Energetic Forum  
Facebook Twitter Google+ Pinterest LinkedIn Delicious Digg Reddit WordPress StumbleUpon Tumblr Translate Addthis Aaron Murakami YouTube 2020 ENERGY CONFERENCE - PRE-REGISTER NOW!!!!

2020 Energy Science & Technology Conference
PRE-REGISTER NOW!!!
http://energyscienceconference.com


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
  #1861  
Old 08-09-2009, 03:11 AM
eternalightwithin eternalightwithin is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jun 2009
Posts: 144
David Piel here.

MIB, kiss my a**

Edit: What's in a name you say? "My name is Inigo Montoya. You killed my father. Prepare to die."
__________________
 

Last edited by eternalightwithin; 08-09-2009 at 05:21 AM.

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

  #1862  
Old 08-09-2009, 03:45 AM
mklimesh mklimesh is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Apr 2007
Posts: 62
Quote:
Originally Posted by Michael John Nunnerley View Post
Hi all,

It seems to me the people who want to disrupt do not want to show who they really are, I wonder why!!!!!!!!! I use my own name, Aaron and Peter as well, how about coming clean?

Mike
As I've used my real name since 1995 online I never have understood why people chose to hide behind usernames (+_+)

Mike Klimesh
__________________
 
  #1863  
Old 08-09-2009, 04:07 AM
poynt99 poynt99 is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2009
Posts: 378
You guys are being completely silly.

Why don't you just ask the folks that you don't want here--to leave. Or perhaps just ban them from the forum or thread if that is possible?



What's in a name anyway?

I think you guys have other more serious issues to be concerned with, good grief!

__________________
 
  #1864  
Old 08-09-2009, 04:07 AM
Joit Joit is offline
Gold Member
 
Join Date: Sep 2008
Posts: 1,993
I can live with the Truth.
My Name is Johann Goede
__________________
Theorizer are like High Voltage. A lot hot Air with no Power behind but they are the dead of applied Work and Ideas.
  #1865  
Old 08-09-2009, 04:55 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 poynt99 View Post
You guys are being completely silly.

Why don't you just ask the folks that you don't want here--to leave. Or perhaps just ban them from the forum or thread if that is possible?



What's in a name anyway?

I think you guys have other more serious issues to be concerned with, good grief!

Hi poynt99,

There was a time in history when a name meant everything and using it could have you reap the perils of hell by some ......

There were a few of course that had bigger things in mind .....

Go Washington - President and deputy from Virginia
New Hampshire - John Langdon, Nicholas Gilman
Massachusetts - Nathaniel Gorham, Rufus King
Connecticut - Wm Saml Johnson, Roger Sherman
New York - Alexander Hamilton
New Jersey - Wil Livingston, David Brearley, Wm Paterson, Jona. Dayton
Pensylvania - B Franklin, Thomas Mifflin, Robt Morris, Geo. Clymer, Thos FitzSimons,
Jared Ingersoll, James Wilson, Gouv Morris
Delaware - Geo. Read, Gunning Bedford jun, John Dickinson, Richard Bassett, Jaco.
Broom
Maryland - James McHenry, Dan of St Tho Jenifer, Danl Carroll
Virginia - John Blair, James Madison Jr.
North Carolina - Wm Blount, Richd Dobbs Spaight, Hu Williamson
South Carolina - J. Rutledge, Charles Cotesworth Pinckney, Charles Pinckney, Pierce
Butler
Georgia - William Few, Abr Baldwin
Attest: William Jackson, Secretary

"The Constitution of the United States"

What's in a name ..... people call me Fuzzy

My name is Glen Lettenmaier
__________________
 
  #1866  
Old 08-09-2009, 04:57 AM
Michelinho's Avatar
Michelinho Michelinho is offline
Silver Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2008
Location: Quebec, Canada.
Posts: 547
Quote:
Originally Posted by poynt99 View Post

What's in a name anyway?
Your credibility?

Michel Tremblay
  #1867  
Old 08-09-2009, 05:10 AM
poynt99 poynt99 is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2009
Posts: 378
So what would make me (or anyone) more (or less) credible in your eyes if you had my name?

.99
__________________
 
  #1868  
Old 08-09-2009, 05:24 AM
witsend witsend is offline
Gold Member
 
Join Date: May 2009
Posts: 1,881
Quotes From Poynt

You guys are being completely silly.
You know what. I can think of lots of things to describe this. But 'silly'?

