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: Is Lindsay?s ?SM? a fraud?  (Read 372916 times)

otto

  • elite_member
  • Hero Member
  • ******
  • Posts: 1215
Re: Is Lindsay?s ?SM? a fraud?
« Reply #270 on: July 15, 2008, 10:27:49 AM »
Hello all,

@wings

thanks a lot for the warning.

I can say that my scope is never connected to the TPU. My output is separated with the output transformer and I have always my bulb connected. Not much but I hope Im a little bit safe. No, I dont have fuses.

Yea, I love your post because I see that my "Tpu" is connected wrong. No, the schematic is OK but I made a 2. ring like the 1. but without the controls. The 2. ring has only the core and the 9 turns collector. I connected this ring to the 1. with the controls. Did I see a better light? Maybe. But the point is that I measured over my TPU a field in the height of around 4". As I saw this I wanted that this field gets into an interaction with my 2. ring but......

Today I have to reconnect my 2. ring. As always, its just a feeling.....

Sequential pulsing of the coils......

Im pulsing my coils in a wrong way, I know this.

When I had my biggest runaway I had 4 controls and pulsed 3 coils with 1 frequency for each control and all the "soup" was then swirling through the 4. control coil. What a current feeded back into the grid!!!

Otto

Grumpy

  • TPU-Elite
  • Hero Member
  • *******
  • Posts: 2247
Re: Is Lindsay?s ?SM? a fraud?
« Reply #271 on: July 15, 2008, 03:24:40 PM »
2. He said: a TPU is air core and if it isnt it cannot work

Yes, my bright light Im only dreaming, ha,ha.
In the other thread, Hubbard coil, it has a core, Tesla used always cores, Bedini, Bearden.......

Why cant a TPU with a core work??

Tesla did not use cores in his Tesla transformers, oscillation transformers, or magnifier.  Ferromagnetic materials are magnetized by the flow of the aether, orgone, potential or whatever you want to call it.  Flow through a ferromagnetic material is so retarded that the effect which is responsible for the gain will not manifest.  You can consult the works of Steinmetz and Tesla about this.  One thing few realize is that a magnetic field is a dielectric phenomenon and "self-capacitance" also absorbs the "effect" and prevents it from manifesting.


3.He said: there are NO collectors. There is just 1 wrap around the entire unit for output. Steven just told us that to keep us on a side track.

Hmmmm.....on one hand Steven wants that we rebuild his TPU and on the other hand he keeps us on a side track. Not logic!!

There is always a "collector" even if one of the controls is also collecting.  It depends on the configuration used and could be countless ways to achieve results.


4. He said: the heating came from the field inducing eddie currents into all that metal. So we got rid of the metal and the unit runs cool now.

My TPU is not anymore hot! Its only warm. In the ECD TPU I had air cores but it was soooo hot. Without metals - cores.

As I recall, you used a lot of current in the ECD - it was supposed to get hot.  What he told you is correct.


5. He said: stop being a fool and start doing right things.

And I say:

1. why not a core
2. why dont you share your results?
3. Its my way to build a TPU and I see its working good

Nice day.

Otto

Answers to your three questions:

1. see answer above.  Ferrous core can be beneficial, but not in this configuration and magnets would be required to magnetize the core - see Gunderson's ring device.
2. He is sharing them in his own way.  Fastest way to feel the "fist of oppression" is to get cocky and think you are beyond their reach.
3. Your friend is trying to help you and you should listen.  Just because you see a light means nothing.  Is the light a bright white or the typical orange? The current applied to the controls should almost nothing, not amps of current like you have been using.  You say your TPU is "working good", what do you base this on?

innovation_station

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 5134
Re: Is Lindsay?s ?SM? a fraud?
« Reply #272 on: July 15, 2008, 03:43:05 PM »
look at sm17... the balums... are transmitters  the collector on the outside is the reciever as the balums plusate or rotate..  they activate the collector control winds the controlls induce engery in the collector

so in the sm 17 air core for transmitters this is why he can read power with the clamp meter above the tpu the collector has to have metal in  it

cuz you need to trap the engery  if it was all air core you will have standing waves every where well depending on your freq and trust me you dont want to walk through an electrified standing wave.... or grab some metal that has been charged in the room like a door knob

internal and external magnetic feilds

hummm  how bout 1 of each!!


ist

Grumpy

  • TPU-Elite
  • Hero Member
  • *******
  • Posts: 2247
Re: Is Lindsay?s ?SM? a fraud?
« Reply #273 on: July 15, 2008, 04:54:11 PM »
On the clamp meter:

"Orgone in motion" can impart a charge to conductors and a magnetic field to magnetic materials, yet it is not electric or magnetic itself. 

buzz-ard

  • Jr. Member
  • **
  • Posts: 81
Re: Is Lindsay?s ?SM? a fraud?
« Reply #274 on: July 15, 2008, 06:11:10 PM »
(No insult intended, Grumpy)

"Orgone", the way I recall, is "orgasmic energy". If someone can come up with way to collect that, or even measure it, they'll really have something!

