Peter, whatever happened with Eric P. Dollard?

[handyandy]

It looks to me that Eric Dollard is continuing work at Bolinas CA and has a website documenting it here: Home :: AMERICAN MARCONI FOUNDATION. It also looks like he's attempting to make his publications available to the public. It seems to me that there's several approaches depending on the persons involved.

In researching Eric Dollards power converter I came across a couple of voltage regulators manufactured by General Radio (WWII era) that claimed to be 90-110% correction (Fair Radio Sales = General Radio Voltage Regulator 1582A or 1582A-AL2) That's not too shabby. I can't afford the $200+ price tag at the moment. It looks to do with power factor correction and mil-spec field radio communications of which I know little about.

It would be great to have Eric Dollard and Hector Peres in the same room. I think they both say the same thing but in different ways. RE=RF=COP>1

Regards,
Andy

[vrand]

It looks to me that Eric Dollard is continuing work at Bolinas CA and has a website documenting it here: Home :: AMERICAN MARCONI FOUNDATION. It also looks like he's attempting to make his publications available to the public. It seems to me that there's several approaches depending on the persons involved.

In researching Eric Dollards power converter I came across a couple of voltage regulators manufactured by General Radio (WWII era) that claimed to be 90-110% correction (Fair Radio Sales = General Radio Voltage Regulator 1582A or 1582A-AL2) That's not too shabby. I can't afford the $200+ price tag at the moment. It looks to do with power factor correction and mil-spec field radio communications of which I know little about.

It would be great to have Eric Dollard and Hector Peres in the same room. I think they both say the same thing but in different ways. RE=RF=COP>1

Regards,
Andy

Thank you for the heads up on Eric Dollard & the General Radio Voltage Regulators

https://www.fairradio.com/catalog.ph...=20&submit.y=1
GR-1582A - GENERAL RADIO 1582A VOLTAGE REGULATOR, automatically compensates for AC Line voltage fluctuations; output 115 VAC +/-10%; 7.4x19x16, 132 lbs sh. 85 amps, 90-110% correction, $275.00 each

GR1582A-AL2 - GENERAL RADIO VOLTAGE REGULATOR, 42.5 A, 82-124% correction
$265.00 each

Next question is how to convert one of these to power out > power in?

- Anyone have a clue?
- Is there a schematic or parts list?

Regards

[LtBolo]

Is it really so hard?

On Naudin's Parametric Power Conversion pages, where Fred Epps quotes from the English version of 1934 Russian paper, what they describe really doesn't seem too difficult. The problem is that folks may not be paying close attention to what is actually said, and therefore what is required.

In short, increase inductance in a resonant circuit at the peak of magnetic energy, and remove the increase at the peak of electrostatic energy. The change in inductance increases the energy in the coil by 1/2dLi^2. If the increase is greater than the losses of 1/2Ri^2(T/2), then the oscillations increase in intensity. Simple.

The problem arises where folks are trying to use saturated transformers to vary L, and in doing so, almost universally change L in the wrong direction at the wrong time. I think it can be done solid state, but it will be far more challenging.

Naudin's example, VARIND4 seems marginal because of the very low delta L and high R in the coil. It's also not clear to me that he is varying the inductance at the right times or by the amounts claimed. Meaning...the experiment proves almost nothing.

In our lab here, we made a small transformer with a nanoperm core. The secondary is ~8H at rest and ~200mH at saturation. By using a small DC bias to put it just under saturation, and then pulsing into saturation, we were able to demonstration a varying resonance frequency at turn on and turn off...something absolutely key to testing the theory. By playing with the turn off time, we were able to increase the inductance at a low point of one of the rings from the turn on...in essence at a current peak. The result was a considerably larger spike than I had seen from normal ringing. I think that is the effect that must be harnessed.

I am of the conclusion that it will be much easier mechanically, at least at first, than solid state, so that is the direction we are going.

Another thought: If you haven't seen the WITTS generator, take a look at it. I am increasingly convinced that it is nothing more than synchronous parameter variation. If you put two large coils in opposition, and rotated a section of core material to make and break a central magnetic path, when the path is broken, the inductors in direct opposition behave like air cores, but when the path is made, they no longer oppose and behave like iron core inductors. With a coil as big as what is there, the inductance could easily be swinging whole henries.

I think the additional 2 coils on the top and bottom are likely there to regulate the power. Per the Russian article, this thing needs regulation to keep from eating itself.

Another thought: In the article, they talk about using neon lamps for loads. The importance is that those lamps provide no load until the voltage gets above several hundred volts. Given that the excess power is a function of i^2, until the current gets high enough, you can't take anything out. You load it wrong...you get nothing out.

Final thought: Eric Dollard said something about this technology being suited to higher power outputs. Given that it is related to i^2, that makes perfect sense.

[SuperCaviTationIstic]

i started a thread about using a toroid wound both toroidally and polarally.... using one of the windings for a DC magnetic amplifier and the other for AC.

if you varied the DC in relation to the AC you'd have a very nice parametric setup

[LtBolo]

I messed with that a bit and didn't see any parameter change. It would be nice if it worked though. Maybe I should revisit.

[Armagdn03]

On Naudin's Parametric Power Conversion pages, where Fred Epps quotes from the English version of 1934 Russian paper, what they describe really doesn't seem too difficult. The problem is that folks may not be paying close attention to what is actually said, and therefore what is required.

In short, increase inductance in a resonant circuit at the peak of magnetic energy, and remove the increase at the peak of electrostatic energy. The change in inductance increases the energy in the coil by 1/2dLi^2. If the increase is greater than the losses of 1/2Ri^2(T/2), then the oscillations increase in intensity. Simple.

The problem arises where folks are trying to use saturated transformers to vary L, and in doing so, almost universally change L in the wrong direction at the wrong time. I think it can be done solid state, but it will be far more challenging.

Naudin's example, VARIND4 seems marginal because of the very low delta L and high R in the coil. It's also not clear to me that he is varying the inductance at the right times or by the amounts claimed. Meaning...the experiment proves almost nothing.

In our lab here, we made a small transformer with a nanoperm core. The secondary is ~8H at rest and ~200mH at saturation. By using a small DC bias to put it just under saturation, and then pulsing into saturation, we were able to demonstration a varying resonance frequency at turn on and turn off...something absolutely key to testing the theory. By playing with the turn off time, we were able to increase the inductance at a low point of one of the rings from the turn on...in essence at a current peak. The result was a considerably larger spike than I had seen from normal ringing. I think that is the effect that must be harnessed.

I am of the conclusion that it will be much easier mechanically, at least at first, than solid state, so that is the direction we are going.

Another thought: If you haven't seen the WITTS generator, take a look at it. I am increasingly convinced that it is nothing more than synchronous parameter variation. If you put two large coils in opposition, and rotated a section of core material to make and break a central magnetic path, when the path is broken, the inductors in direct opposition behave like air cores, but when the path is made, they no longer oppose and behave like iron core inductors. With a coil as big as what is there, the inductance could easily be swinging whole henries.

I think the additional 2 coils on the top and bottom are likely there to regulate the power. Per the Russian article, this thing needs regulation to keep from eating itself.

Another thought: In the article, they talk about using neon lamps for loads. The importance is that those lamps provide no load until the voltage gets above several hundred volts. Given that the excess power is a function of i^2, until the current gets high enough, you can't take anything out. You load it wrong...you get nothing out.

Final thought: Eric Dollard said something about this technology being suited to higher power outputs. Given that it is related to i^2, that makes perfect sense.

very well stated, it would be worth the time and effort to develop effective parameter changing technologies in and of themselves, the rest will fall into place.

[vrand]

Is it really so hard?

If it so easy, why has nobody been able to reproduce the Don Smith or Eric Dollard devices over the past 20 - 30 years?

Hello Eric Dollard, if you are out there, can you please comment on how you converted the WWII Power Converter to "self sustains" your car? Schematic & Parts List? Photos? Videos?

I have a device, built for the Army Air Corps during World War 2, A/N number PP-18/AR Power Converter, which self-sustains the electrical system in my car. It uses the same theory of operation as Chris’s device but involves a different mechanical implementation utilizing a vibrator, several capacitors and 12V and 24V batteries that are connected in parallel through the device, rendering them as one.

Can you describe Chris's device? Schematic & Parts List? Photos? Videos?

"Extraordinary claims require extraordinary evidence".

Regards

[LtBolo]

very well stated, it would be worth the time and effort to develop effective parameter changing technologies in and of themselves, the rest will fall into place.

I think that is exactly what needs to happen. If you can reliably and efficiently control capacitance and/or inductance, this becomes comparatively simple.

Here is a bit of glimpse of what I was describing in my previous post.

PARM1.JPG: Yellow trace is primary excitation through a 33ohm resistor. Primary is right on the edge of saturation and the ring frequency changes with the level of saturation. This is parameter variation causing non-linear oscillations.

PARM2.JPG: Shifting the primary excitation to allow it to come a bit more out of saturation. Notice the ring frequency drops considerably.

PARM3.JPG: Primary excitation is shifted until it is coming almost completely out of saturation. Ring frequency is far lower still. Notice that a 3v swing on the primary produces a 2v move on the secondary.

DUTY.JPG: Since the parametric boost is related to the current, I start reducing the pulse duty cycle to bring the trailing edge of the pulse (the inductance increase) back into the turn-on ring where there is some current to play with. Notice that the spike is now about 2.5v.

PULSE.JPG: Here I have pulled the trailing edge all the way back to the first saturated ring. I have also reduced the excitation voltage to about 2v, but the output pulse is now up to nearly 10v.

TRANSFORMER.JPG: Same setup and frequency at a 50% duty, not saturated, no parameter change.

Conclusions: Not sure, really. The spike at the parameter change in PULSE.JPG is very energetic, and this is where the Russian paper claims the excess energy is. I haven't done a power comparison between it and normal transformer behavior, so I can't say that there is anything extra there, but it does look interesting.

[LtBolo]

If it so easy, why has nobody been able to reproduce the Don Smith or Eric Dollard devices over the past 20 - 30 years?

Can't say about Don Smith. He's so random it's hard to tell what he's really saying half the time.

As for Dollard, I think people have, although most of what I see appears to be wrong based on what I've been trying to explain. I think the WITTS device may be exactly this. They won't give details, however, for their own reasons.

Jim Murray's device is fully documented in his patent, and he seems to want someone to run with it, yet I don't see anybody doing so.

I think Chris Carson's device is precisely the same as the Russian paper, done with capacitance. The problem of capacitance is you have to get north of 10kv to get any meaningful power, given small changes in C. I think it is the harder way to do this.


Our next step will be to build a mechanically variable inductive device. The key will be to get high permeability core material to get the inductance high and still keep the coil resistance low. Spin the core at 2x the effective resonant frequency of the tank, and watch it go.

If you study the translation of the Russian paper that Dollard cites, that's pretty much what they describe. At least that's the theory...

[Sputins]

Translation of the Russian Paper?

If you study the translation of the Russian paper that Dollard cites, that's pretty much what they describe. At least that's the theory...

Ok, do you have a link or could you post a copy of the translated Russian paper? (I used a link posted somewhere previously on this thread and it just sent me around in circles, & was unable to download it)..

I myself may experiment soon with the capacitance variation over time concept.. I think Eric Dollard said in a previous post here, that changing inductance in relation to time destroyed energy, while changing capacitance in relation to time, created energy..?

Never-the-less something unusual, seems to be going on here.

Cheers.

[Raui]

Great find phi and vrand! I myself have found a paper by Nicholas Minorsky on parametric oscillation. I'll upload it somewhere soon, I'm rather busy with school at the moment.

Can't say about Don Smith. He's so random it's hard to tell what he's really saying half the time.

As for Dollard, I think people have, although most of what I see appears to be wrong based on what I've been trying to explain. I think the WITTS device may be exactly this. They won't give details, however, for their own reasons.

Jim Murray's device is fully documented in his patent, and he seems to want someone to run with it, yet I don't see anybody doing so.

I think Chris Carson's device is precisely the same as the Russian paper, done with capacitance. The problem of capacitance is you have to get north of 10kv to get any meaningful power, given small changes in C. I think it is the harder way to do this.


Our next step will be to build a mechanically variable inductive device. The key will be to get high permeability core material to get the inductance high and still keep the coil resistance low. Spin the core at 2x the effective resonant frequency of the tank, and watch it go.

If you study the translation of the Russian paper that Dollard cites, that's pretty much what they describe. At least that's the theory...

I have been looking everywhere for the translation of this paper, would you kindly point me in the direction of this translated paper or send me a PM and I can contact you via email? Thanks a bunch.

Raui

[vrand]

Can't say about Don Smith. He's so random it's hard to tell what he's really saying half the time.

As for Dollard, I think people have, although most of what I see appears to be wrong based on what I've been trying to explain. I think the WITTS device may be exactly this. They won't give details, however, for their own reasons.

Here is some info on WITTS:

World Improvement Through the Spirit (WITTS) Ministries, formerly World Improvement Technologies (WITs), is presently headed by Timothy Thrapp.

For many years, the ministry has been claiming to have around 100 sundry exotic energy technologies for sale (multi millions of dollars), including versions of gravity motors, engines that run on water, radiant energy devices (solid state or mechanical), inertial propulsion devices, and pollution remediation. None of those has arrived in the marketplace yet, that we know of.

They claim that numerous of these have been installed and running for a long time. Though some of the technologies have been witnesses, we know of no such installations, and have not been able to verify this assertion.

These guys are a joke. Claiming to want to save the planet by "keeping it a secret," all their inventions, that could save the planet.

Jim Murray's device is fully documented in his patent, and he seems to want someone to run with it, yet I don't see anybody doing so.

If the inventor doesn't even build a demo unit why should anyone else?

I think Chris Carson's device is precisely the same as the Russian paper, done with capacitance. The problem of capacitance is you have to get north of 10kv to get any meaningful power, given small changes in C. I think it is the harder way to do this.

Could be, we will never know as Chris is dead and so is the Russian, and no one, besides Dollard, claims to have built a unit that works.

Our next step will be to build a mechanically variable inductive device. The key will be to get high permeability core material to get the inductance high and still keep the coil resistance low. Spin the core at 2x the effective resonant frequency of the tank, and watch it go.

Please keep us informed of your progress, as we all are looking for the same thing here, how to be energy independent using the free energy of the universe.

If you study the translation of the Russian paper that Dollard cites, that's pretty much what they describe. At least that's the theory...

A theory without proof are "a dime a dozen".

Regards

[Web000x]

I think Eric Dollard said in a previous post here, that changing inductance in relation to time destroyed energy, while changing capacitance in relation to time, created energy..?

There was also the Rotary Electromagnetic Converter, constructed by Michael Knots and Peter Lindemann with the help of Chris Carson. This unit exhibited the property of materializing and dematerializing electric energy without regard for the Law of Conservation of Energy. This is another example of synchronous parameter variation. In this case inductance (L in Henrys) time (T in seconds) gave rise to positive resistance (R in Ohms), hence the unaccounted for destruction of electric energy. It must be just as illegal to destroy energy as it is to create it – don’t you think? E is NOT equal to MC squared. There is no Matter to Energy equivalency – this is: The Great White Lie…

The parametric transformer built by Michael Knots and Peter Lindemann exhibited an efficiency of 108% which can be seen in Borderland Science Research Foundation's DVD titled "Free Energy". Although, I do not think it is posted for sale under their catalog but may be requested for purchase thru contacting them at Contact | Journal of Borderland Research

Another thought: If you haven't seen the WITTS generator, take a look at it. I am increasingly convinced that it is nothing more than synchronous parameter variation. If you put two large coils in opposition, and rotated a section of core material to make and break a central magnetic path, when the path is broken, the inductors in direct opposition behave like air cores, but when the path is made, they no longer oppose and behave like iron core inductors. With a coil as big as what is there, the inductance could easily be swinging whole henries.

It seems to me that making a rotating variable capacitance device such as Chris Carson's design might prove to be easier and provide a more extreme variation in Farads with respect to time thus a bigger window of reactance with respect to time. But that is all just speculation on my part.


Dave

[LtBolo]

Ok, do you have a link or could you post a copy of the translated Russian paper? (I used a link posted somewhere previously on this thread and it just sent me around in circles, & was unable to download it)..

PHI1.62 already posted this to this thread. It isn't the exact same paper, but does appear to be the same guys and same effort, and has lots of good info...in English.
http://ntrs.nasa.gov/archive/nasa/ca...1970002202.pdf

Another quote from the original paper, for which I haven't yet found the translation, is on Naudin's site. I wouldn't pay as much attention to the commentary, but read the quote.
PARAMETRIC POWER CONVERSION

I myself may experiment soon with the capacitance variation over time concept.. I think Eric Dollard said in a previous post here, that changing inductance in relation to time destroyed energy, while changing capacitance in relation to time, created energy..?

I think you can use inductance or capacitance. The keys are phase and the direction of change.

[LtBolo]

These guys are a joke. Claiming to want to save the planet by "keeping it a secret," all their inventions, that could save the planet.

I wouldn't be too quick to judge others, sir. I have had conversations with their spokesman, and they have a decades long history of being abused by those that don't want the tech out. I might be a bit skittish too, if I were them.

Which is beside the point. The point I was making is that I think their large generator is a variation on this same theme. It was first developed in the late 80s, right around the same time that Dollard published much of his relevant work, and around the same time that Murray's patent was granted.

If the inventor doesn't even build a demo unit why should anyone else?

Why do you say that he didn't?

Could be, we will never know as Chris is dead and so is the Russian, and no one, besides Dollard, claims to have built a unit that works.

Actually the entire subject of the Russian paper is exactly that....a discussion of several devices that worked and the theory behind them. Complete with pictures and descriptions of the devices, as well as discussions about performance. Given that this is the paper that Dollard mentioned that described the same math that he used, and given that PHI1.62 has graciously posted a link to an English translation of a later version of the same data, you might consider studying it. I found it quite enlightening.