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

User Menu

Custom Search

Author Topic: How Stubblefields Wireless Really Worked.  (Read 2513 times)

Offline onepower

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 1008
Re: How Stubblefields Wireless Really Worked.
« Reply #15 on: April 11, 2023, 11:54:04 PM »
stivep
Quote
No method can deliver more energy at output than delivered at input.

A heat pump can deliver/move four times more heat energy than is input or COP>4. You may want to have a talk with your refrigerator because it seems to know something you do not.

Quote
it means - there is no way to gain energy  at output you can only lose.

No, energy cannot be created or destroyed and it is always conserved. We cannot lose or gain energy, only transform or move it.

AC

Offline stivep

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 3313
Re: How Stubblefields Wireless Really Worked.
« Reply #16 on: April 12, 2023, 12:21:32 AM »
stivep
This is incorrect and the Conservation of Energy (COE) demands energy cannot be created (over-unity) or destroyed (under-unity) for obvious reasons. If any material thing or circuit was under-unity it would represent an energy sink relative to the surrounding energy. Energy would keep flowing into the imaginary energy sink forcing the surrounding space to become overunity violating the COE.

This is why energy cannot be created or destroyed only transformed. We cannot get something from nothing nor can we force something into nothing because conceptually they represent the same thing.

This is also incorrect for similar reasons. Motion relates to kinetic energy and is subject to the same rules defined by the conservation of energy.

For example, suppose we could remove all apparent motion from an object. The atoms/particles/sub-atomic particles which make up the object are still in perpetual motion because matter cannot be created/destroyed nor the energy associated with it. The energy must always exist as either the motion of the particles or the motion of EM fields transferring energy between particles.

In effect, the universe is like a giant vacuum tube where all particles are constantly in motion and transferring EM wave energy between themselves. The obvious question is, if motion is not perpetual then where did all the energy go?. So a particle slowed down or sped up representing a change in kinetic energy, where did the energy go?. You see, your reasoning fails under even the most basic scrutiny.

AC
Good point .
Very much thank you : - wording under-unity - is an unfortunate form of  misrepresentation.
the right form of expression is:  less than unity. <1

good approach to  over-unity is here:
https://en.wiktionary.org/wiki/over-unity
Quote
over- +‎ unity (“the number "1"”), referring to the fact that an over-unity device should produce more kinetic energy than whatever potential it receives as input.
Coined to avoid patent rules that prevent impossible technologies such as perpetual motion machines being patented.

Why do subatomic particles seem to have perpetual motion?
is explained here:
https://poe.com/continue_chat?context_aid=1477743640574830&reply=&scroll_to=top
more of it  is here:
https://www.quora.com/Why-do-subatomic-particles-seem-to-have-perpetual-motion
-it is an outdated model of Bohr Atom with is "planetary  structure"  that is to be blamed for this
confusion. But we still use it  just for easiness of  an explanation popular especially in education of young children in EU.

Wesley

Offline stivep

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 3313
Re: How Stubblefields Wireless Really Worked.
« Reply #17 on: April 12, 2023, 01:33:46 AM »
A heat pump can deliver/move four times more heat energy than is input or COP>4. You may want to have a talk with your refrigerator because it seems to know something you do not.
AC
For a refrigerator, the focus is on removing heat from a specific area.
For a heat pump, the focus is on dumping heat to a specific area. 
total equation of net energy use makes you pay for use of your refrigerator with no gain present.
please specify  how do you understand the principal difference between a heat pump and a refrigerator so I can respond to your question   better. :)
Why there was nobody including you looping this   COP>4. back so you could become  respected  new Kapanadze?
-you  may also use help from this article: https://physics.stackexchange.com/questions/344747/heat-pump-is-a-refrigerator

Wesley

Offline joellagace

  • Full Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 119
    • My Free Energy And High Voltage Projects
Re: How Stubblefields Wireless Really Worked.
« Reply #18 on: April 12, 2023, 02:49:05 AM »
Completely off topic this one.  :o Good thing he said he would not participate and leave room for others.  :P

I'll save space in this forum  not going to  more of it.

