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 > >
   

Renewable Energy Discussion on various alternative energy, renewable energy, & free energy technologies. Also any discussion about the environment, global warming, and other related topics are welcome here.

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

Reply
 
Thread Tools
  #901  
Old 09-05-2016, 08:43 PM
marathonman marathonman is offline
Silver Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2014
Posts: 543
Thumbs down resistors

Ufopolitics;

Yes sir i do and thank you kindly.

"BUT", if i may add, that the commutator bars and resistor referred to in the patent are actually thick winding's on a core. it says it is, in it's elementary form for understanding and is just a drawing.
i think people are getting confused as the term resistors being referred to on a continuous basis. PJK even states in his book and this incorrect assumption is confusing people when they come here.
part G is actually both in the drawing in its higher form and has many functions, that is why part G can NOT be omitted or replaced.

1. it split the DC currant into two separate feeds.

2. each feed has opposing fields allowing each feed to be varied separately in unison.

3. allows the inductive force from the declining electromagnet being shoved out of the secondary core into it's own core, then to be stored in the core of part G like an inductor to be used at the next half rotation. part G is constantly fed from all declining electromagnets every half turn of the brush.

4. becomes the power supply for the entire system after initial start.

as you can see part G is very valuable to the Figuera device.
also as you might gather part G does not have a lot of winding like a regular variac. in Hanon's video he used a variac with DC and verified this as only a 1/4 turn varied the currant from zero to full.

again i thank you for your post but i think newcomers are being confused at the notion of resistors in this device.

BroMikey; two opposing magnet or electromagnet's will always put out more than a single one will. Walter Russel stated our coils are wound wrong, wasting 50 % E field to magnetism. Figuera figured out how to add that lost 50 % back making it 100 %. no standard generator can touch this level.

PS. if not in opposing mode ie. N/N or S/S double intensity E fields will not form. if using N/S the currants will oppose each other and output will be less than half of the previous stated.
__________________
 

Last edited by marathonman; 09-08-2016 at 05:34 AM.
Reply With Quote

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

  #902  
Old 09-05-2016, 09:03 PM
Wistiti Wistiti is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2012
Posts: 483
UFO, my point with the bucking field is it will negate the lenz effect..
It is the way i see it but as i have said before, testing will reveal the truth! And dont worry it also goes for me! I will try it soon. 👍
Anyway, lets share our result! 😊
__________________
 
Reply With Quote
  #903  
Old 09-05-2016, 10:12 PM
Ufopolitics's Avatar
Ufopolitics Ufopolitics is offline
Platinum Member
 
Join Date: Feb 2012
Location: US, Florida
Posts: 5,009
Thanks MM

Quote:
Originally Posted by marathonman View Post
Ufopolitics;

Yes sir i do and thank you kindly.

"BUT", if i may add, that the commutator bars and resistor referred to in the patent are actually thick winding's on a core. it says it is, in it's elementary form for understanding and is just a drawing.
i think people are getting confused as the term resistors being referred to on a continuous basis. PJK even states in his book and this incorrect assumption is confusing people when they come here.
part G is actually both in the drawing in its higher form and has many functions, that is why part G can NOT be omitted or replaced.

1. it split the DC currant into two separate feeds.

2. each feed has opposing fields allowing each feed to be varied separately in unison.

3. allows the inductive force from the declining electromagnet being shoved out of the secondary core into it's own core, then to be stored in the core of part G like an inductor to be used at the next half rotation. part G is constantly fed from all declining electromagnets every half turn of the brush.

4. becomes the power supply for the entire system after initial start.

as you can see part G is very valuable to the Figuera device.
also as you might gather part G does not have a lot of winding like a regular variac. in Hanon's video he used a variac with DC and verified this as only a 1/4 turn varied the currant from zero to full.

again i thank you for your post but i think newcomers are being confused at the notion of resistors in this device.

BroMikey; two opposing magnet or electromagnet's will always put out more than a single one will. Walter Russel stated our coils are wound wrong, wasting 50 % E field to magnetism. Figuera figured out how to add that lost 50 % back making it 100 %. no standard generator can touch this level.

