Open discussion for projects on this forum.

[DavidE]

dR_Green

There are no infinite truths. Unless you are talking about such trivial things as the time according to a clock in different time zones, there is only one truth.

I have no attachment to any outcome. Hence I said "I'm not searching for other sources" - get it? I am in no way attached to any outcome.

You are the one who is upset that I'm not attached to any outcome, which you stated through accusing me of having my own agenda. You want me to be searching for "ambient energy", then you would listen to what I have to say. Then I could tell you any old rubbish I wanted and you would lap it up without question.

Perhaps I am the fool for being aware of this and yet choosing not to use it against you to trick you?

If I was attached to an outcome then I would have an agenda. Not being attached to any outcome, I am free to consider all that makes sense. I am happy to take what comes along.

You, on the other hand, who already knows what you want to see, are completely blind to the truth because you already "know" what you're looking for. What happens when you don't find it?

It seems apparent that you simply want to distract people from rational thinking with poppycock. A real explanation is given, and you immediately post some rubbish that's intended to impress the beginners or ignorant.

Idiots on youtube who have absolutely no idea of anything are disinformants and are doing more harm than you could possibly imagine, perhaps. What amazes me is that you don't seem to care whether or not any of it is based on reality. All that you care about is if it sounds impressive. Are there any big or impressive words used. If YES, then you're onboard. If NO, then you are simply not interested.

Apparently you just don't get the point I've been trying to get across and are more interested in arguing about it and defending absolute trash that has no relation to reality. There's nothing more I can say.

Generally for me forums are for launching ideas, thoughts, possibilities... not debating personalities. But based on your posting record, you act as if there is only one truth and you spam it everywhere.

When you were five I bet you had a strong perspective. When you were eleven a new perspective, on and on. Each time what you believed (or you knew) was the truth at that space/time intersection. You didn't intend on buying into the illusion of the day, you did not realize the danger of acting as if your view, was the only view. Perspectives evolve, their is no absolute truth. Something speculatively commands the absolutes but it certainly isn't you or me.

It doesn't really matter what you think you are, it only matters how people observe your actions.

What is frustrating for me is your ceaseless spamming of all things Tesla. All other inventors, and experimenters in your eyes are idiots. So much for an open mind.

The source of all power is not through any inventor, it is through Mother Nature and the creation force, that is the source of all energetic building blocks.

If we can't agree on that, let's just agree to disagree.

[dR-Green]

You can sleep safe and sound, knowing youtube scholars are around.

Trust in Me (English)- Jungle Book - YouTube

[citfta]

Hi, I hope Im not intruding into a where I should not. Several years ago, I was working on a outrunner generator. I had set up 3 phase coil shorting through mechanical brushes.


Since it was a 4 pole motor, I used 4 shorting contacts per rotation.

The results were bright plasma arcs from the brushes


and quite high spikes from the shorting.


So, I thought of a way to catch the spikes into caps and then once per revolution, to isolate the caps out of the circuit, and dump them in series, thus boosting the voltage 3 X.



I never did finish and test the cap switching from circuit system, but if it helps anyone with ideas, then here it is.

Hi Ken,

That is a nice way of coil shorting and I like the commutator of your later post also. That commutator may give artv some ideas.

All technical ideas and projects are welcome in this thread. It is primarily for technical discussions although sometimes it gets into of why people want to believe in certain ideas and ignore others. And those discussions are OK also as long as they don't get personal. I enjoy discussions based on the technical reasons for why we should believe one thing instead of another.

Thanks for your input.

Carroll

[kenssurplus]

cap switching commutator

Oh, here is the cap isolation and series switching commutator I built but never really tested. This build was not very sturdy, and would have taken a lot to stabilize the contact towers.

[dR-Green]

dR-Green



Pretty interesting and revealing post.

Why is it not enough to just state what you see? Give up attachment to outcome in favor of what might be novel and new. Otherwise YOU set up exchanges that suggest only one end point, rather than discovering a new path.

Its like your chapter and verse regarding Tesla, and all other inventors you consider disinformation.

