Quote from Matt Watts on December 2nd, 2017, 11:30 PM

That video you posted of Joe using the thermal current meter is all you need to know.  There's real power there that can only be properly measured by the accumulation of heat.  Of course today we have Chinese oscilloscopes that can easily measure what comes back out from these large coils.  Well, as long as they don't go way above the input voltage limit.  :-P

u missed the point...
back to tuning... :)

hehe,

~Russ

ZZZzzzz

It directly points out that you normally only see in Extremely  large high frequncy components. Well if we are in HF the the only Way to get to series resonance is verry large components....  (Or badly dezighned one's ) He is not talking about newmans motors. He talking about what I pointed out on that radio guys page... 

Becuse its the only Other place I have found that speak about a second point of resonance in a coil being series...

Why else would he use the words "by contrast been dominated by extremely  large high frequncy components "

Newman never talked about this. And its not in his patent ither... A point the judge was aruguing

~Russ

Russ

Quote

One power. On that link. It is stated
"Sometimes the term self-capacitance is used to refer to the inter-winding capacitance of a coil. This is a different phenomenon altogether, not related to the topic we are discussing."
this is what peak positive is saying.  So please do explain this "diffetent phenomenon" this quote is stating.

Context is important and anything which adds capacitance by periodically storing electrical energy from a primary conductor in any nearby dielectric is deemed self-capacitance. Thus the only reason the author stated inter-winding capacitance is different than self-capacitance is because inter-winding capacitance involves another conductor and not only a dielectric. So theoretically we could add a short secondary wire near the primary and wala self-capacitance has now magically transformed into inter-winding capacitance. If this produces unwanted capacitance then wala it magically transforms into parasitic capacitance, lol.

You see it's semantics or word games and if any real capacitance is deemed "unwanted" for any reason it is labelled "parasitic" capacitance. Thus a real capacitor could be labelled as parasitic if for any reason it is "unwanted" by the person building the circuit. I prefer to avoid semantics and see things for what they are thus all capacitance is real capacitance in my mind and the only requirement is that electrical energy is stored periodically. Otherwise we are always left chasing ambiguous terms rather than trying to understand what is actually happening.

Russ

Quote

Becuse its the only Other place I have found that speak about a second point of resonance in a coil being series...
Why else would he use the words "by contrast been dominated by extremely  large high frequncy components "
Newman never talked about this. And its not in his patent ither... A point the judge was aruguing

A patent does not need to disclose all aspects of operation only those the inventor wants to disclose and protect. The judge is obviously a quack and can hardly judge anything he does not understand. Should they deny a patent because their technical literacy is on the same level as a three year old?. As well there can be any number of kinds of resonance on any level any of which may or may not be relevant to the operation of the device and the patent.

The real problem is that the judge and the lawyers are completely ignorant to all the facts which actually matter and are hardly qualified to judge or represent anything. I mean why not ask a three year old to pass judgement on why quarks may or may not represent a wave function in quantum mechanics?. As such  I believe the courts and politics has no place in real science.

The whole scenario is a farce and I would have just built the machines and sold them with no patent protection and let the pencil pushers eat cake. You see, you need to have an intimate understanding of how the device works to successfully replicate it and that in itself is your protection.

I think Newman should have called his device a "Aether pusher/sucker neutron displacing HF/LF energy converting HV/LV virtual field transformer multi-plexer" just to mess everyone up. Who cares what they believe?... if it works.

I know.  Don't forget the patent was generated before it was built...

That's all.  Back in that day. A patent was allmost the only known way...

~Russ

Joseph Newman Motor replications
by Geoffrey Miller of EnergyBat Labs -- Historic and Recent



REED SWITCH CIRCUIT
...https://youtu.be/nzhSBO5MSQU?t=18m35s

what will happen, putting a reed switch in de middle of a small Rodin coil...
http://open-source-energy.org/?topic=3128.msg46824#msg46824

@Namirha
with respect, that is not a Newman motor.
Anyone viewing that will get the wrong ideas....thats a Keppee motor
regards

Parts will be orderd tomarrow... 

Going to try to have the coil wrapped. As its a monster.

One day at a time. 

~Russ

@Namirha
If that video shows us anything it's the fact that you need the commutator design 'fire, blank, short' first and foremost.
How you want to achieve that sequence is up-to you Namirha, yes you could do it with reed switches but your then going to have to set up timing on your timer, sort of defeats the point especially as you need to  find the timing points (positions) to accurately trigger the reeds. Plus the 'fire' needs to be a different duration to the 'short'. so reeds would really over complicate things...
Secondly you need the wire weight to achieve the true energy transference from e=mc² no bulk wire coil no ringing in the short through capacitance of the coil properties.
Again anyone wanting to play with newmans coil on a small coil scale will see their batteries last longer but its going to run out of steam. and will not deliver the torque. this is said with the caveat, ' they do use the 'fire, blank, short' sequence'.
I for one would like to see Newman variations in a whole new thread so this doesnt cloud the true mechanism of how a Newman motor works. So please put your variation ideas there...thank you
Regards.

Do not know if still this topic....

Does mass and not only ohms have virtual math problems in systems?

T2:popping the science bubble
 

I will have MWS wire make this... getting a quote...

Extra wire can be added to main coil, or used as tuning.

~Russ

ok looking good, even trying to get a little generated power out on the tuning hey. ok.

Talisman
I like Distini however science is not the problem because science is simply a method. The problem is people who make simple observations then jump to false conclusions and then call it science.

Distini has many things correct and mass is a false construct because a mass has no weight or Kilograms in outer space however it does have Inertia. Thus Inertia is the defining property of mass and from the property of Inertia comes Force and from that comes Acceleration and from that comes Energy. As well he points out the flawed logic in ignoring the systems internal to a mass which define it as a mass having specific properties relating to the mass. What Distini did not mention however is that this false logic springs from something known as the lumped sum model. This is where we just lump a large number of specific properties and phenomena together and label it as something because were too lazy to take the time to understand it. This includes the Electric, Magnetic and Gravic Fields as well as Inertia.

So we should understand science is not the problem, science is a method and it is people using false logic and then calling it science that is a problem. I mean if we are going to use logic and reason to find better answers then we must hold to logic and reason and see things for what they are. Otherwise we would be using one form of circular reasoning to judge another form of circular reasoning and we have learned nothing. 

Quote from sonnet on December 7th, 2017, 02:15 AM

ok looking good, even trying to get a little generated power out on the tuning hey. ok.

Ah!

so i mentioned that i would be posting a video once all that info settled...

first, this is witts from what it looks like. personally i cant say anything, however i have herd others say things that ant so good about them. but ill keep an open mined. maybe when this video was recorded it was different... infact it might not even be witts. but instead just him trying to get more money for others work...  i kinda hope the first notion. this gives it even more credibility for me...

However i feel we do not need to look in to anything about it. because everything is contained in this video. and i do not see any false information in this video.

in fact it gives the clues to my understanding. so when you watch it, remember everything i sad in that DOC and i bet you will see why the thought i have is correct, or in the right direction at least.

in fact, I'm making this a teaching lesion. i want EVERYONE to make a list of the things that are extremely important in this video that is not so evident in everything else you have seen...  make that list, post it here, and we will find even more interesting clues....

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KYGxIQNLDD4

~Russ

PS. Matt you cant make that check to this guy because you can read the meter ... so he disqualified him self  ... lol do what you want though! haha

Maybe a clue from Sir Timothy Thrapp himself:

Quote

One of the common threads in all these exotic technologies, appears to be what another associate, Jason Owens, calls the "90-Degree Rule". Thrapp described it as "a crossing of two stress fields," apparently resulting in the mitigating of one of them, resulting in the emergence of a useable force.  Harnessing such energy is a matter of tapping into the "dominant energy field."

https://pesn.com/archive/2009/05/06/9501538_TimothyThrapp-WITTS_dominant_energy_field/index.html


I've mentioned in the past three fields, tempic, (di)electric & magnetic, all in a quadrature relationship.  Using Newman's principals, think of little gyros with a specific orientation.  Gyro's have spin; the spin itself is the tempic field.  So if you have two of these little gyros next to each other with their axis of rotation aligned and the rotation direction opposite, you have in effect just cancelled time in that exact spot between the two gyros.  W.B. Smith refers to this as a hole.

So now think of this:  Use no time to charge a capacitor and stretch out time to discharge it--a complete tempic manipulation of the power equation, just like your video Russ of you flipping over the mylar sheets.  Think of the sheets having spinning, polarized gyros.  One sheet has them spinning one way and the other sheet spinning opposite.  Place the two sheets on top of each other and in between them you create a hole, a void.

Anyway, just some thoughts from all the material and ideas swarming through my head as of late.

 Please Russ read the book from Sir Oliver Lodge entitled "Modern views of electricity"

 You will see where we need to correct ourselves. Obviously he got a few things wrong since plasma wasn't discovered yet. The book was written in 1907 and Plasma was coined in 1920 By Langmuir...
 It's a long read but I think it is very very important to you to properly understand electricity and it's analogous definitions as best as we could formulate at that time. This was before electron theory corrupted our minds and locked away the Ether forever in a sideshow.

Thanks John, I Will have a look. i agree that there are things just as newman described that can be viewed form a better angle.

notice i never said electron in my video tho lol

~Russ

Quote

Onepower
I like Distini however science is not the problem because science is simply a method. The problem is people who make simple observations then jump to false conclusions and then call it science.

What I got from the Distinti  video was "the photon has no mass but it has energy".

My thinking is to be a physical thing it should have mass to be physical matter.

If a photon has no mass it has speed in the equation E=MC^2

So light (photons) is an integral part of the equation but if its mass really is zero then photons E=0.

Yes circular definition wonk.
 
   

My coil will look similar to this...

These calculations are made using the method where each wire is laid directly on top the other. not in between the other wire.

If the bobbin is 4.5" OD for the first layer.

coil 1 is 148,433 turns,

The OD of that coil is 7.835",

approximately72.448Lb of bare copper,

and about 76.4lb with the coating,

73,033 meters,

24,721ohms,

138 layers.


if the OD is 7.835" when starting the second coil....

coil 2 is 101892 turns,

the OD of that coil is 10.125"

approximately 72.453lb of bare wire,

and 76.41lb with the coating.

73.039meters long, and 24,743ohms,

should be about 95 layers.


the rest is what ever is left on each spool. that will be added one coil at a time on top.

If we had 160lb of wire ( with insulation) we would have a total of 258,957 turns

241 layers.

153,178 meters,

51.850 ohms

151.95 lb of bare copper.

Just some notes to do with my Drawing...

~Russ

The top of Google ask says:

Since photons have zero rest mass then their energy is simply E = pc.

According to Einstein's E=MC^2, E=0 so this theorist is not using Einstein for sure.

Talisman

Quote

What I got from the Distinti  video was "the photon has no mass but it has energy".
My thinking is to be a physical thing it should have mass to be physical matter.
If a photon has no mass it has speed in the equation E=MC^2
So light (photons) is an integral part of the equation but if its mass really is zero then photons E=0.
Yes circular definition wonk.

Circular reasoning is a logical fallacy in which the reasoner begins with what they are trying to end with.

Let's use non-circular reasoning to get a different answer for a change. "the photon has no mass but it has energy"...so how can something have energy but no mass?. How do we measure mass?, we look for a change in Velocity then use the Momentum or Inertia rule (Mass-Velocity) to deduce mass without actually measuring it. Do you see the problem?, You see the problem is that the measure of Inertia is dependent on the extent of interaction with outside forces causing a change in Velocity and if there is no interaction then we assume there is no inertia and then we assume there is no mass... circular reasoning.

However the Photon could have mass and energy but not interact with external forces as we might expect giving the false appearance that it has no inertia in which case we assume it has no mass despite the fact this may not be true. You see circular reasoning is always dependent on the observer jumping to conclusions without knowing all the facts to get the answer they want.

Not to mention the fact everyone uses a definition of terms which basically breeds circular reasoning...
--Inertia is a property of matter that causes it to resist changes in velocity (speed and/or direction).
--The mass of an object is a fundamental property of the object; a numerical measure of its inertia
-- momentum (pl. momenta) is the product of the mass and velocity of an object.
So Inertia is a property of a mass and mass is a property of an object which is a measure of Inertia and we go right back to the beginning round and round... nice.

So we should be clear that everyone is making the same mistake in assuming a "property" of mass which is Inertia is always constant. Not to mention the fact nobody seems to know what Inertia is. That's kind of like saying the property of a house is shingles but I don't know what a shingle is and if it don't have shingles then it ain't a house despite the the fact it's still... a house. To be honest it's kind of absurd in my opinion because it's superficial.

Quote

I've mentioned in the past three fields, tempic, (di)electric & magnetic, all in a quadrature relationship.  Using Newman's principals, think of little gyros with a specific orientation.  Gyro's have spin; the spin itself is the tempic field.

Spin exists in all fields, it is the one true denomination in your quadrature relationship. as it is in matter too.
Imho

It begins...

https://youtu.be/FRtqD0L4hLI

~Russ

Something about the Faraday paradox polar generator experiments. They say the volts are produced by the rotation of the conducting plate
never the magnet and a lot of guys are doing this experiment for themselves.

Still though I just watched one of them with a large neodymium rotor magnet. The results were the same as with a ferromagnet.

Except that the neo magnets are also good conductors. So the magnetism is not cancelling the conductivity but it is stopping
the power from being generated on that side.

One could argue the conductivity moves around with the magnet so there is no flux actual line (or field) effect. Except they are sill
both the same distance apart (conductor and magnet) with 1) magnet spinning alone  2) the conductor is spun alone.

The power is generated in the gap. Not because of conduction but because of the absence of magnetism in the conductor. 
       

Quote

Something about the Faraday paradox polar generator experiments. They say the volts are produced by the rotation of the conducting plate
never the magnet and a lot of guys are doing this experiment for themselves.

If you ever try, put 4 magnets on your conductor, spin the conductor and your get a AC Wave. the power comes from the spin interacting with the field. the conductor is a conduit to channel the energy through.
Eds wheel is a AC homo-polar generator as well as a motor, he ups the voltage with his coil setup that he utilizes the buzz box coil winding's