thanks! i will check out the image software but it looks like it only does images i need to convert video files specifically quicktime format to mpeg the windows default movie maker software wont touch quicktime (probly cause its apple hehehe)

i would like to try and clear up some concepts for you as peter did for me awhile ago (if i get the details wrong peter can feel free to correct me when he gets back)

i noticed in your posts your trying to relate similarities with john's monopole "radiant battery charger" and peters "magnetic rotary attraction motor" if you go way back to the beginning of this thread you will see there already has been incidents of similar confusion between the 2 "different" technologies.

THE ONLY SIMILARITY between the two technologies is in the "control circuit" using a transistor to turn the field on and off sharply. thats where the similarity stops. remember in johns work the secret is in the way a battery charges not the monopole motor it self. with the monopole your pulsing a coil whose magnetic field is "open to the environment" not "closed down in iron". there was some argument from john himself about how iron absorbs/wastes all of the "radiant energy" if you read the beginning of this thread and if i remember correctly peter did not disagree with that fact. heres whats important.

with the monopole the focus is in studying the amount of "radiant energy absorbed by the battery" "between" the "triggered spikes" developed from the monopole motor itself. remember this important fact. "the torque developed by the spinning monopole is an extra byproduct not the focus of that project"

now we address peters dvd "electric motor secrets" understand that even in the title we see that the focus of this project is on "electric motors" not "charging batteries". how that BEMF spike we see in peters motor charges a battery is not whats important in this motor design. keep in mind that "electrons" and the "radiant energy" are different parts of the equation. we are not focusing on absorbing radiant energy into a battery, whats important to remember is that with the BEMF we are "recycling" electrons, whether or not the radiant energy is lost in the iron is not an important issue. if anything the closest relatable conceptual work i have found regarding "recycling electrons" either using magnetic fields or capacitors is george Wiseman's book "the energy conserver theory" books 1 and 2 in fact i am trying to use his work to help me better understand how to "recycle" more input energy for peters motor. BUT!! thats possibly for a new/different thread.

whats important to understand with peters dvd is that "the secret" the focus of this group and this type of motor is that in a standard off the self direct induction motor the BEMF is acting in "electrical" opposition to the input energy creating heat!! and forever keeping these motors under unity "the secret" is not radiant energy and/or charging batteries, in our group the recycled electrons from the BEMF become the incidental benefit

"the secret" if you go to near the beginning of the dvd and follow more closely the "math" peter breaks down for motor efficacy you will see him describe how after you remove the 9v lost "electrically" (turned in to heat, almost like having a friggin resistor type heater element built into the motor itself chewing up 9v!!!). you end up with 3v * 1 amp applied "mechanically" in terms actual magnetic mechanical work.... blah, that was a mouthful lol, but seriously then if you take his dyno readings and THEN do an efficacy calc you get 300% or cop of 3 ...uh... !@#$%^&* ah hah!!, think about it, the math for that 300% did NOT factor in recycling the electrons at all!! the real mystery is "where did the free work come from?" then the answer is that there are some seriously unanswered questions about "how much mechanical work can you get from a magnetic field thats "initiated" by an electrical circuit!! i always giggle a little when i read threads on this group where people always gravitate towards the bemf and how it charges batteries. oh i know "doing something" with the bemf is important, it has to go somewhere after all so its not a detriment to the motor torque process. and i do get excited by the prospect of putting the bemf to beneficial use by adding it to my motor torque instead of it subtracting it from my torque so i might go beyond cop of 3 to maybe 4 or the theoretical 8 to 12. but if you ask me i bet if you focus on using the bemf to "charge batteries better" you will find that the battery will deteriorate just like a conventional pulse charger would do.

i really am curious? am i the only one here who thought to myself that if you follow the math in the dvd to get the 300% efficacy couldn't i make an attraction motor machined properly so it has a really small air gap and built with the right kind of metal so there are minimal residual fields. that if i just dump the BEMF into a battery and FORGET about it, don't even bother measuring it. than in theory my motor would have a magnetic field capable of producing torque thats not opposed/deteriorated by the bemf and with a dyno reading i should still in theory read a cop of at least over 1? not including whats recycled in the bemf? thats what went through my mind after watching the dvd for a third time. that maybe its possible that an electrically initiated magnetic field could produce more work "mechanically" than was paid for in the electrical input. never mind the BEMF for starters. of course when you add in the BEMF possibilities i get even more excited, keep in mind there are more than one ways to skin a cat. using a battery to suck up the back emf is a great first step. its easy reliable and simpler for your circuit later on i hope to eliminate that step and just add that bemf back into the winding in such a way that it adds to the strength of the field instead of deteriorating it.
BUT FIRST!!! we must understand one of the other critical points of the dvd.
the "air gap". so keep your circuit simple and predictable for now.
if you review the dvd again you will notice how peter describes how in a coil and plunger/piston setup the fields pull is strongest when the piston has completely closed the "air gap". this means there is a solid iron magnetic "raceway" through the inside of and around the outside of your coil, all the air gaps in the iron pathway are minimized.
the air gap has little to do with "air resistance" and adding epoxy will only prevent you from "minimizing" the magnetic air gap between the stator and the rotor, should you decide to have a new rotor made with a larger diameter in order to minimize the air gap like i am doing. If i remember right peter told me that every time you cut the air gap in half you double the pulling power of the magnetic field. So obviously if you double the air gap you cut the strength in half. So in my first motor where i had a new rotor made, due to sloppy work, i ended up with a total air gap of 40 thousands of an inch. So if i made a new rotor for that motor with a total of ten thousands of an inch (5 thouands on each side, about the thickness of a sheet of paper wrapped around the rotor) i would increase the strength of the motor 4 time or 400% stronger!!! do you see the importance of the air gap?

So in review
johns work focuses on absorbing radient energy in a battery
and peters dvd focuses on maximizing the mechancal power produced by a magnetic field by removing the destructive opposing BEMF in the winding. And incidentaly showing us that the heat generated in a standard direct induction electric motor is electrical in origin not mechanical friction as one might assume......

Ok i went i bit long on this post. But i really felt it would be good to clarify some points here for people like me that are on diferent points in the learning curve. And if anybody wants to add anything to this or comment on this please do i love to learn.

Hope this helps!!
Eric