magnetic current
« Reply #50,  »
here is a nice little experiment.
Steinmetz said it takes a voltage (drop) to build up a magnetic field, but it takes no energy to maintain it.

first I thought he was wrong. but... I remembered some strange effects. for instance:

so lets do this the other way around.

what if we take a strong (field flux lines concentrated near to the magnet) neodymium bar magnet.
we wind a coil with insulated wire around it (in the magnetic field) and we solder the beginning and ending together. making it a closed loop.

I say if we want to take the magnet out(if it is loosly wound) we would expierence a drag.

second thing is, if we take the magnet out and place it away, the coil will have a magnetic field.

third, of we open up the closed loop magnetic field disappears.

If all of this is true, what does this say about the dielectric field of the coil? If the loop is openend and the magnetic field collapses, there should be a bemf producing a voltage (dielectric field).

pretty simple experiment.
bmmf bemf
« Reply #51,  »
If a high voltage spike can "punch through" 
than maybe the combination with a high current spike
can draw in the energy through the punched hole.

a high voltage spike in a magnetic field.

I've seen videos of the interaction of sparks inside magneyic fields. very interesting.

could it be this simple, to create a hole(voltage spike), with a vacuum(magnetic field), and let this vacuum be filled through the hole?
Re: idea's
« Reply #52,  »
adding inductance should lower the resonant frequency of a bifilarcoil. but i never tested it.
maybe... it doesnt.
the reversed hall effect would demand more capacitance for more inductance...
back magneto motive enrgy from bifilar shortcut
« Reply #53,  »
If we energize a bifilar coil, a dielectric field build up in between its windings due to the voltage difference between them.
A collapsing dielectric field produces a back magneto motive force. (Steinmetz)
So, it we shortcut the bifilar coil, the potential difference is instantly gone. This collapses the dielectric field resulting in a Bmmf.
If this energy cant go anywhere (cant flow due to disconnect wires), it must tranform into another form.

the bifilar pancake coil, is a series connected 2 winding coil. between the windings is a dielectric field, if we shortcut the beginning and ending, we have 2 spirals, if the dielectric field then collapses, the bmmf produces a current inside the windings that now are closed looped. This means the dielectric field than collapses produces a spiraling magnetic vortex.

So if we shortcut a dielectric charged bifilar coil, we transform the dielectric field into a magnetic field.

If we open up the coil again the magnetic field collapses again.

We can make use of that. If we reinforce the energized bifilar coil with ferrite paste, it could focus the magnetic field produced from the bmmf of the dielectic field collapse.

PLus, and this is a big plus. we can use a second parallel coil next to it, and capture the collapsing magnetic field, that produces a bemf. A voltage.

pulse a ferrite enhanced bifilar coil. if pulsed in its resonant frequency, the dielectric field should be strongest.
when the coil is charged, we disconnect and shortcut it.
The dielectric field collapses, and transfromes into a magnetic field, helped by the ferrite.
A parallel second bifilar coil is captured inside the magnetic field.
we openup the first coil again. the magnetic field collapses, produces a b emf, which is captured by the second parallel coil.

Now I'm not sure about the next part, but it seems the voltage spikes of a bemf are much higher in voltage then what you put in. The duration is short, but energetic.

If those energetic pulses are in the resonant frequency of the parallel second coil you might end up with a massive huge big resonant voltage rise.

All this is maybe a bit far out. but needed to understand the process.

I have always wondered why a 2200uF loaded with 12V can produce a short 70V pulse. Because thats what i use with my IGBT pulse dirver. It shortcuts a 12V 2200uf cap into the bifilar coil, at the resonant frequency of the parallel coil. the primary is also a bifilar coil.

enough for now. Back to the longitudinal bifilar coil transmission

Re: idea's
« Reply #54,  »
a collapsing magnetic field creates a bemf
a collapsing dielectric field creates a bmmf

could we use a relais to simultaneously make both fields collapse?

charge a coil with a magnetic field
charge a capacitor with a dielectric field

the relais opens the coil loop amd simultaneously shortcuts the capacitor

the bemf plus bmmf combined giving a current plus voltage pulse.

capacitor bmmf into empty capacitor
« Reply #55,  »
when a charged capacitor is discharged in to a  empty capacitor, a lot of energy is lost.

the dielectric field when discharging produces a bmmf (back magneto motive force).

during transport of the energy of the  bmmf into the empty capacitor, the wires have a short burst of very high current producing a magnetic field. this field energy seems to be lost.

thats very interesting. It suggests again open field lines.

the best way to tranport the dielectric field from one capacitor into another would be via a inducter that can bundle/store the energy in its magnetic field, until the dielectric energy is stored/redistributed in both capacitors.
the energy can oscillate without being lost.

but we could also use these open field lines.
a bifilar pancake coil can also be seen as a capacitor. It has a much larger capacity to store the dielectric field. but its also a inductor.

so discharging a capacitor into a bifilarpancake coil can be mighty interesting.
because the "lost" energy might be the longitudinal vortex ring that can be recaptured by a collector coil.


