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: OU/COP>1 switched cap PS cct like Tesla's 'charge siphoning'  (Read 146413 times)

nul-points

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 995
    • Doc Ringwood's Free Energy blog
Re: OU/COP>1 switched cap PS cct like Tesla's 'charge siphoning'
« Reply #75 on: June 13, 2008, 07:13:05 AM »
hi Alan

further to Gyula's help for you in tracking down those papers, Bearden has actually published a schematic for a cap 'step-charge' circuit:
  http://www.cheniere.org/techpapers/Final%20Secret%20of%2015%20Feb%201994/index.html

hope this proves helpful, too
sandy
Doc Ringwood's Free Energy site  http://ringcomps.co.uk/doc

pese

  • TPU-Elite
  • Hero Member
  • *******
  • Posts: 1597
    • Freie Energie und mehr ... Free energy and more ...

MinEth3r

  • Newbie
  • *
  • Posts: 25
Re: OU/COP>1 switched cap PS cct like Tesla's 'charge siphoning'
« Reply #77 on: June 13, 2008, 08:35:34 AM »
About Step-Charging
===============
It does work indeed, the step charging idea: patents exist on using noisy current for charging, also using less voltage near the end of the charging cycle, in order not tu buck too much against the charge of the capacitor/cell.... one can monitor coltage using indepedent and generic cell monitors, with let say a light detector to enable sylcell(tm)/pacemaker functionality&reliability, let say mission critical systems would double those control cells, would hook many dormant fail-safe counter-meausre in the mix.

Anyway! Not simply a second order system.... one can "move" charges using only voltage, egg before the chicken when thinking about the control mecanism, but the smaller scale can make it appear an insignificant energy loss... what makes life great, high-level feedback mecanisms on the physical/dead world, on other living beings, or would those be only interfaces... one looses weight when "disconnecting" :o|

So much more out there, biological signals: Benveniste, Co-Operative Healing, chinese guys @ quantumbrain.org, lots of examples, the chi....

'Dead Energy" and you get taken away, too frightful for the economy?! Worse law is an absence of laws, one has to think, to design before hand. The single most simplest layer at the bottom of it all... efficient solar panels from the 60's, even higher than 70% documented on Rex Research for example, it's known. We can do it, only one must not exagerate, one has ti be responsible with this kind of technology at his fingertip, no drone army nor autonomous drone armies ;o)

MinEth3r

  • Newbie
  • *
  • Posts: 25
Re: OU/COP>1 switched cap PS cct like Tesla's 'charge siphoning'
« Reply #78 on: June 13, 2008, 06:27:04 PM »
Sorry for the previous, inspired late night post :O)

As for newelectromagnetism.com, have a look at this
http://www.distinti.com/docs/cap_anom.pdf

Also, this patent is dead simple, great idea, pretty interesting:
US7085123 @ pat2pdf.org

One lets the capacitor do the work, not the battery, the graphs speak for themselves!


nul-points

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 995
    • Doc Ringwood's Free Energy blog
Re: OU/COP>1 switched cap PS cct like Tesla's 'charge siphoning'
« Reply #79 on: June 13, 2008, 07:46:26 PM »
hi all

i don't have any first-hand experience of Bearden's step-charge circuit - i've referenced it above only because alan was looking for a paper, quoted by Bearden, relating to that process

having said that, the basic mechanism of transferring charge from a voltage source to a load via a 'collector' is similar to the circuit i use to switch charge - and of course, i can confirm that my switch-charge circuit does produce results which indicate OU operation  :)

one notable difference is that i force both the final charging & discharging current of the output capacitor to flow through a load resistor to avoid the automatic 50% energy loss which would occur otherwise

MinEth3r, thanks for the links - i'll go & check them out

all the best
sandy

alan

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 716
Re: OU/COP>1 switched cap PS cct like Tesla's 'charge siphoning'
« Reply #80 on: June 13, 2008, 07:57:12 PM »
Very old paper, thanks anyway :)

http://www.newelectromagnetism.com/ is also very interesting, found it following the site in the pdf posted by minether, great find.

MinEth3r

  • Newbie
  • *
  • Posts: 25
Re: OU/COP>1 switched cap PS cct like Tesla's 'charge siphoning'
« Reply #81 on: June 13, 2008, 09:54:14 PM »
Alan, here's my current take on Distinti's work:

    If one fuses the three formulas in one "Master Equation", one immediately see the speed vectors become normalised over C, they become Betas automagically, it gets interesting.

    Regarding Ke and Km, the point was made by Elliott a while ago about being in fact a single parameter conversion factor for currents, enough said :O)

    The first two terms from the v3 Magnetic Laws are in fact one, the relative radial speed, from relative electrodynamics ?la Weber and more recently Assis,- the relative radial acceleration (read: its mathematical expression) isn't mentionned per se in Distinti's work, as with basic rational trig (NJWildberger), basic Geometric/Clifford Algebra and some more advanced retardation calculation techniques such as in the work of Jaume Gin? (http://web.udl.es/usuaris/t4088454/ssd/index.htm , PERIHEL4.pdf ) that I would love to see, along with less Einsteinish propanganda BS - nobody has to give in - and more euclidenrelativity.com-kinda work, more like-minded math.  A Newer&Better , albeit the Final entry-level Electromagnetism, it's just around the corner, really, should be done in our spare time by the end of the Summer, what do you all think :O) glafreniere.com and al. are well on the way themselves. I'll be handing over some time, will naturally post a link to it somewhere on this forum, when the time comes!

   Lots of good reading material available on retardation, inertial drive, interesting canadian patents... lots and lots out there, albeit almost a shame we're still in the standstill. We could achieve throughout experiment simulation, the map would not be the territory, but a close to 100% virtual one perhaps? Would invite to design on-board components, like caps and inductors, stack them and them stack boards, maybe build the whole thing out of clay and ice? :O) No seriously, PCB embedded homemade components, just think Spark Bang Buzz @ http://home.earthlink.net/~lenyr/index.html if you doubt Merlinesque technology is far beyond your reach...

     Finally I feel the need to reiterate, http://drspark.com/idea003.php and it's graphs - entry point in your current effort - , graphs from the patent on switched Ultraconductors, it all speak very loudly! Nowadays a lot is possible on the electrical/dead energy front, a Lot! In fact, it always were that way, tremendous shame on us all :P

allcanadian

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 1317
Re: OU/COP>1 switched cap PS cct like Tesla's 'charge siphoning'
« Reply #82 on: June 13, 2008, 10:52:04 PM »
@MinEth3r
Quote
Also, this patent is dead simple, great idea, pretty interesting:
US7085123 @ pat2pdf.org
Yes, that is a very interesting patent ------ but can anyone here explain why it has a COP of 2 or 200% efficiency?. This looks like a standard charge pump but there is more here than meets the eye.

nul-points

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 995
    • Doc Ringwood's Free Energy blog
Re: OU/COP>1 switched cap PS cct like Tesla's 'charge siphoning'
« Reply #83 on: June 14, 2008, 12:10:35 AM »
Sorry for the previous, inspired late night post :O)

right-o Mr Minerva
i want half-a-dozen bottles of whatever you've been drinking these last couple of evenings - and i want them NOW!!!



As for newelectromagnetism.com, have a look at this
http://www.distinti.com/docs/cap_anom.pdf

most excellent, dude - someone, somewhere (Distinti) - finally - has paid serious attention to the cap re-charge issue

unfortunately, they know only its relationships - not what suckles it and gives it breath - ah, well....

time and tide waits for no man  - but the aether - wow, that's just been sitting there waiting for us for aeons


Also, this patent is dead simple, great idea, pretty interesting:
US7085123 @ pat2pdf.org

One lets the capacitor do the work, not the battery, the graphs speak for themselves!

now we're cooking ...wait, this looks familiar...

...a capacitor charged via a load - then - re-connected and discharged thro' the load with opposite polarity  - sure an' didn't i see a circuity-thing that looked the spit o' that on my website?

dayum - is there nuthin new under the sun?!?


greetings, MinEth3r
sandy
Doc Ringwood's Free Energy site  http://ringcomps.co.uk/doc

nul-points

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 995
    • Doc Ringwood's Free Energy blog
Re: OU/COP>1 switched cap PS cct like Tesla's 'charge siphoning'
« Reply #84 on: June 14, 2008, 12:32:18 AM »
@MinEth3rYes, that is a very interesting patent ------ but can anyone here explain why it has a COP of 2 or 200% efficiency?. This looks like a standard charge pump but there is more here than meets the eye.

hi AC

if it really & truly is 200%, then i suspect that it's because - not only does the cap charge get passed across the load twice, once for each polarity, but also, the original voltage source gets added back into the series circuit with that now-inverted charge

of course, i only believe this at the moment because i'm 200% the way through an inverted bottle of whatever Minerva has been drinking...etc, etc

and, in the cold light of the morning after the night before, i shall publically deny any knowledge of ever having made such a statement - even tho' it will be indelibly typed across my very own corner of thread-dom

goodnight Canada (is there a drunken smiley?!)
sandy

purepower

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 368
Re: OU/COP>1 switched cap PS cct like Tesla's 'charge siphoning'
« Reply #85 on: June 15, 2008, 05:56:03 AM »
Hi All!

