--- Mike Monett <[email protected]> wrote: But we still > don't know if this circuit is the one he is using: > > > http://escribe.com/health/thesilverlist/m59282.html Great work here: I see you have the jist of things. The 330 k however might be better represented as 1 k, or 1000 ohms, as this is the actual resistance of the 23 gauge wire coils, some 9 miles of wire, about a 80 lb coil. > The only information Harvey posted on his process > was contained in > this post > > > http://escribe.com/health/thesilverlist/m59183.html > > If you think this diagram > > > http://groups.yahoo.com/group/teslafy/files/BRS/BRT.jpg > > is the same as this one > > > http://www3.sympatico.ca/add.automation/misc/2eb56731.gif > > then please let me know. If it is, then in this > application it can > be replaced by a single resistor. Yes it is. I dont understand how things can be replaced by a single resistor however, > After looking at Harvey's diagram, I also had to > change my original > guess at the way his circuit operated. It turns > out I was right in > the first place: > > "Since the variac is in series with the tank, > the only way you > could obtain a resonance effect would be to > take the voltage > across the tank, or in parallel with L1 and > C1. However, your > description is the cell is also in series with > the tank."
I dont see where I offered that description. The variac is NOT in series with the schematic, it is in parallel as the source of voltage. Let me again describe what I am trying to convey, and also apologize for my apparent rude responce. Most of us know the full wave rectifier circuit. The circuit I am speaking of has exactly the same context, only the forward conducting diodes are replaced with inductors L1 and L2, and the reverse conducting diodes are replaced with capcitors C1 and C2, as I have shown in the diagram. On each side of the diamond, L and C are resonant to the source 60 hz frequency. 60 hz resonant circuits are not very common, due to the required sizings. Let me rehash some past info on this set up; The 60 henry, 1000 ohm coil, when inputed to wall voltage 60 hz will current limit things down to ~ 5-6 ma. It has ~20,000 ohms (measured by reactive current)impedance. Now if I was to simply to put in series a rectification for a DC current through a CS cell, we would then have to add the resistance of the cell to the equation. I am not doing that. As You know I could add a capacitor to resonate to that inductor. This would make a voltage rise to cause the current go up q times the original reactive current. The voltage rise can then be measured from the middle of the LC series combination to either outside end. Then we could replicate this same circuit in reverse, the order in which the L and C quantities are put in series with respect to the source) and again we would have a voltage rise, measured from the middle to either outside ending. But with respect to each circuit, when one circuit undergoes a voltage rise, so does the other, but each of these voltage rises are in opposite directions. We could call that a bipolar series resonant rise of voltage. Very similar to a ferromagnetic center tapped secondary on a transformer, each leg makes opposite voltage rises simultaneously, and when both legs are used we get twice the voltage that either side has individually. Similarly if instead of measuring the voltage rise on each side individually, by measuring from the center to an end, we could instead measure the voltage rise from center to center,(on both sides) and then we find the same thing found as an analogy on a center tapped ferromagnetic secondary of a transformer, that is a voltage doubling principle, where twice the voltage is registered across the center, then exists on the side alone. Here the analogy stops however. We do not normally allow a short to exist across the secondary of a center tapped secondary of a transformer, unless that transformer is like the NST, which is current limited on its output, by virtue of the large inductance of the secondary, and the flux leakage allowed in its core design by the placement of core shunts, that divert a portion of flux across the center of the core. But the orninary transformer would start consuming maximum current on its primary if we were to allow a short on its secondary. So what happens we we allow a short to exist between two bipolar series resonances? Of course there would no longer be any voltage rise, as we have shorted it out. But if we measure the current across that short, we find it to actually be very small, in fact that short has procurred a condition, where the measured current across the short is identical to the original reactance we started out with. In this situation then we are "current limiting" that midpoint path by the reactance of the outside components. This is actually then a figure 8 tank circuit. I do not know if you can access the schematic of this explanation, but it is at; http://groups.yahoo.com/group/teslafy/files/BRS/BRT.jpg Formerly when the circuit was open, we obtained a doubling of voltage across a measurement of the midpoint path. In the new circumstance of shorted voltage potentials, we can measure a doubling of the reactance currents found on the outside of the circuit. Each reactance essentially folows a zig zag path as shown in the schematic. A tank circuit has opposite directions of reactance currents, which is what makes the circuit appear as a much higher impedance circuit, and is what causes the inverse principle, the resonant rise of amperage with respect to what is inputed. Typically here what happens is that a single 60 henry 1000 ohm coil has a reactance near 20,000 ohms, so for wall voltage (120 volts AC) we obtain ~ 5 ma conduction. If we put ` .12 uf in parallel we still get the 5 ma inside the circuit, but now it is a tank circuit, so the measured input decreases to .5 ma, a value ten times less, for a ACTUAL tank q of 10. The ideal and real q factors do not match up well. If we instead series resonated the coil by placing the cap in series we should expect a q of 20,(20,000 ohms reactance/1000 ohms resistance) but only a q of 15 developes, so the ideal predictions do not always match the real ones. Internal capacitance