Have a giggle Russ,

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bZO5KBeKYVs


This is the one I want:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wPztln54VBY



Checkout all his videos:
https://www.youtube.com/user/jchenry38/videos


And this one if you want to get a better look at the guts:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fUrVidLrt4Y

Can anyone tell me what is so special about this coil configuration?

This one gives a pretty good view of the rotor at time 2:23... note that the one coil is at an angle to the rotor, but not 90 degrees like you show in your graphic:

https://youtu.be/sgoHAXmAqhw?t=143

Here's a full view of the rotor, at time 3:40, the top and bottom coils are angled similarly:

https://youtu.be/1r24xakMzYU?t=220

Si Satchanalai Vocational College website:
http://www.siec.ac.th/websiec/index.php

I'm still trying to work out how something like this could work (not the least of which is, how are they energizing those coils, if they have no battery as they claim?), but near as I can tell, it's a frame-dependent torque, which I discussed here:
http://open-source-energy.org/?topic=2859

Possible wiring/configuration schemes.

Demonstration video:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cIzehAP5URQ

Not exactly pulling wheelies, but it's a start:

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

Now play me some music to go with it:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=C8i7AS9_FrI

Take me for a spin.



Come on Russ, you could do this.    :-)

Hi, Matt.

Take a look at this:

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

TC (Time Constant) = L / (R_coil + R_load)

So if one can make a coil with high inductance and low resistance, one can delay the Lenz effect's creation of bEMF to such a point that the bEMF acts to speed up the rotor at a certain rotor speed (the 'resonant frequency' of that delayed Lenz effect).

So we have three routes by which to achieve this... either increase coil inductance, or decrease coil resistance, or both. (We can also increase generator rotational speed, or increase the number of poles in the generator, both of which carry inherent problems.)

Increasing the inductance requires more windings, leading to either bulky coils or wire too small to carry much current.

Decreasing resistance, though, gives us the best of both worlds... smaller physical-size coils and high ampacity.

Some methods by which to achieve this:
1) Litz wire
2) Graphene coating on the wire... graphene has the lowest resistance of any known material. So you'd have your regular wire, coat it with graphene, then insulate it.

So the question is... how do we coat a wire with graphene?

Coating the wire is how Keshe does it supposedly.  I tried his method and found it to be most precarious.  Paul Babcock is hot on the trail of advanced material science to reduce the internal resistance.

My feeling is that we need to move closer to the source and question why does a coil of wire charge/discharge the way it does.  If this electricity behaves similar to a non-compressible fluid, there should be no delay, but there is and it shows itself as the creation of a magnetic field.  One has to consider that electricity as we are familiar with it must be composed of at least two components, a hybrid of sorts.  We need to think (like nature) and determine what the two components are and how they integrate with each each other to form electricity.  Once this is done, then mechanically we can visualize what electricity looks like.  And once we know that, its a relatively straight forward process to reverse engineer a means to produce it.

I like to look at it like vortecis
spinning clockwise and counter clockwise.

a electron would be a vortex pair. basically neutral.
when this pair is taken apart,  we get a ampere spin and a volt spin (opposite directions).

these 2 are attracted due to their opposite spin properties.  one sucks in the other pushes out (centripetal and centrifugal).

when these vortices are close together, their "tails" lock together. like ropes. this would be the dielectric field between capacitor plates.

the part that is spinning would be photonic. so if a vortex is out of control because it reaches its maximum spin speed. the exessive energy breaks away from the vortex, this would be a photon.

when the vortices are joined they become neutral again forming a stable structure (figure 8 ).

the vortex can also transform into a ring vortex, this would be the longitudinal mode. this ring vortex could transport its energy, and tranfer it into another electron. this electron would be exited with the energy of the vortex ring.

so we have a rope/line of two entangled vortices

we have the vortex itself (seen in magnetic fields, as water vortex) (2 kinds centripetal and centrifugal)

and the ring vortex. (also 2 kinds?)
these ringvortices maybe could also exist in pairs?

bottom line, all fields are eather fields. and its all light.
but the form is giving it its properties.

Quote from Matt Watts on June 2nd, 2017, 09:54 AM

Coating the wire is how Keshe does it supposedly.  I tried his method and found it to be most precarious.  Paul Babcock is hot on the trail of advanced material science to reduce the internal resistance.

My feeling is that we need to move closer to the source and question why does a coil of wire charge/discharge the way it does.  If this electricity behaves similar to a non-compressible fluid, there should be no delay, but there is and it shows itself as the creation of a magnetic field.

I think electrons and thus current flow is analogous to a non-compressible fluid, but magnetism is not. Remember, electrons are fermions, and thus obey Pauli's Exclusion Principle, whereas virtual photons (magnetism) are bosons, and thus do not. So you're converting from a non-compressible to a compressible fluid, to extend the analogy.

Quote from Matt Watts on June 2nd, 2017, 09:54 AM

One has to consider that electricity as we are familiar with it must be composed of at least two components, a hybrid of sorts.  We need to think (like nature) and determine what the two components are and how they integrate with each each other to form electricity.  Once this is done, then mechanically we can visualize what electricity looks like.  And once we know that, its a relatively straight forward process to reverse engineer a means to produce it.

How would a bifilar coil respond on the L/R time constant curve? Seems to me that an oppositely-wound bifilar would have really low inductance (whereas a parallel-wound bifilar would have higher inductance than a regular coil), given that the windings' magnetic fields mutually cancel, allowing one to store energy without increasing the energy tensor of that space. The question is, in what form is that energy being stored? It's not magnetism.

I'd be interested to learn if anyone has weighed a bifilar coil as it stores energy... the canceling magnetic fields of the bifilar coil windings means that energy isn't being stored in a magnetic field, so it must undergo conversion to some other form. By weighing the coil on a very accurate scale, we can rule in / rule out gravitational potential.

I mention this because of the Boyd Bushman magnet drop replication I'd written about previously.

A conventional coil builds its magnetic field at a parabolic rate, but that magnetic field collapses at an inverse parabolic rate (ie: it collapses from 100% faster than it took to build to 100%).



We can take advantage of the disparity between the time it takes to build the magnetic field, and the time it takes that magnetic field to collapse to push the rotor, rather than slow it down.

From the graphic above, we see that the magnetic field of an inductor builds to ~63.2% of maximum in 1 L/R time period, whereas it collapses to only ~36.8% of maximum in that same time period.

Ideally what we want to do is exploit the difference in time and energy between building the coil's magnetic field from ~63.2% to 100% (which would take 4 L/R time periods), and the time and energy necessary to collapse that magnetic field from 100% to ~36.8% (which would take 1 L/R time period). So ideally we'd be putting in 4 L/R time periods to increase the magnetic field by ~36.8% (from ~63.2% to 100%), then utilizing that magnetic field as it collapses in 1 L/R time period by ~63.2% (from 100% to ~36.8%).

Now, obviously that's not going to work for very long... you can't build up by ~36.8% (to 100%) and collapse by ~63.2% for very long before you're hitting 0% during the collapse. The coil on the next few go-rounds would work its way downward in energy until it only builds up from 0% to ~63.2% (because of the rotational speed which gets us that 1 L/R time period). The coil's magnetic field can't collapse below zero, and we can't easily vary the speed of the machine quickly while it's running to take advantage of the 4 L/R time period of building from ~63.2% to 100% (~36.8%), then extracting ~63.2% (100% to ~36.8%) of it in 1 L/R time period, so what we're actually doing when the machine is running is building that magnetic field in the coil to ~63.2% in 1 L/R time period, then collapsing it to 0% in 1 L/R time period before it can act as bEMF. IOW, we've found a way to get around the "hysteresis curve" of the coil.

From the video above, for a normal generator:
L = 106 mH
R_int = 21.1 Ohm
R_load = 200 Ohm
R_total = R_int + R_load

L/R_total = 0.4794 msec

(60000 msec per minute / msec per interaction) / Number Of Poles = RPM

So assuming a 12 pole generator, a conventional generator with the above attributes would have to spin at 10,429 RPM to lessen rotor drag due to bEMF.

From the video above, for a delayed-Lenz generator:
L = 2182 mH
R_int = 384.5 Ohm
R_load = 200 Ohm
R_total = R_int + R_load

L/R_total = 3.733 msec

(60000 msec per minute / msec per interaction) / Number Of Poles = RPM

So assuming a 12 pole generator, a delayed-Lenz generator with the above attributes would have to spin at 1339 RPM to lessen rotor drag due to bEMF.

Quote from Cycle on June 2nd, 2017, 04:56 PM

I mention this because of the Boyd Bushman magnet drop replication I'd written about previously.

Mr. Bushman referred to gravity as a cousin of magnetism.  So we can probably agree the two are related, but which one is for certain the more primitive of the two?   Magnetism?   I lean towards the writings of W.B. Smith:  Three fields:  Magnetic, Dielectric & Tempic.  Like electricity, I suspect gravity is some form of hybrid of the primary/primitive fields.  Three fields with 3 dimensional space to operate in, gives us a lot of possibilities.  Call them Aether fields, a very generalized term for all the possible combinations.  Some of these combinations must then be responsible for the particles or matter we detect/perceive, since everything originates from fields.  So if matter is composed of fields, it's dead certain matter can be manipulated by those very fields, for without them, matter wouldn't exist.  Empty space void of fields is void of everything, truly void, nothing at all.

It's just a matter of effort before we begin to assemble these fields in new ways not commonly known or at all understood.  We may need new forms of detectors to even measure some of them.  We are only scratching the surface of Nature's fanciful ways.

let nature inspire us.  for me water always is a great inspiration. it shows the natural flow.