Free Energy | searching for free energy and discussing free energy

Thats kind of a bad example, because most jacob’s ladders involve more than just the gap resistor


Take the one i have here for example, created by TinselKoala


the gap itself approaches close to the thermal conversion of an ideal resistor


However, it does has a positive impedance value, even above the ionization state of free air


So, measurements taken at the output still show current drawn through the rest of the circuit

A transformer made of 2 superconductors
Would produce no heat

Smoky- thanks for taking the time to answer.

I think I am getting it..  Coil 1 has Amps and Potential Difference (  ie...  pressure)
Transferring to another coil transfers some of that "pressure" to the collector coil..

Same amount of current is flowing in coil 1, just with less pressure ( difference in potential)..

comparable to a car going 50 MPH to a bicycle going 50 MPH..  Current (speed) remains the same on both,  but car has much more power.

Heat production is not solely reliant on amperage numbers but on total power..

Another example..  50 amps through THICK wire where voltage remains low..  Compared with 50 amps through thin wire..  Thin wire raises difference in potential so the "pressure" is much greater- thus creating more heat in thin wire than thick.

This all sounds so basic now and easy to understand..  I just never really connected these dots

To be honest, neither did in until the other day
Examining a system (of actual pressure)
and used Maxwell’s equations (requires all 3)
To translate this perspective to all areas of science

Now I am just thinking out loud on his one..

 I "think" it can be said that a 100 ft piece of energized wire has just as much flux as that same length wound into a coil.  When we wind it, we are just gathering all that flux into a vortex that melds with each other in the same direction, concentrating the flux in 1 place.

So the flux itself is linked with power in all charged wires. And work we do, we are robbing from the flux field around the wire.

Now we know we can use some shielding and magnets and get a second magnet to continually levitate with no input power..  So beating gravity takes no input force once a magnet is placed into the field.   Exact same as placing a magnet in an energized coil.  If the flux field is steady, the magnet does not wiggle or move..  So the levitating magnet in a fluxed coil takes nothing and gives nothing back to levitate there..

When we kill the power of the coil-  Gravity pulls the magnet down through the coil creating some power..

The whole problem comes round robin back to the beginning..  We need to rub the flux field to get the magnet to the top of the coil to levitate.

I know this is theoretical- but:

If a transformer ran at 100% efficiency, it would produce no heat?
When a transformer gets warm, it is only converting the waste from inefficiencies to heat?

Funny you should say that - I ran a FEMM of a transformer and the results were interesting. I show the case where I integrate over the main coil in the image. I integrate total loss which I checked is always the same here in the coils as resistive losses. I summarize below:



Coil 1 (100A) - 0.00623571 W
Coil 2 (5A)   - 0.00000004 W
Core 'loss'     0.06810740 W 

==> losses in core are more than in coils.
Now I tried with air instead of iron in the core:

Coil 1 (100A) - 0.00622984 W
Coil 2 (5A)   - 0.00000004 W
Core 'loss'     0.00000000 W

That is, similar loss in the coil regardless of whether transformer core is present or not!

So could one try a normal transformer with amorphous core to allow heating? If enough input could get output to heat a steam engine...

Hi Kajunbee - yes, your link made me realise that many may have already been using such heating. I also recall old electric heaters where you saw a long
coil of high resistance wire glowing red. And some even use induction heating. But I would still like a test of the simple transformer system as in my simulation with a measure of input and output energy. I Also tried FEMM with no current and got almost the same ratio between input and output power - namely
0.06808210/0.00622984 = 10.928. Not a bad COP if real.