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

Custom Search

### Author Topic: FREQUENCY TO ENERGY (METHOD 1)  (Read 5903 times)

#### piplin

• Newbie
• Posts: 13
##### FREQUENCY TO ENERGY (METHOD 1)
« on: February 12, 2021, 12:31:56 AM »
Hi all.
I introduce myself:
I've been following this forum for a long time, and in general the issue of free energy. A few years ago I discovered a forum in my language, in which a guy made a series of posts that I found quite interesting and I would like to present word for word what that person exposed.
That forum was closed in 2012, and all that project was forgotten.
I want to make it clear that I am a simple amateur, and I do not have enough knowledge to know if what I am going to expose can be viable or not. All I know is based on research and self-study, I do not have materials or reliable measuring equipment. Therefore I do not have the capacity to replicate it, much less to know if it has solid bases.

He posted this:

The famous equation:

E = h * f

It has never been used to its full potential, it has always been put as a law only valid in the world of the very small, that although it says "Energy is frequency", we remain in our macroscopic world where energies we always see them as something that depends on things like current, voltage, time, mass, speed, and we see this strange law as valid in the world of the small and not the big one, but if we start to see things of our world, as for example, a piston or cylinder cyclically hits a surface or a hammer, it is very clear that if the hammer increases its frequency of blows, its energy increases, and if the frequency of blows decreases, its energy decreases, and the relationship is linear, if we raise the frequency to double the energy doubles and if we lower the frequency to half, the energy also drops to half, that is very clear in mechanical systems so that law is certainly valid in our macroscopic world.
Therefore, the electrons that move in electrical circuits are small quantums that must obey the same law. An electron moving at 50 Hz will have the same energy as another electron moving at 100 Hz for example.

If we take 2 power oscillators, let's say both deliver 12 V and 1 A effective load to the load, but the first works at 1 KHz and the other at 1 MHz. If we measure the powers in the load with conventional instruments, we will see nothing different, We will always see 12 watts, assuming sinusoidal waveforms, the question then is to know what happens, because according to quantum the electrons in the 1 MHz oscillator have 1000 times more energy than in the 1 KHz oscillator, and the obvious question is to know what happens, where is that extra energy, the answer is very simple, we are not using the appropriate method to extract it and we are wasting it.

Let's consider the law of conservation of energy but now in the equation E = h * f, as "energy is frequency" then the law of conservation of energy becomes "law of conservation of frequency". This means that if we have a frequency of a signal or wave enters a process with frequency f1 and changes to f2, 2 things may be happening:

- f2> f1, energy is being injected from an external agent to the wave or signal
- f2 <f1, signal energy is being released to the system the frequency has been lowered

Clearly the option f2 <f1 serves us in that we would extract the energy "packed" in the frequency of the signal, so if we lower the frequency of the signal we extract its energy, in fact if we derive the original equation to evaluate the useful power:

P = dE / dt = h * df / dt

We clearly see that the frequency must change and in this case, go down. The correct method is as follows:
Consider a perfectly sinusoidal signal of voltage of amplitude V and angular frequency w, we have:

Vi = V * Sen (w * t)

Now we process the signal by adding its maximum value:

V1 = V + V * Sen (w * t)

I represent this in the attached graphic diagram, in red is the original input signal and in blue the V1 signal processed so far:
https://postimg.cc/vgF3hdPV

Note that the V1 signal is always positive and twice the amplitude of the input signal, also note what would happen if one of the positive semisines is inverted, it would result in an alternating signal, AC totally doubled in amplitude, but note that the frequency is lowered to half, that can be clearly seen in the following image:

https://postimg.cc/c6Df4SQB

There we see the input signal in red as before, but in blue we see the V1 signal with some inverted semisens, and the signal is clearly doubled in amplitude and lowered in frequency by half, the output signal is alternate and the positive part is:
Vo = V * (1 + Sen (w * t))

And the negative part is:
Vo = -V * (1 + Sen (w * t))

This can be repeated with the same output signal with the algorithm seen before:
- Add its maximum value to the signal
- Invert some sections where the signal crosses zero.

If it repeats, the signal will now quadruple in amplitude and its frequency will go to a quarter.
This means that in obedience to the fundamental equation we are transforming frequency into energy, each time we lower the frequency of the signal, it increases in amplitude, and if the current remains fixed, then for each processing step the signal is doubling its power, giving the gain in this way:

COP = 2 ^ N

Being N the number of stages the signal passes with the algorithm or processing, likewise:

f1 / f2 = 2 ^ N

Thus the amplitude rises exponentially, the frequency falls exponentially and the power rises exponentially.
This has immediate consequences:
An oscillator for example of 1 watt generates 1 MHz, if we lower the frequency by this method in successive steps until reaching 50 Hz it would give us a power of:

P = 1 * 10 ^ 6/50 = 20 KW

And the number of stages given by:

10 ^ 6/50 = 2 ^ N

What is approx N = 14

Let's go a little further, now a 150 MHz handy (pocket transmitter) and emits its typical 5 watts of output, if we lower the frequency to 50 Hz, the power would be:

P = 5 * 150 * 10 ^ 6/50 = 15 Megawatts

And the necessary stages:

2 ^ N = 150 * 10 ^ 6/50 = 3000000 N = 21

Which is extremely practical, but we can go further even thinking about your own PC now has the reader working, inside it there is a very high frequency oscillator that generates many gigahertz for the processor, but let's think about a PC that is quite old for getting the idea, let's say an IBM Power PC 970, with a 1.8 GHz processor speed which is fed with 1.3 V at 42 watts (32.3 A). If that high frequency we lower it with 26 stages to about 50 Hz, we get the tremendous power of 1.3 Gigawatts, enough power to power a small country, your PC has an oscillator much faster than that, so your PC is in a position to power an entire country like Spain without problems and it is an energy wasted nobody uses.
We are converting frequency into voltage, so remember that:

E = h * f = q * V

q, the charge of the electron and V the potential moves, there is a direct connection between frequency and voltage. However, to conserve energy, if the frequency is lowered N times the voltage must rise N times. As the frequency can be brought down to almost 0 Hz, the potential power gain is infinite, we are transforming time into energy.

This does not stay only in electrical systems, as I put the example of the mechanical hammer, this is also applicable in mechanical systems, only that these are slower and the frequencies cannot be brought so high since the electrons have little inertia, but a small mechanical oscillator will have little inertia and will be able to oscillate quickly and from it you can get a lot of power by taking it to sub-sonic frequencies, that is why Tesla, carried a small box with batteries that fit in his pocket and managed to move the Empire State under construction with a powerful earthquake in those times scaring the workers, many have believed he used resonance, but those who have tried it by that method have failed, clearly it used this other to amplify power by converting frequency into energy.
I start only with the concept, those who already know a little about electronics or electricity, I think they already realize which are the basic circuits that do the first processing of the signal, there is another method to do it, but I start with this one.
Warm regards to all.

This was his first post. What do you think about what is exposed here? Remember that I am a mere transmitter / translator. I will continue to translate more of his comments from that thread as soon as possible.

#### piplin

• Newbie
• Posts: 13
##### Re: FREQUENCY TO ENERGY (METHOD 1)
« Reply #1 on: February 23, 2021, 09:28:55 PM »
Hello.

I am preparing the next post which is extended with more information.

Greetings.

#### piplin

• Newbie
• Posts: 13
##### Re: FREQUENCY TO ENERGY (METHOD 1)
« Reply #2 on: February 24, 2021, 08:19:55 PM »
Hello again, here you have more information.

The frequency can be much higher than zero, it is only interesting that the change in frequency is noticeable, in addition, it is interesting to leave the frequency at a practical value, such as 50 Hz or 60 Hz from a higher frequency, such as 10 KHz.
The energy of a vacuum is in a volume, 1 cubic centimeter, not in a surface, certainly 1 cm3 of matter has less energy than the energy stored in 1 cm3 of vacuum, that is calculated based on the results of many experiments not only of Tesla but many other people where the cosmic ether is seen as the fusion of matter with antimatter, dipoles capable of breaking and extracting their energy only by applying electrostatic potentials, for example, electron-positron pairs with their gamma radiation emerging from the vacuum when applying potentials above 1.3 Megavolts continuous, but that is another topic that can be discussed more in another post perhaps, and the techniques of extracting electrons from the vacuum directly.

