Language: 
To browser these website, it's necessary to store cookies on your computer.
The cookies contain no personal information, they are required for program control.
  the storage of cookies while browsing this website, on Login and Register.

GDPR and DSGVO law

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.
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.

User Menu

Tesla Paper

Free Energy Book

Get paid

Donations

Please Donate for the Forum.
Many thanks.
Regards, Stefan.(Admin)

A-Ads

Powerbox

Smartbox

3D Solar

3D Solar Panels

DC2DC converter

Micro JouleThief

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

Products

WaterMotor kit

Statistics


  • *Total Posts: 523384
  • *Total Topics: 15584
  • *Online Today: 44
  • *Most Online: 103
(December 19, 2006, 11:27:19 PM)
  • *Users: 2
  • *Guests: 11
  • *Total: 13

Author Topic: Testing the TK Tar Baby  (Read 1470528 times)

Offline Magluvin

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 5832
Re: Testing the TK Tar Baby
« Reply #4170 on: July 19, 2012, 04:52:15 AM »
opps on my last reply. I didnt see that tk posted the series battery circuit.  :o

A and C are equal brightness. B is not lit. 24v on meter.

Mags

Free Energy | searching for free energy and discussing free energy

Re: Testing the TK Tar Baby
« Reply #4170 on: July 19, 2012, 04:52:15 AM »

Offline Magluvin

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 5832
Re: Testing the TK Tar Baby
« Reply #4171 on: July 19, 2012, 04:54:24 AM »
Bulb B should have 0v across it. As if it were not in the circuit. A and B will have 12v across each.

MaGs


Offline TinselKoala

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 13968
Re: Testing the TK Tar Baby
« Reply #4172 on: July 19, 2012, 05:01:05 AM »
Meter reads 0v.  ;]  I made the same mistake(tricky for some odd reason) that the batteries were in series. They are not.  maybe it is the meter presence that confuses what we think we see of the batteries and their polarity to each other.

Mags
Look back, there are 2 separate koans, one with the batteries antiseries and the other in series. Both are puzzlers.

@PC: the A and C bulbs are in series, are they not?

Free Energy | searching for free energy and discussing free energy

Re: Testing the TK Tar Baby
« Reply #4172 on: July 19, 2012, 05:01:05 AM »
Sponsored links:




Offline TinselKoala

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 13968
Re: Testing the TK Tar Baby
« Reply #4173 on: July 19, 2012, 05:02:27 AM »
opps on my last reply. I didnt see that tk posted the series battery circuit.  :o

A and C are equal brightness. B is not lit. 24v on meter.

Mags

Slow down. Two separate circuits, both to be considered. Koan 1: batteries in antiseries. Koan 2: batteries in series. Same questions, same bulbs, same same.

Offline TinselKoala

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 13968
Re: Testing the TK Tar Baby
« Reply #4174 on: July 19, 2012, 05:05:18 AM »
opps on my last reply. I didnt see that tk posted the series battery circuit.  :o

A and C are equal brightness. B is not lit. 24v on meter.

Mags
But B is in series with one 12 v battery and bulb C (removing the top of the circuit), and it's also in series with the other battery and bulb A (removing the bottom). Why should it not be lit at normal 12 volt brightness?

Free Energy | searching for free energy and discussing free energy

Re: Testing the TK Tar Baby
« Reply #4174 on: July 19, 2012, 05:05:18 AM »
Sponsored links:




Offline Magluvin

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 5832
Re: Testing the TK Tar Baby
« Reply #4175 on: July 19, 2012, 05:19:24 AM »
But B is in series with one 12 v battery and bulb C (removing the top of the circuit), and it's also in series with the other battery and bulb A (removing the bottom). Why should it not be lit at normal 12 volt brightness?

Well if you separate the bottom and top, Batt/A/B  or Batt/C/B , each will have an opposite flow of current through B. So when combined, those 2 different current flows will cancel out. No B flow.

The first circuit is like 2 weak 12v power supplies powering the B bulb. Take one of those weak supplies( Batt/A or Batt/C ) away and there will be less current available to B. Or, take away B and no current flows in the circuit.

