Please save your personal Avatar and your personal mails you have here in this forum as we will change the forum software in the next few days or at least next week. Thanks. Regards, Stefan Hartmann ( Admin)
@MH if the JT circuit isn't in "resonance".... what determines the oscillation frequency? How are we defining resonance here, anyway?
Fausto:Here is where you have to analyze things without any emotion. First of all, the 2000 pounds is not doing any work at all. The 2000 pounds is the dead weight of the rotor of Joe's big motor (or it is the weight of the entire motor assembly, I can't remember.)
What do you mean the motor is not running on current? How can you say that after all these years? You know electrical power is voltage times current. There is no such thing as a motor running on voltage only and there is no such thing as a motor running on current only. Those are nonsensical concepts.
The "power of induction" is not doing any work and there is no power associated with induction. Inductance can only store and release energy provided by an external power source.So, we know that Joe is using what? I think it's about 170 batteries in series?I challenge you Fausto to explain how what Joe Newman demos is perfectly explainable with his 2000 pound rotor and the 170 AA batteries. You are claiming that is overunity and I am challenging you to explain how it is in fact under unity.[size=78%][/size]MileHigh
Fausto:I don't have time for a complete reply but here is the answer. A 1.5-volt alkaline AA battery can easily output one ampere of current. I am wondering if you are thinking that a bunch of them in series lowers the current output capabilities of the AA batteries. You seem to be implying that. If you are that's not the case.So, a single AA battery at 1.5 volts and one amp can output 1.5 watts. 170 of them in series can output 255 watts (255 volts at one amp.)So you have a giant "Newman" pulse motor with a large coil. The larger the coil the more voltage you need to get the current flowing in a reasonable amount of time.So, you look at Joe Newman's water flow rate and the vertical height his pump is displacing the water. Do the calculations and you will find that if you power an electrical motor with 250 watts of electrical power that powers a water pump it should be able to easily displace the water that Joe Newman is demonstrating.Honestly, I think that you should have been able to see this. The conclusion is that Joe Newman is demonstrating nothing special at all. It's all just a fake demo in an attempt to impress people and get people to "invest" or "donate" to his "Newman motor" cause.The "2000 pounds" means absolutely nothing. Yes it takes some battery energy to get it spinning but after that it makes no difference and does not affect anything.MileHigh
Fausto:You are not correct here. So we know any real-world inductor is made of wire and has resistance. So what we can easily do is model the real-world inductor as an ideal inductor with zero resistance in the wire in series with a small resistor.So what happens when we energize this inductor? Let's say it takes 5 seconds to energize the inductor. So after 5 seconds some of the supplied battery energy was used to create the magnetic field to energize the ideal inductor. At the same time during the 5 seconds some of the battery energy was burned off in the resistor.After five seconds the only thing that is happening is that battery power is being burned off in the resistor. Also after five seconds there is energy stored in the inductor. That energy came from the battery. Important: Note that this energy stored in the inductor has not gone anywhere else, i.e.; it has not passed through a resistor.Then after some time the inductor discharges its stored energy. This stored energy will discharge through the resistance of the inductor itself, and some sort of a load resistance. Therefore this energy is only discharged ONCE, not twice.Here is the energy path: [energy in battery] -> [energy stored in inductor] -> [energy dissipated in inductor internal resistance and load resistance]There is no 'magic' in the inductor that allows the same energy to get used twice.MileHigh
The correct path is: [energy in battery] -> [energy dissipated in resistance of inductor] --> [energy stored in inductor] -> [energy dissipated in inductor internal resistance] -> [LOAD]You missed the second resistance when discharging SINCE the current path is exactly the same.
Lawrence: thank you for posting the sample spreadsheet file. Am I correct that the file you posted only contained 10 sets of data points out of the 11250 sample total record length? Kind of stingy, isn't it, to not give me the whole 11250 points?
The "2000 pounds" means absolutely nothing. Yes it takes some battery energy to get it spinning but after that it makes no difference and does not affect anything.
Those results will be used to justify the claims.
@Lawrence: is it possible for me to download the user's manual and technical information for your Atten oscilloscope?*** http://www.atten.eu/media/catalog/product/pdf/User%20Manual%20ATTEN%20DSO.pdfThe reason the universities are interested in your system enough to talk to you is because of your nice personality and your self-assurance. They are politely giving you the full opportunity to demonstrate your claims... or to fall on your face in public. In the event you are incorrect in your claims of OU, due to your equipment and analysis techniques and your misapprehensions, would you not like to find out this fact before you have sent out 30 boards for evaluation, met face-to-face with a room full of grad students, and spent money on travel and supplies? So I recommend strongly that you delay your plans a bit, until you can integrate your new-found knowledge completely into your thinking. You might even change your conclusions, if your data upon which they are based is correctly gathered and analyzed.That is not a scientific attitude. "Those results" may very well indicate that your claims are not justifiable. But you have already decided that they are, therefore you will conclude that the evaluations are incorrect somehow and failed to see what you clearly know is true.