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.
 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

Custom Search

### Author Topic: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE  (Read 2094281 times)

#### RMatt

• Newbie
• Posts: 35
##### Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
« Reply #240 on: August 27, 2013, 04:16:31 AM »

When several coils are connected in series, does the voltage add together?, does the amperage add together?, does it multipy?

Bob

#### RMatt

• Newbie
• Posts: 35
##### Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
« Reply #241 on: August 27, 2013, 09:56:53 PM »
Forget last question. Found it on Wikipedia.

"The current through inductors in series stays the same, but the voltage across each inductor can be different. The sum of the potential differences (voltage) is equal to the total voltage. To find their total inductance: L eq=L1+L2+...+Ln"

Bob

#### i_ron

• Hero Member
• Posts: 1160
##### Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
« Reply #242 on: August 29, 2013, 04:34:21 PM »
Forget last question. Found it on Wikipedia.

"The current through inductors in series stays the same, but the voltage across each inductor can be different. The sum of the potential differences (voltage) is equal to the total voltage. To find their total inductance: L eq=L1+L2+...+Ln"

Bob

Hi Bob,

Yes that is almost the case, voltage adds and amps stays the same... except it will be less than one coil as the more coils in series the more resistance, so voltage and amps will need to be adjusted accordingly.

Ron

#### RMatt

• Newbie
• Posts: 35
##### Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
« Reply #243 on: August 29, 2013, 05:14:13 PM »
Thank you for the info Ron.

I recieved 4 of the 3 phase line reactors, and should recieve the other 6 today. ( see Reply# 232 and Reply#234 ). I am going to try using just one for now and reverse one outside coil to get a N-S allignment. I am not going to rewire them until after I have tried them to see if they will work. If they work, I am considering placing all 10 sets ( instead of just 7 sets ) to get a greater output. My main problem will be that I do not have an O-scope, so I will have to find someone with one to run test for me. Hopefully I will have some results by next week.

Bob

#### hanon

• Hero Member
• Posts: 615
##### Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
« Reply #244 on: August 29, 2013, 11:21:28 PM »
Maybe the reason for being a Lenzless generator is simply because both changes in the inducer currents are in opposition. The back emf is a consecuence of the change in the magnetic field, and is calculated by the equation back_emf = -N·S·dB/dt .

Because the current in the N electromagnets is increasing while the current in the S electromagnets is decreasing we can say that their time derivatives are opposite :  dIN/dt = - dIS/dt

As the inducer field is calculated as B = (nu·N·I)/length , therefore deriving:  dB/dt = (nu·N/length) · dI/dt . For this reason , with opposite changes in both inducer currents, the change in both induced magnetic fields are  in opposition: dBN/dt = - dBS/dt

If both values can be added (I am not sure (please comment..)) dBfinal/dt = dBN/dt + dBS/dt = 0  . Thus, althought there is a change in the primary magnetic fields (the cause of the induced current), the resulting induced magnetic field (the consecuence) -moving back to the electromagnets- is almost eliminated.

Regards

#### Doug1

• Hero Member
• Posts: 763
##### Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
« Reply #245 on: August 29, 2013, 11:51:38 PM »
Hannon
You will also have to add to the calculation how much effect  one set of electromagnets helps to collaps the other set or pushes the feild in the other direction as the one set is powering up the other is powering down not just to a state of off but being pushed by the other harder then it would fall by itself. The back emf will be aided by the forward emf of the other.

#### hanon

• Hero Member
• Posts: 615
##### Two unphased signals
« Reply #246 on: August 30, 2013, 06:24:35 PM »
Hi all,

In the attached Excel file there is a calculation to obtain the two 90º unphased signals required in the 1908 patent. The method is very simple, and is summarized as follows:

1- From a AC signal apply a full wave rectification to convert it into two always positive waves. ( By using a center tapped rectifier you can obtain two series of signals: one coming from the positive half waves of the AC signal, and the other signal from the negative half waves of the initial AC signal ). Also you can create both series using a PWM, taking a derivation of its output to a NOT gate, and then two transistors to create two independient square signals.

2- Apply a RL filter or a RC filter. This filter will smooth and will create a lag in order that both series of signals will be delayed and, thus, superimposing themselves. This way you can obtain the two unphased signals.

The RL filtering of RC filtering is defined by the value of L/R or R·C in each case. Choosing a proper value you can get the required result. All the info is included into the Excel file. I have included both possibilities because I don´t know if you can use a RC filter with high amperages, or if the output intensity will rever its direction in an RC circuit. Please comment.

Regards

#### Doug1

• Hero Member
• Posts: 763
##### Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
« Reply #247 on: September 01, 2013, 02:58:39 PM »
Its obvious no one has figured this out yet or come up suporting evidence in a working operational theory. I think the patent was skillfully executed.

#### RMatt

• Newbie
• Posts: 35
##### Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
« Reply #248 on: September 02, 2013, 08:28:34 AM »
Hi all, Bob here with a thought or 2?

IMHO,

In PJ Kelley's newest ebook V24.01 R. Date 14 AUG 13, pg 175, next to the bottom of the page,

"Señor Figueras has constructed a rough apparatus
by which, in spite of it’s small size and it’s defects, he obtains 550 volts, which he utilises in his own house for
lighting purposes and for driving a 20 horse-power motor."

