Does The Load Consume The Energy?

Matt Watts

Re: Does The Load Consume The Energy?
« Reply #75,  »Last edited
Ah ha!

Moving in the right direction here.

This time I connected a filament bulb (27 ohms cold) across the MOT secondary.  Waveform much better.  Transferred all but 18 volts of the 280.  Still have that current roll-off mid way through the transfer.  If I can get the current waveform to shoot straight up and stop, I suspect I'll get a complete transfer.  Then it will be time to add a load and see what compensation is necessary to make that work.

jbignes5

Re: Does The Load Consume The Energy?
« Reply #76,  »Last edited
Keep going. You'll get there..

 I'm still getting my setup straightened out. Got to get the test area uncluttered.. I need a special area setup away from the rest of my family to make sure they are safe when I'm testing this setup. Gonna work with batteries for now and see if i can regen a few bad ones i got.
 Anyone heard from Russ yet?

~Russ

Re: Does The Load Consume The Energy?
« Reply #77,  »
fine work in deed.

Matt have you been testing with the secondary shorted?
if its not shorted you should get results like in your first post. ( from my understanding due to a miss match indeed. Think water hammer, but with an open end...  )
if it is shorted you will get results more like your second post. ( you can get a bigger magnetic field in that secondary that will adsorb the incoming moment. and then let it transfer better as well. )

John. please try to tune in the late evenings ( real late for you) or eerily mornings ( might be best) i will start to stream and test at home. and your influence is MUCH needed.

bless you sir,

~Russ

Matt Watts

Re: Does The Load Consume The Energy?
« Reply #78,  »
Russ,

I'm thinking the secondary is tunable.  More work to do, but if my instincts are right, one should be able to dial this thing right in with pretty much any load connected.

~Russ

Re: Does The Load Consume The Energy?
« Reply #79,  »
Yes. Agreed. To a degree of course

jbignes5

Re: Does The Load Consume The Energy?
« Reply #80,  »Last edited
Ok I was worried our collaboration was gonna end on this and I am actually going to test a few things out on my end. I got a setup that should work but in the areas I need to test out with my transformer. I have collected some parts from my old wash machine and had some stuff from my early collecting days including some nice trannies like the 3055 and 2n2222 can version and the mps03 i think...have to recheck them...
 I am gonna have to see if I can get a breadboard that i can trust or just solder it all together.
 Trust me my skills at soldering is awesome but since I am shaking so much it can get messy some times. I don't have a good area to work on my end so I chose a rather large dinner table to set up shop on. Got some more stuff to lay out like my old scope. Bk precision 15mhz. It was my fathers and I inherited it after he had passed. I only have one probe so far since they are kinda costly locally. I am looking for another online.

 We might have to look into an auto impedance matcher for the load. That way it will auto tune to the load as the resistance changes from heat. I have been researching the crap out of impedance and how it works in radio. Most of it seems to be getting rid of the reflection of one part of the circuit to the other. If you can keep the impulse from inverting it will get stronger.

 Not to get much off the topic but Z told me the job was interfering with your research? Was Z BS'n me or what?
Re: Does The Load Consume The Energy?
« Reply #81,  »Last edited
 Sorry for the double post. While looking for impedance matching circuits i came across this:

Title: Tapped Capacitive Impedance Transformer

http://www.qsl.net/va3iul/Impedance_Matching/Impedance_Matching.pdf

 Check it out Russ... Is that your circuit? It's pretty far down but check out the title i put above.

~Russ

Re: Does The Load Consume The Energy?
« Reply #82,  »Last edited
I will. I spent some time today making new notes on vision's  I had. I should post the page. Will do thst shortly. I also need to look closely at matt's links to the current doubler. It seems to be verry semular to my visions. I will be live  here in a sec too. (Now 8:38pm)   ~Russ

Matt Watts

Re: Does The Load Consume The Energy?
« Reply #83,  »Last edited
BOLD STATEMENTS

The load does not consume the energy passing through it and can be captured at the opposite end to be used again.

The load releases some internally stored energy in proportion to the amount of energy flowing through it.  This "new" energy exists within the load itself.  It isn't created, instead it is released.


BOLD HYPOTHESIS

So the energy we pass through the load can again be stored for later re-use.  We don't lose this original quantity of energy.  AND, we acquire additional energy from the load itself, potentially equal to the amount of energy we passed through the load.  This energy sits within the load dormant, until we excite the load, instigating its release.

Therefore, every circuit has a possible COP of 2.0 when purely looking at the usable kinetic energy.




So, how am I missing the point in this last video that everything is unity?

Seems incorrect to me.  It looks to me like at every instance of one high potential and one low potential, there exists the capability to release a brand new instance of kinetic energy.  Sort of like reproduction?  Am I wrong?  Please tell me I am, because if I'm right, I feel pretty stupid I haven't been able to build a self running machine by now.

~Russ

Re: Does The Load Consume The Energy?
« Reply #84,  »Last edited
Quote from Matt Watts on October 12th, 2017, 01:29 PM
BOLD STATEMENTS

The load does not consume the energy passing through it and can be captured at the opposite end to be used again.

The load releases some internally stored energy in proportion to the amount of energy flowing through it.  This "new" energy exists within the load itself.  It isn't created, instead it is released.


BOLD HYPOTHESIS

So the energy we pass through the load can again be stored for later re-use.  We don't lose this original quantity of energy.  AND, we acquire additional energy from the load itself, potentially equal to the amount of energy we passed through the load.  This energy sits within the load dormant, until we excite the load, instigating its release.

Therefore, every circuit has a possible COP of 2.0 when purely looking at the usable kinetic energy.




So, how am I missing the point in this last video that everything is unity?

Seems incorrect to me.  It looks to me like at every instance of one high potential and one low potential, there exists the capability to release a brand new instance of kinetic energy.  Sort of like reproduction?  Am I wrong?  Please tell me I am, because if I'm right, I feel pretty stupid I haven't been able to build a self running machine by now.
I have been trying to grasp something simple... i know you dont like electrons but i have to use that as a reference.

where do the photos come from to generate that EM field ( light in the case of a filament)? in our case from a wire with electrons trying to balance out there atoms equally.

we have a stored potential energy of atoms that have electrons missing in one cap, we call this Positive lets say there ate 1000 electrons missing to create that positive.

In the other cap we have 1000 excess of electrons we call this negative. ( even tho we are balancing out Positives...)

 so we have missing and excess of 1000 electrons to balance out...

This is our potential difference. A question here at the bottom**

dont forget that the total energy in our 2 cap and resistor system is a fraction of the the energy in the sea of energy.


so. we have a system that is trying to balance all the electrons. so we put a load between the positives. What Happens?

The electrons start to flow. (current)  Along the way they Hit friction. ( resistance)  Where electrons start to bounce and Hit each other. This interns moves electrons from an inner ring to an outer ring in the atom.

Now this action DOSE NOT generate a photon. so no "output" or " loss" here...

 so what just happen? well the new location that the electron is is in a higher energy state. so we just generated more excitation just by slamming electrons around in the system (current flow)  BUT we have the SAME AMOUNT OF ELECTRONS... just at a new energy level.  BUT with in the load its self ( friction) we Generated more potential difference, ( higher energy state)

now that electron WILL fall back down in to a lower energy state. ( Jumping valance rings)  when that happens we lose that excitation we generated by friction and we emit a photon???? and what is photon emission?  is this the load generating its own photon? The electron just went back to where it was in the first place... thats all... there's more to answer here i know... but the load did generate that photon??

 Was it the see of energy This photon was generated??? you cant see it.. How do you know?

An EM field. now they say that is a WAVE? we know its a field. what ever you want to think.

so this keeps happening until we have all of those 1000 electrons an there neutral state. in with we still have all the same electrons. there are a new state on the rings.


remember if electrons are bouncing around generating an EM field then the less they bounce then the less they will emit photons. There for the low impedance ( what are they impeding... ) the better the result. ( the less we say "we lose our potential difference" )  so its better to generate a magnetic field then it is to generate visible light in an element??.

so the question is. how do get our imbalance back???

well if we were able to collect all those photos that came from the Sea of energy... ( lets use the sun???)   Then we can slam the atoms in the wire with those photons,  if the right wave length was used. we can excite the atoms and get the electrons to be imbalanced again. Then we just need to separate them in to the 2 caps...  when we reach the 1000 imbalance we have what we started with... anything past is excess.  ( in a close system this excess would be considered "OU"... we let the sun be apart of this excitation. so this is good because we can collect more then we started with.. think solar panel.. that is in its self a "free energy device" is is not? )

so we went from difference in potential to the sea generating the photons that we sea with out eyes.  ( with our potential difference being "lost") Back to photons from the sun ( the sea of energy) giving our potential back. if done right.. we should be able to call that UNITY.
 

** dose this imbalance of 1000 electrons = the same energy as if the electrons were all balanced in the same number or atoms? ( lower energy state) or is there more energy is the excess electrons due to where there at on the valance rings? I do not know.

this all could be totally wrong. but this is the way I'm viewing it just to make my head not spin to far at the moment...

now why did this work? because we limited our self's to what? nothing... we were able to use the Sea of energy to makt this work...

If you " close the system" i dont know how it can ever work... ( tats what they say right... impossible... )

if nature can do it. then it can be possible in a circuit.

ok.. hammer it out... good thoughts Matt, thanks for posting!!!

~Russ

jbignes5

Re: Does The Load Consume The Energy?
« Reply #85,  »Last edited
 I think we have the same concept but different terms.

 The thing to do is learning how to attract more medium into our channel. Like a transistor does we would control the gain to be better at optimizing the system. This should be the feed back point so it senses an increased load and compensates.

 As for the Unity, that fine for me it is easily provable by your fine example. Negate the reflection and you don't destroy your potential difference. Right now we are stuck at 98% efficiency in our very best motors. If we could totally block the back wave we should be able to hit Unity. No reflection means no depletion. Everything could have it's own sink. Not pulling anything more then it needs at all times. This way we only need to capture the full potential and then away it goes. No need to have power lines. Nothing but a small gen for each unit.

 I'm right in the middle of a Tesla book where he talks about this hammering. That it could generate millions of amps in the primary. Of course he was used to using industrial coils and such.

~Russ

Re: Does The Load Consume The Energy?
« Reply #86,  »
Quote from jbignes5 on October 12th, 2017, 04:08 PM
I think we have the same concept but different terms.

 The thing to do is learning how to attract more medium into our channel. Like a transistor does we would control the gain to be better at optimizing the system. This should be the feed back point so it senses an increased load and compensates.

 As for the Unity, that fine for me it is easily provable by your fine example. Negate the reflection and you don't destroy your potential difference. Right now we are stuck at 98% efficiency in our very best motors. If we could totally block the back wave we should be able to hit Unity. No reflection means no depletion. Everything could have it's own sink. Not pulling anything more then it needs at all times. This way we only need to capture the full potential and then away it goes. No need to have power lines. Nothing but a small gen for each unit.

 I'm right in the middle of a Tesla book where he talks about this hammering. That it could generate millions of amps in the primary. Of course he was used to using industrial coils and such.
i think your spot on with the reflective wave... However there seem to be a problem with resistance. if it produces an EM wave...

I guess we could think that if we get an EM wave, Just because the electrons are hitting each other... if we cut it off before it can get all the way around the wire...

Its possible that we can make that work.

I still fill that if we can make electrical water hammer... ( then add a check valve so the suction can pull in energy... ) we might be able to " ram pump" electrons in to the system.

~Russ
Re: Does The Load Consume The Energy?
« Reply #87,  »
Thoughts
Re: Does The Load Consume The Energy?
« Reply #88,  »Last edited
Here is your example.

Question.

Why dose the high voltage spike happen before the current starts to flow.

This is NOT BEMF. This is BEFORE it.

Green trace is ground on system
Blue trace is BEMF current
And purple is voltage on BEMF output

This is the 10 coiler
~Russ


sonnet

Re: Does The Load Consume The Energy?
« Reply #89,  »
ok, I feel a need to say how I perceive electrons. Take a Hydrogen Atom...one electron ...one proton...One positively charged and the electron negatively charged. (I perceive the electron to be mass very very small amount of mass, only just this side of the e=mc2 formula) The proton and electron want to collapse together but cant...why? Is it because the very process of moving together creates a magnetic field as we now have a moving - charged particle that creates magnetism. So we have a field around the electron as a moving electron creates a magnetic field. Everything has a element of induction as well as capacitance so the electron is its own inductor. This magnetic field opposes the collapse. The proton also spins (they are both 1/2 spin particles).
But the magnetic field can only hold for a moment of time because the movement -  electron to proton was opposed the field has to collapse because movement towards the proton has slowed and stopped. That collapsing field has induced the equivalent of the BEMF in the electron which puts the electron into a state of excitation which throws it out of the valance ring and into a quantum state. So the electron is now energy in a probability wave but sadly it has to return to the atom. We describe the electron as being a cloud of energy around the proton because of the excitation making it resonant in and out of the quantum state.The Heisenberg principal stops the electron from returning to the atom at a closer position than what it does because if you put the position of the electron closer to the proton on return out of the quantum superposition then you are more aware of the position and so you must have less awareness of the momentum. speed it up and you excite it again.therefore it does not return.
As the electron moved towards the proton the magnetic field created a spin on the electron on a axis through the electron because of angular momentum. so both electron and proton are spinning.
This is what I go on about the electron spin on its axis, in a conductor it also spins in a helix around the outer surface. Think of earth spinning on its axis but also at the same time spinning around the sun. this the the movement of the electron in a conductor(wire) when you have electron flow.
Ok lets see this electron in a wire normally it just sits there spinning going in and out of its quantum state. when we use Heisenberg's principle on the atom and we interact with the electrons by passing a magnetic field across the wire the spinning electron get pushed by the spinning field, like to spinning tops bumping into each other they bounce off because of that angular momentum. Now that angular momentum is going to work like this.
Hold a bicycle wheel in both hands out in front of your chest, you've taken it off the bike forks by the way and you have the left side axle in your left hand and right side in your right. get a friend to spin the wheel very fast. You have a gyroscope....now whilst its spinning get your friend to push down on your right hand and the wheel will not let your friend push your arm down but instead your be forced to turn the wheel to the right or left according to the spin of the wheel. This turning force is what acting on the electron when you move a magnet across the wire and so the angular moment pushes the electron along the wire. You could throw in a little bit of special relativity but the speed of the moving electron really is pretty slow for this to be the only reason.but it does play its role but i,ve gone on for long enough and you can look that one up yourselves
This is why they need to observe the galaxies because they will see magnetic flux emanating from and out of galaxies and plasma which will negate dark matter which is a false concept all dark matter is ,is magnetic fields and plasma. spin and magnetic force and potential explains a lot about the universe.
Ok having said all that a Photon is a decay from the electromagnetic wave it too has spin -1 and is not able to rest as in its constantly moving until it bumps into matter. So photon can excite a electron give it more spin or  remove charge from a electron slow the spin.
Russ I don't see the electrons as non structured in a current flow, only when no current is flowing will a electron be bouncing around imbalanced. so in a battery in a chemical structure the electrons are spinning in random directions i,e, there axis spin are the same but there helix spin doesn't exist they behave like a gaseous state or another way to visualize the earth spins on its axis but does not follow the suns orbit instead it wonders off to mars then jupiter, in the wire when current is flowing they are structured. Imho.
Quote
** dose this imbalance of 1000 electrons = the same energy as if the electrons were all balanced in the same number or atoms? ( lower energy state) or is there more energy is the excess electrons due to where there at on the valance rings? I do not know.
I see them as balanced, although some electrons leave the circuit they are replaced. you would have to loose matter in the form of the proton/neutron if the system were to be less balanced.special relativity does make you perceive there are more positive atoms in a moving current. but the density of each charge is the same.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1TKSfAkWWN0

So is it not the speed of your spin of the electron that increases the potential in the circuit, not the number of electrons.
Is that what you where asking a answer too?
So the fast collapse of the coil magnetic field increases the axis spin of the electron exciting a greater charge.??
Just my take guys.

Re: Does The Load Consume The Energy?
« Reply #90,  »Last edited
@russ
Quote
I guess we could think that if we get an EM wave, Just because the electrons are hitting each other... if we cut it off before it can get all the way around the wire...
You can with the right commutator..that's what Joe Newman did.
read his book and study the commutator part...that will work if you want to try it.
 
Re: Does The Load Consume The Energy?
« Reply #91,  »Last edited
Quote from ~Russ on October 12th, 2017, 05:57 PM
Here is your example.

Question.

Why dose the high voltage spike happen before the current starts to flow.

This is NOT BEMF. This is BEFORE it.

Green trace is ground on system
Blue trace is BEMF current
And purple is voltage on BEMF output

This is the 10 coiler
~Russ
you have a push on the contactor/valve from the potential/head pressure the sudden opening of the switch/valve accelerates the current/water from zero to full speed...this is the only time acceleration happens as once current is flowing no acceleration exists until deceleration...is it not the force of this acceleration or the sudden deceleration as in BEMF senorio that creates a vacuum (like what is visible when we shut the valve)... i.e. we create a void/vacuum which must be filled.

~Russ

Re: Does The Load Consume The Energy?
« Reply #92,  »Last edited
Well even if its not the cavataion . if you  can just add a Dioed to ground (or other source of free charge)  in the right place. Then when the vacuum is created it should suck in electrons. Those are More then you started with.

The question is is it more thank you "lost" in your balancing ?  (System as a hole)

Also. Spin I know quite a bit about. I left it out of my thoughts for now. But I must put it in.

Here is my favorite spin videos.


https://youtu.be/7aRKAXD4dAg

You'll want to watch the rest of those videos. VERRY HELPFULL

Here is the play list.
 Introductory NMR & MRI: https://www.youtube.com/playlist?list=PLD14D78BC61685BD7

Thanks again for the feed back. So helpfull! 

~Russ

Matt Watts

Point Blank
« Reply #93,  »Last edited by ~Russ
I'm beginning to suspect y'all are avoiding my question.

Is it possible to transfer energy back-n-forth between two (or more) storage devices by way of some load (which is performing useful work), and recoup enough extra energy (from the load) to keep these transfers going in perpetuity ?

Yes or no?

Why or why not?

 


~Russ

Re: Does The Load Consume The Energy?
« Reply #94,  »Last edited
Quote from Matt Watts on October 12th, 2017, 07:21 PM
I'm beginning to suspect y'all are avoiding my question.

Is it possible to transfer energy back-n-forth between two (or more) storage devices by way of some load (which is performing useful work), and recoup enough extra energy (from the load) to keep these transfers going in perpetuity ?

Yes or no?

Why or why not?
Sorry I tried to edit your post. Wrong button


No...  if you are seguesting that this system is in a closed box. (Closed to the enveriment)

Why...
Because your not alowing anything to go in or out
 So what ever work you performed will not be able to be replenished the way nature would do it.

This is if your storage device was charged when it went in to the box...



Yes...  if you place your system in a place of natural replenishment. (The way nature wants to do it) 

Why...  Because nature has a way. (Lightning any one?) 



Its the same thing as asking if water can be used as potental over and over if you put it in a black box.

Well not if you want the water to run a turbine. You need the sun with a plastic sheet on top. It must be brought to the top again.

But Russ. How can load not consume the energy?? 

Well was the water at the top or the bottom when you closed the lid??? 

If at the top. You get one cycle. ("Used all your energy)
 If it was at the bottom. Your screwd...  But. Do you have  the same amount of water in the box???? 

Get a plastic lid where the sun shines!!!  The water in the box is in a close system!!!  But open to the envirement!!! 

 

????  Is this not true??

Oh don't like the plastic lid?  Ok put the box some where where there is heat it will eventaly boil if hot enugh...

~Russ

Matt Watts

All Systems are OPEN
« Reply #95,  »
Okay fine.  Allow me to make another BOLD STATEMENT...

All systems are open to nature.  All of them.  There is no such thing as a closed system.  Period.


Now answer my question again please.

~Russ

Re: Does The Load Consume The Energy?
« Reply #96,  »Last edited
Quote from Matt Watts on October 12th, 2017, 07:55 PM
Okay fine.  Allow me to make another BOLD STATEMENT...

All systems are open to nature.  All of them.  There is no such thing as a closed system.  Period.


Now answer my question again please.
Put the box in the shade with a plastic lid and you can question your self... Is it Posible to get a "self runner"???

Well not if you haven't descoverd the sun yet...

You'd be stuck with lifting the water back up your self. (Are you nature?)

~Russ

#winning...

Lol. Just kidding...  ;)

Matt Watts

Re: Does The Load Consume The Energy?
« Reply #97,  »
I believe, even though I cannot see.

Now to prove it...

~Russ

Re: Does The Load Consume The Energy?
« Reply #98,  »
Quote from Matt Watts on October 12th, 2017, 08:02 PM
I believe, even though I cannot see.

Now to prove it...
Look at my quote that has been attached to every post for years... 

~Russ.

Hehe

PS its biblical too... 

sonnet

Re: Does The Load Consume The Energy?
« Reply #99,  »Last edited
Hi guys, my take again ...russ yes I  agree extra electrons enter your system, but they do not stay. They impart their energy and leave. Leaving a balanced density. But this density left behind has a greater potential. Was you aware that electrons on different valence rings can have different potentials even in the same atom...we are entering the freaky world of quantum physics.
https://arxiv.org/ftp/arxiv/papers/1104/1104.3189.pdf
that pdf may support your ideas.
just my take.
@ matt yes I do believe there is no such thing as a closed system because quantum tunneling negates the belief that it is truly closed. and as all electrons depend on quantum mechanics to resonant turning on and off and stopping collapse into the proton you have to accept a closed system actually doesn't exist. Hawkings radiation describes how even the strongest jail can be escaped.
Regards