You act like words only have one meaning, and that only you and Tesla are privy to the truth. Newsflash - there are infinite truths. There are infinite ways to any end point.

It would be much easier to hear your perspectives if they were not so colored with what you consider absolutes.

"The largest body of innovations yet exist in the counter-intuitive."

There are no infinite truths. Unless you are talking about such trivial things as the time according to a clock in different time zones, there is only one truth.

I have no attachment to any outcome. Hence I said "I'm not searching for other sources" - get it? I am in no way attached to any outcome.

You are the one who is upset that I'm not attached to any outcome, which you stated through accusing me of having my own agenda. You want me to be searching for "ambient energy", then you would listen to what I have to say. Then I could tell you any old rubbish I wanted and you would lap it up without question.

Perhaps I am the fool for being aware of this and yet choosing not to use it against you to trick you?

If I was attached to an outcome then I would have an agenda. Not being attached to any outcome, I am free to consider all that makes sense. I am happy to take what comes along.

You, on the other hand, who already knows what you want to see, are completely blind to the truth because you already "know" what you're looking for. What happens when you don't find it?

It seems apparent that you simply want to distract people from rational thinking with poppycock. A real explanation is given, and you immediately post some rubbish that's intended to impress the beginners or ignorant.

Idiots on youtube who have absolutely no idea of anything are disinformants and are doing more harm than you could possibly imagine, perhaps. What amazes me is that you don't seem to care whether or not any of it is based on reality. All that you care about is if it sounds impressive. Are there any big or impressive words used. If YES, then you're onboard. If NO, then you are simply not interested.

Apparently you just don't get the point I've been trying to get across and are more interested in arguing about it and defending absolute trash that has no relation to reality. There's nothing more I can say.

I suppose those people would go out to explore looking for an unknown area and refuse to look at any maps of the known area. So how are they going to know when they find an unknown area?

[kenssurplus]

coil shorting and cap switching and dumping

Hi, I hope Im not intruding into a where I should not. Several years ago, I was working on a outrunner generator. I had set up 3 phase coil shorting through mechanical brushes.


Since it was a 4 pole motor, I used 4 shorting contacts per rotation.

The results were bright plasma arcs from the brushes


and quite high spikes from the shorting.


So, I thought of a way to catch the spikes into caps and then once per revolution, to isolate the caps out of the circuit, and dump them in series, thus boosting the voltage 3 X.



I never did finish and test the cap switching from circuit system, but if it helps anyone with ideas, then here it is.

[Matthew Jones]

Hi Matt.

Let me see if I understand correctly what you are suggesting. I don't have time right now to draw it up but will later if you think I need to. You are going to have a power source like a battery connected to a motor or other load. And the return is going to charge a cap. Similar to the way we use the third battery in the 3BGS. Then on the next cycle we would connect that first cap in series with our battery and run the motor on the higher voltage and the return this time goes to another cap to charge it to an even higher voltage. Then on the next cycle we use the second cap as a series voltage source and charge the first cap back up again to an even higher voltage. Did I get that right? And no I have not thought of trying that. You may remember I told you before I am not a very good original thinker but if you give me the idea I can usually figure out how to make it work. I can see how this idea could certainly have the potential to increase the use of the power you have. Like you said you have to conserve power in order to amplify it. I need to sit down and try to come up with a way to do this. It would be easy to use relays to test the idea but in the long run they wouldn't last long. So solid state would be best. Or a commutator might work pretty good too.

Thanks for the idea. Have you tried it yet?

Take care my friend.
Carroll

Remember there is a lot more to the process than just filling the cap. The cap will equalize quick so the power will only flow hard for a fraction of the the time based on the caps capacity. So you have to make it flow.

Battery (Source), Motor, Boost, 3 caps in serial (Charged to 3x source voltage).
Then turn the motor off, Parallel the caps together, then serial or parallel to the source. And swing it from side to side.

Amplification!! Conservation..

Matt

[DavidE]

dR-Green

It's a curious phenomenon.

If you tell someone something that they already happen to believe, they will accept your words without question.

If you tell them something that is contrary to what they believe, they will argue against you and resist your words.

Reality is irrelevant in either case, it depends entirely on what the person believes to begin with.

This applies in general, but I find it particularly ironic when the most guilty are the ones who claim to be searching for the truth. As if you are the one who is trying to tell them lies.

Pretty interesting and revealing post.

Why is it not enough to just state what you see? Give up attachment to outcome in favor of what might be novel and new. Otherwise YOU set up exchanges that suggest only one end point, rather than discovering a new path.

Its like your chapter and verse regarding Tesla, and all other inventors you consider disinformation.

You act like words only have one meaning, and that only you and Tesla are privy to the truth. Newsflash - there are infinite truths. There are infinite ways to any end point.

It would be much easier to hear your perspectives if they were not so colored with what you consider absolutes.

"The largest body of innovations yet exist in the counter-intuitive."

[erfinder]

It's a curious phenomenon.

If you tell someone something that they already happen to believe, they will accept your words without question.

If you tell them something that is contrary to what they believe, they will argue against you and resist your words.

Reality is irrelevant in either case, it depends entirely on what the person believes to begin with.

This applies in general, but I find it particularly ironic when the most guilty are the ones who claim to be searching for the truth. As if you are the one who is trying to tell them lies.

How many reading those quotes from Tesla concerning impedance are really considering whats being suggested by the author? Nodes? Really? Text books have us referring to impedance in a different manner, both are correct, however, that which is being suggested by Tesla we don't generally find in the literature.....why?

[erfinder]

So lets talk about how to amplify power, really amplify it. Lets talk about how to emulate a ground for the sole purpose of catching power, and routing it back to the front end.
Here is how it would work out. You have a load capable of power up to 150 vdc at 10 amp. Maybe a motor, everyone likes motors. Because they are capable.
So you feed 20 vdc @ 1.5 amp per second into the motor and it outputs 15 volt at 1 amp to ground, or in this case to ground emulation. Ground emulation being a set of caps that can hold around 150 +- vdc at 1500 joules, maybe 150k micro farad..... And by the way they need to be ZEROED OUT every second. From that cap we then discharge in time with input pulse and in serial to the original input power. So now we have a situation in which the serial or parallel power with starting power adds up to the full potential of our load. So now..

20 vdc at 1.5 amp on the first round
35 vdc at 2.5 amp on the second round
50 vdc at 3.5 amp....ect...ect...ect.

You see how that work to amplify the power we put in.

I can almost see clearly how every device talked about in history added up to that and that alone. How small the input would need to be would depend on the efficiency of the ground emulation. Would depend on how much accumulated energy accountably stayed in the system and what its actual source ended up being, IE the input or the environment.

True amplification is true conservation. And I am not talking to Carroll alone but all I have to say is, You haven't tried this yet?

Matt

Cascading.... Who is paying attention?

[erfinder]

I totally agree with you, what I am suggesting is that the reason for this efficiency is the transformer action that powers the rotor.

Is it free energy that is powering the rotor? It depends on your point of view, we did pay for it by putting the original current in the motor, so in that sense it is not free, but as work is done both by the current in the field coils and the current in the rotor we do have twice the working current for one input. I believe this transformer action to be very important as both the input and the output of a transformer is doing magnetic work.

We should keep in mind that transformer action is not limited to the magnetic sphere of influence....if there is even such a thing....

Is it possible that all that we hold true concerning magnetism may be flawed...

[mbrownn]

I've worked with induction motors of the 1 to 100 kW size for the past few decades. My experience is that they are very efficient to the tune of nominally 85% at rated load and speed and for very large regions of the load-speed operational map. Within a percent or so, this efficiency does not change when driven from an inverter (PWM) compared to the mains connected operation. You can find NEMA rated efficiency figures for induction motors on the sales literature and web sites of the suppliers of these motors. Those figures support the high efficiency and are verifiable.

Sorry to take your comments out of context but the source is linked and close by. Just trying to keep the post short.

bi

I totally agree with you, what I am suggesting is that the reason for this efficiency is the transformer action that powers the rotor.

Is it free energy that is powering the rotor? It depends on your point of view, we did pay for it by putting the original current in the motor, so in that sense it is not free, but as work is done both by the current in the field coils and the current in the rotor we do have twice the working current for one input. I believe this transformer action to be very important as both the input and the output of a transformer is doing magnetic work.

[citfta]

Hi art,

Yes you can use transistors to switch from one bank to another. I am not sure what switch you were trying to use so can't tell what you were having a problem with. If I were going to use transistors I would use mosfets which can be controlled by mosfet driver chips. Mosfets have a very low resistance when turned all the way on so they make good switches. I have a circuit somewhere that Matt Jones designed using 4 mosfets in parallel and driven by one driver chip. I have used this circuit several times and it works without any of the mosfets getting even warm. You would need at least one of these circuits for each bank of capacitors. If you wanted to switch both the charging and discharging of the caps you would need two for each cap bank. If you think you want to go to the trouble to build all the electronics involved with this circuit I can post it for you. Of you can probably find it somewhere in the Use for the Tesla Switch thread but that could take a while.

Later,
Carroll

Hi all, I wasted 3 days trying to get this switch to work.
Hi Carroll ,will the transistor make switching in sequence , with multiple banks?
I'm loading cap banks and want to discharge them in order to keep the rotation.
I need a switch that can connect one bank after the other.
artv

[citfta]

Hi Matt.

Let me see if I understand correctly what you are suggesting. I don't have time right now to draw it up but will later if you think I need to. You are going to have a power source like a battery connected to a motor or other load. And the return is going to charge a cap. Similar to the way we use the third battery in the 3BGS. Then on the next cycle we would connect that first cap in series with our battery and run the motor on the higher voltage and the return this time goes to another cap to charge it to an even higher voltage. Then on the next cycle we use the second cap as a series voltage source and charge the first cap back up again to an even higher voltage. Did I get that right? And no I have not thought of trying that. You may remember I told you before I am not a very good original thinker but if you give me the idea I can usually figure out how to make it work. I can see how this idea could certainly have the potential to increase the use of the power you have. Like you said you have to conserve power in order to amplify it. I need to sit down and try to come up with a way to do this. It would be easy to use relays to test the idea but in the long run they wouldn't last long. So solid state would be best. Or a commutator might work pretty good too.

Thanks for the idea. Have you tried it yet?

Take care my friend.
Carroll

[Matthew Jones]

....
Basically all an amplifier does is amplify a signal NOT power. There is a major difference between the two. As far as I know there is NO way to amplify power. That is what a lot of us looking for OU would love to have. I have seen some interesting results where extra power seemed to be coming from somewhere, but I have never seen anything that would be considered an amplification of power. Of course we can use leverage to increase torque or speed but that is not an increase in power.......
Respectfully,
Carroll

So lets talk about how to amplify power, really amplify it. Lets talk about how to emulate a ground for the sole purpose of catching power, and routing it back to the front end.
Here is how it would work out. You have a load capable of power up to 150 vdc at 10 amp. Maybe a motor, everyone likes motors. Because they are capable.
So you feed 20 vdc @ 1.5 amp per second into the motor and it outputs 15 volt at 1 amp to ground, or in this case to ground emulation. Ground emulation being a set of caps that can hold around 150 +- vdc at 1500 joules, maybe 150k micro farad..... And by the way they need to be ZEROED OUT every second. From that cap we then discharge in time with input pulse and in serial to the original input power. So now we have a situation in which the serial or parallel power with starting power adds up to the full potential of our load. So now..

20 vdc at 1.5 amp on the first round
35 vdc at 2.5 amp on the second round
50 vdc at 3.5 amp....ect...ect...ect.

You see how that work to amplify the power we put in.

I can almost see clearly how every device talked about in history added up to that and that alone. How small the input would need to be would depend on the efficiency of the ground emulation. Would depend on how much accumulated energy accountably stayed in the system and what its actual source ended up being, IE the input or the environment.

True amplification is true conservation. And I am not talking to Carroll alone but all I have to say is, You haven't tried this yet?

Matt