Storing Cookies (See : http://ec.europa.eu/ipg/basics/legal/cookies/index_en.htm ) help us to bring you our services at overunity.com . If you use this website and our services you declare yourself okay with using cookies .More Infos here:
https://overunity.com/5553/privacy-policy/
If you do not agree with storing cookies, please LEAVE this website now. From the 25th of May 2018, every existing user has to accept the GDPR agreement at first login. If a user is unwilling to accept the GDPR, he should email us and request to erase his account. Many thanks for your understanding

User Menu

Custom Search

Author Topic: falling capacitor charges?  (Read 10828 times)

ckreol1

  • Newbie
  • *
  • Posts: 46
falling capacitor charges?
« on: June 08, 2010, 08:55:16 PM »
Is anyone here able to remember or reference a claim that I remember reading--that a capacitor falling from space towards the surface of earth will become charged? 

If so, what is the theory behind that?  I'm thinking it sounds like a Tom Bearden idea. 

Here's an abstract to a paper that deals with a similar subject.
http://www.springerlink.com/content/k471h8j362v13g31/
  Here's part of the abstract:
 
"A charged parallel plate capacitor contains less electric energy when its plates are oriented parallel to a gravitational field than it contains when its plates are oriented perpendicular to the same field."

Cool, have a good one guys.

George

ckreol1

  • Newbie
  • *
  • Posts: 46
Re: falling capacitor charges - Graham Gunderson
« Reply #1 on: June 09, 2010, 09:07:46 PM »
Continued from above...

The reason I am asking this question above is Graham Gunderson reported inventing a device early in his career that uses a Van de Graaf generator (or actaully a high voltage switching circuit), some capacitors, and some diodes, and created a self running, rotating machine.

I cannot find the specific post in any of the old news groups.  It is OK because I remember the post was necessarily very vague.  That was back in the Reed Huish days (wonder how he's doing).

Only reference I can find is from free_energy yahoo group, april 11, 2001:

"I'd like to tell you that I have had some success tapping cost-free energy
as well.

I offered to let Eric test one of my inventions some time ago. The model
produced less than a kilowatt of inexhaustible energy and he refused to see
it."

Graham thought that gravity and electrostatic fields changed the "density" of space-time in the same manner, as does Tom Bearden, I believe. (interestingly he claimed that positive and negative fields had opposite effects on the density of space-time.  I don't remember him using the word space-time, specifically.)   In fact, in the post Graham was defending Bearden by saying the Tom got a lot wrong but that Tom's papers sparked Graham's invention of this device. 

Graham also said that he could provide a very simple experiment using a capacitor, a diode, and a van de graaf generator that would prove the capability of his invention, but that it would give away the working principle of the device.

Also, for reference, I will mention that Graham said the output of the device was from a "black box diode".  He was referring to the circuit that accumulated the power from the rotating generator device.

The conclusion is that if a capacitor falling through gravity gains a charge, then so would a capacitor moving through the distorted spacetime created by a gradient electric field.  And Graham's device seems to fit into this nicely.

Just a thought.  Any ideas?

ckreol1

  • Newbie
  • *
  • Posts: 46
Re: falling capacitor charges?
« Reply #2 on: June 09, 2010, 10:01:00 PM »
Continued from above:
Here is a post from Graham from around 2001 that explains electrostatic/space-time theory much better than I just did in my previous post.  He mentions a motor device at the bottom:

---Voltage Controlled Radioactivity---

Here's something to try if you want to be amazed.

It requires a lot of crazy equipment that I bet no one has, but it does work.


Obtain a Van De Graff generator and pry the top sphere apart. Construct a pedestal (insulating/non insulating, doesnt matter) roughly half the height of the inner chamber.

With latex gloves on, take apart a *new* smoke alarm, desoldering the metal cage that says, "radioactive". Remove the tiny pellet of americium-241, which will be mounted in a small metal cup.

The gloves help stop alpha radiation (helium nuclei) from entering your flesh. Americium is produced in nuclear reactors - it is not really found in nature.

Using a Geiger counter (or just the tube and some experimentation), make a reading of the average particle count from the americium sample. Remember the distance of the measurement...

Graphing the plain old average decays over a period of weeks will give cycles of about 1% variation, that are in harmony with the Earth's rotation and our orbit around the sun. This is one recurring pattern (found even in measurements of the speed of light) that the physics "community" REFUSES to acknowledge. Observatories insert empirical "fudge factors" into calculations to make observation agree with theory (cart before horse). Most astronomers blame "dark matter" for this effect, based on some unknown cause.

(I propose that the absolute electrostatic potential of the earth is varying with this cycle, affecting the ZPF flux density in all local systems (on earth's surface). Space, as we travel through it, may or may not have a uniform zero electrical charge.)

Place the americium on the pedestal and close the VDG globe. It's best to insulate the globe but it isn't necessary.

Turn on the generator. and leave it be for about a day, or longer if you can. Then come back and quickly check the particle count. Different, huh?

When you charge an atom, the RELATIVE charges of +1 on protons and -1 on electrons don't vary in each other's perspective. However the absolute potential of all the particles in the atom is obviously changed. Again the energies we are up against to really "break on through" are formidable, though the smaller practicable effects - like affecting radiation - are still of interest and potentially some use.


I have done this same basic experiment measuring in the time domain as well. High electrostatic potential alters the rate of clocks local to the potential. Specifically, a grandfather clock charged to +250kV will not keep the same time as a grounded clock of the same design (imagined in a vacuum chamber)

The density of the zero point flux is dependent on potential. Electrostatic potential IS space-time IS vacuum IS scalar potential. All one thing.

This seems like gibberish for two reasons - first, the vacuum has a nonpolarized (? who knows) potential of about 200 megavolts/meter - at least in theory. Even a deadly 20 kV doen't come close (0.01% of vacuum potential). So we deal primarily with meager effects.

Second, anything UL listed (or similarly approved for public use) - like a stereo, a computer, an alarm clock - is grounded, at least to AC neutral. We don't normally deal with anything at high potential, because we conduct. Simply put, nobody in a university lab has ever TRIED this stuff - all the equipment is UL listed and has a ground plug. A good observer with the right idea would have a groundbreaking thesis right there, say, running a cesium standard clock inside a Faraday cage at 500kV "ground" for a few days.

The most modern satellite propulsion method ejects xenon ions, like a rocket, except that the xenon ions eject ten times faster. Some of the most expensive and outrageous satellites going up have xenon thrusters. This is great, beautiful overpriced technology. Looks good. Where the hell did T. Brown get lost on all this? Wouldn't a sattelite research company look into the possibility of propulsion without propellant?

My email to this company suggesting they look into it has received no response.

Maybe Jean would have luck proposing his EHD idea? Do high-falutin' places like this even accept demonstrations from peasants?

Here we have the foundation for a new propulsive technology - good for deep space exploration. We have a time machine with weak effects - but the effects are real, the charged clocks don't keep time with the control clocks. And we can acccelerate or retard the rate of nuclear decay - possibly a missing key in the arena of hot (or even cold) fusion research. Foundations for three separate sciences - and no interested developers?

Note I am not saying whether + or - increases or decelerates time / fission / etc. This is for the reader to find out. I have never said which is which, just a litte annoying tradition of mine. The answer says enough that I feel it is worth discovering for oneself.


It is VERY easy to get free energy directly from the vacuum by polarization. I'd get shot for saying this but I'll say it anyway.

The device had a motor on it from a public bathroom air freshener - the little kind that blows gently on the yummy smelling stuff. The corroded motor was refurbished, and found to be very efficient. Mounted in the device, it consumed only 60mA at 12 volts, achieving some 2000 RPM. The spindle was mounted on magnetic bearings, to minimize drag. So the motor drew less than a watt.

The field plates were charged to an unspecified voltage. The design had 24 output ports. Measuring one output port gave 3VAC. Using a refined output circuit, a total of 0.3 watts from all 24 ports was recovered directly from the vacuum. This 1/3 watt of energy could be shorted, connected to external batteries (as load or source) left open or anything in between -- there was no change in RPM or motor current. The field potential is potential only and draws no current at all, except for some negligible leakage.

After analysis it was concluded that this 0.3 watt of energy was directly recovered from the vacuum. Rotor RPMs did not change with HV on or off, with a load connected or no. There is no mechanical coupling between rotor and field. The HV potential, again, draws no current, like a charged capacitor. The 0.3 watt drew on apparently nothing.

This was a small model device and produced less than half the energy required for a closed loop. However, observation agrees with the theory on this one, potential truly is free. This device was meant to put Tom Bearden's words into action, and he appears correct. There are things that can be done to scale it up, presumably to the point of over unity but this remains to be seen as I am working on a more promising technology right now. This device I mentioned is theoretically simple but it is a nightmare to build and maintain!

(I can't really answer any questions about this thing, sorry)


OK, that oughta be enough for one night. High electrostatic potential is probably used on other planets far more extensively than this one :)

-Graham

gsmsslsb

  • Jr. Member
  • **
  • Posts: 77
Re: falling capacitor charges?
« Reply #3 on: June 13, 2010, 01:59:05 AM »
This looks really interesting.
I wonder what the experiment with the capacitor diode and van der graaf was I have some stuff here and I might try some things just play around and see what happens.
Any morinfo on how electrostatics affects things would be good.
Stuff inside a van der graaf terminal reminds me a bit of joseph hiddink a bit ???

ckreol1

  • Newbie
  • *
  • Posts: 46
Re: falling capacitor charges?
« Reply #4 on: June 13, 2010, 06:54:54 PM »
It really is interesting stuff.  You motivated me to upload an old site I had.  This is a re-hash of a website I had called globaltechphysics.frih.net, a few years back.

http://electropub.wordpress.com/

I'm gonna get out my VDG, too, and look into Hiddink.

ttyl,
George

The Observer

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 397
Re: falling capacitor charges?
« Reply #5 on: June 14, 2010, 02:20:58 AM »
If you think a falling capacitor that charges is interesting,
   
         YOU would definitely be interested in a Capacitor that Charges itself !

I have an Electrolytic 330 uf Cap that has charged up to 1336 mV or 1.336 V in about a week and a half.
    All by itself !

The process is called Dielectric Absorption and is caused by Electric Dipoles that stay lined up.
                                                                                         Much like iron gets slightly magnetized.

As far as I can tell.. this is measurable free energy.
           
                                If I discharge it... it will start all over again.

Check it out if you can... test a used Electrolytic Cap.
                     
                                      1. Discharge it.
                                      2. Let it sit.
                                      3. Test with a Voltmeter on the mV setting.

Let the walls tumble,
                               The Observer

XS-NRG

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 413
Re: falling capacitor charges?
« Reply #6 on: June 14, 2010, 02:26:32 AM »
Hello Observer  :)

Did you notice if the position of the capacitor made any difference?
I have heard about gravity charging up capacitors by gently pulling electrons.
Also, i have seen circuits that use capacitors as gravity detectors.

XS.

gsmsslsb

  • Jr. Member
  • **
  • Posts: 77
Re: falling capacitor charges?
« Reply #7 on: June 14, 2010, 04:22:49 AM »
It really is interesting stuff.  You motivated me to upload an old site I had.  This is a re-hash of a website I had called globaltechphysics.frih.net, a few years back.

http://electropub.wordpress.com/

I'm gonna get out my VDG, too, and look into Hiddink.

ttyl,
George

Thanks for the info
I just read the watch in the steel box writeup and it is great. :o
I have the gear to repeat the experiment and I will go ahead with that forthwith. :P
I am slow because I have VERY little time just now to put into this.
This also smacks of leon sprink and ravatin ( look them up on REXRESEARCH)
Graham said it will speed up reactions which is what sprink and ravatin found.
Thanks again gsm

The Observer

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 397
Re: falling capacitor charges?
« Reply #8 on: June 14, 2010, 05:44:27 AM »
XS,

I don't think gravity has anything to do with it.

The phenomenon has a name called Dielectric Absorption.

Electric dipoles that don't go back to random domains after the capacitor is charged are responsible for moving the electrons to one plate.

The Observer

gyulasun

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 4117
Re: falling capacitor charges?
« Reply #9 on: June 14, 2010, 11:53:56 AM »

Well, it would be important to observe at what voltage level the capacitor has been before discharging it?  Because the dipoles of the dielectric material have been stressed by electric field YOU introduced into the capacitor.

A more realistic test would be to short the capacitor with a piece of wire for a few days to "rest",  then remove the short and see how much Volts you find after a few hours or days in the capacitor. You will probably find values from a few tens milliVolts to a few hundred mV, depending on the quality of the dielectic inside (how old the capacitor etc.)

Earlier what I found with such tests is that the more frequently you utilize the "collected" charge the less and less will be "reproduced"  and in the end the recharge effect stays at some ten mV level or even less.

rgds,  Gyula

The Observer

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 397
Re: falling capacitor charges?
« Reply #10 on: June 14, 2010, 06:30:50 PM »
Gyus,

This Cap had sat idle for about 4 months... and had apparently charged up to 3.5 volts by itself.
                                                                So I am wondering if it will do that again.

You gotta think the thing would have discharged in the course of 1/3rd of a year.

My understanding is that the dielectric has electric dipoles   -==+.
When they are lined up they act like a battery, just like when magnetic dipoles line up to produce a magnet in a larger mass.
When you apply an electric field to these Caps.. the total electric field is that of the CAP + DIELECTRIC (now that is not canceling itself out).
Some then remain in the same position much like a piece of iron stays slightly magnetized in the absence of a magnetic field.
This causes an a uniform electric field that can move electrons from one side to the other.

I will try shorting it for extended periods... but I would like to see if it makes back up to 3 volts by itself first.
                                                               Looks promising !

The Observer



Paul-R

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 2086
Re: falling capacitor charges?
« Reply #11 on: June 14, 2010, 07:14:25 PM »

If a cap falls through the atmosphere, it falls through the Earth's magnetic field.

A capacitor with plates of Al, Cu and another metal between the poles of a magnet
does something interesting. I saw a reference in connection with the Testika machine.

ckreol1

  • Newbie
  • *
  • Posts: 46
Re: falling capacitor charges?
« Reply #12 on: June 15, 2010, 10:44:29 PM »
@paul-r
Interesting, I wonder what the logic is behind that.  The testatika has always fascinated me.

@chef
That tube looks like something tesla would build.  I remember reading in one of his lectures about a rotating spark discharge that was extremely sensitive to external fields or bodies.  I think it would start spinning the opposite direction when he approached it even the slightest bit.


Paul-R

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 2086
Re: falling capacitor charges?
« Reply #13 on: June 16, 2010, 03:32:56 PM »
@paul-r
Interesting, I wonder what the logic is behind that.  The testatika has always fascinated me.
I should have called it the Thestatika.

The cap device tha ti mentioned is on page 4:
http://www.free-energy-info.co.uk/Chapter13.pdf

ckreol1

  • Newbie
  • *
  • Posts: 46
Re: falling capacitor charges?
« Reply #14 on: June 17, 2010, 09:26:25 PM »
Hi Paul.  Thanks for that link.

I wonder, what do you think of this idea in the attached picture?  There's probably some reason it won't work, and I'm sure it can be improved.  I got the idea from the articles on the wordpress website I posted, specifically the Radioactive Voltage article

Seeya,
George