Re: [Vo]:Acceleration Under Load
Thane posted a new video on dec.14. He says he is going to install the prototype shown in an electric scooter. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Dme4bW2fPhQ Harry On Wed, Dec 14, 2011 at 2:41 AM, Mark Iverson-ZeroPoint zeropo...@charter.net wrote: I think I've watched all of Thane's vids and from what I remember, there is a lower limit (RPM) where the acceleration will not happen, but if you start at, or above, that RPM, then shorting the coils causes very significant acceleration (IIRC, 100rpm/sec) from say 1700 RPM to over 3000. I wouldn't be surprised if it would continue to well past 3400 which is double where he started from... not sure what to make of it yet! At one point he was using two different types of coils, hi-frequency coils and hi-current coils; not sure if his latest stuff is still using both types. Just engaging the high current coils to light a bank of small incandescent bulbs WILL bring the induction motor to a HALT. Engaging the high current coils AND the hi-frequency coils results in not only lighting the bulbs, but a very large increase in speed which he limits to ~3000-3100 RPM. Go figure? -Mark
Re: [Vo]:Acceleration Under Load
On Sat, Dec 17, 2011 at 1:19 AM, Harry Veeder hveeder...@gmail.com wrote: Thane posted a new video on dec.14. He says he is going to install the prototype shown in an electric scooter. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Dme4bW2fPhQ Installing free energy devices into vehicles instead of properly testing them for example on a dynamometer and by self running without a battery, is the typical modus operandi of scammers and self deceivers. The other hallmark of a scam is measuring power with simple digital meters when the likely waveform is complex and spikey. Those features are absolutely classical of the sort of nonsense perpetrated by the likes of Dennis Lee (convicted felon) and Bedini. What is supposed to be happening in that weird cluttered demo in the Youtube video?
Re: [Vo]:Acceleration Under Load
MY, that is a violation worse than any Newton's law. EM do not generally obey any Newton's law because even at low energies it is sensitive to Lorentz invariance. So, a violation of Lenz law strongly implies violation of the constancy of the speed of light or violation of causality or violation of conservation of energy-momentum. 2011/12/17 Mary Yugo maryyu...@gmail.com On Sat, Dec 17, 2011 at 1:19 AM, Harry Veeder hveeder...@gmail.comwrote: Thane posted a new video on dec.14. He says he is going to install the prototype shown in an electric scooter. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Dme4bW2fPhQ Installing free energy devices into vehicles instead of properly testing them for example on a dynamometer and by self running without a battery, is the typical modus operandi of scammers and self deceivers. The other hallmark of a scam is measuring power with simple digital meters when the likely waveform is complex and spikey. Those features are absolutely classical of the sort of nonsense perpetrated by the likes of Dennis Lee (convicted felon) and Bedini. What is supposed to be happening in that weird cluttered demo in the Youtube video? -- Daniel Rocha - RJ danieldi...@gmail.com
Re: [Vo]:Acceleration Under Load
On Sat, Dec 17, 2011 at 9:10 AM, Daniel Rocha danieldi...@gmail.com wrote: MY, that is a violation worse than any Newton's law. EM do not generally obey any Newton's law because even at low energies it is sensitive to Lorentz invariance. So, a violation of Lenz law strongly implies violation of the constancy of the speed of light or violation of causality or violation of conservation of energy-momentum. Uhhun. Are you writing about Thane? From the video, it looks to me he is simply connecting a battery-driven motor to a generator and trying to make energy by using the generator to recharge the battery-- a silly attempt to get perpetual motion that most people outgrow by the time they're 12 years old. Did I miss something?
Re: [Vo]:Acceleration Under Load
About anything that claims over unity concerning violations of the EM field. 2011/12/17 Mary Yugo maryyu...@gmail.com On Sat, Dec 17, 2011 at 9:10 AM, Daniel Rocha danieldi...@gmail.comwrote: MY, that is a violation worse than any Newton's law. EM do not generally obey any Newton's law because even at low energies it is sensitive to Lorentz invariance. So, a violation of Lenz law strongly implies violation of the constancy of the speed of light or violation of causality or violation of conservation of energy-momentum. Uhhun. Are you writing about Thane? From the video, it looks to me he is simply connecting a battery-driven motor to a generator and trying to make energy by using the generator to recharge the battery-- a silly attempt to get perpetual motion that most people outgrow by the time they're 12 years old. Did I miss something? -- Daniel Rocha - RJ danieldi...@gmail.com
Re: [Vo]:Acceleration Under Load
He will need a battery for start up. Once the scooter has reached a sufficient speed it will propel itself perpetually by self charging. I have met Thane in person and witnessed an earlier version of his regenerative acceleration device. Is he scammer? No one who has met him thinks he is a scammer. He is much too sincere. Is he a self-deciever? A small group of skeptics who have evaluated his data have convinced themselves that Thane has decieved himself. I don't agree. If Thane succeeds, will those skeptics suffer the label 'self-deceivers' ? Early in 2008 a professor in the engineering facaulty at the University of Ottawa was sufficiently impressed by a version of his device, that he gave him some lab to conduct for further research. In hindsight, I bet he was told he could have the lab space as long as he did not say it violated of CoE. When I met him in the lab in 2008, he appeared conflicted because he would say things like 'this is where it violates 'Lenz's law' and then in the next breath he would say 'but there is no violation of CoE'. After about a year or so his welcome ran out because I suspect he became less restrained in expressing his belief. Of course he now expresses his belief quite openly and I say good for him. Harry On Sat, Dec 17, 2011 at 11:17 AM, Mary Yugo maryyu...@gmail.com wrote: On Sat, Dec 17, 2011 at 1:19 AM, Harry Veeder hveeder...@gmail.com wrote: Thane posted a new video on dec.14. He says he is going to install the prototype shown in an electric scooter. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Dme4bW2fPhQ Installing free energy devices into vehicles instead of properly testing them for example on a dynamometer and by self running without a battery, is the typical modus operandi of scammers and self deceivers. The other hallmark of a scam is measuring power with simple digital meters when the likely waveform is complex and spikey. Those features are absolutely classical of the sort of nonsense perpetrated by the likes of Dennis Lee (convicted felon) and Bedini. What is supposed to be happening in that weird cluttered demo in the Youtube video?
