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.
 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 94046 times)

#### nix85

• Hero Member
• Posts: 1191
##### Reactive Current - Parallel RCL
« on: June 01, 2021, 02:43:14 PM »
This is not OU principle by itself but it's very important to thoroughly understand.

As you know, series LC is like short circuit at resonant frequency,
parallel LC just the opposite.

This is a very good video

Resonance and Q Factor in True Parallel RLC Circuits

As you can see 0.02A of input current is used to produce 0.7A of reactive current.

Question is if this significant current gain can be achieved at higher currents without too big losses, for example to have input current of 1 amp and reactive current of 30-40 amp.

Other formulas for Q are Q=RsqrtC/L and Q=wRC. According to these formulas if we
decrease R or C, or increase L, gain decreases. Obviously goal is to decrease R to have
as little copper losses as possible but also to increase current gain as much as possible.

You see the obvious conflict there.

We might increase C more than we decrease R, and decrease L so we get high Q and
minimise copper losses, but keep in mind copper losses are current SQUARED x resistance, so i guess compromise needs to be found.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Q_factor#RLC_circuits

EDIT:

I suppose the above formulas are for ideal RLC where all three components are in
parallel, while in real RLC where R is in series with the inductance series RLC formula
is valid.

"In a parallel LC circuit where the main loss is the resistance of the inductor, R, in series
with the inductance, L, Q is as in the series circuit. This is a common circumstance for
resonators, where limiting the resistance of the inductor to improve Q and narrow the
bandwidth is the desired result."
« Last Edit: June 01, 2021, 10:02:56 PM by nix85 »

#### stivep

• Hero Member
• Posts: 3222
##### Re: Reactive Current - Parallel RCL
« Reply #1 on: June 04, 2021, 05:06:40 PM »
This is not OU principle by itself but it's very important to thoroughly understand.
Since  OU - overunity is  a nonsense than there   is no OU principles
I suggest to use term FE ( free energy) - that is always completely correct
as truth is that   you can have money and value and energy for free just because you  are special to someone or something.
But you will never,   and never ever have OU as you didn't have OU in the first place.
___________________________________
As you know, series LC is like short circuit at resonant frequency,
parallel LC just the opposite.
- in series resonance  only 1 frequency is allowed to pass through  the door. All other frequencies are stopped
and that  only open door is handling  all current , (all traffic)  flow.
In reality it is  not  one frequency but -1 set of frequencies close enough to resonance - called bandwidth of the filter .( series filter) series-resonance

- in parallel resonance  All of the doors are open all frequencies are allowed to pass apart the only one - the frequency of
the parallel resonance that is not allowed  to pass and every  door  for this frequency is closed.
As you can see 0.02A of input current is used to produce 0.7A of reactive current.
No my friend:
-Current   in  series  elements  "produces"   losses  to  Power supply.
-but in parallel  branches  of that circuit Current  can be larger  ,
....so what?
At the end everything  is going to affect  the source  of energy.- the battery .( to be exact the battery that is powering generator)
that is connected in series with  the circuit.
so it is not current but  frequency of resonance that matters.
Current is dependent of  frequency and not reverse.
Frequency is the boss here.

Resonance and Q Factor in True Parallel RLC Circuits

Local parallel  branches  of the circuit, can behave locally as a "big guys,"
but  you can't ever have  connection of single power supply  in  parallel with the load or circuit. .
If you find such connection it will be only an illusion true  just from your observation point
.
https://www.cui.com/blog/power-supplies-in-series-or-parallel-for-increased-power

if you think different  feel free to challenge me.

Wesley
« Last Edit: June 04, 2021, 08:56:45 PM by stivep »

#### nix85

• Hero Member
• Posts: 1191
##### Re: Reactive Current - Parallel RCL
« Reply #2 on: June 05, 2021, 10:53:49 PM »
Since  OU - overunity is  a nonsense than there   is no OU principles
I suggest to use term FE ( free energy) - that is always completely correct
as truth is that   you can have money and value and energy for free just because you  are special to someone or something.
But you will never,   and never ever have OU as you didn't have OU in the first place.

