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
  #1201  
Old 07-25-2009, 10:43 PM
Aaron's Avatar
Aaron Aaron is offline
Co-Founder & Moderator
 
Join Date: Feb 2007
Location: Washington State
Posts: 10,562
definition of energy

Quote:
Originally Posted by poynt99 View Post
Mike,

Do you agree or disagree that the terms "stored energy" and "potential energy" essentially mean the same thing?

.99
Where does the potential come from Poynt? Not the abstract concept of potential, where does it really, really come from and what is it - in the best subatomic analogy you can give, tell me what the potential is?

We are dealing with the study of energetics, which is the study of the movement of potentials, which is only energy when the potential is moving.

The definition of energy is wrong. Energy is the "capacity" to do work? A capacity to do something is a POTENTIAL do to something and that definition says that Energy = Potential.

Potential is the capacity or capability to do work but not actually doing the work.

When potential is put to work and is being dissipated, that is what Energy is.

Potential Energy is the potential for there to be energy but not actually demonstrating anything energetic at all.

There is no such thing as stored energy as energy is the actual movement of potential being put to work.

Even the dictionary definition is profoundly contradictory.

I don't believe this is semantics, it is a matter of having the correct definition of energy and potential and knowing the difference.

Poynt, can you show me one single bit of evidence in the history of mankind that shows there is some increase in the intrinsic properties of a ball's subatomic, atomic or molecular properties while sitting at 20cm compared to at ground level?

It doesn't exist except if they looked they'll find there is less gravitational potential the higher up since it is further from the Earth's mass.

Seeing a ball fall and "release" potential is based 100% on speculation that "there must be" some "stored potential" in the ball at 20cm compared to ground.

Classical thermodynamics is completely based on these little bits of speculation and then they call it a law. That is absurd.
__________________
Sincerely,
Aaron Murakami

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

  #1202  
Old 07-25-2009, 10:55 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 Aaron View Post
Where does the potential come from Poynt? Not the abstract concept of potential, where does it really, really come from and what is it - in the best subatomic analogy you can give, tell me what the potential is?

We are dealing with the study of energetics, which is the study of the movement of potentials, which is only energy when the potential is moving.

The definition of energy is wrong. Energy is the "capacity" to do work? A capacity to do something is a POTENTIAL do to something and that definition says that Energy = Potential.

Potential is the capacity or capability to do work but not actually doing the work.

When potential is put to work and is being dissipated, that is what Energy is.

Potential Energy is the potential for there to be energy but not actually demonstrating anything energetic at all.

There is no such thing as stored energy as energy is the actual movement of potential being put to work.

Even the dictionary definition is profoundly contradictory.

I don't believe this is semantics, it is a matter of having the correct definition of energy and potential and knowing the difference.

Poynt, can you show me one single bit of evidence in the history of mankind that shows there is some increase in the intrinsic properties of a ball's subatomic, atomic or molecular properties while sitting at 20cm compared to at ground level?

It doesn't exist except if they looked they'll find there is less gravitational potential the higher up since it is further from the Earth's mass.

Seeing a ball fall and "release" potential is based 100% on speculation that "there must be" some "stored potential" in the ball at 20cm compared to ground.

Classical thermodynamics is completely based on these little bits of speculation and then they call it a law. That is absurd.


Mike
__________________
 
  #1203  
Old 07-25-2009, 11:03 PM
poynt99 poynt99 is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2009
Posts: 378
Potential and Kinetic Energy - Definitions

OK,

I get the impression that Rosemary, Mike, and Aaron are all in agreement that potential energy and stored energy do not mean the same thing.

Also, it would seem that we have two camps here that have an opposing understanding of what Potential Energy is and what Kinetic Energy is.

May I ask you guys, strictly about these two definitions of energy, where you got them from? Are you going by your own "new age" view/understanding of them, or is this your interpretation of how it is recorded and taught in mainstream science?

.99
__________________
 
  #1204  
Old 07-25-2009, 11:23 PM
Aaron's Avatar
Aaron Aaron is offline
Co-Founder & Moderator
 
Join Date: Feb 2007
Location: Washington State
Posts: 10,562
potential

Quote:
Originally Posted by poynt99 View Post
Notice there is no corresponding negative spike of current going back into the battery, however notice the short red spike on the leading edge?
The spike is VOLTAGE POTENTIAL.

When you put that potential back to the battery, which is DOES go back to the battery and you apply a load, you will get current from that potential.

This is an absolute fact of life.

Do you know why it looks like a spike? Because there is no real width to the spike. Therefore is represents a higher voltage potential. Meaning it is tall but narrow.

It is called voltage potential because that is the movement of that initial potential that is going back to the battery. Potential to do what?