Re: [Vo]:Acceleration Under Load
On Fri, Dec 16, 2011 at 1:51 AM, Mary Yugo maryyu...@gmail.com wrote: On Thu, Dec 15, 2011 at 9:45 PM, Harry Veeder hveeder...@gmail.com wrote: MY wrote: I know of no properly demonstrated violation of Lenz law. Such a violation would also violate COE and Newton 3. That's rather unlikely, at least on any macro scale for any appreciable time period -- or the universe would not be the way we see it. Are you trying to convince me or yourself that the set of axioms known as the laws of physics apply to everything that has happened or will ever happen? I am trying to convince you that new discoveries rarely if ever change current physical laws for the regimes of size, velocity, etc. in which they have been developed. For example, Newton's Laws of motion are just as good as ever as long as you don't move very extremely fast in which case Einstein's discoveries and deductions begin to apply. Or if you get very very small, quantum physics laws become more accurate than Newton's. That's what I meant. COE is fundamental to the way the universe looks and works and I don't think it will ever be overthrown. You may discover new sources of energy analogous to the discovery of radioactivity, and perhaps new possibilities for converting it but I don't think you will overthrow COE for the known universe. I am familiar with this view of physics. I was taught it and accepted it like most students. However, over the last decade I have gradually become unconvinced of this vision through my own historical research and reflection. I have learned that the conviction that quantities like momentum and energy are conserved was inspired by the theological musings of Descartes and Joule. They posited a Creator who made the universe work according to their own beliefs and values. The conservation laws aren`t really tautological, as Peter Hecket has opinoined, but they are self affirming. It is not my ambition to overthrow CoE. I have come to realize that the principle is important for the design, construction and operation of measuring instruments, but creation is greater than the theological conceits of Descartes and Joules so everything that transpires need not obey CoE. BTW I haven`t found an explicit objection to the creation of energy in Joule`s writing. He writes that energy must be conserved to avoid the destruction of energy because the destruction of energy was implied in Carnot theory of heat engines. He insisted that only God had the capacity to destroy energy. Have a nice day. Harry
Re: [Vo]:Acceleration Under Load
MY wrote: I know of no properly demonstrated violation of Lenz law. Such a violation would also violate COE and Newton 3. That's rather unlikely, at least on any macro scale for any appreciable time period -- or the universe would not be the way we see it. Are you trying to convince me or yourself that the set of axioms known as the laws of physics apply to everything that has happened or will ever happen? Harry
Re: [Vo]:Acceleration Under Load
On Thu, Dec 15, 2011 at 9:45 PM, Harry Veeder hveeder...@gmail.com wrote: MY wrote: I know of no properly demonstrated violation of Lenz law. Such a violation would also violate COE and Newton 3. That's rather unlikely, at least on any macro scale for any appreciable time period -- or the universe would not be the way we see it. Are you trying to convince me or yourself that the set of axioms known as the laws of physics apply to everything that has happened or will ever happen? I am trying to convince you that new discoveries rarely if ever change current physical laws for the regimes of size, velocity, etc. in which they have been developed. For example, Newton's Laws of motion are just as good as ever as long as you don't move very extremely fast in which case Einstein's discoveries and deductions begin to apply. Or if you get very very small, quantum physics laws become more accurate than Newton's. That's what I meant. COE is fundamental to the way the universe looks and works and I don't think it will ever be overthrown. You may discover new sources of energy analogous to the discovery of radioactivity, and perhaps new possibilities for converting it but I don't think you will overthrow COE for the known universe.
Re: [Vo]:Acceleration Under Load
Oops. Forgot about the big bang did we? It is amazing that based on a few 100 years of observations by one species, on one planet, on the outer rim of one galaxy of billions in the known universe that a semi salient entity would make that statement. Had you said that 1,000,000 years in the future, when we have the combined knowledge of physics that 100,000 species have gathered, it may be correct but then it only takes one observation to overturn it. On 12/16/2011 5:21 PM, Mary Yugo wrote: COE is fundamental to the way the universe looks and works and I don't think it will ever be overthrown. You may discover new sources of energy analogous to the discovery of radioactivity, and perhaps new possibilities for converting it but I don't think you will overthrow COE for the known universe.
Re: [Vo]:Acceleration Under Load
Mary Yugo wrote: So why not take some of the output heat, run it through a simple and reliable control system, and then return the heat to the input end? Then, Rossi could self sustain after a brief initial period of electrical heating, for as long as he liked. He did that! What are you talking about?!? He has made the thing self-sustain from internally generated heat for 4 hours. It would have cooled down in 40 min. if it had not been generating heat. Rossi has done _exactly_ what you demand. It seems you will not take yes for an answer. - Jed
Re: [Vo]:Acceleration Under Load
On Tue, Dec 13, 2011 at 6:52 AM, Jed Rothwell jedrothw...@gmail.com wrote: Mary Yugo wrote: So why not take some of the output heat, run it through a simple and reliable control system, and then return the heat to the input end? Then, Rossi could self sustain after a brief initial period of electrical heating, for as long as he liked. He did that! What are you talking about?!? He has made the thing self-sustain from internally generated heat for 4 hours. It would have cooled down in 40 min. if it had not been generating heat. Rossi has done *exactly* what you demand. It seems you will not take yes for an answer. Rossi ran a nuclear reactor for four hours with a claimed six month capability and I am supposed to be ecstatic? There is nothing in any Rossi device's design that routes heat BACK from output to input via a controller. That was my suggestion in response to someone suggesting that the reactor needs to be kept warm at its input. Even Rossi hasn't claimed to do what I suggested he do! Rossi has not explained why he needs a safety heater which in the original E-cat can only HEAT the COOLANT. He has never explained why there is a relatively short time limit for self-sustaining running. None of that makes the slightest sense and it never has. You seem to be writing his script for him now and you seem to be making stuff up.
