Free Energy | searching for free energy and discussing free energy
New theories about free energy systems => The Aether => Topic started by: Dave45 on March 14, 2014, 01:15:28 PM
-
I think this needs to be discussed as it leads to deception in circuit analysis at least where an inductor is concerned.
Lets look at a simple circuit from both views
The conventional view sees current flowing from pos to neg as shown in the first pic, it would appear that the current flows through the inductor then when the current is shut off the spike continues on.
This would seem as though the inductor is resisting change in current flow and the spike is an effort of the inductor to resist that change.
It would look like femf, you see no polarity change in the spike.
-
Now lets Look at electron flow as it should be, from neg to pos
Now you can see that the spike that looked like femf in the convention view is actually bemf and it runs through the diode in the opposite direction as the current flow.
This backward direction through the diode is an indicator of the polarity of the backspike, the backspike has a pos polarity.
-
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=k8y_fKEAMWw
-
@Dave45
I have used electron flow notation exclusively for over 10 years and can say that everything makes much more sense and personally I find conventional current flow notation completely absurd.
For instance if a conventional current is said to flow from positive to negative and the only charges which can actually move in the conductor are the free electrons which have a negative charge then that would mean the negative electrons must be "flowing" to the negative terminal which is a problem. You see like charges repel so why would the negative electrons be flowing to the negative terminal which repels them from the positive terminal which is attracting them?.
Let's do a thought experiment, I attach a lightbulb to a battery and conventional current flow notation say's electrons flow from positive to negative. First the negative terminal has an abundance of electrons and the positive terminal an equal and opposite lack of electrons. So why are the electrons flowing from the positive terminal with less electrons attracting the free electrons to a negative terminal with an abundance of electrons repelling the free electrons?. Lol, it is without a doubt the most ridiculous thing I have ever heard of and contradicts damn near every know law of science.
The fact that this is still being debated in this day and age is a little disturbing in my opinion.
AC
-
Now lets Look at electron flow as it should be, from neg to pos
Now you can see that the spike that looked like femf in the convention view is actually bemf and it runs through the diode in the opposite direction as the current flow.
This backward direction through the diode is an indicator of the polarity of the backspike, the backspike has a pos polarity.
Please explain what is the reason for spike ? I see the problem here : first electrons flow when switch is closed through the diode, toward positive terminal. I imagine they are slowed down and partially stuck inside coils windings and when switch is off they cannot move back via diode , so they should move forward to the positive terminal causing voltage rise ? Hmm...looks like things are not as simple as seen on picture. I thing electrons interact with own magnetic field and this collapsing magnetic field is allowing them to move faster on "switch off" stage. Faster move means current rise and voltage rise is the following result.
What do you think ?
-
If you only use one coil you can see whats happening, as current moves through the coil a magnetic field is formed, when the current stops the magnetic field collapses back into the coil, this collapsing magnetic field causes the backspike (bemf)
What is important to notice is the polarity of the bemf, the diode gives an indication of the polarity.
The bemf runs through the diode in an opposite direction as the applied neg current, this indicates that the polarity of the bemf is pos.
This is important and if you are looking at a circuit in the conventional view you dont see this, it looks as though the current just continues on. Which is wrong.
-
Why is this important
We have to ask ourselves if a coil pulsed with a neg polarity gives a pos return will a coil pulsed with a pos polarity give us a neg return.
And if it does what are the implications.
-
Study up on ionization, ion clouds
Air purifier's
Static eliminators to see what you dont want to do.
Electrostatics
There are two charges and they both operate in a circuit.
Real eye openers
Breaking no laws just understanding
opposites attract
Like the guy from Russia said separate and collect, well he said compare and collect but I think he meant separate and collect, language barrier.
-
Ionization
-
So...beside electrons there is also bemf running, right ?
-
So...beside electrons there is also bemf running, right ?
Yes
If the circuit is configured right like Akula's you will have pos and neg bemf one complimenting the other.
Pos bemf from the neg pulsed coil
Neg bemf from the pos pulsed coil
-
A diode does more than just let electrons through one way
-
Thank You Loner
That was exactly what I wanted to ask. If electrons stuck behind the diode what is moving after switch shut off ? The answer : the real FORCE behind the scene. Or ...does somebody have a better explanation , based solely on electrons flow theory ?
-
I think its very simple really it all boils down to pos and neg charges and their attraction to each other.
