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: ENERGY AMPLIFICATION  (Read 3509799 times)

densama

  • Jr. Member
  • **
  • Posts: 51
Re: ENERGY AMPLIFICATION
« Reply #8310 on: December 05, 2018, 05:46:37 PM »
https://overunity.com/17986/current-amplifier-as-key-to-the-free-energy/msg526593/#new
https://yadi.sk/d/dH-xE-qW3HFWDX
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=smPr7CFHGhw&feature=youtu.be
http://mazeto.net/index.php/topic,10002.msg96812/topicseen.html#msg96812

thanks to x_name41 :o :D
it's hard to hear the voice within consistenly and walk on it ... but i always try to trust it first
there's real fight between my carnal mind and the voice.

sorry 4 everything ...buddy

bringdownthezog

  • Full Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 104
Re: ENERGY AMPLIFICATION
« Reply #8311 on: December 06, 2018, 06:51:13 PM »
For the good of all mankind  ;D ;D ;D 8)

Tito always said that it is ignition coil with extra coil  :-X

Eight times as great  :o  :o  :o
]

Always said its the extra coil. Eight times as great.

https://ibb.co/jRZsnq

PS: I cant post this circuit on this site no matter how much I try. You are free to try yourself!  ;D

F6FLT

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 394
Re: ENERGY AMPLIFICATION
« Reply #8312 on: December 07, 2018, 10:00:22 AM »
Your lack of understanding comes from the fact that you did not build nor test this exact device nor have you considered it's usefulness...
I have built and tested this device, and I am not alone. It doesn't work, and I understand perfectly why it doesn't work.
If yours works, show it to us and have it tested by an independent team.

"lack of understanding"! ::) ;D  It is becoming painful, all those people who believe and claim that this flawed thing work, who give pretentious and insulting lessons from their ignorance, without ever being able in the 16 years since the patent was filed, to present us with a device that works! This is ridiculous. Stop wasting our time. I'm not a gullible religious believer.

Do I have to add that work must be produced to make a parametric change that allows to get extra-energy, and that therefore there is no energy gain in the process? Of course, it's not necessary, these guys are not here to understand but to constantly repeat their acts of faith.


F6FLT

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 394
Re: ENERGY AMPLIFICATION
« Reply #8313 on: December 07, 2018, 10:00:45 AM »
.

bringdownthezog

  • Full Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 104
Re: ENERGY AMPLIFICATION
« Reply #8314 on: December 07, 2018, 03:15:12 PM »
I have built and tested this device, and I am not alone. It doesn't work, and I understand perfectly why it doesn't work.
If yours works, show it to us and have it tested by an independent team.

"lack of understanding"! ::) ;D  It is becoming painful, all those people who believe and claim that this flawed thing work, who give pretentious and insulting lessons from their ignorance, without ever being able in the 16 years since the patent was filed, to present us with a device that works! This is ridiculous. Stop wasting our time. I'm not a gullible religious believer.

Do I have to add that work must be produced to make a parametric change that allows to get extra-energy, and that therefore there is no energy gain in the process? Of course, it's not necessary, these guys are not here to understand but to constantly repeat their acts of faith.

You tell us why its not working. We might as well enjoy your imaginary experiments. And where did you source this core? Did you buy it from a store?

partzman

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 379
Re: ENERGY AMPLIFICATION
« Reply #8315 on: December 07, 2018, 05:21:02 PM »
I have built and tested this device, and I am not alone. It doesn't work, and I understand perfectly why it doesn't work.
If yours works, show it to us and have it tested by an independent team.

"lack of understanding"! ::) ;D  It is becoming painful, all those people who believe and claim that this flawed thing work, who give pretentious and insulting lessons from their ignorance, without ever being able in the 16 years since the patent was filed, to present us with a device that works! This is ridiculous. Stop wasting our time. I'm not a gullible religious believer.

Do I have to add that work must be produced to make a parametric change that allows to get extra-energy, and that therefore there is no energy gain in the process? Of course, it's not necessary, these guys are not here to understand but to constantly repeat their acts of faith.