Re: [Vo]:Acceleration Under Load
On Tue, Dec 13, 2011 at 8:52 AM, Jed Rothwell jedrothw...@gmail.com wrote: He did that! What are you talking about?!? He has made the thing self-sustain from internally generated heat for 4 hours. It's not self-sustaining if you have to cycle the input power, and Rossi has admitted that the input power has to be cycled on periodically. It would have cooled down in 40 min. if it had not been generating heat. No. When they shut it down, doubled the coolant rate, it took more than 40 minutes to cool down by 10C. And this was after drawing heat of the thermal mass for 3.25 hours. Did you notice the difference between the ecat that could self-sustain, and the one that did not? About 70 kg more mass, and 8 kW less power. Hmmm. Coincidence?
Re: [Vo]:Acceleration Under Load
On Tue, Dec 13, 2011 at 9:22 AM, Joshua Cude joshua.c...@gmail.com wrote: Did you notice the difference between the ecat that could self-sustain, and the one that did not? About 70 kg more mass, and 8 kW less power. Hmmm. Coincidence? NO! Progress!
Re: [Vo]:Acceleration Under Load
Mary Yugo wrote: Rossi ran a nuclear reactor for four hours with a claimed six month capability and I am supposed to be ecstatic? Since it would have cooled down immediately in the absence of anomalous heat, 4 hours proves the point as well as 40 years would. There is nothing in any Rossi device's design that routes heat BACK from output to input via a controller. This make no sense. The heat is there in the reactor. There is no need to conduct, convect or convey it back anywhere. It is already right where it is needed. The hydride is hot. - Jed
Re: [Vo]:Acceleration Under Load
On Tue, Dec 13, 2011 at 12:51 PM, Jed Rothwell jedrothw...@gmail.comwrote: Mary Yugo wrote: Rossi ran a nuclear reactor for four hours with a claimed six month capability and I am supposed to be ecstatic? Since it would have cooled down immediately in the absence of anomalous heat, 4 hours proves the point as well as 40 years would. It wouldn't have, and it didn't. When they removed the hydrogen pressure, and doubled the coolant rate, it only decreased by 10C in 40 minutes, and that was after 3.25 hours of drawing down on the stored heat. Four hours is *nothing* for a 100 kg device. You can buy chemical stoves that will give you 40 hours at 3 kW with a tenth of that weight. Forty years would be *something*. The heat is there in the reactor. There is no need to conduct, convect or convey it back anywhere. It is already right where it is needed. The hydride is hot. I agree with this. Which is why the absence of real self-sustaining operation (beyond what is possible from thermal storage alone, let alone chemical fuels) makes the claims completely unbelievable.
Re: [Vo]:Acceleration Under Load
On Tue, Dec 13, 2011 at 10:51 AM, Jed Rothwell jedrothw...@gmail.comwrote: Mary Yugo wrote: There is nothing in any Rossi device's design that routes heat BACK from output to input via a controller. This make no sense. The heat is there in the reactor. There is no need to conduct, convect or convey it back anywhere. It is already right where it is needed. The hydride is hot. OK. Then why does it have to be reheated by a safety heater at regular intervals? Both Defkalion and Rossi claim that this is necessary. It makes absolutely no sense. And while we're on the subject, can you explain why the so-called safety heater on the original E-cat is situated on the outside of the coolant jacket so in effect, it mainly heats the cooling water? That is a very strange geometry. And now that I think about it, so if the entire geometry of the original E-cat. It doesn't seem to be designed to shed heat from a core. It seems too small and tight to do that well. I'd expect many more passages for the amount of power (up to 130 kW according to Levi's claimed transient measurement). What it seems designed for is two large electrical heaters warming coolant.
Re: [Vo]:Acceleration Under Load
Mary Yugo maryyu...@gmail.com wrote: OK. Then why does it have to be reheated by a safety heater at regular intervals? I do not know, but there must be a reason. Nothing happen in nature without a cause. Perhaps they will find a way to make it run without this in the future. In any case, it continues in self-sustaining mode far beyond the limits of chemistry, and the energy used to reheat it is far less than the energy it produces continuously during the self-sustaining period. Both Defkalion and Rossi claim that this is necessary. It makes absolutely no sense. Unless you understand the physics of cold fusion you cannot say whether it makes sense or not. You have no basis for judging that. And while we're on the subject, can you explain why the so-called safety heater on the original E-cat is situated on the outside of the coolant jacket so in effect, it mainly heats the cooling water? That is a very strange geometry. I cannot explain that. Perhaps Rossi or someone else will in the future. In any case, that has no bearing on the heat balance, and the fact that the heat is where it is needed during the self-sustaining operation, and does not need to be conveyed anywhere else. - Jed
Re: [Vo]:Acceleration Under Load
On Tue, Dec 13, 2011 at 2:13 PM, Jed Rothwell jedrothw...@gmail.com wrote: In any case, it continues in self-sustaining mode far beyond the limits of chemistry, Not more than a few per cent on *this* side of the limits of chemistry. and the energy used to reheat it is far less than the energy it produces continuously during the self-sustaining period. I don't recall he ever actually went through a complete cycle: preheat, self-sustain, reheat, self-sustain. The demos are all pre-heat and self-sustain and then shut-down. And the energy used in the pre-heating phase is comparable, if not more than that extracted during the self-sustain phase.
