Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera

[hanon1492]

So , you sold both of your 100 W in / 300 W out devices, the one described in your post in the 10th of september and the one described in overunuty forum, because they both are different designs. It was curious to me that both have exactly the same input/output results.

[marathonman]

How dense can you be be. one device different winding configuration and voltages hanon.
get on with it hanon, if you spent more time building and less time running your mouth, maybe, just maybe you would have a working device but i doubt it will ever take place because you will probably argue with yourself.
subject over in my book.

MM

[Cadman]

Well I just put power to my autotransformer and am pleased to report that it works perfectly.
24vac in and 15 usable taps with voltage from 27.4 down to 1.5 in 15 even increments.

So if want to build a high powered AC variac then the spreadsheet will calculate it perfectly for you.

Next step is to build the rotating brush and run DC through it and see what the difference is.

Wouldn't it be great if all we had to do to calculate a part G was to change the 4.44 constant to 1.1?

Cheers,
CM

[marathonman]

Good news

Congrats on your Autotransformer .

yes that would nice if that is all we had to do.
i'll keep my fingers crossed for the DC test.
may be you can calculate it at 1.11 and see what happens i results.


MM

[marathonman]

inductor

I have been reading and studying about inductors an relating that to part G.
as the brush rotates currant enters from set N & S causing two opposing fields. as the brush approaches set N the winding's are reducing as is cross section of core causing an increase in currant discharge while the winding's are increasing as is cross section of core for set S causing an decrease in currant discharge.
eyes wobbling to much.

MM

[hanon1492]

How dense can you be be. one device different winding configuration and voltages hanon.

In fact different winding configuration, different cores (in one case both primaries and secondaries are 3" long, in the other case primaries 4" long, secondaries 2" long) , and different driving parameters. But both cases having the same output power (300 W). Sorry to tell it but I see something weird in that. I have just exposed the data that you posted. If you are incomodated with that then it is because something is not straight. A saying tells the truth offend.

[Cadman]

I have been reading and studying about inductors an relating that to part G.
as the brush rotates currant enters from set N & S causing two opposing fields. as the brush approaches set N the winding's are reducing as is cross section of core causing an increase in currant discharge while the winding's are increasing as is cross section of core for set S causing an decrease in currant discharge.
eyes wobbling to much.

MM

Thank you for this post. I have been looking at the current flow backwards.
sheesh
CM

[marathonman]

Flow

It was difficult at first realizing it flows from - to +. was it Ben Franklin that had a 50/50 chance and got it wrong. the status quo is stuck on not letting true information out as this would ruin not only relativity and Quantum Mechanics but the science community as a whole. and to think good ole J.P. Morgan started it all.
actually it seams currant flows one way and voltage the other. it is a crying shame that in 2016 that such little and correct information can be had on the subject. i think society as a whole is waking up to the fact that that all the info we have access through schooling is either wrong, tainted or down right lacking in completeness. J.P. Morgan is a prim example as he had school books pulled, had them changed, then put back into circulation. the entire history of all countries are based on Corporate, Government manipulation.

hopefully things are changing for the better but is it to late as the power Elite have devastating plans and most of us are not apart of it.

what really amazes me is so very little people know about Clemente Figuera. almost every person i talk to including corporate America and science community knows nothing of him so almost needless to say i either get ignored, get told free energy is not possible (we know this is a lie) or they show interest until money is involved. i wish i could get some scientist and money backers involved in this project, sure would be nice. at this point in time i would settle for a little backing.

here is link to DipTrace free for Schematic capture, PCB layout ect. the free version is 300 pin 2 layer. Download DipTrace - DipTrace


MM

[Netica]

Hello Marathonman,

I very much, did not understand what you had said from post 1183
"as the brush rotates currant enters from set N & S causing two opposing fields" I understood the opposite, until you said "It was difficult at first realizing it flows from - to +."

I would like to understand how it is known that current flows from - to +,. How did you learn it?, and how could it be shown?

This is very important to understand - "actually it seams currant flows one way and voltage the other" Anything further that could be shown regarding this would be great. I am not so much refering to Clemente's machine as I get what you are saying in this regard, rather a more general understanding about current and voltage flowing in the opposite directions.

Thanks for sharing your work and knowledge.

[marathonman]

currant flow

here is one clue below the rest i will get to you shortly.
when they speak of conventional currant flow, since the days of Ben Franklin, it was thought that currant flowed from positive to negative. well he had a 50/50 chance guessing and was wrong. real currant flows from negative to positive. this can be verified at home by you using a small battery, diode and light bulb.
ps. transistors are the same way but the establishment is just to lazy to change it. watch this video and many, many others. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bkQSt5uA74k
and you are welcome.



MM

[marathonman]

Currant Flow

Also here in this pic, notice currant flow. something to keep in mind when winding coils. south charges centripetally (in)(contracting) north discharges centrifugally (out)(expanding). also both ends are rotating in the same direction which causes a voidance when two opposites are put together not attraction.




MM

[hanon1492]

A couple of simplified sketches of the Figuera Generator:




This last picture was taken from an old version of PJK ebook

[bistander]

Also here in this pic, notice currant flow. something to keep in mind when winding coils. south charges centripetally (in)(contracting) north discharges centrifugally (out)(expanding). also both ends are rotating in the same direction which causes a voidance when two opposites are put together not attraction.




MM

Hi MM,

Convention uses positive to negative current flow outside the source. It is universally accepted that the actual electron flow in a load circuit is from negative to positive. Current is defined as the movement or flow of charge and that applies to positive charge as well as negative charge.

You run into trouble when you ignore one convention and then apply another convention like - to + current and the right-hand rule. North (N) & South (S) are backwards on your coil diagram. I have seen the left-hand rule applied when using electron flow instead of conventional current.

It would be much easier if you just used convention. It is not a conspiracy. It is just an universally accepted convention with the actual electron flow widely acknowledged.

bi

[Allcanadian]

@bistander

Convention uses positive to negative current flow outside the source. It is universally accepted that the actual electron flow in a load circuit is from negative to positive. Current is defined as the movement or flow of charge and that applies to positive charge as well as negative charge.

Yes there is conventional flow notation (+ to -) and electron flow notation(- to +). The obvious question to ask is how could the positive charges (Protons) move or flow when they are the immobile part of the atoms which make up the framework of the material?. The answer is no positive charges can "flow" anywhere and it is only the negatively charged free electrons which move in a wire conductor. Thus electron flow notation is the only correct form and if a positive charge did move then the conductor itself must be moving.

You run into trouble when you ignore one convention and then apply another convention like - to + current and the right-hand rule. North (N) & South (S) are backwards on your coil diagram. I have seen the left-hand rule applied when using electron flow instead of conventional current.

I noticed North in the diagram was backwards as well. I have used the left hand rule and electron flow notation exclusively for over ten years now. I could never go back to conventional flow notation because it simply has no truth in reality. The positively charged Protons do not move or flow anywhere in a conductor because they cannot move... this is reality.

AC

[Netica]

This is a great video -

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Hc3vngKsNb0

Electricity Basics: "Principles of Electricity" 1945 General Electric; How Electrons Flow in Matter