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
  #1171  
Old 09-22-2016, 09:46 PM
hanon1492 hanon1492 is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Nov 2012
Posts: 463
So , you sold both of your 100 W in / 300 W out devices, the one described in your post in the 10th of september and the one described in overunuty forum, because they both are different designs. It was curious to me that both have exactly the same input/output results.
__________________
 
Reply With Quote

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

  #1172  
Old 09-22-2016, 11:18 PM
marathonman marathonman is offline
Silver Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2014
Posts: 543
Thumbs down

How dense can you be be. one device different winding configuration and voltages hanon.
get on with it hanon, if you spent more time building and less time running your mouth, maybe, just maybe you would have a working device but i doubt it will ever take place because you will probably argue with yourself.
subject over in my book.

MM
__________________
 
Reply With Quote
  #1173  
Old 09-23-2016, 12:59 AM
Cadman Cadman is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Aug 2013
Posts: 179
Well I just put power to my autotransformer and am pleased to report that it works perfectly.
24vac in and 15 usable taps with voltage from 27.4 down to 1.5 in 15 even increments.

So if want to build a high powered AC variac then the spreadsheet will calculate it perfectly for you.

Next step is to build the rotating brush and run DC through it and see what the difference is.

Wouldn't it be great if all we had to do to calculate a part G was to change the 4.44 constant to 1.1?

Cheers,
CM
__________________
 
Reply With Quote
  #1174  
Old 09-23-2016, 03:15 AM
marathonman marathonman is offline
Silver Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2014
Posts: 543
Thumbs up Good news

Congrats on your Autotransformer .

yes that would nice if that is all we had to do.
i'll keep my fingers crossed for the DC test.
may be you can calculate it at 1.11 and see what happens i results.


MM
__________________
 

Last edited by marathonman; 09-23-2016 at 08:01 AM.
Reply With Quote
  #1175  
Old 09-23-2016, 07:59 AM
marathonman marathonman is offline
Silver Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2014
Posts: 543
Thumbs up inductor

I have been reading and studying about inductors an relating that to part G.
as the brush rotates currant enters from set N & S causing two opposing fields. as the brush approaches set N the winding's are reducing as is cross section of core causing an increase in currant discharge while the winding's are increasing as is cross section of core for set S causing an decrease in currant discharge.
eyes wobbling to much.

MM
__________________
 

Last edited by marathonman; 09-23-2016 at 08:02 AM.
Reply With Quote
  #1176  
Old 09-23-2016, 09:46 AM
hanon1492 hanon1492 is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Nov 2012
Posts: 463
Quote:
Originally Posted by marathonman View Post
How dense can you be be. one device different winding configuration and voltages hanon.
In fact different winding configuration, different cores (in one case both primaries and secondaries are 3" long, in the other case primaries 4" long, secondaries 2" long) , and different driving parameters. But both cases having the same output power (300 W). Sorry to tell it but I see something weird in that. I have just exposed the data that you posted. If you are incomodated with that then it is because something is not straight. A saying tells the truth offend.
__________________
 
Reply With Quote
  #1177  
Old 09-23-2016, 12:21 PM
Cadman Cadman is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Aug 2013
Posts: 179
Quote:
Originally Posted by marathonman View Post
I have been reading and studying about inductors an relating that to part G.
as the brush rotates currant enters from set N & S causing two opposing fields. as the brush approaches set N the winding's are reducing as is cross section of core causing an increase in currant discharge while the winding's are increasing as is cross section of core for set S causing an decrease in currant discharge.
eyes wobbling to much.

MM
Thank you for this post. I have been looking at the current flow backwards.
sheesh
CM
__________________
 
Reply With Quote
  #1178  
Old 09-23-2016, 05:01 PM
marathonman marathonman is offline
Silver Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2014
Posts: 543
Exclamation Flow

It was difficult at first realizing it flows from - to +. was it Ben Franklin that had a 50/50 chance and got it wrong. the status quo is stuck on not letting true information out as this would ruin not only relativity and Quantum Mechanics but the science community as a whole. and to think good ole J.P. Morgan started it all.
actually it seams currant flows one way and voltage the other. it is a crying shame that in 2016 that such little and correct information can be had on the subject. i think society as a whole is waking up to the fact that that all the info we have access through schooling is either wrong, tainted or down right lacking in completeness. J.P. Morgan is a prim example as he had school books pulled, had them changed, then put back into circulation. the entire history of all countries are based on Corporate, Government manipulation.

