Does The Load Consume The Energy?

sonnet

Re: Does The Load Consume The Energy?
« Reply #125,  »
Quote from jbignes5 on October 14th, 2017, 05:54 PM
But it says 1/10 wavelength. But yeah that is how the signal is broadcasted around the loop. Like a signal traveling down the loop. In this case it is in resonance and there is a standing wave instead of it going around the loop.
If I have got this wrong apologies but goto the webpage to see the 1/4 loop

jbignes5

Re: Does The Load Consume The Energy?
« Reply #126,  »Last edited
 I just read Steinmetz on this subject and this is what he has to say:

  "We find the same thing in all theories, the chemical, the thermodynamic, etc. It simply means that our present formulations of the ionic theory, of the electromagnetic wave theory, and of all other theories are very far from final correctness, but are at best only very crude conceptions of the nature of things, which will have to be modified again and again with our increasing knowledge before we can expect to reach a moderately rational conception of nature's laws and phenomena, if we ever arrive there."

 How are we to advance if we do not challenge the "Laws" and devise a better understanding of the nature of space itself. It turns out Steinmetz was already talking about the "ether" and found staggering contradictions to most of the accepted theories including the electron.

 If we stick to the electron and other logical fallacies then it leads to dead ends and contradictions. We must at some point break away and formulate a new understanding of the aether and what that is. Once we know that the electron is nothing but a surface of layers and double layers then we can devise ways to take advantage of this new understanding and not the old one which has thrown away the baby with the bathwater so to speak.

 Reference: General electric review  Vol. XV., No. 1  January 1912

onepower

Re: Does The Load Consume The Energy?
« Reply #127,  »
jbignes
Quote
If we stick to the electron and other logical fallacies then it leads to dead ends and contradictions. We must at some point break away and formulate a new understanding of the aether and what that is.
So your suggesting we abandon something we know works at the bench and start wildly speculating about something very much unproven?. I see no contradictions and Aether theory falls right in line with our conception of the electron. Which contradictions are you speaking of?.

~Russ

Re: Does The Load Consume The Energy?
« Reply #128,  »Last edited
Just a seguestaion

We all have our own way of looking it this problem

For me I have to look around and and see what nature has to say about it.

Then I look around at what theories others have about it.

Then I ask my self where should I start so I don't have to waist so much time doing tests thst others habe proven for us.

Then I start thinking what is wrong and what I'd like to re test.

Then I can have my own view point.

One thing is true. We need to at least use other well know theory's to just make sence of what we are trying to tell each other.

As we can't help each other if we can't explain our self's in a way that makes sence. So we use what is know to help us explain it. So dont for get that. Its just to help guide other to learn what it really is.

Personialy I think that everyone here has been a major factor to my own thinking. 

And I'm supper great full for all of you.

So heres what I'm asking.

Let's all express this the way we see it. Then be verry open to others views. Then try to go in the right derection. Debeates are needed. I just don't want some one to take it to far. None of us know what it is deep down bottom of it all..  So its cool to see it differently.  So many   ways to skin a cat!!!

Is it a cloud or is it rings. I don't care. All I know is that it is something and past physics shows somthing. (Again I like to keep things simple for now)

Any hoo. Let's just keep sharing what we know and keep being open to others.

Don't get stuck on the little things.

Also. "The bench of truth" will help guide us. For it is the way... 

Much love all. Let's keep going. We can get there I know we can.

~Russ


jbignes5

Re: Does The Load Consume The Energy?
« Reply #129,  »

 I gave the reference Onepower, Steinmetz said that there are logical errors in the current Theories. These errors cause us to chase non entities like in the case of Russ an electron hitting another. Or the system we know today as our grid. Transients can be powerful given the right circumstances. Those circumstances cause outages and strange problems like the runaway disconnection issue with grid systems. Simply because the theories have left something out. Steinmetz was brought in to fix those errors and the only way he could was to learn from Tesla's examples.
 I am only pointing out my take on this and trying to give examples of others who were very respected in their day. I'm not saying that the concepts of the current theories are wrong but the way it happens for real has been misunderstood and further theories base themselves on those errors in the theories.
 The quote from Steinmetz stands. He knew more about our theories at that time then I could ever profess.

 Now am I 100% right.. I highly doubt it but if we went wrong in our theories even in little ways then it would throw off any further advances from then on.

 I think the real problem is that the current science scene is so divided into little groups that walls are built up between them. With those walls separating the different sciences we have diverged from the truth of the whole. We will never be able to reconcile this till we find out where we went in error and express that. You might not be able to see it yet. That is no problem. But flat out rejecting rebuking is like repeatedly bashing your head into a wall over and over with your eyes shut tight.

Matt Watts

Re: Does The Load Consume The Energy?
« Reply #130,  »Last edited
Build it first, explain it later.


Russ has given you all some concepts you can put to the test on your bench.  Find out for yourself if they lead you someplace you have never been before.  Or...

You can wait for someone else to figure it out and balk at their results without ever experiencing it for yourself.

~Russ

Re: Does The Load Consume The Energy?
« Reply #131,  »Last edited
Its OK to start with an idea. But I would not call it a theory till it products your bench test.

And yes the walls are what what I'm trying to avoid.

It seemed to me we have about 6 people or so here on this thred who has the knolage  and skills to get us where we want to be.

I want to keep the amazing knolage flowing. Its magical.  And I'm loving it.

We have a forums here we remove as much BS and people who don't really want to contribute. And I can see its paying off.

Good speed.

Keep the open mined.

~Russ
Re: Does The Load Consume The Energy?
« Reply #132,  »Last edited
Oh by the way. Have we even answered weather or not the load consumes the energy? 

What I have learned on the bench is that in the right conditions we can genarate a magnetic feild with vertialy no loses. The energy is shuffled but not lost.

If we split the positive....

And also that in superconducting condistion we can do the same with no losses (but I haven't verified this on my bench)

And also a light bulb will give off photons and still not lose any energy. But its almost impossible to get any "full" transfer through a magnetic feild

(I still need to verify the no loss with light but a carbon resistor works fine on the bench) 

Also I did a huge 14ohm load with the big cap bank and it also seemed all well. But need to calaualte the voltages still. But it heated up 60-80 degrees C

http://open-source-energy.org/?topic=2679.msg46279#msg46279


~Russ
Re: Does The Load Consume The Energy?
« Reply #133,  »Last edited
If we need a reference Of definitions.  This seems like a good one. Also note this is just to help us.  Its not the say all do all.

If there is a fundamental flaw on this page please due point it out and say why.

http://www.energygroove.net/science/atoms-electrons-photons/

We arnt out to say physics is wrong. We are out to prove nature can be included in a circuit. ;)

~Russ

sonnet

Re: Does The Load Consume The Energy?
« Reply #134,  »Last edited
Quote
Also I did a huge 14ohm load with the big cap bank and it also seemed all well. But need to calaualte the voltages still. But it heated up 60-80 degrees C
Hi Russ, sorry but i think you no well just heating it up is not getting you any where...
you need know the joules, to get this you need to be much more controlled with your data.
  you need to heat a specific material (say water) You need to know its specific heat value.The specific heat of water is 1 calorie/gram °C = 4.186 joule/gram °C, its weight and Temperature difference.before and after difference.

Q = mcΔT  Si unit is J (joules)

Heat added = specific heat x mass x (tfinal - tinitial)

you need to then run two comparisons giving the water heater the watts as per the norms and then running the load through the capacitor circuit.
compare the joules results.
Regards
Oh and just incase your workshop is cold make sure the water is above 4 degrees at start....we dont need to worry about phase transitions i.e. the latency from ice to water.


Re: Does The Load Consume The Energy?
« Reply #135,  »Last edited
Quote from ~Russ on October 15th, 2017, 01:15 PM
If we need a reference Of definitions.  This seems like a good one. Also note this is just to help us.  Its not the say all do all.

If there is a fundamental flaw on this page please due point it out and say why.

http://www.energygroove.net/science/atoms-electrons-photons/


We arnt out to say physics is wrong. We are out to prove nature can be included in a circuit. ;)

~Russ
Thanks Russ for giving us a base line we can all reference, for me the model on this page is as I see it with one exception. but I'll go with this and try to draw attention to when I'm deviating if I have to.

I believe and Pauli recognised a case for the electron to show at times a moment of magnetism, caused by (axis spin). but this is omitted by physics by stating that although the electrons are paired and the pairing with opposite spins (orbital spin) negates the magnetism.
This was omitted because the size of the electron was not found...see my Reply #119
Just recently in science terms the swedes have supposedly captured a electron image.
The fact that the axis spin was omitted in 1929 did not mean it was false reporting. it was omitted because of a caveat
I conjecture that at times the electron would not be paired with another electron - outside of the outer valence and so would show and have axis spin giving that magnetic moment and a magnetic loop.
I would even give a very bold statement and say I believe the free electron has a massive role to play in creating the orbital power of the magnetic flux in a magnet. but don't let this statement take away the legitimacy of the other points I make here.
With reference to your base line website this either admits a single electron position outside the valence or its use of English is poor. I show the quote here and underline the wording 'it'
Quote
Electrons in the outermost valency shell are the furthest from the nucleus and therefore have the weakest attraction to it. In certain conditions the outermost valency electron is so loosely bonded to the atom, e.g., the copper atom,  that it is free to randomly wander from one atom to another. This creates free electrons. When the random movement of free electrons is controlled by an external influence, e.g., a magnet, the free electrons can be directed to form an electrical current.
I am only trying to show existing work and observations that have been ruled out not because they are incorrect but because they were and are observed and by acknowledging them they serve to complicate what scientists wanted to use from the observations at that time. I believe times are changing and soon we shall here a more unified example using the size when found of the electron.

Re: Does The Load Consume The Energy?
« Reply #136,  »
Quote
Oh by the way. Have we even answered weather or not the load consumes the energy? 

What I have learned on the bench is that in the right conditions we can generate a magnetic field with virtually no loses. The energy is shuffled but not lost
For me The load is the whole circuit (the wire is a load) and because of resistance and bad reflections losses exist. so the load has consumed the energy, but greatly reduced over time. A superconductor circuit would make for a fantastic energy circuit and I'd almost say no the load does not
consume the energy in that case.
The saving grace is the fact that we can create a (almost) free magnetic field at ambient temperature which should give us the ability to replenish losses and so negate having to use a superconductor. That is tremendous. and very humbling to think (and how dare we) that we can recycle energy using a open system. even if we don't understand the maths if we can create the cycle, like seeing the seasons we can replenish growth each cycle.

~Russ

Re: Does The Load Consume The Energy?
« Reply #137,  »
I thought this was relevant and verry helpfull


https://youtu.be/KYYWZhsgVPc

Yeah yeah. More eletrons...  But it will help us think. I think.

~Russ
Re: Does The Load Consume The Energy?
« Reply #138,  »
Quote from sonnet on October 15th, 2017, 02:02 PM
Hi Russ, sorry but i think you no well just heating it up is not getting you any where...
you need know the joules, to get this you need to be much more controlled with your data.
  you need to heat a specific material (say water) You need to know its specific heat value.The specific heat of water is 1 calorie/gram °C = 4.186 joule/gram °C, its weight and Temperature difference.before and after difference.

Q = mcΔT  Si unit is J (joules)

Heat added = specific heat x mass x (tfinal - tinitial)

you need to then run two comparisons giving the water heater the watts as per the norms and then running the load through the capacitor circuit.
compare the joules results.
Regards
Oh and just incase your workshop is cold make sure the water is above 4 degrees at start....we dont need to worry about phase transitions i.e. the latency from ice to water.
of course of course. but lets not go so extreme till we prove we need it.

lets look at this for a min.

First thing to do is start basic.

Here is the question.
1. Do we lose charge (voltage potential) due to the load? ( light, heater, carbon resistor, inductor, big short wire)
2. If all we care about is having a difference in potential (charge) and we do indeed louse it, whats the cause?
3. if we do lose charge. What loads can we make due "work" and not lose our charge?
4. Is EM radiation (photons) needed to "louse" our charge? if not, what and how do we louse our charge?
5. is it possible to gain charge, if so what are those points? ( like the transient in the BEMF)

we lose our charge if we have one cap.... this is a bad test device.

we only lose half our charge if we use 2 caps and split the positive.

so we start there.

Test one, get a base line. use 2 caps, see what they do with a dead short. and an inductor ( one cycle of transfer) ( leakage voltage)

now use a light, a heater element, carbon resistor, Etc.

see if the final charge is the same, if not why. ( will need to do some time constant testing as well)

my guess is that if my thinking is correct. Even the light and heater will not have any difference in potential than a non photon emitting ( non EM) load.

the bigger we scale the test up, the eazer it will be to check theses things.

at that massive scale ( 5kJ) i should be able to very eazly tell if we have a delta of 80Deg C ( on a 14 ohm heater) vs an inductor. with almost no heat... and the charges are the same... there is no or virtually no loss due to the photon emitting. ( something else at that point)

if in deed this idea is correct. if we get numbers showing that the light or heater dose make it drop in charge faster... well that's it. no need to go further in testing. little heat or alot... in that test we rule out that the load dose not indeed consume our energy. and we might in fact discover that the resistance is the only factor to our charge balancing...

I'm not out to break thermal dynamics or something... i'm out find what load that can do work. and not consume our energy!

Please tell me where i can improve or change this test.

if some one wants to wright an SOP go for it...

Thanks!!

~Russ
Re: Does The Load Consume The Energy?
« Reply #139,  »
Quote from sonnet on October 15th, 2017, 03:39 PM
For me The load is the whole circuit (the wire is a load) and because of resistance and bad reflections losses exist. so the load has consumed the energy, but greatly reduced over time. A superconductor circuit would make for a fantastic energy circuit and I'd almost say no the load does not
consume the energy in that case.
The saving grace is the fact that we can create a (almost) free magnetic field at ambient temperature which should give us the ability to replenish losses and so negate having to use a superconductor. That is tremendous. and very humbling to think (and how dare we) that we can recycle energy using a open system. even if we don't understand the maths if we can create the cycle, like seeing the seasons we can replenish growth each cycle.
totally my attitude. I love the way you worded this.

~Russ

Matt Watts