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: 489594
  • *Total Topics: 14406
  • *Online Today: 44
  • *Most Online: 103
(December 19, 2006, 11:27:19 PM)
  • *Users: 6
  • *Guests: 127
  • *Total: 133

Facebook

Author Topic: Bruce's Discovery, Tesla's Missing Link for his Unipolar Generator!  (Read 153788 times)

Offline gravityblock

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 3154
    • Get Dish Now! Free Dish Network System from VMC Satellite
Re: Bruce's Discovery, Tesla's Missing Link for his Unipolar Generator!
« Reply #15 on: March 24, 2010, 06:48:30 AM »
Hi GB,

Talk is cheap and I like to experiment.  I never believe something will not work, until I have tried it...thoroughly. 

Is Tesla wrong... Build something and find out.  I do not argue physics. I build and experiment based on my understanding. Can that understanding change?  Of course.

Cheers,

Bruce

Watch these four videos, then tell me there is no reaction between the armature and the field, http://www.andrijar.com/homavi/motor.avi and http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kk2c3m9eVK8 and http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_-kQans2rww and http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wvScSTbly1c

Talk is not cheap when it can be backed up with experiments and research.  I have done extensive research and experiments with the HPG over many years, and from what I understand, Tesla is wrong about there not being a reaction between the armature and the field (It's the very reason why a HPM works and why there is a counter torque in a HPG).  I believe anyone who has done any serious research on the HPG/HPM, will agree with this.  Experiments that have been done since his time, are in contradiction to his suggestions.

Before you tell someone to build something and to find out, you should be sure that person hasn't already done those experiments and done the proper research.  You don't have to agree with me, but the results of your own experiments will be in-line with what I am suggesting to you.  When I experiment, I start with the basics just like you.  I take nothing for granted.  This is the best way to experiment, so you can have your own understanding of things.  In the process, you may uncover something that was over-looked or misinterpreted by others.  I hope this will be the case during your experiments.  I'm not here to argue or to debate physics either.  There are loop holes and back-doors everywhere.  We need to find these loop holes and exploit them to our benefit.  This is one of the reasons why I am here.  I am not here to discourage your work.  I am here to encourage your work and to give you a different perspective on things.  Just keep them in the back of your mind is all I ask. 

I am grateful you at least read my posts.  I posted a document on the main Steorn page yesterday which I believe has really good information in it, but only 6 people downloaded the file and there has been over 400 page views since I posted the document.  It doesn't appear most people here are serious about research or experimentation, because they think they already have all of the correct answers.  In fact, there are those experimenting who are not sharing there results or data here.  It's a real shame and this holds back progress on this forum.  Please keep up your excellent work, for you are one of the very few, who are moving this forum forward in the right direction.

GB
« Last Edit: March 24, 2010, 10:13:41 AM by gravityblock »

Free Energy | searching for free energy and discussing free energy


Offline gravityblock

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 3154
    • Get Dish Now! Free Dish Network System from VMC Satellite
Re: Bruce's Discovery, Tesla's Missing Link for his Unipolar Generator!
« Reply #16 on: March 24, 2010, 10:46:37 AM »
Hi GB,

I am not looking for the eddy currents to excite my brug, (lol...that sounds bad  :D) but I am looking for the current to flow from the inside to the outside perimeter of my pancake coil and hoping that it's magnetic field will reinforce the field.

I have only just begun.  Magnetic bearings are an idea, so also is levitation.  My personal favorite.  So also is the "top" method with friction limited to one point.  I'm going to build and test and see what works best.  Not as easy to spin up copper in this manner as one thinks...but it can be done!   ;)

Cheers,

Bruce

The current flowing in the pancake coil will not re-enforce the field regardless of the direction of rotation.  If you reverse the rotation, then the current flow will also reverse it's direction, which will once again be in opposition to the direction of rotation.  Here's a video from Lumen clearly showing when the direction of rotation is reversed in a HPG, then the polarity of the voltage is reversed, http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=XSWwrvT_c8w

If you can wrap your mind around this concept along with Newton's Third Law, then the HPG/HPM is demystified.