1. 1 HP = 746 wats, 20hp = 14,920W, + lights (lets say 80W), TOTAL=15,000 Watts

2. 15,000 Watts/ 550 Volts = 27.27 AMPS (lot of Amps) Maybe multi stage trans. to get it to useful?

3. 7 sets would be 27.27 Amps each with a Voltage of approx. 78.6 Volts

4. So if there were 27.27 AMPS in each set, and each set had 78.6 Volts, with 7 sets there would be:: 15,004 WATTS.

5. If there were 10 sets, each would have 27.27 AMPS and about 78.6 VOLTS, with 10 sets there would be 21,432 WATTS.

Comments welcome and needed as alsways

Bob

(It's funny what my little brain thinks of when I have a drink or two! LOL)

#### RMatt

• Newbie
• Posts: 35
##### Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
« Reply #249 on: September 02, 2013, 08:45:00 AM »
Hi all again,

I think I might need another drink or three to get this straight.

#### RMatt

• Newbie
• Posts: 35
##### Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
« Reply #250 on: September 02, 2013, 09:12:50 AM »
Hi All,

Bob again,

looking at the only diagrams available, do you think pnp and npn transistors will help? limited v/a?

I think with another drink, that "origin" on the "-" side might mean total ground-put a ground rod in the ground, preferably deep. gather E energy! So?

Any questions I will not be qualified to answer because
I need another drink!!!! yea!

My tempory disability( dog tried to kill me) is slowing me down some!
But I Love this fun!

Bob

#### hanon

• Hero Member
• Posts: 615
##### Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
« Reply #251 on: September 02, 2013, 09:53:12 AM »
Hi RMatt,

The quote that you refers about Figuera generator is dated in 1902 ( 20 HP and 550 V), so it was obtained with his 1902 generator (which didn´t ahve 7 stages but a different arrangement. In the 1902 patent is written that he only shows a group of four stages but more stages could be used for increasing the output). All the newspaper references that we have are from 1902, later, after selling the patent there are no more references, and his 1908 was filed just before dying so no more reference in the newspapers.

About the NPN transistors in Kelly´s diagram I think there won´t be any limitation V/A because they are for the inducer current which is supposed to be small.  Instead of using a cascade of the 2N3055 + 2N2222 to create a Darlington you could use a BDX53 which is directly a Darlington (so it is simpler to be welded)

Regards

#### Doug1

• Hero Member
• Posts: 763
##### Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
« Reply #252 on: September 02, 2013, 04:35:59 PM »
Figuera's invention predates the invention of the transister so none could have been used in the device and it is not certain the device can work with them. The time line for the ocilloscope would sugjest he used an older version paper record type or one he made himself which is actually easier then you might think.Calabration would be questionable.Regardless of the 1st or 2nd patent it can only function one way,the right way.
If a child could do it what gives a child an advantage over you. A child does not know anything and can only follow the directions no matter how obsurd they may be to some one ells who thinks themselves an expert. A good explaination of the process has yet been put up for constuctive argument. If no one can come up with a reasonable expaination of how it could work to apply the math required to resolve the material aspects of the construction for a working model,then you can only hope for accidental results.Which will be useless in the end. If you can not get past lenz law your doomed, if you >can get past it< you have won and will be able to apply it to anything you wish.

#### a.king21

• Hero Member
• Posts: 1613
##### Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
« Reply #253 on: September 03, 2013, 03:28:37 AM »
Figuera's invention predates the invention of the transister so none could have been used in the device and it is not certain the device can work with them. The time line for the ocilloscope would sugjest he used an older version paper record type or one he made himself which is actually easier then you might think.Calabration would be questionable.Regardless of the 1st or 2nd patent it can only function one way,the right way.
If a child could do it what gives a child an advantage over you. A child does not know anything and can only follow the directions no matter how obsurd they may be to some one ells who thinks themselves an expert. A good explaination of the process has yet been put up for constuctive argument. If no one can come up with a reasonable expaination of how it could work to apply the math required to resolve the material aspects of the construction for a working model,then you can only hope for accidental results.Which will be useless in the end. If you can not get past lenz law your doomed, if you >can get past it< you have won and will be able to apply it to anything you wish.

I agree. As to how this works? I see L1 and L2 as a split coil and the pickup coil is in the middle where the Bloch wall resides. Simple. No Lenz in the middle as far as I understand  it because it's balanced by the opposing N and S fields in every coil. Yet this guy figured out  a way to make the bloch wall oscillate. Brilliant.

#### hanon

• Hero Member
• Posts: 615
##### Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
« Reply #254 on: September 03, 2013, 11:21:52 AM »
I agree. As to how this works? I see L1 and L2 as a split coil and the pickup coil is in the middle where the Bloch wall resides. Simple. No Lenz in the middle as far as I understand  it because it's balanced by the opposing N and S fields in every coil. Yet this guy figured out  a way to make the bloch wall oscillate. Brilliant.
Hi a.king21,
Could you explain better how can energy be extracted from an oscillating bloch wall? Is there any link or reference to this subject?

What it is true is that Figuera stated that the distance between the two inducer external coils should be very small. And this statement is related with some kind of effect that he was trying to capture. Is it needed to wind each external coil in clockwise (CW) and counter-clockwise (CCW) directions?