Author Topic: Joule Thief 101 (Read 947681 times)

ramset · « **Reply #840 on:** March 11, 2016, 02:08:27 PM »

Mags
I brought you a Thing...if you haven't seen this thing ,,,your gonna Luv it

thanks to Franco for posting it .

http://www.lafucina.it/2014/09/01/esperimento-acqua-e-suono/

takes the salt shaker sound pattern vid to the next level..I wonder if cavitated water [zillion fine bubbles] in an aquarium
or rain drops in an aquarium ?? would show the salt shaker waves you posted in 3 D ...or maybe smoke in an aquarium ??

what a wild place we live in !!

MileHigh · « **Reply #841 on:** March 11, 2016, 04:43:50 PM »

Quote from: tinman on March 11, 2016, 05:53:33 AM

Your continual insistance of everyone being wrong, while you have provided nothing in the way of answers, is now considered as nothing but unfounded babble.

As you offer no counter argument, that is backed up with proof, you are seen to be no better than those that also try to peddle free energy devices for self gain.

You are a phoney MH--thats all you are, and not worthy of anymore of my time.
You provide endless talk, but you never back up your own claims.

Brad.

This is just a bunch of sour grapes from a sore loser. I am not insisting on anything, I was just telling you that your responses were wrong. You have said a ton of stuff in this thread that was babble, and you were told straight up that it was babble. That's much better than being in a continuous "affirmation environment" no matter what you say or do. That just coddles you and makes you comfortably numb.

More whining and complaining about no counter-argument. When you don't know something you are used to being told the answer within 15 minutes of not getting it. There is no instant answer, there is no multiple choice, there is no trophy for every single child on every single team in the soccer league. Instead you have to study and work it out yourself.

Calling me a "phony" is just another cop-out to make you feel better. Brad isn't wrong, he's just dealing with a phony - my ass. The endless talk has come from you. Instead of having a debate like a rational person, all that you could do was insist that you were right on just about every point, or call me a liar, even if it meant you had to say the same thing 20 times over. You are so used to being coddled, that hearing the straight goods from someone was enough to make you freak out.

Quote

Time to move on,as most of us have a grasp on what resonance is,and how it can reduces losses/increase efficiency's in all manor of different systems.

You clearly don't have a grasp on what resonance is in a wine glass. Resonance is not some kind of "magic increasing efficiency effect" like you are trying to allude to. These things have to be evaluated on a case-by-case basis. And I don't give a rat's ass about the speed of the vehicle and I would not be surprised if your "missing ingredient" actually turns out to be phony baloney like I already told you. There is no point in bringing up the same thing over and over.

If you want to take another shot at answering the wine glass questions, go ahead. If they remain unanswered, they will be answered later.

MileHigh

MileHigh · « **Reply #842 on:** March 11, 2016, 05:03:16 PM »

Quote

Although simple,it is incomplete,and a determination of the car's top speed cannot be made from the information provided as MH has clearly stated.
You can see he has only included frictional forces,while leaving out one other force that is vital in determining the top speed of the vehicle. This missing force provides the needed information about the environment in which the car will be traveling in,and without it,the determination cannot be made.

I will give you an example of Brad's potential phony baloney, retarded logic, whatever you want to call it.

The "one other force that is vital in determining the top speed of the vehicle" is gravity. If the car is on a downhill slope, it will have a higher top speed compared to if the car is on a flat surface. If the car is on an uphill slope, it will have a lower top speed compared to if the car is on a flat surface.

Wow, such profound insights - NOT. That would be a laughable "MileHigh is WRONG!" argument from Brad.

Whether it really is the "missing gravity factor" or not, I don't really know. I am just using the example of gravity to illustrate the possibility that Brad is full of phony baloney and bizarre thought processes about this issue and not thinking straight.

MileHigh · « **Reply #843 on:** March 11, 2016, 08:54:30 PM »

Quote

Perhaps MH would like to go and argue with all these other guy's that say the very same thing i have said,in regards to !what is resonance! ,instead of doing nothing other than providing nothing.

Here is another example of an illogical thought process from Brad. I am not arguing with anybody about what resonance is at all. That's just another Brad stream-of-consciousness ricochet going off somewhere in his head. I asked two simple questions about resonance for the case of a wine glass and I specifically requested short, simple answers of four sentences or less in the person's own words - no copy/paste. I haven't seen those two questions answered properly yet, and if nobody gets it then the answers will be provided later.

