Energetic Forum  
Facebook Twitter Google+ Pinterest LinkedIn Delicious Digg Reddit WordPress StumbleUpon Tumblr Translate Addthis Aaron Murakami YouTube ONLY 13% OF SEATS AVAILABLE!!!*** 2017 ENERGY CONFERENCE ***


* NEW * BEDINI RPX BOOK & DVD SET: BEDINI RPX


Go Back   Energetic Forum > > >
   

Inductive Resistor Open source development of highly efficient inductive resistor circuits.

Bedini RPX Sideband Generator
Closed Thread
 
Thread Tools
  #3031  
Old 10-23-2009, 07:58 PM
Michael John Nunnerley's Avatar
Michael John Nunnerley Michael John Nunnerley is offline
Gold Member
 
Join Date: May 2008
Posts: 1,191
first video now loaded

Hi all

first video now loaded

YouTube - STEAP-2

Mike
__________________
 

Download SOLAR SECRETS by Peter Lindemann
Free - Get it now: Solar Secrets

  #3032  
Old 10-23-2009, 08:28 PM
Michael John Nunnerley's Avatar
Michael John Nunnerley Michael John Nunnerley is offline
Gold Member
 
Join Date: May 2008
Posts: 1,191
I have a question

Hi all,

I have a question, how can we measure the wattage going into the resistor when it is across two phases, one reading 69.1v and the other 78.5v when measured independantly, the voltage across the two phases is 133v. we are talkig AC here.

I did take a reading on DC as well:- 7.74 and 11.06 both positive so it has to be AC

Maybe Harvey can answer this one!

Maybe the electrons are hitting each other in the middle of the resistor and creating heat or maybe this is nothing to laugh about!

Mike
__________________
 
  #3033  
Old 10-24-2009, 01:34 AM
witsend witsend is offline
Gold Member
 
Join Date: May 2009
Posts: 1,881
Red Alert

Hi Guys. Just to alert everyone to a really clever ploy in hacking that has now become evident.

Glen supposedly sent the following message to Harvey

'Hey Harvey, I got some new wave forms Rosie wanted me to send you and maybe some .XLR spread sheet info ... not posted yet ...Aaron is now also trying to replicate the new finding' - Glen L...

The point being that Fuzzy never sent this. And who knows what was in that file.

Harvey also found himself in a typed dialogue conversation with someone who was - again - not Glen and Glen then became the confused recipient of Harvey's replies.

Strange things afoot. Just double check the sender before you open files on Skye. And it's possible that voice identification is possibly the safest. Golly. So much intrigue about this little circuit.
__________________
 
  #3034  
Old 10-24-2009, 03:38 AM
witsend witsend is offline
Gold Member
 
Join Date: May 2009
Posts: 1,881
Aaron - this is for your benefit. Posted over from OU.Com

Re: Claimed OU circuit of Rosemary Ainslie
« Reply #2190 on: Today at 05:16:05 AM »

* Reply with quoteQuote
* Modify messageModify

Hi allcanadian. Just to let you know how much I appreciate your input here. I get it that you feel the intrinsic components on the circuit are somewhat unstable or possibly better described as variable? You are right. But the intrigue is that the 'window' to show any kind of anomaly at all, is aslo so very small. So. Superficially we have a really standard set up which is also well known and well tried. And yet, given certain frequencies? resonances? then really sophisticated measurements point at waveforms and values that seem to fly in the face of...

I have been in some really lengthy conversations in trying to resolve the coincidence of the source voltage across the shunt and the drain voltage across the load. We can nearly resolve this provided only that the current flow instantaneously adjusts to applied voltage and if the load resistor presents an alternate path for that current flow. At present our thinking is that it may be through the hollow of the resistor itself. That way there is an explanation for the spike as being entirely stored energy from the level of the source battery potential difference and greater. Then too, the current flow back through the battery would always be enabled through a circuit path enabled by the body diode.

At its least, this would explain the need for the wider diameter of the load resistor which seems to be required to allow this anomaly at all. The thinking then being that the narrower the diameter the greater the magnetic resistance? (sorry about the term) would not allow the full benefit of returning current. But the question remains. What then happens to the stored energy on the load resistor? Does this dissipate? And if so, as what?

The alternative to this could be that the returning energy - be it stored or regenerated - actually behaves in some way that conflicts with standard electric current flow - resulting in some delivery of energy that also does not relate to heat dissipation. I can still argue this in terms of zipons - but it would need more comprehensive experimental proof. There may be hints of this in Aaron's early experiments where he discovered a distinct cooling over the resistor. But it can only be considered as a possibility at this stage. It needs more substantial proof.

What continues to intrigue me is that our early choice of the appropriate load resistors was - through some miracle of coincidence and good timing - able to satisfy the precise requirement to show this anomaly. Which also explains why the early replicators of that circuit were not able to show those same anomalous values. I must confess that until my foray into these forums - I assumed that replicators were simply pretending not to see the benefits. I now know that the effect may very well have required that precise property. The actual question remains as to what is the upper limit required to show full benefit. I believe Fuzzy is making an even wider resistor and I look forward to seeing these results.

