The SG Radiant Oscillator

[min2oly]

Hi RS,
Thanks for your valuable inputs on this.. just some of my understandings of the Patent''Circuits and related methods of Charging a Battery''
Refering to the fig:3 in the patent, apparently this topology is common for SSG in Rotored machine and SG in the forced triggered mode. However, the diode 54 plays a vital role in the operation of the forced trigger, the reverse polarized diode 54 accross the BE section make use of the depletion layer Capacitance in determining the Frequency of oscillation.(JB and chuck hupp show the cable Oscillator with a capacitor at the position of the diode in their crystal battery video) the patent text also refers the embodiment to be able to oscillate at 60 Hz in some amd at 15KHz in another.
A 60Hz is oscillation is synounmous with a rotored machine.. i wonder if there is any
way to drive the rotored machine in the forceed trigger topology??
Rgd,
Faraday88.

it's very simple to do so:

[Faraday88]

Hi,

One of the things about the differences between the forced trigger, and the free running trigger with a rotor, is the signal shape.

A rotor trigger strand makes the transistor go into a negative current flow through the transistor right at turn on, thus having the full source voltage across the Coil for a very much longer time period, until forward current flow happens. This opens up the "reaction cross section" (think the Standard Math that integrates the Polyting flow as a circle, now integrating the Polyting flow over an ellipse, that has more surface area to collect the Heaviside current flow) so that the coil can capture more of the Heaviside flow, during turn on while there is negative current flow through the transistor, and then have a very much Higher V Spike at turn off.

It is very hard to get a forced trigger to have the correct Wave form, to have the negative current flow period in the transistor at turn on. This is why JB preferred the Rotor versions to the solid state versions.

JB has shown the Transistor Negative Current Turn On Wave Form on one of his web pages (I think the one with Grabrial Kron)

Most of the transistor manufactures do their darnedest to get rid of the Negative current flow at turn on phenomenon, and try to use fly back diodes, etc... to clamp down the Turn Off Spike, and is why JB recommends certain part number transistors for his various versions of his circuits....

Hi RS,
Thanks for your valuable inputs on this.. just some of my understandings of the Patent''Circuits and related methods of Charging a Battery''
Refering to the fig:3 in the patent, apparently this topology is common for SSG in Rotored machine and SG in the forced triggered mode. However, the diode 54 plays a vital role in the operation of the forced trigger, the reverse polarized diode 54 accross the BE section make use of the depletion layer Capacitance in determining the Frequency of oscillation.(JB and chuck hupp show the cable Oscillator with a capacitor at the position of the diode in their crystal battery video) the patent text also refers the embodiment to be able to oscillate at 60 Hz in some amd at 15KHz in another.
A 60Hz is oscillation is synounmous with a rotored machine.. i wonder if there is any
way to drive the rotored machine in the forceed trigger topology??
Rgd,
Faraday88.

[Faraday88]

Hi RS,



Are these pages still available anywhere? I haven't been able to find them since the old icehouse pages were taken down.

Hey Gary,

Here are all the old website for you:http://emediapress.com/johnbedini/icehouse.net/john1/

http://emediapress.com/johnbedini/icehouse.net/john34/

http://emediapress.com/johnbedini/johnbedini.net/

http://emediapress.com/johnbedini/johnbedini.net/

Rgds,
Faraday88.

[RS_]

I was not able to locate that web page, maybe Aaron or Tom has a link to the Kron pages where that current wave form is posted

[Gary Hammond]

Hi RS,

Hi,
...................
JB has shown the Transistor Negative Current Turn On Wave Form on one of his web pages (I think the one with Grabrial Kron)
.................................

Are these pages still available anywhere? I haven't been able to find them since the old icehouse pages were taken down.

[RS_]

Hi,

One of the things about the differences between the forced trigger, and the free running trigger with a rotor, is the signal shape.

A rotor trigger strand makes the transistor go into a negative current flow through the transistor right at turn on, thus having the full source voltage across the Coil for a very much longer time period, until forward current flow happens. This opens up the "reaction cross section" (think the Standard Math that integrates the Polyting flow as a circle, now integrating the Polyting flow over an ellipse, that has more surface area to collect the Heaviside current flow) so that the coil can capture more of the Heaviside flow, during turn on while there is negative current flow through the transistor, and then have a very much Higher V Spike at turn off.

