Dissecting Erfinder’s comments

[Lman]

erfinder,

On a few occasions these days the browser would not load at all the forum for a while. It is possible that you have not been blocked and the problem is somewhere else. Just wanted to share that so that a misunderstanding does not turn into something bigger.

Lman

[erfinder]

erfinder,
Does the zero force motor fit your ideas of how things should really work by not creating any back emf in the first place that needs to be "captured" or recycled back into the system? JB says the zero force motor does not create any back emf and is not switched by magnets. It uses the Bedini Ron Cole bipolar switch that can use the Hal sensors you really like. Bedini also says energy can be collected by the zero force motor just like the others. If no back emf is being produced then where is the energy coming from that is being collected? Is any one making a zero force motor and showing exactly how it works?

I am a fan of the authorities here, however I don't agree with everything. CEMF is not being placed in the right light. It's seen as a bad thing, and I don't think this is right. I feel justified in saying this and find support from JB himself. He was granted a patent which capitalizes on generating CEMF. I have found that we want to maximize the CEMF in a system, not reduce it! My machines are similar to the zero force, and window machines, and don't have reduced CEMF unless I configure the windings specifically so that the CEMF is reduced. The CEMF should be seen as the strain setup inside of a mechanism which is the electrical equivalent of a flywheel. This mechanism is already opposing changes in current, limiting the amount supplying the motor, with the proper understanding we can manipulate this mechanism so that we experience an increase in consumption with increasing RPM, a motor which under normal circumstances is current limited by the CEMF uses the CEMF to increase the consumption with increasing RPM. As this mechanism is a flywheel, we can discharge it, using its energy to recharge the buffer and recovery capacitors. We must comprehend and then command the flywheel, that's why its there! Till you command it, it will do what it supposed to do....limit current. When you command it, it will still do it's job, the difference is, instead of limiting currents decrease, it limits the rate at which the current increases.

CEMF is not inductive kickback. The latter is a completely different animal, one which is totally misunderstood, one of the most important things I have found about it is not what it is, but what it symbolizes! Inductive kickback is the game changer, but not in collecting it, its a game changer when we comprehend what it embodies!


Regards

[erfinder]

erfinder,

On a few occasions these days the browser would not load at all the forum for a while. It is possible that you have not been blocked and the problem is somewhere else. Just wanted to share that so that a misunderstanding does not turn into something bigger.

Lman

It's possible..but, not likely the case. It's up and running again. No love lost.


Regards

[Tom C]

erfinder,

On a few occasions these days the browser would not load at all the forum for a while. It is possible that you have not been blocked and the problem is somewhere else. Just wanted to share that so that a misunderstanding does not turn into something bigger.

Lman

yup happened over here too.

Tom C

[Radiantnrg]

erfinder, thanks for your 2 answers. You mentioned intuition several times. I am an ENFP - the most intuitive of the 16 Briggs Myers types. I have saved all your comments in this thread and committed them over to intuition already LOL
You said in an answer to another that you have given tips on switching- the how, when, where, and why. Where is that posted at? thanks Alan

[erfinder]

erfinder, thanks for your 2 answers. You mentioned intuition several times. I am an ENFP - the most intuitive of the 16 Briggs Myers types. I have saved all your comments in this thread and committed them over to intuition already LOL
You said in an answer to another that you have given tips on switching- the how, when, where, and why. Where is that posted at? thanks Alan

Hello Alan,

All of those posts which described the system I designed were removed from both forums. I will not reload any of that information, too time consuming. The terms I use when describing when and where to switch are tailored to my system.

To answer your question.

How

• System should be configured in such a manner that it alternates between points that I call junctions and regular poles, the difference is clearly established in my system. Junctions are equatorial poles, the forces at these poles work radially. Generally the number of equatorial poles equals the number of normal poles. This works, however, the number of equatorial poles should be greater than the number of normal poles, making the system more asymmetrical, more non-linear. As ones understanding of the existence and function equatorial poles increases, it becomes clear that their number should increase.

Where

• Switching must take place at the point of maximum induced potential, (JTDC junction top dead center). JTDC is also the point of maximum torque at start up.

Why is is a question that requires some thought on your part. For me its all about CEMF. In my opinion, CEMF isn't just generator action, it is a measure of the strain found in the exchange between the system L and C. If L is changing, so is C. The system isn't limited to the values that we measure, the system is dynamic, the supporting evidence of this is in how the coil behaves when current or voltage moving through it changes, note the wave shapes when these changes are made. Think about that...then formulate questions.


Regards

[erfinder]

as far as comprehend what has been said, N + S = 0 and that is the basis of the machine, if you have two coils in series resonance and one is for example twice the size of the other, one will be 180 degrees out of phase so they will always have the opposite poles and therefore create a void in between the two?(and for very little input i might add, just a tickle) so the rotor magnet wont be attracted to it anymore, as they have already reached equilibrium, turn this effect on and off by moving the position of the coils in the circuit.
Back emf really doesn't have anything to do with it as there will be none if the system is doing what we want, the radiant spike everyone talks about is just the magnetic potentials attempt to maintain current in the system so the voltage will rise, its normal in phase electricity - put a resistive load across and there is power - the current is maintained and the voltage wont rise. the voltage generated depends entirely on the resistance.
electricity is generation and magnetism degeneration, all they want to do is reach equilibrium.
just some thoughts i really don't know anything, this is currently speculation.

What is resonance? I know how its defined in the text book but what is it in reality, on the bench?

Its said that there's no phase relation between the applied and the induced, doesn't them being opposed to one another (DC motor) suggest a 180 degree phase relation between the two?

We should look to the "between the turns relations" in coils. Here in conventionally connected solenoids, we observe how the flux spins CW around one half of the coil, and CCW around the other half. Is this significant? I think it is, because these two opposing vortex generate that which we identify with as the pole we find on the face of the magnet, or coil. Between the turns we find the field is moving in such a manner that repulsion takes place between turns, the flow is concentrated in the very center of the solenoid, and outside the solenoid. The flow through the core is opposite to the flow moving outside the core. Together the inner and outer flow constitute one flow, both inner and outer flows are unidirectional. I find it fascinating that there is little or no flow between turns, the bulk of the flux being in the core and outside, and yet, a massive repulsive force is made manifest between the turns.....The general rule of thumb I now go by is if there is repulsion between turns, CEMF will be high, and the generator will oppose the prime mover. If there is attraction between the turns, the CEMF will be low, and the generator either assists the prime mover or has no effect on the prime mover.

Where CEMF is, is the soul of the machine, it is the governor, if you take it away, you have nothing. We blame current limiting on CEMF..... I say CEMF is the "measure" of the opposition experienced in the system, it is not the thing doing the opposing. Do not limit CEMF, increase it! Its our design, and our understanding which is flawed. The mechanism responsible for current limiting does what it does. Its present for a reason! Removing it from the body is likened to removing an organ that we in our infinite wisdom have concluded "has no use"!?

The spike.....inductive kickback.....here is where we leave Kansas. To a force which can overcome any impedance....impedance becomes synonymous with conductivity....

In my opinion there are no facts, no fact givers.....all we have is speculation, if we had facts, we would be in a Utopia. The question I ask often, is can we build on this speculation.......


Regards

[erfinder]

is the zero force motor like the Flynn Motor? are there magnets hiding in the toroid? does anyone know

No magnets in the stator. The zero force is in my opinion Tesla's Electro Magnetic Motor patented in 1888. 381,968. The 21st century version is now operated as a DC machine. It has a DC supply, and a transistor based commutator. The rotor was also upgraded, the new rotor has permanent magnets.

It's being said that these devices don't generate CEMF. Build one and see....they do generate CEMF.

My machine could be considered as a zero force hybrid. Tesla demonstrates in the patent that both the orthogonal poles and regular poles are to be used, following in his lead, I use both. The thing to remember is this topology is as old as the motor itself. The concept was abandoned.....why? The simple answer, a better way of doing the same thing was found, if you work with it long enough, you see why they dropped this concept for salient poles.


Regards

[bigmotherwhale]

No magnets in the stator. The zero force is in my opinion Tesla's Electro Magnetic Motor patented in 1888. 381,968. The 21st century version is now operated as a DC machine. It has a DC supply, and a transistor based commutator. The rotor was also upgraded, the new rotor has permanent magnets.

It's being said that these devices don't generate CEMF. Build one and see....they do generate CEMF.

