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: 897287
  • *Total Topics: 15811
  • *Online Today: 44
  • *Most Online: 103
(December 19, 2006, 11:27:19 PM)
  • *Users: 1
  • *Guests: 14
  • *Total: 15

Author Topic: Single circuits generate nuclear reactions  (Read 371990 times)

Offline starcruiser

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 693
    • Starcruiser's Place
Re: Single circuits generate nuclear reactions
« Reply #825 on: August 06, 2008, 01:32:49 AM »
@ Helmut,

IRAN has something the US wants, what it is is not OIL, they have IRAQ for that. A Stargate perhaps or are they working on one and the US wants them to stop?? I know this is out there but...

I would do my laptop  and my credit cart  into the microwave oven. It seems to be a save place.
Ones i put my cellphone inside to test the MW oven against leakage. I was surprised.
The cellphone was not able to receive any signal.

About Iran.
1) They do not have the transport rockets for such a distance
2) They do not have plans to attac USA (i never read about such plans,but read very offen,that israel or USA are planing to
do a preventive strike)
3) As i know, they do not have nuclear warheads. So whats the hype about?



Free Energy | searching for free energy and discussing free energy

Re: Single circuits generate nuclear reactions
« Reply #825 on: August 06, 2008, 01:32:49 AM »

Offline forest

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 3947
Re: Single circuits generate nuclear reactions
« Reply #826 on: August 07, 2008, 12:51:10 PM »
Under a strong "B Field" the carbon atoms align perpendicular to the impending electron flow. This allows spaces in the carbon for extra electrons to accumulate. As the current increases, the carbon produces a field perpendicular to the carbon rod and the "B Field". When the field in the carbon overtakes the "B Field" the carbon atoms again change direction closing the holes and forcing the accumulated electrons out in the opposite direction of the current flow. This causes the current to go even higher and forces out even more electrons causing the current to go higher continue to flush all the previously trapped electrons in an avalanche. The toroid simply captures the magnetic surge as a large field pulse like a simple single wind on the coil.

The reason it works is because the carbon under the "B Field" can easily be saturated with electrons, then when the field changes direction the carbon works like a battery forcing the stored electrons against the in rushing current. This is typical of all diamagnetic material but shows more in carbon because it is one of the stronger diamagnetic materials.



Interesting.Do you have any source of this information ? I believe it may be true. Do you think that this effect keeps electrons inside carbon rod and only point of release of them is a carbon tip which is perpendicular to both external and internal B-field ? This would explain why so little beta radiation is scoped AROUND carbon, while carbon may be acting like a cannon. Take a look at Edwin Gray patent, copper grids are strangely not around carbon rod but opposite to carbon rod. Also vacuum diode/triode is basically a source of electrons and commutator acting like a switch among two electrical paths.
« Last Edit: August 07, 2008, 01:18:26 PM by forest »

Offline AhuraMazda

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 564
Re: Single circuits generate nuclear reactions
« Reply #827 on: August 07, 2008, 01:35:35 PM »
@starcruiser
You are very right. Afghanistan, Iran, Iraq were once the Persian Empire and are parts of the same jigsaw. Bush said that US is not in Iraq for oil and I believe that.


@ Helmut,

IRAN has something the US wants, what it is is not OIL, they have IRAQ for that. A Stargate perhaps or are they working on one and the US wants them to stop?? I know this is out there but...


Free Energy | searching for free energy and discussing free energy

Re: Single circuits generate nuclear reactions
« Reply #827 on: August 07, 2008, 01:35:35 PM »
Sponsored links:




Offline forest

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 3947
Re: Single circuits generate nuclear reactions
« Reply #828 on: August 07, 2008, 01:53:02 PM »
Continuing post 817, I have done the test with two (pure) carbon rods alone without any thoriated tungsten. The carbon rods are in light contact. I have got substantially the same hump effect as reported in post 817, so it works with carbon alone.

I repeated the test again with one single continuous rod of carbon and got a smooth waveform from the capacitor discharge without any humps and no sign of the saturable reactor going out of saturation so a single continuous carbon rod does not work, a spark gap is needed, a lightly touching contact being enough. The spark gap no matter how small is needed to generate the reverse current needed to get the humps on the waveform.

Mike



Excellent! Thank you. Reverse current idea match exactly with Edwin Gray patent.
I'm impressed....

forest

Offline Reiyuki

  • Full Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 131
Re: Single circuits generate nuclear reactions
« Reply #829 on: August 10, 2008, 11:15:30 AM »
I fixed up the concept a bit.  Should have the rest of the components for it soon enough.  Most parts are simply borrowed from a Tesla Coil I built a while back.