Matt Watts

Re: idea's
« Reply #56,  »Last edited
Quote from evostars on June 30th, 2017, 07:41 AM
when a charged capacitor is discharged in to a  empty capacitor, a lot of energy is lost.
I have to speak up here Evo.  I've never liked this analogy of charge.  Didn't Steinmetz tell us that the concept of static electrical charge has brought us down the wrong road--bad form.

The transfer of electrical energy from one capacitor to another shows us something is terribly wrong.  Why?

Because a dielectric field in motion is energy.
A magnetic field in motion is energy.

What do we have when both fields are in motion?

Some superposition of two energy sources, with a net result less than the sum.  Do you see the problem?  We are told voltage alone is not energy; same with amperage.  But they are when they are in motion.

But a dielectric field trapped in a capacitor is not in motion.  It's still between two conductors where we would expect it, but clearly not going anywhere.  Ah, there's that silly term "potential energy" again.  Useless.  The entire Universe full of its Aether is also "potential energy", so why even bother with that term.  A "charged" capacitor is nothing more than a static, trapped dielectric field.  This field has been separated from its surroundings.  And yes, it has some quantity, but so what, it's not in motion and not very useful in that form.  Not until we put it into motion.

It doesn't matter whether it's a nice lady from India or a senior electrical engineer anywhere in the world, the concept they are spouting is wrong.  Again, Steinmetz made this blazingly clear.  Something does radiate away and our modern electrical engineers have no idea what it actually is or why it does this.  They can only calculate how much.  Sad to think in the year 1911, Charles Steinmetz laid the foundation all future electrical engineers could and should follow, but they don't; most don't even recognize Steinmetz' name.  I'm really starting to understand why Eric Dollard has become so bitter.  The future has thrown away the past even though the past was correct and had the right ideas.

When you have a dielectric field trapped between conductors and you connect the two conductors together, you just killed the dielectric field.  It cannot exist this way, so it leaves.  It goes and finds some other place between conductors to live.  Call this "radiate" if you want to, but it breaks the definition of a dielectric and as such the dielectric field.  I wish more people could see this.  It's not hard to understand if you get familiar with the terms used.


Re: idea's
« Reply #57,  »
hehe :D yes matt,
when I was whatching the video,
I thought that those formulas must be incorrect.

just as incorrect if you measure the inductance of a bifilar coil and calculate the resonant frequency and its way off.

Matt Watts

Re: idea's
« Reply #58,  »Last edited
Quote from evostars on June 30th, 2017, 08:47 AM
I thought that those formulas must be incorrect.
Oh, they are correct alright, I've been down that road.  What they really are is useless.  They completely ignore the two major fields at work within (and outside of) the circuit.

I want to see somebody (hopefully you Evo), short a capacitor and collect all that dielectric energy that now has to find a new home.  And when you successfully collect it, I dare anyone to try and detect the slightest amount of "heat loss" as they say must exist.


Re: idea's
« Reply #59,  »
hahahaha :D


Re: idea's
« Reply #60,  »
If I want to use a pulse of capacitor discharge
at high frequencies, it might be best to use a small capacitance so it can charge fast. but more important, use a really high voltage.
the cap might not be fully drained by the pulse discharge, but the high voltage will serve the most energy to the pulse.

low voltage high capacitance might be the wrong way to create a single pulse.
high voltage low capacitance might be better to create high frequency pulses for the capacitor discharge.

Matt Watts

Re: idea's
« Reply #61,  »Last edited
I can't say what the correct combination will be, but as long as you understand what you are doing to the dielectric field by shorting a "charged" capacitor, I think you'll be on the right track.

Also consider shorting by way of a resistor.  Ah hah, what really is a resistor?  It's not a conductor and it's not a dielectric, a semi-conductor maybe?

Look at Steinmetz's formulas involving Ohms and think about what a resistor must really be and how the dielectric field must react to it.  For a long time I knew in my gut a resistor was much more than I was told.  The most useful of all resistors are ones that happen to be long lengths of coiled wire.  In the old days they had rheostats--coils of resistive wire used as potentiometers.  That's a clue for sure.


Re: idea's
« Reply #62,  »
I never thought about resistors. I know power resistors (cement) often are coiled. some even are counter coiled to eliminate the magnetic field.

I dont know what Steinmetz has to say about resistors. do you have a quote?
I did find he states the relation to reluctance(magnetic) and elastance(dielectric) to resistance in the formulas. but what is elastance? i believe i heard eric p dollard talk about it in one of his videos.

eric p dollard said conductors are like mirrors.
so a resistor would be a bad conductor. a bad mirror. absorbing/transmuting some of the energy and reflecting the rest.

Matt Watts

Re: idea's
« Reply #63,  »
Quote from evostars on July 1st, 2017, 03:19 AM
eric p dollard said conductors are like mirrors.
I think he actually said conductors are dielectric reflectors.  So yes, mirrors.  They are objects that dielectricity can adhere to, to create lines of force.
Quote from evostars on July 1st, 2017, 03:19 AM
so a resistor would be a bad conductor. a bad mirror. absorbing/transmuting some of the energy and reflecting the rest.
Excellent analogy.  Now do you know how a laser works?  Two mirrors, one is nearly 100% perfect and the other not so perfect.  The energy is bounced back-n-forth, amplified between the mirrors until at the not so perfect mirror end, the energy escapes as a collimated beam, intense focused energy.  The kind of energy Ken Wheeler says will burn a hole in your butt.

Can you partially see why I think there is more to a resistor than we have been told?

Suppose this resistor is a coil of thin wire, what kind of a beam do you suppose we could make with it?  Magnetic?  Dielectric?  Choose your coil.


Re: idea's
« Reply #64,  »
No I dont get where you are going with this. but Im a little sick today so my focus is gone.

a resistor? as a field generator?

Matt Watts

Re: idea's
« Reply #65,  »Last edited
Let it soak for a while, then start asking yourself, "What really is a resistor and how could I use it in a way where it doesn't just waste energy?"

Also look at LCR circuits (Series & Parallel) and think about the dielectric field, where it must be and how it moves.  I still have this gut feeling a resistor is a key component in separating the dielectric field from the magnetic field.


Re: idea's
« Reply #66,  »
I just wanted to fill up the hot tub and let is soak.

you want to separate the dielectric from the magnetic? well put a bifilar coil into srf and investigate that high voltage sine wave.
I do believe its pure dielectric energy.
no magnetic component there.

its Not possible to make a ferrite transformer with this sine wave. maybe also because no current is flowing in a standing wave
ken wheeler on scaler instant actionat a distance
« Reply #67,  »

ken wheeler didnt say much but it sure is exciting.

his big hint is volts per second.

and in a reaction: instant action at a distance

and another reply:
voltage modulation by changing the conduit
stream projection.

Matt Watts

Re: idea's
« Reply #68,  »Last edited
Quote from evostars on July 3rd, 2017, 08:55 AM
his big hint is volts per second.
Those would be the ring vortexes flying by a stationary point.  This is the part I think I misunderstood about Ken's magnet research with the dielectric inertial plane.  It's not entirely a flat plane like I thought.  It's actually a stationary ring vortex, smashed very thin due to field pressure mediation.  That's where the rotation is actually coming from when Ken shows us magnets on his special ferro-fluid viewing glass.  The clue to this is his other video that you referenced with the little magnets stacked together and the viewing film reveals a helix around the magnets.

So...  To get high values of volts/sec, we need very thin ring vortexes, very close together, propagating at a high rate of speed.  The energy density in this configuration would be astronomical.  Remember the shadow, that's the blank spaces between rings, your "opposite" polarity.  Opposite in this case is nothing at all.  Whoo-Hoo, I think I'm on to something here.   :cheerleader:


Re: idea's
« Reply #69,  »
sounds like we are goimg to recreate natures mechanisms.

I also am watching dollard again. makes a lot more sense now i learned so much.

you talking about the tempic field is starting to connect. some fields travel faster (in time) then the others.

Matt Watts

Re: idea's
« Reply #70,  »
Quote from evostars on July 3rd, 2017, 01:08 PM
you talking about the tempic field is starting to connect. some fields travel faster (in time) then the others.
It's all right here Evo:

Again, our leaders in science & technology have led us down the wrong road for fear of us not needing them anymore.
Re: idea's
« Reply #71,  »
You should read this one too:
... which radiates doughnut shaped waves, which are not time functions.
Seems I met someone recently talking about this very phenomena.    :-)


Re: idea's
« Reply #72,  »
hahaha just read it!

its a caduceus coil on a hollow ferrite rod
creating vortex rings.

the bifilar coil can also be hooked up as a caduceus coil (cancelation of the magnetic field).

its very interesting indeed. but for now i want to keep focussing on the distanced coil
Re: idea's
« Reply #73,  »
the tempic field does explain the phase shifting of the resonant frequency when changing the capacitance of a bifilar coil.

Matt Watts

Re: idea's
« Reply #74,  »
Yes, phase is spin caught at a point in time.  So if the dielectric and magnetic fields can alter the tempic field, it's easy to understand where a phase change might actually come from.  The whole "defeating Lenz Law" is nothing more than a phase shift and if we can do that with these coils, well...  you know the rest.