The second one, we could look at B's connection to the batteries as 0v common with 12v+ and 12v-.  If that point between the batteries is our common, using a meter we will see 0v on the other end of B, due to the equal voltage division between A and C.
So B is connected across neutral points in the circuit thus 0v across B.

MaGs

Offline TinselKoala

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 13968
Re: Testing the TK Tar Baby
« Reply #4176 on: July 19, 2012, 05:57:24 AM »
Ah. So the flow of current between two points is determined by the voltage difference, or potential, between those points. If there is no potential, then there is no current flow.
And there is only one kind of current flow, there isn't a "positive current" and a "negative current", there is only the flow of (negative) charge from regions of relatively high potential to regions of relatively lower potential (aka voltage). (Thanks, Ben, for guessing wrong and screwing everyone up for ever after).
And the idea of a positive voltage on one side of the bulb "cancelling" or opposing the positive voltage on the other side is simply a matter of the charge pressure being equal and so there is no reason for it to "want" to go in either direction... because the pressure is equal or, to put it differently, the potential difference-- the voltage-- applied across the bulb is zero.



Free Energy | searching for free energy and discussing free energy

Re: Testing the TK Tar Baby
« Reply #4176 on: July 19, 2012, 05:57:24 AM »
Sponsored links:




Offline Magluvin

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 5832
Re: Testing the TK Tar Baby
« Reply #4177 on: July 19, 2012, 06:13:12 AM »
Ah. So the flow of current between two points is determined by the voltage difference, or potential, between those points. If there is no potential, then there is no current flow.
And there is only one kind of current flow, there isn't a "positive current" and a "negative current", there is only the flow of (negative) charge from regions of relatively high potential to regions of relatively lower potential (aka voltage). (Thanks, Ben, for guessing wrong and screwing everyone up for ever after).
And the idea of a positive voltage on one side of the bulb "cancelling" or opposing the positive voltage on the other side is simply a matter of the charge pressure being equal and so there is no reason for it to "want" to go in either direction... because the pressure is equal or, to put it differently, the potential difference-- the voltage-- applied across the bulb is zero.
Are you asking? ;]

Sometimes Ive use the analogy of water pipes and valves to explain electricity to people that dont know how it works. But I think air pressure is a better way to look at it, being water will not compress or decompress. But water pressure and valves and pipes are things most people are familiar with, so it is easier for them to relate.



MaGs

Offline TinselKoala

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 13968
Re: Testing the TK Tar Baby
« Reply #4178 on: July 19, 2012, 07:24:53 AM »
I prefer to use water because its very incompressibility means it can transfer energy "instantly" (really at the speed of sound) in spite of flowing slowly, just like electrons somehow can. Let's save the springy compressibility effects for components, like specifically inductors and capacitors.

OK, thanks for coming and I'm sorry I'm late. I was hoping to get to the Hydraulic Analogy's description of capacitors and inductors last night but other things, as you can tell, happened in between.

The Hydraulic Analogy (HA) to the Inductor.

Well, OK, to make up something that acts like an inductor we have to know how an inductor acts, and to know that we have to make up something that acts like an inductor, and to know that..... well, let's just start and see where we end up

Charge is fundamental, charge is conserved, charge is quantized, comes in two flavors, like repels like, the electron is inseparable from the unit negative charge; away from the center of atoms and cyclotrons, positive charge is the absence of electrons where they "should" be, or a region where electrons are depleted. And it takes a _heck_ of a lot of negative Unit Charges to make a Coulomb, which is an amp-second of charge.

And in the HA we imperfectly represent charge by water, in the aggregate, current by water flow, conductors by pipes, resistors by constrictions, switches and rheostats by valves, voltage by pressure, and power sources by pumps and elevated reservoirs.

But what about mysterious components like the inductor... how shall we represent it?

