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

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 Members: 82882
  • *Latest: ve2lgx

  • *Total Posts: 501247
  • *Total Topics: 14923
  • *Online Today: 44
  • *Most Online: 103
(December 19, 2006, 11:27:19 PM)
  • *Users: 3
  • *Guests: 16
  • *Total: 19

Author Topic: Where the OVERUNITY using INDUCTION COILS comes from (eg Joule Thief)  (Read 23126 times)

Offline antijon

  • Full Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 210
Re: Where the OVERUNITY using INDUCTION COILS comes from (eg Joule Thief)
« Reply #60 on: June 30, 2017, 08:17:05 PM »
Is impedance the same in these two cases?
Are you sending current through a coil,that produces a magnetic field-or are you  sending a magnetic field through the coil,that induces a current ?.

Brad

I really don't know. I'm assuming that the reactance is a part of the circuit because internal resistance is viewed as being in series with the load. I know that if you're load is only resistive, it won't change the power factor of the generator, so I'm not saying that the inductance causes a lag in current. I'm saying that as frequency increases, leakage flux of the generator coil will cause a decrease in EMF.

I'm going out on a limb here, but when you load a generator the output drops. This drop is proportional to the current and the leakage flux of the coil. A typical generator ramps up the motor to maintain 60hz, but it also has to increase the exciter current to maintain output voltage.

I guess what I'm saying is, if you tried to turn a 60hz generator faster, while keeping the exciter current and the load the same, you would actually see a drop in output voltage and current.

Free Energy | searching for free energy and discussing free energy


Offline citfta

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 668
Re: Where the OVERUNITY using INDUCTION COILS comes from (eg Joule Thief)
« Reply #61 on: June 30, 2017, 10:05:04 PM »
I really don't know. I'm assuming that the reactance is a part of the circuit because internal resistance is viewed as being in series with the load. I know that if you're load is only resistive, it won't change the power factor of the generator, so I'm not saying that the inductance causes a lag in current. I'm saying that as frequency increases, leakage flux of the generator coil will cause a decrease in EMF.

I'm going out on a limb here, but when you load a generator the output drops. This drop is proportional to the current and the leakage flux of the coil. A typical generator ramps up the motor to maintain 60hz, but it also has to increase the exciter current to maintain output voltage.

I guess what I'm saying is, if you tried to turn a 60hz generator faster, while keeping the exciter current and the load the same, you would actually see a drop in output voltage and current.


Hi antijon,

The parts of your post I highlighted in red are incorrect.  I believe you may be confusing auto alternators which vary in speed all the time to portable generators which usually run at a fixed speed controlled by the governor.  I am pretty sure I already posted about that is this thread but maybe you missed that post.

A portable generator only has to increase the fuel to the engine to maintain the same speed that it needed to keep the voltage at 120 vac or so and the frequency at 60 hz.  It does not need any increase in exciter current.  In fact there is no way for the exciter current to be increased as it is usually supplied by the residual magnetism in the armature and the windings of the armature.  Of course since an auto alternator is constantly changing speed it has to have a system in place to maintain the output voltage under those changing conditions.  So it does adjust the exciter current to do this. 

You are also incorrect about the voltage and current dropping if you increase the speed of a 60 hz generator.  If you increase the speed of a normal 60 hz generator and the load is not reactive then both the current and the voltage WILL increase.  Voltage is determined by the speed of the magnetic field passing the generating coils.  Current is determined by the load and the available torque to maintain the speed.  As the current increases the torque must increase to handle the extra load placed on the generating power source.  Of course you can overload the generator which will cause a drop in voltage as the current goes up.

I am not sure where you got the idea that increasing frequency causes an increase in flux leakage.  Can you give some source for where you saw that so I can check out that idea?

Respectfully,
Carroll

Offline tinman

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 5021
Re: Where the OVERUNITY using INDUCTION COILS comes from (eg Joule Thief)
« Reply #62 on: July 01, 2017, 04:00:12 AM »
Below are a couple of scope shot's,along with test circuit.

The first scope shot shows results of slow pass of magnet over the coil.
The second scope shot shows a faster pass of the magnet over the coil.

Brad

Free Energy | searching for free energy and discussing free energy

Re: Where the OVERUNITY using INDUCTION COILS comes from (eg Joule Thief)
« Reply #62 on: July 01, 2017, 04:00:12 AM »
Sponsored links:




Offline antijon

  • Full Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 210
Re: Where the OVERUNITY using INDUCTION COILS comes from (eg Joule Thief)
« Reply #63 on: July 01, 2017, 04:46:57 AM »
Hey Carroll,

I can assure you I'm not referring to an automotive alternator, even though it is practically the same, except being 3 phase.

All types of generators have some type of exciter controller. Low exciter current results in low output voltage, and high for high. You may be referring to a brushless type, but that has a way of automatically increasing exciter current, depending on load.

You're probably right that I'm wrong about the decrease in EMF with frequency. I've read about synchronous impedance, armature reaction, and armature leakage flux. I know that losses increase with current, which will limit the output, but I can't find anything about frequency. I'm guessing that's because no one has ever tried turning a 60hz generator at 50,000 rpm. Lol

Offline itsu

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 1653
Re: Where the OVERUNITY using INDUCTION COILS comes from (eg Joule Thief)
« Reply #64 on: July 01, 2017, 11:38:49 AM »
.

Free Energy | searching for free energy and discussing free energy

Re: Where the OVERUNITY using INDUCTION COILS comes from (eg Joule Thief)
« Reply #64 on: July 01, 2017, 11:38:49 AM »
Sponsored links:




Offline jbignes5

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 1281
Re: Where the OVERUNITY using INDUCTION COILS comes from (eg Joule Thief)
« Reply #65 on: July 02, 2017, 08:08:33 PM »
 I'm just not understanding why you are looking at the speed of a magnet running across a coil and why it has anything to do with a joule thief.. Am I missing something here?
 The joule thief uses a bifilar winding right? Well as close as it comes to a bifilar winding.
 From my last post I specifically referred you to the bifilar coil to get back on subject. As the subject of this referred to the joule thief.
 It seems that every time someone asks this question someone distracts the conversation away from the subject and presents an experiment that is not on subject.


 On subject:
" Measurements (Nichelson, 1991) of the same size single and double wound coils, both with
approximately the same inductance have shown that, at resonance, both the voltage response and
voltage gain to be several orders of magnitude greater for the double wound design ."


"Tesla's new "generator" can be explained solely on the basis of its electrical activity. A bifilar
coil is capable of holding more charge than a single wound coil. When operated at resonance, the
distributed capacitance of the bifilar coil is able to overcome the counter force normal to coils,
inductive reactance. It does not allow what Tesla described (Tesla, 1894) as the formation of "false
currents."

 In the case of the joule thief this technique can squeeze all of the available charge out of a battery because it doesn't resist like normal solenoid coils do. The reactive resistance eats up charge in normal solenoid coils. This makes the source work harder to furnish charge to drive the system. This can drain the source faster. The bifilar method negates the reactive portion and allows the source to furnish all of it's charge which it converted into near perfect potential<-little loss, to the load or converter<(transformer) into a load. What you want to do is raise the voltage as high as it will go so that loss is kept to a minimum getting to the load, then transform it as it does work in the load. Such a case would be a motor, where Tesla called it a rotating transformer.
 But I don't think this technique has anything to do with overunity persay. It has more to do with getting energy to the load to which it can convert to energy into a more working form.

 The Overunity would be a way to use a gain mechanism to furnish more energy to the system via that mechanism. Lets say increasing the magnetic gain in a system via a medium that can increase the magnetic density at will. Like plasma for instance. We know plasma has a density and there are different forms of plasma called modes. Cold or dark plasma being not intensified and hot or active plasma being intensified. This is controlled by the electric field. Higher potential field equals hot plasma. Lower electric field means cold or dark plasma. Plasma is highly reactive to magnetic fields. Meaning the space is higher density for the magnetic field to pass or be conducted.