If you build an ionizer circuit the electrodes will actually pull apart the ether, the tension caused by the opposite polarity's pull electrons and protons apart. When this happens we have two charges not one, if these electrodes are in close proximity the charges will join back up and cancel each other but if not in close proximity they build pos and neg ion clouds.
Ok so Iv built my ionizer and have made my two ion clouds, I have the ether separated now how do I collect it?
I put a single coil transformer/choke on each electrode, I want to collect both charges.
The choke that is placed on the neg electrode I pulse neg, the bemf from this choke will be pos just like the ion cloud around it.
The choke that is placed on the pos electrode I pulse pos, the bemf from this choke will be neg just like the ion cloud around it.
If we want to pull energy from the ether we have to split it first, in its natural state the two charge are combined and neutral, but when pulled apart are energetic.
Separate and Collect.
-
So how do we pulse a coil with pos energy
If you use AC its a little easier because one leg is a pos pulse and one leg is a neg pulse.
If using DC its a little more complicated you have to take the bemf from the neg pulsed coil and use it to pulse another coil, this is your pos pulse using DC.
But you have to collect both charges.
-
Alot of it has to do with rectifying the energy within the circuit.
There is a problem using AC
If we look at the diagram a neg pulse goes through the diode to pulse L1 the bemf from L1 will be pos, now the pos energy can run through the diode over to L2 (which is what we want) or it can run back through the diode and back to the source, the same is true when the pos pulse hits L2 on the other side.
This is a problem we dont want the bemf to come back into the driving part of the circuit.
-
I thought of using two spark gaps but this creates a problem as well, first the spark gap would have to have more resistance than the load.
Second the capacitor on the driving side of the circuit would discharge at the same time causing both bemf's from each coil L1 and L2 to hit the crossover diode at the same time, which would destroy the diode.
The only solution I see is to have a mosfet or some switching transistor where the spark gaps are turning on and off 180 degrees out of phase.
-
Dave45,
I think you have got it correct, that there is a conceptual problem here. If free electrons play a role in circuit operation we will have
special problems when we have both conventional flow and electron particle flow both flowing in a schematic circuit simultaneously.
Two things that I think are obvious. First conceptual current is not necessarily real, So real circuits don't have a problem dealing
with this situation, it's our design conceptions that have the problem. We need to divide our concepts so that we don't appear to
be saying that both of our concepts are real. Real diode components *do* pass real electrons against the arrow in the diagram.
Obviously circuitry simply sums the two different paths so that voltage at the node equals zero. The higher power current path
cancels out the lower power ones. But how do we design a circuit for where this is happening? Circuit design is about conceptual
power flows and conceptual control flows.
The first thing that should be done is to divide the circuit into control flows - analyzed conventionally vs power flows where we will
need to handle both. We may have to add components, like the inductor to make this happen. - Imagine adding components
to a real circuit to assist in our design conceptualization! I suspect that we are not the only engineers that have to deal this problem
So I suggest a literature check to see what other engineers do in these cases, and I will now prevent myself from appearing nuts
by continuing to discuss this issue further.
But I see two other secondary effects from the above. First power flows based in the LC resonance should be considering to be rotating
currents. The result of this is that changes to the RC timing in circuits can flip the sign of the control current interaction as the time between
the 360 degree phase can change the sign the control voltages to add vs subtract from rotating currents. Secondly we may have to change
our conceptualization of what we consider ground. Is ground something that positive electron holes are pushed into or is it something that
negative electrons are attracted into. For example in the circuit under consideration I believe you have to consider the biggest
amount of metal is where the grounding comes from. So ground is around the transformer. The high voltage is at the wire going to
the top of the led array.
We don't currently know how energy reflects from the led array, is it in phase with the high rotating current that lights the leds
or does its voltage reflect antiphase from it? Also does the free electrons come in at the speed of light (which like radar has
significant microsecond speed of light delay)? Or it delayed even more because it flows like static electricity separate from
the reflection pulse?
-
Loner:
Keeping it simple, you are right, 100%, that "Conventional" current SHOULD be shown as Negative to Positive when referencing standard electron flow. For part of what I think the original reasons were, look into the theory of FET's. They WERE developed before BJT's but were not as well accepted due to their use of that Pesky Positive EMF (Hard to develop tech when not correctly described, eh?). That's just an interesting historical note.
"...were not as well accepted due to their use of that Pesky Positive EMF" - What???
