The bistander thread

[bistander]

Again, why do it?

So you have your generator running at 1800 RPM steady at rated load on the coil. The power to turn the rotor at 1800 RPM at that load is the same whether the coil is multi-filar or single-filar when the wire size and number of turns are the same. What else needs to be said?

But you did say it here,

Originally Posted by Turion View Post
...
2. The MORE you speed up under load the LESS your coil produces as a generator coil so the perfect coil does not speed up or slow down.
...

I'm not saying you're correct, but if you believe what you wrote, why do you continue to promote "speed-up under load"? Isn't the design objective to produce more, not less?

I never said winding the coil a certain way will not cause the rotor to speed up when the coil is shorted, or loaded, compared to no-load. All I've said all along is that the phenomena is irrelevant to generator performance at load. Which has been verified by the only A vs B test I've seen (the subject video) where the A vs B test was conducted fairly. All you present is conjecture, no direct evidence (tests at load, A vs B).

I don't care. Waste your time with it. But please, don't try to convince me that it in any way substantiates your (2kw out)/(300w in) claim.

bi

[bistander]

I said

@ Bi:

I never said that the speed up under load effect or delayed lenz effect is useless. ...

I didn't say it was. I said:

... That this "speed-up under load" is inconsequential to the generator performance at load. ...

"At load", and in the context of the equipment being built here, speeds, voltage, current, etc., this "speed-up under load" is useless, IMO. Maybe other situations? So what? I suspect that the context or conditions we see here are vastly different than Mr. (or is it Dr.) Tesla envisioned.

Regards,

bi

[bistander]

What matters

The only thing which matters is demonstration/proof of your (300w in) / (2kw out) claim. All else is just gibberish.

BTW, I've had 100kw generators which I could spin by hand. A hand spin test indicates nothing about performance at load.

bi

[Pot head]

Yeah!

You tellum bistander and Bromikey!
Why am I here?
Oh yeah, to watch a fight.
I’m taking bets on myself figuring all this clutter out, but I do respect each other’s valued experience and first hand knowledge of their situations in life, maybe I will learn something yet.

[bistander]

Obvious

Because it is impossible. An electric generator is an energy conversion device. It requires more energy input (in mechanical form thru the shaft) than the energy it outputs to the load (electricity). Nothing you're doing, or anybody has done, changes that fact.

Regards,

bi

[bistander]

Help me?

And that is where you are absolutely incorrect, so I am done trying to help you.

The only thing I've asked from you is proof of your claim. The only "help" you could possibly offer which I care about is that proof. Show a generator running at an output of real power which is more than the input power. But you can not.

Regards,

bi

[bistander]

A child

A CHILD could do what you ask, but you can't. That just kills me.

Now you claim a child can demonstrate a generator which delivers 2kw of real output power while using only 300 watts of input power. Got proof of that claim?

bi

[Pot head]

[Ufopolitics]

Because it is impossible. An electric generator is an energy conversion device. It requires more energy input (in mechanical form thru the shaft) than the energy it outputs to the load (electricity). Nothing you're doing, or anybody has done, changes that fact.

Regards,

bi

Hello Bistander,

I just had to enter here to answer your post above...

It "could be" practically impossible to overcome a "Mechanical Generator", where the "Input" is based on a rotating shaft, but...

Do you ever think a non mechanical generator is possible?, like just spinning (or moving) the magnetic fields is impossible?

Do you think using Magnetism as a solely source-method to generate electricity is the "one and only" method ever?

...and not talking about chemicals, nor any heat or specific reactions. But just using magnetism to control previously accelerated particles (electrons, ions, etc) into specific geometries which could induce electricity, just as magnetic fields do?

I would just ask you to be -just a bit- more "open minded" friend. Open your mind to "possible unexplored fields of science"...


There are some out there...


Regards



Ufopolitics

[Pot head]

[bistander]

Child's play

Hey Turion,

Maybe a child shot this video.

https://youtu.be/5eXLecR17pI

[VIDEO]v=5eXLecR17pI[/VIDEO]

Regards,

bi

[Pot head]

Men, that was a fake. Although he could have been one of my students.
His build is very hazardous and never is picked up to show the wires coming through the table.

[Quantum_well]

Gen.

Hi Bistander,
some time ago you posted a link to a generator design
which appeared to be very efficient.
I think it was possibly an axial design aimed at wind energy.
I'd be most grateful if you could re-post it.

[bistander]

Axial flux genny

Hi Bistander,
some time ago you posted a link to a generator design
which appeared to be very efficient.
I think it was possibly an axial design aimed at wind energy.
I'd be most grateful if you could re-post it.

Hi, I'll see if I can recall that. I think I know what you mean. Later.

bi

[bistander]

Axial flux genny

Was it this one? It was a download so I couldn't get a link. A search for the title should show you the way.

http://www.energeticforum.com/316715-post102.html

Post #102 in this thread.

Regards,

bi