Why don't you just ask the folks that you don't want here--to leave. Or perhaps just ban them from the forum or thread if that is possible?
Poynt, quite frankly we like having you on this forum.

What's in a name anyway?
You need to ask this? Everything is in a name. And without it - not much difference except that there's also all that anonymity. Just such a safe place.

I think you guys have other more serious issues to be concerned with, good grief!
Clearly not. Clearly courage has now become a serious issue.

WOW. I had to disclose my name. Peter and Aaron, Mike, Jibbguy and others all chose to - and so have you guys. I cannot tell you how much I respect that. I hope, so much, that you do not regret the disclosure. I regret my own on a daily basis. But would still prefer the name known than otherwise.

EDIT WELCOME BACK LUC. What a pleasure
__________________
 

Last edited by witsend; 08-09-2009 at 08:01 AM. Reason: enlarged the reference
  #1869  
Old 08-09-2009, 05:41 AM
poynt99 poynt99 is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2009
Posts: 378
Quote:
Originally Posted by witsend View Post

Why don't you just ask the folks that you don't want here--to leave. Or perhaps just ban them from the forum or thread if that is possible?
Poynt, quite frankly we like having you on this forum.
LOL.

Yeah ? If that's true (which I doubt) I can see why. It would seem I'm the last whipping post left here.


.99
__________________
 
  #1870  
Old 08-09-2009, 05:51 AM
witsend witsend is offline
Gold Member
 
Join Date: May 2009
Posts: 1,881
Quote:
Originally Posted by poynt99 View Post
LOL.

Yeah ? If that's true (which I doubt) I can see why. It would seem I'm the last whipping post left here.


.99
Poynt - I assure you that is not true. I personally think that you're highly intelligent and that you are intellectually honest. We all do. And it's the lack of this that also loses one any respect. Nothing else.

I think what I'm trying to say is that you come in from a position of conviction. I'm not sure about those others - is all.
__________________
 

Last edited by witsend; 08-09-2009 at 08:01 AM.
  #1871  
Old 08-09-2009, 06:05 AM
Michelinho's Avatar
Michelinho Michelinho is offline
Silver Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2008
Location: Quebec, Canada.
Posts: 547
@witsend,

Quote:
I hope, so much, that you do not regret the disclosure.
Those who could make us regret posting on a forum would have all the means of getting getting our name and all the pertinent info about us anyway.

Take care,

Michel
  #1872  
Old 08-09-2009, 06:41 AM
SkyWatcher's Avatar
SkyWatcher SkyWatcher is offline
Gold Member
 
Join Date: Apr 2008
Posts: 2,347
Hi folks, Interesting thing courage, seems everyone has there own perception as to what that is. This name thing for unlimited beings seems rather redundant, however since were playing a game here on this planet as though were not unlimited and separate beings, whatever floats your boat I say. Thing is, do you folks honestly think that if another human being or group, if they wanted to know your name and any other myriad of details about you I doubt it would be very hard to find that out, I mean cameras at every other street corner should highlight what the control freaks are about. Anyway with that said, my name is Tyson as I have been putting on my posts lately and is all that is needed.
peace love light
Tyson
Edit: just noticed your post Michel ,yes I thought that would have been obvious to most.
__________________
 
  #1873  
Old 08-09-2009, 07:53 AM
Aaron's Avatar
Aaron Aaron is offline
Co-Founder & Moderator
 
Join Date: Feb 2007
Location: Washington State
Posts: 10,955
coil specs

Quote:
Originally Posted by Armagdn03 View Post
The only difference is the resistivity of the wire. The inductance will not be affected, you can use any available calculator.
Thanks!

Then the 8.64uH is accurate for her coil based on her coil's specs. Calculator came up with high 7 uH's.

48 turns, 150mm long, 36mm diameter.

Also with 1mm spacing, that is 48mm spacing about meaning that is 150mm long minus 48mm of total spacing = 102 mm width of wire. 102mm divided by 48 turns is about 2.125mm diameter wire.

That is about 11.75AWG (11.75 gauge nichrome wire)

Just posting - not sure it this was figured before.

Anyway, that is ballpark, could be from 11~13 or so AWG.
__________________
Sincerely,
Aaron Murakami

  #1874  
Old 08-09-2009, 08:10 AM
Aaron's Avatar
Aaron Aaron is offline
Co-Founder & Moderator
 
Join Date: Feb 2007
Location: Washington State
Posts: 10,955
@poynt

Quote:
Originally Posted by poynt99 View Post
You guys are being completely silly.

Why don't you just ask the folks that you don't want here--to leave. Or perhaps just ban them from the forum or thread if that is possible?



What's in a name anyway?

I think you guys have other more serious issues to be concerned with, good grief!

I have brought it up before that anyone can throw eggs at a car from an over pass. That is the kind of courage and confidence the naysayers have had from the start. Hiding behind a username and expecting for everyone to buy into what you have to say it just simply not going to happen.

Many things you have claimed have been proven wrong.

You want to flame the project and people involved, yet you show nothing, no picture, no video, no name, etc... 100% talk. And it has been talk. We have see NOTHING.

I think if someone is anonymous and is posting pictures, that stands for something. Anonymous and not disrupting this is fine with me.

However, insulting people, making false claims over and over and not showing any proof you are even doing anything on your own to test your own beliefs is no longer acceptable at this thread.

You are free to post in your own threads here but if you do post here, my wishes (as the initiator of this thread) are disrespected, then you may join the others only at ou.com.

It is up to you. Please don't rebuttal this. You may lose your chance to say anything at all in this forum and I have (on several - more than several) given you the opportunity to communicate your disagreements in your own thread so as to not disrupt this one, which you do.

There will be no more warnings. This is the last one.
__________________
Sincerely,
Aaron Murakami

  #1875  
Old 08-09-2009, 08:11 AM
Aaron's Avatar
Aaron Aaron is offline
Co-Founder & Moderator
 
Join Date: Feb 2007
Location: Washington State
Posts: 10,955
name

Quote:
Originally Posted by poynt99 View Post
So what would make me (or anyone) more (or less) credible in your eyes if you had my name?

.99
It means you have enough you know what to stand behind your talk.
__________________
Sincerely,
Aaron Murakami

  #1876  
Old 08-09-2009, 08:19 AM
Aaron's Avatar
Aaron Aaron is offline
Co-Founder & Moderator
 
Join Date: Feb 2007
Location: Washington State
Posts: 10,955
Exclamation Quantum Article Schematic | Rosemary Ainslie

Here are my comments on this circuit (not the one I'm using normally)

YouTube - Quantum Magazine 555 Circuit Test on Rosemary Ainslie's COP 17 Heater Circuit

__________________
Sincerely,
Aaron Murakami

  #1877  
Old 08-09-2009, 08:37 AM
witsend witsend is offline
Gold Member
 
Join Date: May 2009
Posts: 1,881
Thanks for the video Aaron. Yet again, it seems that I need to apologise. The published circuit clearly does not cut it and TK's complaints about the design appear to be valid.

So - let me again apologise to TK. Abject apologies about this. It does seem that the circuit design was erroneous and your comments regarding this were valid. I should, indeed, have had the circuit checked before publication.

And apologies to all those who built that circuit. The only thing that I can assure you is that the design is erroneous - not our test results. Hopefully Aaron can tweek the circuit to get the duty cycle function up to par - and yet hold onto that oscillation. It's just so much in line with our own findings here.

Sorry TK. Abject apologies. But run with that 'wrong' switch. It should, at its least, give the required waveform oscillations.
__________________
 

Last edited by witsend; 08-09-2009 at 08:54 AM.
  #1878  
Old 08-09-2009, 09:03 AM
Aaron's Avatar
Aaron Aaron is offline
Co-Founder & Moderator
 
Join Date: Feb 2007
Location: Washington State
Posts: 10,955
Quantum circuit scope shot

If anyone knows the most "elegant" modification to this Quantum article circuit to get 3.7% and 2.4kHz RANGE - that would be appreciated.

I don't mean changing it with transistors, etc... the SAME concept but with desired range.

Here are scope shots of the proper oscillation waveform:

NOTE - SHUNT DOES NOT GO TO ZERO VOLTS - JUST SPIKE AND PULSE

__________________
Sincerely,
Aaron Murakami

  #1879  
Old 08-09-2009, 09:07 AM
witsend witsend is offline
Gold Member
 
Join Date: May 2009
Posts: 1,881
Aaron - will be disconnecting our own switch and will post it asap. Hopefully you'll be able to figure it out. Our's is a 5th generation switch
__________________
 
  #1880  
Old 08-09-2009, 09:11 AM
Harvey's Avatar
Harvey Harvey is offline
Gold Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2009
Posts: 1,137
Regarding Real Names:

We are probably only removed from each other by seven degrees of separation.

The following two links are teasers, and never actually answer their own questions:
Six Degrees of Separation: Fact or Fiction? - ABC News

The Human Chain - ABC News

Microsoft finds there are 7 degrees of separation – Tech Products & Geek News | Geek.com

So if we really wanted to connect, it's probably not that difficult a task.

I found out yesterday that I am removed by only 4 degrees of separation from the President of the United States, and that is a strange feeling.
Perhaps some level of anonymity is prudent. I reflect momentarily on the you-tube personality known as Desertphile, a strong opponent against free energy research. I found that I am only removed by 3 degrees of separation from this individual and that gives pause.

According to TK, I have been misinformed and he has suggested I build the RA circuit and offer my results. He has kindly offered to send a couple of IRFPG50's to assist me in the assembly. I have accepted the offer. I don't think he was bluffing, but if he was I called the bluff. With over 100 pages of various banter on OU and two thirds that and climbing here, I don't have the ambition or time to process all of it. For that reason, I chose to go to the original documents and interface with Rosemary directly here so as to get to the heart of the matter. I think I have a reasonable understanding of the matter, the experiences involved and the viewpoints from both sides. Hopefully I can offer some objective and unbiased input toward the goals that have been set by the parties involved. I certainly have my fair share of mistakes and failures - as Nolan Ryan is reported to have said, "for every strike pitched on the field, I have 99 bad pitches during practice." But, every now and then I happen to get a few things right.

I imagine this was discussed somewhere in prior posts or on other related forums but I thought I would mention it anyway. COP <> OU or FE
We know that heat pumps are rated in COP > 1. They make extra energy available from the thermal reservoirs. They are not over unity any more so than a transistor is over unity. They simply have a high coefficient of performance which happens to exceed one. (See the COP Definition) So, saying that the circuit has a COP > 17 is a bit different than saying the circuit produces more energy than it consumes. For example, if I place a faucet on a fire hydrant and it allows 1 gallon per minute to flow, I could say that the GPM is 1. Now if I get another valve to allow 17.5 gallons per minute, then I can say GPM > 17. If the performance of the valve were set to be GPM against a baseline of 1 GPM, then I could say that the COP was 1 for the first valve and the COP > 17 for the second.

A couple questions I would like answers to:
1. What is the maximum energy we can we store in any inductor using 24V and the minimum pulse width of an IRFPG50.

2. What is the longest possible ring period possible for any inductor using 24V and the IRFPG50 and any other necessary passive components.

Cheers,

__________________
 
  #1881  
Old 08-09-2009, 10:22 AM
Aaron's Avatar
Aaron Aaron is offline
Co-Founder & Moderator
 
Join Date: Feb 2007
Location: Washington State
Posts: 10,955
Quantum circuit scope shot

Added notes to pics:

__________________
Sincerely,
Aaron Murakami


Last edited by Aaron; 08-09-2009 at 10:27 AM.
  #1882  
Old 08-09-2009, 10:26 AM
Aaron's Avatar
Aaron Aaron is offline
Co-Founder & Moderator
 
Join Date: Feb 2007
Location: Washington State
Posts: 10,955
dissipation

Quote:
Originally Posted by Harvey View Post
So, saying that the circuit has a COP > 17 is a bit different than saying the circuit produces more energy than it consumes.
Exactly!

The cynics claim that over 1.0 COP means over 100% efficient. They simply do not know the difference.

The non-equilibrium open systems are simply able to recycle energy so the dissipation that will happen inevitably anyways simply happens over a longer period of time.

Under 100% efficient but way more work that battery input compliments of how electromagnetic coils work - however that may be.
__________________
Sincerely,
Aaron Murakami

  #1883  
Old 08-09-2009, 10:27 AM
witsend witsend is offline
Gold Member
 
Join Date: May 2009
Posts: 1,881
Quote:
Originally Posted by Harvey View Post

A couple questions I would like answers to:
1. What is the maximum energy we can we store in any inductor using 24V and the minimum pulse width of an IRFPG50.

2. What is the longest possible ring period possible for any inductor using 24V and the IRFPG50 and any other necessary passive components.

Cheers,

Hi Harvey - still awake? I'm delighted to hear that you'll be replicating. In fact I'm thrilled. I rather trust your evaluation of this.

As to your question? I have no idea on either count. I'll check with my co-author and see if it can be answered. Please do not build that 555 swith until we've got the right design. Hopefully soon. TK's going to have a field day.

And regarding your relatives? I'm South African - so I guess if your president is not directly related to me he's definitely related to my relatives. If I'd acknowledged this some 12 years back I would, at its least, have had to change me address.

Hope you're feeling better.
__________________
 
  #1884  
Old 08-09-2009, 10:40 AM
Aaron's Avatar
Aaron Aaron is offline
Co-Founder & Moderator
 
Join Date: Feb 2007
Location: Washington State
Posts: 10,955
ps.

p.s.

If there are any doubts on that oscillation pic - if thinking the off time has been set as low as possible - do the test, it will surprise you! The pics you see are with a 60% duty cycle - cause of the quantum article.
__________________
Sincerely,
Aaron Murakami

  #1885  
Old 08-09-2009, 11:00 AM
Harvey's Avatar
Harvey Harvey is offline
Gold Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2009
Posts: 1,137
Aaron,
The 1K resistors set your limits for the operation in conjuction with the .0033uF capacitor. There are two parts, a charge leg and a discharge leg, however the 5.2K adds resistance (thus time) to the charge leg while it is removed from the discharge process. The 555 works by two thirds. This means that when the trigger pin drops below 2/3 the power supply positive rail the output goes high and the discharge pin floats. When the threshold reaches 2/3 above the negative rail, the output goes low and the discharge pin pulls to ground.

The time constant for charging the cap is 1.1RC and there are generally considered 5 time constants to full charge.

The capacitor charges through the outer charge leg (5.2K -> 50KPot -> 1K ->1N4148) and discharges through the inner leg (1N4148 -> 1K -> 50Kpot -> 555 pin7) The 0.047uF serves no useful purpose in the timing, and increases discharge current - it was probably added at an attempt to quell switching noise and it is possible that those two values are swapped (the .0033 and the .047) in the print erroneously, but that would be a much lower pulse frequency.

Charge time and ON time are synonymous while Discharge time and OFF time are synonymous: I have neglected any diode resistance or diode voltage drops in the following calculations.

The system boots to an ON (pin 3 high) condition because the trigger starts out low and the charge leg begins doing its job. With the setting shown, the fastest time the system will reach threshold (from zero trigger) is in 3.33 time constants or 15 microseconds and then it begins discharging. The longest charge time would be 679 microseconds (pot adj full 50K). The discharge period is shorter because it does not have the 5.2K in the circuit, and it only has to drop 1/3 of the way to the negative rail because we only made it up to 2/3 when it switched to OFF (pin 3 low). So the shortest OFF time is about 6 microseconds and the longest would be 302 microseconds. The diodes change these values a bit, but you should be able to set the discharge pot to max 50K, and the charge pot to min 0K and get pretty darn close to 5% duty cycle with only 15 microsecond on time.

Hopefully this gives you a basis to work off of.

__________________
 
  #1886  
Old 08-09-2009, 11:13 AM
Michael John Nunnerley's Avatar
Michael John Nunnerley Michael John Nunnerley is offline
Gold Member
 
Join Date: May 2008
Posts: 1,193
Quote:
Originally Posted by gotoluc View Post
I'm back and happy to vote yes on this.

Thanks Mike

Luc Choquette
Welcome back Luc, hope everything is OK. The post I made was just a bit of pent up frustation, I suppose the safty valve let off a little steam.

The experiment that has been running at my neck of the woods is just an idea I had and probably at the end of the day it will show that when an item such as a heating element has a rating of 1.5kw and connected as recommended, it is very inefficient in the use of that energy. Interesting we are probably all using 40% more energy than we nead to, just to have the same result!

More results will come when my partner in crime returns from his hols:

OH, perhaps TK should shave off his mostach

Mike
__________________
 
  #1887  
Old 08-09-2009, 11:28 AM
Harvey's Avatar
Harvey Harvey is offline
Gold Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2009
Posts: 1,137
Hi Rosemary,

Looks like I did an all-nighter - yep, was feeling better - probably not a good idea - will sleep in.

Looking forward to getting confirmation on oscillator circuit values - what's there is close, but it's not quite right.

I may sim that just to see if I've got something upside down in my head.

I have to admit, Poynt99's simulations look pretty good - I wonder if he could whip one up that maximizes the resonant ring amplitude and duration after the FET switches off.

On the degrees of separation, I was referring to the contact chain rather than relatives. Of course I believe we are all relatives traceable back to Noah and I think there was a DNA research done on the continental connections - saw it on Discover or something once.

The questions are probably for me to answer unless we have some guru types that can snap that out real quick. I always have to drag out my formulas and tables - just can't remember like I did 30 years ago...now what was I going to say?...

Well I'm off,

Cheers
__________________
 
  #1888  
Old 08-09-2009, 11:56 AM
Joit Joit is offline
Gold Member
 
Join Date: Sep 2008
Posts: 1,993
I got some different Shots too, anyhow i can adjust the Quantum Timer better,
to a long on time or shorter on Time, both Sides.
For the lower Frequency, i need to change the Gateresistance.

I did rebuild now the second Timercircuit too, but had not have the time, to compare it directly better.
I need a seperate Source for both, anyhow seems they did synchronize at one Source, even when i powered them over 2 seperate Diodes, and do shots for the Ontime of the Mosfet.

Just did put it to a transformer, and strange thing is, they affect the Load/ Coil different at an large Overview.
Just thinking, if the optimum is'nt a large wound Coil.
I will try to make some Picture later
__________________
Theorizer are like High Voltage. A lot hot Air with no Power behind but they are the dead of applied Work and Ideas.
  #1889  
Old 08-09-2009, 02:47 PM
poynt99 poynt99 is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2009
Posts: 378
Well,

If the fact that TK and I (and a few others) were correct all along regarding the duty cycle issue for the Quantum circuit doesn't bolster our credibility with you folks here (the recent subject of discussion), then I don't know what would.

Certainly this recent revelation is worth a hell of a lot more to you than knowing mine or TK's name If not, then well, I have nothing further to say.

But alas, the admin wants me outta here anyway. I was thinking of taking him up his offer to correct the 555 circuit for you all, but then you've got Harvey.

So, I'll post some things on my thread here (some last rebuttals to some complaints Aaron has about "us") and we'll see where we go from there I guess.

.99
__________________
 
  #1890  
Old 08-09-2009, 03:07 PM
witsend witsend is offline
Gold Member
 
Join Date: May 2009
Posts: 1,881
Golly Harvey - it seems I've way underestimated your abilities here. EDIT Apologies. I see you've already suggested the problem on our 555. My 'help' in preparing the paper was not the same as the builder of those 555's and I have no idea how any such is constructed. It's just way more than I ever wanted to know. Actually regret this now.

But there's something unique in the properties of this. TK complained that he built it to spec and found that it defaulted to 90% on. Aaron can adjust it to 60% ON at the smallest duty cycle. But his actually resonates at 100% on - albeit that the switch is still switching at 60%.

Our own resonance waveform pattern is also effectively permanently on. We get a clear 3% periodic waveform but with multiple oscillations inbetween. This automatically compounds the frequency. And the waveform only defaults to zero with momentary ringing - replaced by a near perfect but slightly varied copies of the two primary waveforms between each switching cycle. So that ringing is the only moment that it actually gets to zero and it really is momentary. The multiple oscillations between the 'duty cycle' waveforms was identified as a parasitic Hartley effect by an acknowledged boffin at one of your leading universities. He was also going to do the tests. He has never communicated the outcome of those tests notwithstanding my applications. I would have thought he'd be more than ready to deny anything significant here if, indeed, that's what his experiments found.

Whatever the cause of this, the results are extraordinary as it relates to the performance of the battery and to the energy dissipated at the load. And I'm reasonably certain we were nowhere near optimising this.

Regaring the degrees separation. I see this now. I took the trouble to read the links. It is indeed interesting. And I guess it's better that everyone stay in their comfort zones when it comes to disclosure of their names. I still find it remarkably brave when people do disclose this. Maybe not sensible. But wow.
__________________
 
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.

Choose your voluntary subscription

For one-time donations, please use the below button.


All times are GMT. The time now is 12:10 PM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.8
Copyright ©2000 - 2019, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.
Search Engine Optimisation provided by DragonByte SEO v1.4.0 (Pro) - vBulletin Mods & Addons Copyright © 2019 DragonByte Technologies Ltd.
Shoutbox provided by vBShout v6.2.8 (Lite) - vBulletin Mods & Addons Copyright © 2019 DragonByte Technologies Ltd.
2007-2015 Copyright - Energetic Forum - All Rights Reserved

Bedini RPX Sideband Generator

Tesla Chargers