Here's a video of a true levitating HPM, http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2hHfkK4iGBQ

This video has friction limited to only one point, similar to the "top method" you are referring to, http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NHxHNS9gCfg

GB
« Last Edit: March 24, 2010, 11:21:36 AM by gravityblock »


Offline Bruce_TPU

  • TPU-Elite
  • Hero Member
  • *******
  • Posts: 2438
    • Purchase My Book, "The Latter Rain"
Re: Bruce's Discovery, Tesla's Missing Link for his Unipolar Generator!
« Reply #17 on: March 24, 2010, 12:41:22 PM »
Hi GB,

I've seen some of those and some I have not.  Large ones produce high amperage and low voltage.

I already know that they work, ie..Faraday's disc.  Though it is a different setup.

I will not believe anything about the pancake coil not working, until I have tried both it and also Tesla's bifilar pancake coil in my BRUG...sorry..LOL


@ ALL
I am now looking for build designs...  and build ideas.

I have some more little experiments to run tonight.  I have ordered a pwm kit for my SSG3 and I have some time to think on my BRUG until it arrives.

The order in which I want to design is as follows:
1a.  A long spin down time accomplished with a "Top" type set up of 5 minutes or more. Figuring out best vertical height in proportion to horizontal pieces, ie...two magnets and coil/plate.
Center of gravity, weight, mass etc.

1b.  Identify if using satalites is feasable, to create many spinning BRUG's.

2a.  Building a test rig for coils and plates.

2b.  Testing Output, and best means to physically draw off output.

3a.  Putting the BRUG together.  Testing using a very, very, very small duty cycle.

And studying the Generators of yesteryear and today, of the Forbes type.

That is my plan to date.   ;D

Cheers,

Bruce

EDIT:
Hey GB, I did indeed like this one setup that you posted.  I like it very much!  It uses only magnets for full levitation, as well!  It is very clever.  I like it enough to test the BRUG spin down time using one of those set ups.  Thanks!

Offline gravityblock

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 3154
    • Get Dish Now! Free Dish Network System from VMC Satellite
Re: Bruce's Discovery, Tesla's Missing Link for his Unipolar Generator!
« Reply #18 on: March 24, 2010, 01:13:45 PM »
Hi GB,

I've seen some of those and some I have not.  Large ones produce high amperage and low voltage.

I already know that they work, ie..Faraday's disc.  Though it is a different setup.

I will not believe anything about the pancake coil not working, until I have tried both it and also Tesla's bifilar pancake coil in my BRUG...sorry..LOL

Different setup, but based on the same concept and principals.  I don't expect you to believe anything about the pancake coil not being able to re-enforce the field, and I'm not trying to talk you out of doing the experiment, so I don't know why you are apologizing and laughing at me.  Pulsing it is a good idea and definitely should be followed up on, with or without the pancake coil.

Go ahead and prove Tesla wrong in your own experiments.  I've already shown you that his suggestions are more than likely wrong, and gave you reasons why he even made those suggestions in the first place, but you won't be satisfied until you actually see the results in your own experiments.  Do you really think I would say Tesla may be wrong, without having good reasons, when he is highly respected by myself and others here, especially when you are about to do an experiment that will confirm in your mind if he was correct or not?   Of course not.  You automatically reject everybody else's experiments and research while only accepting your own as being correct.  That is very naive, IMO.  I truly wish you Good Luck though!  No hard feelings here.  This should give you the motivation to prove me otherwise, and I really hope you are successful (we are on the same side, and I'm not against your efforts or against having positive results). 

In fact, I can even show you a post of mine from way back, where I mentioned using a pancake coil in a HPG.  This idea has been tossed around on this forum quite a bit, and it needs to be tested (You just really never know one way or the other, until it's actually been tested).  Until it has been tested and proven otherwise, I will hold onto what I currently believe to be correct, based on what I feel like is the best information I have come across from a wide rage of resources, which is not limited to just my own experiments.

GB
« Last Edit: March 24, 2010, 02:41:02 PM by gravityblock »


Offline Bruce_TPU

  • TPU-Elite
  • Hero Member
  • *******
  • Posts: 2438
    • Purchase My Book, "The Latter Rain"
Re: Bruce's Discovery, Tesla's Missing Link for his Unipolar Generator!
« Reply #19 on: March 25, 2010, 12:45:43 AM »
Different setup, but based on the same concept and principals.  I don't expect you to believe anything about the pancake coil not being able to re-enforce the field, and I'm not trying to talk you out of doing the experiment, so I don't know why you are apologizing and laughing at me.  Pulsing it is a good idea and definitely should be followed up on, with or without the pancake coil.

