Dissecting Erfinder’s comments

[erfinder]

Something to chew on:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=STI3koWbzE4
Bob

The famous recirculating BEMF video that started that movement. Correct me if you think I am wrong, but isn't this text book?



How does luc's demonstration differ from the norm? This isn't a question that needs an answer, in my opinion, there is no difference. Here is a shematic that was provided by luc.



Is there a lesson here to be learned here, if so, what is it?


Regards

[erfinder]

How do you see the currents erfinder? Like this:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6BnEl...DDR5KA&index=3
ed leedskalnin magnetic current

Please allow me to attempt an answer to your question with a question. Is there anything wrong with this image?




Regards

[bigmotherwhale]

Thanks Bob very interesting experiment, i tried this using a separate coil, i will try it this way.

just out of interest erfinder would your preferred coil switching method be a mosfet on each side of the coil? if so then i can see how the supply could be back popped, does it light a neon bulb across the supply line when you spin the motor by hand?
also do you have some videos of your work, i saw some once that were impressive but i have lost the link.

[bob smith]

Something to chew on:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=STI3koWbzE4
Bob

[aln]

Like the moth is drawn to the flame, the majority are immediately drawn to the acceleration effect, the red herring. Distracted, they miss the message, which is, in my opinion, UNIDIRECTIONAL FLUX. Tesla said something funny once, something which supports my view, namely, in his system the currents aren't allowed to reverse. What is current? I have heard all the arguments regarding what was implied by Tesla's statement, and the idea that current has something to do with the "electron theory" is familiar to me as well, (I don't buy into the electron theory as it applies to current...), to those who would bring those arguments back to my attention, I offer the following. Tunnel vision = stagnation. We must connect the dots, we must make connections which aren't there until we make them.

Regards

How do you see the currents erfinder? Like this:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6BnEl...DDR5KA&index=3
ed leedskalnin magnetic current

[bob smith]

Hi Bob,

Our idea of capturing is not capturing, its dead ending the force. We are to harness it not dead end it. Honestly I don't think capturing it is possible. What we consider as capturing isn't capturing, if it isn't capturing, what are we doing? My opinion, I feel we are supposed to be learning from the collapsing field. The phenomena themselves can become the instructor, we must empty our cup, as the saying goes a full cup can't be filled.....We must not make the mistake of identifying with the phenomena, observe it, learn from it as it manifests in our circuits. This approach to learning is far removed from text book learning, for we are getting our impressions directly from the source, and not through the mechanism of rationalizing.

Only a fool wouldn't want what EV Gray is claimed to have had. Consider this, what if the power pulse, the one that developed the torque didn't come from the power supply? I don't think it did. I have read all the info that's being placed in our hands about the history of the device and find this info really good. The question I have though, is can we do better now, we may never know how it was done. How do we do it today? As I said, I feel the power supply isn't where the power came from to spin the shaft. I feel it comes from somewhere else, I've demonstrated where I think it comes from. This is speculation as far as the idea is concerned, however, in my own defense, the bench don't lie.

Excellent point of clarification about harnessing, rather than seeking to capture the inductive kickback. If I understand correctly, the mistaken idea of trying to capture the collapsing magnetic field is like filling a bucket from a stream and pouring it onto a waterwheel to make it turn, rather than allowing the stream to turn the wheel itself (perhaps a crude analogy). As you say, much better to harness its power, allowing it to enter the system from without, as you say. Much could be said and developed around this once it's properly understood. My sense is that it's been overly-mystified and in its place people seem content to trifle with small exercises with little practical implication. However, the real approach is a game-changer. Will be in touch.
Bob

[erfinder]

Thanks Erfinder for your honest reply. As far as UFO's motors, I built a few and left it at that. I did see some electrical anomalies in their running and powering up that also seemed to appear in some so-called radiant energy experiments. However, as per the motor's efficacy and functionality, I can't say. I believe they could be exploited/modified in the direction of the EV Gray motor in a way that harvests inductive kickback. This would be a new direction, and I don't have the time right now, though I've been formulating it in my mind for some time. In any event, I respect your take on this and your work.

I think we both agree on the promise of harvesting the backspike to assist the motor. Yes, magic and indeed a game-changer. It will happen, and I believe it will outstrip a number of other alternative energy-seeking pursuits by opening a door onto a wide variety of possible applications, wherever motors and coils are used. I hope this puts us on the same page.
Bob

Hi Bob,

The internet is filled with excited experimenters "capturing" inductive kickback. Our idea of capturing is not capturing, its dead ending the force. We are to harness it not dead end it. Honestly I don't think capturing it is possible. What we consider as capturing isn't capturing, if it isn't capturing, what are we doing? My opinion, I feel we are supposed to be learning from the collapsing field. The phenomena themselves can become the instructor, we must empty our cup, as the saying goes a full cup can't be filled.....We must not make the mistake of identifying with the phenomena, observe it, learn from it as it manifests in our circuits. This approach to learning is far removed from text book learning, for we are getting our impressions directly from the source, and not through the mechanism of rationalizing.

Regarding UFO, we aren't on the same page. Even if by sheer happenstance, he trips over something interesting, coming from him as he interprets and expresses his view now, it will be meaning and purposeless. There was a time when I gave him the benefit of the doubt, this was early on when he first began sharing his thoughts, in the beginning, whether he was aware of it or not, he was on the right track. He has fallen soo far from where he was, and is now nowhere near where he "should" or "could" be.

Only a fool wouldn't want what EV Gray is claimed to have had. Consider this, what if the power pulse, the one that developed the torque didn't come from the power supply? I don't think it did. I have read all the info that's being placed in our hands about the history of the device and find this info really good. The question I have though, is can we do better now, we may never know how it was done. How do we do it today? As I said, I feel the power supply isn't where the power came from to spin the shaft. I feel it comes from somewhere else, I've demonstrated where I think it comes from. This is speculation as far as the idea is concerned, however, in my own defense, the bench don't lie. If you are interested in experiencing what I am suggesting first hand, shoot me an email, lets talk about it.

erfinder@forgotten-genius.com


Regards

[bob smith]

Thanks Erfinder for your honest reply. As far as UFO's motors, I built a few and left it at that. I did see some electrical anomalies in their running and powering up that also seemed to appear in some so-called radiant energy experiments. However, as per the motor's efficacy and functionality, I can't say. I believe they could be exploited/modified in the direction of the EV Gray motor in a way that harvests inductive kickback. This would be a new direction, and I don't have the time right now, though I've been formulating it in my mind for some time. In any event, I respect your take on this and your work.

I think we both agree on the promise of harvesting the backspike to assist the motor. Yes, magic and indeed a game-changer. It will happen, and I believe it will outstrip a number of other alternative energy-seeking pursuits by opening a door onto a wide variety of possible applications, wherever motors and coils are used. I hope this puts us on the same page.
Bob

[erfinder]

I agree. While there are mods that can be done to DC motors (such as UFOPolitics has done [which I believe can be adapted for better output], and perhaps something more along the lines of what EV Gray produced), it seems to me that the easiest way to use the lenz counter-force to our advantage is via a magnetic rotor and multi-coil stator as JB, you and others have shown.

Sorry Bob, but I cannot let this one fly. I do not support UFO's senseless butchering of perfectly sound devices! He literally has some and many more joining in everyday, convinced that mainstream got it wrong, and he got it right. Its OK, hes entitled to his opinion, but some opinions, should be kept to ones self! Please forgive my tone, but, I am growing tired of the mess that is being made on his threads. His "disclosure" equates to nothing more than configuring things back to the original basic topology as presented in the text books! Unfortunately he is not prepared to accept this! You cannot fight with the truth. For some reason he thinks, and has convinced far too many, that he has reinvented the wheel, and has ignorantly dubbed this, his twist on the electric motor, asymmetrical??? Review the information he has presented, and see if you can spot the asymmetry!?! Your search will turn out fruitless. You could save yourself the trouble of going through all the info and just ask him to show you the asymmetry....you will get attacked. You will not receive what you ask for, and if by chance you kiss enough ass to get him to come off his high horse and speak with you, what he will share will make little or no sense, and have very little if anything to do with asymmetry as it is defined! I highly recommend you try your luck getting any real and "useful" info out of him.......you'll love the experience. I have found, through studying those who have an idea, that what we are looking at and for is an orthogonal relation, and not just in the visible, also in the invisible world of the fields. From an orthogonal base, we can begin working towards establishing asymmetrical conditions. When seeking asymmetry, we must pay attention to simple things like for example the speed difference between the applied field, and the collapsing field. Seeing this difference for what it could be, a manifestation of asymmetry, a manifestation of what some in the know call non-linearity. That was one simple example, there are many others.

The modifications that are being suggested and carried out by the UFO and his replicators, are in a word senseless, not because they are wrong per se, its more the logic behind it all, the logic is fundamentally flawed. I know, who am I to make such a statement, the answer is Erfinder. An individual who appreciates the beauty, simplicity and genius in what we were provided with by the authorities. Take a closer look at UFO's suggested geometry, compare it to the original, concept, here you must look at the text book, not necessarily at the motor. Manufacturers wind motors in different ways for different reasons. Many of them stray far from what the text books illustrate. UFO takes the manufactures winding concept which is in many cases fundamentally flawed, but from their perspective, serves the purpose that their customer desires, and blames the choices made by industry on mainstream science??!! See his changes for what they are and not for what he says it is. Comprehend, and accept that 'fundamentally' he didn't improve anything! I could say more, and want to, but the horse is dead...no sense beating it to a puddle.

Again, I agree. There is a lot of material and electrical energy waste, and without acknowledging this waste, the question of "why?" is not raised in ways that it needs to be. My feeling is that the magnetic rotor is one important way out of this connundrum. It also allows for the collection of inductive kickback through a second coil. It seems to me that Litz wire would also allow this energy to be amplified.
Regards,
Bob

In my uneducated opinion Bob, there is no waste, replace the word waste with ignorance and you have the issue at hand. The way out comes in the form of a layman's view to how all of this stuff works! When the authorities can speak to the layman, change can begin. As it stands, they don't appear to have an immediate interest in communicating with us in "our" language. The phenomena Inductive kickback is screaming a message so deafening to those who can hear it, that if and when it is comprehended, can and more than likely will change everything! All I can say, and this is pure speculation, is that this discharge current overcomes impedance! That people, to me, in a word......MAGIC!


Regards

[bob smith]

I am of the opinion that we can and will make improvements in motors, the question that isn't asked is, why? The only beef that anyone has with any motor or generator in operation today are those "negative" effects associated with the self-induction. The geometry that we were left with, here I am specifically referring to DC motors, is for lack of a better way of putting it....flawless. We can expand on it, but will ultimately end up with the same thing that we started with, new associations, but ultimately the same thing.

I agree. While there are mods that can be done to DC motors (such as UFOPolitics has done [which I believe can be adapted for better output], and perhaps something more along the lines of what EV Gray produced), it seems to me that the easiest way to use the lenz counter-force to our advantage is via a magnetic rotor and multi-coil stator as JB, you and others have shown.

In my opinion, inductive kickback is CEMF, however, not in the accepted sense. It's good that its called inductive kickback, or inductive discharge, the name attached to the phenomena implies that something more complex is responsible for the manifestation of the effect. The potential arising from the collapsing field "should" be collected via a second coil, but not for reasons that are presently discussed and or debated, this also is my opinion. Regards

Again, I agree. There is a lot of material and electrical energy waste, and without acknowledging this waste, the question of "why?" is not raised in ways that it needs to be. My feeling is that the magnetic rotor is one important way out of this connundrum. It also allows for the collection of inductive kickback through a second coil. It seems to me that Litz wire would also allow this energy to be amplified.
Regards,
Bob

[erfinder]

Thanks for the reply to my post, Erfinder. I've seen you stating this case on another forum, citing the example of one of Bedini's setups. Rather than counter-intuitive, I think it's simply outside the conditioned box, but for some reason it made sense to me this time around. The whole idea of unidirectional flux seems to me to fit well with this coil arrangement. It would seem to me to mesh in the most proper way with questions around polarity of inductive kickback in a pulsed coil. Gotta go, but continuing to think on it. Always enjoy your posts.
Bob
Edit: Thought a lot about the inductive kickback, but think it's simpler - plain and simple cemf, and using coil topology to harvest it. Lots of possibilities for motor design improvement, no?

I am of the opinion that we can and will make improvements in motors, the question that isn't asked is, why? The only beef that anyone has with any motor or generator in operation today are those "negative" effects associated with the self-induction. The geometry that we were left with, here I am specifically referring to DC motors, is for lack of a better way of putting it....flawless. We can expand on it, but will ultimately end up with the same thing that we started with, new associations, but ultimately the same thing.

In my opinion, inductive kickback is CEMF, however, not in the accepted sense. It's good that its called inductive kickback, or inductive discharge, the name attached to the phenomena implies that something more complex is responsible for the manifestation of the effect. The potential arising from the collapsing field "should" be collected via a second coil, but not for reasons that are presently discussed and or debated, this also is my opinion.


