound coil until the end of each half cycle.

At the end of each half cycle, hook the coils in opposite directions, so that the current from the single-stranded coil is fed into to series-wound coil. Since the current into the series-wound coil runs the other direction and has more turns than the single-stranded coil, this should force the magnetic field to undergo an "inversion" (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=R_w4HYXuo9M). The magnet field which was located outside the inter-winding spaces move to the inter-winding spaces, and subsequently it moves out of that space again, but facing the other direction.

The nice thing about this is that it happens fast, as the mutual inductance between the two windings is negative in that brief moment of contact, with the total inductance reduced, meaning that for the same voltage, the current changes are quicker. Also, instead of the current having to stop and reverse, it is simply being redirected, so the amplitude of the current from the previous cycle carries over to the next, and from the frame of reference of the moving charges, the amplitude function looks more like a staircase than a sinusoid. The combined higher switching frequency and head-start of the current should result in higher field frequency and amplitude in the frame of reference of the lab than what would be expected of the input power.

As before, you would have capacitors hooked up across each coil during the switching process to reduce "external" arcing, conserving energy.
 
I've seen a lot of toroids in computer power supplies that have three or four sets of windings. You'd think that you could hook three windings up in series as closed loop (with your parallel cap), and keep the fourth free as a shorted single-strand. You'd also have the toroid to store some of your flux.
 
Am I understanding you correctly?

Yes.

It's a very interesting proposition, and seems logical.
Bob


Offline Bob Smith

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 680
Re: "Cold current" may be caused by novel magnetic subatomic interaction
« Reply #27 on: August 08, 2014, 03:35:03 AM »
Thanks for the detailed response to my queries, K.
I've been away all day and not had time to think on this. I've read it twice, but need to reflect. Sounds like you have a specific setup in mind, perhaps with windings that are out of phase with one another and switichable to get the effects you desire.  Will have to read more and reflect on what you're saying.
Bob

Offline freethisone

  • Newbie
  • *
  • Posts: 27
Re: "Cold current" may be caused by novel magnetic subatomic interaction
« Reply #28 on: September 03, 2014, 09:25:02 PM »
From a thread I posted elsewhere (http://www.overunity.com/4299/steven-markas-associate-jack-durban-comes-forward-with-more-info/msg199128/#msg199128):

yes tesla made a giant vacume cleaner. its called the ion generator by sharper image. it is his invention. pump up the voltages, and the room will get cold..


 

Share this topic to your favourite Social and Bookmark site

Please SHARE this topic at: