Lost trac with you, like most others, and pity you the most with yourself!

Why don't you just explain what attributes of the two-stroke engine in the clip you showed relate to resonance like I asked you?

Brad:

I never once claimed that the ICE it self was in resonance. What i said that there were various resonant systems that exist within an ICE that improve both performance and efficiency.
Is this not what the whole !resonance! ordeal is about?--showing how resonance can increase efficiency. You stated that there was no resonance at all associated with an ICE,and i provided the resonant systems that do indeed reside within a two stroke ICE.

I get it now, you can use resonant cavity systems to improve cylinder charging and cylinder scavenging.  Now if you only said that in a clear and effective way when you first mentioned the stuff about an ICE and resonance then there wouldn't be a trail of 200 postings to debate it now, would there?

Nonetheless, this stuff is only slightly related to the standard engineering and scientific definition of resonance for electrical circuits or the wine glass.

So far,your track record and knowledge is far to low to be making any such judgement on who is correct ,and who is not.

When are you going to stop the ridiculous trash talking?  The simple fact is for years around here I get referred to as one of the "smart people" in a somewhat cynical fashion when people are on the defensive.  The simple truth is that for years around here that people respect that I can quite often bring insights and offer value and analyze things that your average forum experimenter can't do.  And I am perfectly honest about my limitations also.

So you are just making yourself look like a stupid jackass when you trash talk like that.  Your behaviour is absolutely awful and you have shown the world your true colours and they aren't pretty at all.

Your wisest course of action would be to stop this foolishness now.

MileHigh

   What I want to know is in a JT. is the series impedance of the two elements
 at a minimum  and the parallel impedance at a maximum?
    Poynt99 or Koala or someone with a bit of a clue will know this.
             John.

Brad:

Can you not see what you yourself is writing?. Look at what your saying.
All that definition does is describe an attribute of resonance.  It has very limited scope.  It doesn't even touch what the two wine glass questions are all about.  So, to answer those two questions you have to go deeper and truly understand what resonance is and how it works for the wine glass.
Quote: It was just a "learning tool" for you so that you could see that you could answer questions with concepts only, and not with specifics

You want the specifics understanding of resonance,but described by using non specific concept's.

There is absolutely no conflict in what I am saying.  So you are either trash talking again or you have to work on your English comprehension skills.

You still bring up the Cool Joule circuit but it has already been discussed.  "Miller capacitance" does not explain it.  You have to do a timing diagram and really explain it, not do a "drive by" fake explanation.  Like I told you before, you would be sliced to pieces on any serious electronics enthusiast forum.  You have to teach yourself to effectively communicate a concept.

I can't comment on the evolution in the efficiency of two-stroke engines because I know next to nothing about that and I never claimed I knew anything about it.  It's not the subject of this thread.  We are talking about true resonance and a hypothetical Joule Thief in resonance.

You can rant and rave and stomp your feet and turn blue and trash talk and it won't make a single difference.  Give it your best shot at the wine glass questions and to do that you should do some research and stop and think about it and come up with the proper answers.  Because right now you are incapable of answering the two questions about the wine glass.  Instead of useless trash talk that just makes you look very ugly, you should be embracing the challenge.

MileHigh

You are just a hapless biased groupie Chet.

@MH and others

Wine glass shmine glass. You ask about resonance without defining the resonance type. Audible resonance, resonance to the point of fracture, resonance to the point of being reduced to dust and there are others as well. If you are only looking for a universal answer, then the wine glass will resonate at every known frequency, it is only that not all the atoms in the wine glass will resonate at the same frequency. That's what resonance is.

If the wine glass could act like a cameleon changing colors as you sweep frequencies you would see colors appearing in some spaces and disappearing at others. Every frequency will have an effect.