It is very hard to get a forced trigger to have the correct Wave form, to have the negative current flow period in the transistor at turn on. This is why JB preferred the Rotor versions to the solid state versions.

JB has shown the Transistor Negative Current Turn On Wave Form on one of his web pages (I think the one with Grabrial Kron)

Most of the transistor manufactures do their darnedest to get rid of the Negative current flow at turn on phenomenon, and try to use fly back diodes, etc... to clamp down the Turn Off Spike, and is why JB recommends certain part number transistors for his various versions of his circuits....

[Faraday88]

Hi Faraday,
My suggestion to you would be to keep working on your idea's, but how about demonstrating them. You often speak about things with such conviction but never demonstrate a working principal. I do not think that you are all wrong or should not be considered, you have a lot to offer but you always seem to drop comments that insinuate that you have an esotaric knowledge and riddle the group to figure you out. Stop riddling everything and teach instead by example.

For BroMikey,, Tom could answer that better than I could but I will say that it was not anything to do with the validity of his work. People do not get kicked out for sharing their work around here even if it is wrong, misunderstood or whatever else.

Let me point out something about Mikey's work however. It's a little unfair since he is not here to defend himself but here are some things to consider. He went on a quest of ever increasing power in his machine. He was so impressed by the output but the truth is he was dumping massive amounts of power into that thing and NEVER drove it from anything other than an AC power supply. He never seemed to understand how the radiant worked and was more or less pumping massive amounts of current through coils and had essentially made a AC to DC inverter/transformer. I don't remember Mr. Bedini ever praising BroMikey's work but I could be mistaken.

Hey Bob,
Fair enough pal!! yes i admitt to some of the observations you made about me and yes its time I changed and spoke more by way of proven experimental ways..
its never been my intention to misguide anyone beleive me,but then you never get patted for speaking the truth either!!!
Thanks for enlightning me on the bromikey episode and what is it that he was after..
but the nonetheless he did stubble to the Resonant aspect of the trigger...if you recall JB stating that it is all about the trigger and how it generated that signal a mix of the Standard Electromagnetic Pulse and the Longitudial wave which produces the Radiant.
if there can be two distinct modes of producing the Radiant gain in the battery viz. the SSG(Negative Radiant) and and SG(Positive Radiant) then it very likely that there are two distinct modes of the trigger as well...which is the forced and the Free running modes.
Rgds,
Faraday88.

[BobZilla]

Hey Bob,
Very well....just in case if you have any insight on why Bromikey was booted out from the forum..?? btw he showed the Resonance aspect of the Trigger circuit and JB and other moderators chimed in that time to have look at what bromikey acheived.. some patted him though including JB.
My personal investigation by experiments shows that diode get very hot in the Forced oscillator mode and so does the coil (over a period of time).. while in the free running mode they run cool to the touch.. i wonder what JB did in his demo video that he claimed that the transisitor remained stone cold!!
Well i have something in mind about all these intracasies.. and it direcctly points out at the 'POWER SOURCE' block in that patent emobodiment. I am of the opinion that the 'POWER SOURCE'block is a conditioned source used in conjunction to the disclosed circuit embodiments, like the forced oscillation topology.
rest will be discussed upon the more experimantal findings that i get.
Rgds,
Faraday88.

Hi Faraday,
My suggestion to you would be to keep working on your idea's, but how about demonstrating them. You often speak about things with such conviction but never demonstrate a working principal. I do not think that you are all wrong or should not be considered, you have a lot to offer but you always seem to drop comments that insinuate that you have an esotaric knowledge and riddle the group to figure you out. Stop riddling everything and teach instead by example.

For BroMikey,, Tom could answer that better than I could but I will say that it was not anything to do with the validity of his work. People do not get kicked out for sharing their work around here even if it is wrong, misunderstood or whatever else.