Before I actually go about building this, is there any reason why this setup shouldn't work, assuming the VSG hypothesis holds true?

- 2kv+ voltage
- High-joule pulses
- Fast switching (sparkgap)
- Neodmium magnet B-Field
- 'Extra' B-Field provided by circuit charging
- AC (no inductive losses)

And my personal favorites:
- NO silicon circuitry to burn up
- Closed-loop operation after initial pulse


I'd like to suggest anyone else that's built a Tesla Coil to order up some carbon and a toroid transformer and give this thing a shot, too.

- Rei

     (PS: Apologies for using MSPaint, but you know the rule, function before form)

Free Energy | searching for free energy and discussing free energy

Re: Single circuits generate nuclear reactions
« Reply #829 on: August 10, 2008, 11:15:30 AM »
Sponsored links:




Offline forest

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 3947
Re: Single circuits generate nuclear reactions
« Reply #830 on: August 10, 2008, 11:28:35 AM »
It may :
1. do not working

or

2 .blow power transformer (120V) due to runaway effect

IMHO

Offline sparks

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 2528
Re: Single circuits generate nuclear reactions
« Reply #831 on: August 11, 2008, 06:48:55 PM »
 Good notation on the carbon having to create a pinch zone.  The geometry of the electrodes is a major consideration.   Dipolar geometry should be considered.  See below Utube Demo.  Sugars got carbon in them.
Interesting note about carbon is as it's thermal energy density is increased it's electrical resistance is decreased.

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

   Seems someone else knew how to create plasma where they wanted it.  Please note temple of Dendrah.  Quite aways down the page.  The one with what appears to be 1/2of a Tesla Coil or a horseshow magnet with the 4 spark gaps on top.  The lamp lit independently was achieved by Tesla back in the day as he walked about his stage wowing the hords.  I believe Tesla was planning on creating a stationary " lightning bolt" in his Wardenclyffe sending out electromagnetic density waves through the Earth Crust while at the same time creating a near ionosphere emanating from the top of the tower.  When he told JP Morgan he needed at least three of these to define an area coverage Morgan pulled the plug financially ruining and discrediting Tesla.

                                                     http://ancientskyscraper.com/

Free Energy | searching for free energy and discussing free energy

Re: Single circuits generate nuclear reactions
« Reply #831 on: August 11, 2008, 06:48:55 PM »
Sponsored links:




Offline Reiyuki

  • Full Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 131
Re: Single circuits generate nuclear reactions
« Reply #832 on: August 13, 2008, 08:06:44 AM »
Continuing post 817, I have done the test with two (pure) carbon rods alone without any thoriated tungsten. The carbon rods are in light contact. I have got substantially the same hump effect as reported in post 817, so it works with carbon alone.

I repeated the test again with one single continuous rod of carbon and got a smooth waveform from the capacitor discharge without any humps and no sign of the saturable reactor going out of saturation so a single continuous carbon rod does not work, a spark gap is needed, a lightly touching contact being enough. The spark gap no matter how small is needed to generate the reverse current needed to get the humps on the waveform.

Mike


I've been pondering this one and may have an explanation.

Way back in the first 5 pages of this thread, '110 joule pulse' phrase was mentioned, and that was in reference to the sq/in of the carbon.  IE:  3/8 dia = 110j required.  Thinner carbon should in theory need less power.

  Your pulse may be too small/slow for the diameter carbon rod you're using to 'crack' the full diameter rod.  When lightly touching you are condensing the pulse onto very few carbon atoms and that causes the effect.

  If you have some extra carbon, try the following:
    - repeat the experiment with 2+ carbon gaps of the same total length
    - lathe down a section of carbon to 1/16" or smaller and repeat (if available)
    - (if no lathe available)  try to break some good sized chips from the end of one carbon rod.  Use alligator clips and repeat with the small piece.
    - vary the pressure put on the rod gap.  At a point it should stop working because of the total active area vs pulse power.


Also some useful mini-experiments to try:
 -Does the pulse magically appear at a certain voltage or is there a gradual buildup over a wide range (IE: pulse waveform may appear exactly at 82v and above or may gradually build from as low as 30v in your system)

 -Try variations on the 12v B-Field coil.  See if you can vary the pulse by making a very tiny magnetic field.

Offline mikewatson

  • Jr. Member
  • **
  • Posts: 98
Re: Single circuits generate nuclear reactions
« Reply #833 on: August 13, 2008, 04:42:11 PM »
Quote
I've been pondering this one and may have an explanation.

Way back in the first 5 pages of this thread, '110 joule pulse' phrase was mentioned, and that was in reference to the sq/in of the carbon.  IE:  3/8 dia = 110j required.  Thinner carbon should in theory need less power.