 Lets look at Thane Hines experiment with a high voltage coil inside of a low voltage coil. It seemed to amplify the output of the low voltage coil, why? The only difference I could find was that the high voltage coil attracted more free plasma to it and it amplified the magnetic field in the low voltage coil thus increasing the output. It makes sense because when we make strong magnets we us a high voltage capacitor dump to form the plasma streams inside of the magnetic material. This field does not have to be maintained for any amount of time beyond the Curie temperature of the magnetic material. Once it is locked in the plasma flows in a never ending loop and if we scoop off some of the plasma it creates a vacuum that is filled back again by the free plasma in the environment dictated by the material itself.

Offline tinman

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 5021
Re: Where the OVERUNITY using INDUCTION COILS comes from (eg Joule Thief)
« Reply #66 on: July 03, 2017, 12:23:15 PM »
 author=jbignes5 link=topic=17297.msg507871#msg507871 date=1499018913]



Quote
I'm just not understanding why you are looking at the speed of a magnet running across a coil and why it has anything to do with a joule thief.. Am I missing something here?

Yes,you are missing something.

 
Quote
The joule thief uses a bifilar winding right? Well as close as it comes to a bifilar winding.
 From my last post I specifically referred you to the bifilar coil to get back on subject. As the subject of this referred to the joule thief.

The JT dose not use a bifilar winding,such as Tesla intended a bifilar wound coil to work.

Quote
It seems that every time someone asks this question someone distracts the conversation away from the subject and presents an experiment that is not on subject.

The thread topic is-
Quote
Where the OVERUNITY using INDUCTION COILS comes from
An example was the JT-but it was just an example.
If passing a magnet passed an inductor,creating a current flow,isnt !INDUCTION!,then i have no idea what is.

Quote
On subject:
" Measurements (Nichelson, 1991) of the same size single and double wound coils, both with
approximately the same inductance have shown that, at resonance, both the voltage response and
voltage gain to be several orders of magnitude greater for the double wound design ."

Could you post a link to these test's that were carried out please.

Quote
"Tesla's new "generator" can be explained solely on the basis of its electrical activity. A bifilar
coil is capable of holding more charge than a single wound coil.

Yes,because it has a greater capacitance value.

 
Quote
When operated at resonance, the
distributed capacitance of the bifilar coil is able to overcome the counter force normal to coils,
inductive reactance. It does not allow what Tesla described (Tesla, 1894) as the formation of "false
currents."

An illusion due to the increased capacitance.
When charging an inductor,voltage leads current,and when charging  a capacitor, current leads voltage.
The !counter force! (CEMF) still exist's.

Quote
In the case of the joule thief this technique can squeeze all of the available charge out of a battery because it doesn't resist like normal solenoid coils do.

You do know how a JT work's-dont you ?
It has nothing to do with this bifilar coil stuff,as the coil design on a JT is not of a bifilar type as mentioned by Tesla.

Quote
The reactive resistance eats up charge in normal solenoid coils.

Impedance due to inductive reactance ?

Quote
The bifilar method negates the reactive portion and allows the source to furnish all of it's charge which it converted into near perfect potential<-little loss, to the load or converter<(transformer) into a load.

No it dose not. The included capacitance in a bifilar coil is so small,it makes very little difference.
The only thing an increased winding capacitance dose,is lower the resonant frequency of the inductor.
Further more,the JT has a primary winding,and a trigger winding,and dose not incorporate any traits of a bifilar wound coil.

Quote
Lets look at Thane Hines experiment with a high voltage coil inside of a low voltage coil. It seemed to amplify the output of the low voltage coil, why?

No gains were ever had in TH's transformers.

Quote
The only difference I could find was that the high voltage coil attracted more free plasma to it and it amplified the magnetic field in the low voltage coil thus increasing the output. It makes sense because when we make strong magnets we us a high voltage capacitor dump to form the plasma streams inside of the magnetic material. This field does not have to be maintained for any amount of time beyond the Curie temperature of the magnetic material. Once it is locked in the plasma flows in a never ending loop and if we scoop off some of the plasma it creates a vacuum that is filled back again by the free plasma in the environment dictated by the material itself.

Are you saying the magnetic field around a PM,is plasma ?


Brad

Free Energy | searching for free energy and discussing free energy

Re: Where the OVERUNITY using INDUCTION COILS comes from (eg Joule Thief)
« Reply #66 on: July 03, 2017, 12:23:15 PM »
Sponsored links:




Offline jbignes5

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 1281
Re: Where the OVERUNITY using INDUCTION COILS comes from (eg Joule Thief)
« Reply #67 on: July 03, 2017, 04:49:37 PM »
"Yes,you are missing something."
 
No I am not missing anything, the Title is pretty specific:
 "Where the OVERUNITY using INDUCTION COILS comes from (eg Joule Thief)"
 The example given is the style of a joule thief and not magnets passing a coil.


"The JT dose not use a bifilar winding,such as Tesla intended a bifilar wound coil to work."
 The Joule thief uses interposing winding as does the bifilar winding. It uses the same sympathetic generation scheme. Yes, it wasn't a Tesla intended but it is still the same none the less.


"An example was the JT-but it was just an example.If passing a magnet passed a conductor,creating a current flow,isnt !INDUCTION!,then i have no idea what is."

As usual you cut the last bit off of the title which clearly states an example of Joule thief.
Also there is a big difference between magnetic induction and electric induction.


"Could you post a link to these test's that were carried out please."

 I posted enough information for you to investigate it. Don't read or follow links?

"An illusion due to the increased capacitance. When charging an conductor,voltage leads current,and when charging  a capacitor, current leads voltage.The !counter force! (CEMF) still exist's."

 This is the problem. You say it is an illusion but yet it negates this counter force for real. That means it gets rid of it and it is not an illusion. What is an illusion is talking like that, in double speak.
Because the coil has capacitance built in it negates the counter force. End of story.

"No it dose not. The included capacitance in a bifilar coil is so small,it makes very little difference.The only thing an increased winding capacitance dose,is lower the resonant frequency of the inductor.Further more,the JT has a primary winding,and a trigger winding,and dose not incorporate any traits of a bifilar wound coil."


 First you say it has capacitance then you say here that it is so little. More double speak.


 This is what it has. The capacitance is a real time capacitance meaning it lasts as long as there is a voltage potential in the coil. This mirrors the capacitance in a capacitor. This is done by laying two conductors side by side or two channels that can do two things. One: induce a voltage into the second conductor of opposite polarity and create a capacitance between those two conductors much like is done in a traditional capacitor as high as the wires insulation can stand.


"No gains were ever had in TH's transformers."
 
No gains that you or anyone else will admit to. That doesn't make it any less true.

"Are you saying the magnetic field around a PM,is plasma ?"


 Yup! A cold plasma that can be revealed by an intense voltage field.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2B-lKgcQJvg


 Now a few things to remind you of here. The air is being pumped out. A straight vacuum. Now no vacuum is perfect but yet plasma is still "created", your word not mine. See plasma is the medium. For the most part it is in a state we like to call as dark mode. This makes it invisible because there is no real energy in it. But it is capable of conducting voltages and form around magnetic fields. In the example video I have shown they are merely intensifying the plasma already around the magnets. This shows the structure of the plasma and the density of that plasma that is locked into the magnets material, this is done upon creation of the magnet.

 Lets look at the process here:

 https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=noGGcyPHtdI

 This is a two step process. First pass is high current low voltage. The second process is high voltage lower current. The second process is the key since the first process only weakly magnetizes the material.

 This second process loads the material with more plasma from free space, or all around the magnet. Coincidentally this is why we can use coils to create a magnetic field as well. They are just locking the plasma into the material in a HIGHER DENSITY and why the second pass is very important to strengthen the field.

 I would also like to clarify something here:

 "Measurements (Nichelson, 1991) of the same size single and double wound coils, both with
approximately the same inductance have shown that, at resonance, both the voltage response and
voltage gain to be several orders of magnitude greater for the double wound design."

 AT "RESONANCE" is a very important key.
 Do you see how they are talking about "VOLTAGE" only here. That is another key aspect that people would rather not concentrate on.

 W=V*I  Raise either V or I and there is an increase in W     Hmmm..

 To reduce the resistance of the wire itself, even Tesla was trying to negate that as well:

https://www.teslauniverse.com/nikola-tesla/patents/us-patent-685012-means-increasing-intensity-electrical-oscillations

 Pay attention to the reason why he wanted to do this. To harness the free oscillations that a free oscillating capacitor discharge emits. Getting rid of the cemf is only part of the process. Reducing the wires resistance is another.

 Read it multiple times to get the gist of this.

 Think about this now. If you can harness a freely oscillating capacitor through a coil that has negated cemf and lowered resistance then would the secondary reduce the oscillation?
 This is the reason Tesla devised the disruptive discharge circuit. It negates the feedback to the capacitor via a magnetic pathway across the spark gap. This separates the capacitor from the emitter coil and allows the circuit to continue oscillating away. The bifilar method is another way to get rid of the return feedback in the transformer. When the secondary responds the bifilar is going through the second pass through the coil and negates the response from the secondary. All with one blast from a cap.
 Think about the interference cancellation effect. With noise all you need to do is provide an opposite wave and the noise will be cancelled. Same thing here but with electrical impulses.

 "Active noise control (ANC), also known as noise cancellation, or active noise reduction (ANR), is a method for reducing unwanted sound by the addition of a second sound specifically designed to cancel the first."
"The patent described how to cancel sinusoidal tones in ducts by phase-advancing the wave and cancelling arbitrary sounds in the region around a loudspeaker by inverting the polarity."

 This can be done actively on low frequency emissions or passively on higher frequency emissions.

 Reference patent here:

 https://www.google.com/patents/US2043416
« Last Edit: July 03, 2017, 07:00:05 PM by jbignes5 »

Offline jbignes5

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 1281
Re: Where the OVERUNITY using INDUCTION COILS comes from (eg Joule Thief)
« Reply #68 on: July 03, 2017, 07:07:57 PM »
Funny how the second process pumps a lot of current through those magnetizing coils to magnetize the magnet,, or am I seeing the current wrong,, it was on the video.

Out-gassing is also fun to watch under the influence of highish voltage and a PM field,, high voltage is a relative thing,, to some of us it is like 5KV and others it is 1MV,,

 There are several types of magnets being made here.
The tube magnets or circular magnets are made from the inside out. They use a lower magnetic field and are usually of less strength. 3 volts at 6 amps.
 I guess the plates could be magnetic. They just pass 27 amps at 300V to load the plasma in the already slightly magnetized alloy. There is a big difference between the two types. This draws in Plasma from around the material and loads it in between the already established weak magnetization of the material during the Curie temp transition. The first process sets the alignment roughly and the second attempt loads the alignment with plasma. If you focus on the horseshoe magnet you will see this process. Every magnet has to be preset in the heating to cooling phase to get a strong magnet after the second treatment.


 Yeah Tesla when talking about low voltage was in the range of 1MV and bellow. Weird huh...

Free Energy | searching for free energy and discussing free energy

Re: Where the OVERUNITY using INDUCTION COILS comes from (eg Joule Thief)
« Reply #68 on: July 03, 2017, 07:07:57 PM »
3D Solar Panels

Offline jbignes5

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 1281
Re: Where the OVERUNITY using INDUCTION COILS comes from (eg Joule Thief)
« Reply #69 on: July 03, 2017, 07:34:08 PM »
It is that very large coil under the plates,, the one with about 11 ohms resistance and most likely a lot of large diameter wire,, that is what magnetizes the horseshoe magnet,, another place to see the process is for making speakers,, they magnetize the magnet after the speaker is assembled.

I get picked on a little bit when I say high voltage,, when in actuality the few volts I am talking about doesn’t even register for some :)  I kind of say high and low in reference to what I am playing with forgetting that there is a huge difference between high voltage and low voltage.


 Yeah you can do it another way by putting the coil around the horseshoe itself but since this method is easier for mass production they chose to load the magnets with plates magnetized with either polarity.

