Would we have a kind of phase wave for a magnetic field?

In a ferri/ferromagnetic core - yes.  See here.
In a paramagnetic material or vacuum - I doubt it.

Speed of sound in copper: ~ 3 570 m.s^-1.

Not quite - see here and here and here.

Longitudinal: 4760m/s - 5010m/s
  Transverse: 2270m/s - 2325m/s
 Extensional: 3570m/s - 3810m/s

For most acoustics, the Longitudinal speed is relevant.

Fuck-up to  you, verpies! Your are so nuts that you even don' t understand what means "~" and not able to relise that we are indeed in the case mainly of longitudinal waves in the case of bars.

GO TO TROLL A OTHER THREAD!

I had already noticed in the discussion I had created on the possible basics of overunity that you were not even able to read my posts before to critic, here you have already done the same an other post: you borrow thoughts, you imagine in your your mind thoughts which are only there and then you try covertly attac these same conclusions which are only in your mind, like if it were other's. You're a silly man and I will no more respond or react to any of your post where ever you post them.

Then why did you list the extension sound velocity instead of the longitudinal?

I've had quite a few problems measuring resonant frequencies... So, the last set of results are only useful as a relative guide.
 - Capacitance in scope probes. (Solution - Input signal probe left off)
 - Capacitance in signal generator. (Solution- an extra earth wire to the coil)
 - Too much inductance in exciter coil(?) (5 turns replaced with 2)
 

OK.

For questions about probes and specific use of the instruments, BlueDragon, Colas07 and zgreudz in cos.com will better help you than me

 

I've measured resonances for the 2 copper cores at a range of frequencies from 3.5MHz up to 25MHz - depending on the method chosen. So the results are somewhat inconclusive - and suggest the circuit as a whole is resonating, rather than the bars alone at some specific freq.
 

Lol,  it is very conclusive indeed, dear tim, cause it has been found by Biganos that making a common point between the bar and the coil, setting them in series, boots the outpower 

Colas who told me that he has used this way in his very successful advanced replication but he tunes separatly the coil and the two halves pipe to maximise the power transfer between the power supply in input and between the two halves and the load, for the output. NOT to make or use it AS an antenna but just because the tuning LIKE in antenna tuning, helps to transfer all the power and so increases the whole potential power of the device.

When not accurately tuned, input and output will "reflect" a part of the power they try to transfert which get lost while making standing waves.

Note that we are not here, until now, looking for standing waves but all the contrary, trying to get and SWR near equal to zero so a "impedance match" betwen the "source" (the amplifier, in the case of the imput) and the "receiver" (the coil, still in case of the input) will be satisfied; same principle applies for the output between the cores and the load.

Note too that then, when all is tuned, while looking for Richard's frequency (what ever value it takes in pratical), the device will indeed produce power which will act LIKE a reflective power regards to the input.

It is this power, which is called "negative power".It comes when we increase the power of the load and the consumption weakens very dramatically at the input (giving COP around 35, like 7 W at output and 0.2 W at input - phases, cos phi, been checked, output load been compare with DC resistance when powered with same voltage and hot filament temperature -these are true fully checked REAL POWER consumptions), even becoming null (giving an INFINITE COP) to go COMPLETELY NEGATIVE (THE AMPLIFIER NO MORE DELIVERING POWER BUT RECEIVING IT!).

So, for me your observation looks very far to be "unconclusive", dear tim; what do you think?
 

 

My current best estimate for the Vialle resonant freq of the bars is 7.9MHz - which is considerably higher than the predicted 6.5MHz...

The experimental margin error is +/- 2 MHz. Could comes from the fact as I noticed it in a previous post, that the calculation are based on the lengh or the core while the wiring of the load circuit could act like leakings for the waves on the bar, like a near closed toroid bar through the filament of the load an varing in impedance with the temperature of this same filament while we increase the output power. But it is just an idea, I can very mistake 

But I do insist the fact that Richard is very humble man who knows his theory needs to be brought futher with better models of calculation or corrections in the very basics of his theory.

