Alan
Glad you understand this enuff to assume and write things about presenter ?
7 years now ?
Please teach …
or show us _your_ replication !


Too much pointing at others ….not enuff teaching/sharing!
Exactly what are you waiting for ?
Here it’s an open source forum.
Schematics etc etc ?
Many open source builders here .
Please share !


Thanks
Chet
EDIT for comment on removal of “ your personal surveillance info above”
And now modified you tube link you posted ?


Here opinions from  core members and reasons they
Moved on !


https://www.beyondunity.org/thread/public-answer-to-chris/

Perhaps best to show your own work ?


Enuff hauntings …and assumptions about others …

PLEASE share something ( anything) that can survive scrutiny and show a true gain mechanism…
Yes obviously you must have replicated video and have something which works to share ?
Please do share ..
Here we are part of open source community
Which greatly needs solutions !

Help me out here.
In my very limited understanding of the back EMF avenue to OU, do I understand correctly that in a perfectly efficient system with fully recovered back EMF, we'd have a COP = 2 system?
Now what efficiency might be realistically achieve in high power density solid state applications, around 95%?
Then would recovering about 15% of the available back EMF not already suffice to get a self runner with a few percent of net out, a never depleting battery that does real work, a few % of circuit flow?

Thinking in terms of equipment I read a lot about, electric cars. A Tesla car, especially the big ones, seem able to maintain about a 100 kW output (1 C discharge) for longer periods of time, at say 85-90% efficiency with battery is pre-charged.
If just a but of it's back EMF were to be recovered, this car would become a multiple kW OU station, right? Not enough to drive, but enough to provide the grid more than it would be pulling from the grid, over a typical annual usage.

I want OU to work, but if back EMF were a viable field, would we not have easily replicable setups with predictable net output by now? If someone could recover as much as 50% of the back EMF without hamper the regular output, that would turn a boring BEV into a huge power station and a total gold mine. Seems to me, if viable, a back EMF runner would be easier to build than a magnet more.

What i'm getting at is the acknowledgement that we only get typically less back and in most cases much less back if we were to only try and use the back emf spike to power a load. I don't utilize the back emf in this traditional sense. It is true my system uses back emf, but it is not the sole function at play and used in a traditonal way as we are used to experimenting with.  What makes this work is the back emf spike is only used to maintain feedback between two coils, It's used as a trigger only to cause a secondary feedback system.  its this increase in feedback we tap into. So even a "small" trigger is all that is needed to keep the feedback action going between two tuned inductance coils.

floodrod

Flame me if you will, but my understanding is a bit different than most.  What Joel is referring to "Back EMF" I think is inductive kickback from the collapsing field.  I think Back-EMF is something totally different.

You are correct and Bemf is the same as a Cemf which is different from a kickback or inductive discharge, the terms can get confusing.

Bemf/Cemf relates to the "self-inductance" of a conductor. Simply put the current rise produces an expanding magnetic field which cuts the same conductor(s) inducing a voltage opposite to the applied voltage. Just think "self-inductance" and it makes more sense, to induce itself. In effect, the self-inductance or induced voltage always opposes the applied voltage limiting the current flow. It applies to motor/generator/transformers and it doesn't matter whether the magnetic field is expanding or contracting.

An inductive discharge/kickback is different in a number of ways. First, it normally only applies to a contracting magnetic field and more important there is no self-inductance involved in the process. Self-inductance is produced while the magnetic field is expanding but not so much while it's contracting. As well, an inductive discharge/kickback normally occurs only when a circuit is broken/opened or severely restricted in some way.

Think about that for a moment, so we increased the current, expanding the magnetic field and as it expanded it cuts the same conductors inducing a voltage in the opposite direction. So why wouldn't the same magnetic field self-induce an opposite voltage in the conductor when the field collapsed?. It's a tricky question...

The answer is that when the magnetic field is expanding it expands outward from the conductor which is the "source" of the applied current and magnetic field. However once the magnetic field is fully established it has "no source" because the circuit is opened and the field exists in a separate space outside of the conductor(s). When the now independent magnetic field does collapse inward the induced voltage is in the same direction as the former applied voltage not opposite to it like a Bemf/Cemf.

In effect, the Bemf/Cemf relates to the source voltage/current still in the circuit being self-induced. Where an inductive discharge/kickback has the voltage/current source removed thus there is no source to induce and no self-induction. In effect the collapsing magnetic field is now independent of the old source and a new source in itself.

AC

let me explain.

In a typical electrical system, when a current flows through a coil, it generates a magnetic field around it. When the current is turned off, the magnetic field collapses, which generates a voltage spike known as a back electromotive force (EMF) in the opposite direction of the original current. This voltage spike is often seen as a nuisance and is usually suppressed using diodes or other techniques.

However, in this system, we are using this back EMF spike to our advantage by redirecting it back into the system to provide additional power. The back EMF spike is essentially a burst of electrical energy that can be captured and redirected to charge the capacitor, which is then used to trigger the induction coils again. This feedback loop allows for a continuous flow of energy, amplifying the original energy input.

When the back EMF spike is redirected back into the system, it is essentially converting energy that would have been lost as heat or other forms of energy into a usable form. This allows you to take advantage of the higher amplified amplitude energy that would otherwise be wasted. By using this feedback loop, you are essentially increasing the efficiency of the system and allowing it to output more power than what was originally put in.

It's important to note that this doesn't violate the laws of thermodynamics, as the system is not creating energy out of nothing. Instead, it is redirecting and amplifying the energy that is already present in the system.

Back EMF is definitely one of overunity methods.

This month 'they're' saying we got it wrong about the early universe... thanks to the Webb telescope being able to see further... This forum is about being able to see further, is it not?

D²