That's false, basically a crazy statement from out in left field. None of what you talk about in the quote above is even an issue. It's amazing how these belief systems can develop and take on a life of their own. I am guessing that the root cause comes from something you read or saw on YouTube. May I ask if I am correct?
MileHigh
-
I would suggest everyone here with the exception of Milehigh read this webpage including the links until something makes sense.
What is electricity?
http://amasci.com/miscon/whatis.html (http://amasci.com/miscon/whatis.html)
It is written in plain english even a child could understand and will help you in ways you could not possibly imagine.
I got a kick out of this quote:
ELECTRICITY, n.
The power that causes all natural phenomena not known to be caused by something else.
AC
-
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SjeK1nkiFvI (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SjeK1nkiFvI)
Did I hear correctly free to move pos charges as well as free to move neg charge.
-
Hi.
The relation of "conventional current flow vs electron current flow" I see as the Newton's Cradle action: the balls represent electrons which don't need to move (or move very slightly only, due to their perfect "elasticity") to move the energy within a conductor:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Newton%27s_cradle (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Newton%27s_cradle)
-
5.2 Diode characteristics
The most important characteristics when using power diodes is the maximum current in the forward direction (IFmax), and maximum voltage in the reverse direction (URmax).
Lets see current one direction voltage in the other direction ,,,,,,,,,,,,,,hmmm
But I thought current was flow and voltage was pressure...............somethin stinks in the outhouse.
-
I think we have found our pump, we just need to make it more efficient.
Think for yourselves, Im sure there are other ways but this is simple.
I bet we can make it better
-
Maybe we need to smooth it out and give it somewhere to go.
-
Kinda works like two balloons ;D
-
I wonder does it need a couple of check valves (diodes)
-
A testbed without trying to loop it right away, could use bifilar on the primary but the primary could also be wound first then the other coil on top, all coils need to be wound in the same direction.
Its the principle we need to understand.
Not sure if the middle diode would be needed in this arrangement.
-
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9RO6AXftkDg
Listen to what he's saying in the few minutes of the vid, priceless ;)
Most of the electrons and positrons in the ambient are paired up but can be separated with very little energy expense using a high voltage ionization circuit.
dave
-
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xF00efOgTCM
Why the dome, is it the shape or does it stop the neg ions from escaping and since its aluminum may serve as a collector.
-
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zWIUzoYKIM8
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7CMouk8qAdU (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7CMouk8qAdU)
Very close to Akula circuit
-
Another interesting circuit
The bemf from L1 charges C2 which pulls hard on the ground through the primary of TR,
very interesting simple circuit.
-
Loner:
To say "pesky positive EMF" as if it was "hidden" or some kind of a secret is just silly.
Say you were to actually separate the Pos EMF and the Neg EMF.
it really means using only one of the two or splitting the Neq and Pos forces out.
There is no set of EMFs in opposite directions or "splitting of the positive" or any of this.
The big "leap" is for people to come to the realization that it makes no difference to use conventional current or electron current. The conventional current is just a SYMBOL, that means the real electron current. It's just a small tax on using your imagination to visualize something. We use symbols all the time, what's the problem? It's what it really IS that matters.
It's just like water circulating in pipes in a loop powered by a water pump. As you travel around the current loop there is a unique voltage at every place around the loop, and each point can also change in voltage with respect to time. It's all just about saying to yourself "what is the voltage doing?" as you discuss the current flow. When you understand this you can discuss the voltage or the current, but all the time if you are discussing one you are aware of the other. That's the big "Big Visualization" that many people, including people around here, are not getting.
I know all about transistors and MOSFETs. Your line about not knowing that you could make a transistor yourself is a cheap and pretentious shot, because I am assuming that you are fully aware that I am decent with respect to electronics. The business about making your own transistors is from the previous generation to my generation. That was already in the dustbin of history when I came around. I have been talking electronics on and off for 35 years and the first time I ever heard it was here. For me making a transistor means a whole different thing. You pull a silicon seed crystal out of a crucible filled with molten ultra-pure silicon to make a silicon ignot. Then you selectively dope a small cleaved-off silicon crystal to create the P and N regions using photolithography in some kind of sputtering/whatever vacuum chamber. The Ps and Ns are one atomic number below and above the silicon. The two doping elements are sputtered and they bombard the silicon crystal and penetrate their way into the crystal matrix to create the P and N regions. Now that doesn't sound so easy that you could do it in your kitchen, does it?