opinion expressed is my own
Wesley

Offline stivep

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 3313
Re: How Stubblefields Wireless Really Worked.
« Reply #19 on: April 12, 2023, 03:05:05 AM »
Quote
Wesley: "No method can deliver more  energy at output than delivered at input."
Are you completely and totally sure of your statement above? 
Just curious!! Regards,
Pm
That postulate was  first proposed by Gabrielle Émilie Le Tonnelier de Breteuil, Marquise du Châtelet  in 17 December 1706 – 10 September 1749)
Mechanical equivalent of heat was proposed in 1798, by Count Rumford (Benjamin Thompson)
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Conservation_of_energy
The laws of thermodynamics history goes back to  Sadi Carnot in 1824
Yes According to  modern physics as of today nothing changed  since ~1900 in this area.
Wesley

Offline stivep

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 3313
Re: How Stubblefields Wireless Really Worked.
« Reply #20 on: April 12, 2023, 03:06:49 AM »
Completely off topic this one. 
Dear  friends : I'm only responding the the comments here :)
Legal standpoint on  perpetual motion machines was formulated  by:
Christopher Wadlow. Professor. Emeritus Professor, School of Law
here:
https://academic.oup.com/jiplp/article/2/3/136/2358262
Very interesting lecture.
____________________________________________________
Please note that  Law or Patent Law  is not  and doesn't  represent  physics laws. It only
controls  and regulates - humanity  approach to  mechanisms of economics in this area
( my opinion)
Can a Patent Violate the Laws of Chemistry and Physics?
The answer is NO!!!!


Wesley

Offline joellagace

  • Full Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 119
    • My Free Energy And High Voltage Projects
Re: How Stubblefields Wireless Really Worked.
« Reply #21 on: April 12, 2023, 03:42:58 AM »
Let me try and get this back on topic. Here is another video I talk about more details of using displacement induction communications and how to put it into application.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4EBExi2wv8k

Using the Earth frequencies, such as the Schumann resonance, and modulating a small DC current in the closed loop, we can create a very low bandwidth signal that carries information, such as voice or data. The modulation of the DC current in the closed loop causes a displacement current in the surrounding medium, which in this case is the Earth or the conductive soil in the Earth Battery. This displacement current creates a modulated electric field that can be detected by a receiver antenna at some distance away. The receiver antenna can be designed to resonate at the same frequency as the transmitter antenna, allowing it to pick up the modulated electric field signal, and the modulated DC current can be decoded to retrieve the original information signal. We can do the same with any galvanic cell such as a potato battery to demonstrate a much weaker transmitter.

The information is carried by modulating the amplitude, frequency, or phase of the signal.

The fluctuations of the DC component superimposed on the small AC signal allow for the coding of information. In traditional methods, we are limited by the bandwidth of the AC source signal, but in this method, we can transmit high-bandwidth information using a narrow-bandwidth source signal. The use of the DC component allows for the modulation of the AC signal and the encoding of information onto it, which can then be transmitted.

In order to properly receive and decode the information being transmitted through the earth using the Stubblefield method, the receiving circuit must also include the same DC bias setup as the transmitting circuit. This is because the information being transmitted is not solely contained in the AC signal, but also in the fluctuations of the DC bias that are superimposed on the AC signal. Therefore, the receiving circuit needs to be able to extract both the AC and DC components of the signal in order to properly decode the transmitted information.

To take advantage of the Stubblefield method in a solid-state transmitter, one approach could be to use a high-frequency oscillator circuit that is designed to resonate with the natural frequency of the Earth. This oscillator could be designed to produce a very low-power AC signal, which could be used to modulate a DC carrier signal generated by the transmitter.

The AC and DC components could be combined in a way that produces a modulated RF signal that is transmitted through an antenna. The Earth would act as a waveguide, allowing the RF signal to propagate over long distances with minimal attenuation.

For using the earth as a waveguide, you would not need any special power. The power used would be the same as that used in a conventional transmitter. The key is to use the earth as a low-loss medium to propagate the signal over long distances, instead of using the air as in conventional radio communications.

The range of a radio transmission using the Earth as a waveguide depends on many factors, including the power of the transmitter, the frequency used, the quality of the ground connection, and the terrain between the transmitter and receiver. In theory, the range could be much greater than that of traditional radio communication, potentially reaching hundreds or even thousands of miles.

In theory, it is also possible to modulate a high-power RF signal using these methods, but it would likely be illegal and potentially dangerous. Additionally, hijacking a commercial radio transmitter in this way could cause interference with other broadcasts and violate FCC regulations. It is not recommended to attempt this method without proper authorization and knowledge of radio broadcasting regulations. With that said. If someone tunes in to the carrier wave using a normal radio, they will not be able to hear the extra information that is being transmitted through the use of the loop and dc bias setup. This is because the normal radio is not designed to pick up and decode the information that is being modulated onto the carrier wave using the special setup.

This method could potentially allow for secret messages to be transmitted. However, it would require careful tuning and matching to avoid interference.

A potential advantage of this method. You could essentially "piggyback" on an existing high-power RF signal to transmit your own information without having to invest in your own high-power transmitter. However, it's important to note that using someone else's RF signal without their permission could be illegal and is generally not considered ethical behavior.

The key is to have the right setup,  proper tuning and biasing of the coils and loops, to extract and modulate the information onto the existing carrier wave. This method can be very useful for emergency communication or for secret messages, as it may not be easily detectable by others who are not aware of the specific setup.

The principles and methods we have discussed are based on established theories and experiments in the field of electromagnetics and radio communication. While these methods may not be widely used or accepted in mainstream communication, they are based on sound principles and have been demonstrated to work in various experiments and demonstrations.
The passive setup modifies the properties of the carrier wave through the process of modulation, which essentially superimposes the information signal onto the carrier wave. This modifies the amplitude, frequency, or phase of the carrier wave in accordance with the information signal, and enables the transmission of the modulated signal over a distance using the carrier wave as a waveguide.

In addition, as the carrier wave propagates through space, it interacts with the environment, such as the earth's surface or the atmosphere, and can be reflected or refracted, which also contributes to the modification of the carrier wave. However, in the case of passive transmission using displacement induction methods, the modification of the carrier wave is primarily achieved through modulation.



Offline stivep

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 3313
Re: How Stubblefields Wireless Really Worked.
« Reply #22 on: April 12, 2023, 03:50:27 AM »
Let me try and get this back on topic. Here is another video I talk about more details of using displacement induction communications and how to put it into application.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4EBExi2wv8k

I only watched  the video   till 2:47 minute  as I was preoccupied with  other duties.
Yes it works . the concept is valid.
The terminology and explanation of processes is partially incorrect.
e.g : You are not shorting anything there. !!
In Near Field coupling you are 100%  successful in transferring AC part of the signal to the loop of Rx.

Wesley

Offline joellagace

  • Full Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 119
    • My Free Energy And High Voltage Projects
Re: How Stubblefields Wireless Really Worked.
« Reply #23 on: April 12, 2023, 04:30:30 AM »
LOL glad you liked it. I also think something else around here is "shorted"   :o

Offline joellagace

  • Full Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 119
    • My Free Energy And High Voltage Projects
Re: How Stubblefields Wireless Really Worked.
« Reply #24 on: April 12, 2023, 04:39:14 AM »
I think I know my circuit diagram  8) Thanks.

I only watched  the video   till 2:47 minute  as I was preoccupied with  other duties.
Yes it works . the concept is valid.
The terminology and explanation of processes is partially incorrect.
e.g : You are not shorting anything there. !!
In Near Field coupling you are 100%  successful in transferring AC part of the signal to the loop of Rx.

Wesley

Offline stivep

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 3313
Re: How Stubblefields Wireless Really Worked.
« Reply #25 on: April 12, 2023, 05:02:03 AM »
I think I know my circuit diagram  8) Thanks.
Nope . You shorting nothing there.
Impedance  is present in AC and you have AC with DC offset.
We may also argue that  for example  DC solenoid  of DC powered  relay  is not shorting DC  battery  and so on.
Don't have time for it today  it is 11PM here.
Wesley

Offline joellagace

  • Full Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 119
    • My Free Energy And High Voltage Projects
Re: How Stubblefields Wireless Really Worked.
« Reply #26 on: April 12, 2023, 06:12:29 AM »
Your interlocutor is correct in saying that a DC solenoid or DC powered relay does not short the DC battery. This is because these devices have a resistance (or impedance) that limits the current flow, and they are designed to work with DC power sources.

However, in my loop configuration using earth batteries with no resistor in line, the situation is different. You are essentially connecting the positive and negative terminals of the battery together through a loop of wire. This creates a short circuit, which means that the current can flow freely without any resistance.

While it is true that there is an AC component to the current in the loop due to the modulation, the DC bias is still present and will be affected by the short circuit. This can cause the battery to discharge quickly and can even damage it if the current is too high. I do mention this in my video and surprise surprise recommend having a resistor in line with it help with that issue.

I know my circuit  8)

Nope . You shorting nothing there.
Impedance  is present in AC and you have AC with DC offset.
We may also argue that  for example  DC solenoid  of DC powered  relay  is not shorting DC  battery  and so on.
Don't have time for it today  it is 11PM here.
Wesley

Offline stivep

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 3313
Re: How Stubblefields Wireless Really Worked.
« Reply #27 on: April 12, 2023, 07:33:41 PM »
I must disagree.
At first your battery is not needed. - means DC offset .
second the AC power from  the transformer  must be  quite    significant and greater than that from your battery.
To transform anything  you need  to power  your microphone.

 You may simply  take potato out and close the circuit.
AC from  modulation  transformer will be present in L1 than it will transform to L2.
 However  there would be no short  as than you dealing with AC only and each transformer  winding  has its own impedance.
 In situation with potato you also  not shorting anything. The DC power  from your potato is omittable . ( try to measure  resistance of a potato too for fun)
 https://www.bing.com/ck/a
The presence  of second transformer L1/L2 doesn't give you any gain  at all  but losses only.
 Introduction of a  resistor in that loop is even worse .
 Just connect  your modulating transformer  directly   to the antenna that can be  also open circuit and from the other side  connect your microphone with  power supply.
 one side  of the output winding, connect to random length of wire and  second side of  winding connect to the ground

 Wesley

Offline joellagace

  • Full Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 119
    • My Free Energy And High Voltage Projects
Re: How Stubblefields Wireless Really Worked.
« Reply #28 on: April 12, 2023, 07:47:15 PM »
Hey everyone,

I've been having a discussion with a fellow forum member about the use of loop antennas with earth batteries and whether or not there is a DC shorting issue. I wanted to share my thoughts on the matter.

First off, I want to clarify that when I talk about a DC short, I'm referring to the situation where the positive and negative terminals of a battery are connected directly with a low-resistance wire or circuit, bypassing any load or device that would provide resistance. In this scenario, the battery can discharge quickly and potentially be damaged due to the unrestricted current flow.

Now, my fellow forum member has been arguing that there is no DC short when using a loop antenna with earth batteries, even without a resistor in the circuit. They've brought up the example of using a potato battery and closing the circuit with a transformer, saying that there would be no short because the DC power from the potato is negligible and the transformer winding has its own impedance.

However, this is not an accurate comparison to the use of earth batteries with a loop antenna. In the case of the loop antenna, the battery is a significant power source, and the loop wire creates a low-resistance path for the current to flow through, resulting in a DC short.

My fellow forum member has also insinuated that the inductances of the transformer on the other side would prevent the short circuit from occurring, but this is not correct. While it is true that the transformer winding has its own impedance, it does not prevent the battery from discharging quickly due to the low resistance of the loop wire.

While it is possible to use a loop antenna with earth batteries for signal reception, it is important to include a resistor in the circuit to limit the current flow and prevent damage to the batteries. Without a resistor, the loop wire creates a low-resistance path that results in a DC short and can cause the battery to discharge quickly.  8)

Offline stivep

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 3313
Re: How Stubblefields Wireless Really Worked.
« Reply #29 on: April 12, 2023, 08:09:39 PM »
My friend  I do thank you for  your  passion and that is great.
although it is kindergarten for me.- As much as I would love to help you  I don't have much time for it.
You ask me if it would work  and I said Yes.
 
The simplest   Tx is jut spark between two wires.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Spark-gap_transmitter
The first practical spark gap transmitters and receivers for radiotelegraphy communication
were developed by Guglielmo Marconi around 1896.
I have  some  time free from work to respond and I love  electromagnetics  so I may  comment something
in this area. 
Wesley