I have posted this to Vortex due to the closeness of this to Bill's page on energy sucking antennas which I now see is a misunderstanding of what this post covers.
http://amasci.com/tesla/tesceive.html Ok, I know few people are willing to propose that energy can be created, but really that comes down to a philosophical debate similar to the number of angels that can fit on the head on a pin. Energy can be converted from one type to another, but does that not involve energy creation in one place in one form and destruction in another in another form? Also if a device appears to create energy we can never know that an equivalent amount of energy is not being extracted from the vacuum of space or lost from somewhere else or everywhere else. Therefore let's keep faith and philosophy out of this and stick to logic, whatever you believe with respect to energy creation this does not have any impact on the possibility of this to work. *What I promise in reading this email is that you will see a very convincing way to create energy*, we may never know if this creation is balanced by some destruction somewhere else. So, say you have a DC generator, as you turn the rotor it outputs DC from cutting the magnetic line of force from the stator, this generates a voltage which induces a current in the rotor. This current produces a force that opposes the rotation. So what would happen now if we were to increase the gap between the stator magnets and the rotor? The induced voltage would be reduced and the current would therefore be reduced and there would be less drag as you attempt to turn the generator at a given speed. Now there are clearly many ways we could increase the electrical energy produced despite the large gap, one of these is interesting however. We know that electrical power put simply is amps x volts and that it is inducing a given voltage say now only 2 volts, what if we increase the current flowing through the rotor by (for instance) adding a source of current in series with the rotor. If this source of current is putting say 10 amps through the rotor where before there was only 1, then the 5 volts is now 5v x 10amps making for 50watts induced .vs 5v x 1A making 5 watts. Alas this is not free energy, by putting more current through the rotor windings the magnetic motoring force that opposes the applied rotation is also increased, Lenz Law. I think this is very easy for anyone to understand, the drag from driving a normal DC generator is dependent on the current and resultant magnetic forces created by the rotor. So no free energy yet, but we see that even if we must add a source of electrical power to provide the increased amps, by doing so you can increase the energy produced by a given electromotive force (voltage). If that were somehow not so then we just invented an energy destruction device above because there will definitively be more drag What if we had an AC generator? Turns out we could do the same thing, we could do it by actively pumping correctly phased AC current through the generator coils. Trying to short the generator coils however reduces the loading on the generator (unlike the DC generator) often causing them to speed up, this is because the impedance (self inductance) of the generator coils move then to almost 180 degrees out of phase with the rotor magnets, the generator coils do such a good job of resisting changes in the magnetic field they end up creating an almost opposite EMF. A generator with low resistance windings and high core losses can be easily made to speed up by shorting the generator coils, this is not free energy though. But there is a low tech way to do it, if we select a well chosen capacitor to form a resonant tank circuit with the generator coils then the phase will not be 180 degrees and the magnetic field from the generator coils will never cancel the field created by the rotor even if they have thousands of amps flowing through them creating a magnetic field 100's of times stronger. Another feature is that the current is built up just like pushing a child on a swing. Eventually though a real circuit will encounter losses that stop the growth of current. We also need to apply a well matched load that doesn't reduce too much of the built up current. Also apparent is that by increasing the current through the generator coils it will increase the drag, we will again need to apply more kinetic energy as the repulsion as the magnet approaches will be increased as will the attraction as it tries to leave. (at 180 degrees it is repulsion on both sides which balances out to zero, almost no drag) We can use this same principle in a transformer using a resonant tank circuit on the secondary, actually a Tesla Coil is meant to be just such a resonant transformer. But instead of physical drag, with a transformer you can readily observe that the secondary will create a voltage in the primary that opposes the current we are inputting, this will require increasing the voltage input. So we can see that by increasing the current which we can do with a mere resonant tank circuit we can increase the energy induced, but by doing so we create a field that attempts to stop the driving force of the induction. It is important to note that nothing changes with the source electromotive force to induce more energy and that given enough super-sized superconductive wire the energy you could generate could be enormous. It is merely that it takes more energy (torque, voltage) to keep generating it. BUT, WHAT ABOUT AN EM WAVE!?! PHOTONS! Resonant tank circuits are used to amplify the power received from radio transmissions. A ferrite loop antenna for instance has a ferrite rod which is magnetized by the magnetic component of AM radio wave. The interesting thing is that this works much like the AC generator, but with one very important difference. The reception of the energy in a radio does not load the transmitter outside of the nearfield. (inside the nearfield it is a transformer and does do so) Also if there is any doubt about this, what about EM energy from astronomical sources? The source of the EM energy might be thousands of light-years away and stopped existing eons ago. Do you see that it does not matter to the pickup coil if there is an alternating magnetic field created by a rotor magnet or a free particle of magnetic and electric flux. The photon induces a voltage in the wire and is equally able to increase a voltage by 5v onto a pico-amp current or a kilo-amp current just as the rotating flux from the rotor does in an AC generator. But the energy it generates in the kilo-amp current is huge and in the pico-amp current it is small. The difference is that the field from the receiver can't destroy energy at the transmitter. And while it might 'poison' the field for other receivers, it never does so for it's self due to the cap providing the reactantce which keeping the EM created by the pickup coil/antenna away from 180 degrees. The trick I will admit is that with radio reception, you need the Q of the tank circuit to be extremely high to build up enough current with the tiny voltages received, although battery-less crystal radios can power loudspeakers with good design. Indeed it might require superconductors and perfect capacitors (superconductor and vacuum?) to readily reach current levels that will produce enough current with just broadcast energy. So the challenge then is to create a transmitter and receiver, but this is where the practicality of this comes into question. You don't want to have to have large distances between the transmitter and receiver, and you also what high directionality (dish, waveguide etc) so that the receiver gets as close to 100% of the radiation and both of these requirements call for frequencies above 100mhz if the free energy device isn't going to be huge.. But working with such high frequencies is difficult, indeed my oscilloscope only goes up to 20mhz. So working at such high frequencies is no walk in the park. And yet you could readily reach very high levels of overunity. This is as far as I have got, though I do have some musings on collapsing currents inducing EMF's that find reflection in the environment and return to induce energy, this would fit with the observations, but it doesn't lead to a an easy to analyze concept. It is also true that I have barely touched on the subject of loads. Obviously a load in series with a resonant LC tank circuit would need to be low resistance to allow large currents to build up. If it was inductively coupled to the coil you would need a very high impedance load. But in an ideal LC circuit with no resistance and no radiation resistance then the energy captured each cycle would increase as the voltage was contributing to a larger and larger current. What I am not so clear on is the radiation resistance, if this is directly related to the reception ability then maybe I must break my promise, maybe (I can't tell yet) the radiation resistance and the reception ability are perfectly correlated. If this is the case then when you encounter a 5w transmission and build up a current through resonance you would end up losing 5w from radiation resistance? But would this occur once the 5w EM stream (5v 1A) induced 5w every second into the antenna? A helical coil and capacitor is a very poor radiator. Of course we can do things that make it a worse radiator some things that should stop it from being a radiator at all, but then does it absorb anything? Interestingly a toroidal transformer with an iron core seemingly could receive an EM field, but it would need to be the diameter of 1/2 the wavelength if it is to receive since the half nearer to the antenna must receive a different polarity to the back half. But then does a perfect toroid have the zero radiation resistance I assume it has? We no there are no net measurable magnetic fields outside of it, but it does create an inductive field, but I don't think it is considered as a radiation loss. So alas I think I have really found something, but I'll admit that since considering radiation resistance this has become slightly less clear to me. The fact that an ferrite toroid would not work at high frequencies requires it to be rather large to ensure that it is magnetized differently on the 2 sides. Thanks for reading. John Berry