Let me point out something about Mikey's work however. It's a little unfair since he is not here to defend himself but here are some things to consider. He went on a quest of ever increasing power in his machine. He was so impressed by the output but the truth is he was dumping massive amounts of power into that thing and NEVER drove it from anything other than an AC power supply. He never seemed to understand how the radiant worked and was more or less pumping massive amounts of current through coils and had essentially made a AC to DC inverter/transformer. I don't remember Mr. Bedini ever praising BroMikey's work but I could be mistaken.

[Faraday88]

I'm not sure if you are referring to the trigger coil here or the power but neither has the bottom of the coil going to the negative rail. The power coil goes to the collector, and the trigger"s "bottom" is connected to the primary positive rail. The top of the trigger is going to the base of the transistor providing a positive signal to close the switch. This distinction is not so much relevant as is the purpose of the orientation.

Keep in mind that this is what commonly is called a "solid state" build although the bike wheel uses the same trick (think 2,3 4, triggers per magnet pass). In this patent and this embodiment the trigger is oriented in this fashion so that initially the primary positive flow activates the base of the transistor which closes the C/E junction of the transistor and allows current to flow through the power coil. The power coil builds a magnetic field. As the field gains strength it overcomes the triggers field via induction and cancels out/reverses the current which switches off the base opening the C/E junction. This would not happen if both trigger and power coils were oriented in the same direction, it would only increase and never open. That completes one cycle of operation now as the field of the power coil collapses the spike appears and is routed out the collector diode. As soon as the spike voltage is removed the cycle repeats, trigger pos to base, C/E closed, field grows, shuts trigger, field collapse, take spike, rinse and repeat. This is oscillation and it would not happen without the proper orientation of the trigger field and power field.

Faraday you are fixated on the trigger and that is not where the magic happens. I'm sorry bro but you need to get past this. You argued with me over on the toy thread about the same thing and I suspect you came here looking for "evidence" to try and throw back at me on that one and you thought you found a significance in a loose unattached trigger wire. I told you before that in fig one of the patent There is NO TRIGGER. Number 28 and number 36 are the same component. The reason for two numbers is to describe that 28 is a voltage generator and 36 is the coiled wire that makes it.

Imagine in a patent we have to describe joining two boards. It might say board A is joined to board B with a fastener(28), The fastener can be fashioned out of metal such as a nail (36). It could also be fashioned out of plastic as a screw (37).

Do you see that (28) is the fastener and (36) and (37) are descriptions of it? That is exactly what your mysterious number 36 is.

Now your asking about the .7v source. YES this circuit CAN so stop saying it couldn't. Don't confound the video Mr. Bedini showed with what the patent is describing. the 200uh coil is very tiny compared to what we play with and what he showed in the video about branch circuits. If you used a tiny coil as described the current from .7v is plenty to produce the high potential spike to charge a 12v battery. He was describing the tubes he built for low light solar in this instance. Don't you remember seeing the little oscillators that chuck built and showed running on crystal cells? If you understand these circuits you can build them in proper proportion to achieve whatever load you desire. The whole point of it is to get the high potential from a low potential.

One final note, this is about what Mr. Bedini was showing and your question about Kron etc..

He wanted us to learn open paths/branch circuits and I did, so did Patrick and many others. Anyone remember my old old thread on that SS I built utilizing this information ( no mattter but some of you do i"m sure)?

When you have multiple transistors instead of bussing the collector diodes together as everyone did prior to Mr. Bedini sharing this you put each circuit out to a load to be charged. This allows ALL that you have to share the high potential BUT charge on their own curve. As Mr. Bedini demonstrated with two dis-similar batteries you no longer had to worry about matching impedance. The circuit will gauge itself.

Hey Bob,
Very well....just in case if you have any insight on why Bromikey was booted out from the forum..?? btw he showed the Resonance aspect of the Trigger circuit and JB and other moderators chimed in that time to have look at what bromikey acheived.. some patted him though including JB.
My personal investigation by experiments shows that diode get very hot in the Forced oscillator mode and so does the coil (over a period of time).. while in the free running mode they run cool to the touch.. i wonder what JB did in his demo video that he claimed that the transisitor remained stone cold!!
Well i have something in mind about all these intracasies.. and it direcctly points out at the 'POWER SOURCE' block in that patent emobodiment. I am of the opinion that the 'POWER SOURCE'block is a conditioned source used in conjunction to the disclosed circuit embodiments, like the forced oscillation topology.
rest will be discussed upon the more experimantal findings that i get.
Rgds,
Faraday88.

[BobZilla]

Thanks for understanding the gist of my intricate search.. yes you are right the guy who pointed it out was indeed a old person from what i make out of this comments in that post and i agree with you on that the posts get tampered with and snubbed at times when curious minds point out things..this kills the intention behind the research .. why was Bromikey Booted out from the forum??? anyway....back to the Patent ...can anyone let me know the significance of driving the Radiant Oscillator in the forced trigger mode and the free running mode( the bottom of the coil going to the negative rail) another observation....the Patent 'Circuit and related methods of Charging a Battery'' depicts only the forced mode of triggering??..what is the scientific difference of these two modes.. does that tell us something about the Simultaneous presence of both OPEN and CLOSED path concept of Gabe kron as JB indicated in this earlier posts here..?
btw no one seems to answer about the 0.7V Level source charging a 12V battery capability of this Patent... I know of another Radiant energy patent where this aspect of the discovery is utilized..this is very profound indeed!!
and yes this Patent suggest a SG Radiant Oscillator and not SSG.

...can anyone let me know the significance of driving the Radiant Oscillator in the forced trigger mode and the free running mode( the bottom of the coil going to the negative rail)

I'm not sure if you are referring to the trigger coil here or the power but neither has the bottom of the coil going to the negative rail. The power coil goes to the collector, and the trigger"s "bottom" is connected to the primary positive rail. The top of the trigger is going to the base of the transistor providing a positive signal to close the switch. This distinction is not so much relevant as is the purpose of the orientation.

Keep in mind that this is what commonly is called a "solid state" build although the bike wheel uses the same trick (think 2,3 4, triggers per magnet pass). In this patent and this embodiment the trigger is oriented in this fashion so that initially the primary positive flow activates the base of the transistor which closes the C/E junction of the transistor and allows current to flow through the power coil. The power coil builds a magnetic field. As the field gains strength it overcomes the triggers field via induction and cancels out/reverses the current which switches off the base opening the C/E junction. This would not happen if both trigger and power coils were oriented in the same direction, it would only increase and never open. That completes one cycle of operation now as the field of the power coil collapses the spike appears and is routed out the collector diode. As soon as the spike voltage is removed the cycle repeats, trigger pos to base, C/E closed, field grows, shuts trigger, field collapse, take spike, rinse and repeat. This is oscillation and it would not happen without the proper orientation of the trigger field and power field.

Faraday you are fixated on the trigger and that is not where the magic happens. I'm sorry bro but you need to get past this. You argued with me over on the toy thread about the same thing and I suspect you came here looking for "evidence" to try and throw back at me on that one and you thought you found a significance in a loose unattached trigger wire. I told you before that in fig one of the patent There is NO TRIGGER. Number 28 and number 36 are the same component. The reason for two numbers is to describe that 28 is a voltage generator and 36 is the coiled wire that makes it.

Imagine in a patent we have to describe joining two boards. It might say board A is joined to board B with a fastener(28), The fastener can be fashioned out of metal such as a nail (36). It could also be fashioned out of plastic as a screw (37).

Do you see that (28) is the fastener and (36) and (37) are descriptions of it? That is exactly what your mysterious number 36 is.

Now your asking about the .7v source. YES this circuit CAN so stop saying it couldn't. Don't confound the video Mr. Bedini showed with what the patent is describing. the 200uh coil is very tiny compared to what we play with and what he showed in the video about branch circuits. If you used a tiny coil as described the current from .7v is plenty to produce the high potential spike to charge a 12v battery. He was describing the tubes he built for low light solar in this instance. Don't you remember seeing the little oscillators that chuck built and showed running on crystal cells? If you understand these circuits you can build them in proper proportion to achieve whatever load you desire. The whole point of it is to get the high potential from a low potential.