Appropriately the process is an analog to voting. A candidate rises and talks and we ask all the atoms in the glass, "how many of you vote for this candidate?". Not many, so bring in candidate #2, #5000, #199,999 and so on. Each one will attract a certain number of votes, but only a few will really get the greatest votes. But unlike real elections where the winner is above the 50% mark, in our present state of technology and perceptions we accept that the greatest number of votes will never be more then 3-5%, but that is more then enough to see the effects that we see on our benches of all those votes and we all raise our hands exclaiming, "we have a leader". But big deal man. And as usual, thereafter we will only concentrate on the leader and the number of votes but quickly forget the voters themselves. The important question to ask is "What are those majority resonant atoms (voters) trying to tell you?". Like true politics this question is never asked because they rarely care about the people once in power (hehehe), never considered, never enters your mind. It's just resonance, with nothing to say, nothing to show, nothing to learn from. It is only resonance so move on.

The question the way you asked it is in fact an intellectual trap so you using this as a measuring stick to determine who knows what is just disingenuous and does not become you at all. You have done way better then this and that is why I and many here have always respected your EE acumen while also realizing over the years that you also are badly handicapped in assisting anyone past the Standard EE to enter the OU spectrum. But this is OK man. We all have our strengths. If I started to open up a little more you would be pulling out your hairs trying to cope with where to store these new notions of energy. And I respect that difficulty because it was very difficult for me as well going from the Standard EE mode into this really expanding world of Spin Conveyance.

You know I have a high tolerance for precision and I will look into anything until it makes sense. That's what I get paid for in my water treatment profession. When others cannot find the problem, they call me, even some of my competitors and all of my suppliers. I have proven more then once that I can find faults in many devices. I only exercised the same diligence towards EE and soon found it failed and failed and failed again. The measuring was not the problem. Nor the formulas. Unfortunately for OUers, EE uses the electron and the field in everything. So for OUers, the base EE concepts should be considered as wrong but not the data. The data is always priceless but only if you know exactly how it was derived. That's why I'm asking for the full wire amps table data. How was it derived? Not the final amps. That tells me nothing because you are leaving all the other factors as variables that mean nothing. There is no such thing as variable wire. A wire is a wire OK. When they did these tests they used a length of wire. What was the length, voltage applied, amps applied? How can there not be this information in a world that has info up to our arses. We need this information otherwise it has to be done to know it once and for all. Anyone who can find this will have found a key item in our OU toolbox.

You first understand the maximum amount of power your wire can output. Let's say the wire in your secondary coil has a rated maximum power output of 200 watts before the wire collapses. You then do resonance works and quickly see that even though you are at a high resonant point showing high scope peaks, the actual loadable power is 5 watts. Congratulations, for the first time in EE history you can now equate your output in terms of a percentage of active atoms in your coil. In this case a whopping 2.5% of your wire is active and you just invented a new basis called Resonance Optimization because now you have a comparative basis. So a new science is born and that is, "how can we work with copper wire to increase  the percentage of active atoms" and we can then spend critical time on these questions. But if you think resonance is just resonance, then good luck taking step 2. You will never get there. So if you need ways to do this, just ask. 

You all, including you @MH have no clue man. All you know is what is in between those cement walls that have been erected to keep your mind in league with the majors. If I asked you to give me a precise atomic explanation of resonance where the famous electron and the field do something somehow to cause such a high rise in voltage (resonance) all while those electrons are whizzing along and the field is churning everything up and up, what would it be? hahaha Don't even try because I will have to take out my violin to accompany you while I am really a classical guitar player. The most basic precepts are missing from EE, missing or better said ignored or more conveniently set aside as a hot issue so techies will never consider what's really going on in our coils. I have recently shown and will show more about Half Coil Syndrome and soon will show Coil Bypass that I could never have realized under standard EE. You just cannot because EE is clouded on all sides with unrealistic constructs. 

In a few hundred paragraphs, I can render all of your present causational concepts of EE obsolete. In a few days, the field and the electron would already be in a place in your mind that automatically deploys simultaneous comparatives of EE and this new concept and your mind will start to tally the SC wins and always losses on the EE side. This is what happens when a new "working" construct hits the beaches of EE Island. The inhabitants of this island who are long isolated while they never see it as isolation, start to realize there is a world away from this island and it works and it makes thousands of times more sense in every effect that we will realize.

So be very careful before you dismiss anything and especially the guys here that do the bench work and are here for OU activities should never be exposed to this type of exchange, that is, if your intent is to educate, or demean, or using parcels of each. OU bench guys are rare. How many out of 7 billion? Surely there are more priceless diamonds around then those guys so they should be considered as more precious then a diamond, some in the rough, some more polished, yep some really cracked up or tainted or tinted and some.........even fake.

So you then define your maximum car speed. That is great to know because now you can relate your present speed as a percentage of total power to speed capability. Like Scotty yelling at Kirk, "Captain the Dylithium crystals are only at 13%". These are the signals  or signs resonance is trying to tell us. Y'a y'a lot's of volts because there always has to be a line from source to load but those atoms are twitching real fast (higher voltage output) but the active line in the wire is so thin there is no amps. Resonance is trying to tell you OK man, you have a good number of us in a row but be are still a very small minority so you NEED TO FIND WAYS TO CONVINCE OTHER ATOMS TO BE ACTIVE AS WELL. In this regard, I can help as well. But I cannot do it all and spoon feeding you guys is not an option. 

You and all here need to be very critical of everything you think you know. All these talks so full of present certitude is just a joke where serious men take it very seriously to be fact.

Here is a fact. When Tesla invented AC, he just proved electron flow (EF) is impossible. You cannot have EF if you have AC. The simple reason is your neutral is always grounded so at every half cycle when the hot side is supposed to alternate to the other wire (neutral) you just created a short circuit. So simple but during the next 10 decades, not a peep on this very simple fact. There is no alternation. The alternation HAD TO BE INTRODUCED IN ORDER TO SELL YOU THE EF CONSTRUCT. Take that one to the bank because it is worth its letters in gold. But just by chance, AC can be perfectly explained with SC because it has no moving electrons, only spinning, swaying, swinging, staying, showing and shooting nuclei that always stay in the same place in the wire but convey signals from one to the other down the wire. So they can have one HOT wire changing nuclei swing direction while never causing a short circuit on the neutral side. Based on this simple bit of info, this should already have made you fall on the sofa and ready for that high priced psychiatrist because of course it will be painful for many to absorb. My Half Coil Syndrome video #1 explains how AC works in our wires. We think the negative part of the waveform makes current flow backwards but it does not. That's what we should call impossible. But on the contray, we believe the impossible as fact and then wonder why our toys don't go beyond our designs.

Ya ya I know long post, lot's of words, sounds crazy so just forget this and move on right. hahaha Little do you guys know.

But just to say something else. @MH, I still have to thank you and @verpies and @Poynt99 and @TK and other dedicated EEers here who have still provided the basic notions. I have passed this level into a new level and am looking for ways to show this that will not create undue misunderstandings. It is not easy. I am not an academic or a teacher to know how best to prepare this so I am just doing my best as I go along. I need my personal Maxwell to churn up some new formulas. Please do not try to "set me straight". It is pointless because you will never be able to remove SC from my being. Not with all the rediscovery it is providing and the potential it has to change the world. Just take what I say with a grain of salt. Let some of it sink in slowly. Use your visual mind and put those small actors in their positions and yell "action" and let them show you in your mind how things work. If you cannot do that with your present constructs, then you know there is a problem because human logic is where all this came from. Humans can be wrong for centuries while they munch on their Big Macs so being wrong is not that bad. It's just not good enough to migrate to OUville.

wattsup

I consider getting kicked off of EF the same as being banned from Peswiki...it is a badge of honor and shows that you actually have some intelligence.


Bill

Brad:

If your English is fine how come you say "meaning's" when you should say "meanings?"  The joke is your "explanation" for the operation of the Cool Joule, which you avoided mentioning.  Yes, you are going to wait for the answers.  Karma is a biatch considering you brought that one onto yourself.  However, you can use that as an opportunity to teach yourself instead of being spoon fed the answers.

I can't resist commenting on this doozy from you:

The resonant frequency of a wine glass is determined by the value of the resistance in the system as a whole,where that resistance is seen as acting against/or limiting the frequency of the oscillations of the wine glass.

You are basically saying this,"The resonant frequency of a wine glass is determined by ... the frequency of the oscillations of the wine glass."

Take note again of what I said to you:  You have to teach yourself to effectively communicate a concept.

MileHigh