Overunity is a good term, after all it's just semantics and not worth the useless ramble.

Quote
- in series resonance  only 1 frequency is allowed to pass through  the door. All other frequencies are stopped
and that  only open door is handling  all current , (all traffic)  flow.
In reality it is  not  one frequency but -1 set of frequencies close enough to resonance - called bandwidth of the filter .( series filter) series-resonance

- in parallel resonance  All of the doors are open all frequencies are allowed to pass apart the only one - the frequency of
the parallel resonance that is not allowed  to pass and every  door  for this frequency is closed.

Hah! Why there always has to be one captain obvious around is a phenomena in itself.

I know perfectly well all kinds of band pass/stop filters and their behavior, of course it is not just one frequency they pass/block but if Q is high enough it can get very close to one.

Quote
No my friend:
-Current   in  series  elements  "produces"   losses  to  Power supply.
-but in parallel  branches  of that circuit Current  can be larger  ,
....so what?
At the end everything  is going to affect  the source  of energy.- the battery .( to be exact the battery that is powering generator)
that is connected in series with  the circuit.

No, my friend, effective results is indeed that small current drawn from the battery is
producing greater reactive current in the RLC tank, and again sky is blue OF COURSE that small current is supplying energy lost due to friction and radiation.
And of course that small current is drawn from the battery.

Quote
so it is not current but  frequency of resonance that matters.
Current is dependent of  frequency and not reverse.
Frequency is the boss here.
[/sub]
Resonance and Q Factor in True Parallel RLC Circuits

Local parallel  branches  of the circuit, can behave locally as a "big guys,"
but  you can't ever have  connection of single power supply  in  parallel with the load or circuit. .
If you find such connection it will be only an illusion true  just from your observation point
.
https://www.cui.com/blog/power-supplies-in-series-or-parallel-for-increased-power

if you think different  feel free to challenge me.

Wesley

This last part is specially ridiculous. Let's first look at this nonsense

"it is not current but  frequency of resonance that matters"
Frequency is the boss here.
"

Current amplification is exactly what matters in resonant parallel RLC just like
voltage amplification is in series RLC, and this gain is proportional to Q
and Q is given by formulas i noted above.

PS' in series and parallel is totally off the topic, we are talking reactive power here
with implication that (among other effects), IF everything is tuned just right,
reactive power can do real work. No need to mention Don Smith or this

https://overunity.com/9521/magnacoaster-vorktex/msg551466/#msg551466

Or many other schemes along similar lines where reactive power is used to tap
into subtler energies.

In in the name of effective forum behavior, do not waste server space on repeating
stuff or saying stuff that is totally obvious and well assumed.

#### stivep

• Hero Member
• Posts: 3222
##### Re: Reactive Current - Parallel RCL
« Reply #3 on: June 06, 2021, 11:56:58 PM »
Overunity is a good term, after all it's just semantics and not worth the useless ramble.

Mandatory definition
is - required by a law or rule  of physics.

The word has a meaning  even if it is your  pet name.
But in physics   general concept communicating the theory of a product is presented by  use of words having precise meaning and application. Although product  can be physically  present
- the theory used to explain the product may be overturned , by use  of just one word (e.g overunity.)
In your case  there is no product of overunity as  overunity  is not accepted in any theory recognized by physics
nor is perpetual motion.
Overunity  - as you see this link doesn't even want to make use of word overunity .
overunity-free-energy-and-perpetual-motion- - these guys are just scrutinizes possibly financed also by
far Eastern Europe  regime. But they are often right on  the money.
But if you post there your critical view  challenging  promoted  "members" they will cut your comment  into unreadable gibberish .
compatible to Stalin time era.

___________________________________________________________

This last part is specially ridiculous. Let's first look at this nonsense
"it is not current but  frequency of resonance that matters"
Frequency is the boss here.
"

Current amplification is exactly what matters in resonant parallel RLC just like
voltage amplification is in series RLC, and this gain is proportional to Q
and Q is given by formulas i noted above.

