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: 894434
  • *Total Topics: 15729
  • *Online Today: 44
  • *Most Online: 103
(December 19, 2006, 11:27:19 PM)
  • *Users: 1
  • *Guests: 8
  • *Total: 9

Author Topic: Electron Reversing Device  (Read 67299 times)

Offline MileHigh

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 7600
Re: Electron Reversing Device
« Reply #135 on: January 30, 2013, 12:47:13 PM »
Tinman:

I like Poynt's suggestion for putting three diodes in series to emulate an LED.  An LED is a diode with a larger voltage drop than a regular diode so that should work fine in most cases.  I ran my first ever simulation where I only used a single diode to keep it simple the first go round.  In most cases it should be quite accurate.  The higher voltage drop of three diodes in series will burn off about as much energy as an LED.

The simulator does not have a BPC, but you have to ask yourself what a BPC really is.  It's just an inductor with a higher amount of capacitance in parallel with the inductor as compared to a regular inductor.  I am under the assumption that the capacitance is still minuscule for a BPC in comparison to the inductance of the BPC and the capacitance only comes into play at very high frequencies.  You can try adding some parallel capacitance to the simulation as part of the experimenting.  The key point being that BPCs and "Rodin coils" are still fundamentally inductors and they will behave like inductors.  Have you ever seen someone do a clip where they try to compare a BPC versus a regular coil to look for differences between the two?  I have never seen one myself.  So, with the "cooler heads prevail" line of thinking there is no reason to assume ahead of time that a BPC is fundamentally different from a regular coil.

The magnetic field that surrounds the Earth will not affect the circuit.  The basic rule is that only changing magnetic fields will affect a coil and the Earth's magnetic field is static and unchanging.  So there is no reason for the simulation to factor in the Earth's magnetic field.

For all practical intents and purposes, the simulation is very very accurate and if you have the right component values and know how to do the modelling and use the software at an expert level then the simulation will be deadly accurate.

So when I ran the "Beta Tinman" simulation I could see where I think I made my mistakes with respect to my analysis of your circuit.  Getting the circuit more fine tuned will confirm that and I will be able to revise my description of how the circuit operates.  We need to know more about the square wave generator circuit that you are using to make the simulation more accurate.  Is it the same device you were using earlier or is it something new?  Does it still have the trimpot to adjust the output level?  It's important to know the output impedance of the square wave generator so that you can put the same resistance in the simulator.  All that you really need to do is measure the square wave generator output voltage unloaded.  Then you find a load resistance that makes the square wave generator output voltage drop about 10%.  Just let us know the voltage drop and the resistance you used and then we can then calculate the output impedance of the square wave generator.

MileHigh

Free Energy | searching for free energy and discussing free energy

Re: Electron Reversing Device
« Reply #135 on: January 30, 2013, 12:47:13 PM »

Offline poynt99

  • TPU-Elite
  • Hero Member
  • *******
  • Posts: 3585
Re: Electron Reversing Device
« Reply #136 on: January 30, 2013, 03:51:29 PM »
The schematic is correct other than the two diode's-which need to be LED's.
Thanks.

Quote
Although LED's are a diode,they have a completely different effect on a circuit.
A normal diode will not burn off or remove energy as such that an LED dose.
LEDs typically have a larger forward voltage than diodes, so yes they will dissipate more power.

Have you tested this latest circuit with diodes (2 or 3 in series) in place of the LEDs? If not, how can you be certain that LEDs are required in your circuit in order to produce the observed effect?

Quote
This brings me to some questions i must ask about your sim tests.
If the simulator dosnt have an LED,and you have to make something that simulates an LED-how accurate will it be?
The sim does have LED models, but I haven't had much success with them in other circuits. For accuracy, I compare wave forms from the actual circuit, to that I obtain in the simulator.

Quote
Dose your simulator have a BPC or is it just plain inductors you use?
Dose the simulator take into account the magnetic field that surrounds the earth,and the effect that this may have on the BPC?
The sim has plain inductors and transformers. I don't believe I have ever claimed that the inductor in my circuit would accurately simulate the BPC.

Quote
Simulators may be great for every day electronic setup testing,but as we are trying to gather extra energy from our surrounding's-like the earths magnetic field,energy from the vacume-all that jazz,then i think the sim should take all this into account if it were to be accurate.
Outside influences can be accounted for in a simulation, but one must prove that they are actually contributing something to the circuit first, wouldn't you agree?

The point of performing a simulation in relation to observed anomalous effects, is to determine if the effects are in fact anomalous. To repeat what I've said before; if I can reproduce the observed effects in a simulation with standard circuitry, then I must conclude there is no anomaly. Thus far I have not been able to reproduce your latest wave forms. But I haven't given up yet.

Quote
For me to go any further on this setup,i will need to get myself a two channel scope-so as i can see both scope traces on both output resistors at the same time.
Indeed, that would be of great help.

Quote
I also fail to see how the voltage across r1 leveling out very slightly across the second division on the scope,can be equal to the voltage across r3 to go up to the 3rd division on the scope.
Sometimes it comes down to splitting hairs to reveal the true result. Don't dismiss the notion that a careful array of measurements may be required for this circuit.

Quote
But i will say this-i am still learning,and all your information and explination's i do take very seriously.
This is how we learn.But until i understand as to what is actualy happening-i keep on serching.
Many of my more in-depth posts you don't respond to, so that's good to know.

Offline poynt99

  • TPU-Elite
  • Hero Member
  • *******
  • Posts: 3585
Re: Electron Reversing Device
« Reply #137 on: January 30, 2013, 07:59:13 PM »
Let's split some hairs  ;D

I took your scope shots and analysed them. The current through the resistor is equal to the voltage across it, just as you have said. So I have computed the number of divisions peal-to-peak that each wave form exhibits to see is there is in fact a discrepancy somewhere. I looked at the input 1 Ohm, then the other two 1 Ohms resistors, representing the positive and negative sides of the current. Since all the resistors are 1 Ohm, we can simply compare the number of divisions on the oscilloscope screen in each measurement.

First, let's look at the measurements without the coil connected:
Input side is 3.8 divisions p-p as per the scope shot.
Positive side is 1.8 divisions p-p as per the scope shot.
Negative side is 1.9 divisions p-p as per the scope shot.

All being equal, the input side should equal the sum of the other two:
3.8 = 1.8 + 1.9 => 3.8(Input) = 3.7(sum of outputs)

Of course they should be entirely equal, but there is going to be some small error due to the method used to compute the divisions.


Now, let's look at the circuit with the coil connected:
Input side is 3.7 divisions p-p as per the scope shot.
Positive side is 1.6 divisions p-p as per the scope shot.
Negative side is 2.2 divisions p-p as per the scope shot.

All being equal, the input side should equal the sum of the other two:
3.7 = 1.6 + 2.2 => 3.7(Input) = 3.8(sum of outputs)

Of course they should be entirely equal, but there is going to be some small error due to the method used to compute the divisions.

See the scope shots below...

Free Energy | searching for free energy and discussing free energy

Re: Electron Reversing Device
« Reply #137 on: January 30, 2013, 07:59:13 PM »
Sponsored links:




Offline poynt99

  • TPU-Elite
  • Hero Member
  • *******
  • Posts: 3585
Re: Electron Reversing Device
« Reply #138 on: January 30, 2013, 08:43:15 PM »
Let's see how the simulation looks.  :)

With my simulated LED's, the wave forms track fairly close.

Performing a similar exercise as above by comparing the input to output currents, we have:

Input is +16.17mA, and -16.39mA
Positive is +16.16mA and -4.49mA
Negative is +2.7uA and -11.90mA

Comparing the positive side, we have 16.17mA = 16.16mA + 2.7uA => 16.17mA(Input) = 16.16mA(sum of outputs).

Comparing the negative side, we have -16.39mA = -4.49mA - 11.90mA => -16.39mA(Input) = -16.39mA(sum of outputs).

@All, from this and the last post, draw your own conclusions as to whether you think tinman's circuit is exhibiting anomalous behaviour or not.

Offline conradelektro

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 1824
Re: Electron Reversing Device
« Reply #139 on: January 30, 2013, 09:25:16 PM »
I conclude from poynt99's analysis of the scope shots and his simulation that the alleged anomaly stems from the measurements with Digital Multi Meters.

The DMMs can not accurately represent the power draw (probably due to the rather high frequency of the signal). Only good scope measurements over shunts allow a meaningful interpretation.

Is that correct?

Nice simulation and analysis of the scope shots. I downloaded "PSpice student", but it has a very steep learning curve. So, it will take me some time to use it properly.