I like to think of an inductor as a section of pipe with a valve on the far end (low pressure end), closed, and springy elastic walls, and a valve on the near end (high pressure end), open.  When the flow of water (current) comes in and enters the near end, the pressure of the water makes the springy walls of the tube expand and accept more and more water, but also pushes back on the water so the more full, the harder to push more in. The far end valve is connected to the walls though and as the tube swells up the far end valve starts to open, and by the time the walls are maximally swelled out the valve is fully open and there is no  more constriction and the flow is now just what it would have been if there was only a smooth pipe there -- only now there is a reservoir of energy stored in the springy, expanded walls of the inductor. So the full flow is delayed for a time while the springy walls are stretching out and the valve is opening.  Then... when the upstream supply of water is cut off, the upstream (HV end) valve closes, and the springy walls then can squeeze out all that stored water thru the lowvoltage end valve--- so the current actually continues for a time.

The springy walls are of course the magnetic field produced by moving charges, arranged to be concentrated by various means like coiling wires and/or wrapping them around materials that encourage magnetic fields to penetrate them.

So an inductor is a component that stores the energy of an incoming current in a concentrated magnetic field like a springy reservoir, and as long as the current is constant, it might as well be just a pipe. Only when the current is increasing (delayed, swelling, storing energy) and decreasing (also delayed, shrinking, releasing stored energy) does the inductor make itself felt to the flow of current. In the steady state, the magnetic field of the inductor takes no extra energy to maintain, just as a permanent magnet doesn't take any energy from the outside to maintain its field once it's established.

This is why contacts arc when an inductive load is switched off.... the magnetic field collapses and tries to maintain the current flow in the same direction it was going, and will make an arc as the switch contacts separate, maintaining the circuit as the stored magnetic energy -- as voltage--- continues to push charge through the circuit until the energy is depleted.

OK, digest that for a little while. Thanks for your attention...

Next: Capacitors and the HA.

Free Energy | searching for free energy and discussing free energy

Re: Testing the TK Tar Baby
« Reply #4178 on: July 19, 2012, 07:24:53 AM »
3D Solar Panels

Offline TinselKoala

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 13968
Re: Testing the TK Tar Baby
« Reply #4179 on: July 19, 2012, 07:32:22 AM »
 Hogen, a Chinese Zen teacher, lived alone in a small temple in the country. One day four travelling monks appeared and asked if they might make a fire in his yard to warm themselves.
While they were building the fire, Hogen heard them arguing about subjectivity and objectivity. He joined them and said: "There is a big stone. Do you consider it to be inside or outside your mind?"
One of the monks replied: "From the Buddhist viewpoint everything is an objectification of mind, so I would say that the stone is inside my mind."
"Your head must feel very heavy," observed Hogen, "if you are carrying around a stone like that in your mind."
 

Offline TinselKoala

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 13968
Re: Testing the TK Tar Baby
« Reply #4180 on: July 19, 2012, 08:29:41 AM »
Sigh.

Just when we thought we  were making some progress. We discover that all signs of progress were just illusions, parroted words without understanding.

Vgs: the voltage between the Gate and the Source. The discussion is whether an applied signal voltage Vgs of +4 volts will allow a mosfet's drain-source channel to conduct, and if so how much.

And here in a response, our Ms. Ainslie tells us that she has NEVER checked on the applied signal voltage because she didn't consider it relevant.

And yet it is displayed on every scope shot she has presented, practically, as the famous BLUE TRACE and it is just what is being set when she sets the offset knob and the FG's atten knob. And it is what PW and .99 and lots of other people have been questioning in re the scopeshots that show an applied signal voltage of +12 volts to a mosfet gate without turning that mosfet on.

I am sorry, but I find this extremely disappointing. Is it possible that some other applied signal voltage "refers" ?


And... of course... if she _really_ wants to see this.... "Mosfets, how do they work, parts 2 and 3" is right here, posted 18 days ago:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tKstLQYayNA

Free Energy | searching for free energy and discussing free energy

Re: Testing the TK Tar Baby
« Reply #4180 on: July 19, 2012, 08:29:41 AM »
3D Solar Panels

Offline TinselKoala

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 13968
Re: Testing the TK Tar Baby
« Reply #4181 on: July 19, 2012, 09:07:05 AM »
I will be blunt. Ms. Ainslie. If there is ANYTHING in my videos, Mosfets, How Do They Work, parts 2,3,4 that is unexpected to you, or that you do not believe or that you think is impossible or different from your own circuit's behavior (except that mine is immensely slower).... then you do not understand how mosfets work at all, and you really should empty your cup, try to forget all that kitchen slop that you _think_ you know, and get the real picture somehow.

