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: Proof of concept - perturbing a static magnetic field  (Read 64127 times)

gyulasun

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 4117
Re: Proof of concept - perturbing a static magnetic field
« Reply #45 on: June 06, 2007, 03:52:19 PM »

bob.rennips

  • elite_member
  • Full Member
  • ******
  • Posts: 182
Re: Proof of concept - perturbing a static magnetic field
« Reply #46 on: June 06, 2007, 05:02:42 PM »
The IRS2117pbf high side driver. These are a few notes that I've made concerning this driver.

1. The bootstrap diode across Vcc and Vb (pin 1 and pin8) must be an ultrafast diode. Its reverse voltage time must be less than 100ns. If you get this wrong the bootstrap capacitor will not charge up in time to produce the 10V plus over the supply voltage of the driver. i.e. to turn the mosfet on when switching say 500V you need at least 510V at the gate. The bootstrap capacitor provide the extra 10V over the 500V. The spec sheet mentions 10KF6 but stuffed if I can find out the specs on this diode. An apparent equivalent is 11DF4, reverse voltage time of 30nanoseconds.

2. Although the datasheet doesn't suggest this. I've seen designs where 1 or 2ohm resistor has been put in series with the diode to prevent high current on initial charging of the bootstrap capacitor. Seems to make sense to me.

3. Bootstrap capacitors between Vs and Vb (pin 6 and pin8) needs to be at around/at least 100nF. But if you make it too high, it won't charge up in time to give you required volts, too small and it won't be able to sustain the on charge at the mosfet gate during the required on period. I read on another board that an electrolytic should not be used for the bootstrap capacitor.

4. In other words getting these components right is the black art of electronic design! The high the frequency (or frequency range) the circuit has to cope with, the more arty you have to be!

5. Vin needs at least 10V for logic 1.

6. It has an undervoltage detect. For this reason I'm planning that all logic circuits will be connected to one battary which will happily sit at 12+ volts for many days. The high voltage (if needed) for the pulses will be provided via DC-DC convertor from another battery. This way spikes from the coils, even with diodes, will not make there way back to the battary concerned with keeping the logic going. The last thing I want is interpreting results as being anomalous when what is really happening is the driver is cutting out due to spurious transients.

Once I've got a working set of components and values I'll let you all know what they are. This may take a week or so depending on when I can sit down and do this.

If anyone else gets their first - please holler!

Cheers, Bob.

bob.rennips

  • elite_member
  • Full Member
  • ******
  • Posts: 182
Re: Proof of concept - perturbing a static magnetic field
« Reply #47 on: June 12, 2007, 03:32:50 AM »
Update on circuit

I got the mosfet driver and mosfet side of the circuit working today. I only had 12 volts switching to the two bifilar wound coils.

In short nothing unusual to report. The addition of a static magnetic field only increased the size of the output pulses by around 10%. There were no additional spikes, ringing or anything to suggest anything unusual happening.

The circuit was a compromise on the components I already had around the house. I'm going to abandon the use of the counter to control the pulse width, not enough fine tuning control. I need to be able to independantly control for each pulse train:

1. Pulse width.
2. Pulse spacing.
2. Pulse frequency.
3. Phase between pulses.

So back to the drawing board. I think my next board will be based on a Bob Boyce design.

Oh yeh, a solderable breadboard is needed for mosfets and the like due to heat and the need to get a good contact.

Image of my breadboard circuit attached.

hartiberlin

  • Administrator
  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 8154
    • free energy research OverUnity.com
Re: Proof of concept - perturbing a static magnetic field
« Reply #48 on: June 12, 2007, 04:49:02 AM »
Hi, what frequencies did you use ? With bifilar coils you have to go over 100 Khz to see some effects, but then you will see them...

bob.rennips

  • elite_member
  • Full Member
  • ******
  • Posts: 182
Re: Proof of concept - perturbing a static magnetic field
« Reply #49 on: June 12, 2007, 05:48:48 AM »
Hi, what frequencies did you use ? With bifilar coils you have to go over 100 Khz to see some effects, but then you will see them...