But it is just so nice to be reminded that we can engage with the more open minded. There are a dearth of such on this thread - albeit many on this forum. For some reason this thread is monopolised by a kind of mainstream scepticism which is appropriate to good science provided it is also open to the questions posed by these evident anomalies.

Yet again - thank you for the objectivity and the input in general. It is much appreciated.
__________________
 
  #3035  
Old 10-24-2009, 05:17 AM
witsend witsend is offline
Gold Member
 
Join Date: May 2009
Posts: 1,881
Quote:
Originally Posted by FuzzyTomCat View Post
Hi everyone,

Their is many replicators out there that are asking how can I do this with my older oscilloscope that is 10mhz to 150mhz ...... well its not easy but you can definitely get in the ball park for sure.

The resistance on the gate pot needs to be between 7 and 3 ohms using a DMM across the pot terminals .... 5 to 6 ohms for best results

The battery voltage across the 24 volt battery bank can be monitored with another DMM and tuned to the highest voltage using the gate pot for fine adjustments between the 7 and 3 ohm area.

The Channel 1 is used at the Mosfet shunt area between the 0.25 ohm resistor and the Mosfet "source" pin, "SCOPE" - set at 50mv and probe at X10

The Channel 2 is used at the 24 Volt battery bank positive and negative but connected within 18 inches from your "load resistor", "SCOPE" - set at 2v and probe at X10

The "load resistor" will be from 110 degrees F to 150 degrees F
The "Mosfet" will be from 140 degrees F to 160 degrees F
( temperatures measured with a IR non contact thermometer )

If using these setting this is what should be seen .....






A example of a earlier run using the Tektronix TDS 3054C
Channel 1 - Mosfet "source" shunt
Channel 2 - Mosfet "drain" *
Channel 3 - 555 timer / pin #3
Channel 4 - 24 Volt Battery Bank

As you can see the Mosfet Drain @ 520 Volts rises at the same time the 24 Volt battery bank rises to 70 Volts



I hope this helps all the replicators out there so you know this can be done and get some impressive results yourself

Glen
This should put the question about returning energy to bed.
__________________
 
  #3036  
Old 10-24-2009, 09:16 PM
Harvey's Avatar
Harvey Harvey is offline
Gold Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2009
Posts: 1,137
The Single Conduit Multi Vortex

Nikola Tesla once said that whatever electricity is, it acts like an incompressible fluid. Note the distinction here between fluid and liquid, they are not the same things. James Clerk Maxwell envisaged magnetic vortices swirling around Faraday's 'lines of force' which led to his famous 8 equations of which 4 are in particular use in classical physics involved with electromagnetic radiation today. Viktor Schauberger applied the vortex phenomenon to actual fluid dynamics involving real liquids and demonstrated how the shear zone between two vortices can have nearly zero resistance, and the shear zone between a single vortex and the conduit in which it travels can reduce the restriction of the forward movement of the fluid by reducing or preventing cohesive action.

When voltage and/or frequency increase, the current produced in a conductor tends to move from the inward material area to the outward surface area. This effect is referred to as the Skin Effect and you can discover the principle behind it by clicking on the link embedded in the forgoing term.

Today, I would like to entertain the possibility that a vortex current structure could form in specific resonant circuits that exhibit a dual function with regards to the voltage and/or frequency of the circuit. In this case, we may have a low voltage, low frequency, high current condition flowing in one direction in the conductor center, while we may have a high voltage, high frequency, low current condition flowing on the same conductor surface in the other direction - simultaneously.

Ok...most of you are doing this right now.... wait for it...and now , you ask, "is it even possible?"

Yes We know for a certainty that we can move fluids in two different directions simultaneously in the same conduit. We also know conclusively, that this action results in a transfer of energy from the one vortex to the other in order to conserve its angular momentum. Could Tesla be correct? Could electricity behave in the exact same way? Tesla also stated that electric current behaved as if it contained momentum, especially in inductive circuits. This would be necessary if an exchange were to occur between two coaxial vortices in the same conductor. The most remarkable aspect of this scenario is the possible internal action of a transformer in a single straight wire.

Our measurement equipment is most often attached to the surface of our conductors. Therefore, we may not be getting the whole picture. Instead, we may only be seeing what is happening on the surface and missing what is happening on the inside.

Recent involvement with the Rosemary Ainslie COP > 17 circuit has forced an evaluation of our current understanding of electrical transmission and its relationship with the surrounding magnetic field it produces.

Happy thoughts ,



(This information was first published here.)
__________________
 

Last edited by Harvey; 10-25-2009 at 08:11 PM. Reason: Removed the reduntant duplicity in two places.
  #3037  
Old 10-25-2009, 10:43 AM
FuzzyTomCat's Avatar
FuzzyTomCat FuzzyTomCat is offline
Silver Member
 
Join Date: Jun 2008
Posts: 620
Send a message via Skype™ to FuzzyTomCat
Revised Circuit Diagram

Hi everyone,

Here is a revised "Quantum" Rosemary Ainslie COP>17 Heater Circuit .... this should help everyone that is doing a replication ....