PS. if not in opposing mode ie. N/N or S/S double intensity E fields will not form. if using N/S the currants will buck each other and output will be less than half of the previous stated.
Thanks MarathonMan,


I really hate to disagree with you about the Resistors part...it is stated as "Resistencia" which means Resistance...then the "R" inside the box stands for Resistors Box. This way a variation in the positive feed will cause different levels of Field Intensities across both Primary Coils.

However, I agree it is just a drawing...and even if they were resistors...are not "represented" properly as a real resistor symbol...and look more like small coils.

But, anyways even being coils and cores acting as inductors, like you have interpreted, they will still add a variable resistance feed, just like you wrote, splitting the high end feed in two.

I understand very clear the way you are seeing this patent, and honestly I believe you are actually improving it by "recycling" the energy back to the inductors on the "R" box, making Part G also a source...since Figuera states this feed comes from an External Source (written "foreign" in the patent translation).

The main point and reason why I have posted here is not about the discussion on each particular detail about this specific patent...but mainly to make everyone notice that Figuera emphasizes very clear about his device Moving the Virtual Magnetic Fields in-out of the Induced (secondary) coils and cores, producing currents, while all Coils and Cores generating the Magnetic Fields to do the excitement at the Induced (secondary) are ALL completely static.

I have also some other disagreements about N-S and N-N differences,... but I will not post them here as I consider they are off topic, as could create confusion...so, by no means I want to interrupt your excellent work here.

You understand perfectly clear the statement above in bold letters, and that to me is the most essential part, which reinforces my work.

Please keep posting all your work as I will be just watching...


Thanks again and kind regards


Ufopolitics
__________________
Principles for the Development of a Complete Mind: Study the science of art. Study the art of science. Develop your senses- especially learn how to see. Realize that everything connects to everything else.― Leonardo da Vinci

Last edited by Ufopolitics; 09-05-2016 at 10:15 PM.
Reply With Quote
  #904  
Old 09-05-2016, 10:18 PM
Ufopolitics's Avatar
Ufopolitics Ufopolitics is offline
Platinum Member
 
Join Date: Feb 2012
Location: US, Florida
Posts: 5,009
Quote:
Originally Posted by Wistiti View Post
UFO, my point with the bucking field is it will negate the lenz effect..
It is the way i see it but as i have said before, testing will reveal the truth! And dont worry it also goes for me! I will try it soon. 👍
Anyway, lets share our result! 😊

Wistiti,

I LOVE REPULSION (Bucking) FIELDS, my Friend!!

I have made a Generator which only works based on Repulsion Fields...

And so, I do agree they are MUCH BETTER than Attract Fields.


Regards


Ufopolitics
__________________
Principles for the Development of a Complete Mind: Study the science of art. Study the art of science. Develop your senses- especially learn how to see. Realize that everything connects to everything else.― Leonardo da Vinci
Reply With Quote
  #905  
Old 09-05-2016, 10:35 PM
Elcheapo Elcheapo is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Feb 2010
Location: Canada
Posts: 125
Control Circuit

Hi Gang.

Would just like to share some of my work with everybody.

Being in electronics all my life, I thought I'd try out a solid state circuit for the C.F. device.
I'm pulsing a cd4029 counter with a 555 chip. This counter is bi-directional so I set it up to count
from 1 to 8 in sequence and then keep reversing at the end of each count.
For each of the 8 counts I have two 500 ohm pots connected in parallel across a 12 volt line. One pot to set the gate
voltage of mosfet A. And one to set the voltage of mosfet B. These power fets sets the amperage levels of coils A & B.
So for 8 pulses we need 16 pots. We can't just wire all these pots to the gates all together.We have to isolate them
some way so that each adjustment is independent of all others. The circuit I use consists of one 2n222 transistor
and 3 pc817 opto-couplers which are all used as electronic switches.
A positive going pulse from the counter turns on the 2n222 which then turns on (or off) all 3 opto-couplers.
The 3 coupler led's are connected in series across a 5 volt line controlled by opto 1. When the led turns on, the emitter-collector junction then conducts.
One of these junctions turns the 12 volts to the 2 pots either on or off.
The other 2 couplers controls the adjusted voltage to the 2 mosfets. So the gate of each mosfet has 8 wires going to it
with only one wire at a time being active. We need 8 of these circuits to do the job.
Using an ammeter in the drain line I adjusted the pots like so: Coil A: 9,8,7,6,5,4,3,2 amps. Coil B :2,3,4,5,6,7,8,9 amps.
With the circuit turned on, total current drain was 11 amps which is the difference between the 2 coils.
So with this setting, the source voltage and amperage never change. I thought this was how C.F. mitigated the Lenz effect.
But when measuring the secondary voltage all I got was a big zero. Oh I could measure some by unbalancing the circuit.
Tried exchanging wires on one of the primaries but still zero.
Because of this complete voltage cancellation, I think the coil placement is all wrong. CF said that the secondary coil
should be between the 2 primaries. But that could be either parallel or perpendicular.
I, like many others on here are using "C" sections from old transformers for the core. The magnetic field is closely
contained within such structures. CF definitely said that this is NOT a transformer.
If we are trying to extract energy from the environment by using a varying magnetic field, then it stands to reason
that the magnetic field should have as much exposure to the environment as possible.
I therefore think that all coils wound on a straight core is the way to go.
Hanon has some very good posts on this subject, so I'll be doing a lot of reading before going any further.
__________________
 
