PopularFX
Home Help Search Login Register
Welcome,Guest. Please login or register.
2024-11-28, 03:41:39
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 3
Author Topic: If you knew how simple it was you would laugh  (Read 8525 times)
Sr. Member
****

Posts: 271
Hello my fellow OU explorers. I trust that I find myself in good company here.

I have been doing a significant amount of research alongside a number of experiments these past few months in an effort to understand the history of OU research and identify the common elements. My hope was that by eliminating all which is impossible, then whatever remains, however improbable, must be the truth. My research spanned decades and covered all the greats including Tesla, Gray, Floyd Sweet, Don Smith, Steven Mark, Tariel Kapanadze as well as some of the more recent newcomers.

My research and experiments have all boiled down to one thing: capacitors.

The formula for calculating the energy stored in a capacitor is: E = 1/2 * C * V²

Energy (Joules) = 1/2 * Capacitance (Farads) * Voltage squared.

The formula for the time to charge a capacitor is: T = RC

Time constant = Resistance * Capacitance

The key thing to note is that there is no mention anywhere of current in Amperes.

It is possible to charge a capacitor using static electricity only (volts with zero current).

When a capacitor discharges, the energy released is the total charge in Joules. 1 Joule is equivalent to 1 Watt per Second.

It is possible to extract amps from a charged capacitor. It requires no amps to charge said capacitor.

I am designing a generator using these principles and everything I have tested so far has worked according to my predictions.

I understand that most will be sceptical about this finding, but it is something quite simple that most of you should be able to reproduce and verify yourselves first hand.

I'll post a circuit diagram and step by step instructions on how to reproduce this effect later this evening or tomorrow.
   

Group: Tinkerer
Hero Member
*****

Posts: 3948
tExB=qr
   
Sr. Member
****

Posts: 271
See "charging current" for a capacitor here:

http://hyperphysics.phy-astr.gsu.edu/hbase/electric/capchg.html#:~:text=When%20a%20battery%20is%20connected,up%20to%20the%20battery%20voltage.

Thanks for pointing that out. I'm aware of inrush current which is limited by the resistance, but this is in a closed circuit.

What I'm proposing is to charge the capacitor in an open circuit arrangement, like so:



Here's a circuit simulation that I put together: https://tinyurl.com/2jw643bj
   
Sr. Member
****

Posts: 271
I came across the attached document (Stationary Field Generators) during my research. It describes a similar method of operation to that which I am proposing. The main difference appears to be that in this document it describes the use of an initial current to charge the capacitors, whereas in the scheme that I'm proposing you don't have that initial charge and so power consumption is zero.
   
Group: Experimentalist
Hero Member
*****

Posts: 2072
...
It is possible to charge a capacitor using static electricity only (volts with zero current).
...

This is wrong by definition of what a current is.
A charge displacement is a current, so transferring charges from one place to another will always involve a non-zero current.

Quote
...
The formula for the time to charge a capacitor is: T = RC
...

This is also false. T=RC, the capacitor charging time constant, is not the time to charge, which would be infinite, but the time to charge the capacitor to about 63% of the charging voltage (exactly 1-1/e).

...
What I'm proposing is to charge the capacitor in an open circuit arrangement, like so:


...

This circuit is not open, it is closed by the ground connection. The ground is a conductor. And if two "grounds" are used, which is a misnomer for one of the two, they are at least capacitively coupled so the circuit is looped too (even if one ground was the earth and the other the moon).


---------------------------
"Open your mind, but not like a trash bin"
   
Sr. Member
****

Posts: 472
charging capacitor by displacement current  O0
   

Group: Tinkerer
Hero Member
*****

Posts: 3948
tExB=qr
Nikola Tesla has patents for charging capacitors with radiant energy.

Perhaps you have something similar.
   
Group: Experimentalist
Hero Member
*****

Posts: 2072
Displacement currents are what happens between capacitor plates, or between any conductors whose potentials vary with respect to each other. The influence of charges on each other at a distance is equivalent to a variable current flowing between them.

This has been known since the 19th century thanks to Maxwell. Of course we can charge a capacitor via a circuit including displacement currents somewhere. But a displacement current does not mean an open circuit. On the contrary! it is because the circuit is apparently open and a current is flowing, that Maxwell had to introduce displacement currents. This means that in reality the circuit is closed, there is no mystery, Kirchoff's laws apply.
 
Of course we can laugh when this well-known and completely conventional banality is brandished as a discovery.
Unless you think you're smarter than everyone else, which is unfortunately common because of the Dunning-Kruger effect, tell yourself that if you have a simple brilliant idea in a hackneyed field like electromagnetism, hundreds of thousands of others have had it before you in the past, that the idea is just the result of your own ignorance of the field, and that if it's simple, it's not brilliant at all but wrong. So if you really believe in it, at least make the effort to study and experiment first, rather than bothering us with useless childishness.


---------------------------
"Open your mind, but not like a trash bin"
   
Group: Guest
« Last Edit: 2022-06-01, 18:03:52 by AlienGrey »
   
Sr. Member
****

Posts: 271
I am studying, experimenting and learning more every day. I'm very concious that I don't know everything in the field of electromagnetism. If every newcomer was put off and disheartened by more experienced folk then I don't suppose many of the discoveries that we've come to rely on would have seen the light of day.

I thought I'd share something that I discovered and thought warranted a closer look. If you think that this has been known about for eons and that it's not worth wasting effort on then please feel free to go on your way.

I'm just doing some research and experiments and openly sharing what I've found in the hope that it will help anyone looking into similar phenomena.

I've just built a new high voltage transformer to enable me to progress with my next round of tests. I have a few hypotheses to test out and once I find out the answers then I'll post them here.
   
Group: Experimentalist
Hero Member
*****

Posts: 2072
@lfarrand

Your answer does not give me the impression that you want to learn. A newcomer who wants to learn would have modestly asked questions about his idea rather than pretentiously asserting anything as if it were a truth.

And now you would either admit that your idea was wrong for the reasons given, or you would ask more questions to understand why the idea is supposedly wrong.
My arguments were circumstantial, my answer should have been helpful to you if you wanted to learn, but instead of thanking me, you complain about it because someone tells you that your idea is wrong!  With this posture in the realm of affect rather than science, you won't even learn from your mistakes.

Do you understand why what you have proposed is a dead end? I can tell you more if you have questions.
If you don't believe me, test your setup before bothering us with it, and you should eventually understand why you screwed up.
Not everyone is Tesla. Sorry if my style is a bit scathing, but it's mine.


...
I've just built a new high voltage transformer to enable me to progress with my next round of tests. I have a few hypotheses to test out and once I find out the answers then I'll post them here.

That's the right way. Good luck in your work, and if you have any questions, don't hesitate to ask, I'm always ready to explain what I think I know.



---------------------------
"Open your mind, but not like a trash bin"
   
Full Member
***

Posts: 212
I think this is a legitimate topic.  Except for the 'one' member who decided to jump in with repeated derision, trying to sway the community's opinion.  If there's a ground rod, perhaps it has to be switched in AFTER the cap is charged?  There's options to be explored.  It's not just ditch the concept as quickly as possible because ONE member with a big mouth doesn't want to read about it.

Experimenters at various sites have replicated John Bedini's single wire capacitor charging with his 'radiant' inductive spikes.  Also, J.L. Nadin's Free Electron Pump charges an isolated ball electrode with a single wire connection.  And someone on this forum (me) suffered eye injury due to an arc flash at the non connected side of a cap.

Besides that, answers which aren't know can't be given.
   
Group: Experimentalist
Hero Member
*****

Posts: 2072
I think this is a legitimate topic.  Except for the 'one' member who decided to jump in with repeated derision, trying to sway the community's opinion.
...
Experimenters at various sites have replicated John Bedini's single wire capacitor charging with his 'radiant' inductive spikes.  Also, J.L. Nadin's Free Electron Pump charges an isolated ball electrode with a single wire connection
...

I am the " 'one' member". I conducted experiments on Avramenko's single wire current transmission techniques to verify the claim that no current or almost no current was flowing. Not only does a current flow, but I measured that this current is equal to the current supplied by the generator.
I also replaced the copper wire with an extremely thin strand of carbon fibre. This strand was connected on one side to a high frequency generator, and on the other side to an electrode in the air with a volume of about 3x3x3 cm. The carbon thread caught fire and disappeared in smoke.

It is of course possible to charge a capacity with a single wire, because an insulated electrode is always capacitively coupled to the environment, especially the ground. So we have a normal circuit looped by displacement currents, a current flows well during the charging time. This operation is perfectly consistent with what electromagnetism tells us.

Quote
Besides that, answers which aren't know can't be given.

The answers are known, but apparently not by you. If you take the argument I gave about displacement currents closing a circuit as "derision", then you do not understand the scientific issues.
I invite you to experiment as much as I do, and learn the basics of what you are talking about rather than making derogatory remarks about me and commenting as a bigoted admirer of famous names in free energy (just names as b*dini, not inventors, not discoverers, not even scientists) whatever they do, in pointless verbosity without understanding anything about the mechanisms involved and known for more than a century.


---------------------------
"Open your mind, but not like a trash bin"
   
Full Member
***

Posts: 152
...
It is possible to charge a capacitor using static electricity only (volts with zero current).
...
I am designing a generator using these principles and everything I have tested so far has worked according to my predictions.

I understand that most will be sceptical about this finding, but it is something quite simple that most of you should be able to reproduce and verify yourselves first hand.

I'll post a circuit diagram and step by step instructions on how to reproduce this effect later this evening or tomorrow.

Hello lfarrand,

I think I might know the method you may be using to do this and the perspective you have of the charging scenario.

Although technically, F6FLT is correct when he says a cap can’t be charged without current, you can charge a cap without current just as you say, as long as the current comes from somewhere.

I try to avoid being blinded to other possibilities by “what is known fact”.

Thank you for what you have presented so far and I look forward to hearing more about your work.

Regards
Cadman



---------------------------
'Tis better to try and fail than never try at all
   
Full Member
***

Posts: 212
That Avramenko diode plug is a direct take off of Ed Gray's Electrostatic Generator.  The only thing different is the plug patent adds an extra diode in front of the capacitor.  I've done a lot of work with the cap/diode T-tap circuit.  I verified that the charge pump circuit also works with pulsed DC (the extra diode).  This was long before I heard of Avramenko, or saw Gray's patents.  Taking out one diode bipasses the patent.  Otherwise, the plug is wired to pump negative charge, so of course there is a current.

Dealing with potential only does not require electron rearrangement in every case.  Stan Meyer showed that a water molecule can have a capacitive charge when it is elongated.
   
Group: Experimentalist
Hero Member
*****

Posts: 2072
...
Dealing with potential only does not require electron rearrangement in every case.

A potential alone cannot provide energy. A potential is moreover arbitrarily fixed. We always need a potential difference.
The work of the electrostatic force is W=q.(Va-Vb). A charge must therefore go from a to b for energy to be supplied or consumed, which implies a current, a current being by definition a displacement of charges.


---------------------------
"Open your mind, but not like a trash bin"
   
Group: Moderator
Hero Member
*****

Posts: 2735
The easiest way to understand most systems is to break it down...

1)All energy is the capacity of "something" to perform Work.
2)Work is a function of a Force acting on something causing it to move through a Distance, move meaning motion.
3)Ergo, all energy and work relates to the present motion or change in motion of something... Energy is motion.

This applies to everything on every level so if we want to know where the Energy/work is we look for a Forces present then for the change in distance/motion of something. Some like to confuse everything with fancy terms, math and equations however these energy systems are not that difficult if we stick to the basics.

Here's a clue, Tesla implied the universe could be seen as mechanical in it's nature. We have material stuff, forces, motion and changes in motion. As such we could literally dispense with all the fancy scientific/electrical terminology and use basic mechanical ones.

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
   
Sr. Member
****

Posts: 271
Thanks for sharing your insights folks. I do believe that if we are to 'harness the wheelwork of nature' then we can achieve significantly more if we work together as a team. You know, in an open collaborative fashion where we are free to share ideas without fear of predjudice or being greeted with derision. I think we sometimes forget that we are dealing with other humans who have feelings and emotions. We are all on the same side playing for the same team - humankind.

I'm still hard at work balancing family life with a full time job. I basically spend my early mornings researching and early evenings doing experiments. I only wish there were more hours in a day!

This is one of the ideas that I'm working on at the moment. I've also just had an epiphany about another idea, which I think might explain Don Smith's devices. I'll post another thread about that.
   

Group: Tinkerer
Hero Member
*****

Posts: 3948
tExB=qr
The task we should all be working on, is how to connect to the wheel-work of nature that Nikola Tesla spoke of, and convert energy therefrom.
   
Group: Moderator
Hero Member
*****

Posts: 2735
Grumpy
Quote
The task we should all be working on, is how to connect to the wheel-work of nature that Nikola Tesla spoke of, and convert energy therefrom.

"If you want to find the secrets of the universe, think in terms of energy, frequency and vibration."... Nikola Tesla

I always found this quote strange because literally nobody I know thinks in these terms. Most are consumed with voltage, current and magnetic fields. Energy seldom if ever enters the equation and yet it is basically the only concept which matters.

Keep in mind this constitutes less than 1% of the population and everyone else has fossil fuels on there brains. The concept of electricity is completely foreign to most as is energy. So we could do some math, say 99% of the population doesn't really understand what electricity is and of the 1% that actually do few know how to understand it in the context of energy. Let alone in terms of energy, frequency and vibration as Tesla claims.

There's the problem, isn't it?. Which seems to explain why only a small fraction of 1% of people can even improve upon electrical devices and an even smaller fraction of them could go on to understand how to build a COP>1 device. Realistically were looking at 1% of 1% of 1% of the population which is basically on par with winning the lottery.

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
   
Sr. Member
****

Posts: 271
Here's a thought experiment with some maths, inspired by reading some old Tesla patents.

Take one 1uF, 25V capacitor and build a circuit powered by a 12V battery. Assume 1 ohm resistance.

After 5 time constants the charge on the capacitor will be 99.3% of 12V, which is 11.916V.

One time constant is:

t = RC
t = 1 x 0.000001
t = 0.000001 seconds
5t = 0.000005 seconds = 5 microseconds

Therefore the capacitor will be charged to 11.916V after 5 microseconds.

The energy stored in a capacitor is:

E = (CV2) / 2
E = (0.000001 x 11.9162) / 2
E = 0.000070995528 J

There are 1,000,000 microseconds in a second, so we would be able to charge & discharge the capacitor 200,000 times per second.

Assuming we discharge the capacitor and recharge it cyclicly, making use of the stored energy, then after 1 second we would have accumulated:

200,000 Hz x 0.000070995528 J = 14.1991056 Watts (1 J per second is 1 Watt)

Now, consider that voltage is essentially free. It's relatively easy to generate extremely high voltages with extremely low currents.

If instead of 12V our circuit operated at 20,000V and our capacitor was rated at 20kV, then the calculation would look like this:

99.3% of 20kV = 19,860V

E = (CV2) / 2
E = (0.000001 x 19,8602) / 2
E = 197.2098 J

200,000 Hz x 197.2098 J = 39,441,960 Watts = 39.44196 Megawatts

If our circuit operated at 40,000V then the calculation would look like this:

99.3% of 40kV = 39,720V

E = (CV2) / 2
E = (0.000001 x 39,7202) / 2
E = 788.8392 J

200,000 Hz x 788.8392 J = 157,767,840 Watts = 157.767840 Megawatts

Here are some examples that I put together in the Falstad circuit simulator: https://tinyurl.com/23y9wzcj
   
Sr. Member
****

Posts: 271
It would probably be more efficient to only charge the capacitor to 1t, at which point it would be charged to 63.2% and then discharge at a rate 5x that of charging to 5t. There are diminishing returns from that point to 5t due to the shape of the curve on the graph.

Also, it would make sense to use an extremely small capacitance and charge & discharge many more times per second.

I heard that vibrating a capacitor when charging has interesting effects. That's something I need to try.
   

Group: Tinkerer
Hero Member
*****

Posts: 3948
tExB=qr
Can you check that joules to watts conversion?

197 joules per 1 second is only 197 watts (a sanity check)
   
Sr. Member
****

Posts: 271
Can you check that joules to watts conversion?

197 joules per 1 second is only 197 watts (a sanity check)

Of course. The key point to what I'm saying is that in the circuit above we can charge & discharge the 1uF capacitor 200,000 times per second.

If we are able to charge & discharge once every 5 microseconds, then because there are 200,000x 5 microsecond intervals in one second, then it follows that we can charge & discharge 200,000 times per second.

99.3% of 20kV = 19,860V

E = (CV2) / 2
E = (0.000001 x 19,8602) / 2
E = 197.2098 J < this is the energy per 5 microsecond interval

200,000 Hz x 197.2098 J = 39,441,960 Watts = 39.44196 Megawatts < this is the cumulative energy for a 1 second interval

1 Joule = 1 Watt/second

From https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Joule:
One joule can also be defined by any of the following:

  • The work required to move an electric charge of one coulomb through an electrical potential difference of one volt, or one coulomb-volt (C⋅V). This relationship can be used to define the volt.
  • The work required to produce one watt of power for one second, or one watt-second (W⋅s) (compare kilowatt-hour – 3.6 megajoules). This relationship can be used to define the watt.
   
Sr. Member
****

Posts: 271
Discharging a capacitor through a diode has an interesting effect. It's much faster to discharge it to 0.2t but then becomes much slower to discharge from that point.

From https://physics.uncg.edu/hellen/DiodeDecay.htm:

A charged capacitor initially discharges very quickly through a forward-biased diode.  However the diode current’s nearly exponential dependence on voltage results in a drastic reduction in the rate of discharge.  Figure 1 clearly shows the transition in decay rate.



Measured voltage decay for a 0.1 microf capacitor through a 1N4148 diode.  Initial voltage is 0.62 V.

Also https://www.researchgate.net/publication/233665312_Verifying_the_diode-capacitor_circuit_voltage_decay:

The voltage on a capacitor discharging through a forward biased diode is calculated from basic equations and is found to be in good agreement with experimental measurements. In contrast to the exponential time decay for a RC circuit, the nonlinear characteristics of the diode result in a nonexponential decay for the diode–capacitor circuit. For a silicon diode the decay is predominantly a logarithmic function of time.
   
Pages: [1] 2 3
« previous next »


 

Home Help Search Login Register
Theme © PopularFX | Based on PFX Ideas! | Scripts from iScript4u 2024-11-28, 03:41:39