Re: [Vo]:Acceleration Under Load
Yes, thane's research was the inspiration for this experiment. Harry On Mon, Dec 12, 2011 at 11:34 PM, Robert Leguillon robert.leguil...@hotmail.com wrote: Reminds me of Thane Heins' Regenerative Acceleration. http://ottawaskeptics.org/local-investigations/121-in-this-town-we-obey-the-laws-of-thermodynamics To: vortex-l@eskimo.com Subject: Re: [Vo]:Acceleration Under Load From: dlrober...@aol.com Date: Mon, 12 Dec 2011 23:23:24 -0500 To get the attention of physicists you will need to find a way to connect the output power back to the input and have the device increase its energy. No other test would convince them that your device is effective. Have you been able to achieve this benchmark? This requirement reminds me of the skeptic's demand that Rossi's device needs to run a generator to supply the input power and it is valid. One day I hope to see this test performed. Dave -Original Message- From: Harry Veeder hveeder...@gmail.com To: vortex-l vortex-l@eskimo.com Sent: Mon, Dec 12, 2011 9:20 pm Subject: Re: [Vo]:Acceleration Under Load Hopefully it will become free energy device. Dozens of amateur researchers ( Steorn included ) have established that it is possible to circumvent Lenz's law. The hope is this will eventually lead to a free energy device. But even if you can't use a violation of lenz law to generate free energy, this achievement alone deserves attention from mainstream engineers and physicists, which it isn't getting. It is a strange state of affairs. Harry On Sun, Dec 11, 2011 at 1:21 PM, David Roberson dlrober...@aol.com wrote: I am confused about the purpose of the experiment. Is this some kind of free energy device? If it really works, you should be able to drive the input with the output and have it to accelerate in speed or at least keep freely moving. If this can not be done, then most likely there is a difficulty in reading the true power output and input. Dave -Original Message- From: Harry Veeder hveeder...@gmail.com To: vortex-l vortex-l@eskimo.com Sent: Sun, Dec 11, 2011 12:53 pm Subject: [Vo]:Acceleration Under Load acceleration under load effect, by deepcut66 http://youtu.be/vBDOOSOhbz0 The previous setup had physical limitations although it was excellent for demonstrating the AUL [acceleration under load] effect. This setup lends itself better to harnessing the effect for power-generation. I've done away with the Bedini drive circuitry and replaced it with a 12v/6w motor from an Audi message-pump system : http://www.ebay.co.uk/itm/12v-DC-electric-motor-UK-SELLER-/110739940158?pt=UK... This gives me twice the RPM for a third of the input power, coupled with the fact that the rotor has 24 poles, arranged N/S i can now get higher frequencies. This is running at around six or seven hudred Hz. According to the meters more power is coming out than going in, but we all know how deceptive things can be and i can't do proper measurements until i get my hands on a scope, which i will get in the new year.
Re: [Vo]:Acceleration Under Load
On Tue, Dec 13, 2011 at 12:12 AM, Robert Leguillon robert.leguil...@hotmail.com wrote: The central issue is that Acceleration Under Load (AUL) is a misnomer. No. It describes exactly what is observed. The acceleration is occurring when coils are being shorted. Two issues arise: 1) The initial power/rpm ratio is set while these same regenerative coils are presenting opposition to movement. In most experiments, just moving the coils out of the way would result in more rpm/watt. If you remove the coils then you are missing the point of the experiment. According according to Lenz law the coils should should slow the rotor when the coils are shorted and remain shorted. 2) Shorting the coil does create a collapsing magnetic field. The time constant of the collapsing field is proportional to the resistance to electrical current. If the shorted coil collapses at just the right speed w.r.t. the disk rotation, it would cause a push in the direction of rotation. There could be a higher rpm of rotation at a lower torque value, and only within the narrow band of rotation frequency. Assuming this is possible, the effect you mention will only result in momentary jerk in the direction of rotation. However, what is observed is a steady acceleration in the direction of rotation while the coils remain shorted. Anyway Thane Heins youtube channel has better examples because you can hear the acceleration. harry Date: Mon, 12 Dec 2011 21:19:52 -0500 Subject: Re: [Vo]:Acceleration Under Load From: hveeder...@gmail.com To: vortex-l@eskimo.com Hopefully it will become free energy device. Dozens of amateur researchers ( Steorn included ) have established that it is possible to circumvent Lenz's law. The hope is this will eventually lead to a free energy device. But even if you can't use a violation of lenz law to generate free energy, this achievement alone deserves attention from mainstream engineers and physicists, which it isn't getting. It is a strange state of affairs. Harry On Sun, Dec 11, 2011 at 1:21 PM, David Roberson dlrober...@aol.com wrote: I am confused about the purpose of the experiment. Is this some kind of free energy device? If it really works, you should be able to drive the input with the output and have it to accelerate in speed or at least keep freely moving. If this can not be done, then most likely there is a difficulty in reading the true power output and input. Dave -Original Message- From: Harry Veeder hveeder...@gmail.com To: vortex-l vortex-l@eskimo.com Sent: Sun, Dec 11, 2011 12:53 pm Subject: [Vo]:Acceleration Under Load acceleration under load effect, by deepcut66 http://youtu.be/vBDOOSOhbz0 The previous setup had physical limitations although it was excellent for demonstrating the AUL [acceleration under load] effect. This setup lends itself better to harnessing the effect for power-generation. I've done away with the Bedini drive circuitry and replaced it with a 12v/6w motor from an Audi message-pump system : http://www.ebay.co.uk/itm/12v-DC-electric-motor-UK-SELLER-/110739940158?pt=UK... This gives me twice the RPM for a third of the input power, coupled with the fact that the rotor has 24 poles, arranged N/S i can now get higher frequencies. This is running at around six or seven hudred Hz. According to the meters more power is coming out than going in, but we all know how deceptive things can be and i can't do proper measurements until i get my hands on a scope, which i will get in the new year.