CIRCUIT ADJUSTMENTS - ( For the most efficient results but with less heat )

Use a Digital Multi Meter (DMM) or bench top unit able to see 0.00 type ohms if possible, not just tenths but hundreds to get the pre-set "sweet spot" between 5.80 to 5.30 ohms (checking pot back lash) then using a DMM to monitor the highest voltage reading from your 24 volt battery bank while doing GATE pot "fine adjustments" of more or less resistance to reach that highest voltage reading needed for the most efficient results.

Glen
__________________
 

Last edited by FuzzyTomCat; 10-29-2009 at 05:40 AM. Reason: circuit adjustment clearification - LARGER PRINT
  #3038  
Old 10-25-2009, 11:51 AM
Harvey's Avatar
Harvey Harvey is offline
Gold Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2009
Posts: 1,137
Quote:
Originally Posted by Michael John Nunnerley View Post
Hi all,

I have a question, how can we measure the wattage going into the resistor when it is across two phases, one reading 69.1v and the other 78.5v when measured independantly, the voltage across the two phases is 133v. we are talkig AC here.

I did take a reading on DC as well:- 7.74 and 11.06 both positive so it has to be AC

Maybe Harvey can answer this one!

Maybe the electrons are hitting each other in the middle of the resistor and creating heat or maybe this is nothing to laugh about!

Mike
Hi Mike,

If I understand your question, you have two 'hot' lines and a neutral. Measuring from one hot to neutral you get 69.1VAC and from the other to neutral you get 78.5VAC whereas from one hot to the other you get 133VAC. It is extrapolated then that the difference between 147.6VAC and the measured 133VAC is due to a phase differential and not related to a time difference between measurements. We would need to know the frequency of each, the phase shift between them, possibly the wave shape and whether or not the neutral is included in any way with the resistor, like at a center-tap, wiper etc.

If the neutral is out of the picture as far as operation is concerned, and the power is used only between the two hots, then you simply have 133VAC squared divided by (r + z) where r is the resistance in ohms of the resistor and z is any inductive and/or capacitive reactance present in the resistor as a function of the frequency applied. In this case, your supply is said to be a source of power and your resistor is said to dissipate (consume) that power. Watts are always an indication of work being done. Volt-Amps on the other hand is a type of power that is returned back to the source unused. A transformer primary connected across the mains with no load connected on the secondary may seem to have current flowing in the winding, but no power is consumed until a load is placed on the secondary (barring Joule heating losses).

I don't know if I've answered your question yet - let me know if you need specifics based on the missing criteria above.

Cheers,

__________________
 
  #3039  
Old 10-25-2009, 12:47 PM
Michael John Nunnerley's Avatar
Michael John Nunnerley Michael John Nunnerley is offline
Gold Member
 
Join Date: May 2008
Posts: 1,191
Quote:
Originally Posted by Harvey View Post
Hi Mike,

If I understand your question, you have two 'hot' lines and a neutral. Measuring from one hot to neutral you get 69.1VAC and from the other to neutral you get 78.5VAC whereas from one hot to the other you get 133VAC. It is extrapolated then that the difference between 147.6VAC and the measured 133VAC is due to a phase differential and not related to a time difference between measurements. We would need to know the frequency of each, the phase shift between them, possibly the wave shape and whether or not the neutral is included in any way with the resistor, like at a center-tap, wiper etc.

If the neutral is out of the picture as far as operation is concerned, and the power is used only between the two hots, then you simply have 133VAC squared divided by (r + z) where r is the resistance in ohms of the resistor and z is any inductive and/or capacitive reactance present in the resistor as a function of the frequency applied. In this case, your supply is said to be a source of power and your resistor is said to dissipate (consume) that power. Watts are always an indication of work being done. Volt-Amps on the other hand is a type of power that is returned back to the source unused. A transformer primary connected across the mains with no load connected on the secondary may seem to have current flowing in the winding, but no power is consumed until a load is placed on the secondary (barring Joule heating losses).

I don't know if I've answered your question yet - let me know if you need specifics based on the missing criteria above.

Cheers,

Hi Harvey thanks for your reply

I have posted all the results of the test on my STEAP thread as it is not directly associated with this thread. The inductance value of the resistor I do not know as I do not have an inductance meter, but I supose we could take a stab at it!

Would appreciate if you would take a look. Phase voltage measured with the meter grounded to battery negative.

Mike
__________________
 
  #3040  
Old 10-25-2009, 10:31 PM
Harvey's Avatar
Harvey Harvey is offline
Gold Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2009
Posts: 1,137
Copying over from the OU forum for our readers here:

Quote:
Originally Posted by Harvey link=topic=7620.msg206063#msg206063 date=1256508512

Hi Poynt,

We have to start somewhere using a scientific method if we ever expect to obtain credibility in our data gathering. Glens efforts have been above bar in this respect and no institution can fault his due diligence in this matter. That being said, we all realize that the required data is incomplete. It is hoped that this matter will be resolved soon.

The above table is perfectly valid for the use in which is intended. At a specific time each hour (as can be noted by the documented time stamp on the written record) several data dumps were provided - each being of a different time base thereby increasing the accuracy of the samples. This gives us 10,000 individual samples for each screen of data (3 ea) for each hour of the continuous test. For us, the continuous test is extremely important because it helps diagnose the impact that battery charge has on the desired mode of operation. It is noteworthy that this sometimes did not fully develop until 2 hours into the runs. This data alludes to the concept that a fully charged battery is resistant to the desired effect. If this proves to be the case, then it is doubtful that you will ever produce these effects using your power supply unless you can tune its charge/impedance characteristics to accurately mimic that of the partially discharged battery. Therefore, MH's claims regarding the lack of need for extended runs is grossly misplaced here.

There should be absolutely no doubt that the data retrieved from the equipment is up to industry and academic standards. The quantity and quality of the samples far exceeds those often used for mainstream scientific studies. If you don't believe that, just have a look at any prescription pills you may have in your medicine cabinet and compare the records of their sample numbers to ours.

You have made a serious error in your power calculations which I have tried to tactfully bring to everyone's attention. You cannot determine with any accuracy what power dissipation is occurring in your circuit components unless you understand accurately the precise phasing between the voltage and current. This is the reason that you cannot resolve enormous calculations presented by the data and is the reason that I have not computed them in my latter tables. If we were to believe the instantaneous values as dictated by KCL, we would have power of 21KW present across the load at certain instances. We know this is not the case because current lags voltage in inductors. We also know that we cannot accurately determine the resistance of the load because of its triple impedance characteristics during these rapidly changing frequencies present and observable by the secondary and tertiary images presented in the 'Digital Phosphor' technology of this superb testing instrument provided by Tektronix. The inductive reactance and capacitive reactance inherent in the load resistor, drastically alter the actual current present in the device at specific times in the cycles. It cannot be calculated and the current tests do not provide a means to measure it. Without it, you cannot even begin to reach for reasonable values of power dissipation in the FET or Load. Therefore, we must use the thermal profile as the indicator of the power dissipated and we must use the shunt current as the indicator of battery power delivered as the basis for our results.

It is hoped, that in the future we can get a more accurate method of determining the true current in the circuit as a reference of battery delivery. This is especially true when we consider that the conventional expectation with regards to where in time, what polarity and what value the shunt was to produce, has in fact failed to occur. We all find ourselves looking for a reason as to why 8A of current is indicated in a shunt that is isolated from the power side of the circuit by a high impedance switch while at that exact moment the other side of that switch is indicating an inverse polarity entirely prohibitive of any body diode conduction ... or any conduction through the FET for that matter. This occurrence is clearly not conventional and I am looking forward to having it explained to us by any accredited persons reading this post able to do so. I am sorry to say that MH's attempt just did not come even close to explaining it.

The only problem I see with the chart above, is that it represents 21 independent samples over a 7 hour period for a total sample period of less than 1 second. If you were correct in your earlier comments, that Glen's waveforms were periodic, then this would be rock solid data as 40µs of data at any time during the 7 hour run should be exactly the same as any other 40µs data dump. And, even though the law of averages are on our side here, showing the predominant numbers (19 out of 21) to be favorable to our cause, we cannot ignore the 2 out of 21. This begs for a continuous unbroken data dump for which we currently do not have the means to provide. However, we can narrow the sample times so as to determine conclusively the amount of deviation present. I have suggested 2µs samples be taken every 6 minutes during an hour of stable operation.

Glen has outlined his technique for getting his circuit into a favorable stable operation. I use the term 'stable' rather loosely here as it is a mode where deviations seem to be at a minimum. He determines this by setting the shunt probe to readout the 'mean' for that channel and then adjusting the gate pot so as to produce the lowest mean which is usually between 50mV and 80mV. If you can get it in the negative, then all the better. I really doubt that you can achieve this with your power supply driven circuit, but it is certainly worth a try and if you succeed in producing the same negative average results then we will have confirmed MH's claim that the power supply and battery can be used interchangeably. From years of experience with this, I can state conclusively that power supplies always inject noise into a circuit that batteries simply do not. Whether or not that plays any valid role here is yet to be determined.

I for one am looking forward to, and value, your future presentation of tests performed. Please help us here by including the pristine data dumps for evaluation along with the time stamps and any other pertinent variables such as ambient temp, resistor temp, etc.

Best Regards,

__________________
 
  #3041  
Old 10-26-2009, 12:05 AM
ashtweth's Avatar
ashtweth ashtweth is offline
Gold Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2008
Posts: 2,493
Send a message via Skype™ to ashtweth
Interesting reading Rose!! [Hacking] Hmm!! The more they do the more they will reveal themselves. Thanks Glen got your PM and thanks Harvey /ALL. Did some more tests just getting a report ready and updating the doc for all. Will have Glens revised one to add to the report also. Thanks Glen

Ash
__________________
 
  #3042  
Old 10-26-2009, 05:11 AM
sucahyo's Avatar
sucahyo sucahyo is offline
Platinum Member
 
Join Date: Dec 2008
Posts: 3,073
Quote:
Originally Posted by Harvey View Post
Today, I would like to entertain the possibility that a vortex current structure could form in specific resonant circuits that exhibit a dual function with regards to the voltage and/or frequency of the circuit. In this case, we may have a low voltage, low frequency, high current condition flowing in one direction in the conductor center, while we may have a high voltage, high frequency, low current condition flowing on the same conductor surface in the other direction - simultaneously.
Already implemented and sold as ethernet over powerline:
Run Ethernet through Your Walls with the Existing Power Lines in Your Home - CAT-5 TO AC POWER LINE ADAPT
Linksys PowerLine AV Ethernet Adapter Kit PLK200 - bridge : Read product information and write a Linksys PowerLine AV Ethernet Adapter Kit PLK200 - bridge review

That is very high frequency low voltage low current over low frequency high voltage high current.

In Indonesia the national power company already implement this for internet connection for their branch office where electricity can reach. The data home meter gathering can also directly send by newer home metering to their server from powerline. If you never have power company people checking your meter, it is high chance that your meter act as reporting modem too.

As for theoritical explanation, I believe that what move in the wire move in spiral. Unlike common explanation that electron move between nucleus orbit, I believe that the thing move in stream, seeking the natural path just like river, where it rotation diameter will become bigger and bigger, thus making them move close to the skin. Eddy current is side effect of them since they are now rotating the center. To force them to move fast, I think Viktor Schauberger way of making the water move faster may also work.
__________________
 

Last edited by sucahyo; 10-26-2009 at 05:17 AM.
  #3043  
Old 10-26-2009, 06:07 AM
Harvey's Avatar
Harvey Harvey is offline
Gold Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2009
Posts: 1,137
Hi Sucahyo,

Thank you for sharing that information.

We also have available the inverse, Power over Ethernet where remote devices can be powered by a bias voltage supplied on the Ethernet wires.

One of the things I am proposing here is that the power can be the same for both types of current resulting in a net zero condition. That is part of what I was contemplating and opening up for discussion.

Cheers,

__________________
 
  #3044  
Old 10-26-2009, 06:44 AM
sucahyo's Avatar
sucahyo sucahyo is offline
Platinum Member
 
Join Date: Dec 2008
Posts: 3,073
Quote:
Originally Posted by Harvey View Post
We also have available the inverse, Power over Ethernet where remote devices can be powered by a bias voltage supplied on the Ethernet wires.
I don't think that is the case. From what I know Cisco use the term power over ethernet by using normally unused number 7 & 8 leg of the cable to transmit DC power to remote location. Both switch must have power over ethernet specification or one of them may break.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Harvey View Post
One of the things I am proposing here is that the power can be the same for both types of current resulting in a net zero condition. That is part of what I was contemplating and opening up for discussion.
I see. My mind can't reach that I guess. Maybe sort of two sound entering one chamber. They may weaken or strengthen or may not interrupt each other.
__________________
 
  #3045  
Old 10-26-2009, 07:49 AM
Harvey's Avatar
Harvey Harvey is offline
Gold Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2009
Posts: 1,137
Hi Sucahyo,

IIRC, 100Mb Ethernet only uses 2 of the pairs of a Category 5 cable, whereas 1Gb Ethernet uses all four pairs of a 5e or or higher category. Thus, if you want PoE over Gb Ethernet, the data must share the same wires with the power. For more information on the 802.3af standard see this, or if you have IEEE access; this



Imagine if you can 1KV at 1A moving on the conductor skin in one direction, spiral vortex and a 20V 50A moving in the center of the conductor, opposite spiral, opposite direction. Imagine that the frequency of each is such so as to provide a perfect magnetic interlace where each spiral crosses the other near right angles - sort of like the weave of a Litz wire. Would the result offer no resistance to the counter flow of current?

__________________
 
  #3046  
Old 10-26-2009, 08:10 AM
sucahyo's Avatar
sucahyo sucahyo is offline
Platinum Member
 
Join Date: Dec 2008
Posts: 3,073
Thanks for the information . Never realize that.

Isn't powerline and data transmission both are AC? so current flow in two direction?
__________________
 

Last edited by sucahyo; 10-26-2009 at 08:33 AM.
  #3047  
Old 10-26-2009, 08:57 AM
Harvey's Avatar
Harvey Harvey is offline
Gold Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2009
Posts: 1,137
I must make a correction to at least two posts I have made with reference to the overall quantity of data obtained in any given 7 hour run.

In at least two places on the OU forum I stated that the total data collected was less than 1 second for any seven hour run. I quickly calculated this by summing the microseconds for each hour at 40µs + 20µs + 2µs for each sample set giving 62µs / hr for 434µs for any given run. This is incorrect!

That value is off by a factor of 10.

The reason for this error, is that those sample times represent the 'per division' sample. Each data dump is 10 divisions. Thus the actual data samples we have for any 7 hour run is actually 4,340µs worth of data comprising 210,000 individual samples.

I apologize to any who were affected by this error and would like to use this as a case in point as to why we need others to double check my work and do their own calculations on the data.

This error was discovered when I proceeded to include an overall time value in the master file for test #6 and noticed that each sheet in the file was off by the factor of ten.

__________________
 

Last edited by Harvey; 10-26-2009 at 08:58 AM. Reason: correcting a math error :(
  #3048  
Old 10-26-2009, 09:10 AM
Harvey's Avatar
Harvey Harvey is offline
Gold Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2009
Posts: 1,137
Quote:
Originally Posted by sucahyo View Post
Thanks for the information . Never realize that.

Isn't powerline and data transmission both are AC? so current flow in two direction?
Yes, but these applications usually use the Superposition Theorem to allow the higher frequency component to ride on the lower frequency component as a carrier. So the AC of the higher frequency is really just a fluctuation or deviation of the lower frequency carrier. This technique has been used for many years for products like the X-10 remote systems.

In the case of the PoE, the Ethernet communications rides on top of a 48V DC bias and would look like ripple to anyone viewing the voltage. Capacitors are used to offload the higher frequency intelligence and pass it on to the PHY in the network controller subsection.

__________________
 

Last edited by Harvey; 10-26-2009 at 09:12 AM.
  #3049  
Old 10-26-2009, 01:01 PM
marxist marxist is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Aug 2007
Posts: 181
Single Conduit Multi Vortex

Quote:
Originally Posted by Harvey View Post
...
Today, I would like to entertain the possibility that a vortex current structure could form in specific resonant circuits that exhibit a dual function with regards to the voltage and/or frequency of the circuit. In this case, we may have a low voltage, low frequency, high current condition flowing in one direction in the conductor center, while we may have a high voltage, high frequency, low current condition flowing on the same conductor surface in the other direction - simultaneously.
Hi Harvey and all,
Louis Boutard, was a Frenchman born 1880 and filed 6 patents
Louis Boutard's patents
The first three in the linked list deal with (electro-)magnetism

Here a translated quote from his Patent FR33826EE
[Page 10 line 33]
Quote:
This shows, among other things, that in reality the ‘cross of Oerstedt’ is not an electro-magnetic cross, but solely a magnetic cross. The sacred cross itself, as shown in figure 11: the electric current here (and in all other cases) is only an inductor that creates a force field. And since the lateral magnetic flux always tends to run crosswise to the axial flux, so that the maximum deviation is 90° (degree), it follows logically that the magnetic needle can only tend to form a cross relative to this 'current', without ever being able to form a proper cross - as it’s trapped between the two souths and the two norths of the created force field, so its maximum deviation is 45°.
According to my understanding he also – like many others - found, that the ‘secret’ is related to what we call a vortex: a structure formed by two fluxes, headed in opposite directions. A fast (heavy, descending) axial flux and a slow (lightweight, rising) peripheral flux (enveloping the axial one)
__________________
 

Last edited by marxist; 10-26-2009 at 01:05 PM.
  #3050  
Old 10-26-2009, 07:03 PM
Harvey's Avatar
Harvey Harvey is offline
Gold Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2009
Posts: 1,137
Hi Marxist,

Thank you for that link, I have downloaded a copy of that patent and will review it when I get a chance. (Now if I could only read French... )

It is interesting that as mainstream progressed they seemed to deviate from the vortex theories into a more homogeneous distributed field theory.

I suppose experiments could be done on a single wire system to determine the validity of having two currents flowing in a single wire in opposite directions.

__________________
 
  #3051  
Old 10-27-2009, 09:01 AM
marxist marxist is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Aug 2007
Posts: 181
Quote:
Originally Posted by Harvey View Post
Now if I could only read French...
Hi Harvey, will let you know when I find a proper translation of the patent(s).
I think that such a translation would prove interesting, also because Boutard's view of the underlying fluid mechanics shares some characteristics with R. Ainslie's zippon model. However it already differs from it from the outset, because he calls 'zippons' 'AEther monads'.
Monad being derived from 'mono' and meaning something like 'fractal' or 'basic pattern'.
__________________
 

Last edited by marxist; 10-27-2009 at 09:12 AM.
  #3052  
Old 10-28-2009, 06:14 AM
witsend witsend is offline
Gold Member
 
Join Date: May 2009
Posts: 1,881
Guys, especially Ash, here's some pertinent numbers copied over from OU.COM. It seems that we are running out of interest over there. Hope the posts are self-explanatory.

My reply to Poynt post 2265 copied over from ou.com.

"Hi Poynty. Your objections are duly noted. I take it that in your opinion the range of DC average across the shunt on the source is too wide to represent meaningful results. I think Harvey has covered this sufficiently.

I have an ongoing concern in this aspect of our discussion. It appears that even if we were to log results continuously over - let us say an hour - or alternatively and if possible - the entire test duration - then your objections here will persisit if that variation persists. Unfortunately that is the point where you need to evaluate any real reasons for your continuing involvement. It appears to be required condition of this circuit. In effect this opinion means that regardless of the probe refinement or any apparatus that you apply - this range is unlikely to lessen significantly. In effect, even if you scale 15 meters you will regard the results it as meaningless.


Preceded by this post 2250

"And your results are a failure - except in that they are accurate results of the test you conducted. It would be nice to see more data. But I trust your presentations. You can redo the test a million ways and still come up with the same results. So what? That only gives us your results. Your results are definitive according to your test. We're hitting a blind spot here Poynt. Here's an analogy. The record for high jump is set at - let us say 8 meters. Someone then scales 15 meters. Many try to break that record. Some claim it's impossible and the 15 meter mark was never breached. Some claim to try for 15 meters and fail. One or two people manage the 15 meters AND scale the new level AND their efforts were video'd. Does the fact that the majority failed that level then discount the two that breached it?


And regarding the 'extended run'. I'm satisfied that during your running of the proposed that you will possibly reach random moments where the DC average across the source shunt will show negative. What conclusions do you then draw if that also co-incides with the only moment that you capture your data as you do not see any point in that extended run? You will then erroneously propose a power analysis based on something that is essentially false. Not good Poynty.
"

So I'm inclined to think that Poynt is out of this argument for the reasons stipulated. That more or less brings that thread to a close. And this is is halting a little for want of some data. Hopefully this will be corrected soon.
__________________
 

Last edited by witsend; 10-28-2009 at 06:17 AM.
  #3053  
Old 10-28-2009, 06:55 AM
witsend witsend is offline
Gold Member
 
Join Date: May 2009
Posts: 1,881
Poynt, MileHigh and Hoppy were the only three that kept the thread alive - so, without their interventions I think that the thread has finally come to a close.

I think it will go on record as being the single most challenged claim in the history of that forum. This triumverate of protagonists was preceded by TK and his merry band of admirers who traded insults with my name with varying degrees of skill. And this continued for a full 6 months preceding this thread topic by one month.

I am still baffled at the enormity of that attack. But - bated breath here - I think we may finally see that dreaded thread fall off the cliff that MH referenced in one of his posts. Am feeling uncharacteristically optimistic at the moment. And I'm a sucker for optimism.
__________________
 
  #3054  
Old 10-28-2009, 06:07 PM
eternalightwithin eternalightwithin is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jun 2009
Posts: 144


Having bad day, thatnks for making me smile Witsend.

David P.
__________________
 
  #3055  
Old 10-29-2009, 02:03 AM
ashtweth's Avatar
ashtweth ashtweth is offline
Gold Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2008
Posts: 2,493
Send a message via Skype™ to ashtweth
Quote:
Originally Posted by witsend View Post
Guys, especially Ash, here's some pertinent numbers copied over from OU.COM. It seems that we are running out of interest over there. Hope the posts are self-explanatory.

My reply to Poynt post 2265 copied over from ou.com.

"Hi Poynty. Your objections are duly noted. I take it that in your opinion the range of DC average across the shunt on the source is too wide to represent meaningful results. I think Harvey has covered this sufficiently.

I have an ongoing concern in this aspect of our discussion. It appears that even if we were to log results continuously over - let us say an hour - or alternatively and if possible - the entire test duration - then your objections here will persisit if that variation persists. Unfortunately that is the point where you need to evaluate any real reasons for your continuing involvement. It appears to be required condition of this circuit. In effect this opinion means that regardless of the probe refinement or any apparatus that you apply - this range is unlikely to lessen significantly. In effect, even if you scale 15 meters you will regard the results it as meaningless.


Preceded by this post 2250

"And your results are a failure - except in that they are accurate results of the test you conducted. It would be nice to see more data. But I trust your presentations. You can redo the test a million ways and still come up with the same results. So what? That only gives us your results. Your results are definitive according to your test. We're hitting a blind spot here Poynt. Here's an analogy. The record for high jump is set at - let us say 8 meters. Someone then scales 15 meters. Many try to break that record. Some claim it's impossible and the 15 meter mark was never breached. Some claim to try for 15 meters and fail. One or two people manage the 15 meters AND scale the new level AND their efforts were video'd. Does the fact that the majority failed that level then discount the two that breached it?


And regarding the 'extended run'. I'm satisfied that during your running of the proposed that you will possibly reach random moments where the DC average across the source shunt will show negative. What conclusions do you then draw if that also co-incides with the only moment that you capture your data as you do not see any point in that extended run? You will then erroneously propose a power analysis based on something that is essentially false. Not good Poynty.
"

So I'm inclined to think that Poynt is out of this argument for the reasons stipulated. That more or less brings that thread to a close. And this is is halting a little for want of some data. Hopefully this will be corrected soon.
Hi Rose/ALL, after being around for a few years i have to say that this is a typical day at OU forum, so please don't think that they have the majority of influence in capable engineers, Luc, Glen , Harvey , Aaron and many others, are all capable of coming up with more results and structured tests, between us we are gonna work side by side Glen etc to get a replicable and similar out come, after a few more pop up it is enough to (public opinion) to make them consider, not that we need too.

Aaron and Crew have already given us the blue pill as opposed to them eating the red one.

We are gonna get Glen's down to a T , dont care how long it takes and do more tests, Luc is not far behind, this is all that we need to concern our self's with for now IMO, those guys will always have their own ways, I think with them as jumping off board is less of a distraction for us to get the job done.

I learned long ago that that forum is over run with mis management .Eventually more reps will sway their opinion, even if we have to build 2 of glens and get one to point to test OUR WAY. If so , so be it. building this weekend again .

Ash
__________________
 
  #3056  
Old 10-29-2009, 02:41 AM
gotoluc gotoluc is online now
Gold Member
 
Join Date: Aug 2007
Posts: 1,130
Thanks Ash for your vote of confidence

That's right! ...I'm not far behind, just far away, 2,500Km ... I'm still in Florida but I'll be back in Ottawa, Canada November 3rd. and hopefully I'll have all the components to replicate by then.

@Glen, do you think the 32mm glass tube is a requirement? since I didn't get anything for this yet. Maybe I can find a test tube that's close to this size.

Luc
__________________
 
  #3057  
Old 10-29-2009, 04:37 AM
witsend witsend is offline
Gold Member
 
Join Date: May 2009
Posts: 1,881
Quote:
Originally Posted by eternalightwithin View Post


Having bad day, thatnks for making me smile Witsend.

David P.
Hi David. You are really most welcome. But my own optimism may have been a bit precipitous. And my emotional baraometer is also often in aperiodic oscillation. No wonder the most of us identify with this strange waveform of ours.
__________________
 
  #3058  
Old 10-29-2009, 04:41 AM
witsend witsend is offline
Gold Member
 
Join Date: May 2009
Posts: 1,881
Quote:
Originally Posted by ashtweth View Post

We are gonna get Glen's down to a T , dont care how long it takes and do more tests, Luc is not far behind, this is all that we need to concern our self's with for now IMO, those guys will always have their own ways, I think with them as jumping off board is less of a distraction for us to get the job done.

I learned long ago that that forum is over run with mis management .Eventually more reps will sway their opinion, even if we have to build 2 of glens and get one to point to test OUR WAY. If so , so be it. building this weekend again .

Ash
Hi Ash. I have absolutely no doubt that you will do the necessary here. As ever - am blown away by your dedication.

__________________
 
  #3059  
Old 10-29-2009, 04:42 AM
FuzzyTomCat's Avatar
FuzzyTomCat FuzzyTomCat is offline
Silver Member
 
Join Date: Jun 2008
Posts: 620
Send a message via Skype™ to FuzzyTomCat
Quote:
Originally Posted by gotoluc View Post
@Glen, do you think the 32mm glass tube is a requirement? since I didn't get anything for this yet. Maybe I can find a test tube that's close to this size.

Luc
Hi Luc,

I am thinking that the diameter of the "Load Resistor" possibly is one of the keys to this replication .... the reason being that all the test results I did using a smaller off the shelf wire wound resistor (20-26 uH) did not perform well at all.

As for the test tube ... Humm ... I don't think the "pyrex" glass thickness will allow you to wind a resistor using AWG 20 "Ni Cr" wire .... this material is very springy stuff and you must apply a lot of pressure to get it winded, so I wouldn't recommend it.

There is a piece of 32mm that was a scrap that we found the ends are melted in as normal but it isn't totally perfect it's "exactly" the same material as mine and Aarons prototype resistor and the same size. If you would like it, I would only charge you shipping, if you need a photo or something we can talk in the PM's.

Glen
__________________
 
  #3060  
Old 10-29-2009, 04:46 AM
witsend witsend is offline
Gold Member
 
Join Date: May 2009
Posts: 1,881
Quote:
Originally Posted by gotoluc View Post
Thanks Ash for your vote of confidence

That's right! ...I'm not far behind, just far away, 2,500Km ... I'm still in Florida but I'll be back in Ottawa, Canada November 3rd. and hopefully I'll have all the components to replicate by then.

@Glen, do you think the 32mm glass tube is a requirement? since I didn't get anything for this yet. Maybe I can find a test tube that's close to this size.

Luc
Hi Luc. Was wondering why you were so quiet. Trust you're enjoying yourself.

I really think that diameter may be significant. Provided it's not subjected to really high heat signatures I think that a test tube would work fine. In fact it's a really good idea. But our Fuzzy is nothing if not inventive. Perhaps he'll find a way of getting us more of his resistors?

If you're on holiday down there - have fun. And if you're not on holiday- have fun.

edit. Sorry Fuzzy. Just seen your post re the test tube. Ok. We're talking to the expert here. Take this as an official retraction. Sorry Luc.
__________________
 

Last edited by witsend; 10-29-2009 at 04:48 AM.
Closed Thread

Thread Tools

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off



Please consider supporting Energetic Forum with a voluntary monthly subscription.

For One-Time Donations, use admin@ this domain > energeticforum.com

Choose your voluntary subscription

All times are GMT. The time now is 11:40 PM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.8
Copyright ©2000 - 2017, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.
Search Engine Optimisation provided by DragonByte SEO v1.4.0 (Pro) - vBulletin Mods & Addons Copyright © 2017 DragonByte Technologies Ltd.
Shoutbox provided by vBShout v6.2.8 (Lite) - vBulletin Mods & Addons Copyright © 2017 DragonByte Technologies Ltd.
2007-2015 Copyright - Energetic Forum - All Rights Reserved

Bedini RPX Sideband Generator

Tesla Chargers