Tweet
First I would like to offer a quote that is not from erfinder, "Blessed are the peacemakers: for they shall be called the children of God." -Jesus (Mt 5:9 KJV)
I am not done organizing my notes, but in the interest of everyone participating in discussion as well as moderating the forum I offer another thread that I hope will not go down the potty. I can only write for myself however, so please, if you have no information seeking questions, clarifying statements or beneficial comments; refreain from writing. Since i am not ready to post the whole of my compilation as I am editing yet, I will post my first page of stuff from erfinder as I have edited it some. Maybe I got something wrong and I can be corrected as I go.
Aln
My Organization of Notes from Erfinder
Achieved Effects: The Squires path around the back side is completely unnecessary because of the special character of this specific "coil-magnet geometry", when operated as a "pulsed generator", when proper timing and pulse width are used, the negative torque problem does not manifest. The generator action assists the power supply and current limiting is regulated in the positive sense versus the negative sense. In other words, there is a regulated and steady increase of consumption as rpm increases versus a steady decline in consumption with increasing rpm. I am suggesting that we can have 1:1 electrical input to output, free mechanical......
Asymmetry/ Non linear: From the physical geometry stand point, this device is anything but asymmetrical. The asymmetry is found in the interaction of the induced fields, magnetic and dielectric between coils, it is to be observed in the relation of the induced to self-induced EMF, the repulsive force is twice that of the attractive force, this owing to the specific geometry of the coils and the use of proper timing when driving the machine as a motor. I hope this sheds some light on where I see the asymmetry in my machine. To counter drag, the only thing that has to be done is an offset. The question to ask prior to making this stupid simple change in geometric relations is why does it get rid of drag? When you look at Faraday's law and Lenz law the answer is pretty clear isn't it. Both laws are basically about inducing a voltage. The latter has a magnetic field associated with the induced potential which opposes the magnetic field which induced it. In essence the only problem a symmetrical system has is the fact that we induce one polarity at a time, and always the same polarity as the inducing. In a symmetrical, or better stated, linear system this should be expected. It's a non-linear condition that we want to establish, non-linear in this particular instance isn't exactly asymmetrical but its close enough, and most certainly gets the job that we want done accomplished.
Back Popping: The filling of the start capacitor with energy (measured in volts) after machine is turned off to over what it began with before machine was turned on. Sending Joules, out of phase with, and independent from the applied joules.
Dynamotor: Generator first, motor second. Webster Definition: a motor generator combining the electric motor and generator
CEMF: Dictionary definition: An electromagnetic force appearing in an inductive circuit in such a direction as to oppose any change of current in the circuit.
Erfinder’s description: It is my opinion that everything must be viewed from the point of view of the antagonist, in our situation the role of the antagonist is played by CEMF. There's more than one CEMF! I say two EMF for several reasons, however the most important is because in my opinion the force is one which moves in two directions simultaneously.
1. 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 what it symbolizes! Inductive kickback is the game changer, but not in collecting it, its a game changer when we comprehend what it embodies! 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, 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 discharge current overcomes impedance.
2. I say CEMF is the "measure" of the opposition experienced in the system, it is not the thing doing the opposing. 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. CEMF is always lower than the applied. Simply spinning the rotor past the coils and looking at the scope reveals that CEMF is present. 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. We are taught to look at the wave in such a manner that we perceive the positive and negative periods taking place sequentially, we must learn to see them taking place simultaneously. This is impossible if we consider the wave as manifesting from left to right. 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 the currents decrease, it limits the rate at which the current increases.
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..... 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! CEMF in a motor limits the current, what you must see is that the mechanism responsible for the generation of CEMF can be used to cause consumption to increase with increasing RPM! This is why I say, increase the CEMF, don't decrease it like we are being told. Use the force which limits to push you to new heights. I have demonstrated that the negative effect of CEMF can be reversed.
I am not done organizing my notes, but in the interest of everyone participating in discussion as well as moderating the forum I offer another thread that I hope will not go down the potty. I can only write for myself however, so please, if you have no information seeking questions, clarifying statements or beneficial comments; refreain from writing. Since i am not ready to post the whole of my compilation as I am editing yet, I will post my first page of stuff from erfinder as I have edited it some. Maybe I got something wrong and I can be corrected as I go.
Aln
My Organization of Notes from Erfinder
Achieved Effects: The Squires path around the back side is completely unnecessary because of the special character of this specific "coil-magnet geometry", when operated as a "pulsed generator", when proper timing and pulse width are used, the negative torque problem does not manifest. The generator action assists the power supply and current limiting is regulated in the positive sense versus the negative sense. In other words, there is a regulated and steady increase of consumption as rpm increases versus a steady decline in consumption with increasing rpm. I am suggesting that we can have 1:1 electrical input to output, free mechanical......
Asymmetry/ Non linear: From the physical geometry stand point, this device is anything but asymmetrical. The asymmetry is found in the interaction of the induced fields, magnetic and dielectric between coils, it is to be observed in the relation of the induced to self-induced EMF, the repulsive force is twice that of the attractive force, this owing to the specific geometry of the coils and the use of proper timing when driving the machine as a motor. I hope this sheds some light on where I see the asymmetry in my machine. To counter drag, the only thing that has to be done is an offset. The question to ask prior to making this stupid simple change in geometric relations is why does it get rid of drag? When you look at Faraday's law and Lenz law the answer is pretty clear isn't it. Both laws are basically about inducing a voltage. The latter has a magnetic field associated with the induced potential which opposes the magnetic field which induced it. In essence the only problem a symmetrical system has is the fact that we induce one polarity at a time, and always the same polarity as the inducing. In a symmetrical, or better stated, linear system this should be expected. It's a non-linear condition that we want to establish, non-linear in this particular instance isn't exactly asymmetrical but its close enough, and most certainly gets the job that we want done accomplished.
Back Popping: The filling of the start capacitor with energy (measured in volts) after machine is turned off to over what it began with before machine was turned on. Sending Joules, out of phase with, and independent from the applied joules.
Dynamotor: Generator first, motor second. Webster Definition: a motor generator combining the electric motor and generator
CEMF: Dictionary definition: An electromagnetic force appearing in an inductive circuit in such a direction as to oppose any change of current in the circuit.
Erfinder’s description: It is my opinion that everything must be viewed from the point of view of the antagonist, in our situation the role of the antagonist is played by CEMF. There's more than one CEMF! I say two EMF for several reasons, however the most important is because in my opinion the force is one which moves in two directions simultaneously.
1. 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 what it symbolizes! Inductive kickback is the game changer, but not in collecting it, its a game changer when we comprehend what it embodies! 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, 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 discharge current overcomes impedance.
2. I say CEMF is the "measure" of the opposition experienced in the system, it is not the thing doing the opposing. 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. CEMF is always lower than the applied. Simply spinning the rotor past the coils and looking at the scope reveals that CEMF is present. 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. We are taught to look at the wave in such a manner that we perceive the positive and negative periods taking place sequentially, we must learn to see them taking place simultaneously. This is impossible if we consider the wave as manifesting from left to right. 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 the currents decrease, it limits the rate at which the current increases.
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..... 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! CEMF in a motor limits the current, what you must see is that the mechanism responsible for the generation of CEMF can be used to cause consumption to increase with increasing RPM! This is why I say, increase the CEMF, don't decrease it like we are being told. Use the force which limits to push you to new heights. I have demonstrated that the negative effect of CEMF can be reversed.
Comment