Electro Tech is an online community (with over 170,000 members) who enjoy talking about and building electronic circuits, projects and gadgets. To participate you need to register. Registration is free. Click here to register now.
Welcome to our site! Electro Tech is an online community (with over 170,000 members) who enjoy talking about and building electronic circuits, projects and gadgets. To participate you need to register. Registration is free. Click here to register now.
I have no idea. If I can't find any guidance I will have to employ someone with the right skills. I expect the circuit will need work on both the input and output to provide a stable supply to the inverter.
I understand that a DC/DC converter method is better than the resistance or switched resistance methods but I don't know what construction or parts are involved.
So how are you figuring you can get enough energy from yourgnerator to both charge the 12 volt battery plus power the 500 watt inverter and its rated load through your 3 amp capable UF5408 diode that by systematic voltage and current limits won't let you have much over 40- 50 watts?
By basic design of your circuit the whole stepping up of the 12 VDC to 240 VAC then transforming it back down to 30 VAC to make 42 VDC is pointless given the 42 VDC part of the circuit could easily be made to work at 12 VDC by using more current.
My point is your device will not work because the numbers don't add up to anything but a power draw on the battery no matter how you factor them out or change the circuit beyond simply eliminating in the inverter to transformer part of it and just running it like oddly design pulse drive motor and nothing else.
Simply put, it will not ever spin the rotor and self charge the battery from its own operation without some (yet to be defined) external energy input like an external mechanical power source spinning the rotor to make up for the systematic losses.
Personally, I think you are anything but a properly educated "professional scientist" or anything else.
I didn’t come on this forum to explain the detailed workings of my circuit but to explore a supercap storage system. Through the help of another abroad I have now done that.
All I will say is that when you engineer around Lenz’s Law there is a lot more energy available from DC spikes to keep the battery (or supercap storage system) topped up while it provides the energy for the drive coils and the output.
So, it doesn't work and you won't admit to it directly being if it did work you would not be here having questions about how big of capacitor bank you would need to keep it running given any size of capacitor bank that kept the 12 volt part of the circuit stable enough for the inverter to stay powered would do just fine.
What we do know so far is, (My [Pew - Pew - Pew] bullet points.)
1. You cant/wont explain it in detail despite it being a very simple circuit.
2. You claim to be part of some sort of world wide secret science sect that know how to make apparent overunity work yet you need a very simple concept explained to you by us uneducated commoners.
3. More people than myself have seen and played this game played out ad nauseum and it never goes anywhere productive, just like all pseudo-science BS does when held the flame of even basic reality.
4. I'm part of a world wide secret science sect and I can assure you , you're not on our roster for obvious reasons. (not debatable on your behalf either.)
And yes, I do know Lenz's laws and I don't think they apply here quite as you are implying them to.
Nothing unexpectedly new there on the free energy concepts. Same game, same old ending.
You are right, Im not trained in electronics but in radiation physics and I should certainly not be on the radar of your secret little group. I'm just an explorer seeking advice on an aspect of a personal project to broaden my horizons.
On the other hand the tone and content of your posts speak volumes about you and you are very welcome to keep your own world view. Thankfully it's not one I share. . . . .
How do you get a tone (or volume) of anything from a standard text font and a few note cards worth of text, without using a whole lot of projected imagination on your part?
Trying to use weak strawman deflections/personal attacks to get things off your own topic when you get cornered in something you know you can't explain your way out of with real unbiased science and facts doesn't work with me.
You're touting basic level overunity drivel here (and we all know it, including yourself) which put the explanations and defence of your claims in your court, not mine or anyone else's, (who everyone, but you are, as people is totally irrelevant to all of it) and everyone knows you types cant/wont ever put your claims up for legitimate scrutiny let alone independent confirmation and it has zero to do with you or anyone else's own 'safety' or anything else because we all know that the first time anyone comes up with a real working device they will in fact be wealthy beyond their wildest dreams and or they will literally revolutionize the world as we know and see clean energy and power production and absolutely nobody could stop them or it once it becomes factual public knowledge.
Now that I have had a few hours to ponder on this design here are a few obvious pointless process issues with it.
First, being the 42 VDC part of the circuit being derived from a transformer (at best 70 - 90% efficient for the likely size used) in series with a power inverter (at best 85 - 90% efficient for this size). Why? What is the point given that a second higher voltage winding set could be added over the existing 12 volt one and be used as a direct near zero loss source for the 42 VDC?
It could be done that way or the existing 12 volt coil set be used as the 42 volt power concept is but at a lower voltage and higher current where a second lower voltage coil set would take the place of the existing 12 volt coil sets thus reducing the whole devices primary working voltage down to a common single voltage working level.
Next, the present switching circuit is pointless given it could be done far better with any number of improved timing/triggering circuits including going so far as to eliminate it and replace with a simple mechanical points based setup.
Given just those few simple design changes, if this thing really can run on its own without an external power input (I know damn well it can't), then multiple energy wasting steps would have been eliminated thusly making its true useable energy output even higher, while at the same time having reduced the parts count and construction cost substantially for it.
Now as for my views on the overunity/Perpetual Motion tech being suppressed technology while somehow it can supposedly be easily figured out and built out of common non discriminant parts and components and by people who clearly have very little to even outrightly wrongfully bad understandings of basic STEM principles, yet at the same time, every person with even a basic working knowledge of any level of the STEM fields in every tech/engineering forum in the world is somehow in on the willing and forceful continued suppression of such tech, REALLY?
If people like me are in on suppressing it, what exactly are we supposedly getting for such actions and from whom that could possibly motivate us to continue to use the current energy systems that cost us money and work when we could obviously build our own OU/PM devices and run all our energy consuming everything's in our lives for near free? Us suppersing it make zero sense whatsoever.
To anyone with half a working brain, it's pretty obvious it's not because we have some absurdly poor understanding of basic reality and cant possibly follow the explanations of anything as supposedly obviously basic as is implied to be in play behind these devices workings.
And yet somehow, we can still have easily demonstrable in depth and detailed hands on working knowledge and experiences in and of the same fields of physics required to make such device out of either simple or even very complex components and related designs.
You can't be too dumb to use a hammer and nail yet be easily seen and understood to be an accomplished master craftsman at the same time,while in the same instance the guy who clearly has no detailed understandings of such work to the point he can't even begin to explain the basics of said work to you is the person who knows more than you and everyone like you.
It does not work that way. Like recognizes like by action and stupid cant pass itself off as being of superior knowledge and skill without stepping up and proving its proclaimed place in the legitimate intelligence and skills hierarchy.
As for my own views of why I tear these sort of half-wit theories apart, well to be fair, anyone and I mean anyone, is free to prove me wrong at any time by simply posting a set of blueprints, schematics and a Bill Of Materials list to build such a device.
Any yet that's somehow an impossible task to ask for despite the profound claims that such a device can be built from common and simplistic basic materials and designs that even some half-wit, who knows near nothing about any working form of the STEM fields in play, can somehow make work on their own.
BUT, given that how many centuries have passed since such claims of such devices have came and went, I really doubt anyone's going to step up and prove me, and everyone else like me, wrong here or anywhere else in any forthcoming timeline.
Supposed well understood and simple world changing secrets like this can't stay hidden yet be everywhere and bonehead simple to make at the same time. It's an utterly obvious contradiction in the 'suppressed tech' conspiracy theory claims that can't be ignored yet nobody from the believers side will ever explain, rather like the their designs.
Personally, I think that if such tech does exist the ones suppressing it are the supposed creators being it's clearly them who will say and do absolutely everything in their power to never reveal any working confirmable details about how their supposed OU/PM device and how they are built and function.
I mean, really? If you make a claim to have something and then run away like a ignorant butthurt coward, just to go and hide under absurdly lame unfounded excuses and projectionistic personal attacks, rather then prove yourself, is that really the other persons who are suppressing your supposed knowledge?
