This is perfected and finalized........

Well the sonic resonator is well baked enough developed along to give a report of the advancements that have been made to improve it. And to make it conform to numerous standards of scrutiny.  And I've learned here that you will not please everyone but those of you who are electronics techs, and use LTspice I think that my final development model here and its out come will interest you to run my simulation files and analyze (see above downloads).

Consider the following based upon a DC power input of 5.29 Watts pure steady state DC.

First of all the DC signal output has been worked on and perfected into a DC signal square wave output.  The amplitude of the DC signal is 8.23 Watts.  The rms, average and peak of a square wave are the same.  And please note that the output at this point across the 120 ohm load resistor is a DC Peak signal output of 8.23 Watts.  This has not been converted to peak to peak AC in the model but I have a model I have done this with.

Also, extra energy is stored in the half wave cycle by it being extend past the 180 degree half cycle point by +50 degrees to the 230 degree point in the wave cycle.  So energy has been stored in the half wave by extension of the half cycle of 0.5 wave cycles to 0.64 wave cycles.  As can be seen in the babove LTspice wattage plot.  And you can download the model to run and verify that this is the case below.  You can easily see that the half wave in proportion to the entire wave cycle, is reaching over into the negative half cycle and so, has its half cycle period extended.

Since this is a DC output signal, the positive half cycle is the On state, and the negative half cycle is the Off state.  And so, can be viewed the same way as a digital signal.  The Period of the On state then is extended +50 degrees to the 230 degree position of the wave cycle.  So the the period of the On state of the power cycle is thus now 64% (230 degrees) of the wave cycle rather than 50% (180 degrees) of the wave cycle.  So more energy is added into the power cycle this way, and not just only in the unusual peak power output amplitude that the model demonstrates in software simulations.  The power then is stored in the wave cycle both by amplitude ~ as well as by extension of the period of the half cycle to 230 degrees.

Now there is no way with ordinary circuit concepts you are going to get a square wave output of 8.23 Watts output with only 5.29 Watts DC input from a DC power supply.  If you do the math on a purely lossless system model (theoretically 100% efficient system) you will not get a  8.23 Watts square wave calculated out of an input of 5.29 Watts DC input ~ unless there is more to the circuits concepts and principles than meets the eye.  Such as conservation of losses and restoration of those losses back into the circuit to do useful work.  And the use of electromechanical resonance.

If you convert 5.29 Watts DC to a DC Signal Peak of 5.29W*1.414 = 7.48006W in a lossless  model (and this is based upon a sine wave peak rather than a square wave).  So the rms value of the sine wave peak will be 5.29 Watts, and our rms value of our square wave is the same as its average and peak which equals 8.23 Watts.  Understand?  See?  Thats over unity.

Ok now imagine that you upscale this device into the hundreds of watts range or the kilowatts range.

Example:  Input power is 529 Watts, the output square wave power then equals 823 Watts.  And so, for lighting and heating we have a unique scenario for cost saving.

Or lets upscale this to look like this:

5290 Watt steady DC In ~ 8230 Watts DC square wave signal Out.

(By adding a capacitor in series with the output and a light bulb or heater you have a simple method of converting the DC to AC for such loads.)

So, the idea seems to hold some interesting potential especially for industrial lighting and heating cost savings.  But would be something nice to use out here in the private residential sector for our lighting and heating needs.

For industrial manufacturing facilities that use a few thousands watts per day merely for lighting, and then in the winter uses infra red space heating for large open areas.  I am sure that a good amount of cost savings can be accomplished by use of these circuits to enhance the power.  And so, I would classify these devices as "electrical power enhancement circuits".

Summed Up:

Here is how it all adds up.  After the software simulation runs the circuit's simulation the DC power input starts to become steady after 3 seconds.  So the initial charge up of the circuit is complete and the current and voltage of the power supply become steady at around 5.29 Watts steady state DC.  Now since there is no periodic wave cycle power in the power supply at this point.  The rms, average and peak power input of the power supply are all one and the same, 5.29 Watts pure DC steady state.  And so, the square wave output is likewise to the DC power input, the rms, average and peak power of the square wave are one and the same, 8.23 Watts.  So we have a power enhancement of: 2.94 Watts.

