Author Topic: The TPU uncovered? (A PROBABLE technique.) (Read 339955 times)

otto · « **Reply #270 on:** May 13, 2008, 06:13:59 AM »

Hello all,

@Paul

great post about TRUE resonance!!

Can we get "true resonance"?? How??

Otto

pauldude000 · « **Reply #271 on:** May 13, 2008, 08:03:03 AM »

@all

I have a major brain-fart going on here..... Major.

I am witnessing something which my brain refuses to accept. I have a massive bright signal, of 180volts! WITH ZERO current, even with a load?

?? I am not joking, not even 1uA!

As expected, you short with a resistor, and the voltage drops (in this case drastically).... BUT STILL NO AMPERAGE!!!!!!!!!!

What in the heck?

?

Electricity can be looked at like a hose full of water. Voltage is the pressure of the water in the hose, amperage is the amount of water that is flowing. Putting a load on a circuit is like opening the valve, allowing water to flow. So, I open a valve, and the water is just bulges out alot (loses pressure or voltage), but REFUSES to flow?

Paul Andrulis <-utterly and totally confused

b0rg13 · « **Reply #272 on:** May 13, 2008, 08:17:36 AM »

hi Paul, can you please provide a drawing of the setup for us ? , thank you in advance.

pauldude000 · « **Reply #273 on:** May 13, 2008, 08:42:16 AM »

@Otto

You are one to ask! I should ask you and Loner!

You came close to true resonance, have PHYSICALLY FELT A FIELD and fried your electronics. Loner slagged a ferrite core. You BOTH have come closer than I!

Otto, do you have any idea how strong ANY field has to be for you to feel it in any manner?

Think of it this way, have you waved your hand around a neodium magnet? You didn't feel ANYTHING correct? THAT FIELD AROUND THE MAGNET WAS IN THE MEGAGAUSS!!!!! MEGA----MILLIONS of GAUSS!!!!! You had a field slap you that you felt! Your field was self amplifying, or it never COULD have attained such strength. (I almost left a brown stain in my underwear when I heard this...) Wasn't it you who had coronal discharge off of metal objects in your shop?

Let me give the best effects I have had so far, to put everything into perspective. I have felt a rotating field ONCE, and only for a very short time (30 minutes or so). It was extremely close in to the coil, and was not rotating very fast. I had my sister who was in my lab validate this effect, and she could feel it too. (I didn't lead her either, just asked her to place her hand in a certain position and describe what she felt.) This failed after a time, and detectable rotation stopped.

I have now a 180Volt signal which is not wanting to be (or at least act like) electricity....... GAG!

You fried your oscilloscope! Mount that sucker on the wall as a trophy!!!

Concerning true resonance, I just have some ponderings, but time alone will tell if they are true. Concerning the main point, check your TPU-ECD thread. I described a long time ago, with graphics, my understanding of self-reinforcing frequency relationships, or true resonance. I was talking DC square wave, but the same principles would apply for Sine, or any other waveform as well if my understanding is correct at all.

The main reason I am interested in DC Square Wave is simply because it imparts more energy to a given system for a given frequency at any given voltage than the other possabilities, except for MAYBE a voltage spike.

I wonder about this as I always turn on my scope before firing up the generators attached to the coil, and notice the massive voltage surge coming from the collector when the units fire up.... Even with the probe on 10x it is off the top of the screen for a split second. Maybe voltage spikes through the collectors are the way to go. I intend to test ALL possibilities. (I am starting to think that is what SM was referring to as "kicks" anyway, as ..... OH MY!!!!!

@Loner

Try to make your control coils, NOT the collectors, capacative, but ONLY enough to remove self induction. Follow Tesla's pancake coil principle if you have to!

I am going to try to design a frequency specific spike generating circuit ASAP!!!!! Even JITTER phases spikes! (Jitter is good?)

Paul Andrulis

otto · « **Reply #274 on:** May 13, 2008, 08:53:31 AM »

Hello Paul and all the people here

Here is the "secret" to true resonance in our coils:

1. build the coils like Mannix showed us
2. from your power supply +12V AND THEN RISE THE VOLTAGE

If you have enough money you can play in this manner: You will blow the MOSFETs amd maybe your scope.

I WARN YOU, ITS DANGEROUS.

Otto

pese · « **Reply #275 on:** May 13, 2008, 09:14:44 AM »

@ Pauldude

I your circuit is something wrong , and cant work this way !

The first Transistor cant drawn any current , works , switch, oscilatte or do anything, BECAUSE
the first diode hold the base, in any way below 0,8 volts , so , no voltages/currents can flow after the emitter + second diode.

review your circuit that it can work with the 555 together

gustav pese

pese · « **Reply #276 on:** May 13, 2008, 09:23:11 AM »

@ pauldude

in your circuit is something wrong.
pls review ist.