No my friend
there is no amplification at all in any form in resonant circuits RLC
Such  amplification  is  an illusion of  an uneducated experimenter but yes  you can see its  local value.
And voltage or  current response is only secondary phenomena when frequency  is tuned to resonance.
And if not than there is no  such phenomena taking place.

In any resonance circuit  LRC there is a rule :
An antenna is a RLC resonant circuit but even in non-resonant  antennas you must  match that antenna impedance
by means of external resonant circuits that  are tuned to desired impedance 50 Ohm (standard)
https://youtu.be/A7LHDALBrV8?t=89
Here is   the evidence that transmatch must resonate first !!!!
look here:
https://www.elprocus.com/guide-on-resonant-rlc-circuits-working-and-application/
Quote
The q factor is reliant on the frequency it is most frequently quote for the resonant
frequency and the maximum energy stored in the capacitor and in the inductor

When frequency  from generator is tuned  to  resonance of  LRC circuit
or
the LRC circuit is tuned  to  the frequency of generator
the effect is always the same .
If tuning stops at frequency of resonance of LRC circuit  than
current or voltage is at its maximum ( depends from the character of  LRC circuit)
There is no amplification taking place there as  you see only presence of local phenomena characteristic to  the type of RLC circuit.

Look at the picture  below- Example A and B:

A:  in A you see that  impacting  force is applied  to  wide area  and damage to the hand  is not present.
B: in B you see that impacting force  is applied  to small area and it penetrates the hand.

Example B1:
B1: in B1 the circuit is in series resonance  and  XL - Xc =0 (or it  balances.)

At the resonance : X L – X C = 0 or X L = X C.
https://circuitglobe.com/what-is-series-resonance.html
so when you have  0 impedance than there is only  small R(resistance) that  is not important.
The signal in full power  can now get out using that "door"
And yes Xc  and Xl  they have value  - locally only but in resonance their  value "cancels each other"
therefore there is no opposition and  entire  power of (the force) the signal in that particular frequency can pass.
(Minus small losses)
note: please look at  B1 as if you were looking at  screen of spectrum analyzer.

However power delivered to the LRC circuit will be always bigger  than  that  coming out from the circuit.( filter)
when  you have  big  current you have small voltage  , but power  is always the same
when  you have  small  current you have big voltage  , but power  is always the same
So there is no amplification taking place  at all ..  It is just losses that makes output power to be smaller.

___________________________________________________________
If you think that your audio amplifier is amplifying anything it is just an illusion from standpoint of local observer.
In reality "amplification" is just  use of  power from your outlet to drive  another stage of the transistor  with bigger  voltage and/or current.

If you  recall magnetic amplifiers
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Magnetic_amplifier
They have been very strong amplifiers but no discrete elements were used  at all.
- no tubes no transistors.

Did they amplify anything?
No they  didn't.
They were just  necessary to drive another  set  of transformers at  bigger  current and/or voltage .
But power used for the process  was always bigger than  power of amplified signal in Watts.
And yes you heard stronger sound.

_____________________________________________________

summary:

Because our expectation is  to gain in something  that will give us  FE
The easiest way  is to couple to  wealthy  uncle.

So only  coupling to  energy that doesn't cost us money  will give you FE.
and that is why nonsense   of "overunity"  should be eliminated  as confusing these who don't yet  understand  as much as you are my friend

Wesley
« Last Edit: June 07, 2021, 03:47:15 AM by stivep »

#### lancaIV

• elite_member
• Hero Member
• Posts: 4980
##### Re: Reactive Current - Parallel RCL
« Reply #4 on: June 07, 2021, 02:37:14 AM »
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Transistor

Because the controlled (output) power can be higher than the controlling (input) power, a transistor can amplify a signal.

wmbr

#### stivep

• Hero Member
• Posts: 3222
##### Re: Reactive Current - Parallel RCL
« Reply #5 on: June 07, 2021, 04:21:20 AM »
related to: Re: Reactive Current - Parallel RCL « Reply #3 on: June 06, 2021, 11:56:58 PM »

Dear nix85
Here  is  an example of coils only amplification.
I hope you'll start to understand my answer  in  post  from above now .
Magnetic Amplifier

if you listen only to end of this  video - click
it explains why transistors were used to replace  magnetic amplifiers .
_________________________________________
here is some more:

Wesley

#### stivep

• Hero Member
• Posts: 3222
##### Re: Reactive Current - Parallel RCL
« Reply #6 on: June 07, 2021, 04:04:16 PM »
// specially ridiculous. - Let's first look at this nonsense:
Quote
"it is not current but  frequency of resonance that matters"
Frequency is the boss here.
"
Tuning radio to the frequency of your favorite FM station is done by your hand, tuning circuits to resonance.
It is like opening the door for this FM station.

But you are paying for:
-  losses of energy  used to convert EM energy into sound.
-  for food giving energy to your hand that is turning the knob.
Benefiting emotionally while listening to the music is a  pleasure of a loser
happy to have temporary pleasure he paid for.
No physical net gain makes you lesser of a money loser .

___________________________________

Challenging me you are showing the entire nonsense of loosed battle .
No physical net gain makes you lesser of a loser  in  the battle.

Emotion is  the biggest reason of waste of your time and money.
-you are likely  just a fool paying for the restaurant bill with your girlfriend and all her other pleasures.
-Your entire life is just an emotion making you to lose big time.
-house, car, boat, is not your gain it is just  an excuse of you as a loser showing an effect of that, what was left after  all losses.
Yes you are loser  but be happy - you are not alone
o yea..

Wesley

#### nix85

• Hero Member
• Posts: 1191
##### Re: Reactive Current - Parallel RCL
« Reply #7 on: June 08, 2021, 02:57:29 AM »

Mandatory definition
is - required by a law or rule  of physics.

The word has a meaning  even if it is your  pet name....

<insert more nonsense>

The sweetest battle is when the "enemy" defeats himself.

This pile of shit is hardly worth replying to but i'll address the main "points",
if they only could be called that.

Again, overunity is a good term, better than free energy cause FE includes solar,
wind etc while OU implies (non radioactive) device "in a box" that requires no input
energy of any kind except that which it extracts within the bounds of it's own box
except the small starting energy usually provided from an external battery. So such
systems are literally over-unity, unity being the energy initially provided and energy
it consumes to continue operation, and over being the excess energy to supply loads.

He continues with..

Quote
No my friend there is no amplification at all in any form in resonant circuits RLC
Such  amplification  is  an illusion of  an uneducated experimenter but yes  you can see its  local value

No my friend, such amplification is NOT an illusion, it is an actual increase in voltage/current and anyone who can tell apple from a pear would not claim otherwise. There is real measurable increase of voltage/current.

Quote
And voltage or  current response is only secondary phenomena when frequency  is tuned to resonance. And if not than there is no  such phenomena taking place.

Imagine, there has to be resonance first in RESONANT RLC circuit for amplification
effect to occur. GENIUS!

Quote
In any resonance circuit  LRC there is a rule :

RLC circuits are not meant to radiate, they are used as variable tuned circuits,
filters, oscillators, voltage multipliers and pulse discharge circuits. We are not

So he continues the unrelated rant about nonresonant antennas and how
"you must  match that antenna impedance". IMAGINE! Pure genius.

Funny how you forgot to add you do NOT have to match the impedance
of the transmission line (balanced or non balanced) and the antenna if you
know that impedance of the antenna is repeated every half wavelength
down from the antenna, it does not matter what the characteristic impedance
of the transmission line is and that you have to take into account velocity factor
of the feedline..

Quote
...There is no amplification taking place there as  you see only presence of local phenomena characteristic to  the type of RLC circuit.

This is not just "local phenomena" cause this amplification
is tapped by other parts of the circuit and used in very real way.

Then he goes on a rant with nonsensical parallel about force distribution
and some silly LC tank basics like Xc and Xl cancel at resonance. He of course
does not provide the formulas

XL= 2πfL
XC= -1/2πfC
Z = sqrt(R² + (Xc - Xl)²)
F = 1/6.28(LC)

Then comes the main nonsense

Quote
However power delivered to the LRC circuit will be always bigger  than  that  coming out from the circuit.( filter)
when  you have  big  current you have small voltage  , but power  is always the same
when  you have  small  current you have big voltage  , but power  is always the same

So there is no amplification taking place  at all ..  It is just losses that makes output power to be smaller

HA! Reactive power is exactly Q times bigger than input power, NOT the same!
That is the whole point You do not grasp the very basic of (R)LC tanks.

Then he goes on a rant how amplifier's amplifying is an illusion.

Quote
In reality "amplification" is just  use of  power from your outlet to drive  another stage of the transistor  with bigger  voltage and/or current.

My my, this is a circus!

Then he continues the rant about magnetic amplifiers..

Then he goes back to rant about term overunity..

Quote
..So only  coupling to  energy that doesn't cost us money  will give you FE.
and that is why nonsense   of "overunity"  should be eliminated  as confusing these who don't yet  understand  as much as you are my friend

Wesley

Then some more nonsense about saturation amplifier..

Then he continues with

Quote
Tuning radio to the frequency of your favorite FM station is done by your hand, tuning circuits to resonance.

It is like opening the door for this FM station.

More sky is blue lines. Of course no mention of Varactor Diode or Heterodyne principle.

Quote
But you are paying for:
-  losses of energy  used to convert EM energy into sound.
-  for food giving energy to your hand that is turning the knob.
Benefiting emotionally while listening to the music is a  pleasure of a loser
happy to have temporary pleasure he paid for.
No physical net gain makes you lesser of a money loser .

It seems he is trying to prove what i said in very beginning of this thread.
To quote myself "This is not OU principle by itself" (altho it can be in

And his final fiasco..

Quote
Challenging me you are showing the entire nonsense of loosed battle .
No physical net gain makes you lesser of a loser  in  the battle.

Emotion is  the biggest reason of waste of your time and money.
-you are likely  just a fool paying for the restaurant bill with your girlfriend and all her other pleasures.
-Your entire life is just an emotion making you to lose big time.
-house, car, boat, is not your gain it is just  an excuse of you as a loser showing an effect of that, what was left after  all losses.
Yes you are loser  but be happy - you are not alone
o yea..

Wesley

OMG i feel sorry for this guy, these are hard to find these days, this level of ignorance,
this level of self humiliating and shameless halfwit...just beyond anything seen on this forum.

#### stivep

• Hero Member
• Posts: 3222
##### Re: Reactive Current - Parallel RCL
« Reply #8 on: June 08, 2021, 05:00:11 AM »
Again, overunity is a good term, // So such systems are literally over-unity, // being
the energy initially provided and energy it consumes to continue operation, and over being the excess energy to supply loads.

But it doesn't exist.

Godzilla doesn't exist too.
For physics God doesn't exist too
And for Darwin - you are just an animal - the mammal.

He of course does not provide the formulas
I did but you didn't look in the link.

So  now you nix85  - please provide me:
1. formula for overunity.
2. just any scientific publication  if you find  just one  I will be  surprised.
_________________________________________________________________

overunity is a good term,//OU implies (non radioactive) device "in a box" that requires no input
energy of any kind.
Where  did you get this formulation from?
Is it  only the product of your imagination?
_________________________________________________________________

RLC circuits are not meant to radiate,//
//some silly LC tank basics
Each antenna element radiating modes are modeled by a combination of RLC circuits while the
tank
circuits
represent the inter-mode couplings.
The mutual coupling between the corresponding radiating mode of antenna elements is represented by M 1, M 2, and M 3.
here is a link : Each%20antenna
_________________________________________________________________

This is not just "local phenomena" cause this amplification
is tapped by other parts of the circuit and used in very real way.
examples of local phenomena;
local oscillator          https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Local_oscillator
local resonance        https://www.sciencedirect.com/topics/chemistry/localized-surface-plasmon-resonance
local amplification     https://agupubs.onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/full/10.1029/2012JB009208
Conclusion:
In the system  all of local phenomena  manifest their presence only if recognized, measured, locally.