My machine could be considered as a zero force hybrid. Tesla demonstrates in the patent that both the orthogonal poles and regular poles are to be used, following in his lead, I use both. The thing to remember is this topology is as old as the motor itself. The concept was abandoned.....why? The simple answer, a better way of doing the same thing was found, if you work with it long enough, you see why they dropped this concept for salient poles.


Regards

it looks like there are two windings on each coil of the zero force motor, at least it looks like there are two different colour coils, any idea why this differs from the tesla motor? is this for collection?

there is one similarity to the Flynn motor the polarity of the magnetic flux in the core is the same, they are opposed, as i comprehend it it should create an excess of potential in the core material changing the bh curve, and the saturation point, i have no idea what this would actually do or if this is correct.

i did try to build something like this toroid but it used the tpu(?) coil layout where there was a heavy gauge coil a light gauge coil and a coil around the inner and outer circumference, despite taking hours and hours to wrap the coil i couldn't get it to work.

[Lman]

erfinder,
Could you elaborate on what you meant by pulsed AC ??? As far as I understand Mag Amps, you control DC which in turn saturates the core, which controls the flow of the AC. But Pulsed AC ?!? You mean something like amplitude modulated ??

Thanks
Lman

Your motor is generating AC. You are superimposing a DC signal onto....into.... that AC signal, generally at the peak of the induced. In the absence of a power supply, your motor is an experiment in coil shorting, short circuiting the coil at the peak of the induced wave.


Regards

Erfinder,

So, instead of using DC for control on the Mag Amp you meant pulsing it, right ?

Lman

[bigmotherwhale]

What is resonance? I know how its defined in the text book but what is it in reality, on the bench?

Its said that there's no phase relation between the applied and the induced, doesn't them being opposed to one another (DC motor) suggest a 180 degree phase relation between the two?

We should look to the "between the turns relations" in coils. Here in conventionally connected solenoids, we observe how the flux spins CW around one half of the coil, and CCW around the other half. Is this significant? I think it is, because these two opposing vortex generate that which we identify with as the pole we find on the face of the magnet, or coil. Between the turns we find the field is moving in such a manner that repulsion takes place between turns, the flow is concentrated in the very center of the solenoid, and outside the solenoid. The flow through the core is opposite to the flow moving outside the core. Together the inner and outer flow constitute one flow, both inner and outer flows are unidirectional. I find it fascinating that there is little or no flow between turns, the bulk of the flux being in the core and outside, and yet, a massive repulsive force is made manifest between the turns.....The general rule of thumb I now go by is if there is repulsion between turns, CEMF will be high, and the generator will oppose the prime mover. If there is attraction between the turns, the CEMF will be low, and the generator either assists the prime mover or has no effect on the prime mover.

Where CEMF is, is the soul of the machine, it is the governor, if you take it away, you have nothing. We blame current limiting on CEMF..... I say CEMF is the "measure" of the opposition experienced in the system, it is not the thing doing the opposing. Do not limit CEMF, increase it! Its our design, and our understanding which is flawed. The mechanism responsible for current limiting does what it does. Its present for a reason! Removing it from the body is likened to removing an organ that we in our infinite wisdom have concluded "has no use"!?

The spike.....inductive kickback.....here is where we leave Kansas. To a force which can overcome any impedance....impedance becomes synonymous with conductivity....

In my opinion there are no facts, no fact givers.....all we have is speculation, if we had facts, we would be in a Utopia. The question I ask often, is can we build on this speculation.......


Regards

this repulsion between the coils, is like a pressure, this pressure, just like any pressure or density is the resistance to the body moving through it, and will be when two like poles are present, when the current is moving in the same direction

attraction is a vacuity and has the least resistance, when current is moving in the opposite direction and there are opposite poles

the question is, if the pressure is low and the current is moving in opposite directions the external field of the coil will also be "cancelled" how do we balance these forces and still have an external field? does this relate to our all important impedance mismatch? i think it does

what you speak of reminds me of the magnetic holder as these two are split and on the same core, but there is more than one way of achieving this.

any thoughts?

[erfinder]

it looks like there are two windings on each coil of the zero force motor, at least it looks like there are two different colour coils, any idea why this differs from the tesla motor? is this for collection?

there is one similarity to the Flynn motor the polarity of the magnetic flux in the core is the same, they are opposed, as i comprehend it it should create an excess of potential in the core material changing the bh curve, and the saturation point, i have no idea what this would actually do or if this is correct.

i did try to build something like this toroid but it used the tpu(?) coil layout where there was a heavy gauge coil a light gauge coil and a coil around the inner and outer circumference, despite taking hours and hours to wrap the coil i couldn't get it to work.

Just to be clear, my desire isn't to just speculate on technologies that the authorities can discuss with us! It is their job to talk about their work, not ours to speculate on it. I offer speculation in the absence of their leadership. I have studied the documents and the patents, I have also built machines to test my theories, those are the machines I am versed in.

What is the fundamental difference between the window motor and the zero force? What is the difference between these two, and a standard DC motor as depicted in the attached image? Practical application is my aim, I am not interested in reinventing the wheel. We are being led to conclude that those who came before us didn't have what it takes. They left us with flawed science, and machines based on those flawed ideas? IF you can spot the zeroforce or window in the present day DC motor, you are well on your way! I have built every motor suggested, save two...and with each build I gained a new appreciation for what mainstream thinkers of Tesla's era left us with. There is nothing wrong with what they left us with. IF it was flawed like we are led to believe.....would we be using them today......




Regards

[bigmotherwhale]

Just to be clear, my desire isn't to just speculate on technologies that the authorities can discuss with us! It is their job to talk about their work, not ours to speculate on it. I offer speculation in the absence of their leadership. I have studied the documents and the patents, I have also built machines to test my theories, those are the machines I am versed in.

What is the fundamental difference between the window motor and the zero force? What is the difference between these two, and a standard DC motor as depicted in the attached image? Practical application is my aim, I am not interested in reinventing the wheel. We are being led to conclude that those who came before us didn't have what it takes. They left us with flawed science, and machines based on those flawed ideas? IF you can spot the zeroforce or window in the present day DC motor, you are well on your way! I have built every motor suggested, save two...and with each build I gained a new appreciation for what mainstream thinkers of Tesla's era left us with. There is nothing wrong with what they left us with. IF it was flawed like we are led to believe.....would we be using them today......

[ATTACH=CONFIG]3623[/ATTACH]


Regards

the window motor is a monopole? the difference is the polarity of the magnets?

[erfinder]

Erfinder,

So, instead of using DC for control on the Mag Amp you meant pulsing it, right ?

Lman

Because its not operating like a Mag Amp as we understand the them, we don't see the pulsed DC into the motor as control, we choose to forget the AC is even present till its presence begins to have a negative impact on our consumption.

Once you add a reactor to the motor, a real one.....your motor behaves like a Mag Amp in the true sense. The applied DC (the reactor clones the source and produces new sources......thanks to self-induction) can be seen as control. The AC generated by the motor can assist the supply. Here we have a situation where the induced has changed its phase relation to the supply and is no longer in opposition with it. The same can be said of the induced from the collapsing field, but this is another story, one which we cannot get into till you have a reactor.

This is how I interpret my experience.


Regards

[erfinder]

this repulsion between the coils, is like a pressure, this pressure, just like any pressure or density is the resistance to the body moving through it, and will be when two like poles are present, when the current is moving in the same direction

attraction is a vacuity and has the least resistance, when current is moving in the opposite direction and there are opposite poles

the question is, if the pressure is low and the current is moving in opposite directions the external field of the coil will also be "cancelled" how do we balance these forces and still have an external field? does this relate to our all important impedance mismatch? i think it does

what you speak of reminds me of the magnetic holder as these two are split and on the same core, but there is more than one way of achieving this.

any thoughts?

I want you guys to come to the same or at the very least "similar" conclusions that I came to. It's not going to be easy for you, but you have to try, or you won't get anything out of any of this. I could show you how to build what I built but what higher purpose would it serve? We must begin to "SEE" what's there, that which has always been right in front of us.

I share my most basic view of what I see happening between the turns, this same information you can find on the net, and even test on your bench. This observation brings us to the following......

Repulsion = magnetic field
Attraction = dielectric field

In the end we are trying to establish the case for L and C. Where they are, why they are where they are. Good useful layman speculation, stuff we can use, stuff we can engineer.


Regards