One final note, this is about what Mr. Bedini was showing and your question about Kron etc..

He wanted us to learn open paths/branch circuits and I did, so did Patrick and many others. Anyone remember my old old thread on that SS I built utilizing this information ( no mattter but some of you do i"m sure)?

When you have multiple transistors instead of bussing the collector diodes together as everyone did prior to Mr. Bedini sharing this you put each circuit out to a load to be charged. This allows ALL that you have to share the high potential BUT charge on their own curve. As Mr. Bedini demonstrated with two dis-similar batteries you no longer had to worry about matching impedance. The circuit will gauge itself.

[Faraday88]

Thanks for understanding the gist of my intricate search.. yes you are right the guy who pointed it out was indeed a old person from what i make out of this comments in that post and i agree with you on that the posts get tampered with and snubbed at times when curious minds point out things..this kills the intention behind the research .. why was Bromikey Booted out from the forum??? anyway....back to the Patent ...can anyone let me know the significance of driving the Radiant Oscillator in the forced trigger mode and the free running mode( the bottom of the coil going to the negative rail) another observation....the Patent 'Circuit and related methods of Charging a Battery'' depicts only the forced mode of triggering??..what is the scientific difference of these two modes.. does that tell us something about the Simultaneous presence of both OPEN and CLOSED path concept of Gabe kron as JB indicated in this earlier posts here..?
btw no one seems to answer about the 0.7V Level source charging a 12V battery capability of this Patent... I know of another Radiant energy patent where this aspect of the discovery is utilized..this is very profound indeed!!
and yes this Patent suggest a SG Radiant Oscillator and not SSG.

[Faraday88]

Absolutely! It is one of the great features of the Internet; time and position have no bearing. The previous correspondent may have died, of course, but someone else might pick up the argument. I belong to an aviation board where they lock threads after six months of no correspondence. They are nuts.

Thanks for understanding the gist of my intricate search.. yes you are right the guy who pointed it out was indeed a old person from what i make out of this comments in that post.Now back to the Patent ...can anyone let me the significance of driving the Radiant Oscillator in the forced trigger mode and the free running mode( the bottom of the coil going to the negative rail) another observation....the Patent 'Circuit and related methods of Charging a Battery'' depicts only the forced mode of triggering..what is the scientific difference of these two modes.. does that tell us something about the Simultaneous presence of both OPEN and CLOSED path concept of Gabe kron as JB indicated in this earlier posts here..?
btw no one seems to answer about the 0.7V Level source charging a 12V battery capability of this Patent...
and yes this Patent suggest a SG Radiant Oscillator and not SSG.
.......heyy guys why was Bromikey Booted out from the forum???

[wrtner]

Hey,
Its a compliment i consider that i can go back in time and strike a conversation and that did make a impact like your curiosity!!!

Absolutely! It is one of the great features of the Internet; time and position have no bearing. The previous correspondent may have died, of course, but someone else might pick up the argument. I belong to an aviation board where they lock threads after six months of no correspondence. They are nuts.

[Buz86]

oscillator

my 6x transistor radiant oscillator, ive built 4x for my shed battery backup system to run off solar[ATTACH=CONFIG]5290[/ATTACH]

Hi, was just wondering... Is there a reason you didn't twist the wire? Does it charge better if you just run all them parallel like the instead of twisted? Also, what gage wire is that? and your caps? transistors (mjl21194?), also, how long does it take to charge up your t105s? sorry for all the questions but thank you in advance.

[min2oly]

Hey,
In your privious post also you mention just about 200uH but have not elaborate it any further that is just as bright as a daylight!!
having the extra wire connected the way you describe will reduce the impedance of the trigger coil..yes that's correct! but that JB could do it using a thicker wire instead
anyway i take your input and give it a try to see it experimentally..!
still await your opinion on the 200uH significance..
Rgs,
Faraday88.

I thought you read the patent you've been talking about??? the 200uH reference is from that patent.

on the extra green wire, yes JB could have used a thicker wire, but he wound it from wire he had laying around for that quick little video he made to show a point.