 Besides the magnet, what do you think about the other information I presented?

Offline jbignes5

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 1281
Re: Where the OVERUNITY using INDUCTION COILS comes from (eg Joule Thief)
« Reply #70 on: July 04, 2017, 05:12:24 AM »
It was interesting,, a new view on stuff and I like new views.

Which current is the fake current?


 The counter forces in a normal coil. Cemf in other words. It's a counter force to applied emf. When the opposing winds are used it shorts out the cemf and uses it to load the coil with additional voltage in the capacitance. But this cap is not the standard capacitor and can not hold the voltage for very long. Only as long as there is an emf going. I suspect it also tightens up the winds as well like in normal capacitors. So care should be used in securing the winds so that it will not ruin the insulation on the chosen wire, if you use a solid core copper magnet wire. A solid electrical wire should be used because this kind of coil is specific to the impulse currents Tesla was interested in. Oil being an excellent insulator could be used but Since Tesla was interested in cooling this kind of coil down to reduce the resistance so that nothing was impeding the emf at all.


 When I was talking about noise cancellation I was talking in reference to the beck emf we usually see after pinging a solenoid. If you use a bifilar serial wound emitter primary then a solenoid could be used as a secondary with little effect to the primary emf. This is because of the doubling of the coils. As the second wind of the bifilar is getting the emf it kinda negates the bemf from the secondary. Well that is my thinking and what we usually see in the Gene Gene application. It doesn't have to be a flat pancake at all. It could be wound on a iron core or any Ferris material. The core is to remove as much magnetism from the transformation. With the secondary being the current generator based on mass of the secondary.


 The one problem with impulse power is that it is so sudden. The gauge of the primary must be taken into account because if you drop to far in gauge the impulses tend to swell the metal so much that atoms break apart from each other. But that is if you use extreme voltages like 1 million volts, which Tesla was more then comfortable using..


 Remember the taping of the kid on a swing saying well impulses would be a tap. Time it right and you could get this thing up to extreme voltages. Resonance also works in hitting an object. Match the resonant condition of anything metal and blammo, bad things happen. This is where Tesla was experimenting with resonance and buildings and wires. He wanted to know how this could effect matter around the tapper. His whole line of experiments moved from one thing to the next trying to unlock the secrets of resonant rise and the effects on matter around that rise. This included transformers as well which includes coils.

Free Energy | searching for free energy and discussing free energy

Re: Where the OVERUNITY using INDUCTION COILS comes from (eg Joule Thief)
« Reply #70 on: July 04, 2017, 05:12:24 AM »
3D Solar Panels

Offline Magluvin

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 5752
Re: Where the OVERUNITY using INDUCTION COILS comes from (eg Joule Thief)
« Reply #71 on: July 04, 2017, 08:24:32 AM »
Been following the latest conversation....

Was just on YT for a bit and seen this vid once again, I think its was presented a while back here at OU, but I feel the need to put it up again.

What would be interesting is to try this config to see what happens to the input and also loading. He never got into that.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=D7QiI8p1gi4

Mags

Offline tinman

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 5021
Re: Where the OVERUNITY using INDUCTION COILS comes from (eg Joule Thief)
« Reply #72 on: July 04, 2017, 11:13:48 AM »
 author=jbignes5 link=topic=17297.msg507883#msg507883 date=1499093377]


Quote
No I am not missing anything, the Title is pretty specific:
 "Where the OVERUNITY using INDUCTION COILS comes from (eg Joule Thief)"
 The example given is the style of a joule thief and not magnets passing a coil.

Then why are you bringing up bifilar coils,when the JT has nothing to do with bifilar coils.

Quote
"The JT dose not use a bifilar winding,such as Tesla intended a bifilar wound coil to work."
 The Joule thief uses interposing winding as does the bifilar winding. It uses the same sympathetic generation scheme. Yes, it wasn't a Tesla intended but it is still the same none the less.

It's not the same at all.
Please show where Tesla used one of his windings in his bifilar coil,to switch on a circuit component.

