Author Topic: Understanding electricity in the TPU. (Read 364307 times)

wattsup · « **Reply #720 on:** August 14, 2010, 11:10:16 PM »

Quote from: EMdevices on August 14, 2010, 03:59:11 AM

@wattsup

When the TPU replication effort started a few years ago, we asked all these questions about batteries and did the calculations, and we showed it was not possible, the volume is not there. Even SM says so in the videos. I'm puzzled why you're entertaining these same notions again.

We did the calculations with AC 100 watt bulbs. Redo it with 12vdc bulbs and provide a pulsed DC source above 50 hz and let me know what the results will be then. He forced us to calculate 100watts/110vac when he was running at 12vdc 25 watts driven at 16vdc. 

Here's some answers to using 10 light bulbs instead of 8:

1) The TPU voltage surges can burn all the 8 bulbs at once, ... costly ! SM mentions these surges.

SM always had the right excuses for every occasion. Funny, he knows all the answers except those that really matter. He is a master of turning events to his advantage. Sorry but there are no surges otherwise we would have seen them also with 10 bulbs. Just an excuse to not show at 8.

2) The TPU has produced 1000 V before when more power is drawn from the power lines by his house, (middle of summer, lots of AC units are on)

I have no evidence anywhere about this 1000v.

3) The number ten is easier to multiply with any other number .... easy math!

All numbers are easy when you know how to count.

4) More light bulbs lit up make a bigger impression on the viewer then fewer ones but slightly brighter.

You see, his 10 bulbs has convinced you to accept the lower lumens. Exactly where he wants your mindset to be during a demo. Now replace those with 12vdc bulbs driven at 16vdc and the hook is set and the fish is pulled in.

My advice, don't focus only on the videos, listen to the words in the videos as well, read the engineering reports, but most importantly EXPERIMENT

Again, SM wants you to concentrate on what he is saying and not really on what he is really showing you. Buddy buddy I have been through all the explanations you have given.

EM

Thanks for your post. I answered in bold.

I have a question for you then. If the SM TPU is pulling power from the HV lines and he is making us think they are drawing power from the Earths Magnetic Field, where is the difference between faking it with batteries or faking it with HV lines? You still have the same base of trickery.

Another question? If he is using the HV lines, is it possible that the only energy he can get from it is just reactive power, meaning it is enough to hold a volt meter at a certain voltage but as soon as you put a load it falls to an RMS value around 5vdc.? The rest of the device showing bulbs is again hidden battery driven.

Added:

Seems like the bold feature does not work on Firefox. Also not being able to post more then 2 images per post. lol

sparks · « **Reply #721 on:** August 15, 2010, 06:01:26 AM »

If your definition of current is the amount of electrons moving by a point then of course current can not precede charged mass motion. What moves an electron in an electric field. Does the electron respond to a force from afar or does it respond to a current flow. The ampere is a measure of the number of electrons moved by a point over a defined time period. It does not take into account the velocity of the individual electrons moving past this point. Just the number over a period of time. An electron moving at realitivistic velocities is treated no differently than an electron moving past this point at a snails pace. One electron is in a slow moving current while the other is in a fast moving current. This is not a current of mass it is a current of whatever creates charge. The current flowing into or out of the electron becomes relavent to the currents flowing into and out of the electrons amassed in the plate. Like a whirlpool moves in a river the electron is accelerated in a vector. Now we discharge the capacitor or whatever anode we are using into a second capacitor or inductor to get it out of the way. In so doing we create a magnetic field that bends the accelerated electron path so it doesnt smash into the anode. The electron slows down while it bends and in so doing creates electromagnetic waves or photons. How fast the electron slows down will determine what frequency photon you emit. Uv is a good one. Uv can ionize electrons from air molecules allowing for alot of free electrons awaiting the next pulse across the capacitor to accelerate them. An interesting side effect from this acceleration and deacceleration of the electron is that any thermal photons trapped in the atomic structure undergoing ionization go radiant. These photons can then induce currents in conductors not connected to the accelerator at all. The wavelength of the emitted photons can be lengthened by any number of mechanisms. Tesla did it by creating standing waves in trasmission lines and driving dc motors and SM seems to have taken the rf and converted it into elf. Being familiar with television conversion of rf to audio must have helped him in this process.

EMdevices · « **Reply #722 on:** August 15, 2010, 07:44:46 AM »

@ sparks,
I'm glad to see you do understand the physics.

@ wattsup

I don't think Steven Mark's intentions were to FAKE a TPU by tapping into the magnetic frequency emanating from the power lines behind his house.

I suspect he knows where the power comes from but certainly does not share it with us in the videos.

By saying his energy comes from the power lines, I am not accusing him or his device as being FAKE. It's not easy to make a high Q receiver tuned to those frequencies, and he is definitely using acoustic vibrations as the high Q mechanism.

Quote

We did the calculations with AC 100 watt bulbs. Redo it with 12vdc bulbs and provide a pulsed DC source above 50 hz and let me know what the results will be then. He forced us to calculate 100watts/110vac when he was running at 12vdc 25 watts driven at 16vdc.

