Hi erfinder,
I am not there yet, I have not gone deeply into this. This is why I asked forest but either he knows it but egoism defeats him or he does not. And the question also arises as to what he thinks why 3 coils are needed it may not cover what's your take on this... I do think what you would say would come from tests.
You shared several pointers in this thread what you think, one can find them when one wades through, surely in the quotes below there may be either directly or remotely relevant ones to the 3 coil question and surely there has to be missing relevant quotes too:
"the coils are operated at different times, simultaneous-sequential reactions in the remaining two, non excited, non closed circuit coils, do not allow one to operate in accordance with the law for the purpose of using the law to one's advantage" and
" I identified three induction processes, out of these three, there are multiple distinct instances when current is induced." then
"Technically (my dogma) there is no such thing as a motor, the device we treat as such is and will always be a generator, one which we bias with DC when the fields within the device are quadrature. We inject an impulse directly into the wave of the generator, when the amplitude of the generated wave is peaked. The direction of our impulse is almost exactly (might as well be exact) 180° to that of the induced." and
"we must give the induced a path through the inducer, to a limited degree, this is exactly what we are doing in motors. Our problem is that we have yet to consider the dual nature of that which we claim to understand via the laws. When we finally comprehend its nature, from its perspective, we recognize that we are doing everything right, but doing so in systems with piss poor self reference."
"In your motors (which don't exist, soon to become motor-generators when one experiences the device and the forces operating within it as the force operating within it), there are two instances during the cycle which are of key importance to us. The point of maximum induced potential, and the zero crossing. Why are these two important and what relation do they have to the necessity of three coils?"
"Point of maximum induced potential equates to L. Zero crossing equates to C.
Inductance and capacitance are not just a function of frequency, nor are they restricted to cross area as cross section is associated with proximity or lack thereof, nor is it restricted to the available surface area offered by the material. L and C are, in addition to the aforenamed, a function of geometry, locked in space and time to a very specific geometric locations. Parallel LC resonance is to L what series LC resonance is to C. Series and parallel resonance are higher forms of L and C." and
"On a side note, I am investigating how energy is transferred between L and C, both are source in turn, both are sink in turn, but at resonance something else takes place. The impedance = 0 condition opens the system up so as to allow energy to move in both directions simultaneously, assuming the means for exciting such is available. The prerequisite, resonance must be maintained over a wide band, I call this condition "Infinite Harmonic Resonant Self Oscillation", I mentioned that already...... The key to accomplishing this is understanding what Lenz really is doing in your system and controlling it (Lenz, not running away from it or cutting it out like cancer) through the manipulation of reactive cross section at key instances....sounds complicated but can be broken down into changing the impedance of the circuit, impedance here being a direct reference to CEMF, how, where and when, and which direction it is induced." and
"The force we induce has to be given a path through its inducer. .. No other relation yields the desired result. So many got it right in the past, but their published works make no sense to the classically trained, these souls are written off, as idiots, in spite of their many of years of experience and commitment to the status quo, in their respective field of science."
"Setup x number of beat generators, x being equal to the number of envelopes which are to be voided, all are voided save one (voidance isn't actually what I am aiming at here, however, I use the term in place of that which I have come to recognize as fact as it's far simpler to just say void as the term applies to the removed (the envelopes), than to expound on means and or method by which the phase angle of the removed envelopes has changed to, and more importantly how this set of circumstances is maintained.
The relation of the added beats is such that it causes the isolated envelope to transition from a standing to traveling wave. Now you have a wave packet which bounces between impedances, a less than ideal set of circumstances (a situation which demands one's attention prior to trying to apply this for practical use) for the packet of energy you have worked hard at isolating and mobilizing. This is a fruit of my labor, the ideal inducer."
"To truly neutralize the effect that Lenz has on your system you simply need to comprehend what he's saying. I suggested that beat generation is the solution, it says it all, when you recognize what's being said, when you comprehend what's being implied."
And one full post is also worth referred to:
http://overunity.com/15307/lenz-free-generator/msg490502/#msg490502 However, these quotes cannot be fully understood without doing correct tests.
And actually you have not shared your setup on this, maybe you never will. The latter case would be most unfortunate.
Greetings
Gyula
