Question for Peter, and all, about Newman machine

[bobo36us]

Hi Peter,

Great website! I am a huge fan and especially enjoy
your easy to understand videos.

I was just wondering if you have seen Joseph Newmans
latest machine:
Speed is Power

He is moving a 1700 pound flywheel and rotor with about
200 milliamps! The machine in the video is only spinning
about 150 rpm because that is all it can handle. The machine
is just some old beast he had laying around that he hand
built 4 or 5 years ago, and is not very well balanced.

But he claims to now have the technology to increase the
speed to the point of self destruction!

He also claims repeatedly that it is all about voltage and its potential
as opposed to amps.

I think he is doing it all on DC? Is this just a scaled up version
of your rotary attraction motor, or is he doing something totally different?

Thanks, Bob

[Peter Lindemann]

Thanks for the Link

Dear Bob,

Thanks for the Link to Joseph Newman's latest Google Video. I have taken a look at it. The machine is real. The machine is definitely turning a very large FLYWHEEL and running on "very little" power. Granted, it does have sufficient torque to start (from a specific position) and accelerate. The top speed shown is 106 RPM. This is certainly NOT unlimited speed. We are to take Joe's word for it that he has "solved" the speed problem of his motors, since high speed operation was not demonstrated.

What is missing from this video is:

1) a good look at the side of the motor to help the viewer understand what its structure is
2) a schematic diagram to help the viewer understand the circuit being demonstrated
3) better meters so the exact power input can be quantified more accurately

Please notice the very large CAPACITOR (gray box with white insulators) between the motor and the power supply. I have said repeatedly that motors that recover their own inductive collapse can be configured to direct it back to the THE FRONT of the circuit, thereby OFF-SETTING the input by the amount recovered. This type of circuit REQUIRES a capacitor in-between the primary supply and the motor. Under these circuit conditions, the machine can run on the LOSSES. If the system can recover 95% of its input power, the motor can run at FULL POWER for 5%. Since the losses are usually related to inductive coupling and semi-conductor voltage drops, losses usually drop as voltage goes up. If Joe is demonstrating a system with 98% recovery, then the motor is running at full power on 2% input. If he is demonstrating a system with 99.5% recovery, then the motor is running at full power on .5% input. The problem is, we don't know what we are looking at.

Joe's motors have always been very high voltage systems, with very high inductance and very high impedance. That is why they will run on "dead" batteries. All models I have seen also have a very large permanent magnet rotor. I have no doubt the machine is doing what it looks like it is doing, but the demonstration does not EDUCATE the viewer about either HOW it is done, or exactly WHAT is being done.

It is my personal opinion that if you fully understand the SG Motor, then you understand the basic principles of what Joe is demonstrating. Joe is also showing that Tesla was right: as the voltage rises, the energy gain and efficiency rises as well.

I am not sure that sending him $1 will help "save the world", but each Soul must follow their inner guidance.

Peter

[lighty]

Please notice the very large CAPACITOR (gray box with white insulators) between the motor and the power supply. I have said repeatedly that motors that recover their own inductive collapse can be configured to direct it back to the THE FRONT of the circuit, thereby OFF-SETTING the input by the amount recovered. This type of circuit REQUIRES a capacitor in-between the primary supply and the motor.

Could you please elaborate more technically-wise on that kind of setup? Is it a mere theoretical setup or did you test any construction of that type?

[Peter Lindemann]

Working models

Could you please elaborate more technically-wise on that kind of setup? Is it a mere theoretical setup or did you test any construction of that type?

Dear Lighty,

I have working models of this type of circuit at my shop. Aaron and many other people have seen it. I even demonstrated one set-up at the Extraordinary Technology Conference in Salt lake City last summer where dozens of people saw it.

The method is a simple variation of the recovery circuits published by John Bedini. I have chosen not to put it on the internet at this time. I know you are very smart. You can think it through.

Just ask yourself these questions. What is preventing me from taking the inductive collapse from a coil and using it again, immediately? What changes do I have to apply to the circuit to overcome this limitation?

Peter

[lighty]

Ahhhh, it seems I'll have to use my brain...

OK, so let's see, the problems involving direct recovery to power source could be several:

1. First of all inductive collapse impulse is extremely short and the high impedance inductive loads wouldn't be able to convert them to magnetic flux fast enough. In other words the motor coils wouldn't be able to use it's energy no matter how strong the impulse is. So, one would have to slow down the impulse or better yet store it in a kind of a energy "buffer". Both solutions could be valid.

2. Secondly the voltage of the inductive collapse is quite high in comparison to the primary energizing source and that could cause problems with burning components and isolation. So, one would have to lower the voltage while at the same time preserving the energy and not wasting it. Again one of the two kinds of energy "buffers" could be used solely or together in combination.

3. The nature of the energy of the inductive collapse is somewhat different than in the case of the "classical" electron current. So, again one would need some kind of energy "buffer" where the energy could be converted to a degree that could be useful for use in the closed circuit, electromagnetic machines.


So, if I think about the component that could satisfy all three requirements (at least in theory) the first thing that comes to mind is the capacitor. First of all formation of the electric field between plates is infinitesimally short so it could easily absorb the inductive collapse (hence the use of the capacitor in the Bedini SG). Secondly the only thing that would have to be high voltage rated in the whole system would be recovery diode and capacitor since the voltage at the capacitor would be significantly lower than the peak voltage of the inductive collapse impulses. In this case the voltage could then be determined with the capacity of the capacitor. As for the third requirement I must venture into a bit of an educated guesswork here. In my experience capacitors do show a tendency to "transform" one kind of energy to another depending on how they're used. In this case it would simply be used in a way to ensure the electron flow to the motor power coils.

Now, as for the connection schematic there are a few possible solutions available:

1. One could simply connect capacitor in parallel to the power source and then direct to it inductive collapse impulses. That solution wouldn't be so bad since the power source would give a sort of a constant "DC bias" to the capacitor hence preventing the inductive collapse charging to take any power from the primary source since the inductive collapse charge would draw current from the system (depending on the de-magnetization curve of the power coils and their cores and the frequency of the impulses) up to the point of the voltage equalization of the primary source and the capacitor that is being charged.

So, in this case the capacitor is serving as a kind of "energy buffer" and (at least in theory) fulfill all three requirements in full. Of course this is but a theoretical exercise since I didn't try this kind of arrangement.


2. The second option would be to charge the capacitor that is separated from the primary source of energy and then to discharge it to the system at some predetermined voltage. One could for example use the differential voltage switch to release energy to the system at the optimal point where it would add the energy to the system without burning up circuitry. A semiconductor device like MOSFET or IGBT would serve the role of switch easily. Of course one could easily use a thyristor but depending on the discharge time of the capacitor and the frequency of the inductive collapse impulses the latch-up condition could easily occur.

This kind of recycling of energy would be more to the spirit of the Bedini systems (at least the public ones) but would be a tad more complicated to produce since one would have to determine the proper capacity of the capacitor and the proper voltage differential to discharge it.



Of course there are some other options involving a kind of "slowing down" of inductive discharge impulses that I could think of that could possibly be used solely or in combination with the capacitor method but they would require a somewhat special construction and a great deal more experimenting.


Am I on the right track Peter? I also noticed that at the Newman system there is a big pulse capacitor in the circuit but I was not sure if it's a part of a circuit or simply a leftover from some other experiment.

I would try this myself but currently I'm involved with the experiments of a totally different nature and I simply don't have time to try it all out. Also, I don't have an attraction motor on which to try it out since I suspect the demagnetization curve of the stator as well as rotor play important role and it's effect might influence the performance of the motor torque-wise or RPM-wise (as opposed to the static coils I experimented with).

BTW- whether I'm on the right track or not I do love these mental exercises from time to time. Thanks Peter!


P.S.
BTW- it would be more appropriate if this conversation was a part of your Electric Motor Secrets thread since it's very pertinent to the energy recovery you're proposing. Maybe it could be moved there? (Just a suggestion though).

[adam ant]

what about this?

can Back EMF be rerouted like in this picture? (sorry about quality)



R-1 will have slightly more resistance than the coil, so the innitial charge will take that route. but when the back EMF hits the blocking diode, it must take the path of least resistance and exit out of R-1's lead. that can be used in the motor or for other purposes.

of course there is still much loss, and it wouldnt take you past COP 1, but it would be a simple solution to assist motors already in existance.

[Jetijs]

Lighty,
great post man
All the things you said matches with what I have been thinkering about the recovery. In my opinion your soulution #2 with seperating the capacitor from the primary power source is the way to go. Thank you

[lighty]

@adam ant

No matter that the R-1 resistance is slightly higher than that of the coil. The power source charge will go through that branch as well (see Ohm's law and Thevenin's theorem).

[adam ant]

innitial charge goes through R-1 no matter what?

i always thought that energy, like water and air, follows the path of least resistance. even if there is a little amount that goes through innitially, does it really matter much?

forgive my ignorance of this, it has been ten years since i have worked on any of this.

[Ewhaz]

Actually your pretty right on thinking about electricity flow as water flow, your mistake is not seeing how it applies to the circuit.

The resistor will get current flow through it, but it will be however much it can allow according to ohms law. It will divide itself between the two resistive paths based on ohms law.

If you think of it like water, think of it like this. Two tubes have restrictors in them that reduce the diameter of the pipe. One is slightly larger than the other and so more water goes through it than the other, but it does go through so long as there is an opening.

The resistors resist electron flow, not stop it. Its just like the water it will take the path of least resistance, but that path is divided between the two restrictions put in its way. Only if one path was completely open would you see a serious drop in the restricted path, but so long as there was any pressure behind that restriction, there would be some flow coming out of it.

[elias]

Actually your pretty right on thinking about electricity flow as water flow, your mistake is not seeing how it applies to the circuit.

The resistor will get current flow through it, but it will be however much it can allow according to ohms law. It will divide itself between the two resistive paths based on ohms law.

If you think of it like water, think of it like this. Two tubes have restrictors in them that reduce the diameter of the pipe. One is slightly larger than the other and so more water goes through it than the other, but it does go through so long as there is an opening.

The resistors resist electron flow, not stop it. Its just like the water it will take the path of least resistance, but that path is divided between the two restrictions put in its way. Only if one path was completely open would you see a serious drop in the restricted path, but so long as there was any pressure behind that restriction, there would be some flow coming out of it.

Ehwaz,

Everything is essentially water, but not the water we see but the water of the other dimension. I have come to believe the so called aether is water the giver of life to the whole universe. See this thread on Superlight which I think is the creative water of the universe. http://www.energeticforum.com/renewa...uperlight.html

Also I suggest Stan Deyo's Video about Antigravity. He has done a wonderful job. He has simulated the Whole Solar System by using The Waves on Water. It is pretty interesting and is worth seeing. The planets just pop up when inducing waves on the water. (Very Eye Opening)

Kindest Regards
Elias

[adam ant]

you see Ewhaz, that is exactly how i am picturing it...
however, in certain water applications you can actually get a vaccum, through the venturi effect, through the second opening. everything must be sized and angled just right, but it does work. i use a special device that vacumms aquariums with water flow from a sink. it is quite powerful and effective.

my statement about the R-1 was just speculative, but if there needs to be a larger resistance, perhaps that is the way to go.

[ray0energy]

my expiriments on the Newman motor

hello i am Ray and i am new here and like to share my findings on the Newman motor.

i a from Holland and i am studying this subject ready for same time now.
i started my road 5 years a go wen i find the 2 video of Peter Lindemann on the Gray motor and Tesla. i was totally hooked and look to this videos over and over again to understand it. now 5 years later i find 3 more videos and it gif me a lot of fate in this technology

in short the newman motor is like the wat Peter is doing only the ar still same things different but mainly the same.

my english is a bit shirty s don't main my english

here is my youtube site ware i put more then 50 videos of my expiriments on diverent supjects like Bedini, Newman, and peter. i hoop u like it!

YouTube - ray0energy's Channel


and her is my last video on the newman motor running on hi speed hi volt drivet by a PWM module

YouTube - newman motor powerd by a PWM volt stepup 12/50vdc

YouTube - newman motor powerd by a PWM volt stepup 12/50vdc part2

and here is a video ware i feed the output for the motor back to the ader site

YouTube - Newman motor 2 pulse wit one battery

Ray0energy

ps: i like to thanks Peter lindeman for all the work he dit over all this years it

[Aaron]

welcome Ray

Welcome Ray!

Thanks for sharing the great videos!

[Ewhaz]

you see Ewhaz, that is exactly how i am picturing it...
however, in certain water applications you can actually get a vaccum, through the venturi effect, through the second opening. everything must be sized and angled just right, but it does work. i use a special device that vacumms aquariums with water flow from a sink. it is quite powerful and effective.

my statement about the R-1 was just speculative, but if there needs to be a larger resistance, perhaps that is the way to go.

Actually mentioning the venturi valve seems to make a lot of sense all the sudden. If we think about whats happening in a venturi valve, perhaps we can make an analogy to electricity and what's happening with the energy.

Basically a venturi valve works on the basis of pressure. There is always a potential difference where any two different pressures exist. High pressure flows to low pressure. In a venturi valve, the flow of water is restricted slightly, causing the speed to increase and the pressure to drop. At that point, the low pressure system will draw high pressure into itself. The venturi valve uses this principle to create a vacuum. I used this principle to create a mister for my lathe at work, it draws up coolant and mists it over my parts.

Now just before the restriction, there is high pressure as well. The slower water behind the resistance is of high pressure and slower flow rate.

If we take the analogy of High pressure, pressure being voltage, and the idea that any resistance in the system is an analogy for a restriction in flow of water. We have a situation where the high pulses of electricity create venturi valve analogs at every point of resistance. They draw in more power from the outside. Now unlike a water system, which can be open ended, the electrical systems are always closed loops because of the way they've been designed.

If you created a closed loop system in water (Such as a pump circulating water), no matter how much restriction you had in the system, if you tried to utilize a vacuum in the system it wouldn't work, you would either get nothing going in, or something coming out as the system strives to achieve perfect balance. That being said, how do we create a perfectly open system with electricity so we can amplify the evironmental amplification effect?