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: Reactive Current - Parallel RCL  (Read 67430 times)

#### nix85

• Hero Member
• Posts: 1148
##### Re: Reactive Current - Parallel RCL
« Reply #330 on: December 30, 2021, 05:12:16 PM »
Continuing on the subject of transformers, here is something i shared before but is worth repeating this guy at Quora nicely summed up exactly what happens when secondary is loaded, what is in series what in parallel etc. This is of course not a full explanation of how transformer works, this is just some basic conventional stuff.

A transformer with open secondary is just an inductor. The concept of backEMF makes no sense here. What will happen is the current will lag the voltage by 90° in the ideal case. Power delivered to the inductor is current times voltage. Note that this averages to 0 over any whole cycle when the current and voltage are sines with 90° phase shift between them. Energy is put into the inductor during half the cycle, then given back during the other half. The average power transfer is 0. The energy that is absorbed and then given back is temporarily stored in the magnetic field of the transformer core. In reality, the inductor will not be purely inductive, but will also appear to have some resistance in series with its inductance. That resistance is the DC resistance of the wire the primary coil is made from. That resistance will dissipate power proportional to the square of the current thru it. In a "good" transformer or inductor, this resistance is small compared to the impedance due to the inductance over the frequency range the device is intended to work. Looking at the voltage and current, the current will lag the voltage a little less than 90° due to this resistance. The average of the voltage x current over a whole cycle is now a little positive, which is the energy dissipated by the resistance each cycle. Getting even closer to reality, there will also be some loss in storing then retrieving magnetic energy to/from the transformer core each cycle. This will also appear as a resistive component electrically. The resistance will appear in parallel with the primary inductance. Both together are in series with the DC resistance of the coil.

When a load is connected to the secondary, it looks a lot like the core gets more lossy to the circuit driving the primary. The primary looks more resistive (which means voltage and current are now more in-phase), which accounts for the higher power it now draws at the same voltage.

Like the core loss resistance, this additional resistance appears in parallel with the inductance of the primary, from the point of view of the circuit driving the primary. In a ideal transformer with ideal load, the secondary removes energy from the magnetic core exactly as the primary tries to put it there. The result is the primary current is now in phase with its voltage, and therefore looks purely resistive. This of course never happens exactly because there are always inevitable losses.

In the ideal case, a transformer primary looks like whatever impedance is connected to the secondary, divided by the square of the turns ratio. For example, let's say a transformer has a 1:3 turns ratio. You put 12 VAC into the primary, and ideally get 36V out of the secondary. If there is 10 Ω on the secondary, then it is delivering 36V/10Ω = 130W. This has to go into the primary, which means the primary current is 130W/12V = 10.8A, which means the primary look slike a 12V/10.8A = 1.11 Ω resistor. Note that 1.11Ω / 10Ω = 1/9, which is the square of the turns ratio.

..............

Also...

The magnetizing current is quite small compared to the full load current of the transformer. Magnetizing current remains constant irrespective of secondary load. The magnetizing current lags the voltage by 90 degrees.

#### nix85

• Hero Member
• Posts: 1148
##### Re: Reactive Current - Parallel RCL
« Reply #331 on: January 02, 2022, 03:49:46 AM »
In the case you have not seen Etheric Rainmaking by James Constable

#### nix85

• Hero Member
• Posts: 1148
##### Re: Reactive Current - Parallel RCL
« Reply #332 on: January 03, 2022, 06:08:14 PM »
From NEWSPAPER "LA CROIX", one of newspapers that reported the encounter at the time. This is another in a long row of indications of a secret military in this case Russian space program. All reports in the link below.

October 21, 1954, France.

A worker from Saint-Rémy (Vosges), Mr. Ujvari, 40 years old, has just told the gendarmes of Raon-l'Etape that, last Wednesday, around 3 a.m., he was stopped on the road by a stranger of large build and average height, wearing a gray jacket, decorated on the shoulders with shiny badges.