Regards

[bob smith]

Thanks for the reply to my post, Erfinder. I've seen you stating this case on another forum, citing the example of one of Bedini's setups. Rather than counter-intuitive, I think it's simply outside the conditioned box, but for some reason it made sense to me this time around. The whole idea of unidirectional flux seems to me to fit well with this coil arrangement. It would seem to me to mesh in the most proper way with questions around polarity of inductive kickback in a pulsed coil. Gotta go, but continuing to think on it. Always enjoy your posts.
Bob
Edit: Thought a lot about the inductive kickback, but think it's simpler - plain and simple cemf, and using coil topology to harvest it. Lots of possibilities for motor design improvement, no?

[erfinder]

In other words, the stator's coil topologies and the way they are joined together essentially establishes the conditions which enable reactive power to be harnessed to assist (rather than place drag on) the rotor's spinning. Hope I've got that right.
I believe this is what Erfinder has been trying to get people to understand all along.
Bob

Yup....seems like you are one of the few listening Bob. The point is not so much the "in your face effect", its the mechanism, the nature and desire of that which moves through this geometry is of profound significance and interest to me. Like the moth is drawn to the flame, the majority are immediately drawn to the acceleration effect, the red herring. Distracted, they miss the message, which is, in my opinion, UNIDIRECTIONAL FLUX. Tesla said something funny once, something which supports my view, namely, in his system the currents aren't allowed to reverse. What is current? I have heard all the arguments regarding what was implied by Tesla's statement, and the idea that current has something to do with the "electron theory" is familiar to me as well, (I don't buy into the electron theory as it applies to current...), to those who would bring those arguments back to my attention, I offer the following. Tunnel vision = stagnation. We must connect the dots, we must make connections which aren't there until we make them.


Regards

[bob smith]

ABSTRACT:
"An alternating electric current generator comprises an armature rotatably carried by a drive shaft and positioned between stabilized, non-moving magnetic elements. The armature has first and second magnetic fieldtransmitting sections with a magnetized section sandwiched therebetween. As electric load is applied to the generator, a countermagnetic field is generated through the armature to increase speed of the drive shaft and thereby lessen the torque required to rotate the drive shaft."

In other words, the stator's coil topologies and the way they are joined together essentially establishes the conditions which enable reactive power to be harnessed to assist (rather than place drag on) the rotor's spinning. Hope I've got that right.
I believe this is what Erfinder has been trying to get people to understand all along.
Bob

[aln]

Stole these from the other thread.
Erfinder=red
"listen to the machine! There is a different type of induction taking place, I am not qualified to explain how its different to you, its your job to explain it to yourself. This different type of induction allows for the acceleration to take place when the output coils are loaded. In addition to the type of induction there is a unidirectional magnetic field found in this topology. We find this unidirectional magnetic field in the stator, the magnetic circuit is completed through the rotor poles. The field of the stator doesn't change, the field of the induced in the rotor alternates, this makes for a very interesting combination, one that you have to carefully scrutinize and study, because in my opinion, its here, where AC and DC interact where we find the seed of that which we all are looking to capture."

Focus your attention on the facts. Reduce the system to the minimum number of components. "IF" you want to build a Kromrey or G-field, you must start with the most basic design, comprehend whats happening in the most simple of designs. View it as scientific as you possibly can, view it in light of the present accepted view, whether this view is flawed or not is immaterial. Once you have the necessary understanding of the manifesting phenomena, then and only then should you "consider" advancing. I have been working in this area for a few years, and have found many patents on the subject. The one that left the most lasting impression on me regarding this technology is the following:

https://docs.google.com/viewer?url=p.../US5191258.pdf

The "ABSTRACT" says about all you need to understand where the acceleration force is coming from. This is one of the most well well thought out patents on this principle that I have yet to come across, the author does his best to keep "his" interpretation of the phenomena simple, he doesn't try to confuse the subject with conjecture, nor does he try to mislead the reader.

Patent author:
ABSTRACT:
"An alternating electric current generator comprises an armature rotatably carried by a drive shaft and positioned between stabilized, non-moving magnetic elements. The armature has first and second magnetic fieldtransmitting sections with a magnetized section sandwiched therebetween. As electric load is applied to the generator, a countermagnetic field is generated through the armature to increase speed of the drive shaft and thereby lessen the torque required to rotate the drive shaft."