Back EMF vs. Collapsing Magnetic Field Spike

[darkwizard]

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Jump to: navigation, search

The counter-electromotive force (abbreviated counter emf, or CEMF ) [1] is the voltage, or electromotive force, that pushes against the current which induces it. CEMF is caused by a changing electromagnetic field. It is represented by Lenz's Law of electromagnetism. Back electromotive force is a voltage that occurs in electric motors where there is relative motion between the armature of the motor and the external magnetic field. One practical application is to use this phenomenon to indirectly measure motor speed and position [2]. Counter emf is a voltage developed in an inductor network by a pulsating current or an alternating current [1]. The voltage's polarity is at every moment the reverse of the input voltage [1][3]


Seems that if one puts the tester points on the coil it will measure counter.

It is not back emf, but negative energy, seems the electronics read back emf, i don't know why.

[Aaron]

back emf is NOT the spike

Dark Wizard, please understand this:

Back EMF is always LOWER than what is applied.

If Back EMF can be higher, which is what is collected when collecting the spike, that means that it would be impossible for any motor with back emf to even run, ever and would mean that the opposition coming back is MORE than what went in...that would stop any back emf motor in its tracks.

What you are quoting is very well known and is still NOT what is being captured. The spike is simply NOT back emf. Yes, there can be an opposition when the power is disconnected since it tries to maintain itself, but again, that has nothing to do with the spike.

[darkwizard]

I know what the spike is, it is the heaviside flow returning to the coil, but the heaviside flow seems to be depending on the current, just symmetric?

[Aaron]

what the spike is

Any person with a background of electronics knows what is this spike but they ignore it, they simply call this spike BACK EMF

I know what the spike is, it is the heaviside flow returning to the coil, but the heaviside flow seems to be depending on the current, just symmetric?

Anyone with a background in electronics that calls the spike the Back EMF doesn't understand the distinction and if this is what is conventionally being taught, then it is flat out wrong and is a shame.

The gas that went into the coil is coming back as a spike because it is time compressed. The aether provides a free inwards push on anything displacing it. So when a coil is charged, this free inwards push is what is snapping the potential back to the coil on disconnect so fast virtually with no opposition. And, while it snapped back, it creates a true vacuum meaning it is free of positive potential that can cause resistance and this sucks in more energy from the vacuum with it adding to the potential....so there is a gain in potential by this mechanism. The inward snap of the potential causes a negative pressure zone...it sucks in extra potential from the vacuum. This is what the spike is and why it brings back more with it.

None of this is Back EMF and it isn't Forward EMF either.

The Heaviside flow is not dependent on current, actually it is the other way around in a closed circuit.

Also, the Heaviside flow can move over wires in impulses in open loop mode so there is no current.

[darkwizard]

I can't figure how to obtain extra energy , perhaps is just only theory.

The only way i see, is using the magnetic field B at the Bedini Sg, producing mechanical energy and convert part of this mechanical energy into electrical energy.

So we got radiant energy plus electric energy.

[sucahyo]

@jetijs, the scope shot help me learn the importance of the core, thanks .

@Aaron, thanks for much info.

Do anyone try this yet, posted by Aromaz on Aromaz thread:
How It Works
"What i came up with was a coil pack that when pulsing the coil it pushed the magnetic feild off the coil pack then as the wave from the pulse stoped we could collect the back energy from that same wire and use it to power a battery.
...
What i found was that a wave to pulse into the coil is not a normal wave. The wave we use helps us getmore power back out of out coil setup. the power going into the coil pack is between 1000 - 2000 Hz. Most people when they build my style of unit use a regular wave form and try to remove the power and that is the problem."

Do coil with opposing permanent magnet core have more spike? What kind of pulse is that?

[Guest]

@Aaron, what is your take on the spike of the diode inductor side of the Stan Meyer WFC?

Will the spike "bounce" right back into the water bath from the diode? Or does it go somewhere else?

[nilrehob]

Good morning, knights of the round table!

Whenever I hear someone, be it a politician, a priest, a scientist, a teacher or my wife, higher the voice rather than sharpening the arguments I get suspicious.

If there are no argument to satisfy skeptic enthusiasts there will never be any argument to convince the fanatical skeptics.

So far this spike thing is just another way of increasing voltage and lower the current. Here is another way of getting high voltage: Voltage multiplier - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia which is quite similar.

But this is "Energetic forum" and not "Voltage forum". The current is "almost" zero in the spike so the energy in the spike is not higher than the energy in the coil before shutoff.

Since the spikes are quite central in many circuits under the "free energy"-flag I find it very important to get the theory right here before I move on, so please sharpen the arguments.

What is needed is a simple, easy to replicate, two-stage experiment that would go something like this:
Stage 1: Do this circuit like this and measure this like that and You will get a result which confirms to this ancient formula for calculating energy.
Stage 2: Change the circuit just a bit in this way and You will get new cool results that no known formula can predict.

If there is no experiment like this then this is all about a search for the holy grail and and in this thread we are arguing about which is our favorite color!

[Aaron]

spike - energy - potential distinctions

So far this spike thing is just another way of increasing voltage and lower the current.

The current is "almost" zero in the spike so the energy in the spike is not higher than the energy in the coil before shutoff.

That's right, getting the voltage potential without the current or bare minimum current...but it is possible to pick off the spike without the current. It isn't simple step up transformation, it is a time rate of change and that is why usually 1:1 turn ratio is used because that is the most efficient for this purpose as far as I know.

Also, in the spike, energy is almost non-existent, that is why it is called potential or potential energy. There is no such thing as energy, it is an adjective to describe the movement of a potential to another potential...high to low or low to high, meaning there is work being done...positive or negative work, entropy or negentropy.

When the voltage potential comes back, it draws more potential to it from the vacuum, adding to the sum of potential, which then gets transferred to a receiver...battery, capacitor, whatever. Once this potential is gathered, it has to go through "forward conversion" then it can move to a lower potential to light a bulb or whatever and as the work is being performed, that work is what energy is. What was being stored? Time. That is why time (width) doesn't show up on the spike - TIME is being conserved within that voltage potential...you'll see some width if you zoom way in at the bottom but for all pracitcal purposes, it is a spike without current.

The higher the voltage, the higher the pressure and therefore, the more dense the aetheric gas is. The denser the gas, the slower the time because it is all locked up in the density that gives a lot of resistance to mass' ability to move.

Let the time out by making it do work...you get work because you let the time out of the pressure..pressure goes down...the less resistance there is to the movement of mass and therefore, time ticks quicker.

The spike is literally a TIME CHARGE. That isn't an analogy or metahpor...it is TIME POTENTIAL that is being used to charge caps or batteries...that is what the spike is.

Anyway, the title of this thread is: "Back EMF vs. Collapsing Magnetic Field Spike"

It has been firmly established by pointing out multiple references of what Back EMF is defined as and none of them are the spike.

I've only been involved with this field for 9 years, which is not as long as many members here but when I started, I also thought that Back EMF was what I was capturing to charge batteries.

Bedini told me to build my coils big so the first trifilar's I built, which I still use are built different from everyone elses. I wanted to get around back emf so bad this is what I did as it was my interpretation of the dual battery charger schematic.

I wound the power and trigger winding together around the coil first. THEN, I wound the recovery winding around those, the same amount of turns, but in the OPPOSITE direction. My thought was that if the Back EMF is Lenz's law, which it is and the counter current is in the opposite direction, then my reverse turned recovery winding should siphon off any back emf through the bridge to the cap so that the forward applied field met less resistance. Electromagnetic Jujitsu.

So to make a long story short, I learned the back emf is not what is used to charge the batteries - and again, back emf is not the spike.

[nilrehob]

@Aaron,

If I understand You correctly this is the experiment I asked for:

Step 1: Replace batt being charged with cap

Measure energy from driving batt, compare with energy showing up in cap; energy in cap is smaller than energy drawn from bat.

Step 2: Coil is wound as 2+1

Do the same measurement; energy in cap is bigger than energy drawn from bat.

How many turns and what core in the trifilar coil?
Any other requirements?

[nilrehob]

Most of what has been written here are all just theories, and theories means nothing unless You can back it up with experiments that cannot be explained by already known and by experiments proven theories.

I therefore ask, once again, for a two-step experiment that will establish this new theory. Even a one-step experiment is fine.

If there is no experiment to back it up with, just say so, its quite OK, I'll personally continue to experiment anyway (simply because I think its fun).
If no one knows of a suitable experiment, please stop acting as if this new theory is a fact.
If there *is* an experiment known by users in this forum but who won't reveal it, then who is suppressing technologies now?

And yes, I *will* make the trifilar coil circuit, just for fun.
And probably a bunch of other circuits as well...

[lighty]

@Aaron

Although I do agree with most of what you've said I may have to differ on the point of inductive discharge spikes being pure potential without current. Behavior of that spike largely depends on the impedance of the load- smaller the impedance the more current you get.

The problem of the theory is that when the impedance of load is very high the current is so low that it's very hard to measure it. I mean I used top of the range equipment and still find it difficult because of the extremely small currents impulses with very short duration time. Also, there are problems related to grounding of the equipment, of using appropriate probes (high Z introduces signal noise problems as well as reducing the time response required to capture those small currents).

However, there is one thing there is indicative- if you discharge coil into a high resistance carbon or metalfilm resistor and put a high Z choke in series with load (and we're talking about great number of turns in the order of 20'000) like I did you will notice that a magnetic field will be produced which is indicative of some small current passing from discharged coil into the load. So, no pure potential is possible with this setup if you don't use infinitely high Z load (which is physically impossible).

I think that it's basically the same problem as with using Avramenko plug. I mean, most people believes that capacitor is charged by pure potential which is basically untrue. The problem presented with that system is also that current is so very small that one has a major problem measuring it. Again, if one puts high Z choke between HF generator and Avramenko plug magnetic field will be produced since there is definately some small current passing. Also, contrary to most people thinks- Avramenko plug is not so hard to simulate in advanced EM simulators and the behaviour of the simulated models is pretty much consistent with the mesured performance- the thing is that simulation also predicts small current passing from source to Avramenko. Small current is the main reason for the requirements like using HF and HV to practically charge capacitor with Avramenko plug.


My whole point is that some things are extremely hard to measure even if you know exactly what to look for, if you have required knowledge and if you have top of the range equipment at your disposal. I don't mean to say that Bedini (or Bearden for that matter) is wrong but I think that a lot of things are being too easily taken on their word alone. The point of scientific discussion is to question their assertations. You may remember that although I have a great respect for Peter Lindemann I was engaging him in discussion in order to proof-test his theories as well as mine. There is simply no other way in science. At this point, I would be hard pressed to decide inductive discharge impulses are indeed time charge. Not enough exact measurements have been done and aside from higher math theories no real engineering and simulation methods have been devised to completely prove or disprove the theory. I mean, people said that Avramenko plug cannot be simulated and my friend did it. People also said that Tesla's pancake coils have some magical properties- well they don't have it. Simulation exactly predicted measured behaviour which means it's all well within the conventional EM theory. The only "mystical parts" were predicted with the new metamaterials theory. So, everything is still well within the bounds of mainstream science- I mean metamaterials are a quite new branch of science but it is mainstream science nevertheless.

That being said, that doesn't mean there aren't some great uses for all those intersesting effects and devices. That's what it's all about, isn't it?

[boguslaw]

There is no mystery, just a omitted fact.We are living immersed in weak(?) Earth magnetic field, which is everywhere.

Experiments should explain what happen with that field when coil is charged by own magnetic field. Does it repel or attract Earth field ? Because some interference cannot be avoided, look for example in any good old book about vacuum tubes, or follow overunity.com threads about TPU.

I think that most interesting experiment will be simple : two exact transformers connected in reverse powered by generator. If "inside" flyback spike there is another hidden element caused by influence with Earth magnetic field then after some little time energy accumulated in such circuit will tend to form high frequency current and be self-sustaining with proper condition of circuit ( constant lag of currents between transformers).

TPU was made by such simple principle I think.


In other words if flyback spike is free, or if it contain weak element from Earth magnetic field (hidden or hard to measure) - then USING that energy to induce another spike and so on WILL SOON create tremendous power gain.

[jibbguy]

The power of transient spikes

As far as asking for proof of the existence of the "power of spikes"' this is widely known in electronics (and has been for a century): Especially with high current electrical applications such as DC "SCR" Drives for heavy manufacturing production lines . These are the motor controls/drives which power large conveyors or other types of industrial lines found in steel, paper, aluminum mills or other places such as DC cantenary-powered light rail / trains (although SCR Drives are now rather obsolete and variable F drives are replacing them).

When these DC drives cut in, despite the cascaded relays, giant caps, and other dampening techniques, they can sometimes cause major problems and disruptions for as far as half a mile / 1 km away... On devices with completely separate power sources (...which is the key here to it being "unique"). When i was working in the "Test and Measurement" instrumentation field; one of our biggest applications was power monitoring / troubleshooting for these extremely powerful transient spikes in DC systems which cause great havoc to unshielded electronic equipment (sometimes permanently damaging them)... Which act a lot like the classic definition of an "EMP pulse".

Using digital recording chart oscillographic recorders/data acquisition systems, the User could trigger on the spike and use "pre-trigger" to see the events leading up to the spikes, as well as the post-event results (sometimes with as many as 100 data channels), and thus find the component that was the cause of them. Lol, we sometimes had to power the recorders and their signal conditioners from batteries/inverters and put them in a "Faraday Cage" heavily shielded box to keep them running reliably in this environment... Despite using a widely separate Earth ground.

This spike phenomena is empirical fact.... Not theory

What is not "fact" is the mainstream's explanation for them... Which is completely lame and does not fit the reality (from what i have read in the industry literature they claim the disruptions come from the ground/power supply)... Until they finally embrace Longitudinal Wave Theory (imo, anyway).

I have verified this personally by monitoring the power of the distant devices (usually computers) that were effected: No transients were seen on their incoming power with separate circuits/grounds. It is coming through the "air", there is no doubt of that.

So there is tremendous power in transient spikes, and harnessing it will be one key to reaching "free energy"... As many devices using pulses have shown.

[lighty]

I never said that inductive discharge spikes don't have power to create havoc with electronic equipment- it all comes down to the voltage levels (responsible for destroying components by causing dielectric breakthrough, also for efficient transfer of high levels of energy through capacitive coupling), total amount of discharged energy (depending on the size of the magnetic core, density of magnetic flux, hysteresis of magnetic systems etc.), as well as on the amount of potential energy converted into current (depending on the impedance of load) as well as on the length of the impulse (depending on a few of the before mentioned factors), finally there is also accentuated damped wave oscillation present at higher Z loads that are basically acting as RF transmitters (how efficient they can transmit depends on the particular configuration).

Also, with appropriate equipment it is not so hard capturing these events. With fast enough DSO (as high analogue bandwidth as possible and sampling rate) one can easily see that spike is far from ideal- it has rising slope and falling slope, as well as the damped wave oscillations when falling slope hits the original starting voltage value. Then, when introducing different loads one can see how it all affects the width of the impulse, how much voltage is getting converted into current etc. Most of the people use low bandwidth skopes and that's why they see simple "spikes". Those are not spikes at all, they're much more complex waveforms.

I don't doubt the existence of longitudinal waves- I had opportunity to see Meyl's demonstrations and to discuss it with him personaly. I also had opportunity to listen to the lectures of the Strebkov (Avramenko was only one of the three engineers involved on the single wire transmission for the Russian ministry, there were also Strebkov and Zaev) and to hear and see figures proving that Tesla's wireless transmission of energy was indeed his single wire system in which ground replaced that single wire- so it's basically the same system. Tesla said so himself at the trial against Marconi. So, longitudinal waves are better known in mainstream science than most people are aware of. Also, a great deal of research was done by Russians and Germans and for the most part they aren't available in English language or freely on the internet. One has to look through the relevant literature. So, I still don't see a need to introduce "time charge".