hopefully things are changing for the better but is it to late as the power Elite have devastating plans and most of us are not apart of it.

what really amazes me is so very little people know about Clemente Figuera. almost every person i talk to including corporate America and science community knows nothing of him so almost needless to say i either get ignored, get told free energy is not possible (we know this is a lie) or they show interest until money is involved. i wish i could get some scientist and money backers involved in this project, sure would be nice. at this point in time i would settle for a little backing.

here is link to DipTrace free for Schematic capture, PCB layout ect. the free version is 300 pin 2 layer. Download DipTrace - DipTrace


MM
__________________
 

Last edited by marathonman; 09-23-2016 at 05:24 PM.
Reply With Quote
  #1179  
Old 09-24-2016, 08:52 AM
Netica's Avatar
Netica Netica is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2009
Posts: 162
Hello Marathonman,

I very much, did not understand what you had said from post 1183
"as the brush rotates currant enters from set N & S causing two opposing fields" I understood the opposite, until you said "It was difficult at first realizing it flows from - to +."

I would like to understand how it is known that current flows from - to +,. How did you learn it?, and how could it be shown?

This is very important to understand - "actually it seams currant flows one way and voltage the other" Anything further that could be shown regarding this would be great. I am not so much refering to Clemente's machine as I get what you are saying in this regard, rather a more general understanding about current and voltage flowing in the opposite directions.

Thanks for sharing your work and knowledge.
__________________
 
Reply With Quote
  #1180  
Old 09-25-2016, 04:07 AM
marathonman marathonman is offline
Silver Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2014
Posts: 543
Thumbs up currant flow

here is one clue below the rest i will get to you shortly.
when they speak of conventional currant flow, since the days of Ben Franklin, it was thought that currant flowed from positive to negative. well he had a 50/50 chance guessing and was wrong. real currant flows from negative to positive. this can be verified at home by you using a small battery, diode and light bulb.
ps. transistors are the same way but the establishment is just to lazy to change it. watch this video and many, many others. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bkQSt5uA74k
and you are welcome.



MM
__________________
 

Last edited by marathonman; 09-25-2016 at 04:31 AM.
Reply With Quote
  #1181  
Old 09-25-2016, 04:35 AM
marathonman marathonman is offline
Silver Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2014
Posts: 543
Thumbs up Currant Flow

Also here in this pic, notice currant flow. something to keep in mind when winding coils. south charges centripetally (in)(contracting) north discharges centrifugally (out)(expanding). also both ends are rotating in the same direction which causes a voidance when two opposites are put together not attraction.




MM
__________________
 

Last edited by marathonman; 09-25-2016 at 04:57 AM.
Reply With Quote
  #1182  
Old 09-25-2016, 10:07 PM
hanon1492 hanon1492 is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Nov 2012
Posts: 463
A couple of simplified sketches of the Figuera Generator:




This last picture was taken from an old version of PJK ebook
__________________
 
Reply With Quote
  #1183  
Old 09-26-2016, 03:14 AM
bistander bistander is offline
Gold Member
 
Join Date: Apr 2015
Posts: 1,682
Quote:
Originally Posted by marathonman View Post
Also here in this pic, notice currant flow. something to keep in mind when winding coils. south charges centripetally (in)(contracting) north discharges centrifugally (out)(expanding). also both ends are rotating in the same direction which causes a voidance when two opposites are put together not attraction.




MM
Hi MM,

Convention uses positive to negative current flow outside the source. It is universally accepted that the actual electron flow in a load circuit is from negative to positive. Current is defined as the movement or flow of charge and that applies to positive charge as well as negative charge.

You run into trouble when you ignore one convention and then apply another convention like - to + current and the right-hand rule. North (N) & South (S) are backwards on your coil diagram. I have seen the left-hand rule applied when using electron flow instead of conventional current.