Grumpy

  • TPU-Elite
  • Hero Member
  • *******
  • Posts: 2247
Re: Is Lindsay?s ?SM? a fraud?
« Reply #275 on: July 15, 2008, 07:06:07 PM »
(No insult intended, Grumpy)

"Orgone", the way I recall, is "orgasmic energy". If someone can come up with way to collect that, or even measure it, they'll really have something!

I used to term "orgone" to indicate that the scalar, tempic, longitudinal stuff is the same as Reich's orgone, or primal energy.

starcruiser

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 693
    • Starcruiser's Place
Re: Is Lindsay?s ?SM? a fraud?
« Reply #276 on: July 15, 2008, 08:41:45 PM »
After a bit more research I think the TPU is nothing more than a modified DC generator of sorts, The coils were orientated 90 degrees from the traditional direction. The armature could be the center torrid coil and the collectors (outside rings/wire) are the field (control) windings. This is a theory at the moment but the OTPU, the second version shows a clearer picture of it and seems to back this up. Take a look at the attached for a simple schematic of a DC generator. Here is the URL for the page I took this from, there is additional info that may be of interest. http://www.tpub.com/content/doe/h1011v2/css/h1011v2_94.htm

The only thing really required is a rotating field which I believe can be created using the specially wound center torrid assembly to emulate a turning armature. The external magnet would be used for exciting the coils to start the process.

A few turns of bailing wire would be required for the magnetic core. The actual circuit is basically a hybrid DC/induction generator. A capacitor would be required for output smoothing and one or two for the oscillator (LC tank) which drives the center torrid/armature. This would create a DC component with some hash due to the peaking of the half wave output of the generator.

As for the center torrid, this could be made from a simple wire spool with a few turns of bailing wire which is wrapped over with a few coils, one standard coil for the LC tank and one for the drive/tickler (these could be one coil). the outer coil is the split wound design (CW/CCW) to force the pulse train in one direction, this outer coil is what drives the field windings/controls.

Just some food for thought guys.

innovation_station

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 5134
Re: Is Lindsay?s ?SM? a fraud?
« Reply #277 on: July 15, 2008, 09:04:12 PM »
kinda like a brushless dc motor with a collector wraped round it  :D

or a self vibrating relay telling the power where to go ...   in other words give it only 1 path  it will naturally look fo thr path of least resistance..

so make your load is the path and be sure your load has less restance than the rest of the unit... the output cap does serve a big propous more than just smothing out the ripples

it is your convertor ...   now this is confusing and it seams i conterdict myself this is just not the case.....

there many diffrent tpus and such they all work diffrently ...

1 thing for sure the free CAKE COMES FROM THE KICK

IST

altium

  • Newbie
  • *
  • Posts: 48
Re: Is Lindsay?s ?SM? a fraud?
« Reply #278 on: July 15, 2008, 09:29:04 PM »
Otto, I try to draw your shem with two different colors for control coils. Are this drawing is correct?
« Last Edit: July 15, 2008, 10:22:30 PM by altium »

innovation_station

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 5134
Re: Is Lindsay?s ?SM? a fraud?
« Reply #279 on: July 15, 2008, 09:55:16 PM »
anyone ever do a pancake on a pancake 90 deg ?? then add a peice of steel wire to each one ???

dont make me draw a pic agin....

keep it simple  :)

ist

in what i just wrote   visualize it ...    see it in your mind ...   build it in your mind ...   then assess  its operation in your mind ... then take to paper ...   trace the path of the electron in your mind   what will happen as the electricty enters the steel ?      and when you cut the power from the source what will happen ....?    how does the sterling engine work??   WATER HAMMER ;D

how does this work what does it do when you apply power to it   keep it real simple

just like ottos lil test   50 turns...  1 short fat  stranded coper wire

 :)

otto

  • elite_member
  • Hero Member
  • ******
  • Posts: 1215
Re: Is Lindsay?s ?SM? a fraud?
« Reply #280 on: July 16, 2008, 07:33:51 AM »
Hello all,

@Grumpy

what to say??

I hope I finally got what my friend in his PM wanted to say to me. I really didnt want to mislead people. The point is and was that nobody posted so I jumped out with my schematic.
Now, if allowed I want to wright down how I think he made it:

1. 2 or 3 MOSFETs with square waves from 2 or 3 oscillators, yes, I know about tubes but now Im talking about SS devices
2. the drains connected to a step up transformer
3. this step up transformer is pulsed

I did this with an oridinary 230V/12V little transformer. When I connected ma MOSFET to the 12V side I measured on the 230V side really big sine waves. Yes, I know that such a transformer is a s..t. Clear. I had to use much lower frequencies because of the core.....not to bother the people here.

4. such big signals are then feeded into the TPU. The point is that working in such a way is muuuuuch better than Im doing it because there is almost no current consuption from the power supply and the coils are cool.

5. after rotating and mixing the frequencies I use an output transformer to step down the big kilovolts swirling in my TPU so I can use this voltage.

So, in short, today I will try this. I want only to connect a little transformer to the drain of my MOSFET and see how and why.

@altium

OK.

Otto


innovation_station

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 5134
Re: Is Lindsay?s ?SM? a fraud?
« Reply #281 on: July 16, 2008, 07:55:04 AM »
the sm 17

the balums could be saturated as well as air core i think the effect would be the same  maybe not tho the saturated cores may be able to transmit more current or magnetic vibtations  i think there 2 freqs in it as there is iron wire and copper in the collector and you want to ring both and create a vibrating relay witch intrepus the curcuit  harvest the lil kicks right!!! 

ist

wattsup

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 2606
    • Spin Conveyance Theory - For a New Perspective...
Re: Is Lindsay?s ?SM? a fraud?
« Reply #282 on: July 16, 2008, 02:57:30 PM »
@otto

My question about the thickness was just to know the thickness of your ring and by stating 1/4" (6.25mm), it was to say "I hope it was not any more then that" because it would seem that any more then this and the core would not have been able to reach any kind of saturation point with the amount of windings used (60 turns of 24 awg). But now you are stating the SS core is only 1 mm thick. Now this is sooooooooooo thin. Probably why you notice less heat because this thin material is also acting like a heat sink. Are you sure about the thickness? One thing for sure, with 60 turns per quad over such a thin SS ring, such a core would be extremely reactive to any field and saturation times would be very quick and probably well in line with the higher operating frequencies you are using.

On your FG's, do you have adjustments for the Duty, DC offset and Amplitude and do you play with these as well as the frequencies themselves. It seems any time I touch the DC offset, I fry another IRF840. Can you explain a bit how you play with the FG controls. Also, are you using the TTL/CMOS output or the standard output. Do you use heat sinks on your IRF840s.

Maybe one last point I would like to clarify and that is when we say frequency as F1, F2 and/or F3, these are not real frequencies that one can consider as relevant to real frequencies and their additive harmonics. Going through the IRF840 these become fast pulsing on/off iterations. I will be preparing a post on pulse/frequency and the relationship to single point multiple pulsing as you are doing here because the involved complexity is not only dependant on the frequencies themselves but also each individual setting for duty, dc offset, and amplitude. That makes four variables per frequency and the dependencies between these makes this effort even more complex to replicate. Consider also that the amplitude is fixed at a set level and there is no sweeping action to simulate actual field growth and decay. What I mean is when I manually sweep the amplitude while pulsing, I am seeing more activity then when the amplitude is fixed.

OK, last last question. Are you actually using the wiring as shown in @altium's wiring diagram which basically shows 8 coils but set in 4 bucking coil arrangements.

I purchased a second FG of maximum 2mhz off of EBAY so I should have it soon..

otto

  • elite_member
  • Hero Member
  • ******
  • Posts: 1215
Re: Is Lindsay?s ?SM? a fraud?
« Reply #283 on: July 17, 2008, 07:59:36 AM »
Hello all,

@wattsup

I saw your post yesterday afternoon on my home PC but my PC is blocked so I cant answer you. On my home PC I can only read the messages and posts, nothing more. This happens only at overunity. com. All other sites are working great, my son can post on other forums....

My core is only a stainless steel plate 1 mm thick. Its a 316 grade stainless steel. This core gives me a bigger voltage and more power.

Yes Im working with frequencies in the range of 100 - 500kHz.

My FGs, 3 of them:

each has a ICL 8038 function generator. Output feeded into a jfet IC, the LF 357. This output feeded into a pair of transistors, DC 140, BC 141. This is the output of each FG. This is then feeded into a IRFP 450 MOSFET - Robertos great idea!! This MOSFETs are on little heatsinks. You almost cant blow them.

The duty cicle is 50 - 50 and I cant change this. And I think its OK so. So, Im playing only with frequencies.

Im using the setup as altium showed us but with 1 correction: the start point of the 1 load coil is connected to the +24V. In this way connected.....hmmmm....try it and dont even think to touch your TPU!!!! And dont connect the scope probe to your TPU!!

F1, F2, F3 means only that we use 3 frequencies, nothing more.

Otto

otto

  • elite_member
  • Hero Member
  • ******
  • Posts: 1215
Re: Is Lindsay?s ?SM? a fraud?
« Reply #284 on: July 18, 2008, 10:39:08 AM »
Hello all,

today I want to clarify something. I was at an Bulgarian site and I think people all over the world that are building TPUs have the same "problem". Im talking about the current from the power supply.

The people are calculating the input and output power when a bulb is connected to a TPU.

THIS IS WRONG!!!!

Dont do this!!! As my coils are NOT optimized my TPU needs 2, 3, 4, 5A to light a bulb. It doesnt matter how much!!!

Why?

The answer is easy: when I connect a bulb and have a good frequency mix, I SEE that the current from my power supply is CONSTANT!!! In some cases - very good frequency mixes - I saw, when a bulb is connected, the current DROPPS!!!!

This means that my coils are really not good because all the current from my power supply is needed to run the coils and NOT the load.

Everything clear??

Otto