The circuit that manages to process the signal in the way I described in the method is the famous voltage doubler, it does not do everything, but the first step is to raise the signal to its maximum value, that is, a diode in series with a capacitor , as if it were a half-wave rectifier, but instead of taking the signal through the capacitor, we take the signal between the anode and the cathode of the diode, that is, in the first graph I put, the input signal to the doubler would be the one in red, and the output sign the one in blue.

The stage that follows will invert the semicycles alternately, for this we need a circuit to detect the zero crossing of the output signal through the diode and reverse its polarity using transistors or another semiconductor work as a switch.

Below I put a basic version of the control that although it is exaggerated and can be reduced much more with a flip-flop, it works perfectly and serves didactic purposes:

There we see the voltage doubler formed by diode D1 and capacitor C, then comes the stage that will invert the semicycles formed by 4 NMOS transistors with the load or consumption connected at the end, but in reality, more than connecting a load at the output In this first stage, there would be another frequency processing stage, but for demonstration and didactic purposes we can put something at the output, or at least measure everything is going as expected.

The control stage of the transistor bridge can be achieved with the circuit that we see there constituted by an operational amplifier and the CD4017, the pair of resistors of 330 Kilo Ohms and 10 Kilo Ohms lower the voltage of the incoming signal in order to have a sample compatible with the voltage levels. the operational amplifier can support (AO for short), those resistors have that value because that circuit is designed with values to directly process the signal from the 220 VAC or 110 VAC electrical grid , the idea is that the Resistive divider outputs a signal with an amplitude lower than the supply voltage of the AO, this AO is working as a zero-crossing detector of the signal, generating a square signal at the same frequency as the signal that comes out of the doubler, when it passes through a crossing by zero the square signal has a positive rising edge and when it passes through the next there will be a negative falling edge. That will be the clock signal that will enter the CD4017. It is not more than a decade counter, but adjusted so that it does only 2 counts, not 10, therefore through the output pins 2 and 3 of the counter we will have signals that alternate their value from logical value 1 to 0 at the rate of the signal frequency and both with inverted logic, one sequential output.
The transistor bridge is controlled in the following way, for example, when counter output pin 2 is high, M1 and M4 turn on. At the same time, the output of pin 3 of the same IC is at a low logic level or 0 so the transistors M2 and M3 are open as switches, and in the next count everything is reversed, pin 2 remains low and the pin 3 high and now M2 and M3 are activated. And M1 and M4 are turned off, achieving the objective of having the signal output doubled in alternating amplitude and lowering its frequency by half.

Of course, between the counter outputs and the Gate and Source terminals of the transistors there are 4 optocouplers and 4 independent sources that I don't put. I recommend instead of putting 4 sources to put 4 DC / DC converters, so everything works with just one source.

The photo below shows a capture of the oscilloscope with a circuit like the one described

The input signal is 110 V amplitude at 100 Hz capable of delivering a power greater than 500 watts obtained from a special signal generator that can vary its amplitude and frequency in a wide range. We see that input signal in orange color and as expected, we see in the light blue output signal the same doubled in amplitude and with a frequency in half, that is, 220 V at 50 Hz

If we had entered the system 220 VAC at 50 Hz we would have at the output 440 VAC at 25 Hz, therefore for testing purposes it is advisable to use a step-down transformer lower the 220 VAC from the grid to 110 VAC, but, for those who in countries where there is 110 VAC at 60 Hz they may have an output of 220 VAC at 30 Hz, which for resistive loads is very good.