MileHigh
-
First transistor
Mags
-
Replica of first transistor. ;)
Mags
-
Replica of first transistor. ;)
Mags
Thats cool :)
Thought I would try to simulate the flywheel diode
http://makeagif.com/i/Fk5aUM
-
Lets try it without the diode ;D
http://makeagif.com/i/dLlRx8
Anyone got any transistors I keep blowin em ;D lol
-
Dave:
If you want a challenge, how about you draw out timing diagrams for your last two simple circuits? Even just pencil and graph paper will do. Draw the currents and voltages at various points in the circuit. You have a coil or coils in the circuit? Then draw out on your timing diagram the voltage waveforms across the coils.
Without a timing diagram, all of your schematics are meaningless. Current and voltage does not travel through a circuit like your simple animations depict at all. So your animations confuse more than enlighten.
The suggestion to you is to make the move from abstraction to what you would really see if you could scope your circuits by drawing out the timing diagrams.
Your last two circuits are very simple. So what are the voltages and currents with respect to time? To answer that you have to make timing diagrams. That is the key issue.
MileHigh
-
MileHigh
To be fair I built the sim as seen using the conventional view
http://makeagif.com/i/z4gdPM
If you use this view you see bemf as femf and you see no polarity change as the current moves through the diode, and you will never find free energy.
But thats the intention isnt it. ;)
-
Thats cool :)
Thought I would try to simulate the flywheel diode
http://makeagif.com/i/Fk5aUM (http://makeagif.com/i/Fk5aUM)
Try another diode in between the switch and coil. That should improve it.
-
Loner:
To say "pesky positive EMF" as if it was "hidden" or some kind of a secret is just silly.
There is no set of EMFs in opposite directions or "splitting of the positive" or any of this.
The big "leap" is for people to come to the realization that it makes no difference to use conventional current or electron current. The conventional current is just a SYMBOL, that means the real electron current. It's just a small tax on using your imagination to visualize something. We use symbols all the time, what's the problem? It's what it really IS that matters.
It's just like water circulating in pipes in a loop powered by a water pump. As you travel around the current loop there is a unique voltage at every place around the loop, and each point can also change in voltage with respect to time. It's all just about saying to yourself "what is the voltage doing?" as you discuss the current flow. When you understand this you can discuss the voltage or the current, but all the time if you are discussing one you are aware of the other. That's the big "Big Visualization" that many people, including people around here, are not getting.
I know all about transistors and MOSFETs. Your line about not knowing that you could make a transistor yourself is a cheap and pretentious shot, because I am assuming that you are fully aware that I am decent with respect to electronics. The business about making your own transistors is from the previous generation to my generation. That was already in the dustbin of history when I came around. I have been talking electronics on and off for 35 years and the first time I ever heard it was here. For me making a transistor means a whole different thing. You pull a silicon seed crystal out of a crucible filled with molten ultra-pure silicon to make a silicon ignot. Then you selectively dope a small cleaved-off silicon crystal to create the P and N regions using photolithography in some kind of sputtering/whatever vacuum chamber. The Ps and Ns are one atomic number below and above the silicon. The two doping elements are sputtered and they bombard the silicon crystal and penetrate their way into the crystal matrix to create the P and N regions. Now that doesn't sound so easy that you could do it in your kitchen, does it?
MileHigh
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-Qph8BNrnLY&list=PL5DCEA197C1C07A2D
O_o
-
Jbignes5:
It's someone ironic that you linked to a Jeri Ellsworth video. She would agree with almost everything I have posted, certainly with the exception of my comment about a home-brew transistor. If she read everything you have posted, she would perhaps be mortified and and just turn around and make a quick exit, or perhaps slice and dice through your prose and put you in a state of shock. Just a little ironic twist in life.
MileHigh
-
http://www.science-campus.com/engineering/electrical/dc_theory/chapter2/electron_flow.html
It makes almost no difference which direction you use.
Unless you are looking for free energy
then you realize the magnetic field is pulling charge from the atmosphere as it collapses into the coil
and that charge is of an opposite polarity to the applied charge
if you look at ionizers you realize why ............opposites attract
so a coil charged with a negative charge will pull in a pos charge
and a coil charged with a positive charge will pull in a neg charge.
Have you ever wondered why its so easy to make high voltage but there's no amperage, the amperage seems elusive, this is why.
By pulsing a coil repeatedly with a neg pulse your pulling in voltage every time, but no amperage.
But if you take that pos return and run it into another coil its return will be neg.........amperage.
There I go starting another argument ;D
signed
Troublemaker ;D
-
MileHigh
To be fair I built the sim as seen using the conventional view
http://makeagif.com/i/z4gdPM (http://makeagif.com/i/z4gdPM)
If you use this view you see bemf as femf and you see no polarity change as the current moves through the diode, and you will never find free energy.
But thats the intention isnt it. ;)
In that sim you can clearly see that the voltage across the diode reverses as the sim runs. The intention is to give you the most basic understanding of electronics so that you know what you are doing. There is no "view" as to what a circuit is doing. There is only the actual real-word reality for what the circuit is doing. There is no "Dave's view" or "MileHigh view" there is just the reality.
I will ask you again to make and post a timing diagram. Pick any simple sim or circuit that you have posted previously and make a timing diagram. I am challenging you. Your current attitude is akin to reading books and magazines about driving a car, but never actually getting into the driver's seat and actually driving a car.
So you have been doing your musings about coils and circuits for five years, but you have never driven the car. I challenge you to post your favourite sim and draw what you think is the timing diagram for that sim. The expectation is that you will get it wrong, and the exercise is to get you to the point where you get it right. Repeat: There will be NO "Dave's view" or "Mileigh's view" on what the timing diagram will look like. There will only be the actual truth.
MileHigh
-
Dave:
Let's see what's up (my comments in bold.)
I was fairly harsh in my comments below just to emphasize the point.
Quoting Dave: >>>>>>>>>>
It makes almost no difference which direction you use.
There is only one direction in the circuit. The SYMBOL that we use for conventional current just happens to be opposite to the flow of electrons.
then you realize the magnetic field is pulling charge from the atmosphere as it collapses into the coil
That is complete and utter nonsense, notwithstanding your five years of research. That is an example of why you so desperately need to do the timing diagram exercise.
and that charge is of an opposite polarity to the applied charge
That's mumbo-jumbo talk that you should unlearn. Without any context or frame of reference I can't even decipher what you are really trying to say.
if you look at ionizers you realize why ............opposites attract
Yes, one of the first things you learn about static electricity is that opposites attract.
so a coil charged with a negative charge will pull in a pos charge
and a coil charged with a positive charge will pull in a neg charge.
Your two statements above that you have been repeating for a long time are absolute crap. Coils don't even get charged, that's how bad it is and again it shows why you need to do a timing diagram and confront the actually reality of the circuit. There is NO SUCH THING as coils "pulling in charges."
Have you ever wondered why its so easy to make high voltage but there's no amperage, the amperage seems elusive, this is why.
That's a statement with no context and clearly shows how far you have to go to take some first baby steps towards understanding basic electricity and circuits.
By pulsing a coil repeatedly with a neg pulse your pulling in voltage every time, but no amperage.
Ridiculous whackadoo statement that has no basis in reality.
But if you take that pos return and run it into another coil its return will be neg.........amperage.
Ridiculous whackadoo statement that has no basis in reality.
<<<<<<<<<<<
MileHigh
-
Dave:
After all that harshness, let me switch it back to the positive. I am offering to help you understand how a few simple circuits work, including the coils and capacitors if there are any. But I won't spoon feed you the answers because my experience from being around here a long time is that spoon feeding doesn't work. If you want to learn then you have set your mind to it and make some timing diagrams as the first step. If not then that's fine also, your choice.
MileHigh
-
Roflmao
Have you gotta surprise coming 8)
-
MileHigh
Below is a basic ionization circuit, the electrodes take on a pos and neg charge.
Yet you scoff at the idea of a pos and neg charged coil, why because one's a coil and one's an electrode,
-
Dave:
I'll bite. What are you laughing about and what's the surprise?
You posted a diagram where in the upper section you have a high-voltage transformer and some diodes. It has nothing to do with the ordinary operation of a coil in a circuit. You seem to be fixated on ionization.
The lower part of the diagram you have added coils to the extremities of the ionizer. That's typical, it's a meaningless nonsensical thing to do. If you are alluding to the fact that the coils are charged with high-voltage and that means that they are "charged" coils, that's just plain silly again. The coils at the ends of the wire do not function like coils, they may as well be mylar balloons. So you are shooting blanks.
The real issue: Do you want to post a simple normal circuit and go through the exercise of making a timing diagram for it?
MileHigh
-
You seem to be fixated on ionization.
Yea I think your right
That's typical, it's a meaningless nonsensical thing to do
lol, for you maybe
they are "charged" coils, that's just plain silly again
You can lead a horse to water but you cant make him drink
The ether is all around you its in the air you breath but its in a combined neutral state, ionization breaks the bonds and separates the charges then they can be collected.
Even a low frequency low voltage system is ionizing the air around it but the problem is by running both pos and neg legs to the same transformer it works like a static neutralizer canceling any gain that is being created.
You should read up on ionization, static eliminators, air purifiers educate yourself a little ;)
later
dave
-
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=txmKr69jGBk (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=txmKr69jGBk)
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=a7_8Gc_Llr8
Would you say the charge is only moving in one direction, try both
-
Dave:
You can lead a horse to water but you cant make him drink
Please tell me what your "charged" coils do and how they are different from high-potential mylar balloons.
You are confusing the alleged ether with negatively and positively charged ions. Just the wind is creating ions all the time. Big deal.
You should read up on ionization, static eliminators, air purifiers educate yourself a little
That has absolutely nothing to do with how a coil works. You are deflecting.
Quoting myself: "The real issue: Do you want to post a simple normal circuit and go through the exercise of making a timing diagram for it?"
You are running away from this question. You have been pondering this stuff for five years but you are afraid to broach the issue of constructing a timing diagram for a simple circuit. No timing diagram equals no understanding and self-imposed ignorance. You won't drink. It's a shame and it's why scammers can get away with stealing other people's money all the time.
MileHigh
-
Dave:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=a7_8Gc_Llr8 (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=a7_8Gc_Llr8)
Would you say the charge is only moving in one direction, try both
I would say that there are positive and negative ions in the smoke and that they are attracted to their respective plates.
Now, lets say there is a negative plate on the left and a positive plate on the right. In between you have the ionized candle smoke.
The positive ions will be attracted to the negative plate therefore will move to the left. That means conventional current is moving to the left.
The negative ions will be attracted to the positive plate therefore will move to the right. That means conventional current is moving to the left.
Holy crap Batman, in both cases conventional current is moving to the left. There is a negative plate on the left and a positive plate on the right. Conventional current flows from positive to negative, so that means to the left.
See Dave, the big "brain leap" is to note that positive ions moving to the left represent the same current flow direction as negative ions moving to the right. It's the big "brain leap" that you and others can't cope with with respect to conventional current flow and how it doesn't make a damn difference in the world when it comes to analyzing the behaviour of circuits, which is what it's all about.
And that brings us back full circle where you can't produce a timing diagram for a simple circuit, and therefore you don't understand the operation of the simple circuit, including the operation of the coil in the simple circuit.
MileHigh
-
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=txmKr69jGBk (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=txmKr69jGBk)
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=a7_8Gc_Llr8 (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=a7_8Gc_Llr8)
Would you say the charge is only moving in one direction, try both
The first one has nothing to do with ionization. The induced eddy currents in the plate cause an opposite magnetic field and the two fields repel and produce the levitation. The induced eddy currents also dissipate lots of power in the plate so you can cook on the levitated plate.
The second one is a standard demonstration, I first saw in high school sometime in the last century. Yes, a flame is a plasma, with both positive and negative ions. So? Positive ions are attracted to the more negative plate, and negative ions are attracted to the more positive plate. Do you have enough information in the video to decide which plate is more positive than the other one?
I was waiting for the guy to accidentally touch one of the plates with his hand.... even though there isn't much energy in the output of that machine, he's still in grave danger if he takes the discharge from one hand to the other across his chest. He's violating the first rule of HV experimentation: keep one hand in your pocket at all times.
Here's a demo of an electrostatic oil jet coming off the top of a tiny VDG machine:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=v2lTeGH-lws (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=v2lTeGH-lws)
And here's me, taking a 30 kV shock across my chest:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YpemKuf6X_c (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YpemKuf6X_c)
Fortunately for me there was not a lot of energy behind that jolt.
-
MH
So what do you think a timing diagram is going to prove.
you do the timing diagram and do it for both voltage and the current
then do the actual experiment
whats it going to prove, nothing
MrT
Yea the first vid has nothing to do with ionization just thought it was cool
-
So tell me MH is your timing diagram going to show the high voltage bemf hitting the switch
http://makeagif.com/i/dLlRx8
-
Dave:
So what do you think a timing diagram is going to prove.
you do the timing diagram and do it for both voltage and the current
then do the actual experiment
whats it going to prove, nothing
That's a total cop out. It's clear that like many "talkers" about electronics on the forums, you run away when you are asked to produce a timing diagram.