Reply With Quote
  #906  
Old 09-05-2016, 10:51 PM
hanon1492 hanon1492 is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Nov 2012
Posts: 463
Quote:
Originally Posted by kEhYo77 View Post
Hanon, are you 101% sure that this is the case with N and S poles being wrong? I know the patent says that it is a simplified drawing.
To me the whole drawing looks more and more like rectangular coils from top view. The wires touch to those rectangular lines and in the center of each coil there is an indication of what magnetic field of that coil is facing the top, the bottom is hidden and is opposite. Also, it look to me that the resistor array part might have been a cylindrical, cored inductor consisting many turns between taps and working as a variable choke. I'll try to check something similar on my setup.
I am not trying to sway you or anything, I'm just seeing what I see.
Hi Kehyo,

At the beginning I thought the same as you. But later studying the 5 patents filed by Buforn, Figuera's partner, after 1908 when Figuera died, I realized that they tried to used straight coes, especially this is seen in the 1914 patent when Buforn piled many electromagnets and coils in order to use BOTH poles of each electromagnet while the basic design just uses one pole. Please study this page:

https://figueragenerator.wordpress.c...orn-post-1908/



But again I repeat that the secret is to use both electromagnets in repulsion: North-North or South-South.

North-South will not work. I explain it in this very important link https://figueragenerator.wordpress.c...nterpretation/
__________________
 

Last edited by hanon1492; 09-06-2016 at 12:50 AM.
Reply With Quote
  #907  
Old 09-06-2016, 01:45 AM
BroMikey's Avatar
BroMikey BroMikey is online now
Platinum Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2013
Posts: 6,130
Quote:
Originally Posted by marathonman View Post
again i thank you for your post but i think newcomers are being
confused at the notion of resistors in this device

BroMikey; two opposing magnet or electromagnet's will always
put out more than a single one will. Walter Russel stated our coils
are wound wrong, wasting 50 % E field to magnetism. Figuera
figured out how to add that lost 50 % back making it 100 %.
no standard generator can touch this level.

PS. if not in opposing mode ie. N/N or S/S double intensity E fields
will not form. if using N/S the currants will buck each other and
output will be less than half of the previous stated.
I am still trying to comprehend your thesis. But thanks 4 the simple
version. I like the easy versions first and repeated. That PJK stuff
is often messed up totally. It's better than a 6th grader with a crayon.

I have found many details worst than the Patents that threw me for
a loop, but Patrick did the best he could having to many to post.

I am watching for an experiment so I can do it here.
__________________
 

Last edited by BroMikey; 09-06-2016 at 02:11 AM.
Reply With Quote
  #908  
Old 09-06-2016, 12:31 PM
Ufopolitics's Avatar
Ufopolitics Ufopolitics is offline
Platinum Member
 
Join Date: Feb 2012
Location: US, Florida
Posts: 5,009
Coils Spec´s...

Quote:
Originally Posted by Turion View Post
What we are lacking here are the specifics of the "Best" coil that will act as the two electromagnets and the "Best" coil to place in the generator position. If anybody has THAT information, it would be greatly appreciated. I believe there is plenty of research that will need to be done to determine the best two coils to use, and to me that it a first step.

Dave
Dave,


As in any Exciter-Generator arrangement, the Inducing coils (Exciters) should be done with finer wire, multifilar if possible to magnify magnetic field, higher resistance, so, many turns, in order to be fed with lower voltage-amperage.

The Generating Coils (Secondary) should be the opposite, higher gauge and lesser turns, lower resistance, etc.

The "very" specifics on the exciting coils are dictated EXACTLY by the power supply you would be using (Ohms Laws).

Tesla recommended this same spec's on his generators patents, as he cited "coarse" as higher gauge and "finer" for smaller gauge.

Only real building and testing will give you the exact number of turns as the size of the appropriate ferromagnetic cores.


Hope this helps you.


Regards


Ufopolitics
__________________
Principles for the Development of a Complete Mind: Study the science of art. Study the art of science. Develop your senses- especially learn how to see. Realize that everything connects to everything else.― Leonardo da Vinci

Last edited by Ufopolitics; 09-06-2016 at 12:34 PM.
Reply With Quote
  #909  
Old 09-06-2016, 12:51 PM
marathonman marathonman is offline
Silver Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2014
Posts: 543
Quote; "I understand very clear the way you are seeing this patent, and honestly I believe you are actually improving it by "recycling" the energy back to the inductors on the "R" box, making Part G also a source...since Figuera states this feed comes from an External Source (written "foreign" in the patent translation)."

I wish UFO but no, i just interpret what i see, it is all Figuera's genius not mine. it took me three years and the help of a colleague to figure out Figuera's genius device.
i agree your bolded paragraph is one of the essential elements of the Figuera device. the statement in the patent saying "any variation will produce currant flow", while being true, is not completely true for the Figuera device. he then states "an orderly fashion" which is entirely correct. if the two electromagnets are not in complete unison all induction will drop to the peak of the rising electromagnet. this very statement i just made has been verified by my own research. so the best and easiest way to accomplish this feat is to wind a core in a variac fashion allowing both feeds to be varied in unison.

referring to the coils, one should wind the primaries with as little self inductance as possible. the reason for this is if the primaries have high self inductance, the coils will take to long to respond to currant change. on the other hand if the coils are wound with a little thicker wire, fewer winding's and use a little more currant, the coils will have low self inductance therefore respond much quicker to currant changes. also with fewer winding's comes less resistance in which is a good thing.
something to keep fresh in your mind is part G controls the currant at all times not the primaries, so when constructing part G remember all power supplies are built to handle the load plus extra head room, meaning use thicker wire on part G then your primaries coils have.
plus your core of part G has to handle more watts then supplying the primaries, example;
lets say your part G is wound to put out 100 volts at 5 amp peak for the increasing electromagnet and 2.5 amp for the decreasing electromagnet. that is 7.5 amp at 100 volts = 750 watts of power. i myself would have a part G core of no less than 1250 va rating at minimum and would probably use 1500 to 2000 va rated core. always give your self extra head room.
your part G will become the power supply when started and power supply removed so keep this in mind when constructing part G.

this is just a guide line when constructing your device, each device might use a little more currant while others might use less currant. the final specs will be up to the builder what he feels comfortable with.
it takes 14.8 lbs force shifted back and forth for every kilowatt of power produced so at 15 kilowatt that is 222 lbs force devided by how ever many cores you have or what force you feel comfortable in dealing with. that 222 lbs can be split between 7, 8, 10, or even 12 or more, it is all up to you.
another thing to remember is each primary has to handle 1/2 of the secondary output example, lets say 222 lbs devided by say 8 cores is 27.75 lbs force per core shifted back and forth so each primary is accountable for 13.875 lbs force. so wind your primaries to produce 13.875 lbs force or what ever your goal may be.

MM
__________________
 

Last edited by marathonman; 09-06-2016 at 02:43 PM.
Reply With Quote
  #910  
Old 09-06-2016, 02:18 PM
marathonman marathonman is offline
Silver Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2014
Posts: 543
Thumbs up Research

The best thing for someone to do is read my synopsis post 873, read all the patents and watch Hanon's video on the shifting of the opposing fields.
with those items in your mind you will get a good mental picture of what is going on with the Figuera device. from there you can read William Hooper's great take on Motional Electric fields and his excellent description of what is happening in the Figuera device. it took 70 years for some to figure this out, WOW !

the PDF is William Hooper's work on motional Electric fields. skip to his test he did with magnets chapter 7 if you want, but it's all good research. his test with magnets are exactly what is happening in the Figuera device.

elcheapo; you have to have currant change in order for the Figuera device to work. you stated that voltage and currant didn't change, i thought this is how CF mitigated lentz, he changed intensity of the currant with part G and used two opposing electromagnets that has no drag. every one is to occupied with lentz when other things are more important.

MM
__________________
 

Last edited by marathonman; 09-06-2016 at 08:11 PM.
Reply With Quote
  #911  
Old 09-06-2016, 04:53 PM
hanon1492 hanon1492 is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Nov 2012
Posts: 463
Quote:
Originally Posted by marathonman View Post
it takes 14.8 lbs force shifted back and forth for every kilowatt of power produced so at 15 kilowatt that is 222 lbs force devided by how ever many cores you have
Hi,
To compute the power you need to know the force and the velocity of the magnetic lines moving along the induced coil back and forth. So for example for 60 Hz inducer frequency and a induced coil length of L inches and supposing that the magnetic lines move along the whole coil length one way and the way back in every cycle, then each second you have a movement of 2•L•60 inches/sec. Therefore that force is related to power for certain frequency and for certain induced coil length.


Power = Force • Velocity



__________________
 

Last edited by hanon1492; 09-07-2016 at 12:31 AM. Reason: Added relation to frequency and coil length
Reply With Quote
  #912  
Old 09-06-2016, 07:56 PM
marathonman marathonman is offline
Silver Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2014
Posts: 543
Oh, well please enlighten us with math hanon.
granted not complete but not wrong.
the 14.8 lbs force or what force you are dealing with is what the secondary sees , the primaries have to be calculated from that point.
the end result is lbs force per kilowatt.

but by all means show us with examples.
__________________
 

Last edited by marathonman; 09-06-2016 at 08:04 PM.
Reply With Quote
  #913  
Old 09-07-2016, 05:27 PM
Mario's Avatar
Mario Mario is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Apr 2007
Posts: 423
Quote:
Originally Posted by marathonman View Post
the PDF is William Hooper's work on motional Electric fields. skip to his test he did with magnets chapter 7 if you want, but it's all good research. his test with magnets are exactly what is happening in the Figuera device.MM
Hi MM,

to me it doesn't seem to be the exact same thing? You said in the CF device there are opposing magnet poles, while one is increasing the other is receding, in unison.
The experiment in the book describes 2 parallel bar magnets which, when moved away simultaneously in opposite directions from the wire placed in the centre, will induce a current in the wire. This is not what is supposedly happening in the CF device. If we were to do the same process in the CF device, meaning increase and decrease the 2 opposing primaries in sync, we wouldn't get anything in the secondary coil.

Mario
__________________
 
Reply With Quote
  #914  
Old 09-07-2016, 06:39 PM
marathonman marathonman is offline
Silver Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2014
Posts: 543
Thumbs down Spin Direction

It is Exactly the same thing. the two bar magnetic fields are opposing and if one is pushed farther away from the wire, is exactly the same as an electromagnet's currant being reduced. one magnet is brought closer while the other farther away in unison.

I'm not trying to sound rude but is this your dogma taught brain talking or is it your research talking because they are two entirely different things.
not only does the patent say they are opposing, William Hopper proved it with opposing fields but my OWN research proved it to be so.
i have thousands upon thousands of hours of research into the Figuera Device and it's function and there is not one person in this forum that can make me think other wise.

the observed spin directions alone prove i am right as a North/South electromagnet set up has opposing induced in the Figuera device and North/North set up has induced in the same direction supporting one another. i would suggest you dig a little deeper into spin directions and the Figuera device before you bring a sponge cake to a knife fight.
Metaphorically speaking of course, no disrespect intended.
please study spin directions and pic.


MM
Attached Images
File Type: png Duel Complementary Electric Fields.png (50.9 KB, 41 views)
File Type: png Figuera B x V Fields.png (158.5 KB, 36 views)
__________________
 

Last edited by marathonman; 09-07-2016 at 06:48 PM.
Reply With Quote
  #915  
Old 09-07-2016, 07:26 PM
Mario's Avatar
Mario Mario is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Apr 2007
Posts: 423
MM,

I believe in what I can verify on the bench But I'm afraid you didn't get my post right?
I'm not arguing what the result of 2 opposing magnets is, and that a NN arrangement is very different to a NS arrangement. I'm also not arguing that the CF device has opposing magnet poles, and that electromagnets can do the same as permanent magnets.
I know that moving a non magnetic bar with 2 opposing magnets glued to each end moved back and forth will result in a current in a coil placed in the middle which is way stronger then if it were a NS arrangement. Done that test.

