Ricks best video's

Home Help Search Login Register

Welcome,Guest. Please login or register.

OverUnity Research > News, Announcements, and Current Events > The Buzz > Ricks best video's

2024-11-25, 23:29:25
News: Registration with the OUR forum is by admin approval.

Pages: 1 ... 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 [20] 21

« previous next »

Author Topic: Ricks best video's (Read 70226 times)

poynt99	Re: Ricks best video's « Reply #475 on: 2019-08-10, 20:09:18 »
Group: Administrator Hero Member Posts: 3217 It's not as complicated as it may seem...	Quote from: Aking.21 on 2019-08-10, 19:07:05 Here it is: 1 hour 56 minutes in. https://www.youtube.com/channel/UCu1hNQsr9YnkIjFkMAc3Npw This link only takes you to his YT channel page. --------------------------- "Some scientists claim that hydrogen, because it is so plentiful, is the basic building block of the universe. I dispute that. I say there is more stupidity than hydrogen, and that is the basic building block of the universe." Frank Zappa

Itsu	Re: Ricks best video's « Reply #476 on: 2019-08-10, 20:20:13 »
Group: Elite Experimentalist Hero Member Posts: 4159	poynt, it seems to be the first video you see, named: Selfish Unthankful Circuits or Loving Giving Paths....... Itsu

poynt99	Re: Ricks best video's « Reply #477 on: 2019-08-10, 20:39:17 »
Group: Administrator Hero Member Posts: 3217 It's not as complicated as it may seem...	I don't see it. --------------------------- "Some scientists claim that hydrogen, because it is so plentiful, is the basic building block of the universe. I dispute that. I say there is more stupidity than hydrogen, and that is the basic building block of the universe." Frank Zappa

Itsu	Re: Ricks best video's « Reply #478 on: 2019-08-10, 20:44:37 »
Group: Elite Experimentalist Hero Member Posts: 4159	Here the direct link to about 1:56 in that video: https://youtu.be/SE-AiC9yiFc?t=6960 Itsu

poynt99	Re: Ricks best video's « Reply #479 on: 2019-08-10, 21:02:52 »
Group: Administrator Hero Member Posts: 3217 It's not as complicated as it may seem...	Thanks Itsu. --------------------------- "Some scientists claim that hydrogen, because it is so plentiful, is the basic building block of the universe. I dispute that. I say there is more stupidity than hydrogen, and that is the basic building block of the universe." Frank Zappa

lost_bro	Re: Ricks best video's « Reply #480 on: 2019-08-11, 03:42:46 »
Sr. Member Posts: 281	Quote from: Itsu on 2019-08-10, 20:44:37 Here the direct link to about 1:56 in that video: https://youtu.be/SE-AiC9yiFc?t=6960 Itsu Good day all: Hmmm....... "negative resistance is the resistance that connects to the negative side of the circuit"............WTF??? $:-\$ I guess I am missing something...........LOL? take care, peace lost_bro

CITFTA	Re: Ricks best video's « Reply #481 on: 2019-08-11, 11:31:16 »
Group: Experimentalist Hero Member Posts: 782 Believing in something false doesn't make it true.	I don't think YOU are the one missing something. --------------------------- Just because it is on YouTube does not make it real.

TinMan	Re: Ricks best video's « Reply #482 on: 2019-08-11, 12:26:27 »
Group: Elite Experimentalist Hero Member Posts: 4728	Quote from: poynt99 on 2019-08-10, 21:02:52 Thanks Itsu. The man is so lost. Brad --------------------------- Never let your schooling get in the way of your education.

Aking.21	Re: Ricks best video's « Reply #483 on: 2019-08-11, 14:23:36 »
Sr. Member Posts: 420	Quote from: lost_bro on 2019-08-11, 03:42:46 Good day all: Hmmm....... "negative resistance is the resistance that connects to the negative side of the circuit"............WTF??? $:-\$ I guess I am missing something...........LOL? take care, peace lost_bro The term negative resistance means energy enters the circuit. The negative side means the open path circuits as opposed to the usual closed loop circuits. A negative resistor can be a coil or capacitor or a battery or resistor which allows current to enter the circuit. It is termed negative because it s opposite to conventional Kirchoff law. It is advanced electrical engineering above college/university level. You have to understand Kron and Dollard and Barrett to get it. EDIT: technically you could term a solar panel as a negative resistor as energy enters the circuit. I don't think solar panels were around during Kron's time...but maybe he just hadn't heard of them. --------------------------- Electrostatic induction: Put a 1KW charge on 1 plate of a capacitor. What does the environment do to the 2nd plate?

Reiyuki	Re: Ricks best video's « Reply #484 on: 2019-08-11, 16:11:04 »
Group: Mad Scientist Full Member Posts: 185	Quote from: Aking.21 on 2019-08-11, 14:23:36 The term negative resistance means energy enters the circuit. The negative side means the open path circuits as opposed to the usual closed loop circuits. A negative resistor can be a coil or capacitor or a battery or resistor which allows current to enter the circuit. It is termed negative because it s opposite to conventional Kirchoff law. It is advanced electrical engineering above college/university level. You have to understand Kron and Dollard and Barrett to get it. EDIT: technically you could term a solar panel as a negative resistor as energy enters the circuit. I don't think solar panels were around during Kron's time...but maybe he just hadn't heard of them. For inductors and capacitors, an EE might also call it 'negative reactance' instead of negative resistance (even though it's still calculated with ohms). But they're all expressing the same concept, and IMO although the math can be painful, the concept itself is not that hard to grasp. It's Kirchhoff's laws in a nutshell. Positive resistance represents electricity being converted/dissipated into another form (usually as heat or chemical energy). Negative resistance represents electricity being created from another dimensional form (light, magnetic, dielectric, chemical, thermal, etc). Either electricity is being added to a circuit, or it is being removed from a circuit. In the case of a battery, it presents as a positive resistance when it is charging, and a negative resistance when it is discharging. Of course this is not over-unity by itself, it's merely a way of describing+modeling how energy is converted between forms. Quote from: TinMan And i always thought that was P/in-->silly me Mathematically it's the same thing, we're still using Ohms law here. You're just solving for Power using a negative value to represent electricity accumulation rather than dissipation. See the attached table. ------------------------ Ricks best video's Ohms-Law-Formula-Wheel.png (8.19 kB, 431x320 - viewed 591 times.) « Last Edit: 2019-08-12, 04:01:33 by Reiyuki » --------------------------- When you say something is impossible, you have made it impossible

lost_bro	Re: Ricks best video's « Reply #485 on: 2019-08-11, 18:10:25 »
Sr. Member Posts: 281	Quote from: Aking.21 on 2019-08-11, 14:23:36 The term negative resistance means energy enters the circuit. The negative side means the open path circuits as opposed to the usual closed loop circuits. A negative resistor can be a coil or capacitor or a battery or resistor which allows current to enter the circuit. It is termed negative because it s opposite to conventional Kirchoff law. It is advanced electrical engineering above college/university level. You have to understand Kron and Dollard and Barrett to get it. EDIT: technically you could term a solar panel as a negative resistor as energy enters the circuit. I don't think solar panels were around during Kron's time...but maybe he just hadn't heard of them. Good day Aking While the first statement in bold letter is true, it is only partially true from an EE standpoint: A negative differential resistance device, (of which there are many flavors) will only demonstrate "negative resistance" (a Negative slope of the E.I. curve) in a portion of one of the 4 quadrants. Outside of the the Negative slope portion of the E.I. curve, the device will exhibit 'normal' positive resistor properties. I have attached a drawing for simplicities sake: The Negative slope portion of the E.I. curve dictates that as E increases, I decreases (it is this fact that differentiates it from 'positive' resistance). Actually, the first sinewave oscillator (circa. 1892) was constructed by Elihu Thomson who built a negative resistance oscillator by connecting an LC circuit to the electrodes of an electric arc (lamp), was perhaps the first example of an electronic oscillator. This is very old technology, dating to Tesla's time. See arc lamp NDR hystersis loop attached below. Since that time, the principle of negative resistance has been used in many devices including regenerative receivers, magnatrons, dynatrons, grounded grid tube amplifiers and the effect is also seen in tunnel diodes, point-contact transistors, point-contact germanium diodes, uni-junction transistor, even thermistors exhibit a negative resistance slope. So this is common and known phenomenon and NOT some exotic lost technology. take care, peace lost_bro edit: to fix spelling error ------------------------ Ricks best video's 220px-Voltage_controlled_negative_resistance.svg.png (6.53 kB, 220x215 - viewed 543 times.) Ricks best video's H-loop-NDR-.png (244.22 kB, 899x675 - viewed 572 times.) « Last Edit: 2019-08-11, 22:35:43 by lost_bro »

CITFTA	Re: Ricks best video's « Reply #486 on: 2019-08-11, 18:16:33 »
Group: Experimentalist Hero Member Posts: 782 Believing in something false doesn't make it true.	Quote from: lost_bro on 2019-08-11, 18:10:25 Good day Aking While the first statement in bold letter is true, it is only partially true from an EE standpoint: A negative differential resistance device, (of which there are many flavors) will only demonstrate "negative resistance" (a Negative E.I. curve) in one of the 4 quadrants. Outside of the the Negative portion of the E.I. curve, the device will exhibit 'normal' positive resistor properties. I have attached a drawing for simplicities sake: The Negative portion of the E.I. curve dictates that as E increases, I decreases. Actually, the first sinewave oscillator (circa. 1892) was constructed by Elihu Thomson who built a negative resistance oscillator by connecting an LC circuit to the electrodes of an electric arc (lamp), was perhaps the first example of an electronic oscillator. This is very old technology, dating to Tesla's time. See arc lamp NDR hystersis loop attached below. Since that time, the principal of negative resistance has been used in many devices including regenerative receivers, magnatrons, dynatrons, grounded grid tube amplifiers and the effect is also seen in tunnel diodes, point-contact transistors, point-contact germanium diodes, uni-junction transistor, even thermistors exhibit a negative resistance slope. So this is common and known phenomenon and NOT some exotic lost technology. take care, peace lost_bro WOW, A voice of reason in the land of fantasy. Thank you lost-bro --------------------------- Just because it is on YouTube does not make it real.

muDped	Re: Ricks best video's « Reply #487 on: 2019-08-12, 06:02:32 »
Group: Tinkerer Hero Member Posts: 3055	Whenever Negative Resistance comes up in a discussion I take another look at SparkBangBuzz to review his various devices which are home made with easy to find materials. His curiosity and tinkering seems to be contagious. With a Negative Resistance it seems that the Voltage and Current changes are 180 degrees apart rather linearly in the best cases. « Last Edit: 2019-08-12, 07:31:13 by muDped » --------------------------- For there is nothing hidden that will not be disclosed, and nothing concealed that will not be known or brought out into the open.

forest	Re: Ricks best video's « Reply #488 on: 2019-08-12, 10:47:55 »
Sr. Member Posts: 472	Resonance : https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=UYmbeD5gWk8&t=778s

ion	Re: Ricks best video's « Reply #489 on: 2019-08-12, 13:14:45 »
Group: Elite Hero Member Posts: 3537 It's turtles all the way down	Quote from: forest on 2019-08-12, 10:47:55 Resonance : https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=UYmbeD5gWk8&t=778s Nice that he uses a incandescent lamp to test his resonant circuit. I must chuckle at those using neon lamps such as NE-2's which only require about 400 microamperes to sustain a glow and will operate on even much less. You can get them to light with a stroke of your cat's fur and comb. Nearby RF ionizing radiation will also cause a glow. For a bit more sanity: Lost_bro's graph is included as well as a Wikipedia page and chart. Note the glow can occur with current in the range of as little as 10^-7 amperes. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Neon_lamp So lighting a neon lamp is only proof of microamperes in a circuit, and usually much less than 50 milliwatts. Regards P.S. To Rick, I'm wondering why you did not reply to my post #465, maybe you missed it? https://www.overunityresearch.com/index.php?topic=3796.msg77298#msg77298 ------------------------ Ricks best video's 1024px-NeonLampCharacteristicCurve.svg.png (28.26 kB, 1024x625 - viewed 443 times.) Ricks best video's H-loop-NDR-.png (244.22 kB, 899x675 - viewed 443 times.) --------------------------- "Secrecy, secret societies and secret groups have always been repugnant to a free and open society"......John F Kennedy

TinMan	Re: Ricks best video's « Reply #490 on: 2019-08-12, 14:15:20 »
Group: Elite Experimentalist Hero Member Posts: 4728	When you transmit real wireless power https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8lEJpfApwoo Brad --------------------------- Never let your schooling get in the way of your education.

partzman	Re: Ricks best video's « Reply #491 on: 2019-08-13, 15:23:40 »
Group: Experimentalist Hero Member Posts: 1808	Brad, Thanks for posting what you did in Rick's thread at OU! Truer words were never spoken!! It is really frustrating to not have the ability to respond to such idiotic statements. Regards, Pm

F6FLT	Re: Ricks best video's « Reply #492 on: 2019-08-14, 10:40:04 »
Group: Experimentalist Hero Member Posts: 2072	Quote from: Aking.21 on 2019-08-04, 01:46:09 Incorrect. Nothing disappears, the mass becomes zero. Does an astronaut disappear when he is weightless in the space station? Of course not. But technically his mass is zero. That is why Tesla was able to move a ten storey building with a light tapper. ... The best stupidity said during my absence for a month. A great moment. If you have any other absurdities to support Tesla or the scammer RF, Aking.21, feel free to let us know and thank you in advance for making us laugh again. Quote from: Reiyuki on 2019-08-04, 05:28:43 E=MC^2. Does a charged capacitor weigh more than an uncharged capacitor? Likewise, does a powered electromagnet contain more energy than an unpowered electromagnet? ... Hi Reiyuki, The answer is yes, there is no exception, energy and mass are really equivalent. Then comes immediately an idea of perpetual motion: let's charge a capacitor at high altitude, use its potential energy by lowering it to the ground, recover the electrical energy from its charge. To repeat the cycle, let's put it back at high altitude, this will require less potential energy than we have gained since now its charge is zero, therefore its weight is lower. Unfortunately relativity also applies to the weight of the electrons that we must climb at altitude! It takes more energy to charge a capacitor at high altitude from the ground than if it were on the ground. Of course these differences are infinitesimal. The energy of a capacitor and even a super-capacitor, divided by c², is not even measurable. But other similar ideas, feasible and measurable, can emerge, nevertheless it is clear that the conservation of energy in the mathematical formalism of relativity is also guaranteed. --------------------------- "Open your mind, but not like a trash bin"

TinMan	Re: Ricks best video's « Reply #493 on: 2019-08-14, 11:00:45 »
Group: Elite Experimentalist Hero Member Posts: 4728	Quote from: Aking.21 on 2019-08-11, 14:23:36 The term negative resistance means energy enters the circuit. The negative side means the open path circuits as opposed to the usual closed loop circuits. A negative resistor can be a coil or capacitor or a battery or resistor which allows current to enter the circuit. It is termed negative because it s opposite to conventional Kirchoff law. It is advanced electrical engineering above college/university level. You have to understand Kron and Dollard and Barrett to get it. EDIT: technically you could term a solar panel as a negative resistor as energy enters the circuit. I don't think solar panels were around during Kron's time...but maybe he just hadn't heard of them. A circuit with a resistance would follow ohm's law,where we would see a decrease in current with a voltage drop. A negative resistance would see an increase in current with a voltage drop. Are you thinking along the line's that if we have say a 12 volt battery,and we place a load across that battery,and the voltage drops across that battery,but the current go's up--that is a negative resistance ?. And the greater the load across the battery,the lower the voltage will fall,but the higher the current will rise. This being the case,how exactly dose this result in an energy gain?,as the more current that flow's,the greater the losses in heat. Brad --------------------------- Never let your schooling get in the way of your education.

TinMan	Re: Ricks best video's « Reply #494 on: 2019-08-14, 11:05:36 »
Group: Elite Experimentalist Hero Member Posts: 4728	Quote from: F6FLT on 2019-08-14, 10:40:04 Hi Reiyuki, The answer is yes, there is no exception, energy and mass are really equivalent. Then comes immediately an idea of perpetual motion: let's charge a capacitor at high altitude, use its potential energy by lowering it to the ground, recover the electrical energy from its charge. To repeat the cycle, let's put it back at high altitude, this will require less potential energy than we have gained since now its charge is zero, therefore its weight is lower. Unfortunately relativity also applies to the weight of the electrons that we must climb at altitude! It takes more energy to charge a capacitor at high altitude from the ground than if it were on the ground. Of course these differences are infinitesimal. The energy of a capacitor and even a super-capacitor, divided by c², is not even measurable. But other similar ideas, feasible and measurable, can emerge, nevertheless it is clear that the conservation of energy in the mathematical formalism of relativity is also guaranteed. Why will a capacitor gain weight when charged?,as the volume of charge in a capacitor always remains the same. A capacitor is considered charged when all the electrons are removed from the positive plate,and moved to the negative plate. A capacitor is considered un-charged when the volume of electrons is equal on each plate. When you charge a capacitor,you are merely moving the electrons from the positive plate,over to the negative plate--but the volume of electrons always remains the same. Some like to use the terms positive and negative charges,but it's one in the same,as the volume of charge always remains the same--so how dose a capacitor gain weight when it's charged if the mass of that capacitor never changes?. Brad « Last Edit: 2019-08-14, 11:37:32 by TinMan » --------------------------- Never let your schooling get in the way of your education.

Reiyuki	Re: Ricks best video's « Reply #495 on: 2019-08-14, 14:02:56 »
Group: Mad Scientist Full Member Posts: 185	Quote from: F6FLT on 2019-08-14, 10:40:04 Hi Reiyuki, The answer is yes, there is no exception, energy and mass are really equivalent. Then comes immediately an idea of perpetual motion: let's charge a capacitor at high altitude, use its potential energy by lowering it to the ground, recover the electrical energy from its charge. To repeat the cycle, let's put it back at high altitude, this will require less potential energy than we have gained since now its charge is zero, therefore its weight is lower. Unfortunately relativity also applies to the weight of the electrons that we must climb at altitude! It takes more energy to charge a capacitor at high altitude from the ground than if it were on the ground. Of course these differences are infinitesimal. The energy of a capacitor and even a super-capacitor, divided by c², is not even measurable. But other similar ideas, feasible and measurable, can emerge, nevertheless it is clear that the conservation of energy in the mathematical formalism of relativity is also guaranteed. Thanks for responding F6, but I don't think the answer is quite so simple. If a charged capacitor weighs more than an uncharged capacitor, where is the extra mass located? The same number of coulombs is present in the dielectric, they are simply displaced to one side or the other. Wouldn't the 'left' plate weigh more and the 'right' plate weigh less? I'd have to be in agreement with TinMan on this one. For my cap example, I would use two capacitors rather than one, both at the same altitude but attached to a see-saw-type mechanism that is attached to a generator. That way both capacitors are on the same reference frame, but one would have a greater mass than the other at each point in the cycle. (Assuming ideal capacitors and superconductive shuttling to charge/discharge each one) Keep in mind this is merely discussing the potential symmetry-break granted by relativity. The 'loophole' appears to stem from the fact that EM waves/photons can convey force despite not having/changing mass themselves. If indeed electricity possesses its own mass, then we are faced with a surprising ability to 'teleport' mass from one place to another without losses. ------------------------ Ricks best video's ThoughtExperiment_CapacitorWeight.png (44.96 kB, 889x612 - viewed 257 times.) « Last Edit: 2019-08-14, 15:16:29 by Reiyuki » --------------------------- When you say something is impossible, you have made it impossible

F6FLT	Re: Ricks best video's « Reply #496 on: 2019-08-15, 10:21:03 »
Group: Experimentalist Hero Member Posts: 2072	Quote from: Reiyuki on 2019-08-14, 14:02:56 Thanks for responding F6, but I don't think the answer is quite so simple. If a charged capacitor weighs more than an uncharged capacitor, where is the extra mass located? The same number of coulombs is present in the dielectric... This question is a tautology. If you assume that mass is only in matter, then you can only conclude that whatever its disposition, it should remain constant. But that is not true: mass also depends on energy, they are of same kind. Proof: the mass of an atomic nucleus is greater than the mass of its nucleons. In this case, the additional mass is the binding energy of the atomic nucleus, i.e. the energy that must be supplied to the nucleus to dissociate it into its nucleons, which are attracted by the nuclear force, a force that corresponds to the strong residual interaction. Fission or fusion atomic energy is the energy we obtain from a mass change while the elementary "matter" is the same. In the case of a charged capacitor, the principle is the same, the additional energy to be taken into account for the mass is that of the weak interaction (electromagnetic force, which is taken at the expense of the electrical source that charges the capacitor and loses mass/energy), instead of the strong one. --------------------------- "Open your mind, but not like a trash bin"

TinMan	Re: Ricks best video's « Reply #497 on: 2019-08-15, 10:30:46 »
Group: Elite Experimentalist Hero Member Posts: 4728	Quote from: F6FLT on 2019-08-15, 10:21:03 This question is a tautology. If you assume that mass is only in matter, then you can only conclude that whatever its disposition, it should remain constant. But that is not true: mass also depends on energy, they are of same kind. Proof: the mass of an atomic nucleus is greater than the mass of its nucleons. In this case, the additional mass is the binding energy of the atomic nucleus, i.e. the energy that must be supplied to the nucleus to dissociate it into its nucleons, which are attracted by the nuclear force, a force that corresponds to the strong residual interaction. Fission or fusion atomic energy is the energy we obtain from a mass change while the elementary "matter" is the same. In the case of a charged capacitor, the principle is the same, the additional energy to be taken into account for the mass is that of the weak interaction (electromagnetic force) instead of the strong one. So a wound spring weigh's more than an unwound spring ?--i don't see that being true. A photon has no mass but has energy,therefore energy dose not have to be associated with mass. Brad --------------------------- Never let your schooling get in the way of your education.

F6FLT	Re: Ricks best video's « Reply #498 on: 2019-08-15, 10:43:09 »
Group: Experimentalist Hero Member Posts: 2072	Quote from: TinMan on 2019-08-15, 10:30:46 So a wound spring weigh's more than an unwound spring ? That's true. https://physics.stackexchange.com/questions/252241/does-contracted-spring-weigh-more-than-stretched-one Quote A photon has no mass but has energy,therefore energy dose not have to be associated with mass. So how do you explain that it is deviated by a gravity field? Only the photon rest mass is null, but a photon at rest doesn't exist. --------------------------- "Open your mind, but not like a trash bin"

TinMan	Re: Ricks best video's « Reply #499 on: 2019-08-15, 11:16:30 »
Group: Elite Experimentalist Hero Member Posts: 4728	Quote from: F6FLT on 2019-08-15, 10:43:09 that's true. So how do you explain that it is deviated by a gravity field? It's also deviated by a magnetic field,a mirror,heat,and water etc. A large gravity field warp's space,and to the outside observer,it would appear that the photon deviates from a straight line of travel. But as far as the photon is concerned,it is still traveling in a straight line. So it go's much like this-- You are in a motor vehicle,traveling down a 5km long straight stretch of road. A big giant picks up the whole stretch of road and starts to rotate it. Now,as far as those in the car are concerned,they are still traveling in a straight line down that road,but observing them from space,the vehicle would look like it is traveling in a long arc. Then there is also that big one-->E = mc^2. This means that any object that has mass,as it gets closer to the speed of light,it's mass will increase. Once at the speed of light,it's mass becomes infinite. So,if a photon had mass,and it is traveling at the speed of light,then one single photons mass would be infinite. As we know this is not the case,and the photon travels at the speed of light,then it can have no mass. Brad --------------------------- Never let your schooling get in the way of your education.

Pages: 1 ... 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 [20] 21

« previous next »

Home Help Search Login Register

Theme © PopularFX | Based on PFX Ideas! | Scripts from iScript4u

2024-11-25, 23:29:25

SMF 2.0.18 | SMF © 2021, Simple Machines
XHTML
RSS
WAP2