Russ:

I will get into the thought experiment tomorrow.  You are in the right ballpark, it's about the current value and it's a simple paper-napkin type of estimate.

I am curious about how you measured the inductance of the coil you are working with on the bench right now.  I am wondering if it might be out of range for a hand-held inductance meter.

Also curious about the resistance measurement for the big coil.  I am going to guess with a multimeter you have to keep the probes connected for perhaps 10 seconds to get a proper measurement.

There needs a circuit to convert stored L.M.D. spikes to smoothed conventional T.E.M. AC or DC power.

Quote from SqueezingSparks on January 18th, 2018, 03:01 PM

Russ:

I will get into the thought experiment tomorrow.  You are in the right ballpark, it's about the current value and it's a simple paper-napkin type of estimate.

I am curious about how you measured the inductance of the coil you are working with on the bench right now.  I am wondering if it might be out of range for a hand-held inductance meter.

Also curious about the resistance measurement for the big coil.  I am going to guess with a multi meter you have to keep the probes connected for perhaps 10 seconds to get a proper measurement.

Yes the hand held meters take some time to balance out for the measurement. 

Inductance is calculated from the charge curve and known parameters

But. More extensive tests to do...

~Russ

When the new coil is ready, all that you need to know is the coil resistance and the time constant and the measurement of the fire time when it is running to do the quick paper-napkin calculations below.

The thought experiment:  Assuming the commutator "fire" time is one-tenth of a second, and the voltage is 900 volts and the inductance of the coil is 14,000 Henrys, what will happen during that one-tenth of a second?

The current rises linearly from zero with a slope of V/L.  So at t=0.1 seconds the current is (900/14,000)*0.1 = 6.43 mA.

We will assume that the time constant is 150 milliseconds and we know the fire time is 100 milliseconds.  So knowing how the curve looks we will derate the current by 10% so the approximate current at 100 milliseconds will be 5.79 mA.

Therefore the energy stored in the coil at the end of the fire time will be 0.235 Joules.

The resistance of the coil in this hypothetical example is L/Tau.  So that is (14000/0.15) = 93.3 kOhm.

Therefore the power dissipation in the coil at 100 miliseconds will be 3.13 watts.

So there is the paper-napkin calculation for this hypothetical example.  All that you need is the coil time constant, the coil resistance, and the fire time and you will be able to make a quick estimate at the state of things at the end of the fire time.

So, relative to the thought experiment above, what about the induced EMF in the coil as the big magnet turns?  Of course the thought experiment assumes zero EMF in the coil.

Food for thought:  There may be a certain angle of the rotation of the magnet at a certain rotational speed where the EMF induced in the coil is approximately 900 volts.  Therefore at this angle when the commutator makes the contact for the fire pulse no current will flow.

I cant seem to find the patent application. anyone post it here?

WO1983000963A1

Thanks

~Russ

Quote from ~Russ on January 19th, 2018, 03:15 PM

WO1983000963A1

Can't find the original, in PDF, either.

Also checked: EP0086776A1

Quote from haxar on January 19th, 2018, 03:44 PM

Can't find the original, in PDF, either.

Also checked: EP0086776A1

its only a application. however i known i have seen a version some where. for Canada i think?

along the way I did find the this attachment. although not helpful... its helpful to show what not to do :)

Quote

its only a application. however i known i have seen a version some where. for Canada i think?
along the way I did find the this attachment. although not helpful... its helpful to show what not to do

My theory is quite simple... anything less than that which can be proven beyond all shadow of doubt as tangible in all probability is most likely hearsay. However each and every day I see remarkable and quite extraordinary things I never thought possible thus who am I or in fact we to judge?. Therein lies the key word..."judge" and one cannot say I judge you by these determinations but not myself by the same token?.

The fact is we do not know but we may.

Newman really got under their skin.
Newman's patent case is now cited in the USPTO's Manual of Patent Examining Procedure as an example of an "inoperative" invention that can't have any utility, concretely as a perpetual motion machine.

Quote from ~Russ on January 19th, 2018, 03:15 PM

I cant seem to find the patent application. anyone post it here?

WO1983000963A1

Thanks

~Russ

https://www.google.com/patents/WO1983000963A1?cl=en

Quote from Magneton on January 20th, 2018, 08:33 AM

https://www.google.com/patents/WO1983000963A1?cl=en

WO1983000963A1.pdf

 Now read that pdf.. It tells a lot about the device you have and how it is only half of the system you built. It needs the other coil so that you can hook it back to the input or even drive a separate load.

 The only thing I can not swallow right now is the E=MC2 proof that he sites. E=MC2 is only a theory and a purely mathematical one at that. He even states about how our current system runs on just theory with no proof. Well he is doing that with the statement of E=MC2.
 "All of the prior art systems are designed accordingly to rigid mathematical laws taught both in physics and electrical engineering which coincide with the hypothesis rigidly accepted by the industrial and scientific communities concerning the Second Law of Thermodynamics (1850)."

 My argument is that E=MC2 is a transformation law for matter. Thats it. The energy is equal to the mass times the speed of light squared. Thats the ability for matter to transform the energy around it into it's own radiative emission.

 You guys need to read this document many times till you start to see his understanding and how he didn't have the idea that plasma is the particles he was suggesting as gyroscopic. Seeing that plasma is the conductor of space it should be inside of matter too. When you align the plasma or polarize it, it can become very very strong and enhanced when the potential is raised or biased...

 I know I can be curt sometimes but you have to understand that I have researched this a very long time ago and it partially opened my own understanding of space and energy traveling through that space (induction).

 There are some very good experiments in this pdf that need to be replicated. If they pan out then all he was doing was using the load coil to feedback into the input. Thats why his motors were very strong. When you want to use it as a generator then simply use the load coil to drive a load...
 The things to try here would be bifilar coils in many aspects like serial bifilar or 3,4,5 filars in parallel... He also talks about the gauge of the winds as well and how they work. Putting the load coil away from the huge coil and generating with a loose coupling. Many things we need to try..

 He also talks about why he used the magnet inside of the coil to get the fullest action between the magnet and coil. Multi layered coils... Many to try here. Different transformation styles as well.

 He is also very clear that this patent and the device are very very crude and inefficient. Even though he can get 102% out with such a simple and not highly optimized device it is still greater out then in. Simply put the tingly feeling you feel when you put your hand near the very large coil.. Well that is the plasma field that is well below the intensity of glowing. More plasma=Higher magnification.

 As a side note, you can get rid of the ozone by immersing that very large coil in oil. Maybe a later experiment when the ozone gets bad and we have had a chance to optimize and redesign it first.

 "while third and fourth exemplary embodiments (Figures 5 and 6) utilize a relatively heavy coil (205) made up of ***relatively large diameter*** wire of relatively great length and number of loops and length and a relatively small energizing current to drive a rotatable permanent magnet (200).

 Whats the gauge of the wire you used?

Hi John. 

Good thoughts. 


Just so you know why I wanted the patent is to make sure I'm thinking corect. 

As you stated he had only 1/2 the understanding. 

He was only thinking mechanically and not electrically. This is what I was trying to prove for the time line.   

The unit was built after this patent was made. 

There for giving us the time line for his ideas. 

Did you read my doc I posted?  Of my understanding? 

Or did you not see it? 

Thanks! 

~Russ

PS.  One power,  yes.  We should not judge.  Thanks for the reminder.  And I was not judging,  Insted I was saying that how they tested the unit was not how it operates. 

So what they did is a good exzample on how we don't mesure the output. 

Thanks Richard for the patent!  Glad you found it.  Thank you thank you! 

 I think I read it but can't remember..

Link.. I tried to find it but it is buried.

 By the way I saw a picture of his that you showed showing a side view with a mirror showing top down. In that picture is the magnet array and a thick coil and if you look closely there is a very fine coil wrapped around a spacer between the thick and thin coils. This thing is nothing more then a rotating transformer. One that increases it's magnetic field by using the thick coil and the speed of the fixed strength magnet as variables. That is way different then your setup.

 Shown here:  http://open-source-energy.org/?topic=3128.msg46877#msg46877

 Now weather it goes all the way down the form or is overlapped around the top you can see how he could harvest energy in the load coil.. The main coil could be very fine like you have. So figuring out this design would be the first job.

 A Bifilar version needs to be made even on a small scale to see what differences it would make.

John,  I love you bro but you got to read the book I guess.  Becuse he telles you everything you need to know.  There's not. Much guess work after you reed the book.

What he dose not tell you is how the tuning works,  becuse he also tells you he is not 100% sure.  Like you said and I agree. He only tells you 1/2 the story.  But what he nails on the head is the mechanical configuration that works!!!  This is verry important.  And also tells the story why we were so pusshy on the magent being on the side (or better yet inside)
 not the top of the coil. 

Or just read this thred really carefully.  As most of what your saying is already posted here in this thred.  There for we already agree with most of what your saying I do beleave.  However we can't start there. We must start where newman left us to start. 

He also states in the book that there is so much better configurations then he was demonstrating. Again agreeing with your statements. 

http://open-source-energy.org/?topic=3128.msg47427#msg47427

A few posts after that pile of data is my doc. 

Read it carefully and then you won't forget what I stated there. As its verry semular to your thinking Me thinks... ..

~Russ

Bearing in mind most people use the equation e=mc² wrongly applied, watching this clip might help all of us see Newman was generalizing with the E=MC² statements.
Its not his strength as its not most folks as we all put it over in-correctly by probably 99% of people.
We can all just dive into the rabbit hole or work with what we do know and getting something working, then figure out the where that this energy is coming from.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=eOCKNH0zaho
regards

I did read his book. Even though it was very tough to read.

 I never said to put the magnet on top this time I was refering to the Thick coil around the magnet array...

Quote from jbignes5 on January 20th, 2018, 11:49 AM

I did read his book. Even though it was very tough to read.

 I never said to put the magnet on top this time I was refering to the Thick coil around the magnet array...

You read the entire book is 5 days? 

Yes,  ok! 

Check my doc. 

Thanks!!!

~Russ

Yeah I was bored.. The internet was out on the east coast yesterday so I had a lot of time to read it.
I'm reading your doc now. Gonna take me a bit to get into it...
 I wanted to say this. We both agree on most things. Lets agree to disagree on some of it and continue going forward. We need to check my thoughts out too because I just can not afford this setup atm.

 Also have you looked at the parallels to the window motor. Looks like this is related.

Quote from sonnet on January 20th, 2018, 11:26 AM

... then figure out the where that this energy is coming from.

Still think of this equation as an upper limit of efficiency.  Nowhere in that equation is the expression depicting the conversion rate.  My guess, the rate of conversion is determined by how well the system is built and will be quite evident when testing the output.

The interesting thing around all this is the source of the energy must be coming from the mass itself.  I tend to think of mass as simply condensed energy which took millions of years to happen.  What we need to focus on is the mechanism of which this matter gets uncondensed, thawed, released.  The better you do this, the more energy you can extract for the least amount of matter you start with.  The thing to think of is how the energy was condensed into matter to start with.  We need to approach those conditions and at the point of transfer, reverse the operation.  Something holds those atom of copper together in the ambient state.  We need to change the ambient state to a new state where those atoms are free to revert back into pure energy.  Accomplish that electrically and you'll have all the energy you could ever want.

Newman makes this process sound easy, but I suspect the trick is not allowing the energy contained in the copper to condense back into copper.  There needs to be some sort of wall inserted at just the exact moment which prevents the energy from reverting back to copper mass.  This may be the arc and certainly has something to do with the momentum of the energy flow.  Once the energy is moving away from the copper atoms, it should be near impossible for it to stop, change direction and revert back.  We have to capitalize on this momentum using sufficient voltage and quickness of transition.  Newman did it with relatively primitive methods, though I would consider a spark gap far more sophisticated than any electronics we have available.  It's in the timing.  Timing is everything.

I really don't think the copper is being used up but is actually a focal point for the plasma between the matter. One thing I do know is that if you cap dump to a thick coil what happens to say a quarter inside of it. It shrinks right? Well you could think of the matter squeezing the plasma between it and it pumps it. The voltage across the length of that matter polarizes the plasma between it as well. The plasma then squeezes out from between the matter and is forced to condense around the coil. Being able to sustain the plasma in that form allows it to become magnetic and magnifies the input in the process.
 Yeah the disruptive discharge circuit should be used instead of the motor timing method. With a magnetic polarity across the spark gap you can control the discharges and filter them as well. Especially if you wanted a truly polarized discharge as in a one way discharge.

 Remember my disagreement with the statement of E=MC2. I really think it is just a way to calculate the ability of matter to transform energy from the surrounding flows of plasma around any matter.

Quote from jbignes5 on January 20th, 2018, 12:08 PM

I wanted to say this. We both agree on most things. Lets agree to disagree on some of it and continue going forward.
We need to check my thoughts out too because I just can not afford this setup atm.

 Also have you looked at the parallels to the window motor. Looks like this is related.

There are a thousand experiments we all want to do. 
And we need everyone's input for sure. I personally enjoy many of your thoughts and ideas.
You are a smart guy and have studied a lot.
The wire we used was #30 AWG by the way (you asked earlier).
Newman definitely built a "window" motor style of unit and I want to build one very much.

Quote from Magneton on January 20th, 2018, 08:48 AM

WO1983000963A1.pdf

Preserved on the forum: