Murray / Newman / Babcock / Tesla

~Russ

Murray / Newman / Babcock / Tesla
«  »Last edited
here i will post information that makes logical scene...


Also the difference where  linear and nonlinear systems.

In the attached photos is an article that I find one of the most logical things I have seen in a long time.

The key concepts i see are that:

A. Power and energy... Need to be very well understood. ( defined)
    "Energy is measured in joules as a finite quantity with no respect to time
    Power is measured in joules per second with respect to time"

B. More Than 1HP of work can be done with 745.69W when the system is set up to use its full potential.

C. the ENERGY will eventually die out in the system. ( unless we include some kind of other means for ambient energy to enter the system, such as what Newman could have been doing with his extreme voltages)

D. Power conversion from electrical to heat is not 100% we are missing up to 50% of the ENERGY to POWER conversion in electrical to heat.

E. This is not Frequency Resonance (for me this seems to be the standard LC resonance we think about a specific frequency) but instead this is ENERGY resonance. ( again for me this seems to be something like instead of using the 1/4 wave resonance, we will use ALL the Harmonics as well... in this way we are using ALL ENERGY resonance. )

F. Energy can be moved around and do work (power) with only losses from resistance and the like.

G. The difference where in where linear and nonlinear systems do not compute the same when we define Energy and Power correctly.

H. The fact that Maxwell's equations do not include the fluid dynamic properties of inertia for the electrical system? ( not 100% sure about this but i believe it to be true)

I. EMF and CounterEMF will cancel out each other,(CEMF, this is not the same as Back EMF)  and in doing so, real POWER can be delivered to the load while the Supply will not see this load due to the cancellation. ( reactive power, or better yet REACTIVE WATTS)  ( one must changing the frame of reference between the supply and the load.  In this case in a Nonlinear time variance scenario )   ( delay line motor)

J. Newtons third law dose not apply in all systems. ( In this case electrical system.) such as "Current X the rate of change of inductance = Negative resistance." ( This one needs more study, but i have heard quite a few high level people say this, in the attached article they speak about this. here is some more info. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Einstein%E2%80%93de_Haas_effect )

H. The diffrence between EMF and Voltage. There not one in the same . (EMF is the force that pushes current. Voltage develops from the charge that cant get through the impedance. No impedance then no voltage...?)
So using the magnetic feild of a shorted coil to drive the other coil magnetically.

( I'm sure i have more i forgot... )

http://www.gestaltreality.com/energy-synthesis/jim-murray-dynaflux-serps/


https://youtu.be/xNeLgqrXJiw

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=HK3JOlY0V8Y

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YhaAxQjyeC0

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-chHnLyHVF8

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=J5LsrMPS_KM

just to name a few...

Related to E:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=oyODF8FWs_8
https://www.murata.com/products/emc/emifil/knowhow/basic/chapter02-p3
((3) Waveform of duty 50% has strong odd harmonics)
think about reflecting waves and harmonics and how one could use all those waves to AMPLIFY energy with in a system.


ok, well more to think about.

However i can see how moving energy around in a system like Newman's could result in a similar principal to what Murray is describing.
Newman was a nonlinear system... and the things he was doing resemble the same thoughts and principles. but getting there was different. 

~Russ

Apoc4lypse


~Russ

Re: Murray / Newman / Babcock / Tesla
« Reply #4,  »Last edited
Isolate voltage and force (EMF)... theres a key.

Id say newman's motors could do that if set up correctly...

If you can separate the 2 then you can isolate the CEMF from the EMF . And now there is NOT an equal and opposite reacation (EMF and CEMF)

Hummm.

~Russ
Re: Murray / Newman / Babcock / Tesla
« Reply #5,  »Last edited
Some notes while watching videos

Current x the rate of change of inductance...

= NEGTIVE RESYSTANCE


Making use of the net work done and the aplsute work done.