Quote
Amplifiers are the circuits that are designed to improve the intensity of the signals.
Amplifier energy consumption  is bigger  than  energy at output of the amplifier.
amplifier-its-working-circuit

Whichever kind of amplifier you use, you never get out more energy than you put in.

https://www.explainthatstuff.com/amplifiers.html

Dear nix85 Can you understand English language from above?

Wesley
« Last Edit: June 08, 2021, 02:20:59 PM by stivep »

#### kolbacict

• Hero Member
• Posts: 1175
##### Re: Reactive Current - Parallel RCL
« Reply #9 on: June 08, 2021, 11:26:55 AM »
I apologize for the offtopic.
In Russia, many people believe that the president and the government, and especially the central bank, are controlled from abroad.  What would you say to these people?
I’ll add that I don’t think so ...

#### lancaIV

• elite_member
• Hero Member
• Posts: 4980
##### Re: Reactive Current - Parallel RCL
« Reply #10 on: June 08, 2021, 11:48:35 AM »
I apologize for the offtopic.
In Russia, many people believe that the president and the government, and especially the central bank, are controlled from abroad.  What would you say to these people?
I’ll add that I don’t think so ...

Better than to feel from abroad that the central bank,the government and the president is believed by the RU ,R U or R W : believing !

Off topic end !

#### alan

• Hero Member
• Posts: 673
##### Re: Reactive Current - Parallel RCL
« Reply #11 on: June 08, 2021, 01:11:03 PM »
I apologize for the offtopic.
In Russia, many people believe that the president and the government, and especially the central bank, are controlled from abroad.  What would you say to these people?
I’ll add that I don’t think so ...
Those conspiracies about govs and politicians are everywhere.Putin may be working for the vatican and rothschilds. Emblem on the russian flag and the family crest of the rothschilds are the same.

#### nix85

• Hero Member
• Posts: 1191
##### Re: Reactive Current - Parallel RCL
« Reply #12 on: June 08, 2021, 02:16:55 PM »

But it doesn't exist.

Godzilla doesn't exist too.
For physics God doesn't exist too
And for Darwin - you are just an animal - the mammal.

Again, OU is a good term, useless ramble.

Quote
I did but you didn't look in the link.

You think people wanna open every link you post, think again

Quote
So  now you nix85  - please provide me:
1. formula for overunity.
2. just any scientific publication  if you find  just one  I will be  surprised.
_________________________________________________________________

OK, i'll give you a hint, formula for energy content of a wave is amplitude squared,
let's see if you're intelligent enough to understand.

Quote
Where  did you get this formulation from?
Is it  only the product of your imagination?
_________________________________________________________________

This is off topic cause this thread is not about overunity but i gave you a hint above.

Quote
Each antenna element radiating modes are modeled by a combination of RLC circuits while the
tank
circuits
represent the inter-mode couplings.
The mutual coupling between the corresponding radiating mode of antenna elements is represented by M 1, M 2, and M 3.
The circuit model is designed in ADS.
here is a link : Each%20antenna
_________________________________________________________________

we are NOT talking about antennas here, ofc RLC circuit can be coupled
to an antenna as it was used since days of spark gap transmitters.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Spark-gap_transmitter#Inductive_coupling

Quote
examples of local phenomena;
local oscillator          https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Local_oscillator
local resonance        https://www.sciencedirect.com/topics/chemistry/localized-surface-plasmon-resonance
local amplification     https://agupubs.onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/full/10.1029/2012JB009208
Conclusion:
In the system  all of local phenomena  manifest their presence only if recognized, measured, locally.

What in the world are you trying to prove by saying it's "local phenomena", so
amplification is not real? HAH! Gain has nothing to do with it being local

Also there is no real just-local-oscillator, unless toroidal or enclosed in a metal box inductors radiate EM waves, capacitors also radiate, even power lines radiate, everything radiates unless shielded.

https://physics.stackexchange.com/questions/20126/does-a-charging-capacitor-emit-an-electromagnetic-wave#:~:text=Charging%20and%20discharging%20a%20capacitor,capacitors%20get%20charged%20and%20discharged.

Quote

Whichever kind of amplifier you use, you never get out more energy than you put in.

https://www.explainthatstuff.com/amplifiers.html

And who said you get more energy from an amp than you put in?
You are imagining things. No one even implied that.
Clearly you are mixing reactive power amplification with energy amplification.

Quote
Dear nix85 Can you understand English language from above?

Wesley

Dear Wesley, question is can YOU?

#### lancaIV

• elite_member
• Hero Member
• Posts: 4980
##### Re: Reactive Current - Parallel RCL
« Reply #13 on: June 08, 2021, 02:46:23 PM »
Wesley,I am not nix85,but related #8   1 in and more than 1 out (conditionized !) https://phys.org/news/2012-03-efficiency.html

"  .... the key to achieving a power conversion efficiency above 100%, i.e., “unity efficiency,” is to greatly decrease the applied voltage. ..."

In LED-experiment achieved !

By electric motors,generator,transformer ,electric circuits ?  Does cold ambient (natural/synthetical) influence "voltage and equivalent " !?

Ohm/Mho experiment,super-conduction and -super-isolation ,vaccuo

Volt is the unit in hono(u)r Signori Volta,but there is also the expression  Voltigieren (italienisch volta, französisch volte ‚Bogenschlag', ‚​Bogensprung')

DC Volta length compared AC Volta length  and Puls Volta length : length in a .time distance b. local distance
positive
negative

Sincere

OCWL

#### stivep

• Hero Member
• Posts: 3222
##### Re: Reactive Current - Parallel RCL
« Reply #14 on: June 08, 2021, 04:53:59 PM »
Again, OU is a good term, useless ramble.
//i'll give you a hint//
I didn't ask you for a hint but for any proof or example  that OU ( overunity) exists.

Fake
response:
is a type of hoax or deliberate spread of misinformation with the intent to mislead in order to gain socially, emotionally, financially or politically

Fake is :

made to look real or valuable in order to deceive people.
But you nix85 never  managed  to make  your fake OU look real.

Faker vs lair:

"   she knew he was a liar when he started claiming that he was an astronaut"
"nix85 knew he was a liar when he started claiming that  overunity exists."

Faker arguments:

Questioned faker replaces logical answers  with answers in area of believes when arguments can't to be supported.
Religion and propaganda uses the same  mechanisms.

The attribution of a quality to a word, sending Faker to a position of a liar:

Use of non-supported, nonsense  repeatedly on purpose.
____________________________________________________________

You think people wanna open every link you post, think again
Yes I do.
Attached links makes comment more  convincing (more understanding) to a reader who is expecting more convincing explanation.
____________________________________________________________

This is off topic cause this thread is not about overunity but i gave you a hint above.

OU is a good term, useless ramble.
//let's see if you're intelligent enough to understand.
No I don't.
-can I become enlightened by your knowledge without hints, lies and fakes.. ?

____________________________________________________________

Clearly you are mixing reactive power amplification with energy amplification.
I questioned your amplification in LCR circuit, and there is no amplification taking place at all.
10W AC at  input  of series resonant circuit becomes  less than 10W at output of circuit in resonance.
10W AC at  input  of series resonant circuit becomes                ~0W at output of circuit  not in resonance.

So in this case there is no amplification taking place at all.
Voltage and Current  will fluctuate but to see it you need to look locally at these
local phenomena.
If you don't do it than  all you'll see is that "door" is open or closed.

here is a link: Understanding the basics of reactive power
here is a quote:
Electrical power (P, in Watts)
is composed of voltage (V, in Volts) and current (I, in Amps).
The formula is P= V × I.
A good analogy to describe the relationship between voltage and current is water flowing down a river

-end of quote.

Wesley