It's about you proving to yourself that you will be able to learn and then actually do it yourself after a couple of examples. Then you won't be putting up nonsensical circuits like the one with the two coils at the ends of the wire. You will realize how foolish that is.
MileHigh
-
So tell me MH is your timing diagram going to show the high voltage bemf hitting the switch
http://makeagif.com/i/dLlRx8 (http://makeagif.com/i/dLlRx8)
Of course it will. That's a simple circuit, why don't you do a timing diagram for it?
-
Tesla talked about people like you, is this how you evaluate other peoples experiments timing diagrams instead of doing the actual experiments.
How do you expect to find any anomaly doing experiments this way.
-
Dave:
I did all of these types of experiments between 35 and 33 years ago in school. Then I worked for five years where perhaps 30% of my time was spent on an electronics bench with a scope and a logic analyzer. Meanwhile I am sure that you have read some of my postings where I analyze circuits. When you read those postings, does it sound to you like I have a decent grasp of electronics? When people say to me the "you don't do experiments" line it's a cop out.
What's one full year of working on an electronics bench? 50 x 40 = 2000 hours. So that means from work I have about 3000 hours of work bench time. I will throw in another 1500 hours for everything else over 35 years. So I have about 4500 hours of time spent working on an electronics bench. Is that good enough for you?
Why don't you take a shot at doing the timing diagram? There is no need to be evasive or afraid.
MileHigh
-
timing diagrams instead of doing the actual experiments
The construction of the timing diagram and explaining it IS the actual experiment. You have to get real Dave!
-
The last few days Iv been thinking about you Mr. MileHigh, for a man with your supposed electronics experience you are very unskilled or your ego is blinding or you are a paid government shill, I really havent made up my mind yet..........to me it really doesnt matter I will continue my work.
I have showed you evidence from not only cited articles from your own academic community stating that current runs from neg to pos, Iv shown training vids from the automotive industry stating that current flows from neg to pos.
I created a sim that shows how it works, how it creates femf and bemf, yet you continue to deny and criticize my work.
I even created a sim to show your supposed current flow direction, show me the femf and bemf in your system.
simple
Your system would create a dc response from a transformer, the electron current flow would create an ac response from a transformer with just a single pulse from a switch, why dont you try it and tell me which response you get.
-
You want me to show you a timing diagram, I showed you one in the simulation, you just dont understand it.
Where you fail in reading your scope is that each pulse creates a pos and neg response, but you dont understand what I mean by that do you.
In your scope you read only the voltage and only the amperage but do not realize how the magnetic field works, you do not realize each pulse creates both.
As the magnetic field builds it creates amperage and as it falls it creates voltage each move in different directions through the circuit.
I will show this in a sim when I have time, so you bring on your criticism and I'll do the sim.
I intend to do a sim showing this in an ac transformer as well, so bring it on.
You dont understand ac either but I will show you so stay tuned, maybe you should study the magnetic field.
Something else I should mention my sims dont actually show the magnetic field I use the term so you will understand, my sims show the A vector field, torsion field or whatever you want to call it.
Actually the magnetic field works like a stationary axle that the A vector field spins on.
You see while you were studying a false electronics theory I was studying the magnetic and electric fields so try to keep up.
-
That's pretty neat. I've been meaning to do a similar experiment but my housemate has the freezer stuffed with fruit and corndogs.
Do you have a comparison photo, of the same apparatus frozen the same way, but inert, without any current flowing in it?
-
Dave:
The MIB card!!?? You blew my nose and then you blew my mind.
Watch this guy make REAL TIMING DIAGRAMS for a few simple circuits like yours.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Mj2upmsCCIY
He demonstrates a fundamental understanding of how an inductor really works, something that you clearly have not grasped. I was trying to get you to this point for your own enlightenment and benefit but failed.
More brain food for your starving mind:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ky6cW_VDEGA
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=aLu5SvgUz1I
So you can try running with this valuable information that is absolutely true and you can verify it on the bench with your scope, or just continue wallowing in your willful ignorance in the Internet age.
MileHigh
-
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=aLu5SvgUz1I
http://makeagif.com/i/kdxfon
I really have more important work to attend to, Im wasting my time here.
-
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=aLu5SvgUz1I (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=aLu5SvgUz1I)
http://makeagif.com/i/kdxfon (http://makeagif.com/i/kdxfon)
I really have more important work to attend to, Im wasting my time here.
