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: Free Energy? How about roughly a million tons of force?  (Read 20935 times)

stvnjsha

  • Newbie
  • *
  • Posts: 17
Free Energy? How about roughly a million tons of force?
« on: August 30, 2008, 11:24:33 PM »
Roughly million tons of force with the equivalent to one milliampere at one mm ? Coulomb?s Law.  :o

There is a web page dedicated to this and the enigma of Coulomb?s Law. 

Since, I'm lazy (and... hate typing) and do not like repeating myself; details about the enigma of Coulomb?s Law and a device that attempts to apply this are at http://www.i-am-a-i.org/free-energy/index.html

Here are some of the graphics from the web page.

This device could be considered as an electric field transformer. 




broli

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 2245
Re: Free Energy? How about roughly a million tons of force?
« Reply #1 on: August 31, 2008, 12:15:54 AM »
I was very surprised when I saw this title because I thought it was the idea I had which involves mechanics and not electricity.

Check out...

http://www.besslerwheel.com/forum/viewtopic.php?t=2541

AB Hammer

  • elite_member
  • Hero Member
  • ******
  • Posts: 1253
Re: Free Energy? How about roughly a million tons of force?
« Reply #2 on: September 03, 2008, 01:57:09 AM »
Greetings and welcome to the forum stvnjsha

This is a very good first post and very interesting.

stvnjsha

  • Newbie
  • *
  • Posts: 17
Coulombs Law anomoly and virtual photons
« Reply #3 on: November 23, 2010, 05:30:18 AM »
At first glance the formulas of Coulomb's Law -- F = K x [(q1 x q2)/d2] -- and Newton's Law of Universal Gravitation  --  F = K x [(m1 x m2)/d2] -- appear very similar. Both determine forces present, one electrical and the other gravitational.

Newton's law determines gravitational forces; how much we weigh. While, Coulomb's Law determines forces between electrical charges. We experience this force as static cling.
Newton's law works with mass. While Coulomb's works with charges.
FYI: 1 ampere is 1 coulomb of charge (6.2422 x 1018 electrons) passing a given point in one second
Upon closer examination, due to the constants (K) they are quite different.  The K for the gravitation formula is 6.7 x 10-11(N)(m2)/kg2.  The K for Coulomb's Law is 9.0 x 109 (N)(m2)/kg2.

If ones (1) were placed in the places of m1, m2, and d of Newton's law, the resultant force of gravity would be relatively insignificant. However, if ones (1) were placed in the places of q1, q2, and d of Coulomb's Law, the resultant force would be incredible. It would roughly translate to about a 1,000,000 tons of force.

Now, reduce all the variable of Coulomb's Law by a thousand (10-3) and the force available would still be about million tons. This means if you have (for one moment in time and space) one milliampere’s worth of positive charge and one milliampere’s worth of negative charge with a millimeter between them the ‘static cling’ force would still be about 1,000,000 tons.
My electronics college instructor told us that after Coulomb's Law was published, numerous people 'jumped' on it to try to tap into this physical force. From Volta, Ohm, Faraday, Franklin, etc. we got our laws of electricity. And...in terms of an application of Coulomb's Law, they all walked away "scratching their head" (instructor's words).
An effective power application of Coulomb's Law was the 'holy grail' for the early electrical pioneers.

Why hasn't this been used? The problem is like charges repel each other. To create a condition that holds a bunch of electrons in one place, those electrons have to be put under pressure. Pressure in electrical terms is voltage. To create a condition that would use this force, a very high voltage would have to be used.
This is not that difficult to do; and, it does create some arcing problems. Specially, if put these high voltages are in close proximity to each other with only a small air gap.
That much voltage is hard to contain. So, electric field forces’ usage has been restricted to small power scale applications like watches and power meters.

Coulomb's Law is why high voltage capacitors will always be ‘chunky’. We have the thin material that can stand the high voltage. But, the capacitor plates can't be too close together. If the plates were too close together, the force between the plates literally causes the plates to pinch the insulator and shorts out the capacitor.

THE ANOMOLY OF COULOMB'S LAW
There are all kinds of physical logistic problems in actually creating this condition. And...hypothetically suppose that there is a device where the physical logistics problems have been solved. The enigma of Coulomb's Law is; no way would you have to exert the electrical equivalent of that amount of force to create this condition (given a non arcing condition is established).

True, again, there are numerous physical difficulties. And...all physical problems aside, the math says the resultant force is more than what had to be put in to create it.
To give you an idea of the discrepancy between the electrical 'input' and the physical 'output', a half cycle voltage spike from a small Tesla coil can momentarily supply the voltage and current necessary for the 10-3 example used above (a million tons).
Coulomb's Law is an apparent major ‘glitch’ in the current science paradigm.1 It is a ‘glitch’ or exception to two basic physics axioms:

           "Nothing can be created or destroyed."
           "You can't get something for nothing."

One of my electronics college instructors worked for a high power AM radio station when he was younger. He told us the story of what happened when a million volt capacitor accidentally connected to a low voltage variable tuning capacitor. (A capacitor stores electrical charge. The variable tuning capacitor is used in this instance to keep the radio station on frequency. This type of variable capacitor was two sets of parallel mounted metal plates. They were arranged such that one set could move freely between the other set without touching.)
The story goes, that the charged million volt capacitor got connected to the normally low voltage tuning capacitor . There was a loud "thunk". (The noise was so loud everybody in the building jumped.) 
The observed result was the instantaneous forces generated from Coulomb's Law was so great, that afterwards, the formerly moveable plates were pushed together by such a pressure that "It was impossible to take the tuning capacitor apart."
Within the current energy/power mechanical paradigm, to do this, such that the plates stay together and do not separate, something like a hydraulic press that exerts tons of force would be needed. Yet...a discharging electrical energy storage -- a capacitor --  device did this.

In terms of the 'thunk', using F = ma as a reference and assuming the mass of the tuning capacitor plates is relatively small, the acceleration on the capacitor plates -- toward one another -- could have been so great that the sound barrier may have been broken.  Specially when that force would increase exponentially as the plates approached one another.

There is a whole study in physics around this called quantum electro-dynamics. One explanation that current physicists propose is that there are virtual photons and these virtual photons have the potential of infinite force and are everywhere. Creating this electrical condition brings the infinite potential of virtual photons from the virtual realm to the physical realm.
As I understand the theory, all temporary photonic activity gets its energy from virtual photons.  The induction field around a radio antenna is considered to be of a virtual photon.  So is the electric field of a capacitor.  (See http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Virtual_photon)

Most of the time these photons obey the conservation of energy rule.  And..."The Coulomb force (static electric force) between electric charges.  It is caused by the exchange of virtual photons.  In symmetric 3-dimensional space this exchange results in the inverse square law for electric force. Since the photon has no mass, the coulomb potential has an infinite range." (Wikipedia, underlining is mine)

If you learn anything from this web page, 'walk' away with this:

There is a source of incredible power or energy; that we have known about for a long time, and may be overlooking.

The intent of this aricle is not about the theory nor will it try to explain how this anamoly is possible. The idea like the Virtual Photon Power Converter is to explore possible applications or ways to access this force rather than explain.
(from i-am-a-i.org)
« Last Edit: November 23, 2010, 06:28:40 AM by stvnjsha »

stvnjsha

  • Newbie
  • *
  • Posts: 17
a more polished VPR explanation
« Reply #4 on: December 18, 2010, 05:36:05 AM »
Assuming electric fields can manifest a virtual photon reference – VPR -- and assuming electric fields within capacitors have a VPR, then within the circuit of the present invention having a pair of high voltage capacitors connected in series there would be VPR within each capacitor, (b) and (c).  The circuit across the two capacitors is another capacitor – VPR (a) – and this is the electric field that energizes the entire mixing capacitor plate/winding/plate/winding assembly.   The electric field induced on the mixing capacitor plate/winding/plate/winding assembly electrically polarizes that assembly thus creating a fourth VPR, (d).   In summary a VPR is suspended inside another VPR with two VPRs connecting the two.  This event occurs when any two capacitors are in series and in close proximity.  In this circuit, within VPR (d), is an electrical closed circuit magnetic field device – plate/winding/plate/winding assembly – suspended between the electric fields.  This device has one end of a pair of transformer windings going through one VPR while the other ends of the pair are connected through another VPR – (b) and (c) -- and this magnetic field assembly is contained in VPR (d).

stvnjsha

  • Newbie
  • *
  • Posts: 17
VPPC Electrical Explanation
« Reply #5 on: December 25, 2010, 05:16:50 AM »
Because my writing skills suck, here is (hopefully) a clearer electrical perspective than the previous.  This explanation takes the VPPC theory out of the esoteric virtual photon range into a common recognized electrical theory.
For any single phase power transformer attached to the grid the primary winding has an electro-magnetic footprint.  Part of this footprint is that the primary is in an electric field.  Out of this electric field across the primary there is an electron flow through the primary winding creating a magnetic field.  Energy from the grid that creates these electric and magnetic fields is translated through the fields by the secondary winding and then to the house or whatever.  The secondary gets its energy from these fields.
Both the electric and magnetic fields fluctuate with the frequency of the grid.  The electric field component stays the same according to frequency and for the most part is constant.  However, the magnetic field – electron flow – varies with power draw and is what translates the energy transfer.   The current flow – magnetic field -- in the primary is directly proportional to the energy – VA -- being extracted from the transformer.   
And, for any single phase power transformer the voltage field and the electron source/magnetic field come from the same energy source.

With the VPPC there are two energy sources.  The electric field energy source suspends the primary winding (7) in a closed circuit electric field.  With the electric field circuit, being a capacitive circuit, there is little to no current going through the primary (7) as it is polarized and suspended in the electric field. 
The current energy source feeds into this electric field suspended coil through C1 and provides the magnetic field component for the primary.  When the electric field and current flow mix in C1, the primary (7) is energized by an electron flow coming out of one high voltage(HV)potential across the transformer, through the transformer,  towards and into the other HV potential on the other side of the transformer.  This provides the magnetic component of the primary winding’s electro-magnetic footprint.
The secondary 8 is energized by both of these field components mixing in the primary (7).  From these fields, the secondary draws its energy or power.  So, essentially what this device does is it would give a line transformer primary the same electro-magnetic field footprint and therefore VA capabilities of being on the grid; when it’s not on the grid.
 
Since the HV circuit is a coil capacitor circuit, its power draw would be directly related to the capacitance and have a relatively low VA.  In addition, normally the voltage on a capacitor is 90 degrees out of phase with the current in the coil across it.  This necessitates a device (11) that keeps the voltage on the capacitor C1 and therefore on the primary in phase with the current in (4).   
The major VA consumption with this device would be the current source generating the magnetic fields in the electric field suspended primary winding.  In addition this power consumption would be inversely proportional to the electric field potential – voltage – across the coil.  For any transformer and a given power draw, the higher the voltage field across the primary, the less the current in the magnetic field circuit.

In summary, this device would give a single phase line transformer the electro-magnetic field footprint and VA capabilities of when it’s attached to the grid with a VA input that is a fraction of its VA output.  Energy is pulled out of the virtual photon quantum state to do this.
 :o

stvnjsha

  • Newbie
  • *
  • Posts: 17
Thoughts at large (from a small mind)
« Reply #6 on: December 25, 2010, 05:54:46 AM »
When I first put the schematic for the VPPC on paper and saw how simple it was, I went into denial.  For two weeks I couldn’t believe that it could be that easy.  So, I did everything I could think of to find fault with it.  The more I tried to find fault with it, the better it looked.   It started to fit into other physical law concepts that I knew.