It looks simple, but there are many details to be seen, for example, the first question someone can ask is, what are the values of C, many will be tempted to put a power load at the output of the transistorized bridge, such as of 100 watts or more to verify that in that first stage the power doubles or there is a saving of 50% and possibly they put a capacitor of 100 uF or close, but they will be surprised that there is no amplification, even the opposite , more is consumed than what comes out to the load, apart from strong currents and bad power factor, the reason is that simply the conversion of frequency to energy as I already mentioned is conversion of frequency to voltage, and we must work with a current as low as possible, or written in another way, that the capacitor offers the highest possible impedance, or that the first stage consumes a very low power compared to what we want in the load, for example, if we want to turn on For a 100 watt light bulb, start with only 1 watt and put more stages until we achieve the desired voltage at the output, but, if the load needs a significant current, say 100 A, since the current is the same in all the stages, what we have to do is raise the voltage much higher, 3000 V or more and with a transformer lower it to the level that the load needs with the adjusted current, so we can always pass a low current through all stages. To connect to the grid you can start by testing with a capacitor of at most 0.1 uF, 400 V and a 1N4007 diode. The older the doubling system the better, in the days the semiconductor diode did not exist, you could do something much better Instead of 4 transistors we can use only 2 and a midpoint transformer as well.

Well perfected the system results in a small portable box that could use batteries or a battery and deliver a lot of power, it all depends on the ratio between the output frequency and the input frequency and the number of stages, in fact, the computer you are using in this moment has enough energy to power an entire country, lowering the gigahertz of the main oscillator to 50 Hz or 60 Hz

Think how much more energy you could have with this method if you could process visible light whose frequency is in the hundreds of thousands of gigahertz and lower it by a similar optical method at 50 Hz or 60 Hz totally passive and without losses. Nature does something similar with the photoelectric effect, the atoms absorb quanta of light and the input frequency is reduced, ultraviolet light for example comes out red, but in a process it takes energy out of the frequency and leaves what is left over. However, much of the ultraviolet light that enters the planet remains as infrared radiation of quite appreciable energy capable of heating rocks to a high temperature.

Finally, I emphasize that despite the fact that more energy leaves than enters the frequency processor system, thermodynamic laws are not violated, we have only released the energy packed in quantums of frequency

When two physical quantities A and B are connected by a constant:

A = k * B

or

A = k / B

We can say that A and B are essentially the same, and here

E = k * f = k / T

It tells us that in essence energy and time are the same, by slowing down the pulsations we release the energy of the quantum wave packet

Greetings

#### seychelles

• Hero Member
• Posts: 820
##### Re: FREQUENCY TO ENERGY (METHOD 1)
« Reply #3 on: February 25, 2021, 05:26:26 AM »
THANKS FOR SHARING. PURE GENIUS. I HAVE TO WRAP MY WHOLE WAY OF THINKING AROUND
THIS GREAT PRINCIPLE.

#### Shorted

• Newbie
• Posts: 8
##### Re: FREQUENCY TO ENERGY (METHOD 1)
« Reply #4 on: February 25, 2021, 01:00:27 PM »
Thank you Piplin! Looks very Interesting! Is there a method 2 as well?

#### Jeg

• Hero Member
• Posts: 1539
##### Re: FREQUENCY TO ENERGY (METHOD 1)
« Reply #5 on: February 25, 2021, 02:25:55 PM »
Hi piplin
Thanks for sharing.
Very interesting technique! Looks like that any possible gain is in your technique itself which doubles voltage for nothing, while frequency division by two is just a consequence and not the cause. Nice catch!

#### seychelles

• Hero Member
• Posts: 820
##### Re: FREQUENCY TO ENERGY (METHOD 1)
« Reply #6 on: February 25, 2021, 03:58:40 PM »
ACTUALLY, A SOLAR CELL DOES EXACTLY THAT. AND I WAS WONDERING IF THE SOLAR CELL SHOULD HAVE A
THIRD LEG, GATE OR BASE TO SOMEHOW TO MODULATE THE POWER OUT INTO AC. COULD BE THE NEXT BEST EFFICIENT SOLAR CELLS.

#### e2matrix

• Hero Member
• Posts: 1881
##### Re: FREQUENCY TO ENERGY (METHOD 1)
« Reply #7 on: February 25, 2021, 06:41:26 PM »
In the equation E = h * f I think Planck's constant refers to photons but does it also refer to electrons?  Fascinating idea.

Looking at the inverse though doesn't it seem it would take a huge amount of energy to achieve a Gigahertz frequency?   I haven't absorbed all of the above info yet so pardon if that's a stupid question

#### piplin

• Newbie
• Posts: 13
##### Re: FREQUENCY TO ENERGY (METHOD 1)
« Reply #8 on: February 26, 2021, 09:04:00 PM »
Thank you Piplin! Looks very Interesting! Is there a method 2 as well?
Hi Shorted.
Yes, there is also a method 2 that I will post as soon as I can. Method 2, at least for me, is more technical.

#### piplin

• Newbie
• Posts: 13
##### Re: FREQUENCY TO ENERGY (METHOD 1)
« Reply #9 on: February 26, 2021, 09:12:03 PM »
From my humble opinion: I think that the key to knowing if the proposed idea has possibilities is only to know if it is possible to have the same current at the output of the voltage doubler as at the input.

Because, what a voltage doubler does is reserve the negative cycle to supply it together with the positive cycle. I am right?

#### piplin

• Newbie
• Posts: 13
##### Re: FREQUENCY TO ENERGY (METHOD 1)
« Reply #10 on: February 26, 2021, 09:37:34 PM »
I continue with more content:

Certainly the conversion of frequency into energy is something that comes not from speaking or writing but from practice, all free energy machines revolve around the same principle, especially pulse motors, which in method 2 can be seen better, but before that you have to know where to start, the practice without knowing what you are doing is act without thinking and many times you end up confused, if you start well, first analyzing a consistent theory we already know in practice where to go.
Precisely, the revolutionary Max Planck equation

E = h * f

It came from the results of the black body analysis, it was so revolutionary that even Planck was afraid to expose it as a discovery, that fear of ridicule among orthodox scientists, but, clearly says that energy is only frequency, that equation is more revolutionary than Einstein's (E = m * c ^ 2) because it was not new that matter stored a lot of energy but rather the magnitude of said energy and that both things were the same, but this Planck equation tells us that there is much more energy to take out in less volume. But in orthodox science it has always been taught that this formula is applicable in the world of the quantum, little things are not seen and that in our macroscopic world it does not rule, are not electrons quantums?
The law of conservation of energy thanks to this equation is transformed into the law of conservation of frequency and such extra energy comes from time itself by decelerating the wave that can be either electromagnetic or mechanical, and time is an energetic manifestation from the ether.

Method 1 is a general principle, that of drawing energy from the frequency by lowering it, not the suggested circuit, which can have many better variants or a completely different circuit that does the same.
In the voltage doubler, a high impedance capacitor is needed in order to extract the minimum energy from the source, that is, low current, or else, as the capacitor is charged in parallel to the alternating source and then discharged in series, use parallel resonance in the load, so the current drawn from the source with the desired impedance of the capacitor would be little or nothing, there are many variants.

I don't want to go to method 2 before someone achieves something with method 1.

Warm greetings

#### AlienGrey

• Hero Member
• Posts: 3556
##### Re: FREQUENCY TO ENERGY (METHOD 1)
« Reply #11 on: February 27, 2021, 08:10:05 AM »
Piplin Hi there Your Plank thievery does feel to have a connection with many of the circuit ideas presented on some of the threads
presented here, lets take your capacitor charging in parallel and dumping in series. If one was to adopt that idea into practice
wouldn't one need to charge at one frequency and dump at another as the charge would be split in two as your cutting charge
in two there for your gaining nothing just stretching it, your idea WOULD NEED A PRACTICAL VISUAL EXAMPLE.
I am interested in your hypothesis but have you a practical example ?

