Dissecting Erfinder’s comments

[aln]

The purpose of this thread is to share/reshare comments made by Erfinder in the attempt to understand and achieve "the effect" that he has found and been able to continue to replicate. To some who feel it a waste of time; do not spend your time here. To those interested in commenting for the benefit of the group; feel free to comment, including you Erfinder. I do not spend lots of time on the computer, and I have lots of other things/obligations going on in my life so I expect this to be a slow moving drawn out conversation with myself... I am perfectly fine with that. But someone may benefit down the road if anything is achieved. So with that I begin.

"The Effect"

"Shutting it down results in the device (back popping) the power supply with no additional circuitry, the supply cap is charged up to twice the starting voltage. The cap is 400v 4700uF."

back charging the supply capacitor by sending joules back to the supply, out of phase with, and independent from the applied joules.

This effect has absolutely nothing to do with radiant

The trigger

it is mandatory that one not use an inductively triggered circuit,

I never got this effect with the SG

the transformer action between the trigger and the power windings suppresses this effect.

The SSG is a 1:1 transformer

the trigger coil is an output winding when the power winding is off
the trigger will copy the power that was flowing in the power winding!
the pickup coil is literally "MAKING A COPY" of the power supply.


erfinder, can you display or describe your hall switching setup?

"It's a 555 setup for monostable, triggered by a hall sensor. Nothing special."

The effect cannot be accomplished using an inductively triggered circuit. I have not be able to do it anyway. Maybe someone else can. I use a hall triggered circuit. The effect is only possible when you connect your coils correct. If you don't connect them correctly, you get exactly what everyone gets right now when they disconnect their devices from the power supply, nothing.


Thank you for what you have shared Erfinder, I do not feel misled, nor have I put much effort into this project.....yet. Aln

[erfinder]

The effect associated with recharging of the power supply when the "switching" circuit is disconnected, has been right in everybody's face for years! Improper coil polarity, improper coil to coil communication, and improper switching position are the main reasons why no one has seen the effect. JB shared a coil connection method in his Self Reguaging Idling Magneto that I found highly curious, he didn't share why this connection method was significant, investigation (effort) on my part was required. After what seems like an eternity, I now have a pretty good idea of why the connection method is significant. The connection changed how I look at motors and generators forever.

If you want to understand what I have found, forget radiant, focus on "REACTIVE POWER" and what one requires to construct a truly reactive power generator, that in my opinion is what all of this madness is about. The signs of the times are indicating that I may be correct, for all the forum big wigs are openly working in this direction, and they are moving fast, it's not likely that they are going to lay anything of use on the table for us to utilize. Reviewing the first demonstration video, the one leading up to the conference, there were representatives from a large wind generator company present....so.......I am not holding my breath for a full disclosure or any disclosure.

A powerful message was encoded into the Ferris wheel, I am not sure if this was intentional or if my imagination has gotten the best of me and I have invented something out of nothing! The fact remains, whether JB dropped bread crumbs or not, I saw something that helped to inspire the direction I eventually went into, he therefore indirectly inspired the effect that I demonstrate. For those who don't want to give up their pursuit of radiant. Think about this, the supply is limited to how much current it can supply for the eventual production of effects associated with what Tesla called Radiant, on the other hand, a reactive circuit is limited only by the operator. You know the parallel LC can have more current circulating in it than the supply can deliver...there's a name for this....I think its "Current Magnification", tapping it without invoking Lenz's wrath would be the bees knees. Did I change the subject, or is all of this related?

Regards

[Tom C]

since reactive power is being discussed here, this might help:
http://www.allaboutcircuits.com/vol_2/chpt_11/2.html

Tom C

[Tom C]

also the trigger winding "does" pick up voltage from the coil collapse, it can be harvested and used. JB has told us if you want to use the back battery on the front, get the trigger out of the circuit. hall switching with a small generator coil is one way to do it.

Tom C

[erfinder]

That link is a sure fire way to get lost...I can't argue with anything presented on that page, its all correct in my opinion, however, the question is how is it related to the subject? The idea is to simplify and not complicate the principles. Does one need to know all what that page states and doesn't state to take advantage of reactive power? Some would have us believe we must, I don't think we do. Difficult questions to answer, each must ask and answer these questions for him/herself.

The idea that the supply can be made to charge itself has stagnated any collective progress to such a degree that it may take some years to recover from well engineered mechanism of self manipulation via idol worship. The point is not to get the energy from the power supply back to the power supply. It's fascinating how that is exactly what "was" being being suggested in the early days. In the early days, I was banned for pointing this out, among other things.

What one should focus on is where the authorities are now! Not where they were!!! By staying where you are, out of sympathy or something sinister, the authorities give you exactly what you want. This is brilliant strategy, for since you choose to stay at the ground level debating, they can place meat on the table, your table, right under your nose, and you express little or no interest, the questions you throw at them when given the opportunity reflect your ignorance of what they are doing, and the area that they are now investing most if not all of their energy in.

L and C (inductance and capacitance respectively) are all we need to see when we look at the machine. When you see them you have something! We don't see them, we see motoring and generating, completely disconnected from L and C, this view leads into a debate with the machine that we cannot win, we are angry with the scribes of the laws, observations which describe the behavior of the machines. The clever try and work around the limits dictated by the internal conflict between motoring and generating, the SG is one such machine in my opinion. None approach the problem directly, its as if fear of stepping out of line with the observations of the scribes damns one to partake in fire and brimstone. The source of the problem is ignorance plain and simple.

We know or should be aware of the fact that through clever switching we can get around the the negative effects associated with generator action, this was the number one lesson I received from the SG and variants, the second lesson was an introduction into reactive power harvesting. Radiant becomes reactive when you localize L and C. While I learning to see a reactor being discharge of its ....call it what you want, others were seeing radiant energy....

If its an oscillator, whats oscillating? If its the transistor, the circuit is a black hole that you will watch lots of money disappear into. What happens to the other half of your induced wave? Just vanishes LOL. You don't even ask where it went, why? Because you are too busy trying to charge batteries. Hoping to trip over what JB did to his batteries, hoping to get the magic. The magic is reactive power, isn't it interesting how how your circuit has several so called "resonant" points......Thousands of replications and no one can tell me why that is?! Again most focus on the switch.....I stopped asking this question because the only thing that comes back is some relation to the switch. Friends, the switch is a catalyst, my opinion. Eric Dollard is a clever guy, through him I was introduced to the concept of the resonant frequency that a coil inherently has. Then a strange thing happened....I got this idea that a coil cannot actually have a "specific" resonant frequency, a coil by its very nature must respond to all frequencies as if they are all its resonant frequency. From here I figured that the frequency that we identify as "eigen frequency" is actually (in my mind!) the Keely chord of mass.....(at that point Tesla's decision to go with mass had an explanation that my simple mind could comprehend)......boggles the mind....

This post isn't directed at anyone. Just ranting....The real is ReActivE......

End of Rant....



Regards

[Tom C]

if you use the term reactive power but don't understand what it is, you will get lost no matter what anyone says. you have to understand the term, how it applies to the circuit and how to get out what is there, switching is of course the key, take out of it what you want and leave the rest behind.

Tom C

[erfinder]

if you use the term reactive power but don't understand what it is, you will get lost no matter what anyone says. you have to understand the term, how it applies to the circuit and how to get out what is there, switching is of course the key, take out of it what you want and leave the rest behind.

Tom C

Like folks using the term radiant, having no understanding of what radiant energy is. They are lost, no matter what anyone says. They don't know how it applies to the circuit, clueless as to what is there, switching is key, but not "the" key, can't take what you don't know is there.


Regards

[Tom C]

Erfinder Said:

"The effect associated with recharging of the power supply when the "switching" circuit is disconnected, has been right in everybody's face for years!"

switching...... coil orientation, L and C, it all matters. you have to study them, the meanings of the words, and "what" is being switched, and how and understand their effect in a circuit.

Tom C

[erfinder]

Erfinder Said:

"The effect associated with recharging of the power supply when the "switching" circuit is disconnected, has been right in everybody's face for years!"

switching...... coil orientation, L and C, it all matters. you have to study them, the meanings of the words, and "what" is being switched, and how and understand their effect in a circuit.

Tom C

OK Tom, what am I saying?

[Tom C]

its what you switch, ( a properly configured coil array) driving a rotor (properly configured magnetically) when you switch (what point in the coil magnet timing) how you switch ( using a monostable 555 timer to drive the base driven by a hall) and the effect that is produced by that, - which is the recharging the power supply, be it a battery or capacitor bank or feeding back to the grid, whatever, the implication is a self runner. if it is only a discovered effect and not stable then it needs more research.

Tom C

[erfinder]

its what you switch, ( a properly configured coil array) driving a rotor (properly configured magnetically) when you switch (what point in the coil magnet timing) how you switch ( using a monostable 555 timer to drive the base driven by a hall) and the effect that is produced by that, - which is the recharging the power supply, be it a battery or capacitor bank or feeding back to the grid, whatever, the implication is a self runner. if it is only a discovered effect and not stable then it needs more research.

Tom C

You are parroting Tom.....obsessed with the means, disinterested in why. How many have tried setups similar to the one being discussed, and without knowing it probably have had really small returns like those that Kiril showed in his last video, values so small that they are quickly passed over, these researchers promptly throw in the towel and bash the person who brought the idea to their attention. You clearly don't know what I am saying. This is no fault of your own, maybe I don't know what I am saying eh? Doesn't change the facts though...

Regarding the question of whether its just an effect or if its stable...you cant be serious, does it matter? Have you ever seen this effect before? I have heard it suggested but never saw any of the ones doing the suggesting actually do it? Sorry Tom but this is a stupid question, one that I am absolutely positive you wouldn't have asked JB if he was the one who presented this to you. I have shared all that I care to share with you, like all others you were provided with all you needed to get the the basic effect on your own, you must do what researchers do to make it do more, its not my job to spoon feed you nor anyone job to spoon feed me. It's so unfortunate that the majority want stability to precede comprehension of the underlying mechanism? Your definition of stable isn't mine, when your definition becomes my definition then maybe you will have your answer.

The one thing you got right, the implication is self runner, you are so absorbed with the obvious that the "meat" just passes you by.


Regards

[Tom C]

I thought I was answering your question... sorry dude.

Tom C

[erfinder]

Aln,

I find it unfortunate how none made the connection between what I "was" sharing, and "The Bedini Free Energy Generator". Thanks for starting this thread, hopefully some good will come out of it.


Regards

[aln]

Aln,

I find it unfortunate how none made the connection between what I "was" sharing, and "The Bedini Free Energy Generator". Thanks for starting this thread, hopefully some good will come out of it.


Regards

I am far behind the curve on electronic language/terminology and am working to understand. I will definitely be guilty of parroting you, in fact that is my intent, glad to see you are still around. I enjoyed yours and Toms dialogue. Though we are discussing some of John Bedini's technology I chose to place this thread here so as not to confuse beginners in the ssg following. (I am a beginner as well, mostly fixing dead batteries and not as concerned with efficiencies for that purpose.)

So, here we go again, not allowing Mr. Erfinder to disappear

Red=Erfinder

A powerful message was encoded into the Ferris wheel

I think JB is taking full advantage of this effect in the "Self Reguaging Idling Magneto"

The Ferris wheel hub motor/generator is not the SG, the Ferris wheel three coil device, is not the SG prior art, look at it, look at the circuit driving it.

The SG portion of the Ferris wheel is a massive mismatched impedance network using three coils. It should be clear that impedance mismatching is imperative, this was demonstrated from day one, in the prior art.

From the quotes I came to the conclusion that the true significance of the additional coil is for the expressed purpose of establishing an imbalance in the impedance of the coil, tuning is secondary to this.

Improper coil polarity, improper coil to coil communication, and improper switching position are the main reasons why no one has seen the effect. JB shared a coil connection method in his Self Reguaging Idling Magneto that I found highly curious, he didn't share why this connection method was significant, investigation (effort) on my part was required. After what seems like an eternity, I now have a pretty good idea of why the connection method is significant. The connection changed how I look at motors and generators forever.

Proper geometry of coils enables us to achieve high recovery regardless of high CEMF, there is no need for us to come up with ways to lower the CEMF, we need to comprehend what CEMF really is, because it isn't going anywhere.

Two avenues are presented in part and as confused as the presenter, SINE and COSINE. You are familiarizing yourself with the sine function, the cosine function is a mystery that has only been passively mentioned. The goal is synthesis of the two, when this happens, the result is what I call CYMATICS in the stator.

[aln]

Aln,

I find it unfortunate how none made the connection between what I "was" sharing, and "The Bedini Free Energy Generator". Thanks for starting this thread, hopefully some good will come out of it.


Regards

I am slow, just read the page on icehouse about "The Bedini Free Energy Generator".
Bedini=blue

Now this "free energy resonant coupling" can be done in a simple, cheap system. You don't need big cyclotrons and huge laboratories to do it; you can do it with ordinary D.C. motors, batteries, controllers and trigger circuits.

First we will need a big accumulator to hold a lot of the charged ions in the system that we wish to shock into oscillation. We need something that has a big capacitance and also contains a lot of ions.


An ordinary battery filled with electrolyte fits the bill nicely. While it is not commonly known, ordinary lead-acid storage batteries have a resonant ionic frequency, usually in the range of from 1-6 MHz. All we have to do is shock-oscillate the ions in the electrolyte at their resonant frequency and time our "trigger"potential and "siphon" current correctly. Then if we keep adding potential to trigger the system we can get all that "potential" to translate into "free electrical energy".



Mention was made during the previous discussion of the g field and kromery which are related as here http://www.icehouse.net/john1/foreward.html