Free Energy | searching for free energy and discussing free energy
Solid States Devices => solid state devices => Topic started by: Doctor Whodini on February 01, 2006, 09:37:33 PM
-
Hello all,
Fig. 6 show the detail of the Coefficient of Performance (COP) calculation:
http://www.intalek.com/Index/Projects/SparkGapExp/SparkGapExp.htm
My conclusion is the Carbon arc is performing as a NEGATIVE resistance-like device. The bottom line is that there is MORE energy charging up the capacitor C1 with the spark gap than without the spark gap. Therefore, the Carbon arc looks very promising as providing excess energy, once properly harnessed.
Bill
---
William S. Alek
Exploring Gravitational and Inertial Mass fluctuations,
Radiant Energy, and Temporal Anomalies
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/intalek
INTALEK, INC. PHONE/FAX: 219.924.2742
3506-43rd. Place EMAIL: mailto:wsalek01@intalek.com
Highland, IN 46322 USA HOME PAGE: http://www.intalek.com/
-
Uhh, all due respect Bill, but arent you just showing an energy gain? I mean, all your doing in those experiments is showing the result without the spark gap and then with the spark gap, showing a gain in efficiency. That's great and all, don't get me wrong, but in your COP calculations you use the "without spark gap" measurement as Ein, and "with a spark gap" as Eout. That would only be true if the wimshurst was ALREADY 100% efficient without the spark gap. What you need to do, it would seem to me, is turn the crank on the wimshurst with an electric motor and show Ein as the input power to THAT motor, in Joules or Watts. Then compare it to your Eout.
Just an observation. If I'm misinterpreting your tests, please disregard this, after, of course, you tell me what I'm missing. :)
Regards, Gn0stik
-
Keep in mind, I'm simply measuring the "energy" output of a Wimshurst generator plus the Carbon Arc vs. the "energy" output of a Wimshurst generator. In terms of energy, the calculation is very straight forward, and reveals the Carbon Arc is without question, "overunity"!
The "efficiency" of the Wimshurst generator plays NO role in this calculation.
I will be showing this experiment at the upcoming Tesla Tech 2006 conference end of July!
Bill
-
Oh, my mistake. You're Ein, is Ein to your spark gap circuit, NOT Ein to the device as a whole. I knew I was missing something simple. Thanks for correcting me. Maybe one day we'll have a solid state OU device. How amazing would that be?
This is interesting.
Just for my own curiosity, what are you turning the WH gennie with to ensure consistent speed? What is the rate of decay of the rods? Would a normal transformer work, or is the tesla one vital? What is the out put of the WH when connecting a voltmeter directly to it's posts?
-
Your assumption is that Ein is constant regardless of whether the carbon spark gap is present in the circuit or not. Unless you can measure and prove this assumption, your calculations of power gain are speculative at best.
-
For example, I can measure the output voltage of an unloaded neon sign transformer. Then, by adding a capacitor of a few hundred pF, across the output, I can measure the output voltage to have significantly increased. If I assume that the Ein is constant in this case, I can conclude that the capacitor is OU, where, in reality, it is just resonating with leakage inductance of the transformer to allow the AC mains voltage to more effectively deliver Ein.
-
I have to agree with Magneto (partially) on this one. But keep in mind that no one is shooting anything down... this forum is heavily "peppered" with tangents that are counter-productive - caused by the inability to see that asking questions is the very heart of experimentation.
To whodini - Showing more energy out with one circuit compared to another proves only one thing for certain - efficiency. Quesitons that seek to validate the amount of energy in are valid... But, something I've discovered is that no matter how you measure it... it will never be good enough for some. :)
Personally - I believe the coincidence is too great. Energy is all around us - witness lightning. And what is a spark gap, but lightning? A potential difference creates the path in the air gap via ionization... just like streamers in a lightning storm. You are definitely on to something.
To Magneto - a WH Gen. is not the same as a transformer connected to the grid. The comparison is apples to oranges. But - I'd like to hear some basis for the argument that the circuit is simply pulling more power from the WH. Maybe you can give us insight on how to ensure equal input to both circuits?
-
Why not charge the capacitor with the generator... and then move that charge through the test circuits and measure the result? That would ensure the Ein was the same for both circuits. Should be simple (and satisfying one way or the other) to all.
-
I would also suggest a few modifications to the experiment - try to determine if it is the carbon/tungsten combination that produces your boost in output, or just the spark gap. Substitute your carbon rod and/or tungsten rod with a different material, say, brass or stainless steel, and see how that affects your result.
To measure Ein, you would probably need to place a torquemeter on the WM. The torque needed to turn it will be a function of its power output (though I am guessing the WM efficiency is VERY low).
-
My proof is the difference in output energy. Thats what counts.
Bill
-
Elvis,
I don't agree with Magneto because I'm NOT looking at voltage or current or power, but energy. This is energy charging up a capacitor for a fixed amount of time. Energy is a different ball game than just looking at voltages or currents or power. There's MORE energy charging up a capacitor using a Carbon Arc.
I will go through this step by step at the Tesla Tech show.
Bill
-
I do understand what you are showing - and you do show more energy with the spark gap. We could assume that if the results are the same everytime and that the experiment was run 100 times... that it's pretty solid.
Any ideas on why this works this way?
-
Elvis.
I may have run the test 99 times. :-)
Actually, I ran the test suite over a dozen times for each, then averaged. I saw very little variation in the final accumulated voltage. The length of time was fixed at 15 seconds for each test. In other words, how much energy can be accumlated in a capacitor for a 15 second period. And keep in mind this is REAL energy!
This seems pretty clear to me. Running the generator with a Carbon Arc spark gap accumulated MORE energy during a 15 second period than without. Results speak for itself.
Now, the question I have is Carbon being consumed in this process? Is Carbon a fuel source? There are some that think not, and that a ZPE or active vacuum energy exchange is occurring. Until more data comes in, I would tend to agree with this explaination.
Bill
-
Few observations. Are not Wimshurst generator's electrostatic? So that they produce DC static, not AC? Thus if your circuit uses bypass capacitors, DC does not pass through. When using a spark gap, it then produces AC and easily passes through bypass caps? Also the 'Telsa' type transformer maybe more efficient in higher HF frequencies then lower frequencies, and the spark gap, which produces more HF frequencies will transform more power( voltage) then at lower frequencies. I don't think your setup in ARC verus non ARC really addresses all the many variables which are associated with non-arc verus arc. You may want to measure with a oscope the differences, and even use a network analyzer to see how efficient your Tesla transformer are with respect to frequency. You may find that they are most effecient at HF frequencies.
Just some comments.. Great to see experiments!
Keep rolling!
Ken
-
The spark gap could produce enough wave to cause more induction in the transformer. I think that's what magneto was driving at earlier. The extra energy could be there in both setups... but only passes when the current is alternated by the spark gap.
-
Yes, magneto missed the units of measure. If you were measuring volts or amps, or even watts I would understand his argument. However, you were measuring Joules. Raw Energy, in, and then out AFTER any losses in the system.
I would like to see you further your experimentation, however. I would probably try different electrodes, deuterium, gold, silver, etc. I'd also like to see the effect of varied spark gaps, and introducing various gasses into the spark gap, caesium would be interesting, as firing high energy lasers through caesium gas tubes has shown a time differential. All of these things require hard to get, and expensive materials however, which makes it difficult. I would also, like to see a spark gap through electrolytic water, with D2 electrodes ;) ...
perhaps even charged water from a joe cell.
Man to have access to a real lab, with a budget would be fun for this project.
-
Regardless of how the energy is measured, the fact remains that DC will not pass from primary to secondary coil on a transformer. You need alternating curent to do that.
The energy charging the capacitor is coming off the secondary coil of the transformer. It gets there through induction - produced by an alternating current in the primary coil.
The shape of the power going into the primary has a lot to do with what passes to the secondary circuit and what doesn't. And the shape of the power is not the same in the two setups.