Your "makeagif" site sure delivers some nice juicy p0rn popup ads!
Yep, I can tell that you have much more important work to do. Certainly you are wasting your time here... since you refuse to study, to perform actual experiments rather than demonstrations, or to carefully consider what MH and others have been telling you. You are sure that you are right, so why bother to waste your time?
But you really should try to think about why all those tiny and large inductors are sprinkled all over your computer's circuitry, and how your computer manages to operate at gigaHertz speeds, if everything that real EEs think they know about inductors and current flows in circuits is wrong.
-
Yea I noticed the popups, you would think that would be censored or better yet eliminated, I used the site years ago and dont remember the trash being on there then.
I understand what your trying to point out and Im sure it works what Im trying to show is the mechanical function of the field, and as far as all the really smart EE's they use what they have been taught, just like you.
I am trying to show you there is an alternative, has your conventional view showed you how to harvest free energy, in how many years, 150 or so.
So after 150 years of paying for something that is free with no answers in sight wouldnt you think its worth a look.
-
What the electron current flow shows that the conventional method doesnt is that there is a polarity change in the returned spike
pulsed with negative.........pos return
pulsed with positive ........neg return.
-
As the magnetic field builds it creates amperage and as it falls it creates voltage each move in different directions through the circuit.
More like as the magnetic fields builds it is one in the same with the amperage. It's the voltage applied across the coil that slowly overcomes the electrical inertia of the coil which results in current flow. When the magnetic field falls it sustains the current flow and the current flowing into the load results in the generation of voltage. So in the last example, it's really the resistor that creates the 10,000 volts. The current is the cause and the voltage is the result for the case of a discharging inductor.
So you have a long long way to go to understand what you are observing. Or you can keep your blinders on and do your thing while imaging that the "government is worried about Dave45 playing with his coils."
-
Yea I noticed the popups, you would think that would be censored or better yet eliminated, I used the site years ago and dont remember the trash being on there then.
I understand what your trying to point out and Im sure it works what Im trying to show is the mechanical function of the field, and as far as all the really smart EE's they use what they have been taught, just like you.
I am trying to show you there is an alternative, has your conventional view showed you how to harvest free energy, in how many years, 150 or so.
So after 150 years of paying for something that is free with no answers in sight wouldnt you think its worth a look.
Dave, the right way to "show an alternative view" is to show that it predicts some kind of behaviour in an experimental system that is _not_ predicted by the conventional view, and then to conduct an experiment that tries to falsify that prediction... and fails to do so. Or looking at it another way, conduct a demonstration that shows the difference between the conventional and alternative predictions on a physical system.
So far, the "alternative views" don't seem to be able to do that. They either can't make coherent predictions about anything, they make the same predictions as the conventional view so aren't useful or interesting, or they fail to make _correct_ predictions about the behaviour of real systems, thus showing that they are not correct views, or at least not as correct as the conventional view.
Worth a look? Sure, show me something interesting that is worth a look. Why do you think I bother to read this forum? I'm looking for something interesting to look at. For example, your ice-coil patterns are interesting.... if they are really caused by the electric field from the coil and not some of the other couple of dozen third variables I can think of that might have influenced the pattern. That's why I asked for an image of a control test with no current but other things equal. You didn't respond so I "assume" that you did no such controls. Please prove me wrong by showing a control freeze, I really am interested and I really don't have room in my own freezer to try it.
-
Yes Iv froze the container's with no current flow and no the organized field is not there.
Something interesting with no current applied the containers bust but with current Iv never had one break.
They say ice doesnt conduct electricity but it will if frozen with a magnetic field applied,
I did an experiment thats proves the existence of the aether years ago using the ice but never repeated or documented it.
-
Having a problem posting
test
-
Check out E class power amplifiers
https://www.google.com/search?q=e+class+power+amplifier&sa=X&tbm=isch&tbo=u&source=univ&ei=1cBHU-WUPKn68QHZ74CoAQ&ved=0CEMQ7Ak&biw=1120&bih=612#imgdii=_ (https://www.google.com/search?q=e+class+power+amplifier&sa=X&tbm=isch&tbo=u&source=univ&ei=1cBHU-WUPKn68QHZ74CoAQ&ved=0CEMQ7Ak&biw=1120&bih=612#imgdii=_)
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Amplifier
-
http://www.vk2zay.net/article/181