Tesla's Special Tri-Metal Generator

[Vinyasi]

The gap between the two copper spheres of the Ammann device

[Vinyasi]

[Vinyasi]

[Vinyasi]

[Vinyasi]

[Vinyasi]

https://vinyasi.podbean.com/e/the-se...-to-the-1880s/

[Vinyasi]

Thank you Aaron Murakami for informing us of the equivalency between the Kromrey Converter and a constant current source in your YouTube video...

https://www.youtube.com/results?sear...mrey+Converter

This tells me that Tesla's Special Generator, as spoken of by William Lyne in the 8th chapter of his book: Pentagon Aliens and is also spoken of by Thomas Commerford Martin in his book: the writings and inventions of Nikola Tesla, is another version of the Kromrey Converter since both share too many similarities to be ignored.

In other words, if more mass of ferromagnetizable material were to be added to the core of the Kromrey Converter, it may increase its output per William Lyne's quotation of Tesla's Special Generator, in that: "for every two hundred pounds of iron added (magnetically coupled) to his Special Generator, one horsepower can be expected to increase at its output".

As an aside, Tesla's Tri-Metal Generator may be a solid state version of his Special Generator? Just a guess...

[Vinyasi]

UPDATE...

I tested this circuit in Micro-Cap a few more times and got more data from which I derived the following conclusions (data, in the form of screenshots, follows)...

Overunity may be nothing more than a matter of perspective!

This circuit broadcasts its power to any coil, or wire, which is immediately adjacent to – alongside of – iron, or some other ferromagnetic material, because of its very high parallel capacitance inside of each coil. Needless to say, it is strange that the synonym for parallel capacitance is parasitic capacitance! And it is obvious that popular opinion is hinting at criticizing anyone for thinking that parallel capacitance could create free energy! Instead, it is popularly admitted that parasitic capacitance will destroy equipment without admonishing anyone to make bigger equipment and seek to regulate this destructive tendency of free energy to grow to infinite oblivion if left unchecked.

It is obvious that this discouragement, of popular opinion, is preventing anyone from investigating any further to discover that magnetic remanence is what is being hinted at. And furthermore, that this is effectively equivalent to a magnetic coupling way beyond unity despite the actual coupling is one percent of one percent in this example! I did not bother to find out if there is an actual minimum requirement of coupling coefficience. All I took the trouble to find out is whether or not a magnetic coupling is required, it is, but not how much minimum is needed for this circuit to continue to behave in this manner.

I'm beginning to see a pattern of behavior...

On several occasions, what I see happening is this...

Only coils (and spark gaps) can exhibit the generation of power and it is always reactive power, never real power.

They need not move, ie. rotate. Thus, they are defying Michael Faraday's Law of Induction. And if they did move, they'd probably generate still more power than they are, already generating, constituting an escalation which might spiral out-of-control for all I know. This is speculation on my part, perhaps. But nonetheless, weird things are happening.

Furthermore, regarding the following screenshot (from zip file)... “Byron Brubaker Tesla Hairpin.zip” – located...

https://ufile.io/tyk8hmhj

main-qimg-b57b2b42d51aa7b9f9719a9c18467767.png
...in this circuit, another condition of the generation of reactive power is occurring.

Not only is the definition of self-induction exhibiting the generation of reactive power, but also the definition of mutual induction is also exhibiting the characteristic behavior of the generation of reactive power. In other words,...

Not only are the smaller of each pair of inductor pairs, L1 and L3, generating power, but they are also generating one-half of electricity relative to the other inductor of their pairing. And each pairing completes each other. So,...

The volts of L1 is in opposition to the watts of L2. And the amps of L3 is in opposition to the watts of L4. So, the mutual coupling of each pair of inductors, L1 coupled with L2, and L3 coupled with L4, are together building a total generation of power when we consider both pairs together as a singular unit of generation. Talk about co-ordination!

So, how do we build parallel capacitance into a coil of wire which is magnetically coupled to another coil of wire? By doing what Nathan Stubblefield did: wind insulated copper wire alongside of bare iron wire. Oliver Heaviside did this, as well, in the 1880s. But he laid it out as a straight transmission line of telegraph communications across the Atlantic oceanic bottom. And they did not replace his technique, which had been: to wind bare iron wire or ribbon around an insulated copper core, until 1956. What took them so long?

They waited until they realized that to not do it would jeopardize their monopoly of free energy. The powers that be want to keep us ignorant. So, they switched over to a new technique.

Instead of boosting the magnetic field – which tends to retard the (di-)electric field, they retarded the electric field so that it wouldn't get ahead of the magnetic field. This is the method used by the utility companies who manage their very lengthy transmission lines across the continent... Eric Dollard talks about this...

https://is.gd/spacedisjunction

So, they installed (sank to the bottom of the Atlantic ocean) repeater stations of banks of capacitors just like they do on dry land. This way, no one would stumble upon Nathan Stubblefield's method, and Oliver Heaviside's similar method, of boosting the magnetic field by preserving it against decay.

So, if we wind iron wire against copper wire whenever we wind one or more coils on a transformer, we raise the surface of the iron core up to surround each layer of windings.

Normally, we don't do this. Consequently, the surface of the core gets further and further away (ie. separated) from each subsequent layer of winding making it harder and harder to maintain a high coupling coefficience among the multiple coils which are perched on top of this core.

The whole point of the core is to unite the several coils which are wound on top of it. So, why don't we do as Nathan Stubblefield did and elevate the core to engulf all of the layers of windings instead of merely engage the first layer? I don't know...

Parallel capacitance does this, automatically. This is why there is no need to possess any specific coupling coefficience since any value of coupling will be overridden by the value of the parallel capacitance. Yet, we do need some coupling, but how much do we need to minimally possess? Again, I don't know...

There is one more asset to parallel capacitance...and that is...that it is equivalent to magnetic remanence.

So, not only is the coupling coefficience irrelevant due to the presence of parallel capacitance, but also due to the massive iron which we couple to the core to increase its effective mass despite this additional ferromagnetic material being held outside the boundaries of the core (which is restricted to the boundaries defined by the inside diameter of the first layer of windings).

This additional core mass is what we want to build to exhibit parallel capacitance in the coils associated with it.

This is still not enough...

We want to increase efficiency by turning the standard model for a transformer inside-out by putting a copper tube in the center of the winding (to act as its core) and surround this hollow core with an exclusive winding of iron wire. This copper tube has two hollow spheres perched at either end whose interiors are connected to the interior of the tube. This interior is filled with helium and metallic (reduced) aluminum powder, or oxidized alumina (aluminum oxide) powder. This will add parallel capacitance to this winding's core in addition to the iron winding performing an equivalent function.

So, now, we won't have to have so much iron coupled to the core of the windings of this device. Such was the case with the Elektro-U-Boots of the World War II era which the German Nazi's used: a small fleet of conversions swimming around in the oceans of the world with a minimum range of 30k miles fueled by stolen Tesla technology involving the use of his Special Generator dated from 1895 when it was originally stolen from his lab with arson to hide their theft. The patenting, in Germany, that same year by a Carl Linde of Tesla's liquefaction of air device gives away their arson and theft. Many other technologies were stolen: Tesla's neutron bomb, his anti-gravity technology, and many others.

So...

Why does the increase of the mass of iron, magnetically coupled to a transformer core, give us more power – analogous to the behavior of parallel capacitance?

It's a matter of perspective...

The larger is the mass of a planet nearby a much smaller planet, the greater will be their gravitational attraction despite not reducing their distance.

So, if the mass of iron – which is magnetically coupled to the core of a transformer – is increased, then it continues to dwarf the mass of the windings associated with it. Their layers of windings are no longer separated by any severe distance (whose distance would have caused a loss of coupling and, hence, a loss of analogous parallel capacitance). Hence, these windings get closer, and closer, to the core and are, eventually, engulfed by it. These coils become a footnote merely signifying their location in space and their association with the core. But it is the core which begins to dominate their behavior.

Here are the screenshots in addition to the most recent one up, above...

main-qimg-8d2eb7e9dba1b4b69af90cab3652e479.png

main-qimg-0bddfa37285e86e6e1ebc6d8a4a47018.png
main-qimg-13e86f1e488daa6f66f6a9b4dd2925ef.png
main-qimg-57ffba55a93c346c4bc3862e32608527.png
main-qimg-7d9a54ff29e1aa5ae40749cd6939f0bf.png
Hint…Whenever a wave of voltage is in alignment with a wave of current, then that pair of waves are exhibiting the behavior of the consumption, and conversion, of real power. But whenever a wave of voltage is out of alignment with the wave of current by one-half cycle of oscillations, or 180 degrees of angular shift, then that pair of waves are exhibiting the behavior of the generation of reactance.

Eric Dollard likes to call this, the synthesis of electricity from its constituent ingredients of: magnetism, dielectricity and time. These ingredients are infinite in scope. Their limitations are undefined. It is their conjunction (intersection) which creates the limitations of matter and energy.

Imagine, if you will, the intersection of two lines. Geometry defines them as having infinite length. These are the unlimited ingredients of electricity. Yet, whenever these indefinitely lengthy lines intersect, they create (or, synthesize…if you prefer) a finite point of finite characteristics.