Quote
As usual you cut the last bit off of the title which clearly states an example of Joule thief.
Also there is a big difference between magnetic induction and electric induction.

Please show induction where there is one without the other.
There is no such thing as electric induction,or magnetic induction-->it is electromagnetic induction.

Quote
I posted enough information for you to investigate it. Don't read or follow links?

I see only links relating to Tesla,making magnet's,and magnetic fields effecting plasma--none of which are relevant to the JT.

Perhaps you had better go back to the start of the thread,and see how passing a magnet passed a coil at different speed's actually came about,and how that test !IS! relevant to this topic.

Quote
This is the problem. You say it is an illusion but yet it negates this counter force for real.

No it dose not.

Quote
That means it gets rid of it and it is not an illusion.

Do you know what would happen if the CEMF(your counter force) was removed ?

Quote
Because the coil has capacitance built in it negates the counter force. End of story.

Once again-no it dose not.
It only reduces the resonant frequency of the inductor--and has nothing to do with a JT.

Quote
First you say it has capacitance then you say here that it is so little. More double speak.

It's not !double speak! at all--and that's double talk BTW.
A bifilar coil such as Tesla's design,dose have a capacitance value between the two coil's-->but it is !SMALL! in value--pF only,depending on the size of the coil.

Quote
This is what it has. The capacitance is a real time capacitance meaning it lasts as long as there is a voltage potential in the coil. This mirrors the capacitance in a capacitor. This is done by laying two conductors side by side or two channels that can do two things. One: induce a voltage into the second conductor of opposite polarity and create a capacitance between those two conductors much like is done in a traditional capacitor as high as the wires insulation can stand.

Your getting yourself all confused.
I thought you were talking about Tesla's bifilar coil,where both coil's are connected in series,and both have the same polarity.
When you have two seperate coil's wound on an inductor,and induce one with a current,then the coupling between the two is electromagnetic mostly,with only less than 1% (at best) being capacitive coupling

Quote
No gains that you or anyone else will admit to. That doesn't make it any less true.

It makes it very true,until such time as it can be shown that THs transformers had an efficiency of COP 1+--and TH has never shown a transformer with an efficiency of + 100%--thats a fact.

"Are you saying the magnetic field around a PM,is plasma ?"

Quote
Yup! A cold plasma that can be revealed by an intense voltage field.

How is showing a plasma produced by an electric field,any type of proof that the magnetic field around a PM is plasma?

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2B-lKgcQJvg

Title--Plasma in Magnetic Field

OK,now i see where you are confused.

The video shows how plasma reacts in a magnetic field.
It is not showing that a magnetic field is plasma.

Quote
Now a few things to remind you of here. The air is being pumped out. A straight vacuum. Now no vacuum is perfect but yet plasma is still "created", your word not mine. See plasma is the medium. For the most part it is in a state we like to call as dark mode. This makes it invisible because there is no real energy in it. But it is capable of conducting voltages and form around magnetic fields. In the example video I have shown they are merely intensifying the plasma already around the magnets. This shows the structure of the plasma and the density of that plasma that is locked into the magnets material, this is done upon creation of the magnet.

You do know that plasma is an ionized gas consisting of positive ions and free electrons.
Now how do you think electrons may act around a PM ?
Quote: ionized gas, a gas into which sufficient energy is provided to free electrons from atoms.

Quote
"Measurements (Nichelson, 1991) of the same size single and double wound coils, both with
approximately the same inductance have shown that, at resonance, both the voltage response and
voltage gain to be several orders of magnitude greater for the double wound design."

As i have asked once already--please post reference to these test's,but in stead,you tell me to look at the links you provided,which were on Tesla,and how magnets are made.

 
Quote
AT "RESONANCE" is a very important key.
.

First off,the joule thief dose not operate at resonance,and as you wish to stay on topic,how or what dose resonance have to do with a joule thief?

Quote
Do you see how they are talking about "VOLTAGE" only here. That is another key aspect that people would rather not concentrate on

A joule thief dose not operate on voltage alone-nor dose anything else.
So more irrelevant !double speak!