Ref: : The first diode hold the Base
of NPN in range of 0,6-0,8 volts.
so the emeitter + Diode2 , can not drwn any
current , voltages , swich, oszillating or others.
so ... it cant work wit the "555" together.
pls review it

gustav pese

pauldude000 · « **Reply #277 on:** May 13, 2008, 11:04:11 AM »

@Pese

I double checked, both my schematic, my first draw, and the original, and it is correct.

The initial idea is not mine. I remember coming across it from a circuit diagram online. I searched, an found the original, which I hated as they used a square block diagram with no R or C values and put the pins where convenient to draw, not convenient to breadboard. I modified this in that I did away with an unnecessary connection, made it easy to convert to a breadboard, and modified its scope and applicational usage. The original was a single 555 driving diagram, of which my original post of the schematic was a direct interpretation.

Anyway, I will quote the inventor of the original timing circuit and his reasoning:

From:

Tony Van Roon at http://www.uoguelph.ca/~antoon/gadgets/555/555.html

"When the output is high, the transistor is biased into saturation by R2 so that the charging current passes through the transistor and R1 to C. When the output goes low, the discharge transistor (pin 7) cuts off the transistor and discharges the capacitor through R1 and the diode. The high & low periods are equal. The value of the capacitor (C) and the resistor (R1 or potmeter) is not given. It is a mere example of how to do it and the values are pending on the type of application, so choose your own values. The diode can be any small signal diode like the NTE519, 1N4148, 1N914 or 1N3063, but a high conductance Germanium or Schottky type for the diode will minimize the diode voltage drops in the transistor and diode. However, the transistor should have a high beta so that R2 can be large and still cause the transistor to saturate. The transistor can be a TUN (europe), NTE123, 2N3569 and most others."

The original replies to the 555 schematics start at reply no 1385 in Otto's "Successful TPU-ECD" thread, and end at 1395 on page 35. Check out the screenshots of this non working circuit, working, my friend!

(By the way, you will notice quickly that I draw my own schematics.)

@Loner

You are right, this circuit is FAST. I can overclock the bejeebers out of a TS555CN to the currently measured max of 4.9mhz (though the datasheet says 2.7 mhz max) depending upon components used. Check out otto's thread and my original posts. I have screenshots of the breadboarded unit with the freq meter showing output at 4.1 or so mhz. The wave suffers at such high freq, but it still oscillates!

However, as wierd as the connections seem. IT DOES WORK.

Paul Andrulis

pese · « **Reply #278 on:** May 13, 2008, 12:05:57 PM »

Quote from: pauldude000 on May 13, 2008, 11:04:11 AM

@Pese

I double checked, both my schematic, my first draw, and the original, and it is correct.

The initial idea is not mine. I remember coming across it from a circuit diagram online. I searched, an found the original, which I hated as they used a square block diagram with no R or C values and put the pins where convenient to draw, not convenient to breadboard. I modified this in that I did away with an unnecessary connection, made it easy to convert to a breadboard, and modified its scope and applicational usage. The original was a single 555 driving diagram, of which my original post of the schematic was a direct interpretation.

Anyway, I will quote the inventor of the original timing circuit and his reasoning:

From:

Tony Van Roon at http://www.uoguelph.ca/~antoon/gadgets/555/555.html

"When the output is high, the transistor is biased into saturation by R2 so that the charging current passes through the transistor and R1 to C. When the output goes low, the discharge transistor (pin 7) cuts off the transistor and discharges the capacitor through R1 and the diode. The high & low periods are equal. The value of the capacitor (C) and the resistor (R1 or potmeter) is not given. It is a mere example of how to do it and the values are pending on the type of application, so choose your own values. The diode can be any small signal diode like the NTE519, 1N4148, 1N914 or 1N3063, but a high conductance Germanium or Schottky type for the diode will minimize the diode voltage drops in the transistor and diode. However, the transistor should have a high beta so that R2 can be large and still cause the transistor to saturate. The transistor can be a TUN (europe), NTE123, 2N3569 and most others."

The original replies to the 555 schematics start at reply no 1385 in Otto's "Successful TPU-ECD" thread, and end at 1395 on page 35. Check out the screenshots of this non working circuit, working, my friend! (By the way, you will notice quickly that I draw my own schematics.)

@Loner

You are right, this circuit is FAST. I can overclock the bejeebers out of a TS555CN to the currently measured max of 4.9mhz (though the datasheet says 2.7 mhz max) depending upon components used. Check out otto's thread and my original posts. I have screenshots of the breadboarded unit with the freq meter showing output at 4.1 or so mhz. The wave suffers at such high freq, but it still oscillates!

However, as wierd as the connections seem. IT DOES WORK.

Paul Andrulis

Hallo Paul.
Even if this work (by not to understand circumstances) as leackage currents in transitor, it cant work by this scematcs:

Look:

at the output of the transistor (afre the second diode) you must an an voltage -to have an here, vers low current-.
Even if it is only 0,05 to 0,1 volts.
(but possible you will use 0,6 to 0,7 volt -limited by the diode-)

so:
you must have at the point between emitter and diode(Kathode) at lest 0,7 to 0,8 volts)
SO.:
Iso the transistor must "conduct" that an current can flow fro, collector to emitter.
(if the transistor is not demagend or lecking) so the base of this transitor must be
supplied with at lest 0,55 to 0,7 volt HIGHER (positive voltages) than the emitter.

So you must have 1,4 to 1,5 (or little higher) that the transistor begin to conduct
as an "voltage-follower-trap (current aplifier) "

Use 2 or 3 diodes in front. use an resistor 10kohm to supply (+)
connect the primpot 50kohm between ground and the 10kohm/diodes.
(that point have now 1,5 or 2,2 volt !!
So you can take aut the "slider" from (10-turn-trimpot any voltage between 0 to 2,2 volt (1,5)
ot opereate in better condition with the transistor.

Is the 10 pf condensor right ? .
Than you work with "higher" frequencies !
Attention !!
Thin abaou blocking condendemsort co connect here . also between supply and ground, to reduce
wrong oscillation that can produced by the wirerings in circuits like this.

I have uses lot of time to find out this problems if i start with this experiments near 50 years ago

Pese

In THE CIRCUIT is now the BASE supplieds with max 0,7 Volt
the voltage drp in transitor will be also be nearby 0,7 volts.

If your circuit is (possibly) working , that PALY with very low voltages and currents
and is this "unuasal circuit" not in stabile condition. in this way, taht "everyone reconstructin from
this scematic will work. (Even the transitor can "inmitted" fully by small changes in scematic

sparks · « **Reply #279 on:** May 13, 2008, 06:29:38 PM »

@ Pauldude

Matter to achieve perpectuation through the spacetime continuom (resonance) has to achieve a state of spin. Either it's spinning or falling apart. A change in the dielectric field or charge intelligence of this field is energetic or antiinertial. It is change as is all "energy". This change seems to radiate but what realitivisticly happens is it alters the spacetime intelligence of the field it was inacted upon and the observer "sees" radiation while his inertial frame navigates the spacetime continuom.
This is a realitivistic model of the kick phenomenon. Tesla's model of the spacetime continuom is described in terms that are much more intuitively accepted. Instead of modeling the entire universe into a two dimensional virtual state he uses the aetheric model. Whereas the aether is given fluid properties and a 3 dimensional virtual state. Energy or change displaces this aetheric sea of inertia. The kick still represents change but is imposed on a virtual 3d sea of inertia.. This aetheric liquid composed of inertia is "displaced" by energy. This displacement travels through the aetheric liquid compressing it and expanding it as it goes. Much more intuitively understood. Using either model all matter must spin to achieve resonance. All potential energy in the spin state of matter is translated into change when the spin state of the matter is altered. An energy displacement or kick of the aetheric liquid creates aetheric friction on the spin state of matter. This friction alters the mass spin resonance and translatory energy is released which of course causes more displacement of the inertial sea. I suggest SM was referring to this when he was talking about his cannons firing cannons firing cannons etc. Tesla and Einstein both saying the same thing but Einstein was a mathmatician and Tesla a visonary.

pauldude000 · « **Reply #280 on:** May 13, 2008, 10:37:14 PM »

@pese

I am not going to argue over something as dumb as this (not your arguments, they make sense, the situation is dumb).

I would not have posted the circuit, unless I had already breadboarded and tested the circuit. There is alot of wierd things that happen but "shouldn't". The circuit works... build it before you tell me how it "can't", then explain to yourself when you look at the squares on your scope why it is working. Then get back to me and tell me why.

I found a schematic, tried it, liked it, modified it, use it, and am sharing it.

Paul Andrulis

sparks · « **Reply #281 on:** May 14, 2008, 12:04:16 AM »

please review the below link. It shows how rf catalyst energy can be used in a device much safer than an aether spinner.

Little bit of good physics offered also by a very nice voice

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vCNNqgKqnaQ

pese · « **Reply #282 on:** May 14, 2008, 12:53:10 AM »

Quote from: pauldude000 on May 13, 2008, 10:37:14 PM

@pese

I am not going to argue over something as dumb as this (not your arguments, they make sense, the situation is dumb).

I would not have posted the circuit, unless I had already breadboarded and tested the circuit. There is alot of wierd things that happen but "shouldn't". The circuit works... build it before you tell me how it "can't", then explain to yourself when you look at the squares on your scope why it is working. Then get back to me and tell me why.

I found a schematic, tried it, liked it, modified it, use it, and am sharing it.

Paul Andrulis

O no , it is OK.
It is possibel . THAT ONE CIRCUIT ist working "with you" and with YOUR CHOSEN components.
BUT is "shown for me" possibel, that an replication from other users - will not work- This is the only one tat i sayd. If so. The users can construct changes in this trap.
I understand the circuit, and how if will and must work.

I seen a lot of "naudins circuits" with bad chosen components. that work outside the normal spects from datasheets, but if that work in the circuit. THE mext devive can possible not work, i he use semniconductors, from same type from other manufacturers or only from another lot . (I don over 40jyears , semiconduictor tests for consumers and industry, so i know the problems in the "production area. Your Circuit and scematic , it is principially OK so.
(but ... if...)
G.Pese

pauldude000 · « **Reply #283 on:** May 14, 2008, 02:47:49 AM »

@pese

In that aspect, I can understand. I have tested this circuit with some NE555's (bipolar) , and they do work, but will NOT overclock past 500K. That is why I specified the TS555CN, as it does. Out of five tested, I have only had one that refused to work right with the circuit. It did display bad waveform and low voltage, though the frequency was stable. With a different TS555CN though, it worked.

Paul Andrulis

pauldude000 · « **Reply #284 on:** May 14, 2008, 03:11:35 AM »

@pese

One thing I noticed. It is not really that device specific, beyond the 555 itself.

I have built this circuit with various makes and models of components. For instance, I am using a 2n5551 right now, but a different gen purpose NPN on a different boarded situation.

I have replicated this aprox 3 DIFFERENT times on 2 different breadboards, with various timers replaced in the circuit, CMOS and Bipolar, and innumerable timing cap/pot variations. I have used 1n4148, 1n914, and other small signal diodes, and several NPN transistors..... It has worked pretty well every time, just with differences of available bandwidth.

The circuit has bands at the bottom of the resistance range that you can use to the base of the transistor. If you go to low it will not oscillate. Too high and the same. It also has a definitive upper and lower Timing Pot resistance limit depending upon the components you use. However, I have yet to see a failure of oscillation, or of a completely unstable circuit.

Times I have modified components? 20 or 30 or more? Heck, the version I am trying NOW is using different pots than what is listed in the schematic. (two 10k same transistor and diodes, but with 12pf caps... and it still works.)

That is why I am confused a little by the hesitation to try it. Build it yourself, see if you can over-clock my max of 4.9Mhz! (that may have been a limitation of that particular chip!)

Have fun with it! Build a serious circuit with it!

@all

I made a mistake. I bought some Mosfet drivers..... AND DIDN'T PAY ATTENTION TO THE FACT THAT THEY WERE SMT! (I do not have the equiptment or experience for SMT devices.)

Does anybody want them? (just enough stamps to get them to you is the cost.) $7.00 out the window They are 8pin, and tiny!

Paul Andrulis

News:

User Menu

Author Topic: The TPU uncovered? (A PROBABLE technique.) (Read 339955 times)

otto

Re: The TPU uncovered? (A PROBABLE technique.)

pauldude000

Re: The TPU uncovered? (A PROBABLE technique.)

b0rg13

Re: The TPU uncovered? (A PROBABLE technique.)

pauldude000

Re: The TPU uncovered? (A PROBABLE technique.)

otto

Re: The TPU uncovered? (A PROBABLE technique.)

pese

CIRCUIT !! Re: The TPU uncovered? (A PROBABLE technique.)

pese

Re: The TPU uncovered? (A PROBABLE technique.)

pauldude000

Re: The TPU uncovered? (A PROBABLE technique.)

pese

Re: The TPU uncovered? (A PROBABLE technique.)

sparks

Re: The TPU uncovered? (A PROBABLE technique.)

pauldude000

Re: The TPU uncovered? (A PROBABLE technique.)

sparks

Re: The TPU uncovered? (A PROBABLE technique.)

pese

Re: The TPU uncovered? (A PROBABLE technique.)

pauldude000

Re: The TPU uncovered? (A PROBABLE technique.)

pauldude000

Re: The TPU uncovered? (A PROBABLE technique.)