  Your pulse may be too small/slow for the diameter carbon rod you're using to 'crack' the full diameter rod.  When lightly touching you are condensing the pulse onto very few carbon atoms and that causes the effect.

  If you have some extra carbon, try the following:
    - repeat the experiment with 2+ carbon gaps of the same total length
    - lathe down a section of carbon to 1/16" or smaller and repeat (if available)
    - (if no lathe available)  try to break some good sized chips from the end of one carbon rod.  Use alligator clips and repeat with the small piece.
    - vary the pressure put on the rod gap.  At a point it should stop working because of the total active area vs pulse power.


Also some useful mini-experiments to try:
 -Does the pulse magically appear at a certain voltage or is there a gradual buildup over a wide range (IE: pulse waveform may appear exactly at 82v and above or may gradually build from as low as 30v in your system)

 -Try variations on the 12v B-Field coil.  See if you can vary the pulse by making a very tiny magnetic field

Reiyuki, thanks for your comments.
Some of your points you raised,  I am in the process of doing or have done some and the others I will attempt shortly.
Firstly, the carbons I am using are the" Ted Pella" spectrocopically pure stuff and are 6.3 mm diameter. I have been trying  multiple spark gaps in series with carbon fragments between carbon rods, but I currently get a very noisy waveform, the pressure is critical. I am still working on that one. Lathing down I found difficult because the carbon is so brittle. Mounting a small grinder in the lathe tool post and grinding the rod down shows some success.

About the pulse hump, it always appears in the same place (voltage across current transformer load) unless a magnetic field is present on the (positive) carbon rod. Its position can be also changed by adding or taking away a turn on the ferrite-ring inductor. It appears at a given voltage as seen across the current transformer load. As I said with a continuous carbon rod (no spark gap) there is no hump, the waveform is completely smooth, with or without a magnetic field, with or without a ferrite inductor.
With a spark gap and no B field the hump appears at a given position, changing the B field on the +carbon changes the position of the hump one way and reversing the polarity of the B field moves the hump to the other side of the no B field position. 

On my thyristor tiggered capacitor discharge system the limit of joules is at present set by the 400 volt capacitors so I can get up to 0.5 *(400)^2 *0.008 =  640 joules and I have tried 200 volts = 160 joules on solid carbon without any noticeable effect.
I am using the non scientific method of holding the carbon/carbon or tungsten/carbon junction together by a weak rubber band. With voltages around 130 volts touch contact without rubber bands works but for low voltages a  rubber band or something similar is needed.
I will try filing one carbon or both to a point and see if that helps.
Still work in progress...
The advantage of the thyrstor circuit is that it turns off only when the current has decayed to a small value, after some 5 millisecs.

 I have produced an FET circuit similar to Naudin's.
I will report the results in another post.

Watch for current transformer saturation, even with a 1 turn primary, Thereby hangs another tale! Do the calculation.

NI = HL
N=1 number of turns on primary 
I = 319 amps (VSG v3.5)
L is path length which, on Naudins current transformer is about 10 cm mean diameter or 0. 32 meters.
Then
H= 996 amps/meter
B = mu(0)mu(r)H
taking relative permeability of transfromer iron at mu(0) =2000;
B=4*pi*10^-7* 2000*996
B= 1.6 Tesla
That is right on the saturation limit of common transformer iron using a realively low relative permeability figure. The  point is:- how does the remanent flux in the core get reset? As is well known,
any soft iron in a closed path, such as the core of the current transformer, retains its magnetism unless an airgap is introduced or a demagnetising current is applied. It is a consequence of the finite area of the BH loop in any iron.
Having found the effect of an saturable ferrite reactor, what is the current transformer doing if it is near saturation and no reset pulse is applied? clearly there must be stored energy there.
If this is dumped as a result of a second pulse of a subsequent test we would get two lots of energy one from the current transformer core and the other from the applied pulse from the capacitors/carbons.

Mike




 

 

 


Free Energy | searching for free energy and discussing free energy

Re: Single circuits generate nuclear reactions
« Reply #833 on: August 13, 2008, 04:42:11 PM »
3D Solar Panels

Offline Reiyuki

  • Full Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 131
Re: Single circuits generate nuclear reactions
« Reply #834 on: August 13, 2008, 07:43:37 PM »
Thanks for all the details.  The more we data we have to ponder over the better.  Lot of 'interesting' effects to add to the list.  I'll share what I come up with, but I'm on the road, so that purposed HV setup can't be tried till saturday.  :'(  :(

The erratic waveforms from chips could mean some filtering is being done by the main rod.  Of course, the carbon is really a plain old resistor if you take out the VSG concepts, so there's your 'hump'.  Maybe just rubber-banding 2 carbon rods with a chip in the middle?

