Vortex coil theory

Lynx

Vortex coil theory
« on June 26th, 2016, 11:41 PM »
Here's the related theory thread regarding Russ'es Rodin coil build, http://open-source-energy.org/?topic=2680.0
Please keep theories regarding the coil in here.

Viking

Re: Vortex coil theory
« Reply #1, on July 6th, 2016, 03:55 PM »Last edited on July 16th, 2016, 01:43 AM
Hello all,
I was thinking. The shape of this coil could could well be the same shape as the electron or positron.
We know the electron and positron is most sertainly a wave and probably a vortex in a toroid shape.
Maybe the vortex coils field shape is actually forming the equivalent of an electron ? (particle or not)
In that case it should have spin, charge and mass..

Just an idea ..

After some more reading of Markos work, this is exacly what he proposes - so I'm glad I'm not the only one comming up with crazy ideas ;)

But is that particle stable ? and if not, how long will it last before decaying into it's components ?
The time according to the uncertainly principle will depend on it's energy. The higher the energy the shorter it will live. We could be talking from pico-pico seconds (10-24 s) and up ..
Re: Vortex coil theory
« Reply #2, on July 10th, 2016, 01:20 PM »
OK folks. some theory.

Musing abot the vortex coil as an energy extractor:

Provided that be belive that an energy emanation exists from the center of atomic structures and particles, like the proton and the electron and that it is this energy that makes those same structures and electrons stable . Then how can we affect these so that more energy is required, in order to ensure the stability of the structure ?

In case of a proton which consists of three quarks centered around the aperture from which the emanations take place, how do we affect the proton and therefore it's quarks ?
If this is to be done using the rodin coil, then it's because electromagnetic field structures are being used.

When the effect is removed, the energy is not returned but is manifested in some way in the atom.

The end result would be extra potential in the form of a higher differential voltage.

What is the electromagnetic field configuration that affects the metal atoms to cause them to require more universal energy in order to be stable ?

Since this does not normally occur, it would be some sort of harmonious condition of the fields possibly combined with extreme values of electric or magnetic fields and/or extremely high frequencies.

Any ideas ?

PJ

Re: Vortex coil theory
« Reply #3, on July 10th, 2016, 06:24 PM »
I thought i would add some of my ideas
I don't have indepth knowledge of electronics and atomic theory which i think may be to my benifit :P

My gut feel from what i have read and the experiments i have done is that torus designs represent the flow paths of the two smallest building blocks of everything that is made in our universe.
I believe Ed Leedskalnin's theory of 'magnetic current' may well be true and that there may not be 'electrons' but two separate parts which Ed referred to as North and South magnets which move in a clockwise rotation when moving forward.
In vortex math I see the two rows of 124875  numbers as representing the 'north' and 'south' magnets and the path they follow.
I have to get back to work now but have more ideas on this that I will share when I can and if people are interested in tbese ideas
Cheers

Lynx

Re: Vortex coil theory
« Reply #4, on July 10th, 2016, 09:43 PM »
Keep it coming :thumbsup:

PJ

Re: Vortex coil theory
« Reply #5, on July 11th, 2016, 04:33 AM »Last edited on July 11th, 2016, 04:42 AM
Ok I have some time so continuing....

Ed mainly referred to the north and South magnets in his writings - they formed his 'magnetic current'.  He said one by itself will not do much - you need to lots for them to be useful. I believe Ed used his flywheel and possibly metal pipes connected into the aquifer below coral castle and other means to collect and work with these magnets to help build his stuctures.

With vortex coils i believe they are another way to collect Ed's north and South magnets.  The closer we can get the coil designs to how these magnets move in nature the more efficient the device will potentially become at collecting magnets (overunity).

Most torus designs ì have seen so far approximate the '12 circuit' design modified to be à single or double circuit to make winding easier.  I have a couple of Daniel Nunez coils which i believe are 12 circuit appeoximations. The question in my mind is is there a torus design that we can make that is not an approximation and will this be better at collecting magnets and producing magnetic current?
I came across the following Phi Torus video which rings very true for me on potentially the best torus designs and proportions

https://youtu.be/1KS5XvP_rGI
If this link doesn't work just search 'phi torus' on youtube
What surprised me was that the vortex math Rodin number grid was arrived at from the Fibonacci sequence!
If you watch the video you will see consecutive overlaid torus designs based on vortex math and sized to phi proportions.  The 12 circuit design that most people are following is the second stage of this sequence but as I have said we are making approximations.  I started looking at the third stage which has three circuits each looping through the center 4 times and i decided to try and make this torus as i belived the three circuits could be broken down to two windings (one for positive/ north and one for negative / south) with the third circuit being the gap space.   I was able to 3D model the design however it became evident that the further out you go on the phi torus stages the smaller and more complicated the windings become so i thought this may not be the best approach.   It was here where i asked myself what about the first stage of the phi torus??... this has three circuits each looping through 4 times on a very simple torus design and the windings would be quite thick and potentially give off more magnetic field when hooked up to the amplifier....so i decided to make it.  I have modelled a torus and will upload an stl file soon (likely tomorrow - it is on my surface pro and I am writing this on my phone while family is asleep :P)
I will attatch some photos now of where i am up to andleave this here for tonight and continue tomorrow
Hmmm can't see attachment button
Will post this text then see if i can attatch some photos
Cheers and good night
Re: Vortex coil theory
« Reply #6, on July 11th, 2016, 12:25 PM »
Here is the .stl file for the torus mentioned above
Re: Vortex coil theory
« Reply #7, on July 11th, 2016, 12:29 PM »
I will write more tonight on the current torus i have designed and the theory on what i believe is going on :)
Re: Vortex coil theory
« Reply #8, on July 12th, 2016, 04:20 AM »Last edited on July 12th, 2016, 04:22 AM
I decided to complete the wiring of the torus tonight and do some testing.   I have a pretty basic setup - amplifier, signal generator, multimeter etc (see photo attatched)
Unfortunately no great results - was hoping for spikes in voltage similar to what i get when testing the Daniel Nunez coils however no luck thus time :(
I fed the output of the coil back into the coil which creates a pretty good alternating magnetic field which spins up a magnet pretty well however i have already made a torus which spun up a magnet until it shattered at 500 000 rpm but this was not the goal.
Looks like ill be gong back to the drawing board - i may look again at the third level phi torus design.
Sòrry for diverting a bit from the topic of vortex coil theory.
When i build up some more enthusiasm i will write some more on my view of vortex coil theory.
Cheers

Viking

Re: Vortex coil theory
« Reply #9, on July 12th, 2016, 10:53 AM »
Wonderfull work you have done there. It's so great to see someone so dedicated to exploration and boldly go where no one has gone before.

About the electron - I think we can pretty certainly say that it exists - if for nothing else it has been used to smash into phosphor screens of cathode ray tubes for decades (TV screens) before the invention of LCD screens. Also for radio tubes, magnetrons in microwave ovens and radars, vacuum fluoresence displays, electron scanning microscopes etc etc. So as a wave and particle it's pretty well confirmed.
An even more smaller particle would be the photon, which interacts happily with other atoms and the neutrino which hardly interacts with anything. Both are supposed to have zero mass. Mass probably being a EM wave interaction with other particles, of which the photon and neutrino seem be missing - most likely because of some perfect symmetry that cancels out any mass "effect".
Photons can intefere with each other and neutrinos may be able to also, but since they can never be collected or influenced by any force, it's hard to set up an experiment with them.

PJ

Re: Vortex coil theory
« Reply #10, on July 12th, 2016, 01:07 PM »
Thanks for the compliment Viking :)
I enjoy the challenge of exploring new ideas, designing and creating things to test.  Tends to be more rewarding when there are positive results :P
Keep up your good work also

~Russ

Re: Vortex coil theory
« Reply #11, on July 15th, 2016, 04:18 PM »
wow i missed this thread for a bit, that's some nice work PJ,

may make one for fun lol ~Russ

PJ

Re: Vortex coil theory
« Reply #12, on July 16th, 2016, 12:28 AM »
Oh thanks Russ :)
The model I made was a lot of fun to create.
I decided to allow space to wind a central core which runs as a central ring that the two main circuits wind around.
Unfortunately there was no apparent benefit to this but hey ho you never know so thought it was worth a try :)
Re: Vortex coil theory
« Reply #13, on July 16th, 2016, 01:56 AM »
Just out of interest would anyone like to see the video i took off the high speed spinning magnet? I've shown a few people but never online.
It's pretty spectacular even if it doesn't serve any real useful purpose :P

Viking

Re: Vortex coil theory
« Reply #14, on July 16th, 2016, 02:22 PM »
Bringeth forth for the world to see please ;)

PJ

Re: Vortex coil theory
« Reply #15, on July 16th, 2016, 03:23 PM »
Cool
Glad there is interest :)
I'll post three videos
This first one shows the setup
1 inch neodymium magnet @ 1hz
You should be able to see that the magnet does a full 360 degree rotation at 1 hz.
I had the volume too high on the amp in this test so the magnet jumps out
Re: Vortex coil theory
« Reply #16, on July 16th, 2016, 03:39 PM »
Just tried uploading
Think it may have failed as file is 63Mb or it could just take a while to upload.
Ill see if i can compress the videos a bit.
Is there a maximum suggested file size for uploading to this forum?

Matt Watts

Re: Vortex coil theory
« Reply #17, on July 16th, 2016, 03:47 PM »Last edited on July 16th, 2016, 03:50 PM
Quote from PJ on July 16th, 2016, 03:39 PM
Just tried uploading
Think it may have failed as file is 63Mb or it could just take a while to upload.
Ill see if i can compress the videos a bit.
Is there a maximum suggested file size for uploading to this forum?
I thought it was 64Mb, but you also have to factor in the upload time it takes, because the server will dump the session if it takes longer than that.

PJ, do you have a dropbox or some other file share mechanism/account?   Myself, I'm very interested in seeing your video--probably will connect some of the dots I've been toying with.

PJ

Re: Vortex coil theory
« Reply #18, on July 16th, 2016, 04:01 PM »
Quote from Matt Watts on July 16th, 2016, 03:47 PM
I thought it was 64Mb, but you also have to factor in the upload time it takes, because the server will dump the session if it takes longer than that.

PJ, do you have a dropbox or some other file share mechanism/account?   Myself, I'm very interested in seeing your video--probably will connect some of the dots I've been toying with.
I think i have a dropbox will check.
Have some family matters to attend to so will come back to this later

Matt Watts

Re: Vortex coil theory
« Reply #20, on July 17th, 2016, 01:57 PM »
Quote from PJ on July 17th, 2016, 12:08 AM
Let me know if this works ok
Worked great!

Okay, so there is obviously a rotating magnetic field of some sort going on in there.  What I'm curious of is the orientation of the spherical neo magnet--does one pole of this magnetic try to align itself to a static position while the other pole rotates?

It's difficult to visualize what the fields from the coil look like and in what direction they are rotating or manifesting.  From what Daniel Nunez has demonstrated in the past, the coil creates one stationary pole while the opposite pole rotates.  As long as the permanent magnet is able to reference the stationary pole, it uses that pole as essentially a magnetic bearing.  The opposite pole is then responsible for the force of rotation.

The thing to keep in mind with all this is:  You have an expanding and contracting magnetic field.  This field maintains its polar orientation.  The only thing that is varying is the intensity of the field strength.  Unless...   You are truly energizing the coil with a bipolar signal.  In that case, at the zero crossing, you are actually swapping the pole polarity.  If you are driving this coil with a bipolar signal and the coil continues to create a static pole always having the same polarity, this is highly significant and demonstrates the coil geometry is responsible for positioning this static pole in the same location regardless of signal polarity.  An electrical monopole is what I would call it, meaning it transforms an AC signal into a pulsed DC magnetic field, almost like a diode created by nothing more than inductor windings with the proper geometry.  That would be a big deal to me if it is in fact what is really happening.



PJ

Re: Vortex coil theory
« Reply #21, on July 17th, 2016, 03:27 PM »
I'm glad the videos could be accessed ok.

I don't think anything significant is going on here - would be nice if there is though :)

The field is swapping from one side to the other of the torus causing the magnet to swap from end to end.

If you watch the 1 inch neo at 1hz video you should be able to see this.

I will draw a diagram of what i believe is happening to the fields and post this latter.

~Russ

Re: Vortex coil theory
« Reply #22, on July 19th, 2016, 12:52 PM »Last edited on July 19th, 2016, 03:00 PM
oh yeah nice bang! find any of that magnet? use a plastic bowl or something over that thing! it will go through the skin...

Just my 2 cent's.

I spent years playing with magnets and theses coils only to find that this is not the use for the coils. its not an efferent motor,

its better application is  antenna.

however Dont let me stop you from playing with magnets :)

just sharing my knowledge

hehe

keep up the good work!
~Russ

PJ

Re: Vortex coil theory
« Reply #23, on July 19th, 2016, 02:51 PM »
Ah yes i ended up with a ricochet off my hand that drew blood and a month or so after found a spot on my cheek that when squeezed poped up a bit of magnet!?!

Yikes!

No more high speed magnets for me.
Too many other things to do

All good :)

Viking

Re: Vortex coil theory
« Reply #24, on August 19th, 2016, 01:57 PM »Last edited on August 19th, 2016, 02:17 PM
OK some more musing based on latest inspiration.
We need to ask ourselves:
1. What is the electric force ?
2. What is the magnetic force ?
3. What is the gravitational force ?
4. What is mass ?
5. Why does the mass cause intertia ?
6. What is the strong nuclear force ?
7. What is the weak nuclear force ?
8. What types of wave exist ?
9. When does a wave end up behaving like a particle ?
10. How does the observer affect the outcome of configurations (like in the double slit experiment)
11. Is there a fundamental structure of space that supports all of the above ? and does it follow the vortex math based fractal geometry ?
12. How do the particles and forces carry information, like the state of a system, like the state of our minds ?
13. Is the total energy of the universe zero ? and if zeo, can energy be borrowed from structure of space to create new matter and energy ?
14. Why are the fundamental values of atomic particles the same and why do they behave the same. Like why are all electrons the same.
15. Why can particles be entangled and affect each other no matter the distance ?
16. Is the planck constant defined by other elemental values ?
17. Why does the the speed of light appear as a fixed limit to us ?
18. Why do we and what we percieve as physical matter change as a function of what we call time.
19 . Is there such a things as time or is it just something we have invented ?
20. Is information in the universe preserved ?
21. What is the driving force behind the self-organizing behavious of living systems ?
22. Can other things - like plasma - also be self organising ?
23. Can a superconductor be regarded as a macro sized quantum system ?
24. Why can't magnetic fields penetrate superconductors and fluids, except for small vortex shaped worm holes ?

A. Is the purpose of the vortex coil to have a macroscopic system in a quantum behavioural state ?
B. Can the coil become superconducting when in the quantum behavioural state ?
C. What happens to the magnetic forces and possibly the other forces in the quantum state ?
D. Gravity forces have been detected by  E. Podletkov while spinning a high temperature ceramic superconductor disc and applying RF energy
E. Longitudinal quantum vibrations, i.e. (sound) waves propagating at 1Mm/s seem to cause natural forces to be amplified to the macroscopic ranges.

So to me it seems like we need to have have a rotating (electro)magnetic RF field in the coil and to cause it to somehow drop in temperature and become superconductive. In the path of this the copper should somehow approach the situation of becomming Bose-Einstein condensate and the electrons to form cooper pairs.
Once running, the coil most probably has a magnetic field and a gravitational field effect emanating from the center.
This is much alike the John Searl generator which is also based on geometric math seemingly very similar to vortex based math.

So as Marko Rodin said, this coil can be used for energy generation and propulsion.

So making the field rotate, understanding the quantum effect it has on the electrons in the copper and studying VBM and the John Searl math is the way forward.

It's so sad that if Marko knows some of the above answers that he doesn't wan't to share it with the rest of us. But then again there is the universal principle of having to learn and experience before becomming spiritually mature to handle such technology. Question is does it and can it apply to all of humanity or just a handfull ? If it applies to all of humanity, do we need a sort of global coherency of our consiousness and awarenes before this technology can come out ? And if someone discovers it before this happens, will it be stopped in it's tracks by some force ?? And in that case doesn't that violate the universal law of free will ?

Yeah I'm just asking those out there who might know. Please enlighten us !!

Viking