#### ~Russ

##### Eletrical Water Hammer
«  »Last edited

2 Questions.

What Happens when we start flow then stop it.

can you make an Electrical water hammer? and let it fill its self? (we only need 2 volts in my cap-cap test on my last video)

see video for details.

~Russ

#### Cycle

##### Re: Eletrical Water Hammer
« Reply #1,  »Last edited by Cycle
Sounds like you're trying to create an electric analog to a hydraulic ram-pump, converting momentum to pressure:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hydraulic_ram

Remember, magnetic fields have momentum. The momentum carried by electromagnetic radiation equals its energy divided by the speed of light, as shown in the relativistic formula E2 = p2 c2 + m2 c4, thus p = E/c.

Now... what happens when you slow down the speed of light? If the denominator goes down while the numerator stays the same, the result goes up. The momentum carried by electromagnetic radiation equals its energy divided by the speed of light. ;)

Light has momentum, too. In fact, the highest pressures obtained (10,000 atmospheres) are created by lasers for Inertial Confinement Fusion. That's far higher than can be obtained by conventional compression of an atmosphere.

http://nebula.physics.uakron.edu/dept/faculty/benhu/Reprints/EM_momentum_EJP.pdf

And remember, unlike electricity (which, electrons being fermions, cannot superimpose), light (photons) and magnetism (virtual photons) are bosons and can be superimposed, allowing a much higher energy peak for a much shorter time.

#### chuff1

##### Re: Eletrical Water Hammer
« Reply #2,  »Last edited
Russ,

I am afraid that using the water hammer analogy will not work for electron flow.  Due to https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Drift_velocity an electron does not flow through a wire fast enough to build up momentum.   Only one person has used electrons to create momentum and his name was
Steven Mark.  He found a way to send the electrons down the wire without the
magnetic component which causes the electrons to flow out the wire perpendicular
to the flow due to Magneto-hydrodynamics.Here is a great set of videos that explains in detail all about fluid dynamics that will give you a good understanding of the subject.
If we assume that electricity is a very low viscosity fluid then it should follow the same
rules as any other fluid would.  If you were to substitute the ions from a fluid for electrons
in a wire then we must assume that protons also must flow in the wire in the opposite direction as the electrons.

There are two patents that I am aware of that mention using extra energy to increase the original
chargeThis patent from Rota used inductors to isolate the high frequency voltage from the battery connections.  The other Patent is from Tesla who also uses an inductor or a capacitor to isolate the conductor.

#### Cycle

##### Re: Eletrical Water Hammer
« Reply #3,  »
Quote from chuff1 on October 18th, 2017, 05:26 PM
I am afraid that using the water hammer analogy will not work for electron flow.  Due to https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Drift_velocity an electron does not flow through a wire fast enough to build up momentum.
Through wire. How about a negative resistance device?

#### ~Russ

##### Re: Eletrical Water Hammer
« Reply #4,  »
Quote
In most of cases the analogy of water hammer efect and effect of an electron in a solid is not valid. Most of time the average speed of electron in a solid is omparable to mm/s or cm/s. At a speed of that range the effect of termal motion of electrons is the dominant one, and the current flow is just a drift of electrons that flow chaoticaly inside of metal.

But (there is allways a but in some explaination), in cases of extremely fast switching devices, as it is case with the modern semiconductors in a computer parts or high current high energy switching devices, the effects are drastic. In very fast switching transistors, the leads at the source drain and gate of the transistors are verry small (because of minimization of parasitic capacitance and so on...). A frend of mine is in a field of solid state physics, and I have seen the SEM images of the gates. Even at so low voltages (2.5V - 3.3V) because of the fast switching rate and als large electric fields, the electrons are accelerated to a very large energies comparable with approx 257K [room temperature]. If we consider that the voltage diference between the source and drain is 2.5V and the method of producing such transistors is to implant several atoms as a gate, it is easy to imagine that on such small distances electron woud have only several colision in the path -> energy of an electron is comparable with 1eV => 11500 K. So single electrons have a large energies and they could make a verry large impact on the electrode.

On the other hand, in the case of gas discharge, the mean average energy of the electron is very large. For a normal plasma discharge temperatures, also the electron energies are comparable with 1eV or in case of some more hotter plasmas it coud be realy experimentaly achieved even several dozens, and in few places on earth several hundreds of eV. I hope that if You have finishe anny course of gas discharge physics or electronics, You coud rememger the effect of sputtering of the cathode. It is related to the high electron energies. As a most extreme discharge device, that is used as a extremley fast high voltage switch, lets imagine that we have to swith the capacitor of 1uF on 10kV => 10^-2 Coulombs = 10mC, and a pseudospark is designed to have the distance between the main electrodes much smaller than the free path of an electron in a buffer gas. It means that, in average, every electron that flows thru that device poses the impact energy insignificantly smaller than the charge of electron multiplied by the voltage on electrodes. That means thet first group of electron have the enrgy of 10keV = 10000eV, while the las ones have couple tens of electron volts at which the process stops.

So there exist thje efect of "electron hammer" but not in normal conductors at normal conditions (even several kA).

Sincerely Your

#### jbignes5

##### Re: Eletrical Water Hammer
« Reply #5,  »
"I have found that in these systems the use of a conducting sheath or screen around the line conductors and well grounded, or even brought into proximity to external conductors or large bodies, is attended by an actual and generally a serious loss of energy. I therefore maintain the sheath either entirely isolated or connected directly or inductively to the ground, through a path which will practically prevent the passage of currents over it. I have also found that when a continuous insulated sheath or screen is employed, there is greater liability to loss of energy by inductive action, for unless the sheath or screen be considerably shorter than the current waves passing in the conductor, electro-motive forces will be set up between different points in the sheath, which will result in the passage between such points of induced currents. I, therefore, divide up the sheath or screen into short lengths, very much shorter than the wave lengths of the current used, so that the grounding of any one of such lengths or the approach thereto of a large body will result in an inappreciable loss, or at most a small local draining of the energy, while the tendency of currents to flow between different points in the sheath is effectually overcome. The function of the sheath as a static screen for preventing the dissipation of the electric energy, however, requires for its complete effectiveness an uninterrupted conducting partition or screen around the conductor. I attain this respect in the case of a sectional screen, by causing the ends of the insulated divisions or sections of the same to overlap, interposing a suitable insulating material between the overlapping portions. By means of a conductor or conductors thus protected, I may transmit with slight loss and to great distances currents of very high potential and extremely high frequency."

Both straight ground and inductive or capacitive devices to limit losses. But he does say that you can use it completely isolated or in static mode as well in the case of extreme voltage or extreme frequency without real losses.

Although I think the Bedinin machine might use this radiative effect to gather charges around the batteries (Virtual grounds) and stimulate them to be drawn into the batteries It has to have some real losses since they chose not to use screening on the lead up wires and switching systems.

Like you were saying in your newest video, If we could find a way to balance the system so that we could generate as much from the negative side as it takes or run the positive split then we might be able to create a better fulcrum like effect increasing both sides as in a push pull system.

Listen I know you don't like the anti electron view point but you just might have to in order to figure out an analogous reference to water.

One fact is that the electric flows in the conductor and the current is drawn into the wire. If you have a charge pump that pushes voltage and attracts and yet rejects the current then you get the effects of plasma discharge from the emission point. But if you allow the plasma to flow around the system you could scoop off the plasma either in electric potentials or real current when it flows around a coil or wire.

Getting the circuit correct is the issue right now. You are doing good in that department. Remember Tesla had his analogous mechanical versions of everything he tested. From turbines to fluid diodes.

Keep up the good work!
May (the Universe) Bless you and your Family.
Insert (God) if you like.

#### Cycle

##### Re: Eletrical Water Hammer
« Reply #6,  »
I've been researching negative capacitance... essentially, you substitute a ferroelectric material as one plate of a capacitor. It automatically recharges a bit when discharged, lessening the energy required to recharge it.

So perhaps create your own homebrew capacitors along the same lines?

#### chuff1

##### Re: Eletrical Water Hammer
« Reply #7,  »Last edited
After reading your last post Russ, I may have an idea.  Since a semiconductor speeds up electrons then
its only a matter of laying out a line of semi-conductive material and sending a current through it to
accelerate the electrons. Look up the term Lorentz force to see how electrons flow in a magnetic field.

#### jbignes5

##### Re: Eletrical Water Hammer
« Reply #8,  »
Isn't that a magnetically quenched spark gap?
Plasma is a conductor and the magnetic field adjacent to the travel of that voltage should increase the speed right? It also might have a certain effect of a diode as well. Deflecting any waves returning back from the sped up waves in a different direction?

#### Matt Watts

##### Re: Eletrical Water Hammer
« Reply #9,  »
Cook'n chicken...

:rofl2:

Guess I'm stuck on stupid.  How about one of you smart fellows enlighten me...

Is an open switch:
A.  A very high resistance resistor?
B.  A very low capacitance capacitor?
C.  None of the above?
D.  Both of the above?
E.  No one should care one way or another?

If you answered E, go back and research all the patents that include a spark gap.

A switch is a controllable spark gap.  A physical device and a mechanical device.  Also a very valuable device when you look at electrical circuits as mechanical.  If you jump an arc in an open switch it closes, but you can also close it with low potential that doesn't jump an arc.  There's some parity here I do believe we can take advantage of.

Now Russ, the void, check valve concept creating suction is interesting, but I have to ask:  How does adding more energy to the system actually help me?  I have a chunk of energy already, but I need potential difference to make use of it.  What I need is something that pulls at the extreme of the existing potential--on the negative side, I need more negative; on the positive side I need more positive, or both sides if I can get it.  Thinking mechanically, I'm not sure how to do this because nature wants to equalize this potential difference.  Transferring from one capacitor to another is a really good start, but to guarantee self running operation, we need parametric oscillation.  In other words we need two chunks of energy that would prefer to separate themselves instead of combine and neutralize.

#### Cycle

##### Re: Eletrical Water Hammer
« Reply #10,  »Last edited by Cycle
Russ... that web page you quoted above, there's a post further down which argues that because all electrical components have some value of inductance, it's impossible to get that "valve slamming shut water hammer" effect in electrical circuits.

Except, check this out:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bifilar_coil
Quote from https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bifilar_coil
Some bifilars have adjacent coils in which the convolutions are arranged so that the potential difference is magnified (i.e., the current flows in same parallel direction). Others are wound so that the current flows in opposite directions. The magnetic field created by one winding is therefore equal and opposite to that created by the other, resulting in a net magnetic field of zero (i.e., neutralizing any negative effects in the coil). In electrical terms, this means that the self-inductance of the coil is zero.
So rather than a MOT, perhaps a bifilar instead?

{EDIT}
Idea... Tesla's Hairpin Circuit... but rather than a spark gap, you put a toroidal bifilar coil in its place. The leads of each coil on the bifilar would be connected such that the current must cross-flow through the oppositely-wound bifilar. So rather than throwing that energy away as heat and light of the spark, you're storing and releasing it in the magnetic field of the bifilar. Except the oppositely-wound bifilar coil cancels the magnetic field of each winding... what would be the effect?
{/EDIT}

#### ~Russ

##### Re: Eletrical Water Hammer
« Reply #11,  »
Quote
Listen I know you don't like the anti electron view point but you just might have to in order to figure out an analogous reference to water.
Not at all. I just have to use somthing that we can at least relate too.

In the end I kind of agree with Matt. It might be all fields.?

:)

Cycle. See thses posts here :

http://open-source-energy.org/?topic=3079.msg46517#msg46517

Keep the descusion going. Guys. Good stuff.

Matt. As I described. If I can get the 2v I lost on my cap to cap using this suction idea . Then I can drain the left over 2v and use it to do work. Then we start with 60 and 0 just  like before.

This is what I mean by that idea. And its just  that. A thought.

~Russ
##### Re: Eletrical Water Hammer
« Reply #12,  »Last edited
More thoughts.

According to rodn coil thred and ideas.  Thses coils do wonders with capacitive Coupling and have good power transfer as so.    So I had some ideas.

Thses will work with the Tesla pancake coils on the PCB's Matt.
~Russ
##### Re: Eletrical Water Hammer
« Reply #13,  »
I found this Intresting.
As well as other stuff on that page worth reading .
Quote
It is interesting to note: Several creative people have surmised that it might be possible to extract endless amounts of energy from a dipole if one understands how electrons and current travel through resistive mediums.
Yes, but most (I've seen) rely on Maxwell's demon style effects, trying to switch potential from one circuit to another without loss. And a lot of zero-point handwaving. Quantum effects are odd, however. It may work one day. TTBrown found that rocks could continuously drive a few microamps through a load. So all we need to do is wire a lot of rocks together.
...and for the rest of you, bang... the... rocks... together...
http://wiki.c2.com/?SpeedOfElectrons
~Russ

#### d3x0r

##### Re: Eletrical Water Hammer
« Reply #14,  »
Re: a diode and electron current flow.

You can consider the arrow of the diode like the cup of a checkvalve... where electrons are the water pushing it open.

#### jbignes5

##### Re: Eletrical Water Hammer
« Reply #15,  »
"Some bifilars have adjacent coils in which the convolutions are arranged so that the potential difference is magnified (i.e., the current flows in same parallel direction). Others are wound so that the current flows in opposite directions. The magnetic field created by one winding is therefore equal and opposite to that created by the other, resulting in a net magnetic field of zero (i.e., neutralizing any negative effects in the coil). In electrical terms, this means that the self-inductance of the coil is zero.

The bifilar coil (more often called the bifilar winding) is used in modern electrical engineering as a means of constructing wire-wound resistors with negligible parasitic self-inductance."

Remove the self inductance and you remove that part of the resistance to flow of current in that circuit. This is partly what is referred to as cemf or impedance in a coil or circuit.
It can also be the transition of compression that you would need to facilitate the Hammer effect. Remember that the pressure rises after the valve shuts. It must also be changed in volume as this is where the speed gain comes from. You could liken this to a regular transformer as limiting the current by cemf and raising the voltage or pressure of the transformed energy going into the transformer. Each part of the water hammer must be duplicated. Regular solenoid, diode, capacitance and a place to take off the excess energy from the inclusion of environmental energy.
I hope you get this concept. Try to mirror the process of the mechanical version with the electrical parts. This is what Tesla used to prove to himself of his projects working with unproven theories. Find the mechanical analogy and it should be that way in electrical terms as well.

#### Matt Watts

##### Re: Eletrical Water Hammer
« Reply #16,  »Last edited
Quote from ~Russ on October 18th, 2017, 07:48 PM
In the end I kind of agree with Matt. It might be all fields.?
From my experience so far, if you can get your mind wrapped around the field concept, gradient, divergence and curl, fields are far more flexible--not nearly so limiting as electron theory.  One specific example is when Eric Dollard mentions that electricity flows in between a pair of wires, not on or through the wires.  Looking at it this way opens a whole new world of exploration.  If the Aether is actually composed of fields and we think of it as energy or the medium through which energy of different potentials exist, concepts like the load not consuming energy make far more sense.  How could a load actually consume the Aether or the medium that it itself exists in?
Quote from ~Russ on October 18th, 2017, 07:48 PM
Matt. As I described. If I can get the 2v I lost on my cap to cap using this suction idea . Then I can drain the left over 2v and use it to do work. Then we start with 60 and 0 just  like before.
I hear you Russ.  What I would like to see more of though is this idea that the load releases its own energy when energy is passed through it.  That single concept opens huge doorways.  I think we could actually explore this further on the bench by coming up with some sort of power supply that has an extremely low input impedance--looks like a direct short or nearly so.  If we can pass energy through this type of power supply without adversely affecting a cap-to-cap transfer, while getting measurable/useable output, we're all set.  Everything changes at this point.  The whole concept of electrical energy transport is thrown on its head.  Get that working and you would never look at an electrical circuit the same way again.

#### ~Russ

##### Re: Eletrical Water Hammer
« Reply #17,  »
Yes Matt. I will do cap to cap transfers today with diffrent loads. (Been trying to get to this one)  And try to make more sence of it. Somthing tells me that this makes great sence when dealing with a supper low impedance thick wire magnetic feild generator. Allmost no losses woth a huge feild. As far as a light bulb...  More to do.

~Russ.

#### talisman

##### Re: Eletrical Water Hammer
« Reply #18,  »
Could the forest from the trees be in the  concepts  of traditional electrical  nomenclature  as far as electron flow theory goes? (re: the unexplained happening at the electron level direction of flow behaviors).

"Electron flow is most often seen in introductory textbooks (this one included) and in the writings of professional scientists, especially solid-state physicists who are concerned with the actual motion of electrons in substances. These preferences are cultural, in the sense that certain groups of people have found it advantageous to envision electric current motion in certain ways. Being that most analyses of electric circuits do not depend on a technically accurate depiction of charge flow, the choice between conventional flow notation and electron flow notation is arbitrary . . . almost"

The textbook on this site on direct electricity has a very detailed comparison to the water hydro gravity flow example
compared.

#### jbignes5

##### Re: Eletrical Water Hammer
« Reply #19,  »Last edited
I to think that your take on the load not consuming the energy if done in the split the positive method. You are not grounding out the tap so it should not use anything and still function because of the potential difference between two differing positive voltages.
But in a real battery situation the energy is not consumed so to speak it is grounded out in the opposite polarity effectively nulling the charge. If you don't null the charge difference then the positive should return to the positive minus any losses due to resistance and the time reluctance delays the charge balance has when flowing through coils. With positives only you are not trying to balance the charge out, you are returning to another positive charge holder.
This is a key aspect and you only need to focus on that. The types of capacitors you are using will not compete with a super cap or better yet a battery on current capabilities. Yes a really fast discharge will be awesome and should increase the output but it is very very dirty and will disrupt most electronics. It needs to be shielded and the best way is static shielding designed for the wave duration on the wires and maybe around key paths this hammer impulse will follow. The input circuitry might need to be shielded as well depending on the frequency used. The output should be fine after the secondary since that should be traditional after the conversion.
I am also of the opinion that it will try to compress the uncompressible which should speed it up through the shielded paths as it follows the wave guide or hot wire.

« Reply #20,  »

#### onepower

##### Re: Eletrical Water Hammer
« Reply #21,  »Last edited
talisman
Quote
However, because we tend to associate the word “positive” with “surplus” and “negative” with “deficiency,” the standard label for electron charge does seem backward. Because of this, many engineers decided to retain the old concept of electricity with “positive” referring to a surplus of charge, and label charge flow (current) accordingly. This became known as conventional flow notation:
In conventional flow notation, we show the motion of charge according to the (technically incorrect) labels of + and -. This way the labels make sense, but the direction of charge flow is incorrect. In electron flow notation, we follow the actual motion of electrons in the circuit, but the + and - labels seem backward. Does it matter, really, how we designate charge flow in a circuit?
I would say that YES it does matter and claiming to be looking for the truth and then believing something which is not true simply because it is convenient or popular is disingenuous in my opinion. In fact the electron dense (-) potential and the electron deficient (+) potential do have completely different qualities. For instance a negative discharge heats the conductor, produces a purple/red discharge and produces O2. A positive discharge cools the conductor, produces a bluish violet discharge and produces H2.  In my opinion the moment I hear someone say current flows from (+) to (-) the alarm bells go off and they fail the basic knowledge test because in reality it is not true.

The truth is what we are all after is it not?.

#### ~Russ

##### Re: Eletrical Water Hammer
« Reply #22,  »
I have something i can not figure out in my head....

if we are going from + to + in our cap to cap...

what direction would you say the "electron flow" is ???

full cap + to empty cap + or ... empty cap + to full cap + ???

~Russ

#### jbignes5

##### Re: Eletrical Water Hammer
« Reply #23,  »
The simple truth is there is no electron. Think of it as you will. We have never seen one and to believe there is one is a logical fallacy. That was my whole point.
We need something new. And charge balance fits the bill. Under natural circumstances all matter has bound charges inside of it and an absent of charges around it. This is what led me to the plasma as both structure and charge carriers. Two distinct kinds of plasma or two scales of plasma particles. The structure plasma is in between all matter. With the charge carriers being much smaller and virtual, meaning made up of smaller plasma particles. I say virtual because they add together to form the larger structure and can actually hold charges, even smaller plasma particles, inside of that virtual structure.
The larger particles have a higher surface area and hold little to no charges as the virtual particles. This makes them the conductor between all matter. The mere shape of the particles are geometric pyramids in both cases. With the larger particles being the guide to the virtual charge carriers. I like to call them the highway and vehicle particles.
The neutral space we see everywhere is a combination of both particles and can be separated by a higher potential, which sucks away the vehicle particles and forces that particle to become negative in a sense.

Again onepower you are the one who is believing in a fictitious electron. No one has seen one and no one ever will. If you have then show me the electron that you believe in. I on the other hand can show you plasma and it's ability to condense around a higher potential. At least we can agree on that. You keep saying truth. Well time to put it up then. Show us the electron and how it moves through and outside of a wire? Show us electrons flowing from the negative to the positive. Show us the truth.
##### Re: Eletrical Water Hammer
« Reply #24,  »Last edited
Quote from ~Russ on October 20th, 2017, 11:00 AM
I have something i can not figure out in my head....

if we are going from + to + in our cap to cap...

what direction would you say the "electron flow" is ???

full cap + to empty cap + or ... empty cap + to full cap + ???

~Russ
And that is the crux of it Russ. They believe in the electron and others have their own understanding of current. I have shown you all the structure of a hydrogen atom. By the way that was a cut away view. Those were not rings around the hydrogen those were shells that were cut in half via the software they used. The clear areas between the shells reveal the plasma double layers.
In my mind there is a flow outside of the wire with the wire being an electric conductor drawing in or condensing the plasma around the wire and if the voltage is high enough it will slightly drag into the wire causing heating. Coincidentally the magnetic field is a shell but around a wire the shell is a tube.
We all know that the plasma is both an electrical conductor and a magnetic one as well. Both function provided by each kind of particle.

In my opinion we need to break away from the old because it is very limiting. It will not give us Unity. But if we change our view and look at an outside particle in conjunction with an inside particle then we just might be able to bring more to our quest of Unity. Knowing how electricity works in in neutral space will allow us to take advantage of the new concept.