Go ahead and prove Tesla wrong in your own experiments.  I've already shown you that his suggestions are more than likely wrong, and gave you reasons why he even made those suggestions in the first place, but you won't be satisfied until you actually see the results in your own experiments.  Do you really think I would say Tesla may be wrong, without having good reasons, when he is highly respected by myself and others here, especially when you are about to do an experiment that will confirm in your mind if he was correct or not?   Of course not.  You automatically reject everybody else's experiments and research while only accepting your own as being correct.  That is very naive, IMO.  I truly wish you Good Luck though!  No hard feelings here.  This should give you the motivation to prove me otherwise, and I really hope you are successful (we are on the same side, and I'm not against your efforts or against having positive results). 

In fact, I can even show you a post of mine from way back, where I mentioned using a pancake coil in a HPG.  This idea has been tossed around on this forum quite a bit, and it needs to be tested (You just really never know one way or the other, until it's actually been tested).  Until it has been tested and proven otherwise, I will hold onto what I currently believe to be correct, based on what I feel like is the best information I have come across from a wide rage of resources, which is not limited to just my own experiments.

GB

Woa...Easy there Hoss,

Don't go getting your undies in a knot.  I was not "laughing at you."  I do not laugh at others.  So please do not read things into responses that are not there, or that are "assumed".  I do "respect other peoples experiments, but I have not seen anything to dissuade me, was my point.  You said, "This idea has been tossed around on this forum quite a bit, and it needs to be tested (You just really never know one way or the other, until it's actually been tested)." and that was my point. 

Please feel free to post relevent items here, ie... videos, actual test results, build ideas, etc.  But this is the end of this particular discussion.

@ ALL

I have a series of small experiments to run tonight.  Just some simple things to clarify a few things in my mind.  I will let you know what they are and how they went, later tonight.

Cheers,

Bruce

Free Energy | searching for free energy and discussing free energy

Re: Bruce's Discovery, Tesla's Missing Link for his Unipolar Generator!
« Reply #19 on: March 25, 2010, 12:45:43 AM »
Sponsored links:




Offline Bruce_TPU

  • TPU-Elite
  • Hero Member
  • *******
  • Posts: 2438
    • Purchase My Book, "The Latter Rain"
Re: Bruce's Discovery, Tesla's Missing Link for his Unipolar Generator!
« Reply #20 on: March 25, 2010, 04:47:08 AM »
Evening ALL,

Tonight was fairly interesting and I feel that I learned a lot. 

1.  I was able to drasticaly reduce the input power, while trying to rotate a copper disc (penny) by simply placing a non conductive paper between both the top and bottom side of the magnet.  To complete the circuit I simply ran a very thin piece of wire from top to base.  Now, this will create a little bit of an engineering challange in my larger design, but I think that I will simply run the wire on the BRUG, from the top, and then have a small air gap between the outer perimeter of the Tesla pancake coil and the loop of copper that will encircle it, to take power off, if brushes there, become my choice.

2.  I learned that you can not input power from the top, have it then run and touch the side.  It does not like that....at all!  It wants the power to touch the "edge" of the top magnet(s).  I found it strange and will retry this.  I tried going from nail on the top, to copper wire, to magnets edge.  No joy.  I am sure with enough power I could, but not what I am looking for.  I want to optimize every single step of the way.

3.  I learned that I can seperate the base, electrically from the bottom magnets and rotation is not effected.  In other words, my base is a nail.  From nail to cork, from cork to magnet.  Negative to base, wire completes circuit as describe in #1.  But, try to do this from the top, and no way!  LOL  At least not tonight.  If someone has accomplished this "seemingly" easy task, I would like to know.

Cheers,

Bruce

Offline gravityblock

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 3154
    • Get Dish Now! Free Dish Network System from VMC Satellite
Re: Bruce's Discovery, Tesla's Missing Link for his Unipolar Generator!
« Reply #21 on: March 25, 2010, 11:48:08 PM »
@Bruce:

After more thought on the pancake coil, it may be more promising than I first thought, due to overlooking the piece of the wire that runs radially from the center of the pancake coil to the rim of the coil.

The current flowing circularly in the pancake coil shouldn't couple with the field from the magnet, so there shouldn't be any counter torque here.  But, the field from the current flowing circularly will cross the field from the current flowing in the radial piece of wire at a 90o angle and could provide either a forward torque or a counter torque, depending on the direction of rotation or of the pancake coil.

There will still be a counter torque from extracting the current between the pancake coil and the external circuit, but if there is a forward torque in the above, then this forward torque may be equal to the counter torque and the two forces will be canceled and Lenz will be defeated by using Newton's Third Law.

I'm not able to figure the forces involved to know if the forward torque will equal or be greater than the counter torque, but the pancake coil appears very interesting to me at the moment.  I now understand what Tesla is referring to with his pancake coil idea.  It's amazing how overlooking a small detail changes everything.  This is the reason why it needs to be tested, and I really appreciate you taking the time to do these experiments and sharing your results with us.  Thanks.

GB

Free Energy | searching for free energy and discussing free energy

Re: Bruce's Discovery, Tesla's Missing Link for his Unipolar Generator!
« Reply #21 on: March 25, 2010, 11:48:08 PM »
Sponsored links:




Offline Bruce_TPU

  • TPU-Elite
  • Hero Member
  • *******
  • Posts: 2438
    • Purchase My Book, "The Latter Rain"
Re: Bruce's Discovery, Tesla's Missing Link for his Unipolar Generator!
« Reply #22 on: March 26, 2010, 02:34:01 AM »
@Bruce:

After more thought on the pancake coil, it may be more promising than I first thought, due to overlooking the piece of the wire that runs radially from the center of the pancake coil to the rim of the coil.

The current flowing circularly in the pancake coil shouldn't couple with the field from the magnet, so there shouldn't be any counter torque here.  But, the field from the current flowing circularly will cross the field from the current flowing in the radial piece of wire at a 90o angle and could provide either a forward torque or a counter torque, depending on the direction of rotation or of the pancake coil.

There will still be a counter torque from extracting the current between the pancake coil and the external circuit, but if there is a forward torque in the above, then this forward torque may be equal to the counter torque and the two forces will be canceled and Lenz will be defeated by using Newton's Third Law.

I'm not able to figure the forces involved to know if the forward torque will equal or be greater than the counter torque, but the pancake coil appears very interesting to me at the moment.  I now understand what Tesla is referring to with his pancake coil idea.  It's amazing how overlooking a small detail changes everything.  This is the reason why it needs to be tested, and I really appreciate you taking the time to do these experiments and sharing your results with us.  Thanks.

GB

Hi GB,

A very good post.  I was trying to picture what you were describing and think that I understand, about the inner wire running at 90 deg to the outside.  I would say that I agree with this.  In the days of yore, they always put a shaft in the center.  Here we have the spirals, but no shaft, and as you noted, the wire crossing at a 90 degree.

Evening ALL,

Tonight was the start of a "build night".  I am working on understanding the full magnetic levitation that I will imploy to eliminate much friction.  I have been successful at elivating the first end.  I am very excited with it's success!!  Now to build a real foundation, of wood and begin to put things together, for the "mini BRUNG".  It will give me a learning curve before I build the "level 2" BRUNG.

Washer to end of plastic base.  2 magnets in attraction to one another, to washer.  2 groups of three ceramic magnets each, in "repel" of mags on base.  Finicky, but not difficult.

Cheers,

Bruce

Offline gravityblock

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 3154
    • Get Dish Now! Free Dish Network System from VMC Satellite
Re: Bruce's Discovery, Tesla's Missing Link for his Unipolar Generator!
« Reply #23 on: March 26, 2010, 02:52:22 AM »
On the 3rd page of this article in fig. A, http://www.scribd.com/doc/28943990/Hypothesis-of-Homopolar-Atomic-Model-for-Cold-Fusion-Energy , I find an almost exact setup to what I posted in reply #14 of this thread in regards to the below illustration, 

==N/S/disc/N/S===S/N/disc/S/N==  (The "=" represents the axle.  Compare this and my description in reply #14 to the drawing below)   

I have posted many designs and illustrations on this forum in the past, based on this same technique in the article.

GB
« Last Edit: March 26, 2010, 08:01:13 AM by gravityblock »

Offline Airstriker

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 307
    • anonimowosc.org
Re: Bruce's Discovery, Tesla's Missing Link for his Unipolar Generator!
« Reply #24 on: March 26, 2010, 11:54:29 AM »
On the 3rd page of this article in fig. A, http://www.scribd.com/A/28943990/Hypothesis-of-Homopolar-Atomic-Model-for-Cold-Fusion-Energy , I find an almost exact setup to what I posted in reply #14 of this thread in regards to the below illustration, 

==N/S/disc/N/S===S/N/disc/S/N==  (The "=" represents the axle.  Compare this and my description in reply #14 to the drawing below)   

I have posted many designs and illustrations on this forum in the past, based on this same technique in the article.

GB

This is actually Tesla's patent but made in the other completelly wrong way.
http://www.freepatentsonline.com/0406968.pdf
Tesla's patent ("Dynamo Electric Machine") describes an arrangement of two parallel discs with separate, parallel shafts, joined like pulleys by a metallic belt. Each disc had a field that was the opposite of the other, so that the flow of current was from the one shaft to the disc edge, across the belt to the other disc edge and to that shaft. This would have greatly reduced the frictional losses caused by sliding contacts by allowing both electrical pickups to interface with the shafts of the two disks rather than at the shaft and a high-speed rim.
In the setup of yours you just have a greater friction - not lower ;] Anyway, both have nothing to do with OU ;]

Free Energy | searching for free energy and discussing free energy

Re: Bruce's Discovery, Tesla's Missing Link for his Unipolar Generator!
« Reply #24 on: March 26, 2010, 11:54:29 AM »
Sponsored links:




Offline gravityblock

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 3154
    • Get Dish Now! Free Dish Network System from VMC Satellite
Re: Bruce's Discovery, Tesla's Missing Link for his Unipolar Generator!
« Reply #25 on: March 26, 2010, 07:46:31 PM »
This is actually Tesla's patent but made in the other completelly wrong way.
http://www.freepatentsonline.com/0406968.pdf
Tesla's patent ("Dynamo Electric Machine") describes an arrangement of two parallel discs with separate, parallel shafts, joined like pulleys by a metallic belt. Each disc had a field that was the opposite of the other, so that the flow of current was from the one shaft to the disc edge, across the belt to the other disc edge and to that shaft. This would have greatly reduced the frictional losses caused by sliding contacts by allowing both electrical pickups to interface with the shafts of the two disks rather than at the shaft and a high-speed rim.
In the setup of yours you just have a greater friction - not lower ;] Anyway, both have nothing to do with OU ;]

My designs eliminate having two separate shafts and a conductive belt joined like pulleys.  Both discs are on the same axle (How is this the same as Tesla's patent?).  Since both discs are rotating together on the same axle with opposite EMF, then the rims can be naturally connected in series and completely joined together without a conductive belt, allowing the current to flow between the discs.  In Tesla's patent, the conductive belt doesn't completely cover both discs.  This is not the wrong way, this is a better way.....but you must understand the concept and principals of this first. 

My designs extract the current from each end of the axis since this is where the greatest potential is in this setup.  I have much more efficient designs than this basic setup, based around the same principals.  I even have a design that is totally brush-less using multiple circular Halbach Arrarys (a halbach array can be made to have a uniform field) and are used in high performance brush-less motors you can buy today.

I said the design in the article was almost exactly like my designs.  You overlooked "almost" and didn't read my description in reply #14, and completely took what I said out of context again.  I don't know how you can say my designs have a greater friction.  It is the opposite, they have a lower friction.  My advanced brush-less designs have a near 0 friction.