Re: [Vo]:Acceleration Under Load
Please remember that the impluse required to produce a jump in angular velocity is not the same as the torque required to produce a steady angular acceleration. Harry On Tue, Dec 13, 2011 at 9:31 PM, Harry Veeder hveeder...@gmail.com wrote: On Tue, Dec 13, 2011 at 12:12 AM, Robert Leguillon robert.leguil...@hotmail.com wrote: The central issue is that Acceleration Under Load (AUL) is a misnomer. No. It describes exactly what is observed. The acceleration is occurring when coils are being shorted. Two issues arise: 1) The initial power/rpm ratio is set while these same regenerative coils are presenting opposition to movement. In most experiments, just moving the coils out of the way would result in more rpm/watt. If you remove the coils then you are missing the point of the experiment. According according to Lenz law the coils should should slow the rotor when the coils are shorted and remain shorted. 2) Shorting the coil does create a collapsing magnetic field. The time constant of the collapsing field is proportional to the resistance to electrical current. If the shorted coil collapses at just the right speed w.r.t. the disk rotation, it would cause a push in the direction of rotation. There could be a higher rpm of rotation at a lower torque value, and only within the narrow band of rotation frequency. Assuming this is possible, the effect you mention will only result in momentary jerk in the direction of rotation. However, what is observed is a steady acceleration in the direction of rotation while the coils remain shorted. Anyway Thane Heins youtube channel has better examples because you can hear the acceleration. harry Date: Mon, 12 Dec 2011 21:19:52 -0500 Subject: Re: [Vo]:Acceleration Under Load From: hveeder...@gmail.com To: vortex-l@eskimo.com Hopefully it will become free energy device. Dozens of amateur researchers ( Steorn included ) have established that it is possible to circumvent Lenz's law. The hope is this will eventually lead to a free energy device. But even if you can't use a violation of lenz law to generate free energy, this achievement alone deserves attention from mainstream engineers and physicists, which it isn't getting. It is a strange state of affairs. Harry On Sun, Dec 11, 2011 at 1:21 PM, David Roberson dlrober...@aol.com wrote: I am confused about the purpose of the experiment. Is this some kind of free energy device? If it really works, you should be able to drive the input with the output and have it to accelerate in speed or at least keep freely moving. If this can not be done, then most likely there is a difficulty in reading the true power output and input. Dave -Original Message- From: Harry Veeder hveeder...@gmail.com To: vortex-l vortex-l@eskimo.com Sent: Sun, Dec 11, 2011 12:53 pm Subject: [Vo]:Acceleration Under Load acceleration under load effect, by deepcut66 http://youtu.be/vBDOOSOhbz0 The previous setup had physical limitations although it was excellent for demonstrating the AUL [acceleration under load] effect. This setup lends itself better to harnessing the effect for power-generation. I've done away with the Bedini drive circuitry and replaced it with a 12v/6w motor from an Audi message-pump system : http://www.ebay.co.uk/itm/12v-DC-electric-motor-UK-SELLER-/110739940158?pt=UK... This gives me twice the RPM for a third of the input power, coupled with the fact that the rotor has 24 poles, arranged N/S i can now get higher frequencies. This is running at around six or seven hudred Hz. According to the meters more power is coming out than going in, but we all know how deceptive things can be and i can't do proper measurements until i get my hands on a scope, which i will get in the new year.
Re: [Vo]:Acceleration Under Load
On Tue, Dec 13, 2011 at 12:12 AM, Robert Leguillon 2) Shorting the coil does create a collapsing magnetic field. The time constant of the collapsing field is proportional to the resistance to electrical current. If the shorted coil collapses at just the right speed w.r.t. the disk rotation, it would cause a push in the direction of rotation. There could be a higher rpm of rotation at a lower torque value, and only within the narrow band of rotation frequency. If there is a right speed the values start at lower speed limit and range upwards continuously. Thane does not know if there is an upper limit. Harry
RE: [Vo]:Acceleration Under Load
I think I've watched all of Thane's vids and from what I remember, there is a lower limit (RPM) where the acceleration will not happen, but if you start at, or above, that RPM, then shorting the coils causes very significant acceleration (IIRC, 100rpm/sec) from say 1700 RPM to over 3000. I wouldn't be surprised if it would continue to well past 3400 which is double where he started from... not sure what to make of it yet! At one point he was using two different types of coils, hi-frequency coils and hi-current coils; not sure if his latest stuff is still using both types. Just engaging the high current coils to light a bank of small incandescent bulbs WILL bring the induction motor to a HALT. Engaging the high current coils AND the hi-frequency coils results in not only lighting the bulbs, but a very large increase in speed which he limits to ~3000-3100 RPM. Go figure? -Mark -Original Message- From: Harry Veeder [mailto:hveeder...@gmail.com] Sent: Tuesday, December 13, 2011 7:03 PM To: vortex-l@eskimo.com Subject: Re: [Vo]:Acceleration Under Load On Tue, Dec 13, 2011 at 12:12 AM, Robert Leguillon 2) Shorting the coil does create a collapsing magnetic field. The time constant of the collapsing field is proportional to the resistance to electrical current. If the shorted coil collapses at just the right speed w.r.t. the disk rotation, it would cause a push in the direction of rotation. There could be a higher rpm of rotation at a lower torque value, and only within the narrow band of rotation frequency. If there is a right speed the values start at lower speed limit and range upwards continuously. Thane does not know if there is an upper limit. Harry
Re: [Vo]:Acceleration Under Load
Hopefully it will become free energy device. Dozens of amateur researchers ( Steorn included ) have established that it is possible to circumvent Lenz's law. The hope is this will eventually lead to a free energy device. But even if you can't use a violation of lenz law to generate free energy, this achievement alone deserves attention from mainstream engineers and physicists, which it isn't getting. It is a strange state of affairs. Harry On Sun, Dec 11, 2011 at 1:21 PM, David Roberson dlrober...@aol.com wrote: I am confused about the purpose of the experiment. Is this some kind of free energy device? If it really works, you should be able to drive the input with the output and have it to accelerate in speed or at least keep freely moving. If this can not be done, then most likely there is a difficulty in reading the true power output and input. Dave -Original Message- From: Harry Veeder hveeder...@gmail.com To: vortex-l vortex-l@eskimo.com Sent: Sun, Dec 11, 2011 12:53 pm Subject: [Vo]:Acceleration Under Load acceleration under load effect, by deepcut66 http://youtu.be/vBDOOSOhbz0 The previous setup had physical limitations although it was excellent for demonstrating the AUL [acceleration under load] effect. This setup lends itself better to harnessing the effect for power-generation. I've done away with the Bedini drive circuitry and replaced it with a 12v/6w motor from an Audi message-pump system : http://www.ebay.co.uk/itm/12v-DC-electric-motor-UK-SELLER-/110739940158?pt=UK... This gives me twice the RPM for a third of the input power, coupled with the fact that the rotor has 24 poles, arranged N/S i can now get higher frequencies. This is running at around six or seven hudred Hz. According to the meters more power is coming out than going in, but we all know how deceptive things can be and i can't do proper measurements until i get my hands on a scope, which i will get in the new year.
Re: [Vo]:Acceleration Under Load
Hopefully it will become free energy device. Dozens of amateur researchers ( Steorn included ) have established that it is possible to circumvent Lenz's law. The hope is this will eventually lead to a free energy device. But even if you can't use a violation of lenz law to generate free energy, this achievement alone deserves attention from mainstream engineers and physicists, which it isn't getting. It is a strange state of affairs. Harry On Sun, Dec 11, 2011 at 1:21 PM, David Roberson dlrober...@aol.com wrote: I am confused about the purpose of the experiment. Is this some kind of free energy device? If it really works, you should be able to drive the input with the output and have it to accelerate in speed or at least keep freely moving. If this can not be done, then most likely there is a difficulty in reading the true power output and input. Dave -Original Message- From: Harry Veeder hveeder...@gmail.com To: vortex-l vortex-l@eskimo.com Sent: Sun, Dec 11, 2011 12:53 pm Subject: [Vo]:Acceleration Under Load acceleration under load effect, by deepcut66 http://youtu.be/vBDOOSOhbz0 The previous setup had physical limitations although it was excellent for demonstrating the AUL [acceleration under load] effect. This setup lends itself better to harnessing the effect for power-generation. I've done away with the Bedini drive circuitry and replaced it with a 12v/6w motor from an Audi message-pump system : http://www.ebay.co.uk/itm/12v-DC-electric-motor-UK-SELLER-/110739940158?pt=UK... This gives me twice the RPM for a third of the input power, coupled with the fact that the rotor has 24 poles, arranged N/S i can now get higher frequencies. This is running at around six or seven hudred Hz. According to the meters more power is coming out than going in, but we all know how deceptive things can be and i can't do proper measurements until i get my hands on a scope, which i will get in the new year.
Re: [Vo]:Acceleration Under Load
On Mon, Dec 12, 2011 at 6:15 PM, Harry Veeder hveeder...@gmail.com wrote: Dozens of amateur researchers ( Steorn included ) have established that it is possible to circumvent Lenz's law. The hope is this will eventually lead to a free energy device. Steorn has never demonstrated any violation of any natural law whatsoever. All they did was to make an inefficient pulse motor which converted most of the power fed to it to heat. It was powered with a large, 10 Amp hour battery -- the largest D cell it is possible to buy and that was recharged regularly by the guy who observers nicknamed derisively Tachoman. They called him that because he was usually seen checking for the deceleration of the supposed overunity devices using a tachometer. Sean McCarthy hilariously tried and failed to convince anyone that this awkward contraption was overunity. Everything they have shown consisted of errors, inappropriate instrumentation choices, mis-measurements, bad calculations, incomplete data and data reduction, inappropriate conclusions and downright deception. Or perhaps you didn't see the video (since removed and censored by Steorn) of the questions and answers after their so-called demo at the Waterways Museum? Or the aftersession they held at the upstairs rooms at the Kinetica Museum? Or maybe you missed the replication (only better running and faster and it charges its own battery) of Steorn's device by the critic who calls himself Alsetalokin and calls his device the Orbette? Sorry, I didn't mean to get into a discussion of Steorn but hey, there was the opportunity. I know of no properly demonstrated violation of Lenz law. Such a violation would also violate COE and Newton 3. That's rather unlikely, at least on any macro scale for any appreciable time period -- or the universe would not be the way we see it.
Re: [Vo]:Acceleration Under Load
To get the attention of physicists you will need to find a way to connect the output power back to the input and have the device increase its energy. No other test would convince them that your device is effective. Have you been able to achieve this benchmark? This requirement reminds me of the skeptic's demand that Rossi's device needs to run a generator to supply the input power and it is valid. One day I hope to see this test performed. Dave -Original Message- From: Harry Veeder hveeder...@gmail.com To: vortex-l vortex-l@eskimo.com Sent: Mon, Dec 12, 2011 9:20 pm Subject: Re: [Vo]:Acceleration Under Load Hopefully it will become free energy device. Dozens of amateur researchers ( Steorn included ) have established hat it is possible to circumvent Lenz's law. The hope is this will ventually lead to a free energy device. But even if you can't use a violation of lenz law to generate free nergy, this achievement alone deserves attention from mainstream ngineers and physicists, which it isn't getting. It is a strange tate of affairs. arry On Sun, Dec 11, 2011 at 1:21 PM, David Roberson dlrober...@aol.com wrote: I am confused about the purpose of the experiment. Is this some kind of free energy device? If it really works, you should be able to drive the input with the output and have it to accelerate in speed or at least keep freely moving. If this can not be done, then most likely there is a difficulty in reading the true power output and input. Dave -Original Message- From: Harry Veeder hveeder...@gmail.com To: vortex-l vortex-l@eskimo.com Sent: Sun, Dec 11, 2011 12:53 pm Subject: [Vo]:Acceleration Under Load acceleration under load effect, by deepcut66 http://youtu.be/vBDOOSOhbz0 The previous setup had physical limitations although it was excellent for demonstrating the AUL [acceleration under load] effect. This setup lends itself better to harnessing the effect for power-generation. I've done away with the Bedini drive circuitry and replaced it with a 12v/6w motor from an Audi message-pump system : http://www.ebay.co.uk/itm/12v-DC-electric-motor-UK-SELLER-/110739940158?pt=UK... This gives me twice the RPM for a third of the input power, coupled with the fact that the rotor has 24 poles, arranged N/S i can now get higher frequencies. This is running at around six or seven hudred Hz. According to the meters more power is coming out than going in, but we all know how deceptive things can be and i can't do proper measurements until i get my hands on a scope, which i will get in the new year.
