Author Topic: The Master Of Magnetics "Steven Mark" (Read 1235781 times)

innovation_station · « **Reply #2670 on:** August 23, 2007, 06:21:09 AM »

can someone answer me a question

what was the first thred started here at overunity.com regarding the inventions of steven marks?

the verry first words here ? and i do not mean this thred!!!

im doing my final digg to find what has been missed and im sure somthing has

but it all starts with the answer to my question

what are the first words posted here to do with the sm ring?

i must start at the begining as does every race we run including life

ist

EMdevices · « **Reply #2671 on:** August 24, 2007, 05:35:34 PM »

[edit....moved to "Exploring addition of signals according to SMs TPU"]

EMdevices · « **Reply #2672 on:** August 24, 2007, 05:46:32 PM »

[edit .... moved to "Exploring addition of signals according to SMs TPU"]

EMdevices · « **Reply #2673 on:** August 24, 2007, 07:00:26 PM »

[edit .... moved to "Exploring addition of signals according to SMs TPU"]

13thHouR · « **Reply #2674 on:** August 24, 2007, 07:39:49 PM »

For people looking to get the illusive IRF7307's in America and Europe. So they can drive their IRF840 mosfets, from a function generator:

http://www.digi-key.com/

These guys supply them at reasonable prices, (even though they are a bit obsessive about the Department of Homeland Security Regulations)

I came down like a ton of bricks on them quoting Trade regulations with the United Kingdom.

As compromise I came up with this term.

Device = Standard EMF
Intended use= Public domain research in Tesla/Scalar waves.
Intended recipient= Private use, no third party.

Not strictly true, but it shuts the DHS up.

That should stop you getting 300 questions before shipment.

Just a reminder these are tiny SMT devices which you need very steady hand to solder to the pins.

EMdevices · « **Reply #2675 on:** August 24, 2007, 07:48:37 PM »

13thHourR,Ã‚Â Why don't you start a separate thread where people can list links to electronic parts?

I'm trying to discuss theory over here.

Thanks,

EM

P.S. Never mind, I started a new thread.

Grumpy · « **Reply #2676 on:** August 24, 2007, 10:17:23 PM »

Your theory is solid enough to build it and see.

EMdevices · « **Reply #2677 on:** August 24, 2007, 10:23:30 PM »

Thank you Grumpy, I now opened up the tread for discussion.Ã‚Â

z_p_e · « **Reply #2678 on:** August 31, 2007, 02:43:56 AM »

It's somewhat quiet in TPU land, so let me pose something:

Many folks have watched SM's video's and made several comments on clues that were picked up. One comment in particular I must question, as I have never believed it to be so.

That is the notion that the open 100W version SM demonstrates is a "4-pole" device.

Carrying this notion further, many have also speculated and touted that the "poles" must be configured and driven as per Tesla's patent in order to create a RMF.

I suppose these are reasonable conclusions given that SM seemed to be quite heavily influenced by Tesla, but are they in error?

I direct your attention back to the first device shown...the small sprocket-capped unit "put together with bailing wire".

Some observatons about both devices (let's call them TPU1 and TPU2):

1) TPU1 has no apparent coils at all. Not saying there are none, just that they are not visible, and surely not segmented into 4 quadrants as TPU2.

2) TPU2 does not have the characteristic yellow toroid used on TPU1 and others.

3) TPU1 must be composed of at least some wire, and this wire is most likely wound around the centre "core" area of the device. We can not see this area well, but where else could the wire be?

4) The "caps" on TPU1 and TPU2 are not evident on any other TPU versions. Do they serve a purpose? I believe in TPU1 no, but in TPU2, obviously, yes (see below for what).

5) TPU2 appears to have 4 bifilar windings in four sections on the bottom ring, which seem to correspond with 4 "coils"(?) that look similar to the coil-core of TPU1.

Reasons I do not believe TPU2 uses 4 poles:

a) Steven always talked about 3 frequencies, not 4, not 2.

b) TPU1 is the bare-bones basic concept model. Looking back from SM's descriptions, logic leads me to believe that TPU1 has only a single collector coil... one of the reasons for its relatively low power output (about 25W). TPU1 therefore uses 3 or 6 or 9 or 12 coil segments around the core, which is comprised of the lone collector coil. Each segment is driven by its own frequency. 4 frequencies fails to come into play.

c) The most logical next step to increasing output power is to bundle several devices together, and TPU2 is the result....

d) TPU2 is composed essentially of 4 TPU1's. The ferrite or iron ring used in TPU2 facilitates the role of the yellow toroid on TPU1 and others. The bifilar windings are equivalent to the windings found on the yellow toroid, one for each "section".

e) The output power of TPU2 is about 100W. Coincidently, about 4X that of TPU1.

Cheers,
Darren

Grumpy · « **Reply #2679 on:** August 31, 2007, 03:51:10 AM »

Try it.

innovation_station · « **Reply #2680 on:** August 31, 2007, 04:31:03 AM »

grumpy post a pic of your coil dude you have said it was done and you implyed it worked

@ darren did you ever think you could do all of this from 1 freq? i beleave you can

just wait till crystals work there way into this little mess

or better yet nano crystlialline to grab most of the missed power from the copper when we look at quartz is it not the second harmonic componment of the earth and it is in harmony with the earth soooooo humm now what is the third harmonic compomnent of the earth if we are going to achive overunity from this coil i think we must harness all that we can from it did sm say he worked with nickle cobalt too in his expariments muller also says about super conductive wire so just some more thoughts as it is too slow in here

william

in the first tpu i beleave it is a 4 coil unit look at the outter most edge of it there you will see 4 coils top and bottom but they are covered with alum foil also they look to be out of phase of each other by 90 deg meaning a quator turn diffrence between top and bottom coils look hard as i have to come up with this conclusion

i have been wrong lots so take thease words as you will its just what i see

Mannix · « **Reply #2681 on:** August 31, 2007, 04:47:00 AM »

Darren,

just quiet in here ..im busy, alone in my cave !.Tpu wont be cracked with a key board (I'm not having a go at you or your sims, you are valued here).

You raise an interesting point that has plagued me a lot in the past.
It also brings up a lot of issues ..now that you have me out of my cave!!ha

.
TPU1 to me, has 4 quadrants just as TPU2 has...I hope that you mean TPU1 is the one in the equipment room.
It could be that we are talking about 2 different coils. what I see as tpu1 is where he says "these are not free energy devices...they are conversion devices"...etc.and takes it out of a pilots type brief case.

The issue of an odd combination and what seems like an even number of coils does seem confusing..I agree.

It it possible that what we see on the outside is not designed to give clues as to how it operates. Perhaps there was a strategy involved at that point. I am just guessing here but the possibility exists.

I have wondered at different times if there may have been "spaghetti" involved in some of those early display units.

That would account for the discrepancy....it would also account for peoples unwillingness to use the recent information provided.Moving foward..all else

we have...TUBES
we have high speed rotational field
we have perpindicular wiring
we have 3 or so stack coils
we have a vital "harmonic perfection"
we have the possibility of two metals.
we have "they are very dangerous"

sparse perhaps..challenging i think. Not nearly enough for some BUT...

AS far as I can see there are not many people ..if any , using all of this information in their experiments. Invariably they add their own experience..we cant help it. we are smart arent we...we have better components now haven't we ?
We all want to jump 10 years ahead ahead of the discovery process, which Steven took 30 years going down . I fully understand the will to do it smarter ....but again ..what do we have that was not designed with tubes first??. then refined and perfected.

"There is no reason that using solid state now would be any easier now that it was 20 years ago"

That is why Steven is such a special person with such a special discovery that will eventually change the way that we use energy .

Its good to know that there is an alternative when the oil, eventually runs out

We may learn this process for our selves, given enough effort and time.

While I am not a radiant energy expert like some seem to be.

I certainly hope that I have the mental capacity, physical skill and the correct equipment to achieve some understanding. ...some luck wont go astray!

Many people have contributed to this research and have proved that ss is not the way to discover ....just to perfect like everything else we have ...including what you are looking at now!

Some may just want to buy these from walmart or somewhere and use our credit card. after the gas station close of course!

It would be much simpler but completely uninteresting.

Lindsay

Grumpy · « **Reply #2682 on:** August 31, 2007, 06:41:38 AM »

Quote from: innovation_station on August 31, 2007, 04:31:03 AM

grumpy post a pic of your coil dude you have said it was done and you implyed it worked

I have posted my Bob Boyce version - still working on that, by the way.

I have never stated or implied that I have a "working TPU". I have only "implied" that people should seek a deeper understanding of the universe and how it works. Do that, and you can build your own device - like Tesla, Moray, Bedini, SM, Sweet, Bearden, and everyone else.

So, you see, I am not trying to copy the TPU. I am trying to understand "radiant energy", and I got a pretty good handle on it...

z_p_e · « **Reply #2683 on:** August 31, 2007, 02:38:49 PM »

Good to see that "understanding before building" hasn't completely been tossed out the window.

Try that.

Grumpy · « **Reply #2684 on:** August 31, 2007, 04:09:09 PM »

Quote from: z_p_e on August 31, 2007, 02:38:49 PM

Good to see that "understanding before building" hasn't completely been tossed out the window.

Try that.

Smart Ass.

"Building" is the keyword in your statement.

Jumping from theory to theory, trying to figure it all out first, is futile.

News:

User Menu

Author Topic: The Master Of Magnetics "Steven Mark" (Read 1235781 times)

innovation_station

Re: The Master Of Magnetics "Steven Mark"

EMdevices

Re: The Master Of Magnetics "Steven Mark"

EMdevices

Re: The Master Of Magnetics "Steven Mark"

EMdevices

Re: The Master Of Magnetics "Steven Mark"

13thHouR

Re: The Master Of Magnetics "Steven Mark"

EMdevices

Re: The Master Of Magnetics "Steven Mark"

Grumpy

Re: The Master Of Magnetics "Steven Mark"

EMdevices

Re: The Master Of Magnetics "Steven Mark"

z_p_e

Re: The Master Of Magnetics "Steven Mark"

Grumpy

Re: The Master Of Magnetics "Steven Mark"

innovation_station

Re: The Master Of Magnetics "Steven Mark"

Mannix

Re: The Master Of Magnetics "Steven Mark"

Grumpy

Re: The Master Of Magnetics "Steven Mark"

z_p_e

Re: The Master Of Magnetics "Steven Mark"

Grumpy

Re: The Master Of Magnetics "Steven Mark"