Energetic Forum  
Facebook Twitter Google+ Pinterest LinkedIn Delicious Digg Reddit WordPress StumbleUpon Tumblr Translate Addthis Aaron Murakami YouTube 150 97 SEATS LEFT - 2018 ENERGY CONFERENCE

Monero XMR


Go Back   Energetic Forum > > >
   

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

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

Closed Thread
 
Thread Tools
  #931  
Old 07-20-2009, 02:25 AM
Aaron's Avatar
Aaron Aaron is offline
Co-Founder & Moderator
 
Join Date: Feb 2007
Location: Washington State
Posts: 10,601
credentials

Since Bill Gates dropped out, he doesn't have credentials to do what he did. Neither did Henry Ford since he had a 4th grade education. Ted Turner was a clown of a news anchor and even did the weather interviewing a dog with raincoat...not very credentialed. Yes, look at their results? Tesla had no "credentials" in EE, he was a mechanical engineer so why did he surpass all the EE's?

The argument of credentials lacks substance because those credentials are only as good as the parameters and systems they govern. Closed loop equilibrium thermodynamics systems and that is about it.

We're discussing open non-equilibrium thermodynamic systems here and that is really out of the expertise of 99.9999% of credentialed EE's.

TK has been defended as an apparent expert with credentials and I think he bragged about published papers, etc... but couldn't even intentionally get the mosfet into self oscillation but I could. Therefore, the argument is null and void. The argument of credentials stands or it doesn't and is not subject to "conditions."

If it requires 1000 joules to make x heat or 1000 joules is dissipated into a resistor but we get back 500 joules in potential and that 500 joules makes more heat. It doesn't matter if we "originally" paid for the 1000 joules. Absolute common sense shows that 1500+ joules of WORK was done with 1000 input meaning over 1.0 COP. This seems to be the hardest part for any classicly trained person to admit is that MORE work in measurable energy being done that was input violates thermodynamics.
__________________
Sincerely,
Aaron Murakami

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

  #932  
Old 07-20-2009, 02:40 AM
witsend witsend is offline
Gold Member
 
Join Date: May 2009
Posts: 1,881
Quote:
Originally Posted by poynt99 View Post
Experimental evidence is worthless if the experimenter is not qualified to fully understand the evidence, nor the ramifications of it. It is evident that incorrect assumptions are being made about the evidence at hand and even the operation of the experiment itself. Indeed if you do not have a sufficient enough understanding of something, how can you then be qualified to properly comment on it?

Experimenting is fine and should be encouraged, but what gets me is when folks become authoritarian and downright bold about their results and conclusions when in fact they are sorely lacking the qualifications to do so, especially, disrespectfully and defiantly in the faces of those that are.

.99
Have just seen this post. .99 it is extraordinarily arrogant, with utmost respect. Since when has logic been the exclusive provenance of the trained EE. And there's no presumptive right to assume correct conclusions simply because it is also the most widely held conclusion. Scientific progress has never been in lock step with prior confirmation by popular opinion. On the contrary.

EDIT Just seen Aaron's response to this. All I would add to his comments is 'QUITE'. Popular opinion is worthless unless it is supported by both logic and evidence.
__________________
 

Last edited by witsend; 07-20-2009 at 02:51 AM. Reason: spelling
  #933  
Old 07-20-2009, 02:49 AM
witsend witsend is offline
Gold Member
 
Join Date: May 2009
Posts: 1,881
quote from MileHigh
Here is a clear example where you are misunderstanding the information the scope is giving you. In the clip, the "self-oscillation" is simply the scope loosing it's triggering for a fraction of a second and you are seeing the waveform being displayed free-running with no trigger. How can you make this mistake, it should have been the first thing that entered both of your minds when you saw this!
It may also be that the circuit is resonating. I think both options should be explored.

EDIT by the way - we get the same effect and our conclusions carry the guarantee - in writing - of Fluke themselves. And - thus far - not one accreditor has doubted that this is a resonating frequency. So. It has not slipped anyone's mind. It has been addressed at many levels.
__________________
 

Last edited by witsend; 07-20-2009 at 03:24 AM. Reason: general
  #934  
Old 07-20-2009, 04:26 AM
poynt99 poynt99 is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2009
Posts: 378
Quote:
Originally Posted by witsend View Post
H Popular opinion is worthless unless it is supported by both logic and evidence.
True, and it is supported by logic and evidence in this case.

And conversely:

Un-Popular opinion is worthless unless it is supported by both logic and evidence.

Not supported in this case I'm afraid.

Aaron, Rosemary,

I've spent the better part of my weekend sitting here at my computer carefully composing what I thought were worthwhile responses. And from time to time I was encouraged as it seemed I was getting across once in a while (petersone thanks for the acknowledgment that I've been of some help to you).

But honestly, I've run out of gas going over the same points over and over in every which way imaginable (as well as MileHigh too), apparently to no avail. Not that this was ever a war, but I've got to throw in the towel folks. I'm just not making any headway here, and that is the only reason I AM here, which is to try and add some sense of careful and scientific thought. It doesn't seem to be happening. Folks have only so much patience, and I think I've shown more than could be expected. Folks have told me in private that they are amazed at the patience I have shown, and that in some ways helped me continue to try, and in some ways made me ask myself "why am I even bothering?".

Anyway I've been neglecting my own work long enough over here and I feel the effort is not paying off to any satisfaction that I could be making a positive difference. I'll continue to work with Luc as long as he "tolerates" me as he has been more receptive to input.

Also, I just can't keep up with all the rebuttals, especially when they seem to take turns for the worse and aim even farther away from the original point I was trying to make.

The last couple responses of mine is NOT where I wanted to go, but the issues were forced, and not by me. I won't stand down until I pull the plug, and that time is now.

Good luck to you guys

,99
__________________
 
  #935  
Old 07-20-2009, 04:49 AM
Aaron's Avatar
Aaron Aaron is offline
Co-Founder & Moderator
 
Join Date: Feb 2007
Location: Washington State
Posts: 10,601
circuit replication

Just want to say I have nothing against classical viewpoint because it has served us well obviously. I have my computer, I can watch movies on a dvd player and so on.

The question is with jurisdiction. Classical training is limited to closed systems so why try to apply the constraints of classical training to non-classical circuits? The operating mechanism of normal circuits does not apply to these kind of circuits.

There are some that believe the concept of COP only applies to heat pumps. I have seen this argument but it is still a ratio of work out compared to what we had to provide. Therefore, any extra work done above our own input is a gain compared to what we put in.

It is argued that "the energy stored in a coil" coming back in a spike is the same energy we put in. If it is the same energy that we put in, then what happened to the belief that all the input energy was burned up in the resistor?

For practical application, it doesn't matter if it is the same energy we put in or if it came back from the environment for free. Let's just play the classical role and say it is the same.

If x watt hours left the battery, the conventional thinking is that it can only do that much work. If we get 50% back in inductive spikes after that much work was already done. It does not matter if the belief is that it is the same energy or new energy from the universe.

It is a fact that the 50% recovery can be used to do more work. Because this is an absolute fact of nature, that work the 50% recovered potential provides is still WORK.

A simple Bedini SSG can easily be 90% recovery in a secondary battery. Many of us have done this. There is easily 20% in the mechanical work done with the rotor spinning but the classic viewpoint continually ignores this fact that a turning wheel is work. That is COP 1.1 at minimum. I've had over 1.0 COP not counting the work with high capacitance cap dumps with a mechanical switch (more joules out of the charging battery compared to what left input battery. And the same with some oscillator experiments.

So we had x watt hours leaving the battery and it performed that much work PLUS other work done is what the 50% recovered potential will provide. Original input work + recovered potential put to work is MORE work that the x watt hours is predicted by math to be able to accomplish.

So even if we don't look at recovered POTENTIAL on each cycle and just look at what WORK it does, that work simply must be added to the work that the input amount provided. Add all the WORK, it is more than what can be calculated from the battery.

Even if zero heat can be felt on the resistor because there is a small amount of volts X current passing through, no matter how small, that wattage is supposed to be dissipated there meaning in the classical viewpoint, it is "KNOWN" that it is all dissipated. If ALL of the energy is dissipated there, where did the charge in my capacitor come from? That is potential energy and if all the energy dissipated, that means something that the classical viewpoint simply isn't willing to admit because it will pull the bottom card out of the house of cards that classical thermodynamics built - at least only to those that have surrendered jurisdiction of their reality over to classical thermodynamics.

The resistor is passing energy, without dissipating it and producing heat at the same time meaning there is no dissipation of energy in the resistor to create heat. If it was dissipated there in the resistor, we couldn't keep getting the potential back over and over and over. Conservation goes up in a puff of smoke.

This is beating a dead horse but at least we know the mosfet will self oscillate. It is easy for anyone to replicate this. I would encourage everyone to do their best in getting the exact mosfet the experiment used. They are clearly available.

Anyone that has ever built an SSG should see the similarity. Instead of a serious coil with a core, use an inductive resistor. Instead of a transistor, use a mosfet. Instead of an inductive trigger, use a 555.

And take your rhinocerous skin pills.

I have a few tests to report but don't want to do much more until I get the 3% duty cycle and lower resistance shunt.
__________________
Sincerely,
Aaron Murakami

  #936  
Old 07-20-2009, 05:52 AM
witsend witsend is offline
Gold Member
 
Join Date: May 2009
Posts: 1,881
.99 your last post was measured and from the heart. By contrast my own points were somewhat smug. I apologise. I would just ask you to consider that we are presuming to challenge conventional knowledge. It cannot be done without confronting known excellent disciplines.

It's bound to be at the cost of a certain amount of blood and scars - and, thus far, the wounds have been against those who presumed to challenge classical norms. But we're still challenging - still fighting - and I suspect that it will continue until real consideration is given to the evidence that we present. I would add that classical training seems to go to some lengths to forbid this evidence. They won't even discuss. Hence the gratitude to Hoppy, you and MileHigh. I would add. however, that there is an evident increase in the academic arenas of those who are at least testing some of these principles. But I am not in a position to disclose who they are or what their findings are. I just keep hoping to hear it from them, themselves. It would help if there were a public refutation of this from them. But it simply never comes and the months keep passing.

I only came into the picture because I've got a painfully literal turn of mind. I could not see why classical physics could argue against their own inductive laws - why induced fields would be one thing on one system and another thing on another system. But that's me. And we all know - I'm not qualified to comment.

I do hope we can keep you with us .99. And I am truly grateful for your help.
__________________
 
  #937  
Old 07-20-2009, 08:47 AM
tsakou tsakou is offline
Junior Member
 
Join Date: Dec 2007
Posts: 7
scientific validation

Quote:
Originally Posted by Hoppy View Post
Not tough at all Rosemary; this is the way claims are validated in the scientific community. Please read my post again; I did not say that you have said that anyone is wrong.

Hoppy
I don't give a damn about how the scientific community validates things. There are many inventors who where not validated at their own time and after their death, now, they are accepted.

So Rosemary, keep up the good work, make something that works, and leave the scientific community, to validate, if ever. I just want overunity. Don't need anybody to validate it.
__________________
 
  #938  
Old 07-20-2009, 08:55 AM
witsend witsend is offline
Gold Member
 
Join Date: May 2009
Posts: 1,881
tsakou - thanks. That's such a good point. Who cares? We just need to get the devices up and running. And I bet there's enough expertise in our little forum to find a way to 'trick' the meters to show that gain.

Thanks again. Always a boost when we get this encouragement. By the way - this device is SMALL. The big guns will follow and that's nothing to do with this circuit or my skills. I think I've got the best argument though because it conforms to conventional measurement protocols. So it may help to make inroads.

Rosemary
__________________
 

Last edited by witsend; 07-20-2009 at 09:17 AM. Reason: explained better
  #939  
Old 07-20-2009, 09:32 AM
tsakou tsakou is offline
Junior Member
 
Join Date: Dec 2007
Posts: 7
Quote:
Originally Posted by witsend View Post
tsakou - thanks. That's such a good point. Who cares? We just need to get the devices up and running. And I bet there's enough expertise in our little forum to find a way to 'trick' the meters to show that gain.

Thanks again. Always a boost when we get this encouragement. By the way - this device is SMALL. The big guns will follow and that's nothing to do with this circuit or my skills. I think I've got the best argument though because it conforms to conventional measurement protocols. So it may help to make inroads.

Rosemary
And please, please, please. Don't waste your time trying to persuade people. No need to do so. Communicate only with people who are positive, who are trying and experimenting. If somebody needs scientific validation, just tell him to wait, until it's available. Don't leave him bother all of us, who are interested.
__________________
 
  #940  
Old 07-20-2009, 09:52 AM
Joit Joit is offline
Gold Member
 
Join Date: Sep 2008
Posts: 1,992
About A Scientist would had archive OU, when it does exist.
There are plenty of Examples, what shows, Inventors been killed or 'died suddenly', after her Device was public.
Remember the latest case, where someone had set a Rotoverter into selfrunning Mode.
He tried to get in touch with a Company, and after a while, he lost his House, Work and access to his Bankaccount.
Another Example, someone did sell HHO Cells at EBAY, but seeems they been to good,
and the same, suddenly, his Bankaccount was locked, and after debating he was asked to accept a Cheque for equation,
and of course, not to sell the Cell anymore.
And this did happen LATELY.
Its not like, there are all open Mind outside.
And its like Rosemary says, when a Scientist state, its OU, then he is Out, of her 'Community'.
The Explanations and the Understanding is clearly made, that there is no Space, to explain extraordinary Things.
It seems more, THERE are the Holes at the general Understanding, what is clearly made, that you cannot explain extraordinary Things.

As well said, it are the Results under the Line what do counts, but True.
What does they help, when the Logic to understand them IS NOT HERE.
I only look with an half Eye into the technical Statements, what are overall done, because my Tummy says, anywhere, its quit not right,
And where you come to, when you stay into that Direction,
that you see too, under the Line. Anywhere, No OU.

Input Worth from external Links into this Thread? I would Say COP -200%


@Tsakou Teehee
__________________
Theorizer are like High Voltage. A lot hot Air with no Power behind but they are the dead of applied Work and Ideas.

Last edited by Joit; 07-20-2009 at 10:45 AM.
  #941  
Old 07-20-2009, 11:16 AM
Joit Joit is offline
Gold Member
 
Join Date: Sep 2008
Posts: 1,992
And well, about the Timer Circuit at the Quantum Article.
I didnt like Mosfets too, been just not familar with it, but who is. Not much.

I did do a simple REAL Test, did put a 9V Batterie onto it, and a Led(+100Ohms) between D and Plus, and turn the Pot left and right.
It shows more clear, where the Batterie drains more, and from this, it shows more, like, as if the Timer has the long Duty Cycle.
But still not sure, if it is better, to have the long or short Cycles,
maybe not the Circuit is wrong, but the statements about the Duty Cycle are...?!
Who knows, what is better for the Ringdown Part, when you use other Parts at the Circuit with different Resistance.

What shows the Rest ?
How good expansive DMM's are well isolated with Caps, that they DONT show Things, what are still there?
Quit Impressive!

Thats just so Simple to test and show it with 2 Sentences, as to show it with bloaded Videos and 20 Posts.

And still as Aaron and Rosemary says, IT DOES NOT MATTER which Cycle you got,
when the Transistor is in self-oscillation, then you got the Gain.
Just the Thing to get it into it.

And think about it,
What is more worth, a lot of Comparisons or a simple crude made Thing,
what heats up to 70 Deg with a min of Input or the whole Discussion about it,
what takes more Time then anything else and
where you got more then one Possibilities, to get missleaded.

The importend things in this Thread about the Circuit for me right now are,
The Papers, the Circuit, the Parts and the fact, that you have to do some adjustments.
__________________
Theorizer are like High Voltage. A lot hot Air with no Power behind but they are the dead of applied Work and Ideas.

Last edited by Joit; 07-20-2009 at 08:31 PM.
  #942  
Old 07-20-2009, 12:00 PM
witsend witsend is offline
Gold Member
 
Join Date: May 2009
Posts: 1,881
hi Joit. Love the comments. What scares me is not the academics - because at least they sincerely believe in their science - with good reason. Its the detractors on other forums that are worrying. The lengths they go to to discredit the person and the claim - both.

Have you ever looked through the OU.Com thread on this? It beggars belief. Malice hardly describes it. And the amount of money that is spent on displaying tests and parading brand new state of the art equipment that is never effectively used. Weeks go by without a single test result - just promises of this. Yet we are constantly advised that the claim is wrong. Has it ever occurred to anyone that - to this day - no single power measurement has been made on the circuitry? No test has been run to duration of a battery capacity. Brand new state of the art equipment is constantly on display but never are its full functions referenced. Small irrelevant points become critical evidence of a lack of proof and are championed with an unabashed repetitiveness that is boringly persistent but brutally destructive. But no actual proof is offered.

What is frightening is that anyone who questions a result is actually verbally menaced. One post we've got on record is of Ramset's answer to a challenging observation by one of their contributors. He actually wrote to the effect that 'owlsley needs to kiwl the kitty'. TK is on record as openly saying that I am a mendacious prevaricator. Apparently all aspects of our test are some sort of public con, apparently aimed at I don't know what? Surely my stated intention not to capitalise on the device must bring my motives to question. Clearly, if I am perpetuating a con - then it's not for purposes of defrauding the public. Why would I go to such lengths to expose a small little effect, possibly the smallest of any OU claim ever offered up for consideration? What is it that deserves their heavy handed attempts at wit or sarcasm, done with the orchestrated approval of other 'so called' scientists sharing that thread. TK only needs to make a post for immediate endorsement by other contributors who also then mock my apparent lack of sanity, judgement, intelligence, schooling, beliefs, ideas, lack of expertise - name it's all there. All for public consumption. All unchallenged. And all such detractors always out of reach, always carefully hiding behind their assumed identities. They flirt with their rights to freedom of expression that under normal circumstances, and under ordinary civil law would be actionable. And all this, clearly with Stephan's endorsement. Never do they give us their names. Never do they disclose their identities. Never are we in a position to find out their actual motives.

To compound my concerns is the fact that the entire forum was promoted by Stephan, with, one would assume, the intention of promoting the study of free energy. I can no longer access OU.Com. Was he responsible for my not gaining access? And if so, at whose asking and why? Public - to everyone but me? Then too it seems that my emails are being read. How does that happen? Are my phone calls also being monitored?

It's all very puzzling. All I want is an answer to the question posed in my paper - ideally from academics who can validate the result or not and comment accordingly. If they won't hear me then maybe they'll listen to you guys? It's quite important really. But its only a small question. In the light of the attack, however, I'm realising how significant it is. Certainly it seems to be sufficiently significant for them to do everything in their power to destroy my reputation and my work - both. Why is it that important? I can only propose it's because we're near the truth and this, for some reason, needs to be discredited. And again. Why?
__________________
 
  #943  
Old 07-20-2009, 12:35 PM
Mark Mark is offline
Silver Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2008
Posts: 796
Because it would change the whole balance of power! The power industry would be shook at its roots. One can only image all the changes that would take place with abundant low cost energy.
__________________
 
  #944  
Old 07-20-2009, 01:38 PM
tsakou tsakou is offline
Junior Member
 
Join Date: Dec 2007
Posts: 7
Quote:
Originally Posted by Mark View Post
Because it would change the whole balance of power! The power industry would be shook at its roots. One can only image all the changes that would take place with abundant low cost energy.
Can't agree more.
__________________
 
  #945  
Old 07-20-2009, 01:49 PM
RAMSET RAMSET is offline
Gold Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2009
Location: NYC and Conn USA
Posts: 1,311
A scientist searching for OU [rare as hens teath]

MIB ? bad oil guy?

Can't use equipment?[every day of his life]

wonder what the COP is of this device.

YouTube - Dirod 1

Or this one.

YouTube - Bonetti Machine clip #3

Aaron is on the right page" heat some water" If your COP is that high

then your BTU will be obvious

You go Aaron make it so boil some water make steam Forget all these tests
HOT WATER HEAT is what where after COP 17 and higher

Chet
PS you don't need a lab for that
__________________
 

Last edited by RAMSET; 07-20-2009 at 01:53 PM.
  #946  
Old 07-20-2009, 02:13 PM
RAMSET RAMSET is offline
Gold Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2009
Location: NYC and Conn USA
Posts: 1,311
A scientist[FE scientist] works the resonance

Groundloop gutoluc and An FE scientist

YouTube - resonance effects for everyone

And from another scientist[TRON]

tank circuit video: resonance and harmonics
a great video on resonance and oscilloscope signals in a tank circuit
Make: Online : Short Circuit #2: Frequency multiplication with tank circuits

Make: Online : Short Circuit #2: Frequency multiplication with tank circuits
__________________
 

Last edited by RAMSET; 07-20-2009 at 02:21 PM.
  #947  
Old 07-20-2009, 06:28 PM
witsend witsend is offline
Gold Member
 
Join Date: May 2009
Posts: 1,881
Ramset - I wonder if I could impose on you to desist from giving us links to TK's videos until he is in a position of show us the actual wattage measurements using the instruments to hand.

All videos - to date - have been somewhat misleading and utterly confusing.

Thank you
Rosemary
__________________
 
  #948  
Old 07-20-2009, 06:33 PM
Aaron's Avatar
Aaron Aaron is offline
Co-Founder & Moderator
 
Join Date: Feb 2007
Location: Washington State
Posts: 10,601
blocking

Quote:
Originally Posted by witsend View Post
To compound my concerns is the fact that the entire forum was promoted by Stephan, with, one would assume, the intention of promoting the study of free energy. I can no longer access OU.Com. Was he responsible for my not gaining access? And if so, at whose asking and why? Public - to everyone but me? Then too it seems that my emails are being read. How does that happen? Are my phone calls also being monitored?
I can get into ou.com ok.

I did have emails from some people saying they were blocked from Energetic Forum. I can tell everyone that the blocking isn't done by us. Any blocking had to be done I would imagine at their own country, isp or whatever.
__________________
Sincerely,
Aaron Murakami

  #949  
Old 07-20-2009, 06:36 PM
witsend witsend is offline
Gold Member
 
Join Date: May 2009
Posts: 1,881
Aaron - I only know what's going on there courtesy my neighbour. I can travel anywhere in the world on the internet - but not OU.COM. I also have reason to believe my emails are being read. Not sure about phone monitoring but would expect this is going on as well.
__________________
 
  #950  
Old 07-20-2009, 06:58 PM
Aaron's Avatar
Aaron Aaron is offline
Co-Founder & Moderator
 
Join Date: Feb 2007
Location: Washington State
Posts: 10,601
misc

Hi everyone,

Rosemary mentioned it and so did Joit about the quantum article.

If the quantum article provides 97% duty cycle, it will still work and the mosfet will self-oscillate, just increase resistance of the gate high enough and it happens.

I know this has been said that it will still work but I showed on my video turning my duty cycle to 99% and increasing gate resistance caused self-oscillation. When I showed it on the scope, I went through ALL ranges of duty cycle 50-99%, all frequency and all resistance at the gate. So, there is absolutely no question that 97% can do it.

Therefore, as the article has been published for years, anyone that built it should have been able to get results with that circuit.

Anyway, need to get a new meter so I can check the resistance of the pots to see what they're at when the mosfet self oscillates. Blew them all u on my Gray circuit except for the meter you saw the voltage on the source battery...but the ohm meter in it is fried.

I'll report what the resistance of the pots are at when I can.

I want a bigger inductive resistor and lower shunt resistor. I may have a 3% duty cycle trigger soon. Then, I'll be ready to roll.
__________________
Sincerely,
Aaron Murakami

  #951  
Old 07-20-2009, 07:34 PM
RAMSET RAMSET is offline
Gold Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2009
Location: NYC and Conn USA
Posts: 1,311
As you wish

Rosemary
quote
Ramset - I wonder if I could impose on you to desist from giving us links to TK's videos until he is in a position of show us the actual wattage measurements using the instruments to hand.

All videos - to date - have been somewhat misleading and utterly confusing.
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Absolutely, consider that done

I will also PM Stephan[about access ] What is your user name at OU
wait I just realized you don't have to be a member to viewI will PM him anyway]

Chet
__________________
 

Last edited by RAMSET; 07-20-2009 at 07:37 PM.
  #952  
Old 07-20-2009, 08:07 PM
witsend witsend is offline
Gold Member
 
Join Date: May 2009
Posts: 1,881
Ramset - abject apologies. I actually watched all the links. They were really interesting. Sorry about being shirty. I thought it was another attack at my own circuit.

May I add that I am really impressed that TK duplicated gotoluc's experiment. It seems that I may have underestimated his ability to be impartial. Just ask him to apply the same impartiality to my little circuit. It would be a welcome change. The circuit offers nothing new. It just shows a gain on the measurements of energy in/out that classicists can't refute. That's the only reason it's on offer.

Thank you - and, again, apologies.
__________________
 
  #953  
Old 07-20-2009, 09:49 PM
Joit Joit is offline
Gold Member
 
Join Date: Sep 2008
Posts: 1,992
Hi,
i still can access OU.com, maybe only some connections are messed ? I hope so.

Milehigh sorry, to dont respond to your long Post, but i did mark it, to go back, when i really wanna something proove.
This Vid was really just for entertainment, and its clear for me, that it did not show alot, or show some real Power.
But at all, it still shows, that all our Explanations are still not the holy Grail.
Plus, i was to tired last days, and had no time, and had the Option do redo the whole Thing and make a new Vid 3 Hours, or do something else.
I did something else...


Witsend,
maybe TK is impartial, and his Efforts to show Proofs been quit big, also, there are surely some usefull things for some, what he do show, even, when i have to comit, i only watched them half. But its his Attitude, and how Things did and do escalate did broke it.
And for myself, i dont like it to get my Opinion formed at the beginning from others.
For Ou.com, maybe you click here, its a redirect over a anonymizer, maybe there is really something blocked, when this dont work,
otherwise i would say, the Line to you maybe dont work proper at the Moment.
I hope, i did not make you nervous about the Storys about the Inventors.
It mainly did happen, when they did go public, but not at the Attempts to build something, far as i remember.


For the Timercircuit, i think the same as Aaron, that the Timercircuit need to come into Resonance with the Element, when i did get that right.
Therefor, i am still not sure, if a lower Cycle or a higher Cycle is needed,
and if the 'Load' this case the Element need a longer ON Time, to push Energy through, or a short Time, and what is better for the Oscillation.
Quit not sure about it, and still some strange Things happend by me, when i did do some Tests.
And i am still not sure, if its on now or off. As i did do the first Test, it showed a better State for the Batterie at the Short OFF Cycles,
Lots Things, still, what do confuse.

As i did do the Vid, i had the Pots for (for the understanding, short spikes are OFF) set very low.
So, Looong on cycles, had to adjust the Frequency, i think, it was even higher then 2,4khz, and then turned the Pot at the Gate higher.
And at a certain Point, the DMM starts to go crazy, as you have seen, i had an input into the Coil, what has something about 26AWG(0,4mm)
Source was 12V/2Amp, and it did show 3000V Spikes and even higher, over 4000V, because my DMM did show overload, with a better adjustment.
And i still know, such high Spikes can tickle you well also, it isnt like it, they dont have any Power.
You can even increase the strenght of a magnetic Field, when the Spike comes at the right Time, and from the same Sourcevoltage.
So far to, that they dont have Power.

I think even, that best the Frequency depends at the Load, what is at the Mosfet, just sad anyhow, i think, some can have a hard time, without an OSC or a cheap DMM.
How they did the Measurements from the Article, i dont know, if it did depends at the Load, and it showed something else, or a measurement error,
or just a Typo from the Typographer,
what accidently switched the Words 'ON' and 'OFF', i dont know.
I leave it as it is, maybe can do once a comparison with different Cycles, but i am ok with as it is.

Right now, i only dont have an inductive Resistor or Shunts, to play with, but i think, with other inductive Elements are there sure Possibilities.
And well, still got other Work, Days could have sometimes way more Hours.

Funny thing, AND DONT READ FURTHER, when you dont have Fantasy,

When you compare the OFF and ON time from the Mosfet with your own Steps,
so, you do Step by Step, how long is the Moment, you touch with both Legs the Ground,
and wich Time is better, touching long Time with both for carring a heavy Load or Short with only one for fast run.

Anyway confusing, You do step by Step, your Legs carry a Load, Yourself.
Actually, they move a Load through Time and Space, beside, there is a balanced Load over them,
what has a different Axis to stay stable as the Direction of moving.
Beside, i couldnt figure out, how long both legs are at the Ground for the same Time when you walk, or wich one is better, to carry heavy Load.
__________________
Theorizer are like High Voltage. A lot hot Air with no Power behind but they are the dead of applied Work and Ideas.

Last edited by Joit; 07-20-2009 at 10:01 PM.
  #954  
Old 07-20-2009, 10:08 PM
witsend witsend is offline
Gold Member
 
Join Date: May 2009
Posts: 1,881
My dear Joit - your post is delightful. Can hardly understand your experiment - but I take it you're still quarelling with the duty cycle? I must leave it in your capable hands - I have no idea how to advise you.

Regarding your warnings? I'm not concerned - except that I can't get into OU.COM and everyone else can. Not that it matters.

Regarding TK's objectivity? I'd like to be persuaded that there is any. But that's my opinion. I have no problem if you don't agree. We're not ever meant to agree on everything. Else life would be boring in the extreme.

Such a long post Joit. Many thanks. Now I'm going back to read it again and see if I can understand your experimental set up.
__________________
 
  #955  
Old 07-20-2009, 11:06 PM
RAMSET RAMSET is offline
Gold Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2009
Location: NYC and Conn USA
Posts: 1,311
A scientist replicates Aarons circuit

A nice replication of Aarons circuit


YouTube - Electric OU Supplement: Response to Aaron's Lost Triggering Demonstration

Aaron is using a much higher driving freq from his 555, and a long duty cycle of 50 percent or more. This, plus the high inductance of that load, results in the inductive ring being a substantial portion of the pulse duration, not just a little spike like at 2.4 kHz drive.
So now, you just turn the gate drive down (increase the resistance of that pot) until the scope's trigger is being shown the garbage in the very first little piece of the ringdown. And since the trigger circuit is not so good, or it's set on the wrong coupling, or just because it is a 2-trace scope in "vertical mode" trigger, it can't keep up and the waveform slips past in the time dimension. You can see from the contrast bands that the waveform is nearly the same when it's slipping as when it's caught. Plus, since the mosfet isn't turning fully on before you turn it off and start the ringing, the current draw goes down and the batt voltage goes up.
Now turn the gate up or the duty cycle longer. The mosfet turns on fully so the current goes up and the batt voltage goes down. And the scope's trigger sees a cleaner rising portion of the wave and locks it in.

This is a lot easier to do on the other scopes. My Philips has rock-solid triggering and no beam chopper stuff to get in the way of the trigger. But I was able to fool the Philips, even at the low 2.4 kHz used by Ainslie, and me (but not Aaron.)

Aaron, Steve ,All, please comment
__________________
 

Last edited by RAMSET; 07-20-2009 at 11:16 PM.
  #956  
Old 07-20-2009, 11:31 PM
ren's Avatar
ren ren is offline
Gold Member
 
Join Date: Oct 2007
Posts: 1,108
Hi Aaron,

In regards to variable duty cycle/on time I have a schematic here that drives a TL494 PWM and allows for complete control of pulse width and frequency, as well as dead time, which may or may not be needed in this case. Anyway, it will directly trigger a mosfet from the output, or it can be sent through an opto coupler and the output transistor can drive the fet or transistor etc.

Will go up to 600kHz plus by simply changing the cap off pin 5. Lower the value for higher frequency.

Pulse width can be varied from 0 on time, to 100%, I think it would be perfect for this circuit.

If you are interested I can email it to you, I need to check with the author who gave it to me whether he is happy for it to be posted in the thread, I dont think he will mind at all, but best to be sure.

Anyway let me know if you are interested and whether you can source the TL494 locally, I will check with the author in the mean time.

Regards
__________________
 
  #957  
Old 07-21-2009, 12:04 AM
Joit Joit is offline
Gold Member
 
Join Date: Sep 2008
Posts: 1,992
Ramset for a quick reply from me.
I did try to replicate it now, what i did at the Vid, and i couldnt,
maybe i still did not arrange it right now, because i did change all again.

Anyway, Arron did use a 10K Pot at the Gate?
He mentinoned, that maybe a 1k is enough, for the Gate Pot.
Seems for me anyhow, the 100Ohm Resistor at the Article is to low,
for wich Reason ever, maybe its was a different Element.


And my other Thinking, that the Shunt and the Resistor must match in a Way too.

Thats what i had at my Setup.
Plus ->Timer - 50kPot - Gate Transistor
Plus -> 600Ohm/10WPot - Coil - Drain - Source - 5kPot - Minus.

Where the 50K was very low set.
The 600Ohm should replace for me the Resistor at the Circuit, what is around the 24 V Batt.
The 5k Pot and the Coil was for the Shunt other Side.
Now i have actually 5 Pots, 2 at the Timer, 1 for the Gate, and 2 at the 24V Circuit.

Maybe he can get it into Oscillation when he use a higher Pot, otherwise, i can only think of, that he put some more Pots into the Circuit from the recover Part in Serie
and try to match the Parts to eachother.

But thats just in case, he has nothing else to do, as to play with it.

Edit And not to forget about the Flyback-diode.
__________________
Theorizer are like High Voltage. A lot hot Air with no Power behind but they are the dead of applied Work and Ideas.

Last edited by Joit; 07-21-2009 at 01:08 AM.
  #958  
Old 07-21-2009, 01:21 AM
witsend witsend is offline
Gold Member
 
Join Date: May 2009
Posts: 1,881
Aaron - just for the record. My neighbour is now also blind to OU.COM. Guess that's the last hope for the immediate future.


Puts paid to any accidental disconection. And TK is apparently on record as requiring this. Can I ask that someone on that forum look into it? TK has gone on record as preferring the disconnect. I'd be very grateful.
__________________
 
  #959  
Old 07-21-2009, 01:33 AM
RAMSET RAMSET is offline
Gold Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2009
Location: NYC and Conn USA
Posts: 1,311
disconnect

Rosemary
I asked TK Since it is his thread to look into it
He said something to the effect Rosemary's a big girl she can do it herself.and how can she get banned or no read ,she is not even a member
I will PM Stephan, I will be Amazed If it is the problem TK has pissed off many members in O.U. much much much worse than what caused a ban here [but I have never seen him wrong and not admit it]
Stephan is very tolerant
Chet
__________________
 

Last edited by RAMSET; 07-21-2009 at 01:36 AM.
  #960  
Old 07-21-2009, 01:38 AM
witsend witsend is offline
Gold Member
 
Join Date: May 2009
Posts: 1,881
OU.COM'S intended test

Anyway - as best I understand it. They are going to do a repeat test of mine and Gotoluc's experiment for validation purposes. Jibbguys advices regarding preferred instrumentation is being ignored and they, apparently, are using - going to use - have used? - a Clarke-Hess meter. This is just a really fancy ammeter - and has no capability of separating returning current from delivered current which is the theme on both experiments. This is, notwithstanding the availability of some perfectly good Fluke Scope meters and better - being readily available.

For the record. The question at the heart of my modest experiment goes to a simple known law in physics - the well known inductive laws. You will notice that all OU claims are related to switching circuits that generate a second cycle of back electromotive or counter electromotive force, back to the system. The argument for the classicist has always been that this energy is first delivered by the supply and then stored. The switch is closed. The stored energy then gets used. The result therefore is zero extra being introduced.

The 'new age' physics claims that the energy is delivered from the source. It generates an extruded magnetic field throughout the circuit components. When the switch is closed, these stored fields re-generate a second cycle of energy that is then used in the system.

The only way to prove this conclusively is to apply all tests to an independant supply source. The most reliable is a battery supply source as there is no need for any contact to any extraneous grid supply which then confuses the argument.

But to actually test how much was delivered and how much was returned needs an analysis of the 'spike' or the returning energy - evident in all such cycles. The measurement apparatus intended, or has been or is being used, whichever is appropriate - will ignore what is returned and what is delivered and will show an equal amount of energy on both the input and output of the circuit. So I am asking, in advance, that you discount any such results. And I would ask Jibbguy. if you wouldn't mind, to please address this question, again, on that forum. They will be obliged to respect your knowledge on this matter as it is incontestable.

As the matter is of some considerable importance I would be glad if you could help us out.

Rosemary
__________________
 

Last edited by witsend; 07-21-2009 at 01:38 AM. Reason: heading
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 10:27 AM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.8
Copyright ©2000 - 2018, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.
Search Engine Optimisation provided by DragonByte SEO v1.4.0 (Pro) - vBulletin Mods & Addons Copyright © 2018 DragonByte Technologies Ltd.
Shoutbox provided by vBShout v6.2.8 (Lite) - vBulletin Mods & Addons Copyright © 2018 DragonByte Technologies Ltd.
2007-2015 Copyright - Energetic Forum - All Rights Reserved

Bedini RPX Sideband Generator

Tesla Chargers