This does have to do with OU.  Since the discs are connected in series, the power output is increased to the 4th power, while the input power only increases to the square thereof.  Doubling the radii of the disc and magnets will increase the power output to the 4th power, but the counter torque increases to the 4th power also.  This has already been experimentally verified and confirmed.  Connecting two discs of opposite EMF in series while rotating on the same axle would be equivalent to doubling the radii of the discs/magnets and equivalent to doubling the RPM.  This virtual doubling of the RPM overcomes most of the counter torque.  I guess my next post will have to be in explaining this virtual RPM.  Once you grasp this concept, then you will see the beauty of the system.  In Tesla's patent, since the conductive belt is only covering half of each disc, the system won't be utilized to it's fullest and you will be back to square one again.  My designs overcome this and exploit the HPG to it's fullest potential possible.

GB
« Last Edit: March 26, 2010, 10:04:26 PM by gravityblock »

Offline Bruce_TPU

  • TPU-Elite
  • Hero Member
  • *******
  • Posts: 2438
    • Purchase My Book, "The Latter Rain"
Re: Bruce's Discovery, Tesla's Missing Link for his Unipolar Generator!
« Reply #26 on: March 27, 2010, 03:09:14 AM »
Hi GB,

I am looking forward to your description of "virtual rpm".  Thanks!

Good Evening ALL,

Tonight has been very fruitful.  I have shored up my build, changed my axle, to lessen the weight, and really found out that if I really wanted (I don't...LOL) I could build the entire unit out of 2 magnets a wire and some balsa wood.... (picture will explain)

I found out that from the magnets, I can run a piece of wire, quite a distance, to a "loop" of some sort, be it nail, bushing, etc,and still get spin.  Of course as long as it is connected electrically.  I needed to prove this to know that my BRUG device will rotate.

I am going with full magnetic levitation, slight friction on 1 point of contact.  Gravity is not a factor with this point of friction, so, a drop of oil and it should be not any issue at all.

I have ordered my magnets, last night, for my "Level 1" build.  As I learn from each build, and it works, I will get larger and larger.  Each size up is a cost factor.  So Level 1 is proof of concept, and learning curve.

Cheers,

Bruce
« Last Edit: March 27, 2010, 04:12:05 AM by Bruce_TPU »


Offline gravityblock

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 3154
    • Get Dish Now! Free Dish Network System from VMC Satellite
Re: Bruce's Discovery, Tesla's Missing Link for his Unipolar Generator!
« Reply #27 on: March 27, 2010, 08:53:07 AM »
Hi GB,

I am looking forward to your description of "virtual rpm".  Thanks!

Cheers,

Bruce

Examples 1 - 4 below, shows the Relative motion or relative RPM between the disc and external circuit is proportional to the EMF.

Examples 5 & 6 below, shows the Virtual RPM is proportional to the net virtual relative motion between both discs and the external circuit while taking into consideration the direction of the EMF of each disc, since we're dealing with more than one disc.  The EMF is then proportional to the Virtual RPM, instead of the Relative RPM of just a single disc and external circuit.

In a normal setup, we have relative motion between the disc and external circuit.

1.)  Let's say the disc is rotating at 1000 RPM, and the external circuit is stationary.  The relative RPM between the disc and external circuit will be 1000 RPM in this case.  The EMF will be proportional to 1000 relative RPM.

2.)  Now, let's have the disc rotate at 1000 RPM and the external circuit will rotate in the same direction at 500 RPM.  The relative RPM between them is 500 RPM.  The EMF will be proportional to 500 relative RPM.

3.)  If they're both rotating in the same direction and both at 1000 RPM, the relative RPM is 0.  The EMF will be proportional to 0 relative RPM, which is a 0 EMF.

4.)  Now, let's have the disc rotate at 1000 RPM and the external circuit is rotating in the opposite direction (counter rotating) at 1000 RPM.  The relative RPM between them is now 2000 RPM.  The EMF will be proportional to 2000 relative RPM.

5.)  When you have 2 discs rotating together on the same axle at 1000 RPM with a stationary external circuit, and each disc has an EMF pointing in the same direction, then the relative RPM between the first disc and external circuit is 1000 RPM and between the second disc and external circuit is 1000 RPM, and since the EMF is in the same direction for each disc, then the net virtual relative motion between both discs and the external circuit is 0, which represents a virtual RPM of 0, and results in an EMF of 0, (this is equivalent to the #3 example above in regards to them rotating in the same direction and with the same RPM).