I was referring to the test from the book you mentioned, are we talking about the same?? Attached is the pic. from the chapter 7 experiment.

Now that we're on the same page, what I meant was:

what is shown in picture I've attached is not what we are talking about, meaning opposed magnets (or electromagnets), one increasing while the other is receding like the CF device. The experiment shows 2 PARALLEL bar magnets (not opposing, parallel) that are moving away from the wire in the middle in opposing directions SIMULTANEOUSLY. My point was that comparing this experiment to what we are talking about regarding the CF device is like comparing apples and oranges.

Btw, where are the pics you attached from?

Mario
Attached Images
File Type: jpg Hooper.jpg (25.8 KB, 24 views)
__________________
 
Reply With Quote
  #916  
Old 09-07-2016, 08:07 PM
marathonman marathonman is offline
Silver Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2014
Posts: 543
missed observation

The William Hooper table top lecture says, and i quote; the left magnet is given a slow uniform velocity. that velocity is to and from the wire so the right magnet is given an equal velocity opposite of the first.
that means literally, that one is moving in while the second is moving out. how difficult is that to understand?
that means that while the spin directions are opposing when static, upon movement the induced is in the same direction as the outward magnets spin direction is the opposite from static which was opposing but now compliments each other causing the galvanometer to deflect at twice the potential as one magnet alone.

those pics are the sum of my three plus years of research in the Figuera device and are scientifically correct as the information was pulled from University physics department web site and can not be refuted.

reading something and comprehending what you just read are two different things. what you think you know and what is reality can only be substantiated through research. the previous is just a waste of time and effort.

and if you think for one second that those paralleled magnet fields are not opposing you might want to find an easier hobby, just sayin.

MM
__________________
 

Last edited by marathonman; 09-08-2016 at 05:45 AM.
Reply With Quote
  #917  
Old 09-07-2016, 08:27 PM
Mario's Avatar
Mario Mario is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Apr 2007
Posts: 423
You know, one can always correct or explain something without putting a big ego in between.

Ok man, never mind, so very sorry to have wasted your precious time…. I'll go back and play lego now…

Mario
__________________
 
Reply With Quote
  #918  
Old 09-07-2016, 09:06 PM
marathonman marathonman is offline
Silver Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2014
Posts: 543
Thumbs down No ego

I ment no disrespect by it Mario.
i was on another forum an it was completely ruined by new un knowing people and N/S'ers, mostly n/s'ers.
it is just frustrating when you get really far with people then a new people comes to the table with no research at all or very little and ask a bunch of questions that we solved a year ago instead of reading the post. it does get a little frustrating after a few years.
i really did not mean to be disrespectful or sound ego'ish.

what would you like to know? i will answer the best as i can.

MM
__________________
 
Reply With Quote
  #919  
Old 09-07-2016, 09:14 PM
Mario's Avatar
Mario Mario is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Apr 2007
Posts: 423
And by the way:

Quote:
The William Hooper table top lecture says, and i quote; the left magnet is given a slow uniform velocity. that velocity is to and from the wire so the right magnet is given an equal velocity opposite of the first.
that means literally, that one is moving in while the second is moving out. how difficult is that to understand?
You wrote "that velocity is to and from the wire". What I read (and quote exactly) is this:

"If the magnet on the left be given a slow uniform velocity V and the one on the right a velocity V' equal and opposite to V, then one will note a deflection of the galvanometer needle…"

Where does it say to and from? There are even two arrows pointing outward in the drawing!
What I gather is that the bars are moved simultaneously away from the wire in the centre, in opposite directions. Is it just me? Anyone else?

Mario
__________________
 
Reply With Quote
  #920  
Old 09-07-2016, 09:20 PM
Mario's Avatar
Mario Mario is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Apr 2007
Posts: 423
Ok, we seemed to post simultaneously. What I mean is both, the experiment in the book and the NN arrangement in the CF device are very interesting phenomenons, I don't question either, ok? I just think they are not the exact same thing, I may be wrong but it is what I gather. We do not have to waste time about this anymore. I'm more interested in the NN phenomenon anyway…

Mario
__________________
 
Reply With Quote
  #921  
Old 09-07-2016, 09:29 PM
marathonman marathonman is offline
Silver Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2014
Posts: 543
Electron drift velocity

As you can read from the pic below, the flux paths are opposing, left one moving up, while the right one moving down. so that means the electron drift velocity of the left magnet is moving upward but since we are taking the right magnet out simultaneously, the electron drift velocity is reversed in direction supporting the left magnet drift velocity. both induced are in the same direction causing a doubled E fields as opposed to one magnet or electromagnet a lone. thus acting exactly as the Figuera device does in action.
i hope this gives a clearer picture in your mind .

MM
Attached Images
File Type: png B X V FIELD 2.PNG (238.4 KB, 34 views)
__________________
 
Reply With Quote
  #922  
Old 09-07-2016, 09:44 PM
marathonman marathonman is offline
Silver Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2014
Posts: 543
M.o.n.e.y

Turion;

My demo device i built as prof of concept put out 300 watts with 100 in. it was switched with commutators and made with resistance wire that got hot with prolonged used and was not self sustaining. i sold it to someone on O.U. since that time i figured out part G's functions, then bought some pure iron cores. being so expensive, i could not justify the cost to buy any more. i then was going to get funding by third party but third party backed out suddenly and that leaves me in the position now, struggling.
i am still seeking funding but have had no luck so far. so for now i will just pass on the info i gathered and was passed to me.

my cores are wound and my part G is half completed but the rest will wait until the money situation changes.

MM
__________________
 

Last edited by marathonman; 09-07-2016 at 11:10 PM.
Reply With Quote
  #923  
Old 09-07-2016, 10:27 PM
hanon1492 hanon1492 is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Nov 2012
Posts: 463
Mario,
I understand the Hooper experiment as you do, but that is not what matters now.

The real discovery of Hooper was that the electric field generated by induction in transformers, E = dB/dt, was different to the electric field generated by induction with movement in generator, E = v*B, the one that he called motional electric field. And here is when it matches Figuera ideas: Figuera did not used induction as in transformers just varying the B field, but he, by varying in opposition two B fields, achieved to move the magnetic lines back and forth to get motional induction and creating flux cutting induction in the induced wires, as in current generators. But in a motionless device, so no cogging was present !!

As I understand in transformer the Lenz effect is shown as an opposed magnetic field which counteract the inducer field. But in generator the Lenz effect is shown by cogging. In case of the Figuera device there is generator induction, by movement, but being static there is no Lenz effect. This is my interpretation

Attached Images
File Type: png Induction_Hooper.PNG (13.8 KB, 167 views)
__________________
 
Reply With Quote
  #924  
Old 09-07-2016, 10:59 PM
marathonman marathonman is offline
Silver Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2014
Posts: 543
?

while that may be true it is not complete, the other part of his discovery was the duel motional Electric fields produced by two opposing magnet fields that can not be shielded by anything. the motional field flows through everything unimpeded.
the Hooper experiment is very important in my opinion as that is exactly what is happening in the Figuera device and if you don't understand Hooper's experiment how do you expect to understand the figuera device???

it's very easy to post stuff that are similar in action as you think but you have no clue how they operate. actually knowing how they operate is an entirely different thing. and trust me Hoopers demo is exactly the same action and function as the figuera device contrary to your own beliefs.
it is the NN phenomenon staring you right smack dab in the face.

Regards,

MM
__________________
 

Last edited by marathonman; 09-07-2016 at 11:11 PM.
Reply With Quote
  #925  
Old 09-07-2016, 11:28 PM
hanon1492 hanon1492 is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Nov 2012
Posts: 463
The magic is to create motional induction into a motionless generator. Look how the magnetic lines move back and forth using two north poles and two inducer fields in opposition. Induction by flux cutting the induced wires, not by flux linking the coils as in common transformers. The key is to move the fields back and forth along the induced coil and cut the induced wires.

__________________
 
Reply With Quote
  #926  
Old 09-07-2016, 11:34 PM
j dove j dove is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2010
Posts: 51
@MM

Thanks so much for the excellent information you have provided. I very much appreciate all your efforts to bring this out but not only that but to expend the effort to explain it to others . I have read the patents and also William Hoopers pdf that you posted . I also did experiment for function of motional electrical field with canceled B fields . It functions as indicated and was news to me as I knew nothing about it before reading your posts . My question to you is what shape is the cores for your electromagnets ? Are they selonoids ? ie.....recultanglar in shape . As others have posted C shape cores and I feel this incorrect , but then I am not sure with out experiment as maybe this can be made to work . As it would have NN at one end And SS at the other end .What I am asking is what is the best way in which to start construction of the cores . I read you post I core values But didn't get what shape is best . Maybe I missed something . Any info you may be able to give is appreciated. Again thanks for what is already posted as I have read the entire thread from the beginning to end .

Jeff
__________________
 
Reply With Quote
  #927  
Old 09-07-2016, 11:51 PM
marathonman marathonman is offline
Silver Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2014
Posts: 543
in unison ! Hanon. and yes, nice vid.

j dove;
thank you for your king words. as you can see i am very adamant about the Figuera Device not only from the stand point of getting people off the grid but also the complete intimate details most people are overlooking in the process. i sit and stare at the device for hours upon hours picturing the magnetic fields interacting with each other as the primaries gracefully sweep back and forth in complete unison, oblivious to their complimenting actions of not only supplying the secondary with power but feeding part G every time they recede.

Figuera's magnificent part G that splits a single feed into two from opposing magnetic fields allowing each feed to be varied separately but in complete unison all while feeding the primaries is down right masterful.

Figuera chose straight cores for a reason and i think that should be followed. in the 1914 patent, Buforn shows both ends being utilized in which would be impractical as your device would be way to long to move or store. with that said, i am venturing into the notion of using a toroidal core for the Figuera device with plans to build a 15 to 20 kilowatt device. but for now just stick to straight cores, round or rectangle.
also copy and paste my synopsis on the figuers device, post 873. once you read it a couple of times along with all other wonderful information your mental picture of working device will be much, much clearer.
yes sir, i believe i love this device.

Mm
__________________
 

Last edited by marathonman; 09-08-2016 at 05:54 AM.
Reply With Quote
  #928  
Old 09-08-2016, 12:47 AM
Wistiti Wistiti is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2012
Posts: 483
low cost build

As always the best way to figure it is by building it.

I think we have to find a way every one , even with low budget, can build it. what about salvaging some discard part? In this vid, he use some MOT for the induced part.: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=V5b1CDuv1R4
MM and Hanon, what you think of it?

Someone have other idea for cheap replication?
__________________
 
Reply With Quote
  #929  
Old 09-08-2016, 01:28 AM
Wistiti Wistiti is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2012
Posts: 483
Or mabe the core and coil of a drain pump (like the one Gerard Morin use) may also do the job...
Attached Images
File Type: jpg image.jpg (169.0 KB, 20 views)
__________________
 
Reply With Quote
  #930  
Old 09-08-2016, 01:43 AM
marathonman marathonman is offline
Silver Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2014
Posts: 543
problems in Figuera paradise.

The problem i have with the cores in the video is the same problem Hanon had at first, his primary winding depth are way to short. with a length of one inch the magnetic field will be so week trying to span that huge gape of the secondary. even though the flux will be travelling in the core you still need to consider the square of the distance.

the ratio of primary to secondary CAN NOT be more then 1 to 1. it can be less for the secondary but not the primary.and don't forget about the small gap between you primary and secondary.
ie. 4 inch secondary and 5 or 6 inch primary as this will work out great but NEVER the other way around as the magnetic field just wont reach.

the primary coil should utilize the whole core to bridge the gap successfully, not leaving huge gaps of core showing. i hate to say it but the guy in the video will be very disappointed.

PS. Hanon's new cores are a fantastic find.
PS.PS that core wistiti is about the size of my original demo core i used. scrap yards are a good place to start, slip a 20 and you will be guarateed a phone call when good stuff comes in. plus old welding machines or large transformers.
MM
__________________
 

Last edited by marathonman; 09-08-2016 at 10:25 PM.
Reply With Quote
Reply

Tags
clemente, figuera, re-inventing

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 10:52 AM.


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