-
Magnetoelastic,
Not necessarily, the only thing thats different in the circuit is the addition of spark gaps and about 8 inches of wire. EVERTHING else is held constant - and I mean EVERTHING, which includes constant generator rpm, constant load capacitor, leyden jars remain constant, various circuit components don't change, the 15 second time period remains fixed, etc, etc, etc...
So, the question is, "why is their excess energy coming from a Carbon Arc???"
That is the question? The evidence is very very clear.
Bill
-
JL Naudin,the Prof.Vallee experiments
probably an answer !
S
dL
p.s.:Mr.Dr. Whodini,I respect your trial and you offer a "very interesting library" !
-
The evidence is that your capacitor is collecting more charge under certain conditions.
Since the amount of Ein to the secondary circuit (consisting of the secondary coil in the transformer and the capacitor) depends on the induction in the primary coil.
Even if this is overunity - it is still true - The capacitor only receives energy through the secondary coil on the transformer... and the amount of energy generated in that secondary coil is dependant on induction.
If the spark gap setup has more inductance in the primary coil... we can't prove it's overunity unless the other setup is measured 100% efficient in transforming all the power of the WM Gen to the secondary circtuit. If that's the case - you already have a great invention... but I suggest that it's not even close to 100%
-
The WH Gen is a electrostatic generator and produces DC. The fact that the transformer gets power to the secondary circuit without the spark gap is because no DC is completely flat.
So it's no wonder that a spark gap would provide enough spikes to increase inductance in the transformer.
I bet if you plugged the WH Gen in to a power inverter you would get even more charge on C1.
-
Without a corresponding measurement of input energy, you can make no conclusions. Otherwise, all you can claim is an increase in output energy, nothing more.
-
Yes, Bill, did you try to hook up the spark gaps to your Battery charger system yet ?
Does it increase the charge in your batteries ?
What is then the COP ?
Thanks.
Regards, Stefan.
-
Well then why is the transformer even necessary? Why can't we Just measure Ein, and Eout without it, since it may be skewing the results? If the power gain is a function of the spark gap, it should work regardless of whether or not a transformer is involved.
-
When I take the spark gaps (plugs) out of my automobile i get NO POWER out of it at all! I think we may be on to something!
-
Stefan,
No, not yet, I'm still working on software changes. I'm hoping to have it tested before the show, however.
Bill
-
magnetoelastic,
Excess output energy is all I or anyone else really cares about. Harnessing excess output energy! That's the "ball game" man!
Bill
-
You are using a DC power source to drive a transformer. Obviously the power is not flat... because you get a little on the other side of the transformer. The spark gap increases the highs and lows of the power from the WH - and that causes more induction leading to more efficient energy transfer to the secondary circuit.
That's how it works and it's not overunity and it's not even an efficient power inverter.
-
Elvis,
You're "assuming" the device can't possibly be overunity even though you use words like "increase" and "more efficient energy", and I clearly show the basic process is "overunity". I clearly show there's more output ENERGY with a Carbon Arc spark gap than without.
Now, I should mention that I tested the Perrault Valves. THEY ALL tested "underunity". In other words, ordinary spark gaps NOT using Carbon Rods test "underunity" when compared to NOT using spark gaps.
The spark gap can be modelled as a nonlinear resistor. I don't want to take the next step and say this resistance could be NEGATIVE, because I don't think its NEGATIVE resistance, but a complex DC current is flowing in the circuit. The resistance is therefore always POSITIVE. These complex DC currents are considered to be "temporal" currents.
Bill
-
well I must be missing something here. And maybe you can straighten me out. :)
With your transformer connected to a dc generator you will see very little power to the secondary circuit. This is because there is no alternating curent to generate the induction needed to make the transformer work. There must be- as your experiments show - enough spikes from the WH to transform some of the energy created by the WH to the secondary circuit.
By intropducing a spark gap you are simply creating more spikes. And of course the output is a function of the materials used... mass and density all play a role in resonance. Various materials = various results. Some are better at creating the pulse needed for induction.
so what's the big deal? I'm not seeing it.