The man spoke an unknown language. Mr. Ujvari, of Czech nationality, tried to speak Russian. His interlocutor understood it perfectly. "Where am I, he asked, in Italy, in Spain?" He then inquired about the distance separating him from the German border, and the time. The worker having told him that it was around 3:30 a.m., the man took out of his jacket a watch that marked 4 a.m.

Then the stranger gave the worker the order to move forward. Soon Ujvari saw in the middle of the road a craft in the shape of two plates reversed one against the other, from which emerged a kind of periscope.

Arrived at about thirty meters from the apparatus, which was about 1.50 high and 2.50 m. wide, the stranger tells him to move away. But, looking back from time to time, Mr. Ujvari varies could see the machine rise slowly vertically with a noise of sewing machines. Arrived at an altitude of 500 meters, it took the horizontal and disappeared in direction of the south.

Mr. Ujvari said the unknown was wearing a helmet similar to that of a motorcyclist. He had a gun in his hand.

His last word to Mr. Ujvari was "farewell" in Russian.

https://ufologie.patrickgross.org/1954/21oct1954saintremy.htm

#### nix85

• Hero Member
• Posts: 1148
##### Re: Reactive Current - Parallel RCL
« Reply #333 on: January 20, 2022, 05:41:26 AM »
Little more valuable info on the transformer as constant flux device, what exactly happens, in short due to counter flux developed by the secondary (lenz), overall flux in the core drops, since voltage across the primary is due to inductive reactance (V=IZ) it falls too, new created difference between the source voltage and voltage across the primary cause the rise of current until flux and voltage across the primary are restored (almost) to original value (not exactly since full load flux in the core is slightly LESS than no load flux).

#### nix85

• Hero Member
• Posts: 1148
##### Re: Reactive Current - Parallel RCL
« Reply #334 on: February 13, 2022, 09:10:27 PM »
Another confirmation of secret space program... i know it is pointless to post this cause most of you could not give less fuck, but i am sure there is 1 in a thousand who will appreciate the info so here it is, this is shared by Jorge Martín Miranda on facebook. Below is image of the guards that met em and below that "abandoned" US navy installation on top of Pico del Este near which encounter happened. And then illustration made by Mr. Freddie González of the object he saw inside the camouflaged facilty

Area 51 S-4 like Installation in El Yunque Rain Forest, Puerto Rico?
By Jorge Martín Miranda

During our presentation as a speaker in the July 1993 MUFON Symposium we included in our talk details about the existence of an alleged site similar to the S-4 facility that allegedly exists in the Area 51 section of Nellis Air Force base, in Nevada, USA. One of them was based on an experience a young couple of puertorricans had in the area of Pico del Este (the Eastern Peak), in El Yunque Rain Forest.

One night in late February 1991, young Freddie González and his wife, Nilda Cuevas, went to El Yunque rainforest. With them were Nilda’s younger brother, who was just a child, and their baby.

They had arrived from New York city, where they lived, an wanted to visit the forest, so they took Freddie’s mother’s car and headed up into the forest along road 191. Ecstatic with the beauty of the area and its lush vegetation, they reached a point where there was a large opening between the foliage in the area.

The sun was already low in the horizon when Freddie got out of the vehicle to check it and discovered that the opening was a camouflaged gate covered by thick vegetation.

They decided to continue on through the opening, and further along the way were surprised to find themselves driving on a modern, well-paved road. It was already around 7:30 PM.

“From a certain point onward, there were blue light bulbs at the road’s edge, on each side,” González told us in an interview. “It was like on an airport’s runway at night.”

He continued his explanation. “At that point we felt a weird sensation. Nilda said that we should go back, but I kept going. The road continued going up between the mountains.

“We kept on going for 2 or more miles, and reached the end of the road. There was a big metallic gate there, and a building behind it some distance away, in the middle of a mountain. Just then, two men wearing strange uniforms showed up and stopped us. They ask who we were and what we were doing there.

“They both stood some six feet tall, dressed in tight fitting, one-piece black suits of a leather-like material, similar to a diver’s wet suit. They also wore a wide, black belt. Both of them wore black gloves and black boots with what looked like metallic gold buttons on their sides. These went all the way up to their knees.

"They both also wore big, oval helmets with black visors. You could not see their faces, and I can’t explain how they were able to see us as it was getting dark (see drawing). Everything they wore was completely black, except for those golden buttons.”

“They ordered us to stop,” González added. “Then they told us to get out of the car. Thier voices sounded electronic, muffled. But they both spoke in Spanish language. Maybe their voices sounded like that because of their helmets.

“I got out of the car, but told my wife to remain inside. They asked who we were, and requested our driving licenses and Ids. We gave this to them. They looked at them and gave them back to us.

"They then examined the car’s license plate, and one of them examined the bottom part of the car with a long, metallic object like a thin tube that had a mirror on its end. He said that 'everything was O.K'. Why he did that, I truly don’t know.

“Then they looked at my wife, our baby, and my brother-in-law, and asked again why we were there. I explained that we wanted to have a look at the rainforest and got lost. The two men talked between themselves in a language that sounded strange, guttural-like, and garbled. I would compare it with the Russian language... or maybe German language.

“One of them left the site and at that moment I saw a car approaching. It was a dark blue pick-up truck, and inside of it were two men dressed in one-piece blue overalls like the ones mechanics use. They were Puerto Ricans, because of their accent. They spoke Spanish, and also asked us who we were and how we had gotten there. They would not talk to the tall man dressed in black, who remained there.

“I noticed that the pick-up’s door had a U.S. Navy sign on it and realized, “The Navy? Of course, Navy Roosevelt Roads Station in Ceiba! It is close to the forest!”
The men in the truck looked at my wife and the kids and whispered something to the man dressed in black...”

At that moment, there was a sudden flash of light which came from the direction where the pickup truck had come from. Freddie couldn’t help but see it, and he looked in that direction, but had trouble believing what he saw.

“That light,” he said, “came from inside a rectangular hollowed out area which seemed to be excavated into the side of the mountain covered by vegetation.

“That rectangular area was actually an opening with big crystal doors, and inside of it was an object similar to a flying saucer! It had a circular shape with windows all around its center (see drawing by the witness).

“I could see it clearly due to the brilliance of the light inside. Some men wearing white lab coats were doing something with the saucer, like electrical soldering, and that was what produced the flashes that called my attention.

“The craft seemed to be about some 30 feet in diameter. It was metallic and silvery. It rested on some supports.

“All of a sudden I realized that I was seeing something that, perhaps, I should not be witnessing and became scared. I looked away. The men apparently were not aware that I had seen the saucer.”

One of the men in the pick-up truck told the young couple that they should not be there at that time of night “...because people get lost in the dark and disappear easily in the forest without ever being seen again.”

He ordered them to follow them, that they would drive them out of the area. They also instructed them that they could not talk to anyone about what they saw and what happened there.”

Afraid, they obeyed, and were escorted out of the area. Once they arrived at Route 191, they began their descent from the mountaintop. The Navy pick-up truck followed them for awhile, and then suddenly disappeared from sight.

Freddie and his wife were very nervous, fearing that because of what they saw in El Yunque the U.S. Government might come after them.

In fact, two days later, while they visited the wife’s parents in the town of Canóvanas, everyone present at the place noticed a dark car with four individuals inside of it parked in front of the house. The individuals inside wore fine civilian suits, neckties and dark glasses. They seemed to be watching them. Parked next to the dark car was a military camouflaged truck.

“Someone” was letting them know that they were being watched, and it was obvious to Freddie González and his wife that the reason for that was what they had seen in El Yunque.

According to the couple, Some of the individuals entered the house and talked with them, insisting they should go back with them to El Yunque to discuss something. The couple refused to go, terrified that they might “disappear” in the forest.

Once the men realized that the couple would not go with them, they departed. After this incident, González and his wife left Puerto Rico and moved to the United States, where they still reside.

González believes that the reason they were not taken by the men was due to the children being present at the time. He wonders what would have happened if they were alone that night.

We asked him why they decided to tell us their story, and he replied, “Look, I am conscious of the importance of what we saw up there, as it has many implications. But people should know about it. We deserve to know what is happening. It is our right to know.”

We agreed on this with the witness. But, who were the mysterious individuals dressed with the tightfitting black suits and helmets?

Why would they be wearing this type of suit in such a warm and humid environment like the one in El Yunque rainforest?

Were they human beings or of extraterrestrial origin?

Why did they speak at times in a strange, guttural garbled language the witnesses could not identify?

What can be said for sure is that the individuals who removed the couple from the site were driving a pick-up truck labeled as belonging to the U.S. Navy, which again, implies a connection between that US military agency and the UFO situation.

This was one of the many incidents we reported in the July 1993 MUFON Symposium in Virginia.

In recent years there has been a considerable increase in U.S. military presence in the rainforest, and many visitors have been taken out from it at gun point, even when they were not in restricted areas. This was often done in an aggressive manner and without explanation.

#### nix85

• Hero Member
• Posts: 1148
##### Re: Reactive Current - Parallel RCL
« Reply #335 on: February 13, 2022, 09:22:18 PM »
People quickly forget so let me also remind you nazis REALLY did build gravitational spaceships prior to, during and after WW2, it is NOT just a myth. Accept it wholesomely and understand the implications.

Here is a  testimony of a German pilot first published in 1998 in a book by Karl-Heinz Zunneck. Quote from https://ufomotion.xyz/Dossier_HTML_PDF/Hitlers_Flying_Saucers.pdf

The sighting in question was reported to the author, Mr. Zunneck, by Horst Schuppmann whose friend knew the pilot of the JU-52 in question. The date was July, 1944. Accompanying the pilot on this three and one-half hour flight was a co-pilot, a mechanic, and the radio man. The airplane took off from Brest-Deblin and flew on a westerly course to Lublin. The flight was unfolding smoothly which was somewhat abnormal for the particular time and stage of the war. Over Stettin Lagoon preparations were made to land. A large white cross was sighted which was the marker for their goal, a meadow landing strip. The aircraft descended, landed normally and rolled toward a group of bushes which would hide the aircraft from view. Then things took a decided turn to the abnormal. Harsh orders were received that the pilot, co-pilot and mechanic were not to exit the airplane. Suddenly, the radio man had vanished. The others waited an hour in vain for his return.

Finally, the pilot decided to get out of the airplane and find his missing crewman, without orders, and on his own. On the airfield itself nobody was to be seen. There was only one building visible which was a lonely hanger. The pilot, ever concerned with maintaining cover, headed straight for this hanger. Upon arrival he opened an narrow, high sliding door and entered, hoping to receive some information. No person was to be seen but what the pilot did see bewildered him so that the image was deeply ingrained in his mind.

There in the hanger stood three or four very large, round, dark dish shaped metal constructions on telescope-like leg stands. The objects were about 6 meters off the ground and the objects themselves were 12 to 15 meters in diameter. The pilot compared the shape of the objects to a giant soup dish or soup plate. Suddenly, out of the half darkness a military guard emerged. The guard let the pilot know that he was in an area which was strictly off limits. In fact, the pilot was told, on no uncertain terms, to disappear immediately or this would be his last day on earth.

[...]

Of course the question of what those objects in the hanger really were comes back to this pilot even after almost 55 years. The pilot personally attributes it to the so called "Magnetscheibe", literally, "magnet-disk". According to the pilot rumors of these objects circulated in pilot circles since the summer of 1944.

...

Report of a Pole ex Nazi prisoner about a 75-100-yard-wide, 68-92-meter-long disk that stalled a tractor 150 meters away, a German soldier aware of the test of a spacecraft commanded not to try to start the tractor until the spacecraft left the area. This is happening in East Germany, 1944. Part of the document screenshot below

https://vault.fbi.gov/UFO/UFO%20Part%2012%20of%2016/view?fbclid=IwAR3RyYoTW5fJxh0KCT2boe2Tql_q79IefTrf8L1QyhgvKQ70cfbE6uizuA4#document/p88

Also this documentary about the aforementioned Nazi spacecraft. The sound is a bit out of sync but it doesn’t matter.