So your saying his demo light bulbs are 12 V bulbs? I don't agree. But yes, if he did have some sort of fake bulbs then yes you can fake the video with hidden batteries, but not the people present at the demos who touch those bulbs and tested those bulbs, or who plugged in the TV.

I see you're asking about reactive power. You are correct, in most cases when you load a tuned loop the voltage will drop, it's all based on the impedance mismatch between source and load. However, if you have a very low source impedance and you connect a high impedance load you won't see much of a voltage drop. In most tuned loops you don't connect the load to the main resonant coil, but to another coil that has one or two turns to step the impedance down (source impedance) or step the load impedance up. This way you don't disturb the main resonant tank and lower it's Q.

To answer your question, you can receive REAL power not just REACTIVE power.
It's reactive power only if you don't load it down with a resistive load.

EM

EMdevices · « **Reply #723 on:** August 16, 2010, 07:53:30 AM »

@Loner,

yes, I believe the TPUs are very high Q receivers, normal LC tuned loops might have a Q of around 100, but if you use mechanical vibration you can increase the Q into the 1000 level and even 10 000 levels. I did some calculations elsewhere on all this theory.

Answers:
1) I'm sure the TPUs are somewhat lossy, they seem to over heat.
2) I'm not sure what effects your refer too, but 5 kHz, 830 Volts can easily create those sparks we see in the videos.
3) It's neither Longitudinal or Transverse, we are just coupling to a magnetic field pointing down into the ground (from my experiments at the mansion, there seems to also be a horizontal component) We are basically in the near field of these very low frequency TEM waves that travel on the power lines, or rather resonate on those lines.

EM

sigma16 · « **Reply #724 on:** August 16, 2010, 04:18:42 PM »

What "IF" the TPU is not just a receiver for EM fields? If it is the "real deal", how might it work? Might there be some other way to induce EMF in a conductor than by moving a magnet across it?

giantkiller · « **Reply #725 on:** August 16, 2010, 10:03:11 PM »

This is where I am going...

Quote from: sigma16 on August 16, 2010, 04:18:42 PM

What "IF" the TPU is not just a receiver for EM fields? If it is the "real deal", how might it work? Might there be some other way to induce EMF in a conductor than by moving a magnet across it?

sigma16 · « **Reply #726 on:** August 16, 2010, 10:11:44 PM »

Quote from: Loner on August 16, 2010, 08:58:50 PM

Sigma16, what a loaded question! Were I to technically answer that with proven theory, I would not only be describing the "possible" nature of a TPU, but would be edging into areas that very few even wish to accept.

I'll refer to your little "experiment", if you don't mind. Putting it simply, the amount of "induced" power available from your experimental coil would actually be greater than the input power required to create the effect. Of course, I can't prove that, and have no data to back it up, nor do I have any such coils wound, etc. etc. etc. The induction I am "theorizing" about is NOT EM induction, per say, so what more can I say? No-one will even test this, never mind try to work with it. All I'll add is, it's freaky stuff, not to be taken for granted. Is this what you are talking about?

It's a question to make people think.

In the process of "induction" you are moving a magnetic field relative to a conductor. You can reverse this and move the inductor relative to the magnetic field. The third solution is the one that everyone misses because they are so very smart (and quick to tell you so): move the medium relative to the magnetic field and conductor. Even the TPU has to have a magnetic field somewhere. Steven even stated in one of the videos that the device used "Electromagnetic Fields" like those we use everyday. All three are "EM induction". You just have to look past the normal boring stuff.

Edit
Before everyone starts spouting off, this form of induction has been discussed since at least 1960 by Harold Aspden, probably much eaarlier unbeknownst to us. Aspden calls it "vacuum spin induction".

http://www.aspden.org/books/Asp/1825.htm

forest · « **Reply #727 on:** August 16, 2010, 11:13:56 PM »

is Earth rotating within magnetic field or both are rotating in the same manner ? I don't know.If somebody know ,he is very lucky.however in both cases any ripple on magnetic field will look strange compared to non rotating point of view

giantkiller · « **Reply #728 on:** August 16, 2010, 11:45:42 PM »

While reading the Aspeden paper I see that he spends a lot of time regurjitating known rules. To combat the knowledgable who know the rules?
He could have stated this in a more concise note. Stuff gets buried deep because the author buries it in relationship building explainations for their colleages. Too bad. I understand what he is saying about the Zitterbewegung and going against the status quo takes huzpah. So it has to be done correctly and politically correct.
After all, anybody that has an new idea is crazy. In all the men that had great ideas they are now famous but rejected in their own time. Guess Dr. Aspden is heading in the correct direction according to history.

Let's shake this planet and some others too.

The good Dr talks about the mechanistic same as Reich did.
I like the library scene. Just like Alexander's.

sparks · « **Reply #729 on:** August 17, 2010, 04:50:27 AM »

@Sigma

The true motion of the Earth relative to the cosmic background radiation is millions of miles an hour. A radio receiver tuned into the cmbr has to retune when it looks at the cmbr in another direction due to the doppler effect. Since cmbr is said to be the left over photon energy of the big bang it is everywhere all the time just sitting there glowing away and this little rock we're stuck on is moving through this seemingly inexhaustible power scource at millions of miles an hour. Say we are able to produce an electrical current with it's accompanying magnetic field that truly is static. Doesnt move along with the Earth but just stays put. A conductor downwind then moves through this magnetic field at millions of miles per hour. There is sure to be a little gain from such a movement.

sparks · « **Reply #730 on:** August 17, 2010, 07:03:03 AM »

Loner

If you read Tesla's patents on the Magnifying transmitter you start to see why the Tower came tumbling down. Say you have a watt second appearing as a wattnanosecond. You would have a 1 billion watt transfer of energy from your system to wherever. Heat anything with one billion watts and it goes away. Nature appears to do this little trick when it creates a blackhole. The blackhole creates an event horizon. It creates an event horizon because it is storing the energy that creates time in modified space. When and if it decides to return the energy that manifests time then you get stuff like big bangs going off. Imagine being able to deconstruct the hoover dam in a nanosecond. You do it so fast the water cant even move. You would have a wall of water just standing there and then wham.

wings · « **Reply #731 on:** August 17, 2010, 10:30:33 AM »

Quote from: forest on August 16, 2010, 11:13:56 PM

is Earth rotating within magnetic field or both are rotating in the same manner ? I don't know.If somebody know ,he is very lucky.however in both cases any ripple on magnetic field will look strange compared to non rotating point of view

Tombe:
"I. The Earthâ€™s magnetic field does rotate with the Earth. We can see this
clearly due to the fact that the Earthâ€™s magnetic axis is not aligned exactly
with the Earthâ€™s rotational axis. However, the Michelson-Gale experiment of
1925 indicates to us that the medium in which electromagnetic radiation is
embedded, may not be fully partaking in the Earthâ€™s rotation, if at all."

http://www.wbabin.net/science/tombe17.pdf

Magregus · « **Reply #732 on:** August 17, 2010, 11:00:53 AM »

You can get power from a magnet you just need to know how. Try thinking outside the box.

http://yfrog.com/9ftpubj

sigma16 · « **Reply #733 on:** August 17, 2010, 03:38:36 PM »

Quote from: Loner on August 17, 2010, 05:20:00 AM

For the first time, I am truly questioning the safety of such a thing, as once fully "Charged", and especially if large "rotational" forces are built up, then collapse of the bias field would be a NO-NO. I would figure the response time of the energy output as "Too Fast to Compensate for".

Alternative energy and space propulsion research is not for the "timid" or "weak of heart".

sparks · « **Reply #734 on:** August 20, 2010, 05:27:02 AM »

Tesla use to build tanks that had millions of horsepower in them. If you tip a tank over that has millions of horses running back and forth in it and they all run in the same direction this is called a stampede. You dont want to get in the way of a million horse stampede. You dont need to mutate mass or rapidly oxidize a fuel as long as you can turn highfrequency events of miniscule individual power into low frequency events of high power. That is basically what a plant does. It inputs ultraviolet and stores the energy in chemical bonds. You will notice that a plant like an animal is a low power machine that takes up a shitload of room is inefficent and exists in a very limited temperature realm. Water is another thing. It absorbs infrared the most common form of electromagnetic radiation on Earth and just gets hot. As it is heated the thermal photons it admits change frequency. Warm water emits far infrared frequencys. If we can tune into some xray galaxy a billion trillion miles away we should be able to tune into some warm water a couple of feet away. The antennae has to be so tiny weeny to grab the near infrared frequencies that it is being promoted because the nanotechnology industry can hook up with the fire burners and convert thermal photons of near infrared into dc. Meanwhile we have a superabundant scource of radiation of thermal photons at far infrared frequencys that are being totally ignored. Why would the power and communications industries ignore the most prevalent electromagnetic radiaition bandwith on in and around the face of the Earth. Because it doesnt burn you and light up or go bang bang. It is all over the fucking planet in the water under the water into the Earth. No gotta drill down and get that real hot geothermal. Because it is hot. Cold stuff longer wavelength. Hot stuff shorter wavelength. Hot stuff not so much around sporatic transmission varying bandwidth no good when it rains snows or you dont have acres of land to put down acres of melted sand. Warm or cold air. Lots of it around. Longer wavelength. Available night day and weekends. Requires no land.

News:

User Menu

Author Topic: Understanding electricity in the TPU. (Read 364307 times)

wattsup

Re: Understanding electricity in the TPU.

sparks

Re: Understanding electricity in the TPU.

EMdevices

Re: Understanding electricity in the TPU.

EMdevices

Re: Understanding electricity in the TPU.

sigma16

Re: Understanding electricity in the TPU.

giantkiller

Re: Understanding electricity in the TPU.

sigma16

Re: Understanding electricity in the TPU.

forest

Re: Understanding electricity in the TPU.

giantkiller

Re: Understanding electricity in the TPU.

sparks

Re: Understanding electricity in the TPU.

sparks

Re: Understanding electricity in the TPU.

wings

Re: Understanding electricity in the TPU.

Magregus

Re: Understanding electricity in the TPU.

sigma16

Re: Understanding electricity in the TPU.

sparks

Re: Understanding electricity in the TPU.