PopularFX
Home Help Search Login Register
Welcome,Guest. Please login or register.
OverUnity Research > Electrical / Electronic Devices > Tariel Kapanadze's Devices (Moderators: verpies, Apecore) > TK Replicates
2024-11-26, 20:25:44
News: Forum TIP:
The SHOUT BOX deletes messages after 3 hours. It is NOT meant to have lengthy conversations in. Use the Chat feature instead.

Pages: 1 2 3 4 [5] 6 7 8 9
Author Topic: TK Replicates  (Read 159822 times)
Topic Options img
img  BEP
Re: TK Replicates « Reply #100 on: 2013-06-18, 10:20:58 »
Group: Guest
No flame war is useful or required.

It is good for me to understand your thoughts on this matter and I'll consider them on any thoughts I offer to advance this discussion.
   
img  verpies
Re: TK Replicates « Reply #101 on: 2013-06-18, 10:49:56 »

Group: Moderator
Hero Member
*****

Posts: 3499
Thanks for your consideration and keeping us on track.
I find that I can usually keep my engineering concepts separate from my theoretical musings, which I don't want to impose on anyone.

The empirical formulas that I use in reference to these exotic devices are not much affected by my theoretical framework, anyway.
   
img  Grumpy
Re: TK Replicates « Reply #102 on: 2013-06-18, 15:14:03 »

Group: Tinkerer
Hero Member
*****

Posts: 3948
tExB=qr
Quote from: verpies on 2013-06-18, 07:27:21
From my experience, statements below often start an unproductive theoretical flame war, but I have to state it nonetheless.

IMO opinion space is just a reference system created by gravitating matter, that is devoid of any properties besides three-dimensionality of distance and direction.
The consequence of the above is that space cannot be twisted, bent, curved as in GR, except for an illusion of interaction between expected and actual reference systems.
This also means the IMO aether does not exist and neither do black holes as singularities.

I have no desire to defend these statements but I will if I am provoked.
I don't want this thread to deteriorate from a nice engineering discussion, we had so far, into a theoretical debate that will not bring us closer to a working device.

"devoid of any properties besides three-dimensionality of distance and direction.  The consequence of the above is that space cannot be twisted, bent, curved as in GR, except for an illusion of interaction between expected and actual reference systems.
This also means the IMO aether does not exist and neither do black holes as singularities."

Magnetic and electric fields reside in this space that you say has no properties.   

Vacuum has permittivity and permeability.  Aren't those properties of "space"?

Tesla concluded that space consisted of  charges in a dielectric.

Paul Dirac reached a similar conclusion, termed the Dirac Sea, of charged virtual particles.

Harold Aspden proved that "space" has an inherent rotational factor (see the "Aspden Effect").
   
img  verpies
Re: TK Replicates « Reply #103 on: 2013-06-18, 16:44:29 »

Group: Moderator
Hero Member
*****

Posts: 3499
I was hoping to avoid all that again.

Quote from: Grumpy on 2013-06-18, 15:14:03
Magnetic and electric fields reside in this space that you say has no properties.
Yes, IMO magnetic, electric and gravitational fields are not properties of space. They are the properties of motion of matter and relations between their motions.

Quote from: Grumpy on 2013-06-18, 15:14:03
Vacuum has permittivity and permeability.  Aren't those properties of "space"?
IMO they are not.

Quote from: Grumpy on 2013-06-18, 15:14:03
Tesla concluded that space consisted of  charges in a dielectric.
Paul Dirac reached a similar conclusion, termed the Dirac Sea, of charged virtual particles.
Harold Aspden proved that "space" has an inherent rotational factor (see the "Aspden Effect").
I know about all that. Those are just fudges.
I know that legacy science implies that space (and time) are endowed with these magical properties.  IMO it is not.

Space and time are just geometrical reference systems - they are not filled with a seas of "magical" fluid.
Those are just conceptual crutches.
   
img  Grumpy
Re: TK Replicates « Reply #104 on: 2013-06-18, 17:50:29 »

Group: Tinkerer
Hero Member
*****

Posts: 3948
tExB=qr
Interesting.

Where are you now with the device discussed in this thread?
   
img  ion
Re: TK Replicates « Reply #105 on: 2013-06-18, 18:01:11 »
Group: Elite
Hero Member
******

Posts: 3537
It's turtles all the way down
We can look at the inventions of Roy J Meyers and Hans Coler. They both employed a somewhat similar motiff of oscillating current passing through the gain medium and an orthogonal oscillating magnetic field superimposed upon it.

In the case of Meyers, he used Zn rods and in other cases Zn plates as part of the current path. These were held between the poles of an electromagnet which passed the same oscillating current. (see attachment)

Coler used rod magnets (possibly  Al Ni Co invented 1931) with wires soldered to them and coils wrapped around the rods. (see attachment)

Could these be early examples of accidentally induced beta decay? There have been no other plausible explanations to date and the devices were reported to be somewhat finicky to run, requiring careful adjustment.
« Last Edit: 2013-06-18, 20:18:44 by ION »


---------------------------
"Secrecy, secret societies and secret groups have always been repugnant to a free and open society"......John F Kennedy
   
img  verpies
Re: TK Replicates « Reply #106 on: 2013-06-18, 18:01:33 »

Group: Moderator
Hero Member
*****

Posts: 3499
Quote from: Grumpy on 2013-06-18, 17:50:29
Where are you now with the device discussed in this thread?
Stalled due to non-technical problems.
   
img  Grumpy
Re: TK Replicates « Reply #107 on: 2013-06-18, 19:59:24 »

Group: Tinkerer
Hero Member
*****

Posts: 3948
tExB=qr
Quote from: ION on 2013-06-18, 18:01:11
We can look at the inventions of Roy J Meyers and Hans Coler. They both employed a somewhat similar motiff of oscillating current passing through the gain medium and an orthogonal oscillating magnetic field superimposed upon it.

In the case of Meyers, he used Zn rods and in other cases Zn plates as part of the current path. These were held between the poles of an electromagnet which passed the same oscillating current. (see attachment)

Coler used rod magnets ( Al Ni Co) with wires soldered to them and coils wrapped around the rods. (see attachment)

Could these be early examples of accidentally induced beta decay? There have been no other plausible explanations to date and the devices were reported to be somewhat finicky to run, requiring careful adjustment.

In the post of Meyers patent here, http://www.viewzone.com/meyers/ , figure 8 shows the simplest embodiment of the device.  This example is a simple proof of concept.

Meyer's comments n "figure 8":

In Figure 8 I have illustrated an apparatus which though apparently primitive in construction and arrangement comprehends the first successful embodiment which I produced in the course of discovery of the present invention, and it will be observed that the essential features of the invention are therein disclosed. The structure delineated in said figure consists of horseshoe magnets 54, 55, one facing north and the other south, that is, each opening in the respective directions indicated and the two being connected by an iron wire 55 which is uninsulated and wrapped about the respective magnets each end portion of the wire 55 being extended from the respective magnets to and connected with, as by being soldered to, a zinc plate 56, there being a plate 56 for each magnet and each plate being arranged longitudinally substantially parallel with the legs of the magnet and with the faces of the plate exposed toward the respective legs of the magnet, the plate being thus arranged endwise toward the north and south. An iron wire 57 connects the plates 56, the ends of the wire being preferably connected adjacent the outer ends of the plates but from experiment I find that the wire may be connected at practically any point to the plate. Lead wires 58 and 59 are connected respectively with the wires 55 and 57 and supply an alternating current at a comparatively low tension, and to control such current the wires 58 and 59 may be extended to a rectifier or combined rectifier and intensifier, as above set forth.

The tests which I have found successful with the apparatus seen in Figure 8 were carried out by the employment first of horseshoe magnets approximately 4 inches in length, the bar comprising the horseshoe being about one inch square, the zincs being dimensioned proportionately and from this apparatus with the employment of a single intensifier and rectifier, as above stated, I was able to obtain a constant current of 8 volts.

It should be obvious that the magnets forming one of the electrodes of this apparatus may be permanent or may be electromagnets, or a combination of the two.

While the magnets mentioned throughout the above may be formed of any magnetic substance, I find the best results obtained by the employment of the nickel chrome steel.

While the successful operation of the various devices which I have constructed embodying the present invention have not enabled me to arrive definitely and positively at fixed conclusion relative to the principles and theories of operation and the source from which current is supplied, I wish it to be understood that I consider myself as the first inventor of the general type here-in-before described capable of producing commercially serviceable electricity, for which reason my claims hereinafter appended contemplate that I may utilize a wide range of equivalents so far as concerns details of construction suggested as preferably employed.

The current which I am able to obtain is dynamic in the sense that it is not static and its production is accomplished without chemical or mechanical action either incident to the actual chemical or mechanical motion or incident to changing caloric conditions so that the elimination of necessity for the use of chemical or mechanical action is to be considered as including the elimination of the necessity for the use of heat or varying degrees thereof.

EDIT: I just noticed the "North" arrow on the diagram.
   
img  ion
Re: TK Replicates « Reply #108 on: 2013-06-18, 20:15:38 »
Group: Elite
Hero Member
******

Posts: 3537
It's turtles all the way down
Besides the need to point north and use the earth field as one of the components for NMR, he also used adjustable mercury arc rectifiers with solenoid arc interruption which could be tuned to provide the required frequency as part of the current output loop.

A possible example of doing the best you can with the technology available in that time.

Sorry for the derailment, hope some can see the similarities.

Back to the matter at hand: building a tabletop BASER.


---------------------------
"Secrecy, secret societies and secret groups have always been repugnant to a free and open society"......John F Kennedy
   
img  BEP
Re: TK Replicates « Reply #109 on: 2013-06-18, 21:47:16 »
Group: Guest
verpies,

What gain medium are you contemplating?

Would a form of ferrite in the shape of a ring work without great difficulty?

I ask because I certainly have prior experiments that may be worthy of modification.
   
img  verpies
Re: TK Replicates « Reply #110 on: 2013-06-18, 22:26:03 »

Group: Moderator
Hero Member
*****

Posts: 3499
I tried brass, however I would expect zinc-ferrites to work too.
There is a man that understands nuclear structure like no other and I'd like to have his calculations to be able to answer your question with certainty: which Gain Medium is the easiest/best.

Take a look at the level of detail in his diagrams of the nucleus here.
His model gives me so much more info how to spin-up the nucleus at the appropriate angle to destabilize those inner neutrons, than the simplistic wavefunction or ball-model of legacy science. Compare here.
« Last Edit: 2013-06-19, 12:36:50 by verpies »
   
img  Grumpy
Re: TK Replicates « Reply #111 on: 2013-06-19, 15:00:37 »

Group: Tinkerer
Hero Member
*****

Posts: 3948
tExB=qr
How does a "gain medium" increase energy?
   
img  verpies
Re: TK Replicates « Reply #112 on: 2013-06-19, 15:17:15 »

Group: Moderator
Hero Member
*****

Posts: 3499
Strictly, the Gain Medium doesn't create any energy nor does it increase the energy of the BASER taken as a whole.
It only releases it in the form of very fast electrons.

This release happens at the expense of neutrons that become converted into protons and fast free electrons +*.
As a result of this, the nucleus loses mass and it is this difference in mass that becomes converted to energy and carried off by the fast electrons.

When all of the eligible neutrons in the Gain Medium become converted, then the Gain Medium becomes lighter and used up... but that still represents a lot of energy (1kg of copper can release an energy equivalent to burning ~22000L of gasoline).

P.S.
Neutrons are heavier than Protons.
* For the sake of simplicity of explanation, I am ignoring the release of positrons and neutrinos (or antineutrinos).
   
img  ion
Re: TK Replicates « Reply #113 on: 2013-06-19, 16:18:40 »
Group: Elite
Hero Member
******

Posts: 3537
It's turtles all the way down
Right now trying my best to wade through the papers of Miles Mathis and Stephen Rado. (thanks to verpies and grumpy).

As time permits, I enjoy reading this stuff, however IMHO, new viewpoints should result in new inventions as ultimate proof of their viability, lest they be just more philosophical argumentation.

We shall see.

Verpies: I have some large aluminum discs 16 to 24 inches dia, and a few small brass plates.

I was wondering if spray painting Zn galvanizing onto an insulating disc would be a good idea.

For the single plate unit, I'm thinking that oscillating bucking radial fields against a slowly changing orthogonal static field might be an easy way to test theory. (or vice versa)

Any thought?


---------------------------
"Secrecy, secret societies and secret groups have always been repugnant to a free and open society"......John F Kennedy
   
img  verpies
Re: TK Replicates « Reply #114 on: 2013-06-19, 17:31:15 »

Group: Moderator
Hero Member
*****

Posts: 3499
Quote from: ION on 2013-06-19, 16:18:40
Right now trying my best to wade through the papers of Miles Mathis and Stephen Rado. (thanks to verpies and grumpy).
This guy can really think, I mean really think independently of the legacy encumbrances.
However I am not his disciple. I just think he is less wrong than other physicists.
IMO he goes too far with his "charge field" and most importantly he assumes that photons, electrons and nucleons are "things" moving in space and he does not go deep enough into analyzing what is spining in those "ponderable things".
IMO his space time dimensions are off by one, because he assumes 1D time just like legacy science.

Quote from: ION on 2013-06-19, 16:18:40
As time permits, I enjoy reading this stuff, however IMHO, new viewpoints should result in new inventions as ultimate proof of their viability, lest they be just more philosophical argumentation.  We shall see.
As far as physics goes - you are correct.
However his mathematical and geometrical musings are beyond this burden of proof.

Quote from: ION on 2013-06-19, 16:18:40
I have some large aluminum discs 16 to 24 inches dia, and a few small brass plates.
I have some theoretical indications that Aluminum might be suitable because its inner neutrons can be exposed easily by NMR.  Neutrons not shielded by protons decay spontaneously.
Keep the disk radius as large as possible because that decreases the frequency requirements.  Lower frequency minimizes the skin effect in conductive aluminum and the low-frequency field penetrates deeper into the disk (affecting more of its volume).  Aluminum presents one disadvantage, though. Namely the beta particles ejected from aluminum are very energetic (fast) and that means that they require a stronger static magnetic field to keep them within the boundary of the disk (faster particles curve less in magnetic fields).

Quote from: ION on 2013-06-19, 16:18:40
For the single plate unit, I'm thinking that oscillating bucking radial fields against a slowly changing orthogonal static field might be an easy way to test theory. (or vice versa)
Any thought?
Yes, oscillating opposing radial fields perpendicular to a static field (or a slowly changing field) is a viable technique.
You have to tailor the geometry of your static (or LF) magnetic field so that it is perpendicular to the plane of the disk and its flux density increases further away from the center of the disk.

Ideally, the magnetic field should be perpendicular to the plane of the disk, inside the disk (red), yet the same field should be parallel to the plane of the disk, immediately outside of the disk.  This is tricky, because magnetic field lines do not "like" to make right-angle turns.  But it is possible to approach it - take a look at the spool simulation.

Use any means to approach that field geometry (even with ferromagnetic flux guides [gray] ) or your beta particles will escape the Gain Medium disk (red).

« Last Edit: 2013-07-18, 08:47:54 by verpies »
   
img  Grumpy
Re: TK Replicates « Reply #115 on: 2013-06-19, 20:45:51 »

Group: Tinkerer
Hero Member
*****

Posts: 3948
tExB=qr
Quote from: ION on 2013-06-19, 16:18:40
Right now trying my best to wade through the papers of Miles Mathis and Stephen Rado. (thanks to verpies and grumpy).

A lot of what Rado theorizes was previously shown by the work of Francis Nipher.
   
img  BEP
Re: TK Replicates « Reply #116 on: 2013-06-19, 21:53:59 »
Group: Guest
Building for dense field lines at the perimeter is not impossible but not what is normally seen.

That alone, could be an interesting endeavor.
 
   
img  giantkiller
Re: TK Replicates « Reply #117 on: 2013-06-28, 02:58:56 »

Group: Elite Experimentalist
Hero Member
*****

Posts: 1593
Frequency equals matter...


Buy me a drink
Quote from: Grumpy on 2013-06-18, 15:14:03
"devoid of any properties besides three-dimensionality of distance and direction.  The consequence of the above is that space cannot be twisted, bent, curved as in GR, except for an illusion of interaction between expected and actual reference systems.
This also means the IMO aether does not exist and neither do black holes as singularities."

Magnetic and electric fields reside in this space that you say has no properties.  

Vacuum has permittivity and permeability.  Aren't those properties of "space"?

Tesla concluded that space consisted of  charges in a dielectric.

Paul Dirac reached a similar conclusion, termed the Dirac Sea, of charged virtual particles.

Harold Aspden proved that "space" has an inherent rotational factor (see the "Aspden Effect").


When a person dives into a pool of water he is absorbed. When I person smacks the water IT is absorbed. Sure doesn't feel like it though. So the frame of reference must change to accommodate the energy transfer. Aether is real if you strike the surrounding space with zeal and then listen correctly.

http://www.overunityresearch.com/index.php?topic=79.msg32312#msg32312
Rado specifies on page 22:
Quote
We may still use the word Ether, but only to express some physical properties of space!


---------------------------
http://purco.qc.ca/ftp/
   
img  Grumpy
Re: TK Replicates « Reply #118 on: 2013-06-28, 03:14:36 »

Group: Tinkerer
Hero Member
*****

Posts: 3948
tExB=qr
Quote from: giantkiller on 2013-06-28, 02:58:56
When a person dives into a pool of water he is absorbed. When I person smacks the water IT is absorbed. Sure doesn't feel like it though. So the frame of reference must change to accommodate the energy transfer. Aether is real if you strike the surrounding space with zeal and then listen correctly.

http://www.overunityresearch.com/index.php?topic=79.msg32312#msg32312
Rado specifies on page 22:

Nothing exists without a constant flow of aether into it.  So, the flow of aether is already there, for free, you just have to manipulate it.
   
img  verpies
Re: TK Replicates « Reply #119 on: 2013-07-02, 12:52:15 »

Group: Moderator
Hero Member
*****

Posts: 3499
How do you expect to manipulate something that is just an idea.
Aether does not even have its properties defined and those who have tried to define them, found them to be contradictory.

When Michelson and Morley came along and did their famous experiment to measure Earth's motion through that Aether, they found no indication of it. 
Others have calculated that it must possess contradictory properties such as that it must be a fluid in order to fill space, but one that was millions of times more rigid than steel in order to support the high frequencies of light waves. Aether also had to be massless and without viscosity, otherwise it would visibly affect the orbits of planets, additionally it appeared that it had to be completely transparent, non-dispersive, incompressible, and continuous at a very small scale.  Eventually the whole idea of Aether was scrapped as unnecessary.
Read this link for a fascinating history of the Aether concept.
« Last Edit: 2023-10-05, 20:00:19 by verpies »
   
img  Grumpy
Re: TK Replicates « Reply #120 on: 2013-07-02, 14:21:40 »

Group: Tinkerer
Hero Member
*****

Posts: 3948
tExB=qr
Quote from: verpies on 2013-07-02, 12:52:15
How do you expect to manipulate something that is just an idea.
Aether does not even have its properties defined and those who have tried to define them, found them to be contradictory.

When Michelson and Morley came along and did their famous experiment to measure Earth's motion through that Aether, they found no indication of it.  
Others have calculated that it must possess contradictory properties such as that it must be a fluid in order to fill space, but one that was millions of times more rigid than steel in order to support the high frequencies of light waves. Aether also had to be massless and without viscosity, otherwise it would visibly affect the orbits of planets, additionally it appeared that it had to be completely transparent, non-dispersive, incompressible, and continuous at a very small scale.  Eventually the whole idea of Aether was scrapped as unnecessary.
Read this link for a fascinating history of the Aether concept.

Seek out better sources of information before building the foundation of your beliefs upon erroneous ones.
   
img  verpies
Re: TK Replicates « Reply #121 on: 2013-07-02, 14:48:13 »

Group: Moderator
Hero Member
*****

Posts: 3499
I did.
Nowhere, properties of Aether were even defined.
   
img  ion
Re: TK Replicates « Reply #122 on: 2013-07-02, 14:50:47 »
Group: Elite
Hero Member
******

Posts: 3537
It's turtles all the way down
Here is a newer video from Akula?

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7C4yEAm2ue4

Notice no ground wires are used or are visible. The aluminum? tube is clearly seen at the top of the coil stack.

We can argue till the cows come home regarding the existence or not of the aether. This has been going on over several hundred of years.

Not productive IMHO. A practical and useful invention is better than philosophical excursion.


---------------------------
"Secrecy, secret societies and secret groups have always been repugnant to a free and open society"......John F Kennedy
   
img  Grumpy
Re: TK Replicates « Reply #123 on: 2013-07-02, 16:00:09 »

Group: Tinkerer
Hero Member
*****

Posts: 3948
tExB=qr
Quote from: verpies on 2013-07-02, 14:48:13
I did.
Nowhere, properties of Aether were even defined.

Look up the properties of a vacuum.
   
img  Grumpy
Re: TK Replicates « Reply #124 on: 2013-07-02, 16:07:03 »

Group: Tinkerer
Hero Member
*****

Posts: 3948
tExB=qr
Quote from: ION on 2013-07-02, 14:50:47
Here is a newer video from Akula?

That's interesting.  Notice he is careful when he touches the switch.  The battery might be priming as well as powering the circuits that keep it working.  Has he posted any sort of schematic for this device?
   
Pages: 1 2 3 4 [5] 6 7 8 9
« previous next »


 

Home Help Search Login Register
Theme © PopularFX | Based on PFX Ideas! | Scripts from iScript4u 2024-11-26, 20:25:44