So, even a schoolchild already knows about how we may shrink or expand preexisting energy at will by going to its root causation and handling it there before bringing it back to the relativistic field of limitations (which are an illusion, yet very believable to the untrained eye).

For emphasis, may I repeat the point, ...

... that this definition of wave behavior is not limited to the self-induction of all electronic components. It is also extended to the mutual inductance among two or more inductors (as noted, above)… a sort of collective consciousness among inductances.

[Vinyasi]

Parallel capacitance and parasitic capacitance are one in the same thing. And magnetic remanence is effectively equivalent or analogous to parasitic capacitance.

h t t p : / / i s . g d / u d u y i g

All of this justifies William Lyne‘s quotation of Mr. Dort quoting his father quoting Tesla as saying that for every 200 pounds of iron added to Tesla’s special generator, 1 hp was increased at its output.

I took Byron Brubaker's Hairpin circuit...shortcut...

50197-preview2x.png

shortcut...

...and made my own revisions to accommodate two simulators, a modified version of Paul Falstad's (realsim, below) and Micro-Cap (a flavor of Berkeley SPICE from Spectrum-Soft).

Parallel (parasitic) capacitance within an inductor only helps the inductor when it is involved in a situation of mutual inductance - passing energy back-and-forth between itself and the other inductor. And the inductance has to be above a minimum of 10 milli Henrys (1 milli Henry is not enough to create overunity during the transfer of energy between the two inductors)…

Here's a screenshot in my modified version of Paul Falstad's simulator...

main-qimg-c1b428ceb4b5f32cbde50c21dbfa588e.png

In Micro-Cap (a flavor of Berkeley SPICE)...

main-qimg-283e6a3d0e4b791dc3b5f133bc5e48fc.png

main-qimg-772295dd07c0139062eac0f7949e41b6.png

main-qimg-faa3a7164ebdc6ff7aec372a504f479f.png

main-qimg-8da45dab87cd2c281dc2c3e2a71c0fdd.png

This simulated experiment verified to my satisfaction that the magnetic remanence of Paul Falstad's model of a transformer (which can pass DC) is effectively analogous to the Berkeley SPICE parameter of parallel capacitance inside of the same transformer coil which is intended to exhibit magnetic memory and suppress back EMF...

http://www.falstad.com/circuit/e-transformerdc.html

I took Paul's circuit, above, and modified it...

http://vinyasi.info/ne?startCircuit=...-realistic.txt

Shortcut...

h t t p : / / i s . g d / i s t h i s r e a l i s t i c

...asking this question to myself, and to him, since neither of us knew the answer at the time (a few years ago).

But, now, I know what it is. He has modeled his transformer cores from solid iron suitable for perpetual motion holder experiments which Edward Leedskalnin has made popular and also commercially used inside of computer core memory dating from 1955 until 1975. Present day transformer core material is not solid iron, but is a matrix compressed from powdered ferromagnetic material plus a binder (glue) which suppresses eddy currents, boosts coercivity and severely reduces magnetic remanence causing us to surmise that: "it's not possible to transfer DC through a transformer" when the reality is that: "we refuse to let it happen."

If DC transfer is encouraged, then its only opportunity is in the midst of each half cycle of oscillations.

If AC gets transferred, then it may only occur during the polarity shift in between each half cycle of oscillations.

Hence, there is more time available for the transfer of DC across a transformer's core material then during the break in between each half cycle of oscillations when a polarity reversal is taking place. And suppression of DC transfer encourages back EMF since there is no DC to suppress it.

Someone on the internet has posted his opinion that if back EMF were to be eliminated, overunity would automatically occur. Maybe not a lot of overunity, but definitely more than unity of coefficience of performance, ie. more energy exiting a circuit than what we have to feed it.

So, my instructions to you (for replicating my virtual experiments) are...

Go to here...

http://vinyasi.info/realsim

...and load...

circuit-20210810-1711.circuitjs.txt -- just beginning to surge, 8/10/2021, 5:11 PM, 1.58kb

...vs...

circuit-20210810-1728.circuitjs.txt -- precharged with over 100kW on the "motor load"

...which may also work in...

http://vinyasi.info/ne

...and maybe...

http://falstad.com/circuit/

...maybe with adjustments? It was originally developed (and worked) within...

h t t p : / / v i n y a s i . i n f o / n e

More info...

https://www.youtube.com/results?sear...s+bake+hairpin

This experiment is zipped up here...

https://ufile.io/dahfce70

and is also available here...

[Vinyasi]

To kill back EMF!

http://www.falstad.com/circuit/e-transformerdc.html

http://vinyasi.info/ne?startCircuit=...-realistic.txt

https://is.gd/isthisrealistic

https://is.gd/spacedisjunction

[Vinyasi]

I've always wondered how to translate William Lyne's quotation of Tesla, that "for every 200 hundred pounds of iron added to Tesla's Special Generator (sometimes equated with Tesla's TriMetal Generator), one horsepower was added to its output," into a real world build from any attempt at its simulation...

Please read the description underneath the YouTube video.

The secret lies in the threesome set of equivalencies between: parallel capacitance, magnetic remanence and inductive coupling greater than one, dependent upon which type of simulator you're working with.

Berkeley SPICE family of simulators, such as: LTSPICE and Micro-Cap, disallows a mutual coupling greater than one, but allows for parallel capacitance.

Paul Falstad's simulator does the same, but since it's open source software, you can download it and rewrite its Java code and recompile it into its equivalent JavaScript code (which I have done) to allow for an inductive coupling greater than one (since it does not support parallel capacitance within coils)...

http://is.gd/coremass

...and...

http://is.gd/addinduct

[Vinyasi]

https://is.gd/mhoslaw

https://www.amazon.com/dp/B098HBJSMY

https://www.amazon.com/dp/B098GM2LMQ

https://amazon.com/author/vinyasi

https://payhip.com/b/zmXEt

https://payhip.com/b/csCi6

https://payhip.com/b/Xzwyh

https://payhip.com/vinyasi

http://vinyasi.info/mhoslaw/

[Gambeir]

Aluminum versus lead diodes using an electrolyte involving either baking soda or borax was a kind of diode made 100 years ago by the old-timers. Upon looking up the position of lead on the periodic chart of elements, it became obvious that bismuth might be an alternate to lead and it might give different behavioral characteristics to such a diode.


One rare gem of a story of Tesla‘s 1931 pierce arrow experiment involves the use of a primary battery in other words a non-rechargeable battery in which zinc plates were replaceable i.e. expendable as an anode that degraded as the battery wore out and enough zinc plates were stored in the trunk of the car to last a year and it took five minutes to change out the plates so simply performed by even a child giving a 500 mile range per each new set of plates.

At first glance this actually makes sense to me and the reason is that bismuth is a unique inductive material. What it is inducting is the dielectric field just like a magnet does but it doesn't produce magnetism and this is something to ponder.

Of course bismuth has the highest diamagnetic properties of all metals. Which does not mean it isn't magnetic; demonstrated by Ken Wheeler in a couple video's he has done involving casting a bismuth ingot, and which clearly show the triangular point locations where the dielectric field flows into the molten casting while it's liquid, and another one or two videos featuring the diamagnetic field of bismuth in reaction to a magnet.

The evidence presented by Wheeler shows that bismuth is inducting the surrounding dielectric field, which in the Ken Wheeler theory of magnetism is an incoherent dielectric field all around us, and this is a hyperspatial substance of incorporeal nature which when slowed, such as by crystalline forms, produces a coherency which we recognize as the magnetic field. Now of course bismuth is not magnetic, it is generally the reverse of magnetic, but not entirely. Sort of like saying it operates like a magnet but does not produce a magnetic field. It has a centrifugal vortex just like a magnet does and a magnet will stay in that centrifugal vortex. This raises questions about this substance as a possible tool for accelerating the dielectric plane of inertia in a magnet, but it portends much more.


I suspect, but do not know, if it is then essentially an un~recognized magnet; so to speak, which is of course a butchery of what magnetism is all about. It is to say that this material may well be recycling an incoherent dielectric field in the same manner as a magnet only without the formation of a coherency that results in magnetism.

If so that is a very important thing to understand.

The apparent difference between magnetism and diamagnetism is whether there is either a recycling field, or a coherency to the inducted dielectric field. Something which has not been determined, least ways not to my knowledge, but probably could be and knowing which is which is undoubtedly critically useful.

Bismuth is apparently akin to a ferromagnetic material; capable of inducting the surrounding dielectric field just like a magnet only it's simply not slowing it down to form a coherency. Now this surrounding background field is perhaps a little more comprehensible if viewed from a conventional theoretical understanding of a reverberating field as the local back ground energy field & which lead to such theories as the Woodward Mach Effect. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Woodward_effect


* Now be careful here in reading this story about the quote supposed analysis of a recovered UFO artifact. Put on your hazmat gear and feces glasses. This is 98% counter intel. The Value here is in understanding layered metals reactionary capabilities were almost certainly understood by the end of World War II. I found a glimpse of understanding in part 7. A tiny glimpse involving Tesla, which tells me that he understood the quote "radiant energy" was a pressure field, which is pretty much the precise description of the theory of the Aether as held by most people prior to the overthrow of rational thought under organized education & the corrupted physics of Einstein.

Follow the links to all the parts in the Earth Files story on the so-called recovered UFO artifact. I do not agree at all that this artifact is or was beyond the capabilities of 1940's technology. https://www.svc.org/HistoryofVacuumC...um-Coating.cfm

*A special note here: Information provided by Linda Moulton Howe is reporting. It's what she does and she is not responsible for the explanations handed to her by supposed experts. She only does what any good reporter does. She isn't a policeman. It's not here job or intention to sort truth from fictions. That's my job. I've read things people have said elsewhere but what she does and what her site does is to report information. What you do with it is your business. She isn't responsible for what other's say.



Part 1: Mysterious Bismuth and Magnesium-Zinc Metal from Bottom of Wedge-Shaped UFO
https://www.earthfiles.com/2019/09/0...2018-research/
Part 7 is really where there may be some value. There's not a lot of value because the BS factor is off the charts, but there's tiny amount.
https://www.earthfiles.com/2019/09/1...18-research-2/

Ok, so now the next part is what role is Zinc, or a Magnesium Zinc Alloy playing in the production of power.
I'm going to have to think about this a little bit and maybe do some hated homework. See about that but off hand a magnet, good ones, aren't made from a single material, and so there's a sort of similarity here in creation. A magnet is compressed material subjected to a high shock induced by an electric jolt which aligns the crystalline forms. Here we have the crystalline forms being laid down in layers. Something to think about. It seems like the idea here in this so called UFO artifact is about the same as making a magnet, only this process produces an sort of opposite quality in that the inducted surrounding dielectric field is not brought into a coherency as is produced by a magnet. That would be a very significant material if that is the intention of this layering and I will hazard a guess that could be the reason for the layers.

[Vinyasi]

Revised because it made no sense. Hopefully this will.
Vinyasi

This is a really great thread Vinyasi and I hope you don't mind if I offer a few unconventional thoughts.

This concept of differential materials is directly related to power generation in my opinion.

What you're working on is related to the question I posed on my thread on the ARV which I'm still awaiting any possible responses to. http://www.energeticforum.com/forum/...vehicle/page96

One way to see the application of differential metals is to view their use as something akin or similar to a binary code. One may see that in paramagnetic and diamagnetic we have essentially two opposites, or what could be seen as an equivalency to 1 & 2, or off and on.
https://www.earthfiles.com/2019/09/0...2018-research/

The gist of the idea I'm trying to communicate is that you're putting an electrical current in to a metal and which then creates a magnetic field. Depending on how the metals are arranged should have a effect on the outcome of the power generated.

The concept is really simple. If you have a paramagnetic and a diamagnetic and pulse each one in sequence then you produce a push pull effect. Not sure that's of any value with regards to this thread but thought I'd toss it in.

Aluminum versus lead diodes using an electrolyte involving either baking soda or borax was a kind of diode made 100 years ago by the old-timers. Upon looking up the position of lead on the periodic chart of elements, it became obvious that bismuth might be an alternate to lead and it might give different behavioral characteristics to such a diode.


One rare gem of a story of Tesla‘s 1931 pierce arrow experiment involves the use of a primary battery in other words a non-rechargeable battery in which zinc plates were replaceable i.e. expendable as an anode that degraded as the battery wore out and enough zinc plates were stored in the trunk of the car to last a year and it took five minutes to change out the plates so simply performed by even a child giving a 500 mile range per each new set of plates.

[Gambeir]

Revised because it made no sense. Hopefully this will.
Vinyasi

This is a really great thread Vinyasi and I hope you don't mind if I offer a few unconventional thoughts.

This concept of differential materials is directly related to power generation in my opinion.

What you're working on is related to the question I posed on my thread on the ARV which I'm still awaiting any possible responses to. http://www.energeticforum.com/forum/...vehicle/page96

One way to see the application of differential metals is to view their use as something akin or similar to a binary code. One may see that in paramagnetic and diamagnetic we have essentially two opposites, or what could be seen as an equivalency to 1 & 2, or off and on.
https://www.earthfiles.com/2019/09/0...2018-research/

The gist of the idea I'm trying to communicate is that you're putting an electrical current in to a metal and which then creates a magnetic field. Depending on how the metals are arranged should have a effect on the outcome of the power generated.

The concept is really simple. If you have a paramagnetic and a diamagnetic and pulse each one in sequence then you produce a push pull effect. Not sure that's of any value with regards to this thread but thought I'd toss it in.