The potential to cause current at a lower voltage with load applied.

If the argument is that there isn't real current associated with the spike, I'm sorry I missed that irrelevant point in the past because that is well, irrelevant.

Take a coil, charge and discharge over and over and over.

Look at this:



It is inverted shot. Bottom bumps are 12 volts at X current charging a coil. When discharged, do you see those multi hundred volt spikes of VOLTAGE POTENTIAL?

Do you know why those spikes are cold? Because there isn't current with them. You can charge a battery with it and charge a cap with it and it charges up. You apply a load and you get lower voltage with CURRENT out of it without putting the current there to begin with.

There is no way you can challenge this Poynt.

Why does a photo flash cap in a camera charge? It is only receiving an inductive little spike with no real current going to the capacitor. Don't tell me it isn't the same thing because it is.

The reason the negative spike on the shunt is a spike is because the RATE OF CHANGE. In DC systems RATE OF CHANGE increased the voltage and not winding ratio.

You apply power to the inductive resistor...that is the slow pulse with wide width to it...that is current plus voltage. When mosfet turns off, it goes back as a spike as indicated at the shunt and the voltage from what I have seen can be up to 4 times the battery voltage. 24v in and 100v spike.

The spike is TIME COMPRESSED and the voltage goes up while the current goes down to virtually nothing. That is POTENTIAL.

The battery stores that potential (it gains something)..or a cap stores the potential (it gains something). A ball at 20cm doesn't gain anything sitting at 20cm.

When you apply a load to the capacitor or battery, that potential stored in that spike turns back into energy when a load is applied causing more current!

I don't know why I haven't even noticed this is what the argument was. The spike is full of potential energy. Again, this shows that the classical training has no idea whatsoever what potential and energy really is.

The spike transfers potential BACK TO THE BATTERY.

Go run it on your simulator. Charge a coil at whatever frequency and make sure you get spikes that show little to no current. charge a capacitor with it. You will see the capacitor charge if the simulator software is worth the plastic it is burned on.

Once the capacitor is charged, apply a load to it an tell me if it powers something with current.
__________________
Sincerely,
Aaron Murakami


Last edited by Aaron; 07-25-2009 at 11:31 PM.
  #1205  
Old 07-25-2009, 11:24 PM
poynt99 poynt99 is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2009
Posts: 378
For those here that have an open mind and would like to know what mainstream science has been teaching about Potential and Kinetic energy for a couple hundred years, see the following:

Potential and Kinetic Energy

By Xu Fang Zou

Potential and kinetic energy are energy partners. When there is motion, energy is kinetic. When there is not motion but there is just about to be motion, energy is potential.

Kinetic energy is the energy of motion. It is measure by how much work must be done to put an object in motion or to rest.

Potential energy is stored energy
. Sometimes potential energy is also called gravitational potential energy because it is mostly determined by gravity.

Potential vs Kinetic Energy Throwing a ball into the air is a good example of how kinetic and potential energy work. In this scenario, there is a continuous change from kinetic energy to potential energy.

Imagine a ball lying on the ground without motion. At this point, both kinetic and potential energy are at zero. When the ball is tossed into the air, there is a burst of kinetic energy. As the ball reaches its maximum height, the kinetic energy gets smaller and smaller. Finally it becomes zero. Meanwhile, the potential energy is increasing. As the ball reaches its maximum height, its velocity is zero. Now all the energy in the process is saved as potential energy.

When the ball begins to fall down to the ground, the potential energy is once again gradually converted to kinetic energy. Finally, the ball lands on the ground and becomes motionless.

The energy cycle will begin once more when the ball is picked up and thrown again.



Source: http://www.greenscreen.org/articles_...AndKinetic.htm

My Note: Even if the ball was stopped in mid-air and held there by velcro or a hand or a shelf, it would retain the Potential Energy at that point (potential to do work) until it again fell to the ground. This is just one source among thousands which say essentially the same thing. Do a web search or open a Grade 6 or 7 physics text book.

.99
__________________
 

Last edited by poynt99; 07-25-2009 at 11:36 PM.
  #1206  
Old 07-25-2009, 11:30 PM
witsend witsend is offline
Gold Member
 
Join Date: May 2009
Posts: 1,881
Quote:
Originally Posted by poynt99 View Post
OK,

I get the impression that Rosemary, Mike, and Aaron are all in agreement that potential energy and stored energy do not mean the same thing.

Also, it would seem that we have two camps here that have an opposing understanding of what Potential Energy is and what Kinetic Energy is.

May I ask you guys, strictly about these two definitions of energy, where you got them from? Are you going by your own "new age" view/understanding of them, or is this your interpretation of how it is recorded and taught in mainstream science?

.99
Hi Poynt - am wide awake again. And in the middle of the fray. It really doesn't matter how different people wake up to the realisation that OU is just everywhere. It only matters that they see it. But in terms of electric circuitry - it is in those collapsing magnetic fields from potential difference transferred from the source to the coil - be it an inductor, a resistor or both. It's difficult to argue once it's been pointed to. And I've yet to find, even among the experts, that they will argue it once seen. Not that they'll acknowledge it unless it's given to them in the form of a published paper.

Mike - I saw your post re 'threats'. I'm scared for my personal safety for the first time in my life. I'm menaced on and off the forum. Who's doing this? Is it government? And how are they going to stop this truth from reverberating just everywhere? It's getting too widely understood. So why the menace to the few. It's making martyrs surely?
__________________
 

Last edited by witsend; 07-25-2009 at 11:36 PM.
  #1207  
Old 07-25-2009, 11:37 PM
Aaron's Avatar
Aaron Aaron is offline
Co-Founder & Moderator
 
Join Date: Feb 2007
Location: Washington State
Posts: 10,562
current???

Poynt,

With the diode disconnected from the inductor...going to a separate location, are you able to show how much current is in that inductive spike that I'm using to charge a capacitor?

How much current? I really want to know. Show me the current compared to the current that left to charge the inductor to begin with.

How much current does your simulator show is leaving that diode going to a capacitor for example or even a battery. I wonder what your simulator will show on my scope shot with 12v with the hundreds of volts spikes coming out.

2000 turns
23 awg wire
core is about 2.5 inches tall
and core diameter is 0.75 inches

Apply 12volts from a 12v 7ah battery at about 1000 Hz.
What spikes do you get and how much current is in those spikes?

What does the current probe show?
__________________
Sincerely,
Aaron Murakami

  #1208  
Old 07-25-2009, 11:43 PM
Aaron's Avatar
Aaron Aaron is offline
Co-Founder & Moderator
 
Join Date: Feb 2007
Location: Washington State
Posts: 10,562
about to move?

Quote:
Originally Posted by poynt99 View Post
When there is not motion but there is just about to be motion, energy is potential.
Right, I learned that in high school physics. And it is seeing reality inverse of what is really happening, with flaws.

And the concept of something ABOUT to be put in motion energy suddenly turns into potential?

So an object has a consciousness to know how to shift its atomic matrix that makes up is mass right BEFORE it is about to move and suddenly some magical transformation occurs changing the properties of the ball right before it is about to move? The ball uses its third eye to see that it will just about to begin moving?

See? The classical definition has nothing to do with reality, it is all these abstract concepts that have no concrete meaning to them. They're completely fabricated illusions based on fantasy.
__________________
Sincerely,
Aaron Murakami

  #1209  
Old 07-25-2009, 11:48 PM
Aaron's Avatar
Aaron Aaron is offline
Co-Founder & Moderator
 
Join Date: Feb 2007
Location: Washington State
Posts: 10,562
information

Quote:
Originally Posted by witsend View Post
And how are they going to stop this truth from reverberating just everywhere? It's getting too widely understood.
This forum alone has over 40,000 registered members. Many people that don't participate subscribe to these threads and get the posts mailed to them as they are posted.

This forum is in multiple archives on the internet.

Here is an example of the arhive:
http://web.archive.org/web/200703022...eticforum.com/
Shows on that date, there were only36 members. 2 years ago...

There are thousands of people learning all of this and sharing it with others. These forums are linked to and referenced on hundreds of websites all over the world.
__________________
Sincerely,
Aaron Murakami

  #1210  
Old 07-25-2009, 11:49 PM
poynt99 poynt99 is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2009
Posts: 378
Re. Long Post #1205:

Aaron,

I am open minded when it comes to batteries being charged by pulses, in terms of the possibility that they can be "persuaded" to charge more efficiently this way, and I accept 100% that a capacitor can be readily charged by feeding the flyback to them. I have done it in the simulator and on a pulse motor.

So I am not sure what point you are contending with me at this juncture?

Regarding your test coil specs. Do you have numbers for inductance and DC resistance? I would need that for an accurate simulation of your coil. At the very least if you don't have an inductance meter, the DC resistance is still helpful. I will take a WAG at the inductance.

Another thing that can be helpful is the outer coil diameter, You gave 0.75" as the inner diameter correct? With this (the outer coil diameter) and the DC resistance I can use one of the online calculators such as this one:Coil Calculator - Single-layer and mutil-layer coil calculation in javascript

Also, what value of charging capacitance would you like me to use for this sim?

.99
__________________
 

Last edited by poynt99; 07-26-2009 at 12:17 AM.
  #1211  
Old 07-25-2009, 11:56 PM
witsend witsend is offline
Gold Member
 
Join Date: May 2009
Posts: 1,881
Quote:
Originally Posted by Aaron View Post
Where does the potential come from Poynt? Not the abstract concept of potential, where does it really, really come from and what is it - in the best subatomic analogy you can give, tell me what the potential is?

We are dealing with the study of energetics, which is the study of the movement of potentials, which is only energy when the potential is moving.

The definition of energy is wrong. Energy is the "capacity" to do work? A capacity to do something is a POTENTIAL do to something and that definition says that Energy = Potential.

Potential is the capacity or capability to do work but not actually doing the work.

When potential is put to work and is being dissipated, that is what Energy is.

Potential Energy is the potential for there to be energy but not actually demonstrating anything energetic at all.

There is no such thing as stored energy as energy is the actual movement of potential being put to work.

Even the dictionary definition is profoundly contradictory.

I don't believe this is semantics, it is a matter of having the correct definition of energy and potential and knowing the difference.

Poynt, can you show me one single bit of evidence in the history of mankind that shows there is some increase in the intrinsic properties of a ball's subatomic, atomic or molecular properties while sitting at 20cm compared to at ground level?

It doesn't exist except if they looked they'll find there is less gravitational potential the higher up since it is further from the Earth's mass.

Seeing a ball fall and "release" potential is based 100% on speculation that "there must be" some "stored potential" in the ball at 20cm compared to ground.

Classical thermodynamics is completely based on these little bits of speculation and then they call it a law. That is absurd.
I agree with Mike on this. It deserves endorsement over and over and over.
__________________
 
  #1212  
Old 07-26-2009, 12:19 AM
Aaron's Avatar
Aaron Aaron is offline
Co-Founder & Moderator
 
Join Date: Feb 2007
Location: Washington State
Posts: 10,562
voltage pressure

Quote:
Originally Posted by MileHigh View Post
To try to answer your two questions. For the first, we can go back to the spring analogy. Imagine a spring 200 meters long and when you start compressing it for every meter you compress the spring, the spring pushes back with 10 Newtons of force.

When you have compressed the spring by 100 meters, the force through the spring is 1000 Newtons. You imagine that the spring has no mass or intertia, it is just a pure pushing force. If you stand there and hold the spring in place with no movement, there is no velocity, so the voltage is zero. Your pushing on the spring without moving is of course like DC current flowing through an inductor.
Um, voltage is pressure and the higher the voltage the higher the pressure. Just like gas pressure, since gas pressure is the identical accurate analogy of voltage - and even Tesla compared the voltage to a gas made of a "subatomic" gas - magnetic particles, virtual photons fluxing in the vacuum, whatever. Mendeleev originally had 2 elements smaller than hydrogen because to him, and element was an element and not necessarily an atom...that was all bastardized afterward just like everything else has been but anyway...

If you fill a balloon to 20psi and stop, there is STILL 20psi there is no velocity of air moving in the balloon.

This should be common sense.

Fill a capacitor to 1000 volts. There is nothing moving, at the practical level, but I guarantee you there is 1000 volts of pressure in that cap.

When you compress the spring, the voltage comparison is the PRESSURE of the spring pushing back at you. Even if it is not moving and you hold it there, that pressure IS what the voltage is.

If a coil has zero voltage, explain a scope shot showing a coil being charged then discharged.

I feel like I'm being convinced that I'm supposed to believe that I'm in Bizaarro world:
Bizarro World - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

And I'm having conversations with Mister Mxyzptlk

Mister Mxyzptlk - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Please repeat after me: Kltpzyxm

I'm just messing with you MH but my points above are ignored by you. Voltage is pressure. A coil charged is like a balloon charged. When charged, the balloon has pressure even if you are not blowing air into it anymore.

Charge a capacitor (compress the spring) and you have the voltage right there.

Am I arguing something different here or am I seeing what I think I'm seeing? I guess I'm practically dumbstruck at the claim.
__________________
Sincerely,
Aaron Murakami

  #1213  
Old 07-26-2009, 12:28 AM
MileHigh MileHigh is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Nov 2008
Posts: 140
Aaron:

There are indeed different ways to model something so the pressure that you feel a spring exerting can be modeled as voltage. However, the model that I was using has the mechanical pressure through a compressed spring analogous to the current through an inductor, and the velocity between the two ends of the spring analogous to the voltage across the inductor.

MileHigh

P.S. Ha ha... the air inside the baloon is moving!

P.P.S. > If a coil has zero voltage, explain a scope shot showing a coil being charged then discharged.
It would be worthwhile reading through the last 10 pages of the thread in a week for a second go-through!

Me!:
The voltage across a coil is proportional to how fast the current going through the coil changes with respect to time!
__________________
 

Last edited by MileHigh; 07-26-2009 at 12:35 AM.
  #1214  
Old 07-26-2009, 12:30 AM
Aaron's Avatar
Aaron Aaron is offline
Co-Founder & Moderator
 
Join Date: Feb 2007
Location: Washington State
Posts: 10,562
battery

Quote:
Originally Posted by poynt99 View Post
I am open minded when it comes to batteries being charged by pulses, in terms of the possibility that they can be "persuaded" to charge more efficiently this way, and I accept 100% that a capacitor can be readily charged by feeding the flyback to them.

So I am not sure what point you are contending with me at this juncture?

Regarding your test coil specs. Do you have numbers for inductance and DC resistance? I would need that for an accurate simulation of your coil. At the very least if you don't have an inductance meter, the DC resistance is still helpful. I will take a WAG at the inductance.

Another thing that can be helpful is the outer coil diameter, You gave 0.75" as the inner diameter correct? With this (the outer coil diameter) and the DC resistance I can use one of the online calculators such as this one:Coil Calculator - Single-layer and mutil-layer coil calculation in javascript

Also, what value of charging capacitance would you like me to use for this sim?

.99
Poynt,

In this case, the simulation isn't needed. Your simulation shows no real current moving back into the battery. I can accept that if I see just a spike returning because I know what that means and I know what it does to the battery. And I don't see a reason to claim there is current moving into the battery...there is definitely a high voltage potential spike returning.

But if the claim is that current isn't going to the battery so it can't get charged, then I would have to dispute that based thousands of hours of experiments over almost the last 10 years specifically on this "phenomena."

Electrostatic pressure in impulses hitting the terminal of the battery causes charge separation in the battery. Charge separation in the battery is an increase in potential difference between the terminals...hence the voltage increase. With a load, that potential becomes voltage moving from the positive terminal of the battery over the wire's surface toward the negative terminal of the battery. "Electron current" moves in the opposite direction.

The impulses of voltage potential spikes absolutely give real recharging to the battery and I'd hope that you would at some point prove it to yourself with actual experiment. It is actually quite a trip to see that the battery charges stone cold as well as the load powering capability increasing with each charge and discharge cycle.

That is the opposite of hot current charging where each charge discharge cycle allows the load to be powered less and less and less. Typical sulfation and other heat damage degrading it with each cycle.
__________________
Sincerely,
Aaron Murakami

  #1215  
Old 07-26-2009, 12:33 AM
Aaron's Avatar
Aaron Aaron is offline
Co-Founder & Moderator
 
Join Date: Feb 2007
Location: Washington State
Posts: 10,562
Ainslie circuit

Basically with the Ainslie circuit, you can't help but to have free energy pouring out of your ears.
__________________
Sincerely,
Aaron Murakami

  #1216  
Old 07-26-2009, 12:35 AM
MileHigh MileHigh is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Nov 2008
Posts: 140
> Basically with the Ainslie circuit, you can't help but to have free energy pouring out of your ears.

Bring it on! lol
__________________
 
  #1217  
Old 07-26-2009, 12:43 AM
poynt99 poynt99 is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2009
Posts: 378
Aaron,

MH already alluded to the answer, and I believe I mentioned it quite some time ago as well.

When talking about and dealing with inductors, the root language is current. With capacitors it is voltage.

Capacitors and Inductors are analog opposites, but most folks have trouble getting their heads around inductors and how they operate. Most likely because inductors have a certain stigma and mystery associated with them.

An ideal charged capacitor with no load placed across its terminals has potential energy. If you place a voltage meter across its terminals, it will indicate some DC voltage. So the capacitor has a voltage across it and it is not supplying energy or power to anything, so therefore it has no current from its terminals.

It is again the same with an inductor. Before going ahead, one small thing needs to be distinguished and I am sure is responsible for much of the confusion, inductors do not get "charged" or "discharged". That is capacitor and battery terminology. Inductors are "energized" and "de-energized".

Another important fact that is being overlooked here: capacitors store "charge", while inductors store "magnetic flux".

So we "energize" an inductor. What does that mean exactly? It means we are "filling" it with current. Current is the language of inductors. The flux level around an inductor is proportional to the current "in" the inductor. Just as there is no current from a charged open-circuit capacitor, there is no voltage across an energized inductor, because and ideal inductor has no DC resistance remember? So how can you measure a voltage across a piece of wire that has no resistance? Aren't you going to measure zero volts? When was the last time you were able to measure any voltage across the ends of a 1 inch length of wire? That's essentially what an ideal inductor is, a piece of wire (coil) with no resistance.

(I know this is simplified MH, but trying to get the point home)

.99
__________________
 

Last edited by poynt99; 07-26-2009 at 01:00 AM.
  #1218  
Old 07-26-2009, 01:05 AM
Aaron's Avatar
Aaron Aaron is offline
Co-Founder & Moderator
 
Join Date: Feb 2007
Location: Washington State
Posts: 10,562
in time

Quote:
Originally Posted by MileHigh View Post
> Basically with the Ainslie circuit, you can't help but to have free energy pouring out of your ears.

Bring it on! lol
There is a required sequence for everything.

Jetijs saw more current circulating in his circuit than what left the battery. Luc is showing the same thing.

There will eventually be HUNDREDS of videos showing this and eventually thousands.

It is hard to make it fail - unless the one doing experiments is the leader of a three ring circus.
__________________
Sincerely,
Aaron Murakami

  #1219  
Old 07-26-2009, 01:08 AM
poynt99 poynt99 is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2009
Posts: 378
Quote:
Originally Posted by Aaron View Post
There is a required sequence for everything.

Jetijs saw more current circulating in his circuit than what left the battery. Luc is showing the same thing.
Aaron,

Have you ever needed or wanted to step up or step down an AC voltage for some reason?

If so, how did you go about doing it?

.99
__________________
 
  #1220  
Old 07-26-2009, 01:09 AM
Joit Joit is offline
Gold Member
 
Join Date: Sep 2008
Posts: 1,992
Wouldnt it be better, to say, you move Currrent through a Coil instead filling?
Hole Flow
Because it has usual two Points or Potentials where it is connected to.
__________________
Theorizer are like High Voltage. A lot hot Air with no Power behind but they are the dead of applied Work and Ideas.
  #1221  
Old 07-26-2009, 01:12 AM
poynt99 poynt99 is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2009
Posts: 378
Quote:
Originally Posted by Joit View Post
Wouldnt it be better, to say, you move Currrent through a Coil instead filling?
Hole Flow
Because it has usual two Points or Potentials where it is connected to.
Yes Joit, you are exactly correct.

I am trying to keep things as simple as possible, and "speak" the language quite often used here, but I'm not that good at it I'm afraid. I guess I should stick to the correct technical terms, just as I was espousing above

.99
__________________
 
  #1222  
Old 07-26-2009, 01:32 AM
poynt99 poynt99 is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2009
Posts: 378
Quote:
Originally Posted by witsend View Post
Apologies. I'm way too prickly. Ok. If the simultor shows the spike ask the simultor if it could have come from the coil? EDIT or better still - ask the simulator what comes from the residual PD at the coil? Poynt - that's your real expertise. Do you make allowance for this moment?
Rosemary,

I don't understand what you are asking here. Also you mentioned a couple times that MH and myself (and the academics) are avoiding answering some specific questions of yours.

Could I ask you to please rephrase them here in a clear and simple way? What is it precisely that you are asking us?

.99
__________________
 
  #1223  
Old 07-26-2009, 01:33 AM
Aaron's Avatar
Aaron Aaron is offline
Co-Founder & Moderator
 
Join Date: Feb 2007
Location: Washington State
Posts: 10,562
coil charging

Quote:
Originally Posted by poynt99 View Post
Aaron,

MH already alluded to the answer, and I believe I mentioned it quite some time ago as well.

When talking about and dealing with inductors, the root language is current. With capacitors it is voltage.

Capacitors and Inductors are analog opposites, but most folks have trouble getting their heads around inductors and how they operate. Most likely because inductors have a certain stigma and mystery associated with them.

An ideal charged capacitor with no load placed across its terminals has potential energy. If you place a voltage meter across its terminals, it will indicate some DC voltage. So the capacitor has a voltage across it and it is not supplying energy or power to anything, so therefore it has no current from its terminals.

It is again the same with an inductor. Before going ahead, one small thing needs to be distinguished and I am sure is responsible for much of the confusion, inductors do not get "charged" or "discharged". That is capacitor and battery terminology. Inductors are "energized" and "de-energized".

Another important fact that is being overlooked here: capacitors store "charge", while inductors store "magnetic flux".

So we "energize" an inductor. What does that mean exactly? It means we are "filling" it with current. Current is the language of inductors. The flux level around an inductor is proportional to the current "in" the inductor. Just as there is no current from a charged open-circuit capacitor, there is no voltage across an energized inductor, because and ideal inductor has no DC resistance remember? So how can you measure a voltage across a piece of wire that has no resistance? Aren't you going to measure zero volts? When was the last time you were able to measure any voltage across the ends of a 1 inch length of wire? That's essentially what an ideal inductor is, a piece of wire (coil) with no resistance.

(I know this is simplified MH, but trying to get the point home)

.99
I understand what you're saying.

But tell me when is voltage not in forward movement over the coil's windings?

When the switch goes off? For one small blip of a time unit? At the point when it transitions from forward to backwards?

Then the voltage is moving in backwards movement over the coils windings.

The very term of a coil being energized implies the active process of potential moving across the coil and potential can't move unless there is a potential difference.

I'm not sure if we're even discussing the same thing anymore.

This goes back to the nonsense of seeing no voltage across the mosfet when it is on and I already mentioned way back then it is the same as putting the volt meter on the same piece of wire side by side. Of course there is no potential difference, but in reality there will be mv's, but I agree with this.

But...

The little test I just did.

I have nothing applied to the coil (1000 turn trifilar), I find 0.8mv...what one would expect with no power applied to the coil. That is the measurement of voltage potential across the leads of the coil.

I connect a 24v bank to the coil I charge...kept the power to the coil...it is "energized", there is a strong magnetic field as I can feel it repelling the magnet above it very strong.... and I read 24v across that coil while it is charged. Not zero voltage.

That is 24 volts of potential difference across the coil - while it is energized.

And coils don't get filled with current, they have current moving through in the opposite direction of voltage moving thru them.

The only time I can prove with actual test that there is no voltage potential on the coil is when

A. There is no power applied

or

B. After disconnecting power from an energized coil and the voltage goes to 0 then carries on to negative. Then of course, it will eventually get back to zero.

Am I missing something? I'm honestly asking. Where does this zero voltage business come from because I can't find it except examples A & B above.
__________________
Sincerely,
Aaron Murakami

  #1224  
Old 07-26-2009, 01:36 AM
Aaron's Avatar
Aaron Aaron is offline
Co-Founder & Moderator
 
Join Date: Feb 2007
Location: Washington State
Posts: 10,562
step up and down

Quote:
Originally Posted by poynt99 View Post
Aaron,

Have you ever needed or wanted to step up or step down an AC voltage for some reason?

If so, how did you go about doing it?

.99
Typical 2 coil transformer. One with more windings than the other usually with smaller wire. With ac it is the turns ratio to help determine up or down voltage.

Microwave transformer for example. 110v in and 1000v out... of AC of course.
__________________
Sincerely,
Aaron Murakami

  #1225  
Old 07-26-2009, 01:36 AM
witsend witsend is offline
Gold Member
 
Join Date: May 2009
Posts: 1,881
Following quotes from .99 intended for Aaron
Do you mind if I put in my tuppence worth again?

When talking about and dealing with inductors, the root language is current With capacitors it is voltage.
Both as repositories of potential difference? Then I agree.

It is again the same with an inductor. Before going ahead, one small thing needs to be distinguished and I am sure is responsible for much of the confusion, inductors do not get "charged" or "discharged". That is capacitor and battery terminology. Inductors are "energized" and "de-energized".
What nonsense is this Poynt.99. They are indeed energised and de-energised, as you put it. But with what? Have they been energised with something that is not potential difference that is then discharged as something that is also not potential difference? If, indeed they are the same thing - then is that not potential difference - now called a state of being energised? Is this a form of energy that has entirely eluded any definition within the scientific framework perhaps?

So we "energize" an inductor. What does that mean exactly? It means we are "filling" it with current.
Indeed. And simultaneously we are forcibly extruding those magnetic fields. Which means that filling it with current also establishes the voltage that also establishes the potential difference availabe if required, if allowed, through the switch.

The flux level around an inductor is proportional to the current "in" the inductor.
Spot on. That flux is the potential difference that you, for some reason, need to refer to as an 'energised state'.

... there is no voltage across an energized inductor, because an ideal inductor has no DC resistance remember?
What are we saying here? There is voltage across an energised inductor. This is evident in the extruded magnetic fields that are always found where current flows. The electromagnetic interaction. Always the one with the other. Never apart. The only time they're separate is when there is no path to discharge. Then it's referred to as potential difference. You refer to it as 'energised'.

So how can you measure a voltage across a piece of wire that has no resistance?
Why am I telling you this? You know the answer. if there is an extruded magnetic field you have voltage. But to measure voltage you need to refer to polarity. You cannot find the polarity unless you twist the wire into a coil. That is why ammeters cannot measure the polarity or direction of current. Ammeters are measuring with reference to (edited) magnetic fields

ALSO EDITED. I think this may be a valid distinction. Voltage is the measure of extruded magnetic fields that relates directly to potential difference and its polarities. Amperage is a measure of extruded magnetic fields that relates to current flow without the distinction of polarities? Maybe?

(I know this is simplified MH, but trying to get the point home)
Poynt. It is extraordinarily patronising and it's offensive that you assume more ignorance in your audience than is in fact. As a rule it just tends to expose ones own ignorance. There are readers of this little thread whose qualifications would intimidate the heavenly host, if not God Himself. They are considerably greater than your own. There are others without qualification who are well able to understand electromagnetic interactions at a level that is evidently as deep as if not deeper than your own. It is a really good thing to take pride in one's learning provided it still offers scope for revision - re-evalution - re-testing.
__________________
 

Last edited by witsend; 07-26-2009 at 02:13 AM. Reason: 'with reference to voltage' corrected quote
  #1226  
Old 07-26-2009, 01:44 AM
Aaron's Avatar
Aaron Aaron is offline
Co-Founder & Moderator
 
Join Date: Feb 2007
Location: Washington State
Posts: 10,562
meters

Quote:
Originally Posted by witsend View Post
That is why ammeters cannot measure the polarity or direction of current.
And to take it further, the experts can't show a meter that measures current because they don't know what current actually is.

The amp meters only measure voltage drops across resistors to determine what the current "is supposed to be." LOL

Another assumption or speculation.

If there is "electron current" as indicated by the classical model why not build a meter that measures electron current?

They could I'm sure if they actually knew what current is.

The current meters are actually in effect doing nothing more than taking VOLTAGE readings and assuming the rest based on speculation.
__________________
Sincerely,
Aaron Murakami

  #1227  
Old 07-26-2009, 01:47 AM
MileHigh MileHigh is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Nov 2008
Posts: 140
Aaron:

Hopefully this will help. Various circuit components have very simple electrical models that describe their real-world behaviour. The simple electrical models consist of two or more idealized components.

For a real-world coil the simple model is a small resistance in series with an ideal coil. The small resistance models the resistance in the wire of the coil. So of course with your battery directly connected you will see a voltage across your "coil" but what you are really seeing is the voltage across the wire resistance. not the voltage across the coil, which is zero if the current is pure DC.

For your working with coils, you really should avoid putting them across a battery. Within a very short time the coil will be shorting out the battery. Depending on the coil and the battery something may start to burn up. A coil can easily get white hot.

MileHigh
__________________
 

Last edited by MileHigh; 07-26-2009 at 01:50 AM.
  #1228  
Old 07-26-2009, 01:53 AM
poynt99 poynt99 is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2009
Posts: 378
Aaron,

If you could get "inside" the inductor and separate it into it's lumped elements, then put your meter across only the inductive part, you would find that there is no voltage there. It is all across the resistive lumped element.


Quote:
Originally Posted by Aaron View Post
Typical 2 coil transformer. One with more windings than the other usually with smaller wire. With ac it is the turns ratio to help determine up or down voltage.

Microwave transformer for example. 110v in and 1000v out... of AC of course.
OK. Let's say you want to step down 120VAC to some real low value such as 0.12VAC, you can use your MOT connected 120VAC to the secondary and your 0.12VAC will appear on the primary. You already know this, just establishing the scenario.

But the question I have is this: What would the current read on the 120VAC input side (using your 60Hz AC current meter) and what would it be on the 0.12VAC output side (again measured with your 60Hz AC current meter), WITH THIS OUTPUT SIDE COIL SHORTED?

Let's take an example to make this easier. If you measured 1mA AC on the 120VAC side, what would the output side AC current meter be measuring?

.99
__________________
 
  #1229  
Old 07-26-2009, 01:59 AM
witsend witsend is offline
Gold Member
 
Join Date: May 2009
Posts: 1,881
Quote:
Originally Posted by poynt99 View Post
Rosemary,

...What is it precisely that you are asking us?

.99
Sorry Poynt. What I'm trying to get to is that your actual expertise appears to be with simulated programmes. The question. Do your simulations allow for a 'regenerated' cycle of current from collapsing magnetic fields during the 'off' period. And if not, why?
__________________
 
  #1230  
Old 07-26-2009, 02:07 AM
poynt99 poynt99 is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2009
Posts: 378
Quote:
Originally Posted by witsend View Post
Sorry Poynt. What I'm trying to get to is that your actual expertise appears to be with simulated programmes. The question. Do your simulations allow for a 'regenerated' cycle of current from collapsing magnetic fields during the 'off' period. And if not, why?
First of all, I do not consider myself and expert in simulation. It is a program that I am proficient at using, and considering all that can be done with it, I would consider myself an intermediate user level. I do not proclaim to be an expert at anything, not even electronics. I have much to learn, and I always am.

Second, what do you mean by "regenerated cycle of current"? If you are referring to the inductive kickback phenomenon exhibited by a disconnected energized inductor, then YES the simulator "allows" for this.

If that is not what you mean, then please explain it.

.99
__________________
 
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 06:23 AM.


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