View Single Post
 
Old 02-24-2012, 07:39 PM
alvarohn alvarohn is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Dec 2011
Posts: 93
wow

Wow, clearest than water

That explain the difference in spark size in my mechanical commutator when I charge a relatively sane battery vs a very sulfated one.

best,

Alvaro


Quote:
Originally Posted by Peter Lindemann View Post
Hi Mario, et al,

Thank you all for a considered discussion on these topics. The most important thing to keep in mind, is that we have all been learning as we go.

The terminology of "Negative Energy" and "Positive Energy" was Tom Bearden's first attempt to inform us all that there was a QUALITY DIFFERENCE between these two manifestations of electricity that the meters were saying were identical. This was a gigantic philosophical leap for most people, at the time, but as usual, Tom was right! Whether "Negative Energy" and "Positive Energy" are the best ways to characterize these differences is not the point.

If we simply observe the "facts on the ground" we can come to a reasonable understanding. In the case of the various chargers that John has been testing over the last 10 years, let us say that "Negative Energy" is that quality of electricity that comes from AN INDUCTIVE COLLAPSE. It is produced by a MAGNETIC FIELD in natural free-fall after the current that produced it has been discontinued (open circuit).

Its effect on a battery is unique. In response to the impedance (resistance) in the cells, the inductive collapse will produce an ever rising voltage to overcome it. Once this potential hurdle has been overcome, then it will produce current to complete the discharge. The higher the impedance, the higher the voltage will rise and the less current will be supplied. The lower the impedance, the lower the voltage will rise and the higher the current will be supplied. The response is completely self regulating, and the battery always gets as much energy transferred into it as it can receive, in the shortest period of time.

Let us also say that "Positive Energy" is that quality of electricity that comes from A CAPACITOR DISCHARGE. It is produced by a DIELECTRIC FIELD in natural free-fall after the voltage that produced it has been discontinued (short circuit).

Its effect on the battery is quite different. In response to the impedance in the cells, the capacitive discharge will produce a TIME VARIANT discharge rate, since the voltage cannot rise above its initial value. It is characterized by a current surge with a dropping voltage component. By contrast, the inductive collapse is characterized by a voltage surge with a dropping current component.

What John found, after exhaustive testing, is that both of these methods charge the battery quite well. Personally, I believe, from what I have seen, that the Inductive Collapse methods work a little better for restoring lost capacity in a battery and Capacitor Discharge works a little better for maintaining a battery. In other words, there are trade-offs.

The other thing John found is that the Capacitor Discharge method of charging a battery was universally compatible with other commercial methods, while the Inductive Collapse method was not. Batteries were just fine if they were ALWAYS charged with Inductive Collapse, but their performance was extremely poor if the charging method varied between Inductive Collapse and other commercial methods.

This is the reason why John eventually changed all of his commercial designs over to these universally compatible methods......so people would not blame him for ruining their batteries when they didn't use his chargers.

I hope this discussion of these issues of helpful.

Peter
__________________
 
Reply With Quote