Originally posted by Allen Burgess
View Post
Announcement
Collapse
No announcement yet.
Open discussion for projects on this forum.
Collapse
X
-
More Allen
That would be reactive power in units of (var, volt amperes reactive). If you care to learn more about AC power, see:
-
Save
Pardon my use of this space, but I'd like to save Allen's post before he can edit it as he has done to other posts after my replies. I'll add some comments later. Thanks. bi
Originally posted by Allen Burgess View Post@bystander,
Tinman's measuring his Tesla serial bifilar pancake coil for Overunity and trying to gauge his real A.C. power with a complex RMS equation involving phase angle of current and voltage.
The bifilar coil is storing this electrical power in a magnetic field. Measuring the flux density of the field is a much simpler way of measuring for gain. You , Citfta and those other two turkeys over at O.U. argued with me that a Tesla is not an inverse Henry?
A simple measure of "Flux Density" in Tinman's bifilar is a much more accurate measure of "Real Power" than the measurement of A.C. power with the RMS equation that's too complex for Tinman to deal with.
You have ridiculously argued with me about the electrical power equivalency of flux density along with Citfta the entire time, falsely claiming that the Tesla, Henry and Watt hour are incongruous values such as apples and eggs?
Leave a comment:
-
Originally posted by Allen Burgess View Post@Citfta,
You're not getting anywhere with your complaints. No one listens to you. The deal Stephan struck with those two monsters was that they agree to stop commenting in exchange for renewal of my moderated status. I'm still commenting here on Energetic forum as Allen Burgess while they're down, so I won! You're just some kind of phony ass kisser.
Absolutely false as anyone that knows you would already know. As usual you are making false statements with nothing to back you up. Just like all the rest of the ridiculous claims you make. Where's the proof!
Leave a comment:
-
@Citfta,Originally posted by citfta View PostTinselkoala and Milehigh are no longer posting because you are no longer posting foolishness they need to correct. Neither of them has been banned.
I stated that I had asked that you be banned. And I DID! As far as I know you have only been put on moderated status AGAIN because of your constant badgering of the respected members there. If you have actually been banned then all I can say is HOORAY! Maybe you and Zephir can go and start you own forum so that you can both harass and badger anyone you want without repercussions.
And my user name is citfta which you have never gotten right. If you weren't so entertaining I would ask Aaron to ban you from this site also. But you need some place to demonstrate your complete lack of electronic knowledge. Do you stay up all night thinking of ways to mix up electronic terms?
You're not getting anywhere with your complaints. No one listens to you. The deal Stephan struck with those two monsters was that they agree to stop commenting in exchange for renewal of my moderated status. I'm still commenting here on Energetic forum as Allen Burgess while they're down, so I won! You're just some kind of phony ass kisser.
Leave a comment:
-
Tinselkoala and Milehigh are no longer posting because you are no longer posting foolishness they need to correct. Neither of them has been banned.Originally posted by Allen Burgess View Post@citfa,
You're a fraud! You said Teslas and Henries were like apples and eggs. How come Tinselkoala and Milehigh are no longer posting? You stated that you were getting me permanently banned from the Overunity site. Drop dead you stinking crank!
I stated that I had asked that you be banned. And I DID! As far as I know you have only been put on moderated status AGAIN because of your constant badgering of the respected members there. If you have actually been banned then all I can say is HOORAY! Maybe you and Zephir can go and start you own forum so that you can both harass and badger anyone you want without repercussions.
And my user name is citfta which you have never gotten right. If you weren't so entertaining I would ask Aaron to ban you from this site also. But you need some place to demonstrate your complete lack of electronic knowledge. Do you stay up all night thinking of ways to mix up electronic terms?
Leave a comment:
-
Units confusion
The tesla is the unit of flux density and in SI base units is webers per square meter, abbreviation (Wb/m^2). The henry is the unit for inductance and in SI base units is webers per ampere, abbreviation (Wb/A). Clearly the unit henry is not the same as the unit tesla.Originally posted by Allen Burgess View Post@citfa,
You're a fraud! You said Teslas and Henries were like apples and eggs. How come Tinselkoala and Milehigh are no longer posting? You stated that you were getting me permanently banned from the Overunity site. Drop dead you stinking crank!
The A in the denominator of (Wb/A) is the abbreviation for amperes not used as a symbol for area in this context. I can only guess that is where Allen's confusion about equivalency arises.
Apples and eggs. I like that. Been trying to think of an appropriate analogy.
bi
Leave a comment:
-
@citfa,Originally posted by citfta View PostThat is exactly what this thread is for. To post objections and discussions about projects or ideas on this forum without disrupting the original thread. Vent away. I have been too busy lately to waste any more time trying to correct all the errors Allen keeps posting. He is either very lacking in the basic math fundamentals or is deliberately trying to provoke arguments. My own personal opinion is the later.
BM is just another lost cause. No matter how carefully you show him his heroes are wrong he will continue to worship at their feet. He has no technical knowledge of his own so he will follow whatever strikes him as being worth following no matter how ridiculous.
Later,
Carroll
You're a fraud! You said Teslas and Henries were like apples and eggs. How come Tinselkoala and Milehigh are no longer posting? You stated that you were getting me permanently banned from the Overunity site. Drop dead you stinking crank!Last edited by Allen Burgess; 04-29-2017, 12:04 PM.
Leave a comment:
-
That is exactly what this thread is for. To post objections and discussions about projects or ideas on this forum without disrupting the original thread. Vent away. I have been too busy lately to waste any more time trying to correct all the errors Allen keeps posting. He is either very lacking in the basic math fundamentals or is deliberately trying to provoke arguments. My own personal opinion is the later.
BM is just another lost cause. No matter how carefully you show him his heroes are wrong he will continue to worship at their feet. He has no technical knowledge of his own so he will follow whatever strikes him as being worth following no matter how ridiculous.
Later,
Carroll
Leave a comment:
-
Allen B
I need a place to vent. The OP and a few other members are upset because Allen and BM have dragged it into a b!tch session off-topic. I've been a frequent poster there lately countering, technically, Allen's BS. He continues to demonstrate his lack of math and science skills and basic understanding. Here is a reply of his to which I had not yet responded.
You can see where Allen highlights in bold (nH/m). He calls it a factor in the equation. It is not a factor. It is the units of the quanitiy. Allen is particularly confused by units.Originally posted by Allen Burgess View Post
You can see the factor in the equation below:
"The Mystery of Inductance of Lead Wire We sometimes see "inductance of lead wire" in Electrical Engineering technical books. For example, the expression below is found in a book titled "Analytical Noise Mechanism" by CQ Publishing Co. at its 120th page".
L = 2*l*(log(4*l/d)-3/4) (nH/m) (1)
where, L = inductance of lead wire (nH/m)
d = diameter of lead wire (cm)
l = length of lead wire (cm)
Thanks for the vent.
bi
Leave a comment:
-
I have...
Originally posted by bistander View PostHi all,
I will copy and post a reply I found interesting over on the Figuera open thread. Since it would seem to apply to much more than that particular device, and I'd like to see further discussion which might be off topic over there, here it is:
Anybody have any experience doing this?
Regards,
bi
Hello Bistander,
By the way...please update-refresh my post, as I have rectified a couple of things there...thanks.
I have done that...with my Repulsion Field Generator by retro-feeding its prime mover: an Asymmetrical small motor I built just for this design...Five Poles.
In an Asymmetric Motor is much easier to do it, since we could loop one Gate (Output on Motor, used as Input) connected to Output Coils from Generator, while the other one (Normal Input) being fed by PSU.
And of course, PSU is the starting supply, or "bait", where you need to reach the proper RPM's on rotor, to generate the required output to do that.
It takes lot of testing where gradually decreasing power on PSU until it is noticed speed (RPM's) does not decay...but that is not all...there must be a small increase when you do that...which means PSU is becoming a load, a drag on motor, instead of a feeding to a higher speed.
Many different size of cores and coils #turns/gauge configurations are involved in this testing until getting the right output.
And what am referring on that post, is basically about this Transfer Switch Losses. related to Figuera Generator operated with resistors versus Part G.
Hope it explain my post...as I wish many more members start joining in -hopefully with experience on this subject, as you wrote above- and not just to theorize or else ..good idea.
Regards
UfopoliticsLast edited by Ufopolitics; 12-21-2016, 07:51 PM.
Leave a comment:
-
Looping your OU machine
Hi all,
I will copy and post a reply I found interesting over on the Figuera open thread. Since it would seem to apply to much more than that particular device, and I'd like to see further discussion which might be off topic over there, here it is:
Anybody have any experience doing this?Originally posted by Ufopolitics View Post
The ONLY THING that you are correct on above post...is that you would do all this...while you are sleeping...resuming:Originally posted by seaad View PostGive me an electrically operated "black box" using 100W input (DC) and delivering 300W (AC-DC??) from its output.
I can loop that unit and make it self going without any G-part while i'm sleeping!
The hard thing is; not feed it with more than 100W so it not explodes. / Arne
Only in Your Dreams...
Do you really think it is that "easy"??!!
While sleeping you can do it?
Really Ant?
You are also, so full of BS...I see it coming off your ears...
There are something called "Transfer Switching Losses", whenever you attempt to make an OU device self sustained from its own output.
And it relies exactly on the Ratio of Scaled Up Input/Output over Time. And so, just in milliseconds it takes without power input, is enough to decay beyond recuperation to make it to self loop.
And so, unless you have a Built-In within own System, Pre-Stored Energy Component over time, based on whether Magnetic Fields or Capacitance, which sustains even for those milliseconds...it will not work, since resistors "store" all that power into ATMOSPHERIC HEAT ...which is lost in the air, and so can not be recuperated back to be "reused"...unless you could do that...maybe also while you are sleeping...meaning "dreaming"...
Part G Stores that required extra energy within its own Core Magnetic Field, which is "Reusable within own system" making this Transfer Switching possible.
It takes several testing cutting power off then measuring System Decay over Time with many different Second-Secondaries responses options... to achieve the right and robust transfer spot on.
So, not that simple little ANT.
Another burst of Stupidity at max expression...
No intelligent life on this Planet...Beam me Up Scotty...am done here.


Ufopolitics
Regards,
bi
Leave a comment:
-
hi all. auto repair shops that machine brake rotors and drums have piles of iron filings. good source of usually free samples.
apologies for interjecting this torrid torroid discussion,but after reading some mainstream wisdom on the topic of commercial battery desulphators, i think the reason i haven't had success with restoring lead acid batteries is because individual collapsing field spikes are just too brief. i think cap dumping is an essential addition to a medium current joule thief circuit, in order to succeed.
pic 1 is a joule thief concept that sends charging pulses back to the source,the charge battery with a trickle charger hooked up.the plan is to charge the cap up to say 50 volts,then close both switches near simultaneously,the cap and battery equalize,maybe with a short ring down.switches open and the blocking oscillator resumes for say 98% of each cycle. the other 2% the switches are on.
so i'm open to any suggestions as to how to switch between oscillate and dump.
is there a fairly simple way to stop the transistor from turning on during the dump cycle,as obviously it would short the cap,when the dump switch is closed. just after that close the dump switch, open the dump switch,then resume oscillations for the set period.
im thinking maybe mechanical switching or relay contacts might survive as the dump goes through the primary winding,the small delay in current buildup might afford some protection to points or contacts on closing and current drops to zero by the time the points or contacts open,maybe with the addition of a condensor.but also considering scr's, solid state relays,flip-flop circuitry, a 741 chip,opto isolators or using a modified computer fan or something.
*looks like a 200uf flash cap goes from 13.5 to 50v in about .8 of a second.a relay might do it.just need to energise the relay coil with 2% duty cycle every .8 sec.
** ok, pic 3 runs,but backwards to how i intended.the relay has about a 98% duty cycle.so i just had to swap n.o. with n.c. and it does the job.i guess there could be losses if the relay contacts bounce or ark. i should devise a way to monitor or measure the pulses.
cheers.Last edited by voltan; 12-17-2016, 07:13 AM.
Leave a comment:
-
A TPU is another of those so called free energy devices. As far as I have been able to determine no one has successfully replicated it. Below is a link to a whole section devoted to the study and replications of the device.
TPU replications
I think TPU stands for Toroidal Power Unit.
Leave a comment:

Leave a comment: