First of all I would like to thank Gpssonar for his input and making me understand what in the world is going on.
First of all we need to look at this picture and determine how we get from the gated pulse to the reduced pulse time and how the isolated circuit (encircled) achieves this:
[attachment=4977]
First of all, ALL OF US need to go back to the classroom and look at mutual inductance of a one to one transformer driven by pulsed dc. So here goes:
[attachment=4978]
This is the effect on the 50% duty cycle of the pulse seen by TX1 and TX2. We all know how mutual inductance works in two coils of equal inductance value. When TX1 is at L (inductance) TX2 is at V+ and vice verse and I have shown this in the pulse train. Where TX2 is at V+ and TX1 is at L then we all know that to be back EMF. Charles Flynn has shown us that introducing a magnet to a transformer has this effect:
[attachment=4979]
Now we no longer have mutual inductance. The magnet has restricted the flow of back EMF by creating an opposing magnetic field of TX1 and TX2. The effect on the pulse train is that TX1 still has the same forward voltage but because time has been reduced TX2's V+ has been reduced as well of the inductance field of TX1. Now because we cannot destroy the voltage (back EMF) at TX2 and its return path back to TX1 is partially blocked by an opposing magnetic field it has no other alternative but to flow back into the resistive load (R1).
Here in this video we can see the effect of this when the motor speeds up because of the increase in forward voltage and the effect of the amp meter because the return path back to TX1 is greatly reduced. (Also see Thane Heins.)
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=r8asKJNYJIY
So far so good. We see the voltage recirculating through the resistor, amps going down.
So we can at least conclude that introducing an opposing magnetic field to mutual inductance network will cause disruption to the parity of those inductors.
But this is not free energy and the more load we place at R1 the more intense the current leakage will be across the magnet path back to TX1. The path can never be cut off completely with an opposing magnetic field otherwise there is no communication between the TX1 and TX2 and the system will fail.
Therefore we always have to have this thought in our minds that TX1 and TX2 must always be allowed to communicate.
We can also conclude from this that time and voltage are inversely proportional which is what we already know. When we compress time on either TX1 V+ or indeed TX2 V+ on the pulse train then the voltage amplitude goes up and we see this all the time on our scope. This statement is going to be very important as we progress. The load at R1 cannot tell the difference between forward and recirculated back EMF.
Where do we go from here? Well we have to take a look at Gpssonar's signature in which he stipulates that all we need is more time.
Gate time is what we need.
We want to keep the two inductors in mutual inductance because they operate better that way, faster and more efficient especially with a magnetite core that can move much quicker and more efficiently than other cores.
So we keep the mutual inductance and we introduce time in the form of a gate per se:-
[attachment=4981]
I've got rid of R1 and replaced it with a water fuel cell.
Now the introduction of time into the schematic at this stage does nothing, but it allows TX1 and TX2 to be still mutual in inductance.
Because I said time and voltage are inversely proportional what we are going to do is to steal that gate time and turn it into voltage. Now you will notice that the time we introduced just so happens to be on TX2's back EMF voltage. NOW THAT IS VERY HANDY.
We explained earlier we can steal back EMF quite easily. But this time not are we only going to steal it we are going to keep the mutual inductance between TX1 and TX2 the same.
Enter our little friend TX3. He's going to replace the magnet in the earlier schematic and he is going to produce an opposing magnetic field that we can control but as you can see he is isolated:-
[attachment=4982]
Now marked in red is the time in the form of back EMF that we are going to steal and recirculate into TX2. This will allow TX1 and TX2 to remain in mutual inductance throughout. The timing and crossed voltages are an issue unto themselves which I will reveal in part two. But the one thing I can tell you is that this isolated inductor is variable because of the critical timing in blocking the back EMF we are going to steal. TX3 is going to have mutual inductance with TX2 but because we have isolated TX3 that inductance will be in the form of resonance. Now the system is beginning to look like Meyer's isn't it?
The way TX3 is isolated I will Relay to you in part two.
First of all we need to look at this picture and determine how we get from the gated pulse to the reduced pulse time and how the isolated circuit (encircled) achieves this:
[attachment=4977]
First of all, ALL OF US need to go back to the classroom and look at mutual inductance of a one to one transformer driven by pulsed dc. So here goes:
[attachment=4978]
This is the effect on the 50% duty cycle of the pulse seen by TX1 and TX2. We all know how mutual inductance works in two coils of equal inductance value. When TX1 is at L (inductance) TX2 is at V+ and vice verse and I have shown this in the pulse train. Where TX2 is at V+ and TX1 is at L then we all know that to be back EMF. Charles Flynn has shown us that introducing a magnet to a transformer has this effect:
[attachment=4979]
Now we no longer have mutual inductance. The magnet has restricted the flow of back EMF by creating an opposing magnetic field of TX1 and TX2. The effect on the pulse train is that TX1 still has the same forward voltage but because time has been reduced TX2's V+ has been reduced as well of the inductance field of TX1. Now because we cannot destroy the voltage (back EMF) at TX2 and its return path back to TX1 is partially blocked by an opposing magnetic field it has no other alternative but to flow back into the resistive load (R1).
Here in this video we can see the effect of this when the motor speeds up because of the increase in forward voltage and the effect of the amp meter because the return path back to TX1 is greatly reduced. (Also see Thane Heins.)
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=r8asKJNYJIY
So far so good. We see the voltage recirculating through the resistor, amps going down.
So we can at least conclude that introducing an opposing magnetic field to mutual inductance network will cause disruption to the parity of those inductors.
But this is not free energy and the more load we place at R1 the more intense the current leakage will be across the magnet path back to TX1. The path can never be cut off completely with an opposing magnetic field otherwise there is no communication between the TX1 and TX2 and the system will fail.
Therefore we always have to have this thought in our minds that TX1 and TX2 must always be allowed to communicate.
We can also conclude from this that time and voltage are inversely proportional which is what we already know. When we compress time on either TX1 V+ or indeed TX2 V+ on the pulse train then the voltage amplitude goes up and we see this all the time on our scope. This statement is going to be very important as we progress. The load at R1 cannot tell the difference between forward and recirculated back EMF.
Where do we go from here? Well we have to take a look at Gpssonar's signature in which he stipulates that all we need is more time.
Gate time is what we need.
We want to keep the two inductors in mutual inductance because they operate better that way, faster and more efficient especially with a magnetite core that can move much quicker and more efficiently than other cores.
So we keep the mutual inductance and we introduce time in the form of a gate per se:-
[attachment=4981]
I've got rid of R1 and replaced it with a water fuel cell.
Now the introduction of time into the schematic at this stage does nothing, but it allows TX1 and TX2 to be still mutual in inductance.
Because I said time and voltage are inversely proportional what we are going to do is to steal that gate time and turn it into voltage. Now you will notice that the time we introduced just so happens to be on TX2's back EMF voltage. NOW THAT IS VERY HANDY.
We explained earlier we can steal back EMF quite easily. But this time not are we only going to steal it we are going to keep the mutual inductance between TX1 and TX2 the same.
Enter our little friend TX3. He's going to replace the magnet in the earlier schematic and he is going to produce an opposing magnetic field that we can control but as you can see he is isolated:-
[attachment=4982]
Now marked in red is the time in the form of back EMF that we are going to steal and recirculate into TX2. This will allow TX1 and TX2 to remain in mutual inductance throughout. The timing and crossed voltages are an issue unto themselves which I will reveal in part two. But the one thing I can tell you is that this isolated inductor is variable because of the critical timing in blocking the back EMF we are going to steal. TX3 is going to have mutual inductance with TX2 but because we have isolated TX3 that inductance will be in the form of resonance. Now the system is beginning to look like Meyer's isn't it?
The way TX3 is isolated I will Relay to you in part two.