Regards AG

PS Have a look at Ron Coles bipolar switch circuit

#### piplin

• Newbie
• Posts: 13
##### Re: FREQUENCY TO ENERGY (METHOD 1)
« Reply #12 on: February 27, 2021, 09:45:20 PM »
Now I will post some ideas and developments that some people made, based on what was exposed by that user:

One said:

There are many types of h-bridge, and it is used mostly to control the rotation in DC motors, and I also realized that the scheme you proposed at the beginning of this topic is precisely an h-bridge, only with mosfet and controlled by the CD4017, so taking advantage of components that I already have, and some other that I have to get and with the help of Proteus (electronic simulator), I have done this:

https://postimg.cc/23BVL7yF

Perhaps the scheme is a bit confusing, but basically it is the proposed scheme transformed to bipolar transistors and following the previous basic scheme of the h-bridge.

The power supply is an AC source that gives me a sine wave of 20 v amplitude at a frequency of 50 Hz, and the measurements in voltage and frequency of the source and between points A and B, are the following:

https://postimg.cc/rDyVj1VH

As seen in the simulation measurements, between A and B the voltage almost doubles and the frequency (rectangular digital displays) drops by half, in principle it would be what it has to be.
The oscilloscope graph is weird, but I think I have the explanation:

https://postimg.cc/xNSYzHpt

As you can see, it does not correspond to the signal posted by the OP, but I think the problem is in the same simulator, it always takes the same ground, so the signals at point A (blue) and at point B (red ) are positive, because both are actually positive with respect to the sine generator ground.

Be that as it may, I will try to put together this scheme, this time with real components, if someone sees something wrong, that escapes me, or has any suggestion to make it work better, I would greatly appreciate the information.

The issue of the grounds is not very clear to me, I am not able to separate them in Proteus, I have added a lamp between points A and B to be able to get the current graph, because I am not able to get the voltage graph. And it looks like this:

https://postimg.cc/dDKLdTyb

https://postimg.cc/QVkVqxgH

As can be seen in the graph (the measurement is made at the point where the blue arrow marked Q1 (C) is), the current signal is sinusoidal (more or less) so putting together all the data, that is, the RMS voltage measurement, halving frequency and current graph, I think it will work.

Kind regards to all.

#### piplin

• Newbie
• Posts: 13
##### Re: FREQUENCY TO ENERGY (METHOD 1)
« Reply #13 on: February 27, 2021, 09:53:33 PM »
Piplin Hi there Your Plank thievery does feel to have a connection with many of the circuit ideas presented on some of the threads
presented here, lets take your capacitor charging in parallel and dumping in series. If one was to adopt that idea into practice
wouldn't one need to charge at one frequency and dump at another as the charge would be split in two as your cutting charge
in two there for your gaining nothing just stretching it, your idea WOULD NEED A PRACTICAL VISUAL EXAMPLE.
I am interested in your hypothesis but have you a practical example ?

Regards AG

PS Have a look at Ron Coles bipolar switch circuit

Hello AlienGrey.

I do not know if you have read the first post, but the idea is not mine, in fact I am not an expert on these issues, far from it. I just limit myself to capturing what I think may be interesting in this active forum of free energy researchers.

I am simply translating and synthesizing the most relevant of what was written on this matter.

The idea is that those of you who have extensive knowledge of electronics and physics say if it is viable or not.

Cheers

#### Shorted

• Newbie
• Posts: 8
##### Re: FREQUENCY TO ENERGY (METHOD 1)
« Reply #14 on: February 28, 2021, 10:20:04 AM »
At normal operation every stage should divide the current along with the frequency. Voltage is easy to manipulate. But the voltage doubler is designed to sacrifice current to double the voltage.

Lets forget about the equation at a moment and think of a simple example..
A non electrical example of what the basic idea is:

Lets say you can hit a nail to the wood with the hammer with constant rate of hits and power.
(ignore gravity down forces - horizontal hammer movement)

1) We hit the first nail. for 10 seconds.
The frequency is 2 hits per second.
Each hit force equal lets say 4 newton.
So the total force spend for 10 seconds equals 80 newtons.

2) Now lets try another nail. We divide the frequency to 1 hit per second and double the
force to 8 newton and keep it for 10 seconds as well.
The total force spend again equals 80 newton.

At both examples the nail at the end has accepted the same amount of energy. It is a closed system.

This equation can be "somehow" valid if at least photons really exist. Do they? I am not convinced yet!