It looks more and more that regardless of whatever process is supposedly at work in a VSG, the carbon rod is acting like a transformer core.  supersaturated.  That would explain your ferrite current transformer saturation throughout the process; it's coupled.
  If this were the case, you could prevent runaway by simply moving your transformer further away from the carbon until the voltage is 'reasonable'.  Or maybe by adding lossy metals nearby.


Welp, that's all I can think of at the moment.  Good luck with the tests.

-Rei

Offline mikewatson

  • Jr. Member
  • **
  • Posts: 98
Re: Single circuits generate nuclear reactions
« Reply #835 on: August 13, 2008, 09:26:22 PM »
Problems with Naudin?s current transformer method

Naudin used a toroidal wound mains transformer as a current transformer. This is only possible once without resetting. If a unidirectional pulse current is passed through the centre the toroid becomes magnetized and the field remains in the core unless a demagnetizing field is applied to reset it or an air-gap is introduced. This is due to the finite area of the BH loop.
To prove this assertion a toroidal transformer core wound with 400 turns loaded with a 100 ohm resistor has through its centre a non magnetic 316L 3 mm thick stainless steel rod. This is connected through a high current FET switch to 0.2 F capacitors charged to 37 volts.

Firstly, the stainless steel rod is impulsed once, this leaves the core magnetised. The stainless steel rod then is impulsed again but this time the impulse produced across the 100 ohm resistor of the current transformer is stored.
Now the current transformer is rotated 180 degrees so that the face which was left now faces right. The current direction in the stainless steel rod remains unchanged.
Again the stainless steel rod is impulsed and the results stored.
As can be seen the toroid has now dumped the stored energy giving a much larger pulse area.


Mike

Free Energy | searching for free energy and discussing free energy

Re: Single circuits generate nuclear reactions
« Reply #835 on: August 13, 2008, 09:26:22 PM »
3D Solar Panels

Offline AbbaRue

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 587
Re: Single circuits generate nuclear reactions
« Reply #836 on: August 13, 2008, 10:02:15 PM »
@mikewatson
So how would this effect us applying multiple pulses to the carbon rod? 
Would the pulses have to be AC instead of DC for it to work?

I wonder how this effects the use of toroids in the  "Thane Heins Perepiteia"
http://www.overunity.com/index.php/topic,4047.3160.html

Maybe you should post this info there as well.

Offline mikewatson

  • Jr. Member
  • **
  • Posts: 98
Re: Single circuits generate nuclear reactions
« Reply #837 on: August 14, 2008, 02:16:10 PM »
Abbarue,

The problem is that after the first pulse the core is nearly fully magnetised so applying another pulse in the same direction cannot produce a further increase in the core magnetisation, this implies very little change in magnetic flux is possible so the measured output pulse is vastly smaller than it should be. If the core were demagnetised a full change in magnetic flux can occur proportional to the size of the input pulse.

After every pulse the core needs resetting to its zero flux state. This is best done by incorporating an small "air gap" (a piece of paper will usually do). Alternatively a single insulated copper rod is mounted through the toroid, parallel to but not touching the carbon/tungsten and another pulse equal and opposite to the first is  applied. I am experimenting with two half C cores from an old power transformer  as the current transformer and a few pieces of paper as the "air gap" to demagnetise it. There are several other ways more or less hassle ridden, such as demagnetising with heavy current AC, the best way is to get a broadand current probe but these are very very expensive.

Regarding the "Thane Heins Perepiteia" thread I have not been following it so I do not feel it worth anything offering my opinion.

Mike




Offline mikewatson

  • Jr. Member
  • **
  • Posts: 98
Re: Single circuits generate nuclear reactions
« Reply #838 on: August 14, 2008, 06:48:25 PM »
Problem with Naudin's current transformer method: continued

Cutting a slot through the toroid with a hacksaw so it is no longer a closed circle cures the flux remanence problem of post 835 etc. Now reversing the toroid 180 degrees has little or no effect on the pulse size or shape. However care should be taken to ensure the flux density in the core is not too close to saturation, the slot helps in this respect.

Mike

Offline AbbaRue

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 587
Re: Single circuits generate nuclear reactions
« Reply #839 on: August 15, 2008, 06:46:08 AM »
@mikewatson
I don't know why no one else has mentioned this point, at least I don't remember reading it.
But making an air gap in a toroid sounds very useful in another way.
A toroid could be cut completely in half to get 2 air gaps.
Then each half could be wound to whatever number of turns one wants.
This would make it much easier to wind a toroid then trying to pass the wire through
the center each time.
Does it mater if there are 2 air gaps 180 deg. apart?

 

OneLink