Magluvin · « **Reply #844 on:** March 11, 2016, 11:05:08 PM »

Quote from: tinman on March 11, 2016, 10:43:16 AM

Perhaps MH would like to go and argue with all these other guy's that say the very same thing i have said,in regards to !what is resonance! ,instead of doing nothing other than providing nothing.

I find it hard to believe in some one that works in such ways,and either gets many things wrong,or misses vital required information when posting in reference to making determinations.
MHs top speed of a car example is a good example of required missing information to make such a determination.
Quote: How do you determine the maximum speed of your car in simple terms?
The answer is the maximum speed of the car is determined from where the maximum horsepower that can be output by the engine is in balance with all of the air friction and various other friction forces.
Although simple,it is incomplete,and a determination of the car's top speed cannot be made from the information provided as MH has clearly stated.
You can see he has only included frictional forces,while leaving out one other force that is vital in determining the top speed of the vehicle. This missing force provides the needed information about the environment in which the car will be traveling in,and without it,the determination cannot be made.

The problem we have here is very large,and can quite easily be seen as disinformation.
This is one of the reasons many people just give up,and one of the reasons man has not progressed any further than he has today. The problem being so called guru's trying to tell you that you are wrong,and are going about things the wrong way--you do not have the correct understanding to progress any further than you have--until you listen to me. These sort of comments come from people that have nothing to show to back up there claim's.They cannot even put together a completed,self presented example of making a simple determination that works. They do not even practice the art them self. They do not even see the effects in existing system's of that they are trying to preach.

These are time waster's,and are here only to make life hard.
They are people that cannot and do not answer there own question's--and yet expect others to answer these questions within days,and to be answered in the same twisted way that the presenter of the questions wants them answered in.

Mag's
I am spending the weekend down the coast a ways,on the boat. But i have begun work on a duel core resonant circuit,and should have it finished around mid week,next week.

Time to move on,as most of us have a grasp on what resonance is,and how it can reduces losses/increase efficiency's in all manor of different systems.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZzHajoDf1fg

Brad

"These are time waster's,and are here only to make life hard."

Im with ya there 100%.

"They are people that cannot and do not answer there own question's--and yet expect others to answer these questions within days,and to be answered in the same twisted way that the presenter of the questions wants them answered in."

I think there is more to it than that, but thats all Ill say. For now.

Mags

Magluvin · « **Reply #845 on:** March 11, 2016, 11:08:37 PM »

Quote from: ramset on March 11, 2016, 02:08:27 PM

Mags
I brought you a Thing...if you haven't seen this thing ,,,your gonna Luv it

thanks to Franco for posting it .

http://www.lafucina.it/2014/09/01/esperimento-acqua-e-suono/

takes the salt shaker sound pattern vid to the next level..I wonder if cavitated water [zillion fine bubbles] in an aquarium
or rain drops in an aquarium ?? would show the salt shaker waves you posted in 3 D ...or maybe smoke in an aquarium ??

what a wild place we live in !!

That was really cool. Thanks

here is the direct YT link

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=uENITui5_jU

Mags

Bob Smith · « **Reply #846 on:** March 11, 2016, 11:26:35 PM »

Quote from: Magluvin on March 11, 2016, 11:08:37 PM

That was really cool. Thanks

here is the direct YT link

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=uENITui5_jU

Mags

I agree - very cool.
But oh dear, frequency altering the effects of gravity? My my. Maybe there really is something to this resonance thing

Bob

MileHigh · « **Reply #847 on:** March 11, 2016, 11:32:01 PM »

Quote

"They are people that cannot and do not answer there own question's--and yet expect others to answer these questions within days,and to be answered in the same twisted way that the presenter of the questions wants them answered in."

I think there is more to it than that, but thats all Ill say. For now. (http://overunity.com/Smileys/default/wink.gif)

Mags

There is nothing more to it than that. I can answer my own questions, Brad is talking nonsense. There is nothing twisted about my straight forward questions, more nonsense.

If you have something to say, go ahead.

What I can see is that you are doing some searching on resonance because this discussion has given you the motivation to inform and educate yourself instead of just being on cruise control.

Have you ever disagreed with Brad in your life? I have a feeling that you haven't, it's the good old straitjacket effect. I am sure that you have read stuff that he has posted that you disagree with strongly, but you stay mute. It just promotes stagnation.

Why don't you answer the questions yourself? I have to assume that you can't either. So we have a trio of "resonance researchers" that can't answer a few simple questions about a resonating wine glass. That should make you all want to try to get better and more informed, and not to whine and complain like Brad.

MileHigh

MileHigh · « **Reply #848 on:** March 12, 2016, 12:03:30 AM »

Quote from: Bob Smith on March 11, 2016, 11:26:35 PM

I agree - very cool.
But oh dear, frequency altering the effects of gravity? My my. Maybe there really is something to this resonance thing
Bob

Frequency also makes propellers on airplanes spin slowly backwards and yet the planes fly forwards.

tinman · « **Reply #849 on:** March 12, 2016, 12:41:42 AM »

Quote from: Magluvin on March 11, 2016, 11:05:08 PM

"These are time waster's,and are here only to make life hard."

Im with ya there 100%.

"They are people that cannot and do not answer there own question's--and yet expect others to answer these questions within days,and to be answered in the same twisted way that the presenter of the questions wants them answered in."

I think there is more to it than that, but thats all Ill say. For now.

Mags

Yes,and they laugh at things they dont understand,like-->
The "one other force that is vital in determining the top speed of the vehicle" is gravity. If the car is on a downhill slope, it will have a higher top speed compared to if the car is on a flat surface. If the car is on an uphill slope, it will have a lower top speed compared to if the car is on a flat surface.
Wow, such profound insights - NOT. That would be a laughable "MileHigh is WRONG!" argument from Brad.

The thing is,gravitational force is indeed the missing factor needed in order to make a correct determination of the cars top speed. But it would seem that MH has decided that the gravitational force is determined or !included in! the total frictional forces in his master piece.
I also remember him referring to a sewing machine,where he decided that a sewing machine has no resonant frequency at all--another bumbled attempt at trying to dismiss resonant frequencies in everyday machines. Well i'm calling him out on this one as well,as the sewing machine dose indeed have a resonant frequency that in directly inline with the scientific model of resonance--you only have to look at the mechanical workings of the sewing machine,and Tesla's earth quake machine,where you have a very small oscillating weight,that when the oscillation frequency is at the correct frequency,larger secondary masses will begin to oscillate at large amplitudes.

Everything this !!teacher!! has said so far -in this thread alone,has been incorrect-->and yet his insistence on us being wrong continues.
We now see remark's like--you cannot have a reasonable debate about the subject

-->this of course coming from some one that is yet to put forward any explanations toward this discussion-and refuses to do so. So how do we have a debate when only one side has been putting all the effort into answering questions asked ? How is it that these answers could be deemed wrong by the questionnaire,when he has put forward no answers toward this debate that he insist we should be having?--not to mention that he has been wrong on every occasion so far.

There is also the fact that this list of incorrectness is growing for said teacher as the thread go's on.
This list i expect to continue to grow--we will see how he go's with the gravitational force in regards to his top speed of a car determination,and whether or not he will become the first to work out what the force of gravity is--is it just resistance

I dont expect an answer to be forth coming on this one.
Then there is his sewing machine saga,where the sewing machine was suppose to be some sort of distorted representation of a 2 stroke engine that would disprove resonant systems within the 2 stroke ICE. I am saying that the sewing machine dose indeed have a point of opperating speed where a resonant frequency is reached--> i will await said teachers response on this one as well--but i also expect that there will be none now that he has had time to think about his silly little statements.

So continue your attack on me MH,and i will continue to defend myself by way of exposing every mistake you have mad so far on this thread alone.

Summery
The sewing machine dose indeed have a resonant operating frequency.
Gravity !IS! the missing vital piece to your attempt at determining the top speed of a car--and it is not a frictional force.
ICEs do have resonant systems that do increase the efficiency of that ICE.
A debate cannot happen when only one side is putting forward there thought's,while the other side refuses to put forward there thought's.

The "one other force that is vital in determining the top speed of the vehicle" is gravity. If the car is on a downhill slope, it will have a higher top speed compared to if the car is on a flat surface. If the car is on an uphill slope, it will have a lower top speed compared to if the car is on a flat surface.
Wow, such profound insights - NOT. That would be a laughable

So man up MH,and lets see who has the last laugh.
Lets see you prove that the gravitational force is accounted for in your !total friction and engine HP! is all that is needed to make the top speed of a car determination.
You want to debate a subject?--then lets start with this one,as we cannot debate the wine glass questions until you actually put forward some sort of counter claim.

Once we have sorted the !top speed of a car! debate,we can start off on the sewing machines resonant frequency curve ball you threw in there,in some wacky attempt to dismiss resonant operations in an ICE.

One by one we will put an end to your rubbish and disinformation you are plastering all over this thread for some reason

---along with your !so far! failed attempt to discredit me.

Brad

Magluvin · « **Reply #850 on:** March 12, 2016, 01:11:14 AM »

Quote from: MileHigh on March 11, 2016, 11:32:01 PM

There is nothing more to it than that. I can answer my own questions, Brad is talking nonsense. There is nothing twisted about my straight forward questions, more nonsense.

If you have something to say, go ahead.

What I can see is that you are doing some searching on resonance because this discussion has given you the motivation to inform and educate yourself instead of just being on cruise control.

Have you ever disagreed with Brad in your life? I have a feeling that you haven't, it's the good old straitjacket effect. I am sure that you have read stuff that he has posted that you disagree with strongly, but you stay mute. It just promotes stagnation.

Why don't you answer the questions yourself? I have to assume that you can't either. So we have a trio of "resonance researchers" that can't answer a few simple questions about a resonating wine glass. That should make you all want to try to get better and more informed, and not to whine and complain like Brad.

MileHigh

Its just the simple fact that you have been spending most of your time here bashing, bashing and more never ending bashing. You say it is to save others from spending money on nonsense. lol the parts required for a joule thief is next to nothing. Where is the big savings??? They can take an old pc power supply and get what they need other than an led and a AA. And probably dead ones from the junk drawer.

Even radioshack with say $20 max in parts. Dang, little kids are going to be starving because of it all.

You have said a few times here so far that you were done and were going to leave us to our work. Thats not going to happen.

So you do what you gotta do, for how ever long you wanna do it. I will probably put you on ignore soon. When thats done, it kinda screws thing up due to seeing replys to you without your input, but my pages will be less of a hassle to go through.

Your here to discredit. To make us look like we cant do anything. Move along readers.

You say you have 3500 hours on the bench 30 yrs ago. What is that? Lets see, 5 days a week, 52 weeks, eight hours a day, 2080 hours. Maybe all 3500 hrs in say 2 years. I spent 4hrs a day, 5 days a week at votech 10th through 12th grade. 2 years at electronic institute of Pittsburgh. 6 years fixing vcrs, camcorders, amplifiers and most everything other than TVs, professionally at 2 different shops over that period. Also countless hours working on mechanical and electronic stuff here since what, 2008?

I got you beat pretty bad there. I even had to tell you that a red led wont light up with just a 1.5v batt like you described it would in Larskros motor. If you deny that I will hunt down that page of posts for all to see. Thats what 30yrs off the short time on the bench does. Cant remember everything in accurate detail, but you profess that you got it all in that head of yours and fight tooth n nail, and tell us allll about your couple years on the bench 30 yrs ago, and at times, use that for an excuse for not knowing something when someone finally proves your wrong, just like you did in that thread we argued about with Larskros motor.

I remember it pretty clearly. You had drawn up or modified Larskros schematic showing the motor being activated with the reed switch from the battery and showing the led as being powered by the battery alone when the reed closed, completely ignoring the fact that the coils field collapse was capable of firing the led when in was across the coil like larskro had shown it.

Thats a very accurate memory of it. Go ahead. Deny it. Ill plaster every page of it right here so the 'readers' can see what you are all about.

Try me.

Magluvin

Magluvin · « **Reply #851 on:** March 12, 2016, 01:18:56 AM »

Quote from: MileHigh on March 11, 2016, 11:32:01 PM

Why don't you answer the questions yourself? I have to assume that you can't either. So we have a trio of "resonance researchers" that can't answer a few simple questions about a resonating wine glass. That should make you all want to try to get better and more informed, and not to whine and complain like Brad.

MileHigh

Im just waiting for this BIG reveal to occur. So what, 6 weeks maybe, being what, 2 weeks ago you stated 4 to 8 weeks? Cant wait for the big event.

Im not going to be coerced into that never ending crap. Others can continue on with you if they want to, but ive been through this before a few times and dont have time for this.

Mags

MileHigh · « **Reply #852 on:** March 12, 2016, 01:32:05 AM »

Brad:

Quote

The thing is,gravitational force is indeed the missing factor needed in order to make a correct determination of the cars top speed.

You have got to be absolutely out of your mind. All this time you have been ragging me about the "secret" and it's bloody gravity. Yet again, you are making a fool of yourself.

Why don't you go join these two automotive forums:

http://www.yellowbullet.com/forum/
http://ls1tech.com/forums/

Make a posting that says, "We need a new test for a car's top speed. We need a level track, an uphill track, and a downhill track and we need to quote three top speeds for every new car."

Watch the posters there slice you to pieces and make mincemeat out of you and think that it is an early April Fool's joke. You are unbelievable, or should I say beyond unbelievable.

Quote

I also remember him referring to a sewing machine,where he decided that a sewing machine has no resonant frequency at all--another bumbled attempt at trying to dismiss resonant frequencies in everyday machines.

More retarded nonsense. A sewing machine is not designed to resonate. If you hit some kind of resonant mode in a sewing machine something might start shaking too much and ruin the machine's ability to sew. In other words, a sewing machine will not operate "better through resonance." Any mechanical machine or system will have all sorts of resonant modes and by design they are normally to be avoided or they are intentionally damped out. Smoky2 even made reference to it. I am pretty sure that he was talking about the mechanical resonant frequency of an entire engine block assembly. The last thing you want to have is an engine revving at the fundamental resonant frequency of the engine block assembly because the thing might shake itself into destruction.

Quote

Everything this !!teacher!! has said so far -in this thread alone,has been incorrect

I will call you out on this - you are completely full of shit. You are showing your critical flaw. "Everything" I said? All that you are doing is showing that when you are stressed from a debate is that you will lie through your teeth as it suits you. Therefore, when you get into this state, nobody should be surprised if you pick and choose when to lie to advance your cause. You simply can't be trusted when you get into a heated debate, and for all practical intents and purposes you completely lose your decorum and become a temporary pathological liar.

Quote

So man up MH,and lets see who has the last laugh.

That has already been decided.

Quote

One by one we will put an end to your rubbish and disinformation you are plastering all over this thread for some reason (http://overunity.com/Smileys/default/shocked.gif)---along with your !so far! failed attempt to discredit me.

Just read what I stated above and think about it a long hard time.

There is no point in this kind of debate since you seem to lack common sense and you simply cannot be trusted like I sate above.

The only thing I am interested in is closing the loop on is the two questions about the resonating wine glass.

MileHigh

MileHigh · « **Reply #853 on:** March 12, 2016, 01:48:58 AM »

Magluvin:

The only interest at this point is to close the loop on the resonating wine glass. Your buddy's bad karma is the reason you are going to wait, such is life.

I didn't know the voltage drop on an LED, I admit it. I am pretty sure I saw that funky pulse motor in a Revolution Green article about frauds and scams, go figure. For what it's worth, I don't recall you ever finishing that particular pulse motor project.

I am not here to bash people but I will stand my ground also. Surprise surprise, you have seen a lot of other bashing going on and said nothing about it. It's like you and Chet are bondage twins.

It's all useless water under the bridge at this point in time. My only interest is to close the loop on the wine glass. I would love to see one of you guys get it but I am not counting my chickens. On top of that, I am not really interested in commenting on people building pulse motors and stuff like that and it's highly unlikely I will do that again, especially for what Brad does. He can delude himself just fine without me. Nor am I here to discuss any bench work you may do with your "resonant Joule Thief" I have made that perfectly clear many times now. No kidding a Joule Thief costs less than ten bucks.

MileHigh

P.S.: The real reason I joined this thread was to try to get you guys to educate yourselves and get you to ask yourselves some critical questions about a Joule Thief and resonance. Is a Joule Thief designed to resonate? What does it mean for a Joule Thief to resonate? Should I just presume that a "resonant Joule Thief" will give me better performance before I take a long and hard look at that idea? Are we truly talking about resonance or it is something that looks like resonance? Before I look for resonance in a Joule Thief can I explain it and describe it for a common everyday example of resonance? How am I going to define better performance?

And I have been partially successful at getting you guys to do some critical thinking about what the whole thing means.

SeaMonkey · « **Reply #854 on:** March 12, 2016, 02:07:57 AM »

Quote from: Miles Higher

What the hell does a buzz bomb have to do with anything?

Frankly, the Buzz Bomb Pulse-Jet is a really good example of
resonance. Rather like the way a whistle resonates.

As this discussion has illustrated, resonance has acquired
additional meanings as our time-line has progressed forward.
Resonance can even be applied to human traits and actions
or emotions. In fact Miles, it would seem that the tenor of this
discussion gets you "resonating" at a pretty good pitch!

FarmHand offered some good food for thought to help clear things
up.

If it oscillates then it could be said to resonate or be in resonance.

Whaddya think Miles? Are you resonating with this?

The Human Mind is a Terrible Thing to Waste.

News:

User Menu