Dobble the horspower simply by changing its refrance frame. 50% to 100%



Acheving forces with out asemitry
Eleptical force rather than eliptical force in OU generators. Like a spinning plate conserves all its energy rsther than only 50%

In the sling shot effect the path is a segment of a decaying eclipse...

Elepitical force = elepitical path

Thinking about the elips gravity motor...

FEMM magnetic softwere.

So if emf genarates a Cemf. Then the effency of the system can be no greater than 50% (100% conventialy) however if CEMF can be removed. Then the system can reach greater than 50% (》than 100% conventionally)
This is where  Newton's third law is broke. And this where if we apply this law then we get only a real 50%... (they call it 100%)

Myth, energy and momentum are conserved...

Control angle and time...

Store energy slowely and relice it quickly. Energy transformation device.

~Russ
Re: Murray / Newman / Babcock / Tesla
« Reply #6,  »Last edited
So the qustion is... how do we remove Cemf...

Geometry...

That's one way... there are others. But thats one way...

My goal is to seek how the Christmas motor of newman's could accomplish this geometry with this understanding of cemf and emf.

Split voltage from EMF and remove Cemf. Then use BEMF if possible.

It seems this is partly what newman was doing with his outter coil and the cancellation effect. But using the Bemf (again Bemf is the collapseing magnetic feild and the inertial effects of matter in motion)

Later in his work it seems he was using caps to recover insted of the second coil...

Murray used a mono pole rotor configuration to achieve this removal of CEMF. so only flux was traveling in one direction...

I would say that Newmans motor also dose this in the right configuration. using my video TSFA #14 showing that we can get current in the same direction with out "clashing" magnetic fields. Current going in the same direction... generates no "push back" hummm...

~Russ
Re: Murray / Newman / Babcock / Tesla
« Reply #7,  »Last edited
http://open-source-energy.org/?topic=3231.msg49271#msg49271

The transforming generator will basically run at full power and the main drive motor can be turned down and only left in place to make up for frictional losses... this makes scene.

remember the goal was to study the difference between voltage and EMF. during the one demo he was talking about where the voltage was at because it was not at the load. and it was in the coil... (Being used to counter Cemf)

because if we remove Cemf then EMF can take over and the device will " take off" up until that extra 50% is at its full potential.  however there still needs to be something making up for the frictional losses...  dont forget this is not a device where it will run forever... it so seems that you could loop it back... and that is unknown. but if you cant. id be quite happy with a generator under load that is only pulling a few watts to cover the friction losses... more to learn here and only by testing will we know...

~Russ

Attached is the stater and rotor. as the one coil is shorted, it provides a magnetic EMF to the other coil via a "reluctance" path. so the shorted coil provides the needed magnetic energy to the other coil... they balance each other out. more understanding on how those 2 work together is needed. however we could build a small version of this so it seems. and understand it better. even with the lack of knowing how his was build. we could think it through and make something work. its hard to see but there is wire on the rotor and there mare slip rings. also he turns up the "exciting voltage" so I'm guessing that is on the rotor there...

Piero

Re: Murray / Newman / Babcock / Tesla
« Reply #8,  »Last edited
Please ATTN:

Quantum physics  says  :

-->  Η = ΝaB.Nmols A.m2

wherre μB  is   Bohr's magneton

-->  H = 4466 A.m2

for  100kg  of  copper  big coil

For  a  1 mm2  copper  filar

H= 4,466 mA

but forgotten  the  big coil as a  factor 
--> Q = 1575

--> 1575 . H ~7A

Total  power   that  can flow  through BIG COIL with    of  unit  Tesla  value if  I  suppose  I can  flush   out  the  potential   at  fly  cycle.

Experiment  done  with  big coil   short cutted.




~Russ

Re: Murray / Newman / Babcock / Tesla
« Reply #9,  »
Piero, i wish i could understand your comment better. unfortunately i'm not a math guy at hart so i have a hard time with the math.

so your saying that if we have no Cemf ( or no apposing resistance) the theoretical maximum output is 7 amps? with every square inch of copper experiencing 1 Tesla of magnetic flux?

i really appreciate your comment. i just want to understand it more.

Thanks!!

~Russ

Piero

Re: Murray / Newman / Babcock / Tesla
« Reply #10,  »Last edited
Yes,  sorry  it  was  a little   unclear .

1  T  of  mag  flux  from   the   magnet ,    use it  as  a factor  K  to adjust  to  your  neomag  rotor

total  flux    is    proportional  to  the    filar section of  the  big coil 'or other same)

7 A  is   the  minimum ,   I have   counted  spin 1/2 (+ or -  , it depends  on the  polarizatioin of the coil)

Precisely:  the  big coil is supposed  t be  completly immerged  in the magnet  flux
I think  K=0.5  should  be  applied  due   to   form factor  of    experiment

so  I = 3.5 A

Just   due  to   magnetic  potential  of  big   coil -  electrons   spin

Now ,   I  suppose  you cant   go   to high   amps  in  coils
Also  ,   I  suppose  no resonance  , meaning   factor  of  amplification  for   coil  potential  equal to  1


~Russ

Re: Murray / Newman / Babcock / Tesla
« Reply #11,  »
Hummm...
Re: Murray / Newman / Babcock / Tesla
« Reply #12,  »
Conserved as momentum in the feild...

Do maxwells equations include momentum in the field?

~Russ
Re: Murray / Newman / Babcock / Tesla
« Reply #14,  »
So we know that a magnetic field in a coil has momentum and inertia.

So a permanent magent would have the same right?

So we must have consistent current flowing in a coil... but in a magent its already there...

And endless flow with in the field.

And this energy over its life span is NOT equal to the energy required to get this feild... where is the energy conservation in that statment???

~Russ

Matt Watts

Re: Murray / Newman / Babcock / Tesla
« Reply #15,  »
I should see if the domain name open-source-power.org is available...     :fdrum:

Apoc4lypse

Re: Murray / Newman / Babcock / Tesla
« Reply #16,  »Last edited
Quote from ~Russ on April 14th, 09:10 PM
So we know that a magnetic field in a coil has momentum and inertia.

So a permanent magent would have the same right?

So we must have consistent current flowing in a coil... but in a magent its already there...
~Russ
This has been bothering me since I started reading about magnetism.... lol

The thing is in a coil its a wire with current traveling in a direction through atoms in the wire giving it the poles.

In a magnet its... ?...  If magnetism occurs in a magnet based on the alignment of the atoms... and from what I currently understand is its the alignment of the free electrons spin axis in the atoms giving it its magnetic polarization right?

Maybe there's actually a current flowing in the magnet's atoms, but how and how to read it or see it or even use it I'm not sure...

If the axis of spin in an electron gives us a north and south pole on either ends of the spin axis, then I'm guessing the current in it is literally the electron spinning, and all of those aligned spins adding up are what give the magnet its total magnetic polarized field around it...

Would mean that each electron actually acts like a tiny coil, because I don't think current is entire electrons. Its charge moving, and electrons spin, so that is charge moving right there and a current inside the electron itself... if they didn't spin there wouldn't be any magnetic field (and a lot of stuff wouldn't work in this world lol).

I don't think there's a way to physically tap into that current really if the analogy of an electron being like a coil itself creating a closed circuit is true...

So lets hope its not and its really an open circuit and that its not really a coil and just a spinning charge or current transferring charges and current between the electrons... which gives me a stupid strange idea for an experiment that's probably already been tried.

Take a long cylindrical permanent magnet and hook up a wire to both ends to "complete the circuit" and measure with an oscilloscope, and measure with the wires touching different areas in respect to one another on the different ends of the magnet... it seems too simple to give any kind of result I know I used a multi meter and get nothing... but if there is current causing a magnetic field you should be able to measure it somehow right? The question is wheres the current making the magnetic field in the magnet?

Do capacitors give off magnetic fields when they are charged at all?

~Russ

Re: Murray / Newman / Babcock / Tesla
« Reply #17,  »
Quote from Apoc4lypse on April 15th, 01:33 AM
Do capacitors give off magnetic fields when they are charged at all?
Yes they do.. thisnis called desplacment current. And conduction current.

Get the definitions of those 2 well u understood. 

Displacment current is desplacing somthing. And there is current flowing in the wires and plates at the cap. Genarating a magentic feild. 

And conduction current is the brake down of somthing causing REAL conduction. And current flow. Creating a  magnetic feild.

(Dont forget about the dialectric feild)

~Russ
Re: Murray / Newman / Babcock / Tesla
« Reply #18,  »
Quote from Matt Watts on April 15th, 12:03 AM
I should see if the domain name open-source-power.org is available...     :fdrum:
Yep! Wide open... Its all yours!

We are just shuffling stuff around here...

There we can do real work...

~Russ

Piero

Re: Murray / Newman / Babcock / Tesla
« Reply #19,  »
Quote from Piero on April 12th, 10:09 AM
Please ATTN:

Quantum physics  says  :

-->  Η = ΝaB.Nmols A.m2

where μB  is   Bohr's magneton
Forgotten this  electron is  4s1   means  L=4

This  result  has  to  be  multiply   by  a  factor 4

Matt Watts

Playing with Units
« Reply #20,  »Last edited
Quote from ~Russ on April 15th, 07:47 AM
We are just shuffling stuff around here...

There we can do real work...
So here's the deal...

Power (in Watts) is voltage (in Volts) times amperage (in Amps) ~ P = VA

Watts is Joules per Second ~ P = E / S

If we multiply both sides of the equation by Seconds, we get:
Energy (in Joules) is Voltage times Amperage times Seconds ~ E = VAS

This tells us Energy has a Time component, a Dielectric component and a Magnetic component.  Three fields, as I have said all along: Tempic, Dielectric & Magnetic.  Energy is the medium, the Aether.

If you want more Energy, increase time, voltage and/or amperage.  More Energy, more Work.

However Power is what we are really interested in and as you can see above, less Time (when generating), more Power.  Or, more Energy, more Power.

If you can increase the Time having Energy do Work while the Energy is in transit, more Power.  How is that possible?  Sounds contrary to what I just stated doesn't it?  Keep in mind the difference between Time spent generating and motoring.  I'll explain in summary.

Work (also in Joules) is Force multiplied by Time (in Seconds) ~ W = FS
So for our electrical research here, W = E with a caveat:  Energy must be doing Work, not just sitting there or floating around unharnessed.

Suppose while the Energy is propagating it is also pushing, say via a magnetic field.  And the longer it pushes, the more Work we get done.

And we have a way to make Energy stay in motion longer than normal. It's called a delay line.  The trick is controlling the delay line in such a way where we can produce a changing magnetic field.  It turns out to be rather simple actually.  We just send small packets of energy down the delay line; each packet adds to the previous packet and the magnetic flux increases proportionally.  When the delay line is full, we stop sending packets of energy.  The packets then drain out and when completely empty, we repeat the cycle.  This gives us a constantly changing magnetic flux which I hope by now everyone knows how to harvest.

Suppose we made a transformer using a delay line.  Do you see the difference here compared to a typical transformer?  Two totally different animals that only look similar.

In a typical transformer, if I want a certain magnetic flux, I have to apply and hold a certain amount of power, constantly.  If I shutoff power, the flux goes to zero.  Not so in a delay line transformer.  I only need a short burst of energy and the flux will persist until that chunk of energy hits the terminator.  Work is being performed the whole time.  Big difference, because in the delay line transformer, I can keep pulsing chunks of energy into it (until it's full) and the flux keeps going up-n-up, building and building.  It's the difference between addition and multiplication.  The faster the pulses or the longer the delay line, the more advantage I have.  Energy magnification resulting in Power.  I stated we pump pulses of Energy and not Power for a good reason--the interval of Time is very short, making the Power very large, such is the phenomena of transients, well explained by Steinmetz.

We keep Time linear but manipulate Energy exponentially.  That's the trick.

namirha

Re: Murray / Newman / Babcock / Tesla
« Reply #21,  »Last edited
Quote from Matt Watts on April 16th, 11:11 PM
...
In a typical transformer, if I want a certain magnetic flux, I have to apply and hold a certain amount of power, constantly.  If I shutoff power, the flux goes to zero.  Not so in a delay line transformer.  I only need a short burst of energy and the flux will persist until that chunk of energy hits the terminator.  Work is being performed the whole time.  Big difference, because in the delay line transformer, I can keep pulsing chunks of energy into it (until it's full) and the flux keeps going up-n-up, building and building. It's the difference between addition and multiplication. The faster the pulses or the longer the delay line, the more advantage I have.  Energy magnification resulting in Power.

We keep Time linear but manipulate Energy exponentially.  That's the trick.
addition > LINE
multiplication > SQUARE



Point = 0D, Line = 1D, Square =2D, Cube =3D and Tesseract =4D

https://lovecraftianscience.wordpress.com/2014/02/04/the-mathematics-of-the-witch-house-part-3-higher-dimensions/

Michael Schneider - Constructing The Universe
...https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=f81ZEVO6Btw

eMC2
eWC2

Wee Cee 2

Mee Cee 2

LARYNX
https://www.facebook.com/permalink.php?story_fbid=304848006588597&id=100011901996265


~Russ

Re: Murray / Newman / Babcock / Tesla
« Reply #22,  »
Give and take. Balance it out and the only thing you have to over come is the mechanical losses... just what jim said...

~Russ
Re: Murray / Newman / Babcock / Tesla
« Reply #23,  »
Quote
"The differences between Speed Voltage (Vs) dependent
systems and Transformer Voltage (Vt) dependent systems are
many and pronounced. The most pronounced difference
between Vt and Vs lies in the inductive mechanism with
which each potential is associated. Regarding the term I
dL/dt, under dimensional analysis yields that dL/dt has the
dimension Joule-seconds/coul, which is representative of a
resistance. Hence, I (dL/dt) is dissipative by its very nature,
while the expression VI, from which L dI/dt is derived, can
easily describe a reactive condition. Energy can be extracted
from a reactive situation, but not from a dissipative relation
ship."
Quote
As discussed above, an important
feature of the disclosed rotor is that it be shaped to assist in the
reduction of the factors that contribute to the generation of
Back EMF.
Quote
Such an arrangement facilitates a mini
mum change in magnetic potential energy across the air gap,
and the production of a much reduced Speed Voltage (Vs)
component of the Back EMF as described herein.
Quote
By way of non-limiting example, a conventionally
designed, variable air gap motor of a source Voltage V and
current I may include a number of windings N to produce an
output power P for the given V and I. By implementing the
Back EMF reducing design disclosed herein, a constant air
gap motor can exploit a Surplus of windings NPN for the
same V and I and deliver the same, or greater P. Alternatively,
using the concepts disclosed herein, lower values of V and I
can be implemented with the Back EMF reducing designs
disclosed herein to deliver the same magnitude of P.
Quote
The placement of each salient pole 1202 around the stator
assembly 1200 also enables deliberate placement of each
active inductance, and allows for the utilization of a phase
vector situation which does not occur in existing three phase
distributed wave windings of the prior art.
Quote
a.) Time-Varying Inductance Due to Rotor Geometry;
Quote
Turning first to the topic of Time-Varying Inductance Due
to Rotor Geometry. An important characteristic of embodi
ments of the herein disclosed rotor assembly (e.g., 1190) is
that it varies the inductance of the overall magnetic circuit as
a function of its angular position in space. Hence, when the
rotor's minimum diameter is aligned with two in-line salient
poles (e.g., FIGS. 7B & 14B), the magnetic circuit inductance
will be at a maximum value. However, when the rotors
maximum diameter occupies the same position (e.g., FIGS.
7A & 14A), the inductance will be at a minimum value.
During rotation, therefore, the inductance becomes a time
varying parameter, which can contribute to the electrical
impedance.
Quote
the rotor component varies with
time while the stator impedance does not, however, the entire
value of inductance at any given time has an effect upon
circuit performance, especially, for example, where reso
nance phenomena exist.
Quote
the rotor
only value may be averaged over 180 mechanical degrees,
and then added to the stator-only value.
It has been found through experimentation that the second
method gives preferable results for producing a resonant
response, because the average inductance value can be
equated to a specific value of capacitance without involving
any electronic Switching.
Quote
When the herein described embodiments of the synchro
nous reluctance motor reach synchronous speed (e.g., 2700
RPM), the rotor's minor diameter is aligned with the motors
rotating magnetic wave. Under these conditions, the flux den
sity in each pole is situated in the geometric center of the pole
face. Accordingly, the space angle is almost Zero degrees, and
the power factor is very low because the magnetic circuit is
very far from resonance. However, because the rotor is now
moving in Synchronism with the magnetic field, the relative
simple harmonic motion component with respect to the rest
position of the flux has disappeared, and only the rotary
component of angular Velocity is apparent.
Quote
a.) The motors windings are operating as the inductive
component of a tank circuit which is in resonance, or anti
resonance, with the line frequency.
(i.) If in resonance, the capacitors and the inductive wind
ings are connected in series.
(ii.) If utilized in anti-resonance, then the inductive wind
ings and the capacitors are connected in parallel. How
ever, in Such an arrangement, the resistive value of the
windings, R, becomes important. If R is large with
respect to the inductance L, the combination may down
shift the resonant frequency of the motor significantly.
b.) The motor's acceleration phase has been completed.
c.) Load is being applied slowly by means of a Prony brake,
or other external load, and is being monitored constantly.
Under these conditions, embodiments of the invention pull
a large current when lightly loaded, and exhibit a low power
factor. However, as load is increased, the power factor
improves, and the current begins to drop. The reduction of
load current with increasing mechanical load is a highly unex
pected behavior in prior art motor design. However, this effect
can be explained as follows.
Quote
As mechanical load is applied, the space angle slowly
begins to increase, and the tracking factor changes position.
The rotor twists in space as a function of load, and its instantaneous
 diameter increases as load torque increases. This
increase in diameter causes an increase in inductance, and so
the magnetic circuit slowly approaches the value necessary to
Sustain series resonance. This action drives up the power
factor, but it also stretches the magnetic flux lines, and thereby
causes the motor torque to automatically match the external
torque created by the load.
Quote
The advance of the space angle toward the 90 degree posi
tion drives the power factor toward unity because it automati
cally “tunes' the tank circuit as it rotates in space. However,
as loading continues, the rotor begins to “slip' a bit with
respect to the magnetic field this has the effect of providing a
low frequency rotating field to the armature, and the change in
inductance per rotation now takes effect. The parameter dL/dt
slowly begins to create a Back EMF, which drives down the
current. This is illustrated in FIG. 30.
However, this action has little effect upon the torque at this
point, because it is being mechanically created by the
stretched lines of magnetic force operating directly upon the
geometry of the rotor. For some embodiments of the herein
disclosed synchronous reluctance motor, this process will
continue until equilibrium is established between the motor
torque developed, and the current available from the source.
Quote
These additional losses arise, because standard silicone
steel laminations can only suppress the formation of eddy
currents in one direction at a time. But, the compound motion
of the flux in the presently disclose synchronous reluctance
motor gives rise to two eddy current components which are
perpendicular to each other within the stator steel. Accord
ingly, one current is Suppressed, while the other is given free
reign.
well then...

theses r only the last parts of the patent. there is a lot more in there.