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.

GDPR and DSGVO law

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.
Amazon Warehouse Deals ! Now even more Deep Discounts ! Check out these great prices on slightly used or just opened once only items.I always buy my gadgets via these great Warehouse deals ! Highly recommended ! Many thanks for supporting OverUnity.com this way.

User Menu

Plug Heater

Powerbox

Smartbox

3D Solar

3D Solar Panels

DC2DC converter

Micro JouleThief

FireMatch

FireMatch

CCKnife

CCKnife

CCTool

CCTool

Magpi Magazine

Magpi Magazine Free Rasberry Pi Magazine

Battery Recondition

Battery Recondition

Arduino

Ultracaps

YT Subscribe

Gravity Machines

Tesla-Ebook

Magnet Secrets

Lindemann Video

Navigation

Products

Products

WaterMotor kit

Statistics

  • *Total Members: 83423
  • *Latest: funergy

  • *Total Posts: 511197
  • *Total Topics: 15228
  • *Online Today: 44
  • *Most Online: 103
(December 19, 2006, 11:27:19 PM)
  • *Users: 3
  • *Guests: 12
  • *Total: 15

Author Topic: Electrical Faux Pas  (Read 21254 times)

Offline BEP

  • TPU-Elite
  • Hero Member
  • *******
  • Posts: 1322
Re: Electrical Faux Pas
« Reply #45 on: January 20, 2008, 12:05:06 AM »
@Wattsup

I'm sure there is a better way (usually burning the insulation off with a soldering iron and solder flux) but my favorite when I have a lot of little connections:

Take one busted (missing the drill bit part) small hole saw.
Insert it in the chuck of a small battery drill or screwdriver.
stuff the hole saw full of fine steel wool.
Stick the wire end in the center of the steel wool and pull the trigger.

It takes a bit of practice but it works. After you get the hang of it you'll stop breaking wires  :)

Free Energy | searching for free energy and discussing free energy

Re: Electrical Faux Pas
« Reply #45 on: January 20, 2008, 12:05:06 AM »

Offline gyulasun

  • without_ads
  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 3975
Re: Electrical Faux Pas
« Reply #46 on: January 20, 2008, 12:41:26 AM »
@all

Since z_p_e is no longer around, thought I'd put this here.

One thing that has bugged me for a long time now was how to skin magnet wire. When you have 20 of these to do using sand paper, it starts getting messy, your fingers ache and it takes forever.

So, I just found this video attached below.

If anyone has a better idea, I'm all ears, uh eyes, uh fingers, uh whatever. lol

Hi Wattsup,

I used to use alcohol or spirit burner to burn the enamel (nowadays a gas-filled lighter is ok just like in your video) and when the wire end is red-hot you suddenly immerse/dip it into spirit (denaturated alcohol) to cool it down.
Usually you get a nice/clean copper surface ready to solder. Be careful not to light the spirit with the lighter (spirit was poured into a small bowl or cap in advance).
Basically this method was preferred to clean Litz wire ends but obviously should work for single wires too.  If you happen to have contact spray (Tuner 600, or the like that has no oil/lubricative additive) at hand, you may use it a little after you take the wire ends out from the spirit. Then you are ready to solder the surfaces.

rgds
Gyula

Offline wattsup

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 2627
    • Spin Conveyance Theory - For a New Perspective...
Re: Electrical Faux Pas
« Reply #47 on: April 19, 2008, 05:57:36 PM »
Hi Guys;

I have been mulling over an idea for a few weeks now and thought to resurrect this thread instead of starting another one for what may be a few questions.

The topic is Microwave Ovens. lol. No this is not a cooking question. Well maybe.

I know that some of the devices by Otto, Roberto and especially @GK can produce some pretty nasty waves that may be harmful.

I also know that my EE prowess is in the gutter, but my continuous quest for pulsing things (all sorts of coils, etc.) is never ending.

So what I am wondering is can I use a microwave oven. Remove the magnatron that has two wires connected to is. Put a plug connector on those two wires and run this into the cooking chamber where I can connect all sorts of coils. I can also run the coil output out from the same hole to measure output power.

What I am thinking is the oven already has all the electronics, you can choose time, power level and some other parameters. Then when I drive a coil, the coil would be inside the cooking chamber that is already designed to protect from microwaves so it should be good to protect against other types of waves. Plus if this could work, it would be easy to measure power input as 120vac or whatever and then check the amperage, then compare this with the output.

Microwaves are super cheap to buy these days. Used ones are even cheaper. Plus, if you really get to know what is coming out of the control panel circuit, you can make changes to the cap value and even the microwave transformer.

Maybe one last thing. I know many will say do not touch it if you don't know what you are doing, but that never stopped me before. I know how to be careful. I think this may have some merit and provide a secure way to test devices, even if it's just for the cooking chamber itself.

So, anyone have any ideas about this.
« Last Edit: April 20, 2008, 04:17:53 AM by wattsup »

Free Energy | searching for free energy and discussing free energy

Re: Electrical Faux Pas
« Reply #47 on: April 19, 2008, 05:57:36 PM »
Sponsored links:




Offline armagdn03

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 441
Re: Electrical Faux Pas
« Reply #48 on: April 20, 2008, 07:22:42 AM »
Below are two errors that seem to occur on a regular basis, yet I have seen no one yet correct them.

These are fundamental faux pas and should not be propagated any further. They are:

1) Square waves contain all frequencies.

2) Transformers do not faithfully pass square waves. A 50% duty-cycle square wave applied to the primary of a transformer, will only yield a "short pulse" on its secondary. This is because most of the square wave time is spent on a steady voltage, either +V, or 0V... i.e. the wave form is hardly ever "changing" over time.

Both notions are absolutely false!

1) True square waves contain only odd order (integer) harmonics. A sawtooth wave form does contain all integer harmonics (one example).



2) All transformers have a finite bandwidth. Any wave form can be disassembled into its constituent sine wave components, a la Fourier. A square wave can be reasonably constructed using the first 5 sine waves, i.e 1, 3, 5, 7, and the 9th harmonics. The more harmonics applied, the more exact the resulting square wave shape will be. It comes down to transformer bandwidth, and what square wave frequency is applied to it. Too high an applied frequency, and the corners will start to become more rounded. In addition, the flat portions will begin to show "ripple" until finally, only the fundamental sine wave will appear. Too low a square wave frequency, and the flat portions will begin to tilt. At no time however between these two extremes, does the secondary exhibit a "short pulse-like" output. The transformer does not arbitrarily convert the square wave duty cycle to something other than what it is at the primary. Transformers therefore can pass square waves, and in fact any wave form faithfully, as long as the input frequency lies reasonably within the bandwidth of the transformer. If this were not the case, Audiophile tube amplifiers would not be possible.

Sorry to butt in, and I only read this one post, so this might have already been corrected but....

Square waves can only excite harmonics that are of the same wave length or longer than the rise / fall time of the "square" pulse. first off, there is no such thing as a  square wave, they are all trapezoidal, it takes time from "on" to the steady state, and it takes time to turn off too, its not instantaneous as a square wave would imply. So lets say that a square wave has a rise time of 1us, this means that it takes .001 second for it to rise, this is known as its period, and we also know that frequency is the inverse of period, meaning that 1/.001 = 1000 hz, and this would be the fastest frequency it could excite. this same principle holds true for physical vibration as in spring mass systems, and also for other wave forms, including saw tooth.

Offline armagdn03

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 441
Re: Electrical Faux Pas
« Reply #49 on: April 20, 2008, 12:18:35 PM »
Sorry to butt in as well, but I think I can offer a realistic word of warning.

The voltage from the microwave transformer is a LOT higher then you would
normally want in a TPU type of coil.  (Assumption on my part...)  I can't give
any form of exact figures without measuring, but I would assume always
greater than 1Kv unloaded.  (I think around 4Kv is average, but again, I have
not measured it personally.)  If anyone has done a measurement and I am
wrong, please say so, but trying to measure this high of a voltage with a normal
DVM will cause the end of the DVM.  (Most are rated to 600V....)

Armagdn03:

Little oppps.  I think you meant 1mS rise time, not 1 uS.  1uS rise time would be 1Mhz.
Also, you are in what I call a "Gray" area, because the "Output" Frequency is going to
be as much related to what you drive as the square signal.  Example:  Send the wave
you describe to a tank ckt and the output will be whatever the tank is tuned to.  Freq.
multiplication is common in digital logic and the output freq of a simple ckt can be
higher than the rise time would suggest. 

Now, to ensure that I'm branded the idiot, what you state is exactly correct for a resistive
load, and being that this is a "Faux Pas" thread, That is the best way to look at it.  As far
as driving a coil, the Freq that you are going to get will depend on WHERE you measure
or get the signal from, as anyone could guess.  The Coil ring is one.  The Actual Current
input to the Coil is the Square wave on input (Mostly.....)  The inductive output from the
coil should match the ring but may have components from both of the above.  To go any
further, you would have to talk to people well versed in RF, which I am not.  (Just basics..)

The biggest killer is, modern switching times for Square waves are Soooo fast for common
parts (50nS is easy today.) that the freq people are trying to use is usually much slower
than what the square wave puts out.  I bet that causes the most trouble.  Most people
don't realize how fast that is.  (20 Mhz)  For someone trying to work in the Khz, this is
way beyond where they are working and, for me, clouds the issue of basic signals.  20Mhz
is plenty high enough to be RF, and will transmit all over the place.  All it means is, unwanted
effects can appear from the RF that comes off a normal logic gate or transistor when using
square waves.  This is also where I lose drive to MOSFETS.  The instant current value for fast
switching gets crazy on fast risetimes, which is what a good 555 can put out.  I'll shut up
now and leave the theory to people that know far more than I.  (Try using 100pS Switching...)


Yes, I agree with everythig you wrote, I should have been more specific, the 1Mhz (thanks for the correction) would be the fastest it could excite, if you impart this pulse on a circuit containing both inductance and capacitance (which all systems I am aware of do) it will excite its natural frequencies.

Free Energy | searching for free energy and discussing free energy

Re: Electrical Faux Pas
« Reply #49 on: April 20, 2008, 12:18:35 PM »
Sponsored links:




Offline wattsup

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 2627
    • Spin Conveyance Theory - For a New Perspective...
Re: Electrical Faux Pas
« Reply #50 on: April 20, 2008, 05:29:56 PM »
Thanks guys for your comments.

I use a mircowave transformer now with high voltage outputs (but very low amps) and I also suspect the voltages entering the transformer/cap from the microwave control circuit will be much lower, but pulsed DC. So I will eventually have to try this and see.

Offline wattsup

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 2627
    • Spin Conveyance Theory - For a New Perspective...
Re: Electrical Faux Pas
« Reply #51 on: June 26, 2008, 10:59:53 PM »
Yep, another question for the EEers.

I am currently using a IRF840 transistor with my frequency generator (FG) going through a resistor then to the base. The collector is receiving +12vdc via my DC power supply (PS) and the emitter is going to the positive of a small 12vdc light, and the light negative is going to the negative of the PS. With this set-up I can see the light pulsing as per the frequencies I set on the FG. So far so good.

The trouble I am having is when I try to do the same thing but pulsing the negative side instead of the positive side.

So, still using the IRF840 transistor with my (FG) going through a resistor then to the base. The collector is receiving -12vdc via my PS and the emitter is going to the negative of the small 12vdc light, and the light positive is going to the positive of the PS. With this set-up I cannot see the light pulsing as per the frequencies I set on the FG. So far so bad.

So the question is how can you use a transistor to pulse the negative. I need to find this out because I want to replicate the Tesla Ozone Patent and use the transistor as the shorting device. From what I can understand, the IRF840 is an NPN. Do I need to use a PNP instead or is there another type that I should be using?

Free Energy | searching for free energy and discussing free energy

Re: Electrical Faux Pas
« Reply #51 on: June 26, 2008, 10:59:53 PM »
Sponsored links:




Offline pauldude000

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 569
    • My electronics/programming website
Re: Electrical Faux Pas
« Reply #52 on: June 29, 2008, 07:44:05 AM »
@wattsup

For AC, look for a "push-pull" oscillator. Any of these is AC by definition. There are many different types, and many different configurations. Do a search on "push pull transistor oscillator circuit schematic" on yahoo, you will find a bunch of outlets. Each style you come across will have it's good points, and its bad points. Choose the style you need that has the attributes you desire. Just a thought.

Someone said square wave DC is not AC. They are absolutely correct. DC propagates in one direction only. AC "pushes", then "pulls", in that the applied direction of current flow switches polarity.

Looking at a square wave AC on your scope, with ground being the center line, means that the part of the wave above the line is a positive pulse, while that below the line is a negative pulse.

A DC square wave means that the pulses are positive ONLY. The current flows, then returns to ground, and never reverses polarity. The bottom edge of the wave IS the ground line, not the center of the waveform as in an AC square wave.

@all

This is the first time I have read this thread, and it is a good and necessary thread. I hope it continues.

I noticed though a statement made on the last page, where one stated the concept of "Overunity", "impossible", and "closed loop" in the same breath. THAT is why I stress that these devices are not overunity, and the importance of understanding WHY they are not overunity or even a closed system. This may seem irrelevant to most, but it truly IS important to understand.

The gerneral EE is quite correct when he states that you cannot get out more energy than is put in. His error in thinking ONLY lays in that his assumption of a closed system includes ONLY includes the obvious. IE the human input energy. (Connect a battery, apply mechanical force, etc.)

No one is ever achieving COP>1, not even with a nuclear weapon, as every BIT of energy out, has ALWAYS been present in the system. The source of energy has not been understood to be a USEABLE source of energy, is the only problem.

You can build a working device of any type, Sweet, SM, just start listing the names.

No matter how incredible the output of the device seems compared to obvious input energy, the energy it is tapping into has always been there, available for use, and can be considered as a huge untapped battery which we have not figured out before how to connect the terminals. None of these is actually by definition overunity or especially COP>1 since a power source exists which is being tapped.

Otherwise, by the same definition, everytime I watch my lights click on with the flick of a switch, I am achieving overunity as ->> I <<- have put only a few dynes of mechanical energy into mechanically flicking a switch. These power sources that are tapped into are no different logically than the unseen electrical power plant 30 miles away, which is neither seen by myself, nor the exact means of generation of said known by myself, (natural gas, coal, steam, who knows.) which provides the current to drive the bulb.

My knowing how the energy is generated does not change whether the bulb comes on when I flick the switch.

If a TPU puts out more energy than the energy supplied by the builder, then it only demonstrates an unknown available power source, NOT COP>1.

Concerning perpetual motion......

How long does an atom,  remain stable and in motion, if no outside force greater than ambient is exerted upon it to change its state. Does this satisfy the 100 year minimum? Fine, they exist naturally. (not to mention solar systems, galaxies, etc. etc. etc. etc...) ;D

The problem is that terms are misunderstood, misapplied, and misconstrued, and I speak not only of the amateurs, but also the professionals. We truly NEED an understanding of these terms, so that we may all communicate these ideas without unnecessary confusion.

This thread is the most relevant place for many of these things, as they do qualify as an "Electrical Faux Pas", since what we are dealing with in the TPU Genre is electrical in nature, but the understanding of its function and operation does include other areas as well.

Paul Andrulis


Offline poynt99

  • TPU-Elite
  • Hero Member
  • *******
  • Posts: 3556
Re: Electrical Faux Pas
« Reply #53 on: June 29, 2008, 08:37:35 AM »
Paul,

i would have to disagree with your opinion that devices can't have overunity or COP>1 and whether the terms should even be used.

you are partly correct, but missing one key consideration, and that's the characteristics of the source.

your analogy with the light switch is logical enough but what's important to note is that the power supplying that light is man-made and this power required resources from the earth to be produced.

geothermal energy is another example of energy from the earth.

in both cases, this energy isn't renewable. it will eventually die out. the geothermal method could last as along as the earth does, so in terms of life-times, we could think of geothermal energy as free energy allowing COP's >1.

but when i think of overunity and COP>1, i'm not thinking of geothermal energy from the earth, or from burning fossil fuels to light my house, i think of zero point energy and the like. to the best of my knowledge, there is no limit to this energy supply.

if a device puts out excess energy as a result of tapping into this endless ocean of energy, then in my books this is overunity, COP>1 and an open system.

the heat pump effect of geothermal energy is technically COP>1, and an open system, but imho not overunity, at least not the kind we're all seeking. do we think of windmills as ou? i don't think so, even though the COP is infinity (unless you take into account losses and cemf).

so in summary, i'm saying that ou is a valid term providing it's used in the correct way, and that would be when referring to an outside source that does not diminish with time (eons).

i would agree with you that open systems are always present, but unless we have a case where energy is converging on our circuit from some outside limitless source, we don't care about it.

Free Energy | searching for free energy and discussing free energy

Re: Electrical Faux Pas
« Reply #53 on: June 29, 2008, 08:37:35 AM »
3D Solar Panels

Offline pauldude000

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 569
    • My electronics/programming website
Re: Electrical Faux Pas
« Reply #54 on: June 29, 2008, 07:29:28 PM »
@Poynt

I read and thoroughly enjoyed your logic. Refreshing.

You inadvertently stated the problem yourself, when you stated "what it means to me.....". That is the heart of the problem, in that for 50 people, you may get 10 to 20 different definitions of "what it means to them". Confusion then sets in between those using the terms.

I would have no problem using the terms OU or COP>1 if your definitions were applied to them with the understanding of open systems, as then they would be true, accurate, and applicable.

You mentioned some sources, such as geothermal. Consider also the photoelectric. It is by definition COP>1 for a solar cell, since no power is input by the user whatsoever. Another "endless supply", of which I am beginning to think there are many.

P.S. concerning a different post, I have been thinking about this. I reprimanded you for attacking verbally another, and you pointed out that I had not defended or supported you when you were attacked elsewhere. My only defense is that I did not see or notice it happen. I try to hold equal measure for all men. I apologize.

Paul Andrulis

Offline poynt99

  • TPU-Elite
  • Hero Member
  • *******
  • Posts: 3556
Re: Electrical Faux Pas
« Reply #55 on: June 30, 2008, 06:02:00 AM »
hi Paul.

i was doing a comparison to your analogy of the light switch and power company. when i say "what it means to me", i am hopefully speaking for all free energy seekers/believers.

i do understand open systems, and anything other than a limitless (or almost limitless) source of high power is of no interest to us right? i hope so anyway, otherwise why are we here at this forum  ???

"conventional" open systems are mostly divergent. as you say solar and geothermal are open (convergent) free energy systems, but i don't place them in the same class as ZPE, VPF, aether etc. do you?

so there is a technical and practical way of looking at open systems and COPs greater than 1. anyone can hang a solar cell out their window and collect free energy, but that's not what we're here for. solar energy is technically free energy, but it's too inefficient at the moment to put a real dent in things.

now if you can hang your TPU out the proverbial window and are able to produce a COP of 1000:1 from wherever this baby gets it's energy, well now you're talkin'!  ;) that's practical free energy  :D

in the end all this terminology talk means very little. when we get our TPU's working we'll have tons more energy available than what our 9V can supply, and it will do this for as long as the darn thing lasts. i don't care all that much where the additional energy comes from, nor if i should be calling it free energy, overunity, COP>1, an open system, 100+% efficiency, or whatever.

 :)

Thanks ;)

Free Energy | searching for free energy and discussing free energy

Re: Electrical Faux Pas
« Reply #55 on: June 30, 2008, 06:02:00 AM »
3D Solar Panels

Offline Grumpy

  • TPU-Elite
  • Hero Member
  • *******
  • Posts: 2267
Re: Electrical Faux Pas
« Reply #56 on: June 30, 2008, 04:35:26 PM »
When we say "open system" - in what sense are we speaking of?

For example, an ordinary solenoid coil is closed electrically, but open magnetically - so it can be closed or open depending on the reference used.

--------------------

Getting to something more interesting, why is the "electric vector potential" not used in classical electrodynamics?  This precedes the magnetic field and the electric field.

F.F. Mende has some interesting thoughts and conclusions:

http://arxiv.org/ftp/physics/papers/0506/0506083.pdf

Quote
These four fundamental parameters ee0, mm0, Lk and Ck clarify the physical picture of the wave and resonance processes in material media in applied electromagnetic fields. Previously, only electromagnetic waves were thought to propagate and transfer energy in material media. It is clear now that the concept was not complete.  In fact, magnetoelectrokinetic, or electromagnetopotential waves travel in material media. The resonances in these media also have specific features. Unlike closed planes with electromagnetic resonance and energy exchange between electric and magnetic fields, material media have two types of resonance ? electrokinetic and magnetopotential.  Under the electrokinetic resonance the energy of the electric field changes to kinetic energy. In the case of magnetopotential resonance the potential energy accumulated during the precessional motion can escape outside at the precession frequency.

Hmm - Ck (kinetic capacitance) has never been known to exists...interesting.


Offline pauldude000

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 569
    • My electronics/programming website
Re: Electrical Faux Pas
« Reply #57 on: June 30, 2008, 07:40:11 PM »
@Grumpy

By "open" and "closed" systems, we refer to a systems energy interactions with the surrounding environment. Any system is determinate of the energy available verses the work applied to the environment.

A "closed" system has a limited amount of energy, contained only within the system.

An "open" system assumes that there is an external energy source which cannot be depleted. (The external source is generally thought of as infinite, though it does not have to be.)

That is the definitions in a nutshell.

Concerning Mende.

I intend to read the pdf, as it looks interesting just from the quote. Thanks Grumpy.

Paul Andrulis

Offline Grumpy

  • TPU-Elite
  • Hero Member
  • *******
  • Posts: 2267
Re: Electrical Faux Pas
« Reply #58 on: June 30, 2008, 08:04:39 PM »
Paul

Forget about open or closed. 

Take a common spark gap in an "anomolous" device such as a Tesla Transformer.  By the way, Tesla state many times that he could obtain "any amount of energy" he desired from his transformer - hint hint.

Is the gap open or closed?  Doesn't matter.

It is not the spark gap itself that is responsible for the magnification effect. any more than the top load capacitance.  The important part is what the spark gap does.  It conducts within a couple of nanoseconds and with magnetic quenching, it quenches just as quickly - so you get a steep rise and a steep fall for your pulse.  This pulse combined with the coils of the system produces the effects.

See, Paul, the energy is already there.

Offline wattsup

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 2627
    • Spin Conveyance Theory - For a New Perspective...
Re: Electrical Faux Pas
« Reply #59 on: July 01, 2008, 02:23:52 AM »
Before @zpe left the forum (hope he is doing good), he left us with a set of guidelines in order to determine if a device is producing OU or not. I am honored to upload his pdf document for any newer guys to mull over.

It is located here;
http://www.overunity.com/index.php?action=tpmod;dl=get94

I would classify open system as linear and closed system as looping.

Eventually, we will realize that Grumpy is right and that there is no open or closed. There will simply be "always has been" and "never knew it was there". If you dive in the ocean, you don't look to make open paddling and closed paddling. You just paddle and the water is always there.

But given the fact that life and humanity is in a progression of events and obviously we still have a ways to go before free energy becomes our daily reality, we still need some rules to go by and what @zpe had proposed seems to be almost correct. I say almost because I remember there were a few points that I myself did not agree with. But at least he put this in writing. Coming from a true EEer, who I sense did not have a total belief in free energy systems, for him to produce this document must have been difficult. Especially when he would see all of us continuously trying to plug our devices (or concoctions) into the wheel work of nature, only to see us blowing fuses. lol

@pauldude000

Thanks for your reply to my initial question. I will look into it. I used to come to this thread once in a while when I had some questions on regular EE stuff and I imagine I will do so again and again and again....................................... Beats opening a new thread any time you have a question.


 

OneLink