Ditto for voltage/current/charge, in general. Your false knowledge is impeding your ability to learn true knowledge because it causes you to reject or misinterpret what you are seeing.

Offline MileHigh

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 7600
Re: Testing the TK Tar Baby
« Reply #4182 on: July 19, 2012, 10:46:26 AM »
TK:

I am up way past my bedtime and I thought that I would throw this one out onto the field:  A simple representation for an inductor using the hydraulic analogy is just a regular pipe filled with water.  That's it - just a pipe and water - a water pipe!  Now a teaser related to this representation might be pulled from a theme in this thread, "A wire is not just a wire."  Perhaps it can be considered after you finish your discussion.  I'm not saying that your analogy is wrong or anything and I don't want to disturb the flow of your discussion.

Get it on!
Bang a bong!

MileHigh   8)

Offline TinselKoala

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 13968
Re: Testing the TK Tar Baby
« Reply #4183 on: July 19, 2012, 02:26:03 PM »
@MH: You are right of course, a wire is not just a wire, it's an inductor and a capacitor too, and the springy wall analogy breaks down because in a real springy wall cylinder there would be a "force" exerted by the walls pushing inwards all the time, not just as the flow was changing. And real inductors don't "charge" you anything once the magnetic field is established by the current, it takes no energy to maintain it once it's established.

And of course a simple pipe does behave sort of like the inductor: it takes a finite time to fill, before water starts running out the other end, once you cut off the flow at the upstream end it takes a little while for the last dribbles to come out the far end. Add some springy walls...all real pipes have springy walls to some degree--- and you are close to modeling an inductor .


I embarked on this little journey full of hope and enthusiasm, because I felt that Ainslie's attitude may have changed, in her continuing discussion with .99 about FG anatomy and the general performance of her circuit. After last evening's glance at the state of affairs at her forum, though, and seeing that last statement of hers regarding the applied signal voltage at the mosfet gates.... I am very discouraged. It seems as though there has not really been any progress, or that she is still deliberately not understanding what is being said to her, nor what her scope shots even mean. Everything she's said seems to have been only parroted, without the least real understanding at all. Each and every scope shot that she has presented, except for a few early ones, has shown the applied signal voltage  prominently as the blue trace, and this is the only real control parameter used in the system: the applied signal voltage, its frequency and duty cycle.

Yet she now makes the statement, emphasis in the ORIGINAL, that she has NEVER "checked on" or considered the applied signal voltage because she did not consider it important.

What, then, is the use? If after all this time she does not even realise that she is CONTROLLING HER SYSTEM BY VARYING THE APPLIED SIGNAL VOLTAGE...... then there is no hope whatsoever in making any progress. The woman is as dense as a lead brick and even more difficult to move. Not only that she hides her misunderstandings behind false agreements and fake comprehension, merely parroting back concepts as if she understood them... but she really doesn't.

Offline PhiChaser

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 256
Re: Testing the TK Tar Baby
« Reply #4184 on: July 19, 2012, 03:25:46 PM »
Look back, there are 2 separate koans, one with the batteries antiseries and the other in series. Both are puzzlers.

@PC: the A and C bulbs are in series, are they not?

Er... My answer was for the second with the batteries in series. Yep, definitely in series. Sorry for 'skipping' to koan #2... Just looking forward to the capacitance/induction discussion, I wasn't prepared for any tests LOL!!
The first koan (battery positives together) would be: A and C are normally lit and B would have double voltage but with opposing current direction so I'm gonna say B is not lit at all in koan #1.
Better?  ???
PC
 
EDIT: The meter would read zero on the first one (measuring between the negative poles) I think. The difference of potential between them anyways, which should be the same (close to zero).

 

OneLink