between windings always degrades a resonance on multilayered coils. These two descriptions here are basically what can be found on every text on series and parallel res. I have simply taken things a step further, and formed a bipolar series resoanat circuit, which when shorted at the voltage rises converts to a figure 8 tank, which sure is hard for most folks to grasp, because they are accustomed to thinking that series resonance is one thing, and so is parallel reosnance, but this circuit combines both aspects. If open across the midpoint path, we have tow opposite series resoanances producing tow opposite voltage rises by series resonance. If shorted we then have a figure 8 tank circuit. Recall that for this example that simple tank circuit inputed .5 ma, but 5 ma remained INSIDE the loop. For the figure 8 tank, we will find 5 ma ONLY on the midpoint path, but on the coils itself we find 2.5 ma. Actually the cited 20,000 ohms impedanace has now become 40,000 ohms, and becomes apparent by the zig zag pathway each reactance takes in the schematic. In fact just like the full wave rectifier that converts AC to DC, the currents on the midpoint pathway sum to unity. We have merely "twisted" those reactance pathways by the figure eight schematic so that a portion of the circuit, ( the midpoint pathway) allows for the reactance currents to share a pathway summing to unity. In fact if we "untwisted" the figure 8 circuit, we would then have L1 and L2 in series on one side, and C1 and C2 in series on the other side of the loop, thus essentially we have a tank circuit of TWICE the internal impedance. This is where the confusion of the cited 20,000 ohms and 40,000 ohms has occured. In any case, topologically if we replace the short with a rectified CS cell, we still have 20,000 ohms impedance on both side of the cell, thus in series this is 40,000 ohms. The distilled water of the CS cell initially acts as a barrier of higher resistance, so when we start out we get a small resoanat voltage rise. Typically for a single CS cell a 10 volt input by variac will show about 20 volts across the cell, but as the cell becomes more conductive, we find the voltage across the cell rapidly dropping, so after 12 hrs at finish of batch with a ~ 1ma current limit measured across the short initially, the same 10 volt variac input then shows only 2.5 volts across the cell, but there is more current across the celll then is actually being inputed by the AC because now the circuit is acting as a tank, and not a bipolar series resonance. I will not go into how the diodes themselves change of degrade things, but they do so radically, depending on how many cells in parallel we employ. To continue here now, let us now imagine that the center midpoint pathway is actually a rectified CS cell. We start out with the outside components creating voltage rise, because the distilled water has a high resistance. The voltage of the outside resonances will rise according tho the resistance it sees as the load between them. The voltage rises according to the ability of the coils to do so by the Q of each coil. FROM EACH ACCORDING TO HIS ABILITY. Now as the cell becomes more conductive, the outside voltage rapidly falls, as it is more and more approximating the conditions of a short. If it were a short, it would be current limited by the reactance of the outside components. The amount of current obtained in a reactance is dictated by its impedance. It only needs that amount of current conduction to comply with Ohms law. TO EACH ACCORDING TO HIS NEEDS. Now the inventor of voltage rise by capacitive method was named MARX, but the Marx bank voltage increase principle has nothing to do with resonance. It is simply charging a lot of capacitors in parallel, and then making a new connection between the capacitors so that instead of being in parallel they are given new connections for discharge where they then appear in series. Now suppose we tried to do this with only two capacitors. This would be exactly what would occur in the above schematic if the coils were replaced with a resistance. Each capacitor is initially charged in opposite directions, by respective line connections to opposite potentials. The discharge would be twice the voltage stored on each capacitor. So how would we enhance that voltage discharge? To make it very much higher, even though only two capacitors are used? We would simply allow those capacitors to exist in a series resonance, where the additional increase of voltage beyond that being inputed would be attained to by series resonance. Thus in entirety the principle being espoused here is simply adapting the Marx voltage doubling principle to that of resonance. I hope I have satisfactorily explained these things now, so that one can grasp how resonance can be applied to act as a sort of bipolar resonant transformer. If need be I could cite jpegs with many meters showing this same principle with a collection of 14 gauge coils being resonated at 480 hz from AC alternator inputs, where in that case only .15 henry is employed, but similar high q factors develope, as the higher input frequency means that such large values of inductance then do not become neccesary, because with resoanace, frequency is everything as far as obtaining better q factors with smaller sizings. I am sorry about the name calling or nasty aspects here, and I am glad a mutual understanding can be reached,where we are all adults, and should act accordingly. Sincerely HDN > The cost of the coils is greatly exaggerated. It > is not $500 as he > claims. It might be closer to $25.00. PS check your prices for 9 miles of 23 gauge wire, as that is what these coils employ. ===== Tesla Research Group; Pioneering the Applications of Interphasal Resonances http://groups.yahoo.com/group/teslafy/ __________________________________ Do you Yahoo!? The New Yahoo! Search - Faster. Easier. Bingo. http://search.yahoo.com -- The silver-list is a moderated forum for discussion of colloidal silver. Instructions for unsubscribing may be found at: http://silverlist.org To post, address your message to: [email protected] Silver-list archive: http://escribe.com/health/thesilverlist/index.html List maintainer: Mike Devour <[email protected]>
