I'm not sure how many people here on this forum have researched Chris Sykes and his Partnered Output Coils but I'd like to ask the members here a very direct (should be simple to answer) question:
If you wind a transformer with a single primary and two identical secondaries and connect the secondaries together so they are out of phase, do you in effect create a condition of infinite current?
Let me add a little more detail so people can better visualize what I mean.
Let's suppose this transformer has 400 turns on the primary and each secondary has 100 turns. So this is clearly a step-down 4:1 transformer. Now we connect the two secondaries together, out of phase. One might think you would get a big spark and smoke when you do this, but you won't. Let's think for a minute why...
If we wind 100 turns clockwise on an inductor then change directions and wind another 100 turns counter clockwise, effectively we have no inductance. The 100 turns we wound to create the magnetic field we just cancelled by winding another 100 turns in the opposite direction. So we have a net zero magnetic field induced into the core of this inductor. Now let's go back to the transformer scenario.
We know about transformer turns ratio right? A four-to-one step-down transformer should reduce the voltage to 25% of what we started with and boost the amperage by four times. So if we have the two secondaries connected in bucking configuration, the effective turns count on the secondary (output) side is zero. Which means the voltage output is zero. But wouldn't that imply the current is infinite?
And what does the primary see with this configuration?
It should see nothing because effectively there are no turns on the secondary--they all cancel out. So this transformer now behaves like a simple inductor with no secondaries at all. Any power you feed into this device is all returned, i.e. completely reactive.
Okay, if you agree with me so far (because you have done the experiments), what does infinite current mean? What can we do with it? If we were able to mix voltage with that current in-phase, would we again have real power? And lots of it? After all, just a tiny bit of voltage times infinite current is a lot of volt-amps right?
Now lets look a little more in-depth. Suppose the primary was wound with tiny wire, 400 turns and the DC resistance was 100 ohms. If we fed this primary with 10 volts peak-to-peak, by Ohm's Law, the primary could never draw more than 100 milli-amps. One tenth of an amp times 10 volts is one volt-amp or if in-phase one watt. So we have on the input PMAX equal to 1 watt. But on the output side we know the amps are infinite, we just don't have any voltage to go with it.
If we can find a method to mix some voltage with that current and do it in-phase, would we not have real power?
And if this real power exceeds one watt, are we COP > 1 or generally speaking overunity?
Having said all that, think about a scenario with two separate transformers, each with one primary and one secondary. If power to each primary is synchronized and we connect the two secondaries together out-of-phase, we do in fact get a big spark, smoke and all the rest that goes with transformer destruction. The question to ask yourself is why with one primary and one core you don't, but with two primaries and two cores you do?
Can a hybrid be made with two C-cores (and gap); each core leg having a secondary? Maybe just a single primary that sits centered on the gap. What we want is the primary to behave as though there are no secondaries, so all reflected power is reactive on the input side and limited by the winding resistance, but on the output side we would like the infinite current plus the in-phase voltage.
I don't know about everyone else, but I see a strong correlation between this proposed transformer design and that of Stan Meyer's VIC. Infinite current with just the right amount of voltage will certainly split water. I wonder... Do you suppose the high voltages we see with Stan's VIC is actually the reactance of the cell, meaning we hit the water with current, the molecules split, electrons fly out and the scope sees these electrons as voltage?
I do wonder...
If you wind a transformer with a single primary and two identical secondaries and connect the secondaries together so they are out of phase, do you in effect create a condition of infinite current?
Let me add a little more detail so people can better visualize what I mean.
Let's suppose this transformer has 400 turns on the primary and each secondary has 100 turns. So this is clearly a step-down 4:1 transformer. Now we connect the two secondaries together, out of phase. One might think you would get a big spark and smoke when you do this, but you won't. Let's think for a minute why...
If we wind 100 turns clockwise on an inductor then change directions and wind another 100 turns counter clockwise, effectively we have no inductance. The 100 turns we wound to create the magnetic field we just cancelled by winding another 100 turns in the opposite direction. So we have a net zero magnetic field induced into the core of this inductor. Now let's go back to the transformer scenario.
We know about transformer turns ratio right? A four-to-one step-down transformer should reduce the voltage to 25% of what we started with and boost the amperage by four times. So if we have the two secondaries connected in bucking configuration, the effective turns count on the secondary (output) side is zero. Which means the voltage output is zero. But wouldn't that imply the current is infinite?
And what does the primary see with this configuration?
It should see nothing because effectively there are no turns on the secondary--they all cancel out. So this transformer now behaves like a simple inductor with no secondaries at all. Any power you feed into this device is all returned, i.e. completely reactive.
Okay, if you agree with me so far (because you have done the experiments), what does infinite current mean? What can we do with it? If we were able to mix voltage with that current in-phase, would we again have real power? And lots of it? After all, just a tiny bit of voltage times infinite current is a lot of volt-amps right?
Now lets look a little more in-depth. Suppose the primary was wound with tiny wire, 400 turns and the DC resistance was 100 ohms. If we fed this primary with 10 volts peak-to-peak, by Ohm's Law, the primary could never draw more than 100 milli-amps. One tenth of an amp times 10 volts is one volt-amp or if in-phase one watt. So we have on the input PMAX equal to 1 watt. But on the output side we know the amps are infinite, we just don't have any voltage to go with it.
If we can find a method to mix some voltage with that current and do it in-phase, would we not have real power?
And if this real power exceeds one watt, are we COP > 1 or generally speaking overunity?
Having said all that, think about a scenario with two separate transformers, each with one primary and one secondary. If power to each primary is synchronized and we connect the two secondaries together out-of-phase, we do in fact get a big spark, smoke and all the rest that goes with transformer destruction. The question to ask yourself is why with one primary and one core you don't, but with two primaries and two cores you do?
Can a hybrid be made with two C-cores (and gap); each core leg having a secondary? Maybe just a single primary that sits centered on the gap. What we want is the primary to behave as though there are no secondaries, so all reflected power is reactive on the input side and limited by the winding resistance, but on the output side we would like the infinite current plus the in-phase voltage.
I don't know about everyone else, but I see a strong correlation between this proposed transformer design and that of Stan Meyer's VIC. Infinite current with just the right amount of voltage will certainly split water. I wonder... Do you suppose the high voltages we see with Stan's VIC is actually the reactance of the cell, meaning we hit the water with current, the molecules split, electrons fly out and the scope sees these electrons as voltage?
I do wonder...