Greetings, Conrad

Free Energy | searching for free energy and discussing free energy

Re: Electron Reversing Device
« Reply #139 on: January 30, 2013, 09:25:16 PM »
Sponsored links:




Offline poynt99

  • TPU-Elite
  • Hero Member
  • *******
  • Posts: 3585
Re: Electron Reversing Device
« Reply #140 on: January 30, 2013, 09:36:52 PM »
Conrad,

tinman is using his scope for these last measurements, pretty much as I have shown in the simulation. He is measuring the voltage across the 1 Ohm current-sensing resistors with his oscilloscope, so in effect he is showing the current in each leg. I have done the same.

tinman's measurements aren't too far off, but the interpretation of them may be. I also noticed that his magnetized screw driver used as a pointing device skews the scope display at least once in the video (around 4:25), so that should be something all should be aware of. I would also encourage him, and everyone to calibrate their scope probes prior to measuring, as an uncalibrated probe can lead to sloped tops on square waves.

Offline MileHigh

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 7600
Re: Electron Reversing Device
« Reply #141 on: January 31, 2013, 03:22:28 AM »
Excellent work like usual Poynt.  Imagine giving your computer twenty minutes to crunch out a waveform by lowering the step size and increasing the precision?  It would be awesome.  I still reference computing power relative to the early Eighties in my mind.

Can't you just edit the model for a diode and change the IV transfer curve so it resembles a LED?  Just "stretch the voltage scale?"  I am assuming there is a real exponential-type transfer curve for a diode in the model?

It sure beats giving a stack of punched cards to the computing center and then going and picking up your output the next day.

MileHigh
« Last Edit: January 31, 2013, 05:42:08 AM by MileHigh »

Free Energy | searching for free energy and discussing free energy

Re: Electron Reversing Device
« Reply #141 on: January 31, 2013, 03:22:28 AM »
Sponsored links:




Offline TinselKoala

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 13968
Re: Electron Reversing Device
« Reply #142 on: January 31, 2013, 06:43:02 AM »
Well... I've been away on other things, but I see lots of progress is happening. I don't really think that there is much I can add except to say how happy I am that the sim results and .99's scopeshot analysis agree with my scope measurements mostly. The sim even captured the slight asymmetry between the positive and negative traces, where the slope isn't a perfect mirror image on the bottom. (This asymmetry was what I thought might be influencing the DMM results).

I've been meaning to comment for some time on this: Tinman, I think your scope might have a stable "false triggering" mode where it will display essentially two different timebase sweeps overlaid. I think I've seen this happening a couple of times in your vids, I'll try to duplicate it on my kit to demonstrate what I mean. Like if you have a complex signal that consists of a regular train of a few square pulses, then a long inductive ringdown, and repeating, your scope might trigger one sweep on the pulse train and the next sweep on the ringdown, hence overlaying the two images on the screen. And frustrating the heck out of the user; I see it a lot on my old HP180 when it's not yet warmed up properly.

But I'm crushed.... MH said,
Quote
Have you ever seen someone do a clip where they try to compare a BPC versus a regular coil to look for differences between the two?  I have never seen one myself.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mvb39SwTXBE

Offline tinman

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 5236
Re: Electron Reversing Device
« Reply #143 on: January 31, 2013, 11:27:13 AM »
@Poynt99
I never ment to insinuate that you made any reference to the BPC being the same as any inductor-im sorry if you took it that way.My questions were cincere.
And in reguards to me not responding to a few of your post,i do appologise-but as you know, i have been a bit busy elsewhere aswell as running my own forum.

So in reguards to your test and the time you have taken toward this circuit and explaining what is happening,i am happy with the outcome.
I have gone as far as i can with the equipment i have,and will have to wait until i can get a better scope and SG.
Thanks for all your input on this.

@ TK
It is good to see you back-long break for you.
I would be interested in knowing a bit more about what you think the scope may be doing,this could come in handy a little later on.
An yes-i to am a bit supprised at MH comment aswell,as there are many video's and lots of information about the differences in the BPC and a normal inductor or coil.

Free Energy | searching for free energy and discussing free energy

Re: Electron Reversing Device
« Reply #143 on: January 31, 2013, 11:27:13 AM »
3D Solar Panels

Offline MileHigh

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 7600
Re: Electron Reversing Device
« Reply #144 on: January 31, 2013, 03:01:15 PM »
As I mentioned about modelling inductors, there is a university Wiki page called "Spiral Inductor Design:"

http://bmf.ece.queensu.ca/mediawiki/index.php/Spiral_Inductor_Design

Note the model that the person is using for a spiral inductor in the attached image.  There are stray capacitance and resistance components that come into play.  They model the subtle secondary characteristics of a spiral inductor in this case.  Note the "Cp," the coupling capacitance that bypasses the inductance alltogether.

So if you do something like look at how the coil responds to square wave you can observe the L/R time constant and that shows you how the coil responds in the time domain.  Then if you put the coil in a test circuit and then sweep a sine wave through low to high frequencies you could observe how the coil responds in the frequency domain.  Then you relate that back to your complex model and get a clearer picture of what's going on with your coil.  Once you know how the coil responds in the frequency domain then you know how it will respond to any arbitrary waveform.

If you are using Spice to model how a very high frequency circuit operates then you use the more complex model.  You can also see from the Spice waveforms that they do include some of these secondary real-world properties for most components.  That's why you see the spikes and ring-downs in the simulation waveforms.

So for a lot of the fancy coil configurations people play with you can assume that they are variations of the kind of modeling you see in this example.  But BPCs and pancake coils and Rodin coils are fundamentally still all coils.

MileHigh

Offline poynt99

  • TPU-Elite
  • Hero Member
  • *******
  • Posts: 3585
Re: Electron Reversing Device
« Reply #145 on: February 01, 2013, 02:05:33 AM »
tinman,

When you get a chance, let us know if the effect is still seen using diodes rather than LEDs.

Thanks.

Free Energy | searching for free energy and discussing free energy

Re: Electron Reversing Device
« Reply #145 on: February 01, 2013, 02:05:33 AM »
3D Solar Panels

Offline tinman

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 5236
Re: Electron Reversing Device
« Reply #146 on: February 01, 2013, 03:57:57 PM »
tinman,

When you get a chance, let us know if the effect is still seen using diodes rather than LEDs.

Thanks.
I will try and get that done this weekend poynt99

Offline tinman

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 5236
Re: Electron Reversing Device
« Reply #147 on: February 06, 2013, 03:23:24 PM »
I thought this document might be of interest to MileHigh
As he was refering seeing no test done that show the diference between a single wound coil,and a tesla bifilar coil
http://home.comcast.net/~onichelson/VOLTGN.pdf
http://jnaudin.free.fr/gegene/images/00512340.pdf

So as you can see MileHigh-there is a very large difference between a standard coil,and the BPC-also shown in TK's video.

I am still to get around to that test .99-but i will

Offline MileHigh

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 7600
Re: Electron Reversing Device
« Reply #148 on: February 06, 2013, 08:26:27 PM »
Tinman:

I will reply to the Tesla document in another message.

What the Oliver Nichelson document shows you is that the self-resonant frequency of the series bifilar coil is lower.  That is expected because of the extra inter-winding capacitance in a bifilar coil and the higher potential difference between adjacent windings.

The plots from the network analyzer look legit and shows the detection of the self-resonant frequencies for the two coils.  But I don't get his other analysis and I think it is wrong.

I am not sure what he means by "voltage gain" in this formula:  Voltage_Gain = 2 * Pi * freq * L / R.   He says R is one ohm.  I don't know where that is coming from.

What that equation says is that the voltage gain increases linearly with frequency.  It's meaningless as far as I can tell.

So forget about the number crunching for the voltage gain.  Any inductor can create a voltage gain and it's always in balance with current and time for a net energy gain of zero.

The key point is both types of coils act like coils with small "invisible" capacitors in parallel.  When you factor this in the coils behave exactly the same way.

I also took a peek at a HP 8510C network analyzer.  What a beast!  I have never used one of those babies.  I saw eBay pricing from $4K to $25K.  This is TK territory.

MileHigh

Offline MileHigh

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 7600
Re: Electron Reversing Device
« Reply #149 on: February 06, 2013, 11:48:23 PM »
Tinman:

I read through the Tesla patent.  It says essentially the same thing that I said above.  You get more self-capacitance and higher potential difference between windings with a series bifilar wound coil.  So it's an LCR resonator that can store energy.

Tesla seems to be implying that they would be used for energy storage.  That never really came to pass as far as I know. The killer is the resistance in the wire and the energy can't be stored for very long.

So I guess you can say you are right and they are different in the way you can apply them.  But a regular coil in parallel with a capacitor will look the same as a series bifilar wound coil.  In that sense I am right.

If this helped demystify coils then we are all winners.

TK's clip is another story.  There is a flaw in his testing procedure but I don't disagree with his results at all.

MileHigh

 

OneLink