RE: [Vo]:Acceleration Under Load
Reminds me of Thane Heins' Regenerative Acceleration. http://ottawaskeptics.org/local-investigations/121-in-this-town-we-obey-the-laws-of-thermodynamics To: vortex-l@eskimo.com Subject: Re: [Vo]:Acceleration Under Load From: dlrober...@aol.com Date: Mon, 12 Dec 2011 23:23:24 -0500 To get the attention of physicists you will need to find a way to connect the output power back to the input and have the device increase its energy. No other test would convince them that your device is effective. Have you been able to achieve this benchmark? This requirement reminds me of the skeptic's demand that Rossi's device needs to run a generator to supply the input power and it is valid. One day I hope to see this test performed. Dave -Original Message- From: Harry Veeder hveeder...@gmail.com To: vortex-l vortex-l@eskimo.com Sent: Mon, Dec 12, 2011 9:20 pm Subject: Re: [Vo]:Acceleration Under Load Hopefully it will become free energy device. Dozens of amateur researchers ( Steorn included ) have established that it is possible to circumvent Lenz's law. The hope is this will eventually lead to a free energy device. But even if you can't use a violation of lenz law to generate free energy, this achievement alone deserves attention from mainstream engineers and physicists, which it isn't getting. It is a strange state of affairs. Harry On Sun, Dec 11, 2011 at 1:21 PM, David Roberson dlrober...@aol.com wrote: I am confused about the purpose of the experiment. Is this some kind of free energy device? If it really works, you should be able to drive the input with the output and have it to accelerate in speed or at least keep freely moving. If this can not be done, then most likely there is a difficulty in reading the true power output and input. Dave -Original Message- From: Harry Veeder hveeder...@gmail.com To: vortex-l vortex-l@eskimo.com Sent: Sun, Dec 11, 2011 12:53 pm Subject: [Vo]:Acceleration Under Load acceleration under load effect, by deepcut66 http://youtu.be/vBDOOSOhbz0 The previous setup had physical limitations although it was excellent for demonstrating the AUL [acceleration under load] effect. This setup lends itself better to harnessing the effect for power-generation. I've done away with the Bedini drive circuitry and replaced it with a 12v/6w motor from an Audi message-pump system : http://www.ebay.co.uk/itm/12v-DC-electric-motor-UK-SELLER-/110739940158?pt=UK... This gives me twice the RPM for a third of the input power, coupled with the fact that the rotor has 24 poles, arranged N/S i can now get higher frequencies. This is running at around six or seven hudred Hz. According to the meters more power is coming out than going in, but we all know how deceptive things can be and i can't do proper measurements until i get my hands on a scope, which i will get in the new year.
Re: [Vo]:Acceleration Under Load
On Mon, Dec 12, 2011 at 8:23 PM, David Roberson dlrober...@aol.com wrote: This requirement reminds me of the skeptic's demand that Rossi's device needs to run a generator to supply the input power and it is valid. Actually, with Rossi, it's simpler than that. His claim is that his device makes 6X the thermal power at the output that he supplies as Joule heating at the input. But the input current powers a simple resistance heater. So why not take some of the output heat, run it through a simple and reliable control system, and then return the heat to the input end? Then, Rossi could self sustain after a brief initial period of electrical heating, for as long as he liked. I've never understood why Rossi did not do that simple maneuver and then run for a week or two under a webcam on a glass table in an open field. A lot more people would now believe him if he had done something like that.
RE: [Vo]:Acceleration Under Load
The central issue is that Acceleration Under Load (AUL) is a misnomer. The acceleration is occurring when coils are being shorted. Two issues arise: 1) The initial power/rpm ratio is set while these same regenerative coils are presenting opposition to movement. In most experiments, just moving the coils out of the way would result in more rpm/watt. 2) Shorting the coil does create a collapsing magnetic field. The time constant of the collapsing field is proportional to the resistance to electrical current. If the shorted coil collapses at just the right speed w.r.t. the disk rotation, it would cause a push in the direction of rotation. There could be a higher rpm of rotation at a lower torque value, and only within the narrow band of rotation frequency. In the video Date: Mon, 12 Dec 2011 21:19:52 -0500 Subject: Re: [Vo]:Acceleration Under Load From: hveeder...@gmail.com To: vortex-l@eskimo.com Hopefully it will become free energy device. Dozens of amateur researchers ( Steorn included ) have established that it is possible to circumvent Lenz's law. The hope is this will eventually lead to a free energy device. But even if you can't use a violation of lenz law to generate free energy, this achievement alone deserves attention from mainstream engineers and physicists, which it isn't getting. It is a strange state of affairs. Harry On Sun, Dec 11, 2011 at 1:21 PM, David Roberson dlrober...@aol.com wrote: I am confused about the purpose of the experiment. Is this some kind of free energy device? If it really works, you should be able to drive the input with the output and have it to accelerate in speed or at least keep freely moving. If this can not be done, then most likely there is a difficulty in reading the true power output and input. Dave -Original Message- From: Harry Veeder hveeder...@gmail.com To: vortex-l vortex-l@eskimo.com Sent: Sun, Dec 11, 2011 12:53 pm Subject: [Vo]:Acceleration Under Load acceleration under load effect, by deepcut66 http://youtu.be/vBDOOSOhbz0 The previous setup had physical limitations although it was excellent for demonstrating the AUL [acceleration under load] effect. This setup lends itself better to harnessing the effect for power-generation. I've done away with the Bedini drive circuitry and replaced it with a 12v/6w motor from an Audi message-pump system : http://www.ebay.co.uk/itm/12v-DC-electric-motor-UK-SELLER-/110739940158?pt=UK... This gives me twice the RPM for a third of the input power, coupled with the fact that the rotor has 24 poles, arranged N/S i can now get higher frequencies. This is running at around six or seven hudred Hz. According to the meters more power is coming out than going in, but we all know how deceptive things can be and i can't do proper measurements until i get my hands on a scope, which i will get in the new year.
