Storing Cookies (See : http://ec.europa.eu/ipg/basics/legal/cookies/index_en.htm ) 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:
https://overunity.com/5553/privacy-policy/
If you do not agree with storing cookies, please LEAVE this website now. From the 25th of May 2018, every existing user has to accept the GDPR agreement at first login. If a user is unwilling to accept the GDPR, he should email us and request to erase his account. Many thanks for your understanding

User Menu

Custom Search

Author Topic: PhysicsProf Steven E. Jones circuit shows 8x overunity ?  (Read 920547 times)

JouleSeeker

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 685
Re: PhysicsProf Steven E. Jones circuit shows 8x overunity ?
« Reply #600 on: July 06, 2011, 02:37:13 AM »
An increasing battery voltage does not mean the battery is gaining energy. Dozens of experimenters on this site have been fooled by this.

Right -- as I noted, this could be "battery relaxation" (for example).

With regard to the ideal toroid experiment -- I wrote,
Quote
Will the wire-loop experience a voltage and current in it, due to the nearby changing magnetic field -- even though the measured B field outside the solenoid is ZERO?

Experimentally, the answer is yes.  This phenomenon is rarely discussed in Physics classes (from my experience).  There must be some change in the "vacuum" around the toroid in order for there to be an induced current in the loop.

The question is, how is the change in magnetic field at the center of the loop SENSED by the loop, when the magnetic field outside the toroid itself is ZERO?    There is no magnetic field to affect the electrons in the wire, from the toroid, just an electric field.  And does this electric field propagate outward from the toroid at the speed of light?  I suppose so.

I'm hoping Frankly will consider the appearance of the electric field outside the toroid in the absence of a magnetic field outside the toroid, in his theoretical model.

NickZ

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 5225
Re: PhysicsProf Steven E. Jones circuit shows 8x overunity ?
« Reply #601 on: July 06, 2011, 02:53:44 AM »
  For those that have not seen Koolers bwjt video lighting 70 leds at 27mA:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=TgX1gYlmVsk&feature=related
   
   And for those that want to light 60 leds "forever" for less than $10:
http://cgi.ebay.com/ws/eBayISAPI.dll?ViewItem&item=160614929505+&clk_rvr_id=245930330144
                                          Not a bad deal, huh?
   
   
   

NickZ

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 5225
Re: PhysicsProf Steven E. Jones circuit shows 8x overunity ?
« Reply #602 on: July 06, 2011, 02:55:40 AM »
  Sorry for the double post...  I hit the post button and nothing happens, so I hit it again, and...

NickZ

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 5225
Re: PhysicsProf Steven E. Jones circuit shows 8x overunity ?
« Reply #603 on: July 06, 2011, 03:12:04 AM »
   There may be a lot more to "battery relaxation" than meets the eye.  As both capacitors and metal cased batteries display this same effect to a certain degree.  I believe it to be caused by aether absorption pulled in by the device. 

xee2

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 1610
Re: PhysicsProf Steven E. Jones circuit shows 8x overunity ?
« Reply #604 on: July 06, 2011, 03:40:20 AM »

The question is, how is the change in magnetic field at the center of the loop SENSED by the loop, when the magnetic field outside the toroid itself is ZERO?    There is no magnetic field to affect the electrons in the wire, from the toroid, just an electric field.  And does this electric field propagate outward from the toroid at the speed of light?  I suppose so.


I do not think the magnetic field outside of the solenoid is zero. I think that if a compass is brought near either end of the solenoid it will show a magnetic field. These field lines are continuous and go from one end of the solenoid to the other end. There does not appear to be a magnetic field close to the sides of the solenoid because the fields cancel each other out there. Note, I am posting this without checking to make sure I am correct, so I could be wrong, but I do believe this is correct. For a toroid, the magnetic fields are all (almost all) contained inside the toroid since it has no open ends.





« Last Edit: July 06, 2011, 09:09:56 AM by xee2 »

nul-points

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 995
    • Doc Ringwood's Free Energy blog
Re: PhysicsProf Steven E. Jones circuit shows 8x overunity ?
« Reply #605 on: July 06, 2011, 05:27:38 AM »
An increasing battery voltage does not mean the battery is gaining energy. Dozens of experimenters on this site have been fooled by this.


i agree with the 'intention' of this statement - but, as they say in all the best 'law films' : "it's the truth, but not the whole truth"...

the 'truth' is that OUR CIRCUIT may not be increasing the energy of the battery - but the WHOLE truth is that the battery energy IS increasing


let's think about it - a battery has an effective internal resistance, let's call it Rbatt

let's apply an external load, Rload, across a battery, soon after a previous heavier load

the voltage we measure at the battery terminal, Vb, is a result of the 'potential division' of the 'real' battery potential, Vint, by the combined effect of Rbatt and Rload:

Vb = Vint x Rload /(Rbatt + Rload)

for example, let Vint = 12V,  Rload = 11 ohm, and Rbatt = 1 ohm (to  simplify math only!)

Vb = 12 x (11/ (1 + 11)) = 12 x 11/12 = 11V

now if we have a constant Rload (and we haven't recharged the battery), then the only ways for Vb to have increased since its previous load, are EITHER

 a) the internal voltage, Vint, has increased

 - OR -

 b) the internal resistance, Rbatt, has decreased

BOTH of these states are taken as an indication that the battery is now in a higher state of charge - effectively, the available energy stored in the battery HAS increased



whether we like it or not, when a battery terminal voltage INCREASES under constant load then the available energy in that battery HAS increased


that in itself is a matter of interest to me, at least (as i mentioned a few posts ago, in relation to the tests i've been reporting here about looping some of the o/p energy back to the battery)

however, as we've all acknowledged, it is possible for this operation to occur WITHOUT that extra energy coming TOTALLY from our circuit

and so THIS is a closer approximation to the WHOLE truth about battery 'relaxation'

(and this is what is often mistaken as an increase caused solely by our circuit)

as Nick has rightly pointed out, what we've just seen referred to cells/batteries can ALSO apply to capacitors - and not just the 'relaxation' effect

(i give some experimental evidence of this in my PDF file 'The Secret Life of Capacitors', the subject of one of my threads here in this forum)
  link to PDF download page-->http://www.overunity.com/index.php?action=downloads;sa=view;down=479


it seems to me that 'battery relaxation' and 'dielectric adsorption' are, at present, merely 'labels' not explanations - there is real increase in stored energy and this must either have come from some internal conversion of kinetic energy back to potential energy at the micro (quantum) level, or else there has been an input of energy from the ambient environment


just my 3 x (2 / (1+2)) cents!  :)
np


http://docsfreelunch.blogspot.com
 
« Last Edit: July 06, 2011, 06:18:40 AM by nul-points »

frankly

  • Newbie
  • *
  • Posts: 26
Re: PhysicsProf Steven E. Jones circuit shows 8x overunity ?
« Reply #606 on: July 06, 2011, 06:31:47 AM »
Right -- as I noted, this could be "battery relaxation" (for example).

With regard to the ideal toroid experiment -- I wrote,
The question is, how is the change in magnetic field at the center of the loop SENSED by the loop, when the magnetic field outside the toroid itself is ZERO?    There is no magnetic field to affect the electrons in the wire, from the toroid, just an electric field.  And does this electric field propagate outward from the toroid at the speed of light?  I suppose so.

I'm hoping Frankly will consider the appearance of the electric field outside the toroid in the absence of a magnetic field outside the toroid, in his theoretical model.

Well, although I have not received any enlightenment from .99 regarding the questions I posed to HIS/HER statements, only the idea that I misunderstood HIS/HER statements somehow, (and if so, would like explanation please), I will answer this somewhat crossed message question.

Firstly, please be specific.....are we looking at a solenoid, or a torroid? Secondly, There is no Bloch wall formed on an electromagnet with present energisation, so a different set of phenomena are used to establish the rules of interaction than are used with magnets alone. Thirdly, with a torroid, or closed core transformer, as you rightly point out, all the magnetic energy for "induction" is within the core, therefore, how can this be "transferred" to the adjoining coil and provide useable energy via the collapsing or building magnetic lines of force.....and do it so well? The only answer is that the wire is being energised in some way that is not immediately apparent, and is occuring within the bounds of the primary coils' geometry, as it cannot be "sensed" untill the secondarie's winds are lower to the face of the torroid than the primary, so energy is lost. In the same manner, by placing wraps further out, there is loss. I wonder, has anyone used flat strap to wind a transformer? Probably not in nearly a hundred years. Interestingly, this is what was used for transformers with the AC electricity in it's early form...wire ribbon. Why? What did they know that seems to have been forgotten, or missed?

Previously I asked why amperage and magnetic strength of the B field were related. I wait for an answer.

As to "just conveying my thoughts" on what the form of the wheelwork of nature really is?? That thing that is the water in our pond? If I did that, what would you learn? No. How about you reflect on what I have said. The answer is there. Right before you. Only one person thus far has even attempted to think and imagine a solution, then, (hopefully) test that idea with apparatus. Oops, sorry. Did I just suggest that someone do science?

I wonder, did anyone measure the mass of the plates in the battery that is charging and measure the capacitance of the entire circuit and find the resonant frequency.....to see if there is a correlation with the running frequency?

What of these reported "sweet spots" with the present design?

Where are the joyous words extolling the solution has been found, for it is these that prove the thoughts. The basis of the harmonic scale of matter.

Have any mass measurements been done?

Why does the mass of the primary and secondary have to be so similar in transformers? What does "harmonic resonance" lock onto?

We hear the standing wave in our well tuned musical instruments all the time. Pianos are a prime example. Why is it that no-one has applied that thinking to energy amplification.

I recently learned that an "amplifier" in electrical engineering is not "amplifying" anything. To amplify means to increase in strength. So, the end result must be that energy is greater out than in via some sort of fulcrum or pulley. Like a gearbox, amplifying the mechanical energy to push the car faster with less engine speed. Utilising inertia to relieve torque. This was the reason for heavy flywheels in old engine designs. The storage of inertia so the energy from it could be amplified via pulleys and such.

However, nowadays it seems that to amplify a signal means to hold back on the original strength of the current, or working force, and control it. This means that the highest amplification of the signal possible is the same as having no amplifier present. The control of the signal DOWNWARDS in strength is referred to as amplification. It is this type of thinking that prevents discovery of the truth.

How, in what manner, can we amplify energy when we are not taught that energy spins and has inertia, just like a flywheel??

This motion is called reactance, reluctance and resistance and is the source of all of the original though forms and quaternion equations that once described, in perfect detail, the overall manner in which electricity operates based upon circles not lines.

How can vectors describe rotation of subatomic particles? It cannot. So, "science" invents quantum math to blur the edges of their straight lines, and gets further and further away from the truth.

Anyway, I am now ranting.

Back to the issue at hand.

What is affected by the energy from a source of electricity to form a magnetic field around the energised current carrying medium?

Ohh, and also, if you take out the core of a transformer and leave the coils adjacent, does it still work? Why? What must be done to prevent them interacting and transferring energy one to the other with the changing magnetic field?

This type of science is what must be done, all over again, to find the truth. I cannot just blurt it out, for I will not be believed. I tried that once before.

I have no credentials, only experimental experience. And, without the math skills to back me up, all I have is these words.

I can point the way, but you must walk.

I can show you pictures, and videos 'till the cows come home. These would only be the source of more conjecture.

I tried asking for expert assistance, none came. So, I now ask the questions of you that I asked myself, in order that you may also do the same thinking. This is what a teacher does, so the student may learn for themselves. Only in that manner will the result, once realised, be believed.

Do the investigations I suggested, think on the real reasons behind the simple processes, and the truth will be revealed.

Or, you can simply do nothing but continue along, blundering in the dark. Frankly, I don't give a damn.

NickZ

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 5225
Re: PhysicsProf Steven E. Jones circuit shows 8x overunity ?
« Reply #607 on: July 06, 2011, 07:10:50 AM »
  I think that all Jt circuits have a certain amount of feed-back to source. But, most all of these circuits are drawing more juice than they are returning, and will therefore always discharge the battery. The battery or capacitor while forming part of a circuit also have a natural resonance factor of one type of another. Once disturbed or drained by the draw, will try again to reach an equilibrium, if and when it can do so. And will do so by drawing from the only available source, Aether.   This is a usually overlooked by most people as being relatively unimportant in ordinary electronics circuits. 
   I also feel that the small capacitor (103, 471, etz) that is being used in the Hartley or Backwards Jt type circuits may be one of the keys to this anomaly. 
  Now some people are finding that you can light the led, by just using coils, and yes, that capacitor, with no battery, just a ground connection.
   My two pesos...

rukiddingme

  • Full Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 208
    • Kore
Re: PhysicsProf Steven E. Jones circuit shows 8x overunity ?
« Reply #608 on: July 06, 2011, 08:34:15 AM »
TIL that a microwave oven can be used as a Faraday cage.

Thank you.


xee2

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 1610
Re: PhysicsProf Steven E. Jones circuit shows 8x overunity ?
« Reply #609 on: July 06, 2011, 09:35:55 AM »

i agree with the 'intention' of this statement - but, as they say in all the best 'law films' : "it's the truth, but not the whole truth"...


I was referring to the MoPoZcO video. But the statement is true. I (and many others) have noticed that if a run down battery is left over night, without any energy being applied, it will sometimes have a higher voltage in the morning. If the voltage can increase without any power being added then battery voltage increase is not a good indicator of energy being added to the battery. I am not saying this is always the case, only that using battery voltage is not a reliable way to measure energy in a battery since it can sometimes be misleading.

xee2

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 1610
Re: PhysicsProf Steven E. Jones circuit shows 8x overunity ?
« Reply #610 on: July 06, 2011, 11:27:39 AM »

The question is, how is the change in magnetic field at the center of the loop SENSED by the loop, when the magnetic field outside the toroid itself is ZERO?    There is no magnetic field to affect the electrons in the wire, from the toroid, just an electric field.  And does this electric field propagate outward from the toroid at the speed of light?  I suppose so.



Sorry, I do not think I answered this question with my previous post. Sometimes it takes a while to sink in.

Each loop is coupled to the toroid core as a result of charges in loop (moving electrons) causing magnetic field in core. This coupling is bi-directional. If the loop current can effect the core, then the core can effect the loop current. The coulpling is between to the moving charges (electrons) in the loop and the moving charges (electrons) in the core domain atoms. I do not think that the coupling can be explained with classical "Faraday/Maxwell" concept of magnetic fields. I think it requires a relativistic solution for electric fields of moving charges. I think the best classical solution is to compute the current induced in loop from the change in flux through the center of the loop. I hope that is a better answer.


nul-points

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 995
    • Doc Ringwood's Free Energy blog
Re: PhysicsProf Steven E. Jones circuit shows 8x overunity ?
« Reply #611 on: July 06, 2011, 12:48:46 PM »
 
[...]
Frankly, I don't give a damn.


i don't give a damn either, frankly


if you have something to share, do it and cut the cr&p


if you just want to groom a bunch of acolytes you can patronise, then go start your own thread

poynt99

  • TPU-Elite
  • Hero Member
  • *******
  • Posts: 3582
Re: PhysicsProf Steven E. Jones circuit shows 8x overunity ?
« Reply #612 on: July 06, 2011, 03:35:18 PM »
@ frankly,

I have already provided the answer to the question regarding how current is induced in a loop of wire outside of either a solenoid or toroid. It's the electric field.

Now, regarding your initial question about what causes a magnetic B field:

The electron has charge. A spinning charged particle has a magnetic moment, i.e. it is a magnetic dipole. There are many free electrons in copper. When an electric field is applied to a copper wire, the magnetic moments of these free electrons become aligned such that a net magnetic moment (or field) is created which encircles the wire.

.99

dimbulb

  • Newbie
  • *
  • Posts: 34
Re: PhysicsProf Steven E. Jones circuit shows 8x overunity ?
« Reply #613 on: July 06, 2011, 04:35:45 PM »
Frankly
I see your frustration on the many aspects of the tesla magnifier,
I can tell that the rant is really a caring one and not giving up.
Your focus on battery as a  negative resistor function is good priority.
The math aspect in this regard is working within the negative resistance zone.
The battery impedance shifts and needs tuning until stablized.

As you know the tesla constraints on voltage are often extreme to most.
I don't know what Nickola had exactly in every part of his system.

I have heard that when tuning at minimum he would look for faint corona discharge
that was hard to see except under low light.

I used 11 turns for L2 and it was inline with L1 tightly wound no gaps except
between L2 and L1 was approx 3/32 to 3/8 inch. this was my finese adjustment.

frankly

  • Newbie
  • *
  • Posts: 26
Re: PhysicsProf Steven E. Jones circuit shows 8x overunity ?
« Reply #614 on: July 06, 2011, 07:27:58 PM »
@ frankly,

I have already provided the answer to the question regarding how current is induced in a loop of wire outside of either a solenoid or toroid. It's the electric field.

Now, regarding your initial question about what causes a magnetic B field:

The electron has charge. A spinning charged particle has a magnetic moment, i.e. it is a magnetic dipole. There are many free electrons in copper. When an electric field is applied to a copper wire, the magnetic moments of these free electrons become aligned such that a net magnetic moment (or field) is created which encircles the wire.

.99

Excellent, now we are getting somewhere.

So, could the amount of these dipoles in the wire, all lining up in one direction, have anything to do with the capacity of the wire? So, if long, or in a coil, deliver a pulse of energy to a load? In other words....is that what amperage is? The amount of dipoles aligned and then relaxing? Is that what the term reluctance equates to? The dipoles' relaxation speed?

SO.

Resistance then, must be related to the SIZE of the dipole. It's mass. So, aluminium, a lighter substance and yet, a metal and a conductor, conveys energy far easier for less space, the dipole's are smaller.

Cool. I hope you see the correlations here, because it is important to understand this simple stuff.

So, if the dipole, being aligned, and then allowed to relax, delivers that inertia to another component, called a load, or in the case of DC energy, has to be pulsed, (except with a resistance like light bulb, which is itself a resonating element), why does it have to stop spinning? Why not simply, instead of aligning the dipoles in the wire, and then allowing them to relax, set them spinning?

This, then, is also a changing magnetic field, so, delivers energy to the load just the same.

It is just that, one must use OSCILLATING DC energy to achieve this rotation of the dipoles.

If you investigate the actions of the elements in the present circuit, I think you will find, once the calculations are done, that the "sweet spots" described, are where the capacitance and inductance match harmonically, so, some extra rotation of the core's dipoles is occurring.

Also, the "feedback loop" is simply where this opposite polarity energy is coming from to achieve this.

Tesla was using OSCILLATING DC of HIGH FREQUENCY and HIGH POTENTIAL.