It would be much easier if you just used convention. It is not a conspiracy. It is just an universally accepted convention with the actual electron flow widely acknowledged.

bi
__________________
 
Reply With Quote
  #1184  
Old 09-26-2016, 04:03 AM
Allcanadian's Avatar
Allcanadian Allcanadian is offline
Silver Member
 
Join Date: Sep 2008
Posts: 659
@bistander
Quote:
Convention uses positive to negative current flow outside the source. It is universally accepted that the actual electron flow in a load circuit is from negative to positive. Current is defined as the movement or flow of charge and that applies to positive charge as well as negative charge.
Yes there is conventional flow notation (+ to -) and electron flow notation(- to +). The obvious question to ask is how could the positive charges (Protons) move or flow when they are the immobile part of the atoms which make up the framework of the material?. The answer is no positive charges can "flow" anywhere and it is only the negatively charged free electrons which move in a wire conductor. Thus electron flow notation is the only correct form and if a positive charge did move then the conductor itself must be moving.

Quote:
You run into trouble when you ignore one convention and then apply another convention like - to + current and the right-hand rule. North (N) & South (S) are backwards on your coil diagram. I have seen the left-hand rule applied when using electron flow instead of conventional current.
I noticed North in the diagram was backwards as well. I have used the left hand rule and electron flow notation exclusively for over ten years now. I could never go back to conventional flow notation because it simply has no truth in reality. The positively charged Protons do not move or flow anywhere in a conductor because they cannot move... this is reality.

AC
__________________
 
Reply With Quote
  #1185  
Old 09-26-2016, 05:35 AM
Netica's Avatar
Netica Netica is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2009
Posts: 162
This is a great video -

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Hc3vngKsNb0

Electricity Basics: "Principles of Electricity" 1945 General Electric; How Electrons Flow in Matter
__________________
 

Last edited by Netica; 09-26-2016 at 05:37 AM.
Reply With Quote
  #1186  
Old 09-26-2016, 06:39 AM
marathonman marathonman is offline
Silver Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2014
Posts: 543
Thumbs up Cat Bag

Sorry didn't mean to let the cat out of the bag. just sick of status quo pucks getting away with BS. not a single kid now a days knows what time it is, well except TED. one in a million kid.
just the thought of positive, negative, positron, electron makes me want to barf. it has nothing to do with positive or negative but just high pressure and low pressure. just the thought of electrons running through a wire like F-in marbles makes me want to bust a scientist in the head with a hammer.

but we must move on with the best device ever, the Figuera.

BOOYAH ! who's your daddy, Mr Figuera, that's what i thought.

MM
__________________
 

Last edited by marathonman; 09-26-2016 at 06:46 AM.
Reply With Quote
  #1187  
Old 09-26-2016, 03:54 PM
bistander bistander is offline
Gold Member
 
Join Date: Apr 2015
Posts: 1,682
Quote:
Originally Posted by Allcanadian View Post
@bistander

Yes there is conventional flow notation (+ to -) and electron flow notation(- to +). The obvious question to ask is how could the positive charges (Protons) move or flow when they are the immobile part of the atoms which make up the framework of the material?
Hi AC,

I did not say, nor does literature concerning current say that electric current consist of moving protons. Current in the + to - direction can be defined as the flow of positive charges. Once an electron has moved what is left in its place? A positive charge. As electrons move in one direction, these positive charges (created by departing electrons) move in the opposite direction at the same speed.

Does a charged capacitor or battery have an abundance of negative charge on one plate and equal positive on the opposite plate? That does not mean or imply there are a bunch of protons sitting on the positive plate, does it?

Looks to me like this is off topic. I don't know why it was even brought up. To me it is just a foolish distraction which really doesn't matter to the context here. It only serves to confuse the reader. If you're smart enough to disagree with convention and use - to + and left-hand rule, why not keep it to yourself and let the discussion follow convention in a minor detail so it is less confussing to the casual reader?

bi
__________________
 

Last edited by bistander; 09-26-2016 at 05:39 PM. Reason: Typo
Reply With Quote
  #1188  
Old 09-26-2016, 04:15 PM
hanon1492 hanon1492 is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Nov 2012
Posts: 463
As bistander has wisely said there is no need to discuss here the international convention of the current movement. We all agree that the reality is contrary to the rule established. This generator will work fine no matter how you define the sense of the current, one way or the reverse way.

The only key for a successful device is to place both electromagnets in repulsion mode. North-North or South-South and move the two fields back and forth, no matter the method you use to achieve it.

This what is claimed in the patent, therefore this is the esence of the device:




__________________
 

Last edited by hanon1492; 09-26-2016 at 04:18 PM.
Reply With Quote
  #1189  
Old 09-26-2016, 07:11 PM
Allcanadian's Avatar
Allcanadian Allcanadian is offline
Silver Member
 
Join Date: Sep 2008
Posts: 659
@bistander
Quote:
I did not say, nor does literature concerning current say that electric current consist of moving protons. Current in the + to - direction can be defined as the flow of positive charges. Once an electron has moved what is left in its place? A positive charge. As electrons move in one direction, these positive charges (created by departing electrons) move in the opposite direction at the same speed.
Matter is like a checker board with equal black pieces (negative electrons) and white pieces (positive protons). The charge is said to be neutral because the black pieces neutralize the effects of the white pieces. The white pieces cannot move so obviously they cannot move in the opposite direction.

It is only when the black pieces move leaving more white that we can say more white is present. Likewise when more black pieces move into an area there is more black. However at no point can the white pieces move in any direction... it is an illusion.

It is important to understand this because it does matter how things actually work in reality.

Quote:
Looks to me like this is off topic. I don't know why it was even brought up. To me it is just a foolish distraction which really doesn't matter to the context here. It only serves to confuse the reader. If you're smart enough to disagree with convention and use - to + and left-hand rule, why not keep it to yourself and let the discussion follow convention in a minor detail so it is less confussing to the casual reader?
Are you implying I should lie because the truth might confuse the casual readers?. No offense but the readers are already very confused because they have been told to believe in imaginary things which have no basis in reality such as flowing positive charges which is absurd.

This is actually the only conversation which is on topic because it is the only one which will allow people to understand the basics which will lead to the understanding of the device in question. Why do you think Figuera labelled the negative terminal "the origin"?... any idea's?.

AC
__________________
 
Reply With Quote
  #1190  
Old 09-26-2016, 07:42 PM
bistander bistander is offline
Gold Member
 
Join Date: Apr 2015
Posts: 1,682
Quote:
Originally Posted by Allcanadian View Post
@bistander


Matter is like a checker board with equal black pieces (negative electrons) and white pieces (positive protons). The charge is said to be neutral because the black pieces neutralize the effects of the white pieces. The white pieces cannot move so obviously they cannot move in the opposite direction.

It is only when the black pieces move leaving more white that we can say more white is present. Likewise when more black pieces move into an area there is more black. However at no point can the white pieces move in any direction... it is an illusion.

It is important to understand this because it does matter how things actually work in reality.



Are you implying I should lie because the truth might confuse the casual readers?. No offense but the readers are already very confused because they have been told to believe in imaginary things which have no basis in reality such as flowing positive charges which is absurd.

This is actually the only conversation which is on topic because it is the only one which will allow people to understand the basics which will lead to the understanding of the device in question. Why do you think Figuera labelled the negative terminal "the origin"?... any idea's?.

AC
OK AC,

What does it really matter what we call it? N. S. +. -. All just labels we assign to stuff. And many or most of us agree by convention and accepted language what symbols are used for those things. It should be obvious to you that nobody is claiming moving protons constitute normal electric current.

And why does MM call it currant? Does he know something which has been hidden from us for hundreds of years?

bi
__________________
 
Reply With Quote
  #1191  
Old 09-26-2016, 11:03 PM
Allcanadian's Avatar
Allcanadian Allcanadian is offline
Silver Member
 
Join Date: Sep 2008
Posts: 659
@bistander
Quote:
What does it really matter what we call it? N. S. +. -. All just labels we assign to stuff. And many or most of us agree by convention and accepted language what symbols are used for those things. It should be obvious to you that nobody is claiming moving protons constitute normal electric current.
Logically, if an electric current is defined as the flow of "electric charges" through a conducting medium and some people believe this current can flow from positive to negative then they must believe protons are moving because they are the only positive charges present.
Obviously we cannot have an abundance of free electrons flowing from the positive terminal to the negative terminal of a battery. Otherwise the positive terminal would become more positive and be charging due to this imaginary current which should be discharging. Thus they must be referring to positive charges moving as a current from positive to negative which we know cannot be true.

So No, what people may be thinking is not obvious to me by any means because what their thinking is illogical.

The question I would ask you is, if there is by definition a "current" of electric charges flowing from positive to negative then which kind of charges are they?... positive protons or negative electrons? and how exactly do you think they could "flow"?.

AC
__________________
 
Reply With Quote
  #1192  
Old 09-26-2016, 11:04 PM
hanon1492 hanon1492 is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Nov 2012
Posts: 463
If we are going to discuss something really useful into this project, please listen to Richard Feynman into this short clip. Take good note. Now it is late, tomorrow I will post a more detailed post

Feynman Quotes - Motion Of a Magnet Electric Field Generated whether or not conductor present.mp3

Other link to the audio

Two different phenomena, the same output: electromotive force, emf
__________________
 

Last edited by hanon1492; 01-03-2017 at 10:29 PM.
Reply With Quote
  #1193  
Old 09-27-2016, 02:12 AM
bistander bistander is offline
Gold Member
 
Join Date: Apr 2015
Posts: 1,682
Apologies for off-topic, IMO.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Allcanadian View Post
@bistander
...
The question I would ask you is, if there is by definition a "current" of electric charges flowing from positive to negative then which kind of charges are they?...
OK CM,

By no means is my reply all inclusive, but rather a couple of examples.

To your quoted question above:
Inside the armature coil of a generator, electrons or negative charges flow from + to -. That is from positive to negative, or from a high potential to a low potential difference.

Lightning is current. Most lightning is the sudden massive movement of positive charge to the concentration of negative charge in the cloud although sometimes it is negative charge movement.

Positive charges exist and can move.

CM, please explain how this is relevant. If it isn't relevant to the thread topic, let's move to a new thread and continue there.

Thanks,

bi
__________________
 
Reply With Quote
  #1194  
Old 09-27-2016, 04:35 AM
marathonman marathonman is offline
Silver Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2014
Posts: 543
Thumbs up ops !

There is no off and on for nature or the Universe for that mater. Universe is easy, man is what is the F-up. study nature as Walter Russel and you will receive .

just saying.

MM
__________________
 
Reply With Quote
  #1195  
Old 09-27-2016, 11:23 AM
hanon1492 hanon1492 is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Nov 2012
Posts: 463
Richard Feynman: two different phenomena in induction, one for flux linking ( 2nd Maxwell equation) and other for flux cutting (Lorentz Force). Richard Feynman Lectures, Vol.2, Chapter 17.

Joseph Henry: two types of induction

Konstantine Meyl: two different formulations for induction

George Cohn: two different phenomena in induction

William J. Hooper: three different kinds of electric fields, one electrostatic field, and other two due to induction with different properties: one transformer induction, (which is shieldable), and one motional induction (which is unshieldable)

Figuera used this motional induction field, as in common generators, but into a motionless device, without the drawback found in common motional generators: Without dragging , because nothing moves.









__________________
 
Reply With Quote
  #1196  
Old 09-27-2016, 12:06 PM
jegz jegz is offline
Junior Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2016
Posts: 16
Little relation between Figuera and William Hooper

Hanon. Can we respectfully have a second look at William Hooper's claims again vis a vis the proposed N-N configuration in the case of Figuera.

Based on my understanding of his description of the linear conductors the aim is to NEUTRALIZE the magnetic field by using COUNTERWOUND coils (read 1st 3 sentences of Page 6)

http://www.gravityresearchfoundation...970/hooper.pdf

..It is in the process of neutralizing the conventional magnetic fields that can be shielded that he was able to observe the Motional Magnetic field..a field that alegedly cannot be shielded by a faraday cage.

However in the case of Figuera it is the use of flux cutting with normal magnetic fields.

The only similarity I see is arranging both sets arranged in opposition but the fields are very different

attached is a depiction of the linear conductors from Hooper's patent..notice they are counterwound
Attached Images
File Type: bmp fig 6.bmp (851.2 KB, 44 views)
__________________
 
Reply With Quote
  #1197  
Old 09-27-2016, 12:38 PM
marathonman marathonman is offline
Silver Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2014
Posts: 543
Talking Reality

Contrary to your thinking two opposing magnetic fields taken in unison, one up, the other down, causes a double strength E field referred to as a pure BxV field, ie. 100 % field. if you can't see that, all i can say is, "oh well" that's your problem because i sure see it.

MM
__________________
 
Reply With Quote
  #1198  
Old 09-27-2016, 12:44 PM
hanon1492 hanon1492 is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Nov 2012
Posts: 463
The summary of the works of Feymann, Joseph Henry, Cohn, Meyl, Hooper and many others is that the electric field induced in transformers (E=dB/dt) and the electric field induced in generators (E=v•B) are DIFFERENT in nature, although in both cases they produce an electromotive force. This is the key.

Transformer induction, as a Lenz effect, creates a opposite induced field which affects the primary.

Motional induction, as a Lenz effect, creates dragging in the device, and thus a greater mechanical force must be supplied.







__________________
 

Last edited by hanon1492; 09-27-2016 at 12:53 PM.
Reply With Quote
  #1199  
Old 09-27-2016, 09:34 PM
Allcanadian's Avatar
Allcanadian Allcanadian is offline
Silver Member
 
Join Date: Sep 2008
Posts: 659
@bistander
Quote:
please explain how this is relevant. If it isn't relevant to the thread topic, let's move to a new thread and continue there.
As I said before, if someone cannot understand the what, when, how and why of even a basic circuit then there not going anywhere. The fact remains only the free electrons move in the circuit in question and there are no moving positive charges. The electron density determines the state of charge is any given region of a conductor and also determines the direction of the Emf.

@Hanon
Quote:
The summary of the works of Feymann, Joseph Henry, Cohn, Meyl, Hooper and many others is that the electric field induced in transformers (E=dB/dt) and the electric field induced in generators (E=vB) are DIFFERENT in nature, although in both cases they produce an electromotive force. This is the key.
It seems straightforward, in generators we see (E=vB) and in transformers we see (E=dB/dt) where dB is equivalent to v in a generator. We should remember the conductor does not care how the field change occurs only that it does because it's just a conductor. We can take a straight core transformer as in your diagram and induce a current by powering the primary or we can move a magnet past the core with an equivalent field and the result is the same.

However what marathon man has eluded to is an entirely different beast altogether. It cannot be shielded and relates to gravity, in extreme cases it acts on both the protons and the electrons simultaneously in materials altering there physical properties. It can also alter how the material reacts to any other external fields. Play safe.

AC
__________________
 
Reply With Quote
  #1200  
Old 09-28-2016, 02:10 AM
Solarlab Solarlab is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Sep 2012
Posts: 63
Linear VS Differential Equation?

Hannon:

Quote:
The summary of the works of Feymann, Joseph Henry, Cohn, Meyl, Hooper and many others is that the electric field induced in transformers (E=dB/dt) and the electric field induced in generators (E=v•B) are DIFFERENT in nature, although in both cases they produce an electromotive force. This is the key.


Interesting and valuable work; excellent; thanks!

A simple thought: consider a linear equation (E=v x B) versus a differential equation (E=dB/dt) [change in B divided by change in time]; also consider the "G" {stepping staircase commutator}; amongst other things... e.g. why a precision German built (high speed?) commutator circa 1900's {the "dt" part}?

Did Fugeura "discover" an excess of energy while attempting to eliminate the mechanical parts of a generator. Maybe simplified but stranger things have happened!

Does an ounce of lead accelerated to 1000 feet per second [(same thing as) dB/dt] contain (or generate) more energy than an ounce of lead accelerated to 2 feet per second [dB/dt]?

Sorry but I have not studied Figeura's system in any detail and have not, as yet, attempted any simulations. Just thought I would commend you on your approach and add an observation comment.

Just Lurking here...
__________________
 

Last edited by Solarlab; 09-28-2016 at 02:19 AM. Reason: change "traveling at" to "accelerated to"
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 10:29 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