I am a mechanical engineer with little experience in ECE, but a long time enthusiast of Tesla's work. I find this device very interesting and plan on building it on my breadboard at home. But with everything I do, I like to understand what is happening and why.

Could someone explain what is going here and how this circuit works?

Now I understand the basics of circuitry, so dont dumb it down too much.

Many thanks!

-PurePower

nul-points

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 995
    • Doc Ringwood's Free Energy blog
Re: OU/COP>1 switched cap PS cct like Tesla's 'charge siphoning'
« Reply #86 on: June 15, 2008, 10:10:21 AM »
hi purepower

...boy you had a rough ride with Archer - you must be ready for some R&R ;)


I am a mechanical engineer with little experience in ECE, but a long time enthusiast of Tesla's work. I find this device very interesting and plan on building it on my breadboard at home. But with everything I do, I like to understand what is happening and why.

Could someone explain what is going here and how this circuit works?


...hmmm - well, i wish someone would tell me  what is going on here!!!! 


the results indicate that this simple circuit:

 - firstly, introduces extra charge into a closed circuit - which, unless someone is able to explain otherwise, appears to be in violation of Conservation of Charge

 - secondly, expends more energy than is supplied - which, unless someone is able to explain etc, etc, appears to be in violation of Conservation of Energy


ok, let me just give a quick overview of what i  think   is 'going on' - at a fundamental level, first...


now, i'm an (elec) engineer, not an astrophysicist, so what do i know?

well, actually, i know that when a 0.3 Coulomb charge is removed from one capacitor in a self-contained circuit and it re-appears as a 0.9 Coulomb charge on a second capacitor of similar value in that circuit, and there are no other voltage sources, then any existing model of the physics involved, which can't explain that, "ain't up to the job!"

of course, if the boundary conditions for electromagnetic activity were to be extended to include its root cause (eg. all 'electricity' is obtained by diverging energy from the vacuum medium {VM}, the underlying fabric of the universe), not just the currently-perceived side-effects (eg. the associated electric and magnetic fields), then these two basic principles would not have to be violated to achieve these results

the explanation would then be that this circuit operates by the expected exchange of energy between the VM (the updated, Quantum, concept of the old material 'aether') and the capacitive & inductive components of the circuit, in the usual 'ebb and flow' of energy stored and released

however, since the circuit is switched in such a way as to prevent temporary net gains of charge & energy from flowing back to the VM to complete a cycle of energy exchange - our macro perception of this being that we 'gained energy' - what happens at the micro level is that the VM draws on the surrounding ambient energy (eg heat) and restores the local energy balance (eg something local gets colder to 'pay' for our 'energy gain')


now, i suspect that the second part of your question was more along the lines of "how does this circuit work - at a component level?"


well, small packets of charge are switched rapidly (currently around 1kHz, but i don't think this is critical to the operation of the circuit) from a charged, large-value input capacitor, via a much smaller-valued switching-capacitor, to a discharged, large-value output capacitor in series with a resistive load

current entering the switching-cap is passed thro' an inductance to help reduce switching losses - and since the inductance is getting switched too, then i've included a 'flyback' diode to recover some of the inductor's field-collapse energy

when the input cap has discharged a known amount of energy then the switching is stopped and the output cap is discharged back thro' the same resistive load - ie. the energy initially used to charge the output cap passes thro' the resistive load twice

somewhere along the charge transfer path between the input & output caps, the switching process captures energy temporarily in the state of being 'borrowed' from the VM, and prevents it from being returned, so it gets added to the charge being stored in the output cap

(i see two possible interactions with the VM where this imbalance might be occurring)


i think that covers its operation

let me know if & when you're ready to go ahead with a replication and i'll send you some more details (eg inductor winding example, basic test steps, etc)

all the best
sandy
Doc Ringwood's Free Energy site  http://ringcomps.co.uk/doc

purepower

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 368
Re: OU/COP>1 switched cap PS cct like Tesla's 'charge siphoning'
« Reply #87 on: June 15, 2008, 07:28:57 PM »
Ya, Archer and I have bumped heads to say the least. Im done with all that and its now time to consider a real FE device...

Ive done extensive Tesla research, mostly relating to his wireless transfer of electricity and the device in the Pierce-Arrow, and all his work leading up to those previously mentioned. One thing I have noticed in many, many of his devices is the use of resonance frequency.

For this reason, I wouldnt be so quick to dismiss the "1 kHz" as insignificant to the operation. Tesla was very keen on the power of resonance (google "tesla earthquake machine"). When you read the reports relating to the device in the car, you see that he took a moment to make some "adjustments" to that machine.

In my opinion, he was tuning it to the resonance frequency of the aether.

I could be wrong, but I defiantly think its something to consider.

Id love to see some schematics. I can read a diagram (for the most part), but would you mind clearly labeling the individual components. Start me off small so I can chip away at its function one piece at a time.

-PurePower

PS I have a pretty good idea on how to duplicate the device in the PA. There are a few functions/components I am missing, and this should fill in the gaps. I dont want to be another AQ and make promises prematurely, but this sounds promising...

PPS Ever look into Morray? He's another individual I have put extensive research into. Ive pretty much figured out his device, the key is in his "pellets." They were slightly radio-active and ionized the air in his partially-evacuated vacuum tubes. The freed ions were then "siphoned" into the circuit by the rest of the device for use.

alan

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 716
Re: OU/COP>1 switched cap PS cct like Tesla's 'charge siphoning'
« Reply #88 on: June 15, 2008, 07:37:48 PM »
@Sandy
Maybe, just maybe it can be explained with the new electromanetics models posted earlier in this thread.
It could mean a huge step forward.
I'm still reading them, but I have never learned CED so it is pretty tough. Someone who understands it should give it a go.  8)

nul-points

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 995
    • Doc Ringwood's Free Energy blog
Re: OU/COP>1 switched cap PS cct like Tesla's 'charge siphoning'
« Reply #89 on: June 15, 2008, 11:25:47 PM »
hi guys

@purepower
yes, i understand what you're saying about resonance - and i need to do further tests to see where i am currently on the 'bandwidth' of my circuit's operation

i have varied the switch rate within approx *2 & /2 and there didn't appear to be any significant difference in the end-voltage achieved for 1V input discharge

however, i do take your point (and as mentioned by others, eg allcanadian) that resonance is definitely a factor to investigate - it's possible i could be operating way out on the edge of the bandwidth 'skirt' where small (relative to bandwidth) frequency changes might appear to have little effect

this variation of test parameters will have to wait a while, though, as i have other tests planned (and these may open the way to varying more test parameters in general, including frequency)


when i noted Aspden's comments about the possible linking of anomalous capacitor activity and Tesla's car, i'd only seen a few of the reports - since then, i've seen a report by a relation who claimed to have been present - i don't know how reliable it is but it didn't seem to have much indication about capacitor involvement as i recall,
so i may backtrack a bit on the way i comment in my website on possible alignment between my circuit conditions/results and Aspden's comments about Tesla's car

i believe Aspden's general comments about possible anomalies in cap charge still apply though


the full schematic & parts for the circuit are given in replies #25 & #26 on page 1 of this thread - let me know if & when you want to try a replication and i'll send you example winding details for a suitable inductor and some notes on test steps


yes, i have looked into Moray - only recently found a lot more detail though

i have a few concerns about some aspects of his claims: he appeared to be claiming compatibility of his output with regular household mains - at the same time as claiming that his circuits responded to very high input frequencies

however, when i looked at circuits claiming to relate to his 'free energy' system i saw possible transformation of voltage levels - but no indication of frequency translation

also, he made one particular claim that he had developed a special motor arrangement which would work with his energy 'receiver'- this says to me that the output of his 'receiver' was NOT compatible with household mains

and so now i wonder if all the loads he used (eg lamps, irons, etc) were being operated at high frequency, possibly also high voltage, low current (there seemed to be some question from one of his witnesses as to how his matrix of load lamps were wired: eg. 'was it series, parallel, or series-parallel?')

i'm not saying the other aspects of his systems weren't valid - as you say, radio-active initiated ionisation seems to be a strong contender - very interesting guy, multi-skilled!



@alan
yes, the new electromagnetics looks very interesting doesn't it? i'm working my way through the extensive list of PDFs

unfortunately, MinEth3r's special bottles of night-medication are running out and my synapses are starting to disconnect from the meaning again  ;)


all the best
sandy
Doc Ringwood's Free Energy site  http://ringcomps.co.uk/doc