 
Quote
W=V*I  Raise either V or I and there is an increase in W     Hmmm..

W?-->watt's?
I see you need I in there,so what happened to voltage only?.--How many watts from V only?.

Quote
To reduce the resistance of the wire itself, even Tesla was trying to negate that as well:

1-larger gauge wire
2-use hollow copper tube for high power/high frequency devices.
3- use silver wire
4-invent super conductive wire.

 
Quote
Pay attention to the reason why he wanted to do this. To harness the free oscillations that a free oscillating capacitor discharge emits. Getting rid of the cemf is only part of the process. Reducing the wires resistance is another.

Pay close attention
1-A capacitor dose not oscillate,unless in an LC circuit.
2- If you have an inductor that you send current through,then you also have CEMF--regardless of the winding capacitance.

Quote
Read it multiple times to get the gist of this.

Please show an inductor/coil,that has a voltage dropped across it,void of CEMF

 
Quote
Think about this now. If you can harness a freely oscillating capacitor through a coil that has negated cemf and lowered resistance then would the secondary reduce the oscillation?

Dont need to think about it,as the answer is straight forward.
A coil cannot and dose not negate CEMF-regardless of winding capacitance.

Quote
This is the reason Tesla devised the disruptive discharge circuit. It negates the feedback to the capacitor via a magnetic pathway across the spark gap. This separates the capacitor from the emitter coil and allows the circuit to continue oscillating away
.

Perhaps first learn and understand how the Tesla coil work's,then get back to us. ;)

Quote
The bifilar method is another way to get rid of the return feedback in the transformer.

No it's not.

Quote
When the secondary responds the bifilar is going through the second pass through the coil and negates the response from the secondary. All with one blast from a cap.

The Tesla bifilar coil has no secondary.

Removed all the !double speak! about noise cancellation,as it is irrelevant to the topics subject.


Brad

Offline citfta

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 668
Re: Where the OVERUNITY using INDUCTION COILS comes from (eg Joule Thief)
« Reply #73 on: July 04, 2017, 12:36:41 PM »
jbignes5,

You should pay attention to Brad.  He is correct in all that he has posted in reply to your post.  You are very confused about the bifilar coils and what they can and can't do.  There is a thread here where they were very thoroughly investigated to see what if any special qualities they might have.

The only special quality the bifilar has is the extra capacitance between the turns of the coil.  And this is only if you connect it up as a series connected bifilar coil.  Otherwise the capacitance is the same as if it were a normal coil.  Connect the two windings in parallel and the extra capacitance is gone because the higher voltage between turns is gone.  And as Brad has said the extra capacitance is very small.

And Brad is also correct that the only effect the extra capacitance has is to lower the normal resonant frequency of the coil.  It DOES NOT do away with the CEMF.  I can't imagine where you got that idea.  There is so much false information being put on YouTube that you really shouldn't be using YouTube as a source of information.  Go back to some good electronics books such as the American Radio Relay League Radio Operators handbook.  Or ARRL handbook for short.  You can get a cheap copy on Ebay.  Then you can learn about how electrical circuits really work.  Or start studying a good online electronics course.

Brad and I both are actively seeking evidence of overunity.  I believe OU is possible and I think Brad does also.  But if it exists it won't be found by following the false information being promoted by so many on YouTube.  You can do the experiments for yourself to see that a lot of what is posted is simply not true.

Respectfully,
Carroll

Offline web000x

  • Full Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 107
Re: Where the OVERUNITY using INDUCTION COILS comes from (eg Joule Thief)
« Reply #74 on: July 04, 2017, 02:16:50 PM »
jbignes5,

You should pay attention to Brad.  He is correct in all that he has posted in reply to your post.  You are very confused about the bifilar coils and what they can and can't do.  There is a thread here where they were very thoroughly investigated to see what if any special qualities they might have.



I feel like this investigation was fairly short lived considering the encouragement from a certain few individuals regarding this concept.  I'm still working on this as I don't think this investigation of bifilar coils has been fully vetted.

 

OneLink