PopularFX
Home Help Search Login Register
Welcome,Guest. Please login or register.
OverUnity Research > Benches > PhysicsProf (Moderator: PhysicsProf) > Matt Jones' Challenge: Build this Tesla Switch. Schematic, Plans.. Is this IT?
2024-11-27, 08:34:43
News: If you have a suggestion or need for a new board title, please PM the Admins.
Please remember to keep topics and posts of the FE or casual nature. :)

Pages: [1] 2
Author Topic: Matt Jones' Challenge: Build this Tesla Switch. Schematic, Plans.. Is this IT?  (Read 36656 times)
Topic Options img
img  PhysicsProf
Matt Jones' Challenge: Build this Tesla Switch. Schematic, Plans.. Is this IT? « on: 2011-09-24, 20:03:48 »
Group: Moderator
Hero Member
*****

Posts: 3017
TODAY (9/24/11)  Matthew Jones has posted his plans for his Tesla Switch -- I'm attaching his PDF here for our convenience.
Also, his post with this PDF -- fair to call it a challenge:
Quote
Part 1 released
@all

This is the first of 2 parts of the Guide for the Simple switch. I am pretty sure I covered everything as far as small one goes.
Part 2 will include the big one and will compiled with this version.

Simple Switch TS Guide Part 1

If you have any questions feel free to post them. If your not currently trying to build and all you wanna do is analyze I am not interested in answering your questions. Make sure before you ask you can provide a picture of the parts, unless its a question about ordering parts.

Make sure to read the whole paper before you attempt to build and defendantly follow the startup and safety guidelines outlined in last part of the writeup. They will save you alot of grief.

Now as far as specific go alot of different things can be used. If you do not know the difference between things then just buy the parts I listed in th PDF. If you do know the difference feel free to change the recipe but do not expect me to be able to help with really weird things.

I at first I said I was going to cover alot of different IC's. I didn't and I am not going to. If you choose to use another IC outside of the listed ones PIC and Stamp you do so knowing you need to find the correct code to make it work.
I give you enough info to find and write the correct code.

Several times I speak about a switch that is not Published and is very powerful. I will not even discuss this switch with you unless you have a working prototype of the outlined switch. Before you the mistake of asking ME IN PRIVATE without providing a workup of the outlined switch I will cut you off and not help you again.
When the time comes and some of you manage to get a handle on the SIMPLE LITTLE SWITCH or the big one for that matter, I will contact YOU, and we will go into an agreement before I share anything with you.

Post your work and results. This the key to gaining knowledge of the next step. Nothing not even money will get you any further.

Enjoy
Matthew Jones



He claims OU, somewhere around 300% IIRC... the thread is about 120 pages long now; here:

http://www.energeticforum.com/renewable-energy/962-use-tesla-switch-123.html

What do you think about this one? 

   
img  MileHigh
Re: Matt Jones' Challenge: Build this Tesla Switch. Schematic, Plans.. Is this IT? « Reply #1 on: 2011-09-24, 21:33:01 »
Group: Guest
Wow, this one is based on using transformer couplings and it looks like it's not going to be easy to analyze this one assuming that they are measuring power from the transformer coil output(s) due to current transients from the switching.  I only glanced through the paper and I suppose that I have some sobering comments.

Matthew Jones discusses electronics and electricity in the style of the "Aaron Murakami" school.  It is completely disconnected from reality and based on preconceived notions that are wild and zany and seem to have been plucked out of the Aether itself while on acid.

I don't know if any of what is going on is based on observations of battery voltages increasing but you know my thoughts on that.

I looked at the circuit and it's the same old story - I am presuming that there is no proposed mechanism for over unity in Matthew's pdf.  It looks to me like he is doing his own variation on a Tesla switch type of concept and pulsing the current transients through a transformer output stage.  There is no rational reason for this to work.

So I guess we are back to looking at empirical evidence.  If the intention is to make measurements on battery energy or power consumption and compare that with the output from the transformer stage, and not forgetting that when some batteries are discharging other batteries are charging - it would appear to be very challenging to make measurements on a setup like this.  All discussions of before/after battery voltage measurements should be ignored and ideally somebody would make that clear to Matthew on down.  (ha ha I know that I am dreaming.)

The bottom line is that it looks like replicating Matthew's setup and then making serious measurements will be a long and difficult slog.  I will guess that people will make fake "short cut" measurements and that's how it will play out.

I didn't read the paper, keep that in mind.  For me personally, there is just no point.  You can discount everything I am saying if you want to, and time will tell if what I am saying rings true.  I am not sure you will get that many replicators either, it looks like a tough replication.  I can't envision anyone doing charge and discharge cycles on four batteries to make battery energy measurements either.

MileHigh
   
img  muDped
Re: Matt Jones' Challenge: Build this Tesla Switch. Schematic, Plans.. Is this « Reply #2 on: 2011-09-24, 21:56:12 »

Group: Tinkerer
Hero Member
*****

Posts: 3055
Matthew's circuit is a good one for small
scale experimentation; as a learning tool.

It's a simplified version of the full-blown
switching system and therefore will reveal
some problems.  But it is a good start at
discovering the benefits of the switching
scheme and how it is able to extend the
discharge time of batteries.

Any who attempt to evaluate the circuit
will want to have a flexible pulsing generator
circuit which will enable adjustment of the
pulse width as well as pulse frequency.


MileHigh does make some good points -
I know, I know...  Aaron Murakami and all
that goes with his circle of sycophants.

But, for learning about pulsed switching
systems it's worth looking at for those who
might be interested.  The enhancements to
the circuit for full-blown operation can be
added relatively easily for those with good
knowledge and experience in switching systems.


---------------------------
For there is nothing hidden that will not be disclosed, and nothing concealed that will not be known or brought out into the open.
   
img  PhysicsProf
Re: Matt Jones' Challenge: Build this Tesla Switch. Schematic, Plans.. Is this IT? « Reply #3 on: 2011-09-25, 00:06:50 »
Group: Moderator
Hero Member
*****

Posts: 3017
Quote from: MileHigh on 2011-09-24, 21:33:01
Wow, this one is based on using transformer couplings and it looks like it's not going to be easy to analyze this one assuming that they are measuring power from the transformer coil output(s) due to current transients from the switching.  I only glanced through the paper and I suppose that I have some sobering comments.

Matthew Jones discusses electronics and electricity in the style of the "Aaron Murakami" school.  It is completely disconnected from reality and based on preconceived notions that are wild and zany and seem to have been plucked out of the Aether itself while on acid.

I don't know if any of what is going on is based on observations of battery voltages increasing but you know my thoughts on that.

I looked at the circuit and it's the same old story - I am presuming that there is no proposed mechanism for over unity in Matthew's pdf.  It looks to me like he is doing his own variation on a Tesla switch type of concept and pulsing the current transients through a transformer output stage.  There is no rational reason for this to work.

So I guess we are back to looking at empirical evidence.  If the intention is to make measurements on battery energy or power consumption and compare that with the output from the transformer stage, and not forgetting that when some batteries are discharging other batteries are charging - it would appear to be very challenging to make measurements on a setup like this.  All discussions of before/after battery voltage measurements should be ignored and ideally somebody would make that clear to Matthew on down.  (ha ha I know that I am dreaming.)

The bottom line is that it looks like replicating Matthew's setup and then making serious measurements will be a long and difficult slog.  I will guess that people will make fake "short cut" measurements and that's how it will play out.

I didn't read the paper, keep that in mind.  For me personally, there is just no point.  You can discount everything I am saying if you want to, and time will tell if what I am saying rings true.  I am not sure you will get that many replicators either, it looks like a tough replication.  I can't envision anyone doing charge and discharge cycles on four batteries to make battery energy measurements either.

MileHigh

Certainly we should start with the empirical evidence and read the paper.  As you admit, MH, you have not done this.  Tsk Tsk.
Have your puke bag handy just in case -- when you read...   Quote:
Quote
MileHigh: I listen to or read John Bedini and sometimes I want to puke.

"All discussions of before/after battery voltage measurements should be ignored and ideally somebody would make that clear to Matthew on down. "

  ALL - should be ignored?  sorry to ask you to repeat yourself, but that does not ring true to me MH. Let's see how his actual DATA pan out, shall we?  and the data of replicators?  

Are you up to the challenge, MH?

Does anyone want to try this, or a variation, with me?

I might add that mechanical switches can be replaced by solid state ones...   O0
   
img  EMdevices
Re: Matt Jones' Challenge: Build this Tesla Switch. Schematic, Plans.. Is this IT? « Reply #4 on: 2011-09-25, 00:26:07 »
Hero Member
*****

Posts: 805
Professor,   

I built a variation of one of these things years ago, and it "worked".   ;)


Seriously, they seem to work but it's not free energy.   In fact I did not even have to use two batteries, just one.   My circuit was very simple,  a trifilar winding coil, a BJT, and a diode, and maybe a capacitor or resistor.   Here's how it worked.    During the short ON time, the battery supplied energy and built up the magnetic field of the coil,   than when the BJT turned OFF,  the magnetic field collapsed and sent an impulse of charge back into the battery through the diode.    That's it.    Apparently these repeated kickback spikes of voltage did something to the battery to bring the voltage up a bit more.   But, I should mention this only works with certain apparently "discharged" batteries, and that's the trick.  The spikes of voltage somehow loosen up the battery or breaks up the crystals on the plates and open up more plate area for the acid to interact with the plates, but it's not free energy by any means, just conditioning the battery by using it's own energy.    So once again this is one of those devices claimed to be OU because people do not understand all aspects of the battery.

EM
   
img  MileHigh
Re: Matt Jones' Challenge: Build this Tesla Switch. Schematic, Plans.. Is this IT? « Reply #5 on: 2011-09-25, 00:29:37 »
Group: Guest
PhysicsProf:

Hey have fun with it!  But I can advise you that if Matthew Jones is going to be running/dominating a thread where true replicators are all working on their setups, you might start feeling like you are in an alternative electronics universe.

But have fun!

MileHigh
   
img  PhysicsProf
Re: Matt Jones' Challenge: Build this Tesla Switch. Schematic, Plans.. Is this IT? « Reply #6 on: 2011-09-25, 06:55:30 »
Group: Moderator
Hero Member
*****

Posts: 3017
Fair enough, MH.    I was reading the RomeroUK "confession" and well, it's sobering.  
http://www.overunityresearch.com/index.php?topic=1102.100

PS -- are we sure this is the real RomeroUK speaking here?

Thanks EMdevices --

Quote from: EMdevices on 2011-09-25, 00:26:07
Professor,  

I built a variation of one of these things years ago, and it "worked".   ;)


Seriously, they seem to work but it's not free energy.   In fact I did not even have to use two batteries, just one.   My circuit was very simple,  a trifilar winding coil, a BJT, and a diode, and maybe a capacitor or resistor.   Here's how it worked.    During the short ON time, the battery supplied energy and built up the magnetic field of the coil,   than when the BJT turned OFF,  the magnetic field collapsed and sent an impulse of charge back into the battery through the diode.    That's it.   Apparently these repeated kickback spikes of voltage did something to the battery to bring the voltage up a bit more.   But, I should mention this only works with certain apparently "discharged" batteries, and that's the trick.  The spikes of voltage somehow loosen up the battery or breaks up the crystals on the plates and open up more plate area for the acid to interact with the plates, but it's not free energy by any means, just conditioning the battery by using it's own energy.    So once again this is one of those devices claimed to be OU because people do not understand all aspects of the battery.

EM


Hmmmm...   I appreciate the warning.  SO :

1. I expect then that the "re-conditioned" batteries would not be useful OVER AND OVER to run devices, and be "powered up" again and again?  is that what you're saying?

2.  How did you know this was happening:  " just conditioning the battery by using it's own energy."  What tests did you do to show this?

3.  Finally, does what you say apply to ALL types of batteries, including NiMH rechargeables??

Man -- interesting comment, EMD!  leaves me very curious about batteries and HOW you will answer the above questions.
« Last Edit: 2011-09-25, 07:21:48 by PhysicsProf »
   
img  EMdevices
Re: Matt Jones' Challenge: Build this Tesla Switch. Schematic, Plans.. Is this IT? « Reply #7 on: 2011-09-25, 17:59:59 »
Hero Member
*****

Posts: 805
Professor,  here's the answers to your questions:



1)  yes, that's what I'm saying.

2)  from an understanding of the circuit and how it operates.    Basically the circuit takes energy from the battery slowly, and than kicks it back with a higher voltage and shorter duration as the magnetic field collapses.  I could see on my scope that the voltage would shoot up above 12 volts maybe up to 17 volts or 20 volts, just for a very short duration.  It was explained to me that these voltage spikes break down the crystals that have formed on the plates, but I did not carry out an experiment to investigate this claim since I'm not a chemist.  You might want to explore this angle of the problem if you have the background.

3)  maybe or maybe not, I'm sure there are differences between batteries.  We are here talking about lead acid batteries only.
   
img  muDped
Re: Matt Jones' Challenge: Build this Tesla Switch. Schematic, Plans.. Is this « Reply #8 on: 2011-09-25, 18:48:10 »

Group: Tinkerer
Hero Member
*****

Posts: 3055
Quote from: EMdevices on 2011-09-25, 17:59:59
...
 I could see on my scope that the voltage would shoot up above 12 volts maybe up to 17 volts or 20 volts, just for a very short duration.  It was explained to me that these voltage spikes break down the crystals that have formed on the plates, but I did not carry out an experiment to investigate this claim since I'm not a chemist.  You might want to explore this angle of the problem if you have the background.

3)  maybe or maybe not, I'm sure there are differences between batteries.  We are here talking about lead acid batteries only.

Those brief overvoltage pulses when applied to
the lead acid battery are capable of rejuvenating
it.  In a battery which has lost capacity it is invariably
due to significant buildup of phase changed lead
sulfate (aged hardened crystals) which are resistant
to normal charging voltages.

The overvoltage pulses are effective in converting
the hardened sulfation back into active plate materials
while regenerating the sulfuric acid electrolyte.  Once
successfully desulfated (reconditioned or rejuvenated)
the battery will again demonstrate full capacity providing
the plates haven't been damaged by abuse or by physical
shock.

The voltage on the lead acid battery is a good indicator
of the state of charge but ONLY following a 24 hour rest.

A sulfated battery will show a higher than normal voltage
while being charged, particularly with overvoltage pulses,
which creates the illusion of charging or increased energy
storage.  Once the battery in this condition has rested for
24 hours its voltage will properly indicate its state of charge
as it will be less than the normal voltage for a fully charged
battery in good health.

Some heavily sulfated batteries will show a near normal
unloaded rest voltage but when load tested will have
little capacity and the voltage will decrease rapidly due
to excessive internal resistance caused by weak electrolyte
and considerable hard sulfation.

It is remarkably easy to rejuvenate and restore a "dead" lead
acid battery which hasn't suffered any internal damage with
a simple desulfator circuit.   


---------------------------
For there is nothing hidden that will not be disclosed, and nothing concealed that will not be known or brought out into the open.
   
img  ion
Re: Matt Jones' Challenge: Build this Tesla Switch. Schematic, Plans.. Is this IT? « Reply #9 on: 2011-09-25, 18:55:39 »
Group: Elite
Hero Member
******

Posts: 3537
It's turtles all the way down
Agreed Dumped

Two wire battery desulphators are available commercialy.

http://sterling-power.com/products-battref.htm

You can go here to get some ideas and build your own:

http://www.overunityresearch.com/index.php?topic=604.0


---------------------------
"Secrecy, secret societies and secret groups have always been repugnant to a free and open society"......John F Kennedy
   
img  Allcanadian
Re: Matt Jones' Challenge: Build this Tesla Switch. Schematic, Plans.. Is this IT? « Reply #10 on: 2011-09-26, 01:17:45 »
Hero Member
*****

Posts: 2735
@Milehigh
Quote
Matthew Jones discusses electronics and electricity in the style of the "Aaron Murakami" school.  It is completely disconnected from reality and based on preconceived notions that are wild and zany and seem to have been plucked out of the Aether itself while on acid.
I thought the diagrams and explanations in the paper were pretty straighforward and he did not claim anything which I would not consider common knowledge.

Quote
I didn't read the paper, keep that in mind.  For me personally, there is just no point.

Hmm, now let me get this straight you did not even bother to read any of the document? So you did not read any of the paper, you have never done any experiments relating to this technology nor the paper you didn't read yet you have no problem in stating---"There is no rational reason for this to work". I'm confused here because it would seem to me that you are offering your technical opinion on something you have already declared you know nothing about.

@EMdevices
Quote
Seriously, they seem to work but it's not free energy.   In fact I did not even have to use two batteries, just one.   My circuit was very simple,  a trifilar winding coil, a BJT, and a diode, and maybe a capacitor or resistor.   Here's how it worked.    During the short ON time, the battery supplied energy and built up the magnetic field of the coil,   than when the BJT turned OFF,  the magnetic field collapsed and sent an impulse of charge back into the battery through the diode.    That's it.    Apparently these repeated kickback spikes of voltage did something to the battery to bring the voltage up a bit more.   But, I should mention this only works with certain apparently "discharged" batteries, and that's the trick.  The spikes of voltage somehow loosen up the battery or breaks up the crystals on the plates and open up more plate area for the acid to interact with the plates, but it's not free energy by any means, just conditioning the battery by using it's own energy.    So once again this is one of those devices claimed to be OU because people do not understand all aspects of the battery.
I have done these experiments years ago as well and for those who are interested in doing actual experiments to find actual facts here is what I have found.
First the lead sulphate on the plates of an old battery form a stable crystaline form which will not dissolve back into the electrolyte thus it must be removed for proper charging and battery operation. The easiest way to do this is with an inductive discharge, this is when an inductor discharges abruptly into the battery which causes the battery plates to physically move. Think of it this way, the lead sulphate on the battery plates acts similar to the electrically "insulating" oxide film in an electrolytic capacitor and in fact produces the same effects whereby the battery voltage seems to rise as if it is taking charge but this is simply a surface charge on the lead sulphate film. Our old battery is acting just like a leaky capacitor in series with a rechargable battery, now if we want to renew our battery we need to remove the capacitive lead sulphate layer from the plates. One way is an ultrasound device, an easier way is something similar to ultrasound whereby an abrupt discharge from an inductor periodically charges the plates to a high voltage and just like a capacitor plate the high rate of change of potential can cause the plates to physically move or vibrate. If the frequency of the discharges is in resonance with the natural resonant frequency of the plates and the magnitude of the discharges is high enough then the lead sulphate film will be removed. How do I know this?, I cut the side out of the battery (after removing the sulphuric acid) and siliconed a glass plate in it's place so that I could actually see the process in action, seeing is believing. One old timer's trick was to pull the top off the battery and use sand paper to remove the sulphate film which I would never recommend, ever, however it was proven to work very well.
This is the very heart of this matter, there is no replacement for actual experiments --- Period, you have to see it, feel it and prove it works beyond all doubt and anything else is simpy speculation.
EM I'm glad your a Do'er, we need more like you

Regards
AC


---------------------------
Comprehend and Copy Nature... Viktor Schauberger

“The first principle is that you must not fool yourself and you are the easiest person to fool.”― Richard P. Feynman
   
img  muDped
Re: Matt Jones' Challenge: Build this Tesla Switch. Schematic, Plans.. Is this « Reply #11 on: 2011-09-26, 02:36:57 »

Group: Tinkerer
Hero Member
*****

Posts: 3055
Early battery rejuvenation advocates did think
it was necessary to physically remove the lead
sulfate from the plates of the batteries in order to
restore them so procedures were developed
accordingly;  to either shed the sulfate crystals
from the plates or to use a chemical (EDTA) to
dissolve them.

With the advent of the modern pulse desulfator
we now know that removal of the crystals is not
desired - it is better to convert them with the
overvoltage pulses back into usable lead,
lead dioxide and sulfuric acid as the sulfate
crystals are electrochemically decomposed
during desulfation.

In this way there is no loss of plate material and
sulfuric acid electrolyte during the rejuvenation.

Granted, some shedding of plate material is
unavoidable due to the plate expansion during
discharge and contraction during charge.  In a
well designed deep cycle battery those stresses
will have minimal effect upon the plates which will
retain nearly all of their composition.

Automobile batteries however, due to their plate
structure, will suffer some damage when deeply
discharged and repeated deep discharges will
cause plate shedding.  (Severe overcharging with
excessive gas generation will also cause plate shedding
by erosion.)

There is a way to "condition" the battery through a series
of controlled discharges to minimize the loss of plate
material when deep discharge is desired.  To gradually
acclimate the plates to deeper discharge.  Some auto
batteries are more responsive than others for this process.


---------------------------
For there is nothing hidden that will not be disclosed, and nothing concealed that will not be known or brought out into the open.
   
img  PhysicsProf
Re: Matt Jones' Challenge: Build this Tesla Switch. Schematic, Plans.. Is this IT? « Reply #12 on: 2011-09-26, 17:26:56 »
Group: Moderator
Hero Member
*****

Posts: 3017
  Thanks EMD, AC, Dumped, everyone -- for the explanations about lead-acid batteries.  Very educational, and I agree with you all (perhaps there is one exception ;) ) regarding the importance of EXPERIMENTS.

  Note however that I'm now using NiMH rechargeable batteries.  I see the "relaxation" effects, but these seem to damp out in several hours.  I'm curious if the warnings about "reconditioning" of batteries being mistaken for "charging of batteries" apply to NiMH. 

  That is -- if we use NiMH batts in a circuit and the voltage rises clearly in the output, while essentially not dropping on the input (just an example for now) -- can we say that the circuit is OU??  Here I am straying rather far from the Matt-Jones circuit, BTW.
 I do read and appreciate the comments. 
   
img  muDped
Re: Matt Jones' Challenge: Build this Tesla Switch. Schematic, Plans.. Is this « Reply #13 on: 2011-09-26, 20:52:17 »

Group: Tinkerer
Hero Member
*****

Posts: 3055
Quote from: PhysicsProf on 2011-09-26, 17:26:56
...

  That is -- if we use NiMH batts in a circuit and the voltage rises clearly in the output, while essentially not dropping on the input (just an example for now) -- can we say that the circuit is OU??  Here I am straying rather far from the Matt-Jones circuit, BTW.
 I do read and appreciate the comments. 

The chemistry of NiCd and NiMH cells
permits full strength electrolyte for all
levels of charge and/or discharge so the
variations in internal resistance aren't so
great as with the lead acid battery.

Those cells may in fact be a better indicator
of voltage related state of charge but it's
probably not as simple as we'd hope it to
be:

Inaccuracies of Estimated Remaining Capacity

You're not straying far afield with this
discussion - anything that imparts better
understanding of all facets of the circuit's
intended purpose and the limitations of
batteries is edifyingly beneficial.


---------------------------
For there is nothing hidden that will not be disclosed, and nothing concealed that will not be known or brought out into the open.
   
img  PhysicsProf
Re: Matt Jones' Challenge: Build this Tesla Switch. Schematic, Plans.. Is this IT? « Reply #14 on: 2011-09-28, 15:42:32 »
Group: Moderator
Hero Member
*****

Posts: 3017
  Thanks for the pointer, Dumped.   

   Over at EnergeticForum, Matt Jones replies to our thread here:
Quote
A Different place
I was informed this afternoon of a discussion taking place at Overunity Research .com on this PDF I put out.
Although they have nothing good to say about me I tried join to offer assistance if they chose to replicate it.

Matt Jones' Challenge: Build this Tesla Switch. Schematic, Plans.. Is this IT?

Thats the Thread they started.
Some of them I recognize and most of the one I do recognize are people who have removed from this site for one reason or another.

But either way I am here to help if your here to work.

So let me go through this and tell ya exactly what the claims are on the outlined device in case any of them are reading this. Feel free to to post it on your site.
First claim:
You can get up to 4x - 8x more work done for the amount of power power used in the batteries if the load is appropriately sized and the circuit is tuned.

This easily checked. It is not complicated.
Use your 4 batteries in parallel and run the load you plan to use. Measure the amount of power coming out at the average voltage and measure the time it takes to discharge your batteries from A voltage to B Voltage. IE 13.00 volt to 12.20 volt.
Charge your batteries back
Now hook the switch up and run it. Tune the load.
Average your top and bottom battery voltage. The top batteries have tendency to charge and the bottom has tendency to discharge. Watch your average until it reaches the Bottom voltage.
Make sure you are measuring the time it takes to get that far.

Second claim:
This is not OverUnity. This just a simple potential based circuit that allow you to reuse energy until it escapes in either heat or entropy actually kills it. But because we are capturing the potential and reusing it we can moderately say the transformer is generating to some level.

Thats all the claims. It is a simple little switch to teach people how to start running the Tesla switch that was outlined in the Brandt article included in my paper.
It make a simple little 12VAC signal that can be rectified and used to drive loads. It can be scaled. It does not run on spikes or transient behavior.
It is just a simple thing to get a higher COP from your load.

As stated though it is the first step to learning another switch that has alot more power to give out.
But before you can use that setup you need to be able to handle this one fairly easy, including tuning and troubleshooting. If not most will get lost and end up hurting themselves.

So if you make a good replication and report the data you will be considered for the next level.

Thank you PhysicsProf@OverUnity Research .com for your interest and I wish you luck.

Cheers
Matthew Jones

    Thanks Matt -- I must say, Matt responds to questions and is genuine.

This I don't quite understand, though:

1. "First claim:
You can get up to 4x - 8x more work done for the amount of power power used in the batteries if the load is appropriately sized and the circuit is tuned."

This sounds like OU to me, but perhaps Matt has a different definition of OU?  because he says:

2.  "Second claim:
This is not OverUnity. This just a simple potential based circuit that allow you to reuse energy until it escapes in either heat or entropy actually kills it. But because we are capturing the potential and reusing it we can moderately say the transformer is generating to some level."

 
   
img  Hoppy
Re: Matt Jones' Challenge: Build this Tesla Switch. Schematic, Plans.. Is this IT? « Reply #15 on: 2011-09-28, 19:15:18 »
Group: Guest
The charge & discharge curve shapes will most likely be different when load testing on and off the TS. Very careful data logging would be required to get an accurate comparison of energy both discharged and replaced back into the batteries during re-charge. Matt does not explain his method and procedure in enough detail to satisfy me that his load testing is accurate enough to be certain that there is in fact an overall gain from the environment as he claims. A much wider discharge voltage band between LTP and HTP would be required to obtain a meaningful performance comparison.

Hoppy
   
img  PhysicsProf
Re: Matt Jones' Challenge: Build this Tesla Switch. Schematic, Plans.. Is this IT? « Reply #16 on: 2011-10-03, 16:00:42 »
Group: Moderator
Hero Member
*****

Posts: 3017
  Matt, like myself, has been out of town, but he responds to questions raised in this thread -- over on his thread at EF.com.
http://www.energeticforum.com/renewable-energy/962-use-tesla-switch-125.html

Quote
Matt Jones: This answer is to address a few issues the guys at "Overunity Research .com".

Quote:
Physics Prof. Writes....

Quote
Thanks Matt -- I must say, Matt responds to questions and is genuine.

This I don't quite understand, though:

1. "First claim:
You can get up to 4x - 8x more work done for the amount of power power used in the batteries if the load is appropriately sized and the circuit is tuned."

This sounds like OU to me, but perhaps Matt has a different definition of OU? because he says:

2. "Second claim:
This is not OverUnity. This just a simple potential based circuit that allow you to reuse energy until it escapes in either heat or entropy actually kills it. But because we are capturing the potential and reusing it we can moderately say the transformer is generating to some level."

OU is one of those terms that is not used correctly. Overunity could be anything that puts out more power under the classic terms of use in Electrical Engineering. The single largest problem with conventional engineering is the GROUNDED circuit. So the use of overunity is only applicable when using a grounded circuit.
We all know the Heat Pump. An efficient Heat Pump is an overunity mechanism if the COP is above 1. And they usually are between 1.5 and 6.5.
I have a geothermal heat pump that rates a COP of 5. Water Furnace.
With the heat pump you input 100 watt seconds /joules of electricity into a system and you can receive up to 650 watt seconds/Joules of Thermal energy. You basically used the 100 joules of electricity then through it away to ground. Even after you through away the 100 joules you still received 650 joules of thermal energy.
So in other words You used a grounded circuit and still received more out than in.
That is the definition of OverUnity. It does not need to self run it just needs to put out more than you put in in one form or another.

But in a potential based system we do not use a ground. And we are depositing our energy back into a battery that is wild variable for collection and storage. So how are we supposed to measure our efficiency? And if we are not throwing the energy away when we are done how then can we ever determine whether its overunity or not.

   Thanks again for responding, Matt.  And I'm frankly excited that so many are doing builds of your device and preparing to report results.  THAT is the way to answer these questions, so many questions -- by actual builds and experiments (as you have also said).

About the definition of "overunity", I offered this definition several months back which may be helpful.
http://www.overunityresearch.com/index.php?topic=762.msg14477#new

Quote
PhysicsProf, 10 March 2011:
I would define a "novel energy" (NE) device that has merit for science and for society as follows -- here are my criteria at this time:

1.  Energy from a non-conventional source.  This excludes:  fossil fuels and biomass burning, solar (including wind and wave power), geothermal, nuclear fission or fusion (although I should not exclude cold fusion -- but see point 3).  It does not exclude:  earth's gravitational or magnetic fields, galactic magnetic fields.  Even currently unknown sources are allowable -- and sought.

2.  More power out than in (that is, COP = Pout/Pin > 1), also known as "overunity" (OU).  This does not mean that principles of physics such as conservation of energy are (necessarily) violated.  It does imply a novel energy source.  Multiple methods of measurement are preferable, but the experimental method and the measurements must bear scrutiny (e.g., a peer-reviewed paper would be great!)

3.  The observation of OU must be repeatable.  A device must work every time specified conditions are met.  Successful replication must be demonstrated also.

4.  The power output must be capable of scaling up.  (Unlike extracting tiny currents from a magnet or iron pyrite, for example.)  To be more than a curiosity, a scaled-up working device should produce at least tens of watts.

5.  I would prefer that results and inventions be freely available worldwide, and not controlled by some big corporation or government entity.  A benefit to humanity is sought, not beaucoup-bucks for an elite few.

6.  If a theoretical model is claimed, the basis of that model needs to be empirically demonstrated.   For example, if a proton-nickel --> radioactive copper isotope production is claimed (as in a recent Bologna, Italy claim), then demonstration of copper isotope production is required.  This could be done by detecting the decay products of the produced radioisotopes, which should not be difficult to measure quantitatively.

I welcome comments on the stated criteria, which I may amend as time goes on.

[snip] I would like to see SOMETHING work definitively.  The prizes for OU have been sitting there for too long!

Note that Matt's example of a heat pump pulls in geothermal energy, and thus would not satisfy my definition of overunity -- which requires a non-conventional source of energy.
Now back to Matt Jones' response today at EF.com.

Quote
Matt Jones:  This should also answer the next post in your thread from Hoppy...
Quote:
Hoppy Writes....
The charge & discharge curve shapes will most likely be different when load testing on and off the TS. Very careful data logging would be required to get an accurate comparison of energy both discharged and replaced back into the batteries during re-charge. Matt does not explain his method and procedure in enough detail to satisfy me that his load testing is accurate enough to be certain that there is in fact an overall gain from the environment as he claims. A much wider discharge voltage band between LTP and HTP would be required to obtain a meaningful performance comparison.
Hoppy
So for starter I never claimed an Environmental Gain. That is something entirely different and I do not understand why you would insert that into your comment unless you were trying to misinform or you did not understand what I wrote. This a common problem. People do not read what is wrote, they imagine they read something else. If you choose to live in a Fairy tale then skip the next part.

If you want to truly measure the power discharged, used and collected you have to first have way to money to be any good for yourself or others.
You would need impedance and capacity meters on all 4 batteries. You would need at least 8 channel 200 mhz (on all 8 channels)scope that can interact with the capacity meters.
Lets look at 1 cycle. You take power from 24 volt battery. Discharge it on a wire through an inductor then deposit it into the plates of a 12 volt battery. 1 cycle.

First we need to know how much power we pulled exactly. Thats not too hard. (For example) We know the battery is at 24.5 v standing and then we pull the current for 2 ms and between this time the battery drops to 24.4 v. Our current is 10 amp. So we can reasonably say we pulled 244.5 watts for 2 ms.
This power then went through the inductor and changed slightly. We know we can measure this and like pulling the load from the battery its not an issue. Its an easy measurement.
But the power changed to 230 watts or 23 volt at 10 amp. Now we are going to deposit this in a 12 volt battery.
Well here is were the issue comes in.
*What is the internal resistance in the battery?
*What is the capacitance of the battery?
*What amount actually can be absorbed in the plate and what amount will just actually turn around and exit when we switch the cycle?

I doubt seriously anyone can measure that and accurately give that answer. More than likely it will be based on assumptions. In fact I know it can't be measured.
SO whats our options at this point since NO MATH EXISTS to measure this.

Well the best we can do is look at the load and watch the clock.

I have a heard alot of bright ideas for logging and data collection but really put the vector math to potential based system is not reality.

But maybe somebody has a better idea. I would love to hear it.

Matt
   
img  ion
Re: Matt Jones' Challenge: Build this Tesla Switch. Schematic, Plans.. Is this IT? « Reply #17 on: 2011-10-03, 19:11:58 »
Group: Elite
Hero Member
******

Posts: 3537
It's turtles all the way down
Quote
OU is one of those terms that is not used correctly. Overunity could be anything that puts out more power under the classic terms of use in Electrical Engineering. The single largest problem with conventional engineering is the GROUNDED circuit. So the use of overunity is only applicable when using a grounded circuit.
We all know the Heat Pump. An efficient Heat Pump is an overunity mechanism if the COP is above 1. And they usually are between 1.5 and 6.5.
I have a geothermal heat pump that rates a COP of 5. Water Furnace.
With the heat pump you input 100 watt seconds /joules of electricity into a system and you can receive up to 650 watt seconds/Joules of Thermal energy. You basically used the 100 joules of electricity then through it away to ground. Even after you through away the 100 joules you still received 650 joules of thermal energy.
So in other words You used a grounded circuit and still received more out than in.
That is the definition of OverUnity. It does not need to self run it just needs to put out more than you put in in one form or another.

But in a potential based system we do not use a ground. And we are depositing our energy back into a battery that is wild variable for collection and storage. So how are we supposed to measure our efficiency? And if we are not throwing the energy away when we are done how then can we ever determine whether its overunity or not.

If Matt  had any credibility, he largely destroyed it with this post.


---------------------------
"Secrecy, secret societies and secret groups have always been repugnant to a free and open society"......John F Kennedy
   
img  Hoppy
Re: Matt Jones' Challenge: Build this Tesla Switch. Schematic, Plans.. Is this IT? « Reply #18 on: 2011-10-03, 23:22:18 »
Group: Guest
Matt states in his PDF that: "The TS is not a matter of the reaction from the batteries or the transformer. It is not the SWITCHING that makes it happen. Its the reaction you create in the environment you build and the power that reaction returns. That power is then stored and released, in an unimaginable way."

My apologies to Matt if I read this statement out of context but to me it implies that the environment is responsible for the high performance (4x to 8x) as he says "its not the switching that makes it happen". I took the 'make it happen' and "the power that reaction returns" to mean the 4x to 8x performance gain over conventional loading. If the return is not due to the environment then maybe the cycling of the batteries is creating fresh plate material by the process of desulfation?? If Matt has no idea why the return is 4x to 8x then that's fine and its up to others to decide for themeselves whether his claim stands up through experimentation and if so, to decide on why this is. I have already built a small transformer and pulse generator and will be running it up in a day or so.

Matt has put himself out to share his ideas to form a practical project and I congratulate him for that. He has very sensibly raised the important issue of safety in his PDF. In addition to the safety procedures he describes, I would suggest the insertion of fuses for added protection.

Hoppy
   
img  Hoppy
Re: Matt Jones' Challenge: Build this Tesla Switch. Schematic, Plans.. Is this IT? « Reply #19 on: 2011-10-04, 08:58:21 »
Group: Guest
Matt wrote on the Energetic Forum: -

The switch outlined for everyone to duplicate does NOT follow the statement in the paper
Quote:
MJ wrote....
The TS is not a matter of the reaction from the batteries or the transformer. It is not the SWITCHING that makes it happen. Its the reaction you create in the environment you build and the power that reaction returns. That power is then stored and released, in an unimaginable way.
This is another switch entirely. The one outlined is simply an ungrounded circuit. You are not throwing away your electricity. You are just redirecting it for use again and again. Just good conservation. No magic if you will.

The true TS is as I outlined in that statement. It is a reaction between the environment and the environment we create in the circuit. We open a path for energy to come in from the environment. This allows us to do things and see results that are not explainable even under TS we are looking at now.

Matt, thanks for clarifying this.

Hoppy
   
img  PhysicsProf
Re: Matt Jones' Challenge: Build this Tesla Switch. Schematic, Plans.. Is this IT? « Reply #20 on: 2011-10-04, 15:37:23 »
Group: Moderator
Hero Member
*****

Posts: 3017
Quote from: Hoppy on 2011-10-03, 23:22:18
... If Matt has no idea why the return is 4x to 8x then that's fine and its up to others to decide for themeselves whether his claim stands up through experimentation and if so, to decide on why this is. I have already built a small transformer and pulse generator and will be running it up in a day or so.

Matt has put himself out to share his ideas to form a practical project and I congratulate him for that.....

Hoppy


I agree with you here, Hoppy.  Matt has gone the second mile with sharing to allow for replications.

 
Quote
small transformer and pulse generator and will be running it up in a day or so.


Will you report results here?
And is your build along the lines delineated by Matt, or some variation?
   
img  Hoppy
Re: Matt Jones' Challenge: Build this Tesla Switch. Schematic, Plans.. Is this IT? « Reply #21 on: 2011-10-04, 18:08:46 »
Group: Guest
Hi PhysicsProf,

I have attached some pics of my Matt Jone's small TS replication using 25A/hr SLABS. Its currently been running on a PICAX pulsout of 10. This gives me 7V DC across the 12V / 2.2W lamp load. Switching frequency is 850Hz. The first set of readings are as follows over the period 15:50hrs to 17:20hrs: -

Batt 1 (Top LHS):           13.32, 13.46, 13.40, 13.42. 13.43
Batt 2 (Top RHS):           12.37, 12.38, 12.40, 12.40. 13.39
Batt 3 (Bottom LHS):      12.37, 12.38, 12.36, 12.34. 13.32
Batt 4 (Bottom RHS):      12.31, 12.32, 12.31, 12.28. 12.25
Total V:                          50.37, 50.54, 50.47, 50.44  50.39

The transformer (a stripped-down solenoid from a big DC Contactor) is running cool and the transistor pairs on heat sinks are running quite warm, so there is power being dissipated. I'm expecting the total voltage to start dropping off now that the battery set has peaked at 50.54V. Given that the last total voltage reading is up 0.07V on the first, the TS appears to be performing well. However, I have found this to be the case with other pulse charged batteries, which can rise in voltage for several hours after being put on load before dropping under the initial reading.

Hoppy
   
img  Hoppy
Re: Matt Jones' Challenge: Build this Tesla Switch. Schematic, Plans.. Is this IT? « Reply #22 on: 2011-10-04, 22:33:47 »
Group: Guest
I have three more sets of readings to add as follows: -


13.43, 13.45, 13.47

12.39, 12.39, 12.37

12.32, 12.26, 12.15

12.25, 12.19, 12.06

50.39, 50.29, 50.05


It can be seen from these readings, the last of which was taken at 21:40 before I terminated the run, that the total voltage is starting to reduce below the starting level.

Hoppy
   
img  Allcanadian
Re: Matt Jones' Challenge: Build this Tesla Switch. Schematic, Plans.. Is this IT? « Reply #23 on: 2011-10-05, 01:21:48 »
Hero Member
*****

Posts: 2735
@Ion
Quote
If Matt had any credibility, he largely destroyed it with this post.
I think you may be a little confused with your reply #17, "Credibility: the quality of being valid and rigorous". Now we can see from the definition that a persons credibility has nothing to do with how they talk or the terminology they use, not how they dress nor the color of their skin which would be more in line with another term called racism. No, credibility relates directly to validity ie: "Valid: Producing the desired results; efficacious" and if a person can produce the desired results then it would seem to me that they are the only one's with any credibility. Not the ones who love to use big words or quote obscure references, not the ones who have a huge knowlegdge base nor years of experience as this done not imply success in any way. Credibility is about getting the job done and producing the desired results and I think any person who believes they have any credibility without any success in this field of technology is just fooling themselves, myself included. We cannot just remove ourselves from the equation and judge everyone else because we think we have all the answers and there must be some measure of proof, success is the ultimate proof.

As far as Matt's post which you quoted is concerned I see nothing which would suggest he was no credibility in fact he shows a great deal of creativity. Now I know some self-proclaimed experts dislike the heat pump analogy but the fact remains that the output is greater than the input due to energy extracted from the environment. It just seems odd to me that any suppossed expert would want to draw an imaginary box around their devices and declare this is all there is, odd that some suppossed experts live in an imaginary world where everything beyond their device magically ceases to exist. I think a little imagination is a good thing and it feeds our creativity however just ignoring our whole world and the seemingly infinite universe beyond it smacks of denial if not delusion.
Regards
AC


---------------------------
Comprehend and Copy Nature... Viktor Schauberger

“The first principle is that you must not fool yourself and you are the easiest person to fool.”― Richard P. Feynman
   
img  Hoppy
Re: Matt Jones' Challenge: Build this Tesla Switch. Schematic, Plans.. Is this IT? « Reply #24 on: 2011-10-05, 09:21:52 »
Group: Guest
Matt Jones wrote on Energetic Forum: -

Hi Hoppy

I see your getting my messages. Good work man. I am little confused as to why you chose to use a solenoid instead of a transformer. But none the less you got it running up pretty quik. I'm real impressed.

I would be interested to know if your solenoid is a complete closed loop like transformer. I notice frequency is really high. Generally my stuff usually tunes out much lower. Between 50hz and 200hz.

I did say the thing will lose power over time. You would hard pressed to find a TS that didn't. But if measure your batteries not while they are running but before you make a run and after with rest period you will see a very insignificant amount missing.

Also if the MJL's are heating alot you may want to try a little more robust switch if you have one. I am sure you are capable of figuring that out.

I appreciate anyone who is looking into it.

I gotta say again Nice Work
Matt

Matt,

The solenoid has a split yoke and therefore made it very easy to wind the strands on a single bobbin. The iron yoke is laminated and I left the top section off because it sings rather loudly given that it is the moving yoke section of the solenoid and just sits on top of the lower section. I loose about half a volt with it off.

I have carried out many experiments and hundreds of hours load testing pulse charged batteries and have found like with the TS switch, that when batteries are cycled to charge / discharge alternately at a few hundred Hertz, the discharge curve is radically altered. The flat part of the LA curve is shifted up so that by the time the battery is discharged down to 12V, its almost fully discharged and the terminal voltage drops off quite suddenly under load. My TS readings show a typical peak in total voltage as the batteries begin to stabilise their internal resistances and then slowly drop off. The curve more resembles that of a NICAD. I've had batteries hanging steady or rising in terminal voltage for a couple of hours or more on loads well exceeding C20 and the higher the load, the more accentuated is the rise in terminal voltage.  I don't take  much notice of 'before and after' voltage levels as this can be very misleading as I've found that 'after' readings give little indication of capacity remaining. I've pulled heavy currents for running invertors from freshly pulse conditioned battery sets over short time periods, without any noticeable drop in voltage after rest. Having said this, I would be most interested to learn how you have found a way to increase the effective capacity of your battery set by 4x to 8x.

I would normally use a low RDS mosfet for switching and like you have found SSR's quite effective for this. I think my very warm transistors is more to do with the rather poor switching waveform! As to why my TS is tuning better at a much higher frequency than yours, I'm not sure at the moment.

Hoppy
   
Pages: [1] 2
« previous next »


 

Home Help Search Login Register
Theme © PopularFX | Based on PFX Ideas! | Scripts from iScript4u 2024-11-27, 08:34:43