I have a suggestion.  Why not use your previous MEG setup and test it with MOV loads.  I've been searching thru my old files and logs and have not yet found my notes from that period but I did find that JLN's website did have some info that I posted there years ago.  This can be found at-

http://jnaudin.free.fr/meg/megnot01.htm

Here you will find the exact MOVs I used and some of my thots and opinions on the device.  As I recall, I did attempt to loop the device in many configurations without success and since then I've learned that because a device exhibits a COP>1 from a measurement standpoint, does not mean a stand alone "generator" can be built.

Pm

leonelogb

  • Full Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 122
Re: ENERGY AMPLIFICATION
« Reply #8316 on: December 07, 2018, 11:21:38 PM »
You know why???  ::)    ;D ;D ;D

]

Always said its the extra coil. Eight times as great.

https://ibb.co/jRZsnq

PS: I cant post this circuit on this site no matter how much I try. You are free to try yourself!  ;D

Magluvin

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 5884
Re: ENERGY AMPLIFICATION
« Reply #8317 on: December 08, 2018, 03:19:14 AM »
Hmm.  been thinking this week as to what I could come up with as variations of bifi coils that could avoid the issue of resistance....
If we want more capacitance, then we need more turns, thus more resistance.  So Ive been, Hmmmm..
lets say we have a bifi coil that is 1H and a capacitance of 15uf.  Just an example...  It would ring about 41hz...
Now, if we put another identical bifi in parallel, we should double our capacitance!!!!! But we reduce inductance by what, Half?

So I went to Circuit sim to look at some things....
I used the default circuit which has a 1H inductor with a 15uf cap which rings at 41hz. Then I added another 1H coil in parallel with the original, with a switch to switch out the second inductor when needed. With the second coil switch on the oscillation went to 58hz Hmmm, if the induction was halved, thats not a crazy increase. Might have thought it to be more like 82hz, like 41x2.  But there is one thing to change which is the 15uf cap to 30 uf. Now we are back to our original 41hz!!!   This I think is a great thing!!! More bifi coils in parallel, same resonant freq but we halve the resistance with every doubling of bifi coils. Now there is another aspect that will have to be tried.....
Say we have 8 bifi coils in parallel connection, would there be any advantages to having the coils set in different positions to one another,  such as in close proximity, say inline, or to space them away from each other.


Gotta git. got more on this.  Just let the possibilities of this sink in a bit.  ;)
Mags
« Last Edit: December 08, 2018, 06:47:39 AM by Magluvin »

ayeaye

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 866
Re: ENERGY AMPLIFICATION
« Reply #8318 on: December 08, 2018, 03:24:42 AM »
You tell us why its not working. We might as well enjoy your imaginary experiments.

F6FLT saying that he built something, usually means that he tried to simulate something remotely similar, but it failed. In spite his criticism of others may sometimes be right, he excessively used to condemn others, and he is apparently stranger to the scientific rigor what concerns doing experiments.


bringdownthezog

  • Full Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 104
Re: ENERGY AMPLIFICATION
« Reply #8319 on: December 08, 2018, 08:34:11 AM »
You know why???  ::)    ;D ;D ;D

Tito and Leonelogb. Are you using high side switching ?

Jeg

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 1532
Re: ENERGY AMPLIFICATION
« Reply #8320 on: December 08, 2018, 10:43:54 AM »
Tito and Leonelogb. Are you using high side switching ?

For sure a high side switch will fit better to your needs on this subject, but again it depends on what you are trying to accomblish.

My personal opinion on Tom Bearden.
His transforrmer as a stand alone unit, will never give something more than a simple conventional transformer. As F6FLT said it needs energy to do parametric changes and this is really NOT "free" to do it. I am not saying that Bearden is a fraud. He just protects his work as any logical researcher who gave his arm and leg to discover something of a value. Don't seek his secret on his drawings or else you are doomed to repeat again and again the same and wrong approach to the subject. The same applies to all of the researchers the last 100 years who applied a patent for a "free" energy device. Their secret is never showed on papers or else everyone now would have a maschine of this kind. Experimenting with your own ideas and gaining personal experience is the only way out..

Regards
 

F6FLT

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 394
Re: ENERGY AMPLIFICATION
« Reply #8321 on: December 08, 2018, 11:58:21 AM »
F6FLT saying that he built something, usually means that he tried to simulate something...
Please stop your defaming lies.
We are here to discuss about technology, not about people.
« The elite minds discuss ideas, average minds discuss events, the mediocre minds discuss people. »
Jules Romains

F6FLT

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 394
Re: ENERGY AMPLIFICATION
« Reply #8322 on: December 08, 2018, 12:04:03 PM »
You tell us why its not working. We might as well enjoy your imaginary experiments. And where did you source this core? Did you buy it from a store?
I said it hundred of times. You can't modulate a flux. A flux should be understood as looped field lines and the "modulation", when you increase/decrease the source field, as an increase/decrease of the number of field lines.
A field from a "switching" coil simply add to the field supposed to be switched, they don't multiply. This is always true, you just have to take into account the instantaneous values of the fields but also of the permeability if it's not constant. It means that the field of the switching coil and the output coil is common, so the coils act on one each other as in any transformer (but here with a low coefficient of mutual induction) and that the change of permeability needs energy. A parametric change consumes energy when it allows for extra-energy in the system, the additional energy being that one that we put for the parametric change (same effect when we try to change a capacity storing a charge, to increase its energy according to W=1/2 * Q²/C).

My experiments are not imaginary, see the photo of a part of my modest laboratory today, yes it is a mess, I don't have time to clean up.  ;D
An experiment is done to test an idea, and the results of the experiment must help to clarify the idea, or to validate it, or to reject it. If you have no idea, or if you don't have the competence to understand both the physics underlying your idea and the results of your observations, you're not doing experiments but anything to please yourself, it's just looking at pretty slopes on an oscilloscope while jumping like a young goatee and screaming, I'll have it, I have it, I got it, the free energy is there!!!  ::)


partzman

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 379
Re: ENERGY AMPLIFICATION
« Reply #8323 on: December 08, 2018, 04:59:33 PM »

A parametric change consumes energy when it allows for extra-energy in the system, the additional energy being that one that we put for the parametric change (same effect when we try to change a capacity storing a charge, to increase its energy according to W=1/2 * Q²/C).


I will agree here as all my tests of circuits using parametric inductance and capacitance have been conservative up to this point in time.  However, Gorchilin claims gains are possible with parametric inductance using partial cycles.  See-

http://gorchilin.com/articles/energy/RLC_5?lang=en

Unfortunately my calculus skills are lacking so I'm unable to determine if his theory is correct and I haven't attempted any type of build.

I'm curious to know if you have ever considered the TPU by Steven Marks?

Pm

bringdownthezog

  • Full Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 104
Re: ENERGY AMPLIFICATION
« Reply #8324 on: December 08, 2018, 05:19:24 PM »
I said it hundred of times. You can't modulate a flux. A flux should be understood as looped field lines and the "modulation", when you increase/decrease the source field, as an increase/decrease of the number of field lines.
A field from a "switching" coil simply add to the field supposed to be switched, they don't multiply. This is always true, you just have to take into account the instantaneous values of the fields but also of the permeability if it's not constant. It means that the field of the switching coil and the output coil is common, so the coils act on one each other as in any transformer (but here with a low coefficient of mutual induction) and that the change of permeability needs energy. A parametric change consumes energy when it allows for extra-energy in the system, the additional energy being that one that we put for the parametric change (same effect when we try to change a capacity storing a charge, to increase its energy according to W=1/2 * Q²/C).

My experiments are not imaginary, see the photo of a part of my modest laboratory today, yes it is a mess, I don't have time to clean up.  ;D
An experiment is done to test an idea, and the results of the experiment must help to clarify the idea, or to validate it, or to reject it. If you have no idea, or if you don't have the competence to understand both the physics underlying your idea and the results of your observations, you're not doing experiments but anything to please yourself, it's just looking at pretty slopes on an oscilloscope while jumping like a young goatee and screaming, I'll have it, I have it, I got it, the free energy is there!!!  ::)


Not MEG. This is just piss pond.  ;D