#### nix85

• Hero Member
• Posts: 1148
##### Re: Reactive Current - Parallel RCL
« Reply #336 on: February 13, 2022, 09:42:04 PM »
An example that even totally conventional things like the most ordinary airship only with a carbon fiber body is a top secret and on any inquiry about it Lockheed gives no comments, not to mention exotic stuff.

An excellent lecture by Bill Hamilton on American Underground Bases. Special Emphasis on "Anthill" Northrup RCS Facility, Tejon, California

Cosmic Top Secret: America's Secret Ufo Program - Bill Hamilton

https://avalonlibrary.net/ebooks/William%20Hamilton%20-%20Cosmic%20Top%20Secret%20-%20America%27s%20Secret%20UFO%20Program.pdf

Reagan's diary, Tuesday, June 11, 1985

"Lunch was with 5 top space scientists. It was fascinating. Space truly is the last frontier and some of the developments there in astronomy etc. are like science fiction except they are real. I learned that our shuttle capacity is such we could orbit 300 people. "

https://www.reaganfoundation.org/ronald-reagan/white-house-diaries/diary-entry-06111985/

According to the testimony of Jan Harzan, engineer and one of the directors of MUFON, in 1976 at a lecture by Ben Rich, who was a director of Lockheed Skunkworks (Lockheed's secret project department) for 16 years, Ben showed a black disk in space at the end of the lecture and stated “ We now have the technology to take ET home”.

First photo below is ARV from Provo, Utah, 1966, others are screenshots from JL Walson's (same guy shot the city on the near site) videos showing man made craft in orbit. I wonder if these show the same 600 foot arrow seen in remote Utah desert from Gordon Novel's report above.

Report Gordon A novel about a character who went on a 2005 trip to the Utah desert 40km from the nearest road, at one point saw a 180-foot arrow-shaped spacecraft silently descend, a camouflaged door in the ground opened and the spacecraft disappeared.

http://projectavalon.net/Gordon_Novel_Coast_to_Coast_AM_Jan_17_2010_Hour_2_extract.mp3

Other photos are screenshots from JL Walson's footage, here are some

If you take a good look at the arrow shaped craft below, i believe it is built in the shape of a bull, i am almost certain these are Templars.

#### activ25

• Full Member
• Posts: 161
##### Re: Reactive Current - Parallel RCL
« Reply #337 on: February 15, 2022, 11:20:47 PM »

have you read information from wikileaks too ?

#### nix85

• Hero Member
• Posts: 1148
##### Re: Reactive Current - Parallel RCL
« Reply #338 on: February 21, 2022, 09:47:45 PM »
You're welcome. I don't know which info from Wikileaks you refer to, i already posted this on previous pages but here it is.

REPORT THAT UR DESTROYED SECRET US BASE ON MOON
Date: 1979 January 24, 00:00 (Wednesday)

https://wikileaks.org/plusd/cables/P790011-1247_e.html

#### nix85

• Hero Member
• Posts: 1148
##### Re: Reactive Current - Parallel RCL
« Reply #339 on: March 23, 2022, 07:11:50 AM »
I been corrected on my how does the secondary know idea at highvoltageforum.net.

Basically, i knew voltage across the inductor is proportional to it's inductance and speed of change of current, basically Faraday's law.

v = L(di/dt)

But i somehow imagined various combinations in the primary producing the same flux do not respect the turns ratio, but they do.

Here is

HIS ELABORATION

Quote
I agree with the first part, but don't see Faraday's law breaking down.   Would you mind reviewing the following example, designed with "flyback-like" size and frequency, and point out what I'm missing?

The core has effective length 10 cm, area 1 cm^2, permeability 796.   To make coil inductances 1 microhenry per turn squared.
Let's operate at 15.9 kHz, for radian frequency of 10^5.

Our first primary coil has 10 turns (L = 100 uH), intended to operate at 10 V (peak) with magnetizing current of 1 A (peak).  MMF is 10 amp-turns, H is 100 A/m, Bmax is 0.1 T, peak flux is 10 uWb, dF/dt (peak) = 1 Wb/s, inducing 1 volt/turn.  The unit "webers per second" is dimensionally identical to the volt unit.

Our alternate primary coil has 5 turns (L=25 uH), to operate at 5 V (peak) with magnetizing current of 2 A (peak).   MMF is 10 amp-turns, ..., dF/dt is 1 Wb/s as before.

Our secondary has 40 turns (L = 1600 uH), and will have peak voltage of 40 V no matter which primary coil is used.   Each turn of the secondary goes around 1 Wb/s of flux change rate, so Faraday says 1 volt per turn.

If a secondary load draws 1A, that would increase the primary current by 4 A (original coil) or 8 A (alternate coil).   Net MMF (ampere turns) and net dF/dt are about the same as the unloaded case, no matter which primary coil is used.

What suggests to you that Faraday's law isn't valid here?  If the example is missing a pathological case, what can we vary to expose the failure?

Note 1: normally the secondary load current and corresponding change in primary current are in phase with the voltage, while the magnetizing currents have 90 degree phase lag wrt the voltage.

Quote
Now that you gave a practical example, i gotta say my bad. I knew this, i even said it from post one that voltage across the primary is proportional to it's inductance, that is, flux, so turns ratio is automatically respected.

[...]

We all know when secondary is open IV through the primary are 90° outta phase, in reality little less due to various magnetizing losses. Loading the secondary with resistive load brings primary IV more into phase, like i in the first post, "as if resistor appears in parallel with the primary inductance". Ofc magnetizing IVs are always 90° outta phase and load currents are always in phase, well, at least if load is purely resistive.

If load is inductive then picture is not so clear, but extending what happens in the core to the load, we can assume this inductive load will also appear as an inductor and resistor in parallel and larger the work done larger the virtual resistor in parallel will appear again bringing IV in phase.

I assume we can extend the last paragraph to capacitive loads altho i never read about this anywhere, of course, electric field just like magnetic field can also be used to do work and as you all probably know there are various electrostatic motors, some newer ones of significant power (some even speculate about replacing magnetic ones). Anyway..

« Last Edit: March 23, 2022, 09:27:57 AM by nix85 »

#### nix85

• Hero Member
• Posts: 1148
##### Re: Reactive Current - Parallel RCL
« Reply #340 on: March 24, 2022, 04:46:31 PM »
But i somehow imagined various combinations in the primary producing the same flux do not respect the turns ratio, but they do.

I put that wrong, i did not imagine turns ratio is not respected, it obviously is, i imagined the fact that turns ratio is respected even when change of flux is the same violated the Faraday's law.

#### nix85

• Hero Member
• Posts: 1148
##### Re: Reactive Current - Parallel RCL
« Reply #341 on: March 25, 2022, 07:49:37 AM »
To recap on the subject, for "normal" (non flyback) transformer, i'd summarize it like this to cover all the angles.

When transformer is unloaded (secondary open) only magnetizing current flows through the primary which is tiny compared to load current and is always (almost) 90° outta phase with the driving voltage, almost but not 90° due to various losses, namely, eddy currents, hysteresis, magnetostriction and copper losses (P = I²R). Average flux in the core is maximum in no-load state and slightly smaller in the full-load state.

When secondary is loaded, counterflux developed by the secondary demagnetizes the core and this makes the voltage across the primary to drop since this voltage is directly proportional to rate of change of flux, we all know Faraday's (or should i say Henry's) law V=--N*dΦ/dt.

Voltage across an inductor can also be expressed as V = L(di/dt)

And current through an inductor I = (V-E)/Z where V is voltage of the source driving the primary and E is voltage drop across primary's inductance. Clearly, when secondary demagnetizes the core and flux through the primary drops, so does it's inductive reactance Z and voltage across it E, V remaining the same means current must rise and so it does trying to bring the flux back to the original value but it never fully manages to do so, so, as said before, max load flux is slightly less than no load flux.

To the circuit driving the primary, it appears as if a resistor appears in parallel with the inductance of the primary, bigger the load smaller the resistor appears, obviously.

As said above magnetizing current is always almost 90° out of phase with the driving voltage while the load current is always in-phase. At least when the load is purely resistive.

If load is inductive then picture is not so clear, but extending what happens with the resistive load, we can assume this inductive load will also appear as an inductor and resistor in parallel and larger the work done larger the virtual resistor in parallel will appear again bringing IV in phase.

I guess we can extend the last paragraph to capacitive loads too, of course, electric field just like magnetic field can also be used to do work and as you all probably know there are various electrostatic motors, some newer ones of significant power (some even speculate about replacing magnetic ones).

As for flyback, the only difference is, as said before in the thread, induction in the secondary happens with a delay (due to internal diodes blocking the current in one direction) when the primary flux collapses. Ignition coil uses the same principle, store, collapse, get 10x (or more) voltage in the primary and x turns ratio in the secondary.

Talking of ignition coil, the reason for cap across the switch (be it mechanical relay or a MOSFET) is to limit the peak voltage, cap appearing as a short for an instant and lower the resistance in the circuit of the collapsing flux, lower will be the peak, obviously, higher the resistance higher the peak and faster will it burn out.

#### alan

• Hero Member
• Posts: 593
##### Re: Reactive Current - Parallel RCL
« Reply #342 on: June 07, 2022, 02:19:08 PM »
What happens when you place an Avramenko plug into the voltage line of the wall outlet and put between the 2 diodes a regular 110/220V step-down transformer?
And what would happen when the transformer is customized so the primary or secondary has the length of 1/4 wavelength of 50/60Hz?

#### alan

• Hero Member
• Posts: 593
##### Re: Reactive Current - Parallel RCL
« Reply #343 on: June 07, 2022, 02:30:20 PM »
How bout you read before posting. For russian expedition the quote i posted clearly says second expedition showed it's probably natural/volcanic and i wrote 'probably false alarm'..

Other reports like Azores pyramid remain undebunked and need further investigation. Sadly, these things end up suppressed.

Pepedeluxe attachment is not bs, i clearly wrote i am sharing it cause it contains a summary of how young Frederick Spencer Oliver came to ghost write this occult classic of unmeasurable value.

"Russian  propaganda"

Speaking of science, you claimed (quoting official narrative), there is no power amplification in parallel RLC yet i have shown number of examples where we see clear power amplification in parallel RLC.

105W in 2.34kW reactive

200W in 3.5kw reactive

Etc
Just some thoughts.
In parallel an RLC has max current through each component at resonant frequency, and the current magnitudes exceed the input  current (infinite if it was possible), but the vector sum does equal input current. The current is still higher than the input current and is being converted to a magnetic field which depends on a changing current only (L=N.dϕ/di, Ldi/N=dϕ), this field can do work freely according to work of a potential field (a permanent magnet can attract iron freely) before being converted back to current according to conservation of energy. So there are 2 types of energy, field energy that  isn't consumed (gravitational) and conservative energy (one form to another, current>flux>current).
I was wondering if such an inductor could freely drive an iron piston by repetitive attraction only.

#### nix85

• Hero Member
• Posts: 1148
##### Re: Reactive Current - Parallel RCL
« Reply #344 on: June 08, 2022, 02:47:34 PM »
you can try it and see the result.

I shared this in Don Smith thread (not my vid)

As for reactive current...

"but the vector sum does equal input current"

Reactive current exceeds the input current by Q factor,
it does not equal the input current by any means, input current
merely compensates for copper losses and even that can be
avoided in certain configurations (drawing everything
from ground).

Here is a good video about it (conventional)

Reactive power can do 'free' work in special configurations
if load is far removed from the input, but in ordinary
the resonance and bring voltage and current in phase and
make the circuit draw more active power like in ZVS heater
for example.

I seen various ways of varying effectiveness.
Some pump up 5-6kw of reactive power in the middle
part of the circuit to take 1/3 of it as real output with
200w in the input and this of course requires huge
transformers, very bulky, and i seen it done far
more efficiently with small transformers where
input is down to 8W and all is taken from earth.
So it depends.