The coils were wound bi-filar as per the original patent at the begninning of this thread. The idea was that two sets of pulse sequences could be put through the coils, some overlapping and some interleaved. I tried frequencies up to the 1.5MHz and as low as 500Hz. I know the patent says to use high voltage but I hoped for some smaller effect to be visible even at low voltage.

Since I started this project I've been reading up more on Bob Boyce's experiences and I can see the parallels between the patent, SM and what boyce is doing. As such I now believe that the phase between successive pulse sequences is a lot more important to the extent that one pulse may be appearing only a few 10's of nanoseconds after a pulse in another coil. i.e. You have two pulses in very rapid sequence one pulse into 1 of the bifilar coil and the other into the other part of the bi-filar coil.

I now want to take this project more towards having very fine control of the phase between two identical frequencies.

karl

  • Jr. Member
  • **
  • Posts: 75
Re: Proof of concept - perturbing a static magnetic field
« Reply #50 on: June 14, 2007, 02:49:25 PM »
Dear Mem bers,

I've studied the patent for some days.
I'm also a patentholder and I wonder about the missing workingprinciple.
What's the influence of the RND shifting of the pulses?
Should it be a matrix correlator which works on cosmic RND influences?
Is the correlated frequencypattern of two RND sequences a new form of super-RND?

My copy is not verry good. Are the lower coil ends crossed or joined at thje point where also the earth (mass) is located? or is the first coil looped back to the generator and the second coil grounded to earth?

There is a important link to the "universal magnetic field" includet in the beginning of the patent. In this case our permanent magnet is the earth's and therefore the sun's magnetic field which is linked but which is never constant. All cosmic influences are coupled and amplified due to this field.

What I mean: The main magnetic field of our solar system is generated in the sun's inner reactive shape. This shape and therefore momentary poles changes every moment. two of this poles are stretched out to the earth poles and communicates in this way with the gravitational center of the earth (Fe+Co+Ni+...who knows).

What we can measure is a superimposed static field. Is it real static? or is it influenced with numerous sub-Informations (E as a stream of bits or trits(extra thread needed)).

How can we link to this gravitational field? How can we extract the information behind this wall of static?

How can we determine the information (data) of a 4 wired blackbox?

For many of you a book with seven locks: taguchi

He uses natural mathematic principles to describe ways to identify systems and find factors to influence them.

Yes empirical science is real and is used to optimize systems due to some interesting ways.
Please feel free to inform yourself about this topic.

An other way is to pulse a system and get the impulse-answer which gives you more than enough information about it's momentary situation which could change also due to the pulse, but this principle works in static electronic design.

You can use this information to perform a second action (x2.5 as stated?) and coupled anyway to extract or tune in.

I know my mails are more intuitive than exact, but maybe thats the key.

But what's the influence of the superimposed RND?

What's the RND generator? A kind of sensor what's comming in next?
It looks like a magic generator, a reviewer?
Or was it again a project to get money from sponsors?

The RND itself is the interesting part of the configuration. I always tried to build pendulums with superpoles, but also the superpoles find their point of lowest energy in the system. Is it possible to move the resting magnet in an RND way so that it uses the energy of the pendulum to move to a random position and therefore changes the resting configuration over the time?

Then high grade mathematics or purely intumatics is possible. Chaotic systems which get's their energy from super-chaotic influences.

My next mail should be about "How to build natural RND generators and how to utilize them to extract useable electric energy from the matrix."

But before my computer get's again a headache i'll send this mail out to the cybersea.

Best wishes to Stefan and all the finders.

KArFunkel

karl

  • Jr. Member
  • **
  • Posts: 75
Re: Proof of concept - perturbing a static magnetic field
« Reply #51 on: June 14, 2007, 03:39:48 PM »
Again...
is there a way to "lock in" the em fine structure of our solar system, including our basic planetary situation or multi vibratory influences by a kind of electronic "chopper" system?
Did a defined and sensed RND value include more information and therefore discrete E-levels, as includet in particles as we know?
Are this discrete levels natural numers or do we have to think in relative numers as 1/2?
As known from trit's (similar to bits) some informations or sequences of informations could carry more strutural informations by viewing it's last, momentary and next value, a kind of checksum. In this case we are talking about the checksum-electronics which measures a static M-field of the earth.
Next question is: (hen-or-egg-first-principle) what is the basic energy form of materia and all other manifestations? E or M, expansion, implosion or maybe ether (resting).
All over all it should be a little bit of all, mixed together and stired well.
How to overcome the checksum and make them (E, M, hen and egg) moving to my f...... electronic meter?
The philosophical answer is: it's the  which was first, because it's the beginning and the end of the logical progression.
The  in electronics is the ether and it's resting, but it carries periodically changing informations of what has been and therefore knows always what will come. This is our mastermind. How to convert to usable energy? An endless magnetic tape, carrying the last information, but superimposes the actual situation to know the next step.

So far in the interpretation of the proposed patent: A local R/W data acquisition head with ou properties....
 

starcruiser

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 693
    • Starcruiser's Place
Re: Proof of concept - perturbing a static magnetic field
« Reply #52 on: June 14, 2007, 08:54:34 PM »
@Karl

From my take on this patent the control electronics (I assume this is what you are speaking of) indicates an amplifier and a randomizing generator to change the levels of the pulses.

The main theory as I see it is to pulse the magnetic field (either permanet or electrically induced) and gain amplification from it by maybe tapping the ether.

Sharp gradients or pulses are required (sharp rise time, or on/off if you will) to generate the effect. The output is derived from the pulses voltage delta (the difference between the high and low pulse values).

We are looking to determine if this actually does work by performing the build of a similar device but using a control system to deliver the required pulses. The control systems we are thinking of will be synchronous as well as asynchronous, the patent stated either will work, so some are pursuing one path and others are pursuing the other. I myself am pursuing async pulsing using a blocking oscillator design using the control coils as part of the oscillators design.

I say have a go at it and see what you get if you are so inclined.

bob.rennips

  • elite_member
  • Full Member
  • ******
  • Posts: 182
Re: Proof of concept - perturbing a static magnetic field
« Reply #53 on: June 18, 2007, 01:21:31 PM »
Having duplicated Otto&Jason's driver/mosfet combination I've now got a much better setup. The main difference other that using a low side driver and not the high side driver, is the addition of two decoupling capacitors directly across the power inputs to the driver. This removed much of the rubbish and I was getting much crisper square waves when entering high khz 500K+.

I've also noticed that when applying a larger 24V across the coil to generate the static magnetic field, that the ability of one coil to induce into another coil is cut in half, REGARDLESS of the direction of current applied to generate the static magnetic field. In other words it doesn't matter whether N is top of the coil or bottom of the coil, they both have the effect of reducing the coupling between the two inducing bifilar coils.

I expected this to happen in one direction, but thought that in the other direction there would be an enhancement.

starcruiser

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 693
    • Starcruiser's Place
Re: Proof of concept - perturbing a static magnetic field
« Reply #54 on: June 18, 2007, 09:47:32 PM »
hummm...

Earl

  • TPU-Elite
  • Sr. Member
  • *******
  • Posts: 435
perturbing a static magnetic field
« Reply #55 on: June 20, 2007, 12:27:00 PM »
Hi Bob,

yes, you are right several capacitors right at the supply pins of the driver IC are necessary.  I suggest 1nF, 10nF, and 100nF with the smaller capacitors closer to the IC pins than the larger values.  Also a few uF of tantal will not be negative / attention to correct polarity of the tantal capacitor.

I suggest a trifilar winding for the first experiments, two coils for injecting pulses, and one coil for the output.

Remember the polarity of the pulsed magnetic field adds to the field of the permanent magnet.

It is not clear whether some exact sequence must be used or whether a quasi-random sequence generated by linear shift registers will suffice.  I will soon post some information concerning random bit generators.

It is even possible that pulsed magnetic fields can shock the aether even without the pressence of a permanent magnet?

I think the best step forward is to start experimenting and see what happens.

Regards, Earl

starcruiser

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 693
    • Starcruiser's Place
Re: Proof of concept - perturbing a static magnetic field
« Reply #56 on: June 20, 2007, 04:04:42 PM »
Well I finally have a day off and I am winding my test rig, so I should have something to report soon.

@Earl,

From what I read in the patent, the voltage/power is derived from the differential of the pulses, i.e. one set at say 500v and the other set at say 350v, this would provide a difference of 150v.

The patent did mention sequential/synchronous and async pulses would work. I am planning on using async pulses to start, leveraging a blocking oscillator designs that uses the control coils as part of the oscillators circuits. I will be using 2 oscillators initially and plan on adjusting the drive voltage to adjust the output pulses voltage.

My initial design will use a 12v battery for testing and a voltage divider to drop the   source on one oscillator to say 9v while the other oscillator uses the straight 12v, this should provide the difference required.

As far as the magnetic field source, I am planning on using both a coil on the test rig for the source then replacing that with a neo magnet to see what results I get between them. I was wondering if the magnet is being used to couple the 2 air coil transformers. This will be another test for the rig as well.

There is some information on blocking oscillators that mentions designs that allow one oscillator to be sync'd to the main one and with careful capacitor selection would allow a frequency divider action to occur between the two. I am wanting to try this out as well. This will be the sync'd option I mentioned.

So first step is to build the test rig using 3 or maybe 4 coils per set on a 1/2" PVC form (pipe) and wrap 2 sets spaced 1" apart to allow for coil separation (reduce field coupling) and allow testing the Neo magnet theory. The use of the PVC pipe will allow insertion of various materials for potential collectors as well and this angle will be tested as well.

All of these ideas will be using as part of the testing a diode and capacitor to capture the radiant energy from the output of the coils for power conversion.

These thoughts are partially based on the SM open TPU design.

Well it is off to the hardware store to pick up a few items to wind the test rigs, I will be making a few of these rigs to test a couple of variations. Will report back later. Lots of variations to test.

karl

  • Jr. Member
  • **
  • Posts: 75
Re: Proof of concept - perturbing a static magnetic field
« Reply #57 on: June 23, 2007, 10:35:38 PM »
@Karl

From my take on this patent the control electronics (I assume this is what you are speaking of) indicates an amplifier and a randomizing generator to change the levels of the pulses.

The main theory as I see it is to pulse the magnetic field (either permanet or electrically induced) and gain amplification from it by maybe tapping the ether.

Sharp gradients or pulses are required (sharp rise time, or on/off if you will) to generate the effect. The output is derived from the pulses voltage delta (the difference between the high and low pulse values).

We are looking to determine if this actually does work by performing the build of a similar device but using a control system to deliver the required pulses. The control systems we are thinking of will be synchronous as well as asynchronous, the patent stated either will work, so some are pursuing one path and others are pursuing the other. I myself am pursuing async pulsing using a blocking oscillator design using the control coils as part of the oscillators design.

I say have a go at it and see what you get if you are so inclined.
Hi Starcruicer,
here is the fiddle for your concert.
  Re: Proof of concept - perturbing a static magnetic field
? Reply #41 on: June 06, 2007, 11:16:40 AM ? Quote Modify 

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Hello Finders,

what you want to do is building a kind of stationary newman machine.
Have a look at the newspage of Stefan.
Someone has attempted a good example again. A working model out of nothing.
The main part of this kind of negative energy collector is a spark (plasma).
No discrete parts are used as diodes, transistors and so on.

Stefan has postet this 1998 at JLN labs site http://jnaudin.free.fr/html/NMac1118.htm
This machine consists basicly of a big coil (the bigger the better), a tuned sparkgap and a blocking device to direct the backward current.
At the right tuned distance the color (frequency=E-Level=tuning) of the spark change from blue (discrete spectrum, maybe a line of oxygen) to white (full (most)spectrum) and is making a hissing sound.
This is the electronic-hit-part of the future and the past.

The Teslas use different discharge tubes filled with H2 or N2.
I've found such tubes some time ago at ebay.
The are used to work in front of wimhurst machines (is a light going on in your head?) to show different colors of discharging gases.

This is the real tuner.
H2 has a continious spectrum!
H2 is receiving a continous spectrum!
The sun is sending out a continous spectrum!
Evey particle is tuned in a continous spectrum.
Every Molecule could be replaced by a frequency (actual science: Using frequency as catalysator).

Thats it.
The cat is out of the house.
The mice are dancing on the table.

So what I mean Stefan and all other finders:
This is a kind of tuner for a special spectrum and a kind of coupler between discrete energy levels (light to electrons and backwards).
You know that plasma is called the fifth (element) state of energy.
Most of the materia of our cosm is in plasma state.
You want to couple in this mass. The best universal and universallegal way to fullfil your wishes.
!This are just suggestions. I'm not a proofer, but think about it!
Please open your minds and start to see: over unity is only possible by thinking on cosmic levels. Oder ist das nicht so?

Every particle in the 3d space is affecting every particle in the 3d space.
Simply by overlapping all influences of all roompoints we get the momentary situation in static and dynamic fields. This is the basic of our common computersimulation programs.

The biggest mass is in plasma state. The biggest content of energy (gequantelt oder nicht) is sending out energy because of the fact, that plasmatic materia has more energy as motion, and therefore heat and preasure and speed, as materia which is resting more in one roompoint.
Is this clear?

We should couple to this mass of frequencys by sending out a em pulse with our coil (creating a vacuum) and receive a modified pulse (filling the vacuum) after a while.

Stefan: is it possible that we change the "Verweilzeit", the time of duration of our pulsed mass in the space and therefore the time of the em-Quant in space by adjusting the sparkgap?

Is the energy quant able to collect energy and mutate to a harmonic em object which is rejected by the coil (blow-suck-effect)?

Yes, I think so.

PLEASE READ THE PAGES 37 FF OF THE ATTACHED .PDF

It's the Patent from the most famous Scientist. Thats the Key to all FEdevices.
Thats the way.

The generator consists of two C's and one ore two L's with HF Ferrites, AMCC prefererd.
Meyer, Kunel, Morray, Tesla, ever and ever the same principle.

But the basics are here and search for my last mails, all books about that physics are free to download at the postet sites.

But I'll show you the sites if you can't find them.

Green technology with 100% positive energy respond.

and think about my words again

Best wishes to all.

Kar Funkel

karl

  • Jr. Member
  • **
  • Posts: 75
Re: Proof of concept - perturbing a static magnetic field
« Reply #58 on: June 23, 2007, 10:48:04 PM »
Good Morning,

who knows Dr. Aspden?
Here is the theory and practice of all! OU phenomenas.
http://v3.espacenet.com/textdoc?DB=EPODOC&IDX=GB2390941&F=0&OREQ=1&&CY=ep&LG=de

This Patent includes further Information how it works.
Fasten your seatbells...

All Books and papers from Dr. Aspden could be free! downloaded from:
http://www.aspden.org/books/Booklist.html
Please read all..

All Energy Science Reports are here for free! download (sparky or not, there is everything)
http://www.aspden.org/reports/reportlist.htm

His Newest Book could be downloaded free! here or buy it
http://www.aspden.org/books/2edpoc/2edpoccontents.htm

What do you need more to end your discussion.

###Step in FREE NRG###

karLfunkel

kames

  • Full Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 141
Re: Proof of concept - perturbing a static magnetic field
« Reply #59 on: June 24, 2007, 02:45:12 AM »
Good Morning,

who knows Dr. Aspden?
Here is the theory and practice of all! OU phenomenas.
http://v3.espacenet.com/textdoc?DB=EPODOC&IDX=GB2390941&F=0&OREQ=1&&CY=ep&LG=de

This Patent includes further Information how it works.
Fasten your seatbells...

All Books and papers from Dr. Aspden could be free! downloaded from:
http://www.aspden.org/books/Booklist.html
Please read all..

All Energy Science Reports are here for free! download (sparky or not, there is everything)
http://www.aspden.org/reports/reportlist.htm

His Newest Book could be downloaded free! here or buy it
http://www.aspden.org/books/2edpoc/2edpoccontents.htm

What do you need more to end your discussion.

###Step in FREE NRG###

karLfunkel

@Karl.


I tried that patent about 2.5 years ago (right away when it just appeared on the web) with 20000 V setup. It didn?t work. I liked all of the Aspden?s publications and was following him very closely. I also tried to play with it by changing the configuration in some little different ways. The result was zero.
I read almost all Aspden?s articles publicly available.
Sorry, if I disappointed you.

Kames.