RE: [Vo]:Acceleration Under Load
Due to the lower torque of the disk, the output rpm should not be used as its own representation of power. In the video, output voltage and current are measured, but the method is unclear. It is certainly not a series measurement, as the probe placement is not required for continuous operation, but he seems to be treating it as such. The reason the measurement is so critical is that the collapsing fields, and resultant disk-assist will create a variance in motor impedance and input current. Very,very careful analysis is needed. A standard voltmeter will have difficulty with erratic waveforms, and certainly don't show the entire picture. For the secondary, you could always pull a waveform from an inline sampling resistor. In the comments he references Thane, so it's most likely the same method. From: robert.leguil...@hotmail.com To: vortex-l@eskimo.com Subject: RE: [Vo]:Acceleration Under Load Date: Mon, 12 Dec 2011 23:12:03 -0600 The central issue is that Acceleration Under Load (AUL) is a misnomer. The acceleration is occurring when coils are being shorted. Two issues arise: 1) The initial power/rpm ratio is set while these same regenerative coils are presenting opposition to movement. In most experiments, just moving the coils out of the way would result in more rpm/watt. 2) Shorting the coil does create a collapsing magnetic field. The time constant of the collapsing field is proportional to the resistance to electrical current. If the shorted coil collapses at just the right speed w.r.t. the disk rotation, it would cause a push in the direction of rotation. There could be a higher rpm of rotation at a lower torque value, and only within the narrow band of rotation frequency. In the video Date: Mon, 12 Dec 2011 21:19:52 -0500 Subject: Re: [Vo]:Acceleration Under Load From: hveeder...@gmail.com To: vortex-l@eskimo.com Hopefully it will become free energy device. Dozens of amateur researchers ( Steorn included ) have established that it is possible to circumvent Lenz's law. The hope is this will eventually lead to a free energy device. But even if you can't use a violation of lenz law to generate free energy, this achievement alone deserves attention from mainstream engineers and physicists, which it isn't getting. It is a strange state of affairs. Harry On Sun, Dec 11, 2011 at 1:21 PM, David Roberson dlrober...@aol.com wrote: I am confused about the purpose of the experiment. Is this some kind of free energy device? If it really works, you should be able to drive the input with the output and have it to accelerate in speed or at least keep freely moving. If this can not be done, then most likely there is a difficulty in reading the true power output and input. Dave -Original Message- From: Harry Veeder hveeder...@gmail.com To: vortex-l vortex-l@eskimo.com Sent: Sun, Dec 11, 2011 12:53 pm Subject: [Vo]:Acceleration Under Load acceleration under load effect, by deepcut66 http://youtu.be/vBDOOSOhbz0 The previous setup had physical limitations although it was excellent for demonstrating the AUL [acceleration under load] effect. This setup lends itself better to harnessing the effect for power-generation. I've done away with the Bedini drive circuitry and replaced it with a 12v/6w motor from an Audi message-pump system : http://www.ebay.co.uk/itm/12v-DC-electric-motor-UK-SELLER-/110739940158?pt=UK... This gives me twice the RPM for a third of the input power, coupled with the fact that the rotor has 24 poles, arranged N/S i can now get higher frequencies. This is running at around six or seven hudred Hz. According to the meters more power is coming out than going in, but we all know how deceptive things can be and i can't do proper measurements until i get my hands on a scope, which i will get in the new year.
Re: [Vo]:Acceleration Under Load
On Sun, Dec 11, 2011 at 9:52 AM, Harry Veeder hveeder...@gmail.com wrote: According to the meters more power is coming out than going in, but we all know how deceptive things can be and i can't do proper measurements until i get my hands on a scope, which i will get in the new year. DVM's are notorious for responding in a nonlinear fashion to spiky waveforms. That sort of error is the usual cause of overunity in claimed overunity magnetic devices such as Bedini promotes. If that were otherwise, Bedini could make a device which would run without input power. He can't.
Re: [Vo]:Acceleration Under Load
I am confused about the purpose of the experiment. Is this some kind of free energy device? If it really works, you should be able to drive the input with the output and have it to accelerate in speed or at least keep freely moving. If this can not be done, then most likely there is a difficulty in reading the true power output and input. Dave -Original Message- From: Harry Veeder hveeder...@gmail.com To: vortex-l vortex-l@eskimo.com Sent: Sun, Dec 11, 2011 12:53 pm Subject: [Vo]:Acceleration Under Load acceleration under load effect, by deepcut66 http://youtu.be/vBDOOSOhbz0 The previous setup had physical limitations although it was xcellent for demonstrating the AUL [acceleration under load] effect. his setup lends itself better to harnessing the effect for ower-generation. I've done away with the Bedini drive circuitry and replaced it with a 2v/6w motor from an Audi message-pump system : http://www.ebay.co.uk/itm/12v-DC-electric-motor-UK-SELLER-/110739940158?pt=UK... This gives me twice the RPM for a third of the input power, coupled ith the fact that the rotor has 24 poles, arranged N/S i can now get igher frequencies. This is running at around six or seven hudred Hz. According to the meters more power is coming out than going in, but we ll know how deceptive things can be and i can't do proper easurements until i get my hands on a scope, which i will get in the ew year.