The schematic that originally was drawn had the current circuit slave to the voltage circuit and the converter xformer wasn’t in.

What issues and/or variables I did see are mostly around the mixing capacitors C1:
     1.   What kind of voltage drop would be across C1
          a.   Generally speaking under constant current load any voltage drop can be compensated by an increase in the high voltage circuit.
          b.   Changing current draws
               i.   A fluctuating current draw would create a fluctuating voltage across T2-4
               ii.   This fluctuating voltage across T2-4 can affect the capacitance of C1-6
                    1.   As a complimentary voltage rises --  a current increase, capacitance rises
                          a.   If capacitance of C1-6 rises, then the total capacitance of C1 rises
                          b.   When charge stays the same and capacitance increases, voltage must drop
                    2.   As a complimentary voltage lowers, capacitance decreases
                           a.   If capacitance of C1-6 lowers – a current decrease, then the total capacitance of C1 lowers
                           b.   When charge stays the same and capacitance lowers, voltage must increase
                     3.   The voltage across C1 may vary with current draw
                     4.   possible solution
                           a.   Putting another capacitor of about the same capacitance of the whole electric field circuit across – in parallel with -- T1-9 before C1.
                           b.   Putting a capacitor across T3-7
                           c.   A combination of the above
      2.   How will the voltage induced on C1-6 reflect as impedance to T2

I’m sure a prototype would manifest other issues and give a considerable more data.  (hint…hint) 

This idea is a seed looking for fertile ground.  I am not naive.  I know the Beast is out there and the ‘deck is stacked’ for a single inventor/developer.  :'( 
The ‘shotgun approach’ – a number of simultaneous developments -- seems like the best gambit.  With the grace of God, if enough holes in the dike occur at the same time, the Beast might miss a few. 

Peace

ramset

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 8073
Re: Free Energy? How about roughly a million tons of force?
« Reply #7 on: December 25, 2010, 08:52:42 PM »
Jerry,
If you could post a pic ?and any other info, that would be fabulous!

This seems amazing ,and the fellow that started this thread stvnjsha, makes a very sincere and convincing presentation!

stvnjsha
More please?

Chet
PS
Oh, And Merry Christmas

ramset

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 8073
Re: Free Energy? How about roughly a million tons of force?
« Reply #8 on: December 26, 2010, 07:18:22 PM »
Jerry
Nice,Thanks for taking the time to do this!!Do you feel this could be Electrostatic in nature?
Very exciting stuff!

Chet

ramset

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 8073
Re: Free Energy? How about roughly a million tons of force?
« Reply #9 on: December 27, 2010, 03:24:34 PM »
Jerry,
I must say they sure look Good,You must have a very light hand to not crack them!

Very cool stuff here Jerry!The potential of harnessing Electrostatic energy Boggles the mind!

Chet

ramset

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 8073
Re: Free Energy? How about roughly a million tons of force?
« Reply #10 on: December 28, 2010, 01:10:31 AM »
Jerry,
You definately have our attention!!,Electrostatic energy is becomeing quite the topic lately.
Chet

stvnjsha

  • Newbie
  • *
  • Posts: 17
Re: Free Energy? How about roughly a million tons of force?
« Reply #11 on: December 28, 2010, 06:17:50 AM »
Interesting, maybe for the future have you thought about a dremel or a rotozip and a template jig?  And...if you have a drill press, the way to go is your way for circles.

In terms of this thread, the first topic is an attempt to use HV to electrically polarize a closed system and to use the electric fields in that polarized system.  The premise was electrically polarizing a conductor so that it exhibited electet qualities.  Because it would all be a 'closed system' electric fields would be available and it would tend not to arc to any thing outside of it.  This is an attempted form of using the non-conservative character of electric fields.
I saw that one of the major factors would be the molecular matrix of the core material.  For in the end, the matrix is the closed system that is being polarized.  I choose iron just to give the idea the K.I.S.S. and to use it's conductive and magnetic characteristics.

From my limited perception, the one to go for is the second item, the VPPC.  With the varied intrinsic qualities of the multitude of matrix materials that can be used, you could end up like Edison Labratories looking for filament material or Bell Labs looking for transistor material.  And...you may get lost or distracted in some the interesting discoveries you make along the way.
With the VPPC, a couple of microwave xformers (one being the HV source and the other HV secondary being the mixing xformer primary), a couple of isolation xformers (one being maybe 1kVA), some glass and sheetmetal, and the phased lock power supply are the basics.  There would be less variables like shapes and molecular matrices involved.  In theory, you should be able to see the direct effects with less distractions and variables.  My fantasy is that one can make a number of discoveries with the VPPC as well.

And...don't let me discourage you from what you are doing.  For me, what you may be doing is exploring another side of the 'box' we are in.  Even though your 'outside of the box' may be a different side than the one I'm pointing to.  They both may lead out. ;D

Peace and Happy New Year
Steven Joshua

Chet,

The main thing I'm careful of is to not spin the drill too fast or it might torque the disc out of the clamps.

And I would like to harness electrostatic energy.  Although I'm not sure if what I'm doing so far is consistent with the intent of this thread.  But I did do a test discharge to the disc, which is unnotched for now.  Static does discharge to the disc when it's placed on wood, since wood attracts the static.  And with the setup I'm using wood sometimes gives off the spark.  The spark in the picture is around 4kV.

Doctor No

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 262
    • NSPAP
Re: Free Energy? How about roughly a million tons of force?
« Reply #12 on: December 28, 2010, 08:05:07 PM »
Such big power can not be obtained at all. Even with newest, element 115 basing engines. They can have power of some 200.000 T but only as cluster of many small engines (about 200-400). Please remember that big tachyons engines built by Beluzzo in Breslau (today: Wrocław, Poland), had "only" 300 T of power.

core

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 405
Re: Free Energy? How about roughly a million tons of force?
« Reply #13 on: December 29, 2010, 04:23:37 AM »
Steven,

   Hope all is well. Got a question regarding the 'glass' mixing capacitor. Is the 3rd copper plated needed? I am under the impression that the electric field would terminate on the 2nd copper plate that is connected to the 'current' transformer.
 
   The blue lines in the picture represent what I believe would be the 'electric' field. The glass needed to build the cap's could easily be found in small picture frames that you find in the $.99 stores.

   Hope you have a great new Year!  :)

Respectfully,

Core
   

stvnjsha

  • Newbie
  • *
  • Posts: 17
Re: Free Energy? How about roughly a million tons of force?
« Reply #14 on: December 29, 2010, 09:23:52 PM »
Hey Core glad to hear from ya. :) 
In terms of your question about the extra plate, that plate is probably not needed.  I added the 3rd plate as insurance so that the mixing plate would be totally immersed in the electric field.  The original design only had two plates.
Your pic is what I would guess-timate the fields' interaction involved. A pic of total fields would almost look like the flux lines of a magnetic field with each plate being a 'pole'.

Peace and Happy New Year 8)
Steve

P.S. Right now, I am looking into the phased control power supply.  There is an old window on the property that has lots of 'lites' in it.  I intend to cannibalize that for the cap.
 
Steven,

   Hope all is well. Got a question regarding the 'glass' mixing capacitor. Is the 3rd copper plated needed? I am under the impression that the electric field would terminate on the 2nd copper plate that is connected to the 'current' transformer.
 
   The blue lines in the picture represent what I believe would be the 'electric' field. The glass needed to build the cap's could easily be found in small picture frames that you find in the $.99 stores.

   Hope you have a great new Year!  :)

Respectfully,

Core