BUT, many replications, like those of JNL, have verified the theoretical Richard's frequency, proved as giving overunity AS PREDICTED. In a first sight, looks to me only since, we can see that we have a shift of +/- 2 MHz, could be indeed since we create a common point between the coil and the bar; to be checked...

 

I think I'll have to try it with more power - using the amp - and see how it behaves then. That'll have to wait for the heatsink glue.

Indeed, you are very true, tim, this device needs to go above a threshold of amps in the output, so first in the input, to run o.u.

Even more: it is the creation of a huge short-circuit current in the shunt that will induce the negative power in the coil and reduce the input power consumption, nulling it and then feeding the input. So yes, amps looks to be very important.

Nice to see you again having your heatsink glue!

Khwartz,
  I read the comments about 'standard resonance' vs. Vialle resonance on , and i think I'm only seeing the standard version ATM. The amp should help...

Indeed, it has been seen already that the phenomenon of overunity appears only when amps are enough.

BTW, did you test it with the shunt? Because if you have not shunt across the load and the cores, you won't get any overunity (but could be you understood it too ).

I'm re-reading some Keely stuff. This one's interesting - and it could be related...
 "Sound and Gravity" - http://www.keelynet.com/davidson/sound1.htm

Why not! Could give some good parallels

Best regards,
K.

Then why did you list the extension sound velocity instead of the longitudinal?

Sorry,  in my speed to answer to verpies I have mixed the both: in solid, as I can know, longitudes waves not applies, they are extentional and transversal.

The value I have taken is only a Wiki one and I do not claim to be specialist of, that why I have used "~" the value, so the intelligent enough persons who need more accurate value could make their own search, while I had not the time for nor the present necessity to.

http://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Speeds_of_sound_of_the_elements_(data_page)


It is not that verpies didn't give accurate nor useful data, it is just he is  on this thread to try to discredit my efforts to make Richard Vialle work known and try to distabilise me while I think he did not appreciate I left him alone on the other thread I had created where he continuously criticised me without even taking time to read my posts well and their interety.

Verpies then came here and started trying to spread false data on Richard work and the replications of the Autogenerator, and try to spread the idea that we don't know what we do in France and that we don't know anything in physics, while the skills in physics in Condpirovnisciences.com goes up to Master and Doctorate.

So verpies here only fakes to help, imo, he just tries to destabilise the creator of the thread, while only caring about anything which would be wrong (or taken as) but without a obvious common sense because at the very base his intentions is only to discuss his previous (missing) opponent from an other thread.

Been years I follow threads in different community, it came easy to differenciate someone who brings a correction for The General Interest, from one who just tries to put an other at wrong to discredit him/her.

Sorry if you didn't bother, but like this I will have fully clarified my position.

@Khwartz
Does it exist a more effecient version than the "U" shape one?
Do you know what happen with JLN? His site have no update since a while... .  ?

Correction:

Quote
My current best estimate for the Vialle resonant freq of the bars is 7.9MHz - which is considerably higher than the predicted 6.5MHz...

The experimental margin error is +/- 2 MHz. Could comes from the fact as I noticed it in a previous post, that the calculation are based on the lengh or the core while the wiring of the load circuit could act like leakings for the waves on the bar, like a near closed toroid bar through the filament of the load an varing in impedance with the temperature of this same filament while we increase the output power. But it is just an idea, I can very mistake 

But I do insist the fact that Richard is very humble man who knows his theory needs to be brought futher with better models of calculation or corrections in the very basics of his theory.

BUT, many replications, like those of JNL, have verified the theoretical Richard's frequency, proved as giving overunity AS PREDICTED. In a first sight, looks to me only since, we can see that we have a shift of +/- 2 MHz, could be indeed since we create a common point between the coil and the bar; to be checked...

"Could comes from the fact as I noticed it in a previous post, that the calculation are based on the lengh or the core" ->. Could comes from the fact as I noticed it in a previous post, that the calculation are based on the  length of the core