6)  When both discs rotate on the same axle at 1000 RPM with a stationary external circuit, and each disc has an EMF pointing in the opposite direction, then the relative RPM between the first disc and external circuit is 1000 RPM, and the relative motion between the second disc and external circuit is 1000 RPM........ and since each disc has an opposite EMF, then the net virtual relative motion between both discs and the external circuit is 2000 RPM, which is a virtual RPM of 2000 RPM (this is equivalent to the #4 example above in regards to them counter rotating)

To sum it up, the Virtual RPM represents the net virtual relative motion between both discs and the external circuit by taking the direction of the EMF of each disc into consideration since we're dealing with more than one disc.  If you can accept #1 - #4 above, then I don't see why #5 & #6 above can't be accepted either.

RPM's is not relevant in the HPG.  What is relevant, is the relative motion or relative RPM between the disc(s) and external circuit along with the direction of the EMF.

The effects of this Virtual RPM is similar to a force in the non-inertial reference frame and is a fictitious force in a stationary or inertial reference frame.  This analogy is similar (I must put this in bold, or somebody will take it out of context and twist my words) to the Centrifugal force, http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Centrifugal_force  I don't think this Virtual RPM is a reactive force, but I could be wrong.  http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Reactive_centrifugal_force  If it is a reactive force, then we won't have OU and the counter torque will increase in proportion to the Virtual RPM and the EMF.  If it isn't a reactive force, then we just may have OU, because the counter torque won't increase in proportion to the EMF.  We would in effect have an EMF that is proportional to twice the RPM of the axle, with a counter torque that is only proportional to the RPM of the axle (this is how the Virtual RPM could cancel most of the counter torque and how these designs based around this concept is relevant to OU).

It's also not much different than being able to simulate a virtual air gap in a ferromagnetic material, http://www.ele.utoronto.ca/~lehn/conference_papers/CP16.pdf

I hope I didn't confuse you too much.  You probably need to get inside of my head to understand it properly.  I'm sure that is a scary thought.  The concept is simple, if you can grasp it, lol.  I don't expect you or anyone else to understand this post.  If anyone does, then I'll be surprised.

GB
« Last Edit: March 27, 2010, 12:03:59 PM by gravityblock »

Offline Bruce_TPU

  • TPU-Elite
  • Hero Member
  • *******
  • Posts: 2438
    • Purchase My Book, "The Latter Rain"
Re: Bruce's Discovery, Tesla's Missing Link for his Unipolar Generator!
« Reply #28 on: March 27, 2010, 01:26:54 PM »
Hi GB,

A very thought provoking post.  I guess my only issue, is that I do not see the magnetic fields rotating, at all, even though the magnets of course, are.  Now, the copper discs/coils rotate, and if the emf in copper disc one is spinning ccw at 1000 rpm and the second copper disc emf is spinning cw at 1000 rpm, I can see, that from the point of the observer riding the emf on any one of the copper discs the other emf would appear to be going the net sum of 2000 rpm.  I guess that I do not see how this helps us, since each emf is to their perspective copper disc.  Now, if one copper disc with an emf of ccw, were exactly ontop of another copper disc with an emf of cw than I could possible see a net gain. 

Anywho, just how I am picturing it right now, if that is even correct.  Have you built that description of yours and taken some measurements?  I would love to see some pictures or video if you have any, as well as a log of your measurements.  Thanks!

Cheers,

Bruce


Offline Bruce_TPU

  • TPU-Elite
  • Hero Member
  • *******
  • Posts: 2438
    • Purchase My Book, "The Latter Rain"
Re: Bruce's Discovery, Tesla's Missing Link for his Unipolar Generator!
« Reply #29 on: March 27, 2010, 10:49:17 PM »
Happy Saturday afternoon, everyone,

I have begun to build the pieces to my Level 1-BRUG, while I await parts and caps for the SSG3 and magnets for this project.  The pieces numbered below correspond to the numbers on the drawing, a couple of posts up.

I will continue to take some pictures as I make a little progress.

Back to the bench...

Cheers,

Bruce

Free Energy | searching for free energy and discussing free energy

Re: Bruce's Discovery, Tesla's Missing Link for his Unipolar Generator!
« Reply #29 on: March 27, 2010, 10:49:17 PM »

 

Share this topic to your favourite Social and Bookmark site

Please SHARE this topic at: