Replication attempt of patent NL1032750

Home Help Search Login Register

Welcome,Guest. Please login or register.

OverUnity Research > Electrical / Electronic Devices > Arie De Geus > Replication attempt of patent NL1032750

2024-11-28, 06:44:30
News: Registration with the OUR forum is by admin approval.

Pages: 1 2 [3]

« previous next »

Author Topic: Replication attempt of patent NL1032750 (Read 8228 times)

Classic	Re: Replication attempt of patent NL1032750 « Reply #50 on: 2023-09-27, 11:13:25 »
Group: Restricted Sr. Member Posts: 270	@verpies, my bad, 1.i should say wires need to be wound tide not coils, thanks for observation. 2. I have specified the wire used for spacing needs to be removed after finishing the coil and the same apply if fishing line is used instead. But this is valid observation and thanks again for pointing out, as it helps for those who intend to build. 3. I will disregard observations related to inter and intra winding capacitance as they are part of non existent aether and I really don’ t want to discuss in this stage this aspect. If still in doubt please refer to first part of patent description and literature mentioned. I am trying to help where most of people can use something instead of pushing them to self educate. I am going to state again that the purpose is to have as many as possible working devices built and people start benefiting from this invention. @chetK 1. After i read what i wrote in a very temperamental impulse, i have apologised to itsu and indeed it was wrong and mean to write in that way. But my observations about his setup that have nothing to do with this patent stands. I only can apologise again for the way i have communicate my observations. 2. My bad, it seems that i have create the impression that i am willing to share some of my previous work, which I am not. But i only wanted to say is I am willing to share all I know for this replication and i do have some experience and skills. 3. I am not quite sure if you are asking me to leave or you want to discipline me ? Please, clarify.

verpies	Re: Replication attempt of patent NL1032750 « Reply #51 on: 2023-09-27, 11:37:46 »
Group: Professor Hero Member Posts: 3499	Quote from: Classic on 2023-09-27, 11:13:25 3. I am not quite sure if you are asking me to leave or you want to discipline me ? Please, clarify. I think he is asking you to reveal your username on overunity.com.

Chet K	Re: Replication attempt of patent NL1032750 « Reply #52 on: 2023-09-27, 14:24:45 »
Group: Ambassador Hero Member Posts: 4045	A member was banned at Stefan’s forum recently ( prior to classic posting here) posted similar unsupported summaries ( no actual experiments to support) Many times using YouTube vids to bolster unsupported claims. Took over as many topics as he was able to ( with combative unsupported claims) Then got moderated and went further with horrific behavior towards Stefan offline ,he had to close forum membership . Very similar behavior here ( smaller scale with a few plot twists ) Classic you seem to post over there under adrouk ( new member who recently got through new moderation policy there after Closing of membership.. Yes there is no room for unsupported claims or YouTube as evidence here Now I see you changed your “Always share” to never ? Please no games here … You seem to make plenty of claims…and offer very strong statements (“ it’s all there “ etc etc And now you share nothing of your own and try to infer incompetence ,nefarious behavior /accusations in our host And others ?( try to dismiss with “sorry “?) Signal to noise is way off the charts ( signal being bench proof of claims , not wordy often corrected text) I will speak with owner tonight about this , Your recent addendums to your willingness ( unwillingness) to share your own work,bring even more concern to “ why are you here”? And making incredible amounts of posts …towards encouraging others to build ??and share ?? HUH ?

Classic	Re: Replication attempt of patent NL1032750 « Reply #53 on: 2023-09-27, 14:51:36 »
Group: Restricted Sr. Member Posts: 270	No problem at all, this will probably be my last post Good bye everyone

verpies	Re: Replication attempt of patent NL1032750 « Reply #54 on: 2023-09-27, 15:50:02 »
Group: Professor Hero Member Posts: 3499	Quote from: Classic on 2023-09-27, 14:51:36 No problem at all, this will probably be my last post So what Chet wrote about is true ?

Chet K	Re: Replication attempt of patent NL1032750 « Reply #55 on: 2023-09-28, 01:56:45 »
Group: Ambassador Hero Member Posts: 4045	Classic Perhaps you should read Darren’s Power and Creed again ( prerequisite for joining forum when you signed up) Small preface attached in screenshot PDF also attached below. Please read again. Tipping point for me is your false claims on Replication attempt ( you wrote “it’s not In patent “) As you are aware our host was also involved in this attempt. Also the grotesque insinuations attached to your rebuttal! If you can follow forum OU claims protocols ( build it yourself and prove it or submit for review by other builders) This would be good, making broad OU claims with no empirical proof is forbidden here ( example: holding statement “it’s all in the patent” as OU proof) also etiquette between membership ,false accusations or insinuations ..unacceptable according to terms of service and guidelines. Sincerely Chet K Ps I have not asked for Peter or Darren’s opinion yet in this matter Nor will I if you can adhere to forum rules.( just like we all agreed to do here as part of accepting terms of service and additional guidelines ) ------------------------ Power and Creed_v2.0.pdf (65.95 kB - downloaded 145 times.) Replication attempt of patent NL1032750 IMG_9538.jpeg (357.58 kB, 828x989 - viewed 688 times.)

Itsu	Re: Replication attempt of patent NL1032750 « Reply #56 on: 2023-09-29, 15:00:46 »
Group: Elite Experimentalist Hero Member Posts: 4159	It seems "Classic" is not able to access this forum anymore according to a comment he made under one of my old YouTube videos. That comment can be seen here (he goes by the name of Caesarus2011): https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=yDZZUSZkG4Y Itsu « Last Edit: 2023-09-29, 16:54:25 by Chet K »

Chet K	Re: Replication attempt of patent NL1032750 « Reply #57 on: 2023-09-29, 16:56:24 »
Group: Ambassador Hero Member Posts: 4045	will ask Peter don’t think any administration action is responsible I believe members can remove their own membership And he is no longer listed as a member . Chet EDIT Just spoke with Grumage And it does seem no administration action is involved Will ring Peter in a few hours just to be certain ( he is still at work ATM

Itsu	Re: Replication attempt of patent NL1032750 « Reply #58 on: 2023-09-29, 19:55:48 »
Group: Elite Experimentalist Hero Member Posts: 4159	I just got a PM from Classic that somehow he again has access to this forum. Itsu

Itsu	Re: Replication attempt of patent NL1032750 « Reply #59 on: 2023-09-29, 20:36:20 »
Group: Elite Experimentalist Hero Member Posts: 4159	In post #39 of this thread i mentioned: "some 8 years ago i did a replication of this NL1032759 patent of Arie deGeus together with Peterae and also Smudge was involved. Somehow i cannot find the thread anymore where we were discussing this." After consulting Peterae (admin) it seems that i (and others??) was looked out for seeing this thread somehow which is now resolved. So this thread where we were discussing this NL1032759 patent is here: https://www.overunityresearch.com/index.php?topic=2897.0 I can see it again, hopefully everybody else too, if not please send a PM to Peterae. Perhaps it contains some good info about this patent which others could use. I do not have this setup anymore, so i am not able to provide any additional data other than what is shown in this thread / videos. Regards Itsu

Classic	Re: Replication attempt of patent NL1032750 « Reply #60 on: 2023-09-30, 10:53:55 »
Group: Restricted Sr. Member Posts: 270	Many thanks for reply itsu, i really appreciate your effort. I have spent some time reading all the posts again as i was able to do a while ago in Peterae bench but has disapeared somehow after i started this thread and could not find again. All i can say, it was pretty close to prove as long as guidelines has been adhered and i can observe, every little alteration has lead the outcome outside of the purpose of patent. It seems the most of people are afraid somehow to trust an inventor and when replicating they diverge from guides outlined in patents, or overlook some important details based own their own experience and this apply for almost all attempts to replicate any other devices that i have seen in this forum. I can understand and is a valid point that some automatisms exist especially for those with vast experience and it might be a correct explanation for failures. Also, analysing some opinions makes me think that probably someone has had the results needed and probably a working device, not necessary an user from this forum. (my guess) So, i want to point out that this is my approach and what i consider to be important in order to achieve desired outcome. 1. Frequency requirement is a must. This is the heart of device and everything is calculated upon it, not other way. 2. Correct length of wire (as little difference would render all outcome undesirable). 3. Correct connections at specified points. As fig2 in patent drawings 4. Correct aspect ratio and number of turns. As per description in patent in 2 separate sections. 5. Correct phase shift with the help of 2 capacitors in series with correct capacity as per patent description. When i will have all parts i will perform calculations again according to parts i can get where signal generator is the main issue yet. I am not making any claims and everything should be read as an attempt to replicate as per thread name. And indeed i make reference to patent description almost all the time where i consider is the utmost importance. After all is a replication attempt where assumption that we do not posses the same knowledge as inventor is taken in account. I wil not try to outsmart the inventor at any point and if you want to see it like that i am an idiot who knows nothing, but I trust the inventor where he proved with a working device when a patent has been granted and in his generosity shared almost all info to replicate. « Last Edit: 2023-10-01, 19:34:02 by Classic »

Classic	Re: Replication attempt of patent NL1032750 « Reply #61 on: 2023-10-03, 11:43:04 »
Group: Restricted Sr. Member Posts: 270	Looking at patent on espacenet i found a slightly different translation https://worldwide.espacenet.com/patent/search/family/039564703/publication/NL1032759C1?q=NL1032759 Quote The method and apparatus are for the withdrawal of zero point energy from space for the increase of electro-magnetic field energy, translated into increased kinetic energy of 'free' electrons established by oscillation of two electro-magnetic fields with a single frequency, but with a phase difference. Parallel conductors are used, which have a reduced distance from one another. In operation, the apparatus has a cylinder length of its double winding of 33 cm and a winding diameter of 16.5 cm. A magnet wire thickness with insulation of 1.1 mm is used and with the application of a block voltage of 21 volts, with a ferquency of approximately 8.5 MHz a capacity increase or near 8 per cent is measured (measurement is carried out with instruments whose accuracy is at 8.5 MHz). If input voltages at higher frequencies are obtained or can be secured, there is the possibility for free electrical energy to be obtained and at each scale level. The correct choice of wire length, inductances and capacities in respect of the input frequencies can be selected with very few losses occurring, whereby the number of these circuits must be formed as a 'cascade'. I think a second translation might offer some other clues. If someone bother to analyse each component in this circuit and what they doing step by step may discover interesting things. I did not ordered yet any signal generator, as according to my new calculus and analyse i found that i may use an unipolar square wave as well or instead … need more work to find the outcome. My attempt is to replicate this system at a very affordable low cost and i have no interest to just prove that work as this part has been done by the inventor himself. So, if anyone can find a cheap signal generator capable of clean square wave with adjustable duty for 20-30 MHz, any little voltage above 1v where we can additional boost voltage with low cost solution. Minimum 20 mhz square wave output is essential as it would have 2 effects that i am looking for: 1. length of wire will be shorted bringing the cost down and 2. Better output with less necessary additional circuits cascade for domestic power generation. I am thinking of approx £100-150 budget or less where everything is bought new off the shelf. This is an essential condition in my attempt. Magnet wire approx £30 Ceramic Capacitors 0.5 pF 50 v £5 for 10 of them or few different capacities under 10 pf to play with them Ceramic trimmer capacitors 0.3-0.6 pF under £5 for 10 of them Power source + Signal generator £ 50 or less Solution to collect in useable form for domestic use £50 Sounds feasible ? Later edit: if someone ask why do we need a phase shift in a bifilar coil where we already have opposite flow of electrons in 2 conductors which are in close proximity to each other, the answer is simple: phase shift will introduce a magnetic delay.

Paul-R	Re: Replication attempt of patent NL1032750 « Reply #62 on: 2023-10-03, 16:19:31 »
Hero Member Posts: 1579	Quote from: Classic on 2023-10-03, 11:43:04 Magnet wire approx £30 What diameter and length?

Classic	Re: Replication attempt of patent NL1032750 « Reply #63 on: 2023-10-03, 16:26:18 »
Group: Restricted Sr. Member Posts: 270	Quote from: Paul-R on 2023-10-03, 16:19:31 What diameter and length? If we go for frequency above 20 MHz you may find some good options here: https://www.switchelectronics.co.uk/collections/copper-wire Also they have caps as well at a very decent price not what they charge on amazon or whatever popular choice. Lately amazon have became kind of useless where no selection can be made and prices are extreme robbery where a lot of fakes are allowed and not doing what they suggest their products doing.

Classic	Re: Replication attempt of patent NL1032750 « Reply #64 on: 2023-10-04, 11:01:19 »
Group: Restricted Sr. Member Posts: 270	It seems that “some distance” between bifilar (as per patent description) should be in range of fraction of the wire thickness (probably less than 1/2 of thickness of wire used) and not in multiple of wire thickness as seen in itsu replication attempt, as it is seen as a mitigation for skin effect and proximity effect.

Classic	Re: Replication attempt of patent NL1032750 « Reply #65 on: 2023-10-07, 13:41:52 »
Group: Restricted Sr. Member Posts: 270	I wonder if i can use for signal generator an “high elevated plate” with dimension to match desired frequency ? Even if there is just a small voltage

Classic	Re: Replication attempt of patent NL1032750 « Reply #66 on: 2023-10-26, 19:17:03 »
Group: Restricted Sr. Member Posts: 270	https://youtube.com/shorts/Lr6mwJiLAmo?si=mXsO9Jwe8DkdzL8X It looks similar, isn’t it ?

Classic	Re: Replication attempt of patent NL1032750 « Reply #67 on: 2023-11-05, 14:55:48 »
Group: Restricted Sr. Member Posts: 270	Can i use a magnetron from on microwave owen as signal generator ?

AlienGrey	Re: Replication attempt of patent NL1032750 « Reply #68 on: 2023-11-05, 19:58:57 »
Group: Guest	Quote from: Classic on 2023-11-05, 14:55:48 Can i use a magnetron from on microwave owen as signal generator ? Are you serious ? are you tierd of living ? I ask this as what SG operates at 4 GHZ and at 2-4 1000 volts output ? Do your self a favour don't upset luved ones, dont mess with the micro wave. Sil

verpies	Re: Replication attempt of patent NL1032750 « Reply #69 on: 2023-11-05, 20:03:47 »
Group: Professor Hero Member Posts: 3499	Quote from: Classic on 2023-11-05, 14:55:48 Can i use a magnetron from on microwave owen as signal generator ? Yes, but only for 2.4-2.5GHz, which can be amplitude modulated by its LF HV power supply, e.g.: 50-120Hz.

Classic	Re: Replication attempt of patent NL1032750 « Reply #70 on: 2023-11-05, 20:48:47 »
Group: Restricted Sr. Member Posts: 270	Quote from: AlienGrey on 2023-11-05, 19:58:57 Are you serious ? are you tierd of living ? I ask this as what SG operates at 4 GHZ and at 2-4 1000 volts output ? Do your self a favour don't upset luved ones, dont mess with the micro wave. Sil You need to do better homework, all magnetrons in microwave ovens are set for the same frequency 2.45 GZ only difference between them is the power output. We need to look around in domestic appliances and “misuse” them as Don Smith have tried to explain.

Classic	Re: Replication attempt of patent NL1032750 « Reply #71 on: 2023-11-05, 21:31:14 »
Group: Restricted Sr. Member Posts: 270	Quote from: verpies on 2023-11-05, 20:03:47 Yes, but only for 2.4-2.5GHz, which can be amplitude modulated by its LF HV power supply, e.g.: 50-120Hz. Well, it looks like is the exact frequency that i need to inject in that bifilar coil. At 2.45 Ghz allow me to use very short wires for coil which will be perfect to obtain a decent small device. I can’t find what shape will be generated, as all device ou use a square wave. Also i need a solution to power the magnetron from 12v battery as I am gathering parts for it now … similar with the one that i posted a Romanian patent. Also, i wonder how can i increase capacitance in the bifilar coil without using huge amount of wire, as capacitance is the exact factor that dictate the output power. There is few things that I have learned analysing many devices but I am not looking for a self runner, at least not yet. All I can say we need to change the way we use electricity and we need to let it flow instead of shorting it in our appliances unless we need to create some heat. Shorting is killing the source, nullify the gradient whichever we use.

verpies	Re: Replication attempt of patent NL1032750 « Reply #72 on: 2023-11-05, 22:29:13 »
Group: Professor Hero Member Posts: 3499	Quote from: Classic on 2023-11-05, 20:48:47 You need to do better homework, all magnetrons in microwave ovens are set for the same frequency 2.45 GZ only difference between them is the power output. The industrial microwave ovens use 915MHz magnetrons.

verpies	Re: Replication attempt of patent NL1032750 « Reply #73 on: 2023-11-05, 22:51:03 »
Group: Professor Hero Member Posts: 3499	Quote from: Classic on 2023-11-05, 21:31:14 At 2.45 Ghz allow me to use very short wires for coil which will be perfect to obtain a decent small device. ...wires?! Do you realize the skin-depth at 2.4GHz ? Also, magnetrons emit EM waves, so you'd need to connect any electric current carrying "wires" to the coupling-loop of the magnetron without damaging the vacuum-seal. See the location of the "probe" in the diagram below. ...or build a microwave antenna. Replication attempt of patent NL1032750 Just don't grind the ceramic neck because the dust from it will kill you. Quote from: Classic on 2023-11-05, 21:31:14 I can’t find what shape will be generated,... Sine burst.

Classic	Re: Replication attempt of patent NL1032750 « Reply #74 on: 2023-11-06, 06:47:42 »
Group: Restricted Sr. Member Posts: 270	Quote from: verpies on 2023-11-05, 22:29:13 The industrial microwave ovens use 915MHz magnetrons. Yeah, I’ve made reference to domestic appliances … i like off the shelf idea the most. Also, I am well aware of the health hazard, that’s why I asked around if it may be a good idea. And i pretty much dislike idea to use microwave antenna … I could use that in other setups for aerial collection and can be bought from electronic components shops not so expensive. But it is too easy of someone want to mess with your device.

Pages: 1 2 [3]

« previous next »

Home Help Search Login Register

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

2024-11-28, 06:44:30

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