Extended Half Cycle Period:

Now its hard to tell how the extended period of the half cycle will average out in terms of the power that is placed in the extended +50 degrees past the 180 degree half cycle. 

It just so happens that 5.29 Watts / 8.23 Watts = 0.6427

When rounded off, this equals 0.64 or our extended half cycle period.

Since there appears to be a direct relationship between the square wave amplitude and the extended period of the half cycle.  I can not say that we can extend the period of the half cycle anymore.  And so, there is a limit. 

If it can be extended I do not believe that it can be extend so that the angle of the period is 270 degrees, which would reach the negative peak.  But, if it is possible to extend it more, then I suspect that it will not go past 0.7 wave cycles at most.  Perhaps 0.68 might be the limit if that amount of periodic extension can be accomplished?

It would perhaps take a super computer able to analyze and also make design changes and tweaks, to come up with some sort of improvement.  Given a standard model to begin with, the software then would analyze the circuit, change a parts unit value and analyze the results of the various changes made and tabulate the data ~ and then formulate the most efficient model from its data.  So thats what we need to happen somewheres, someday.  Its kind of hard for one person to keep track of all of the various changes and their effect and data.

Innovation:

I guess all we are going to get is baby steps here, and so, the rest is up to a whole army of researchers and university students to improve and make something out of the math of it all.

I am hoping though that someone with some Spice library models for vacuum tubes might make this into a higher powered device model.  And maybe realize a greater ratio of input to output power for use in such things as industrial electric lighting and heating.  My tube suggestion for this is the 4-65 A beam power tube.  And if anyone comes up with a LTspice library model for this particular vacuum tube, then I would like to have a copy of that to model circuits with.

I would have to say that with all of the circuit components, that would normally result in allot of losses in such a circuit.  And with a DC power input that in no way under conventional thinking can equate to a square wave output as this model demonstrates, that this model best demonstrates what some refer to as over unity.  Which in some engineering circles is a taboo and hence forbidden term.

You can download the model here and run it and who knows, somewheres, sometime ~ someone else may advance it even more.

Loading The Circuit:

As for the ways I have found to load the circuit to take power off, you can use a capacitor, a resistor or a coil or transformer.  However when you add a diode or two to rectify the output and then a filter capacitor you have immediate losses.  I believe that one of the things that happens is that the diodes pulse the half cycles and so, these pulses feed back into the transistor collector circuit of L1 and L2, etc, as a reflected wave and upset the circuits timings.  And the filter capacitor draws allot of charge current.  This does not mean that in time a remedy will not be found.  However if no remedy is ever found, then the application of the circuit is such that it will work with resistive loads such as electric lights and heaters.  But these things account for allot of our power use.  Electric heating is used in manufacturing on a daily basis and not just in the winter.

Applications:

Given enough output voltage, the circuit I believe could change the way we light our buildings particularly when using fluorescent lights that respond to higher frequencies better than they do to 60 Hz.  Some fluorescent lights can be fired up without filament heaters in each end.  Tesla did this using H.F. frequencies.

Also, in some of my models I have been able to effect high instantaneous power peaks.  Such peaks I believe would be useful with fluorescent lights and with quartz (infra red) heaters as well as with oil filled heaters that store heat in the thermal mass of the oil.  The idea of the oil heater is to use the regular 120V AC line to bring the oil up to hot, then this device can replenish heat losses with instantaneous high wattage peaks.  And so, sort of stroke the heat, and stoke it up.  While resulting in a cost savings.

However the square wave output when used in a higher voltage and higher powered model is able to flat out run a quartz or oil filled heater and bring it up to hot, and then can be switched, manually or in a self automated manner to provide instantaneous power peaks which is more applicable with oil filled heaters than with quartz types (the instantaneous peak mode I mean).

And well, the device can be used with incandescent light bulbs also.

Since the device works on a DC power supply input, in an emergency the device can be powered by a few automotive batteries and so, provide light and heat.

Since the device can be used with batteries it then would make a great addition to solar electric systems since the device can run straight off of the storage battery bank.  And so, enhance the lighting and heating capability of solar electric systems making them more efficient.

The margin of efficiency that my low powered simulation model under discussion here demonstrates is equal to:

8.23 Watts / 5.29 Watts = 1.55:1 

Now to calculate the improvement:

5.29 Watts / 8.23 Watts = 0.6427 ~ equal to the extended period of the half cycle

0.64 wave cycle - 0.5 wave cycle = 0.14

0.14*100 =14%

14% then equals the power enhancement improvement that this model would provide to a solar electric system.

More Software Analysis:

I have seen applications written for LTspice by hobbyist that run in the program.  My thoughts is that someone might become familiar with these circuits.  Or a team of researchers, may write an application for use in LTspice, or an whole new Spice software, that can analyze this circuit (and this circuit only)  and self adjust and tweak around the parts values so that the software can come up with a design with the best figures of Input versus Output.  And such things as transistor or vacuum tube max voltage and current ratings not be exceeded.

Conclusion:

I believe in sharing things that are important with others.  And I know allot of us study and try hard to accomplish things with regards to potential over unity or alternative energy innovations.  And so, more minds working on somethings leads to something in the world sooner.  And who knows, someone may be working on something that we can not conceive of at the moment that will achieve something even more for us when combined with these ideas.

Then again, we may not ever find anything else that seems for the moment to be feasible at least in software analysis.  And I know I don't have any 1 Henry to 0.5 Henry transformers at the moment to prototype a test bench model with, but someone out there may.

I of course do hope that something else will come along somewheres to help round out the world of alternative energy concepts.  And whether or not their ideas can be combined with mine for a more complete and effective concept.  Well, is not the point, if someone else has something that is working or at least can be modeled in software, then I hope that their innovations also will add to the world of things that we need.

More than anything, we need people to become focused on something that appears to be feasible in software analysis.  And so, allow as many as can and want to, to do those analysis themselves and so, pool together.  And then as a world wide team of interest, we can make test and if all goes well, we will have something that I hope will work on the test bench.  An who knows who will be the first to get all of the parts together to test it all?  Sure wished today that I had the parts to test it all.

If I could have a transformer to test these circuits with, I would like one of those new toroid core power supply and audio transformer types  with a 1 Henry primary and a 0.5 Henry secondary.  And there is a new core material that is used with audio transformers that consist of powdered ferrite with piezio electric crystal powder impregnated into the powdered ferrite core.  It is said that this core enhances the audio quality and so, I wonder what it might do in this circuit?  I wonder if the piezio electric crystal might be capable of adding its electrical energy to the sum of energies?

Ok, when I saw that my concepts worked in software simulations, I thought then that I had accomplished it.  But I had to work at it all to get something substantial out of it.  And so, days it looked all good and then days it did not.

And so, I concluded early in my testing that if all I could get out of this is enhancements for electric lighting and heating then thats perhaps what we need the most at this time.  And so, though the device fails when I attempt to convert the output to DC for obtaining an energy efficient power supply it does shine with potential for use with lighting and heating. 

So, when I realized that my square wave output held up to the idea of a notable and demonstrable energy enhancement.  I was satisfied with that.  I did realize in the end what I was looking for.  And its hard to argue with the results when it comes to us in a square wave output in watts where the rms, average and peak power of the square wave are all one and the same.

LTspice IV analysis then demonstrates that the over unity device concept works in software, and is feasible in software analysis.  And anyone can run the simulation for themselves and analyze the DC input versus the square wave output power ratio.  And you can download those files here at in this post.  See above.

If anyone is interested in what an actual square wave looks like, and how even the small deviations from squareness exhibited by the output of the above circuit affect the claim of "overunity", you can check that other thread.

Dear D.R. Jackson,

TinselKoala, who others on this forum used to know as "Al" is a skeptic of anything O.U. and a Hoaxer.  Please do not let him dissuade you or bother you too much.

Keep up the good work!

Kind regards,

Bruce

P.S.

I was sure that someone would come along who would not be satisfied with a square wave with a little ripple, and maybe a so slight deviation in the base width of the wave compared to the top width of the wave.

I knew that someone like that would come along.  However, those who have been in electronics a long time, know enough to know that slight deviations do not stop the circuit from performing to close enough specifications such that we would never dream of building and testing and hopefully perfect a test bench model. Etc. etc.

And as to your comments in my other post about this device and the amount of significant figures that the software computes to power to be, up to 5, 6 or seven figures past the decimal point.  In practise we usually just round those off to three figures.  Maybe two significant figures past the decimal.  And as to why someone wants to be so precise in measuring every little figure down to 5, 6 of 7 figures past the decimal, well you can do that if you want.  But most of the time we do not.

One thing you did not comment on, was the unusual fact about the period of the power half cycle being increased to 0.64 wave cycles (to 230 degrees).  So how do you account for that and the power in that extra 14% of added period?  Can't explain that can you?

Anyways such comments as those made about these matters will not deter anyone who sees what is up; from want to examine this all the more.

And if the individual thinks that we have the time to answer such trivial questions about minute details about imperfections of wave form and about a string of significant figures past the decimal.  Well as for such trivial things, no one has the time to waste to pay attention to such an individual.  So post such trivial comments all you want.  The sum of them, does not out weigh the sum of the findings of this circuit that everyone can analyze.

After having read more of you comments at my other post, I thought I would tell people what you are up to.  And so, enjoy yourself all you want.  We will keep up our work and stay on course, despite you.

I read their other comments in my other post and concluded that all of their preoccupation over significant figures concluded that they were a nut.

I will not be dissuaded.

I have one more comment to post about this individual.

Thank You
D.R. Jackson

There a few others also.
Paul.

If done correctly, power measurements are valid for determining COP.

In the case presented here where the claimed COP is 8.33W/5.29W = 1.57:1, an error has been made.

With pulsed DC power, the RMS power is the average power over one cycle (assuming the wave form is periodic).

Input power (RMS) = 5.29W RMS (no dispute here, will assume correct)

Output power (RMS) = 8.23Wp x .64 (duty cycle) = 5.27W RMS

COP = Po/Pi = 5.27/5.29 = 0.996:1

Conclusion: The circuit is clearly underunity, and LTSpice is running correctly. Interpretation of the output data is in error.

Two oversights:

1) Duty Cycle must be taken into account for any measurement, and for pulsed DC the RMS power is the average power. If the wave form is periodic (i.e. repeating consistently) one need only compute one cycle. The RMS power is: Po(peak) [Ton/period].

2) From the above it was noted that the COP was nearly 1:1. In theory it should have been exactly 1:1, but due to rounding errors etc, it was 0.996:1. This is not a big concern, but the point that should be noted, is in the real world this figure would have been significantly less, perhaps 0.8:1 or worse. The reason the circuit presented here exhibits a COP of 1:1 is because no real world finite resistances are present in the circuit. Every inductor or transformer has a real world DC resistance, and if introduced in the circuit, the simulation would clearly show a reduced COP, well below 1:1.

Regards,
.99

"RMS
RMS is defined as the value for a composite signal - which emits the same energy in a load than a dc signal of the same value would have.
This means that 5Watts DC heats up a resistor to the same temperature - as a 5Vrms AC signal would do. (assuming ideal resistor).
Even if you have for time T x 0.64 8.xxW - which heats up the resistor - you have for the rest of the periode T x 0.36 no power - no heating - the resistor would cool down - emit energy.
Because the resistor has some thermal capacity - it will have a resulting temperature t - which corresponds to the 5.39W feed in. This temperature is defined by the ratio its feed with energy."

I know this pretty well.  I hope this does not post twice here since the first time I posted it I lost it.  So this is a second try at responding.

Ok, you did not mention that the rms, average and peak value of a squarewave are one and the same.  And so. the rms value of 8.23 Watts is 8.23 Watts, the average value is 8.32 Watts, and the peak value is also 8.23 Watts.

Go look that up at Wikipedia.  And the 8.23 watts square wave makes this a little different ball games doesn't it?