I am more than happy for you to think all of those things. It suits me fine, especially as you have just beautifully demonstrated to all the members why no one in their right mind would want to share certain types of new ideas on a forum like this. While I'm sure most of the members here are well meaning, capable, educated and considerate people, those with your attitude and approach are exactly why new energy developments are not yet mainstream. On a global scale its called 'Fear' and 'Vested Interest'.
Whereas I am following the full and time honoured scientific method of practical experimentation, gathering data, (in this case based on nearly 60 years of research and patents by others), repeating and validating such data and then contributing to the theoretical framework, you on the other hand are just stomping around within the confines of your own worldview getting irritated by a view that does not accord with yours.
There are two types of sceptics in this world; open minded and closed minded. Only the former can lead to new discoveries and technological developments. I know which one I am and it's seems increasingly evident which one you are. I also think that if you were genuinely interested in testing new ideas in this area you would get the blueprints and information yourself for they are freely available with only a little digging and make your own investigations. I did not come on here with a mission to change anyones mind for there aren't enough hours in the day and its not my role to short circuit the process of you discovering what is real or unreal in this universe and what does or does not work. I came on with a simple technical query. All your comments have just confirmed that there are many people who are happy to proclaim foul play and how life's unfair but then not lift a finger to actually change anything. If on the other hand you had said "well what sort of information do you have that makes you think it worth spending time, money and effort exploring this type of generator and electronics" then I might well have shared all sorts of published docs. However, I am not a scapegoat for your sentiments about new ideas and I'm not going to share anything with someone who thinks it's ok to attack me for getting on with my own personal projects and enquiries. Who would!
The best person to test an interesting idea is the person asking the question and not some third party. We all take on faith the findings of others in most areas of our lives but there are some areas where, for a host of reasons, it is appropriate to find out for ourselves. That's what I'm doing and it should have no impact whatsoever on you and your journey.
So you stay safe with the 'a priori' views of your secret 'Mythbusters' group, or whatever it thinks of itself as, for you are obviously well matched. Bon voyage!
Hi tcmtech,
With people like this it is pointless using logical reasoning. I just gave up after a few posts. There is a quote I saw somewhere "Don't confuse the argument with facts" That fits this situation perfectly. I remember being in the same position as the OP when I was about 8 years old. I had been bought a toy steam engine and I wanted to drive a generator with it to power a heater to heat the boiler. My father explained why it was not possible in terms that an 8 year old could understand.
With people like this it is pointless using logical reasoning. I just gave up after a few posts. There is a quote I saw somewhere "Don't confuse the argument with facts" That fits this situation perfectly.
Their game can be spotted a mile away simply because their #1 fall back excuse for not showing anyone anything is that it's we are too stupid to understand and thusly they can't be bothered to reveal their reality to the world while at the same time screaming that the world needs to see the reality of what they have.
How is it that we are too stupid to understand yet have no problem putting forth the basic effort to show why we don't think their claims are real while at the same time they claim to have something that so obvious anyone can do and understand it, but oddly enough can they can never be bothered to prove their ends validity?
They say they want everyone to believe as they do yet, for whatever daft reasoning, not one of them can ever be bothered to put forth even the most basic show of confirmable proof that would easily win all of us over to their side in less than 5 minutes while also writing the very history and science books into a new era of enlightened discovery that they own and command.
They say they want to talk about it yet always refuse to actually talk about the stuff that gets questioned. They say they want to teach us yet when asked to teach us what we are not seeing they can be bothered to say a damn thing that's educational.
So, once again , we are here where we are now getting nothing of value or proof of anything other than the continued confirmation that the OU/PM crowd does not in fact have anything real to support themselves with and everyone on both sides knows it.
open minded and closed minded. Only the former can lead to new discoveries and technological developments. I know which one I am and it's seems increasingly evident which one you are.
While I'm sure most of the members here are well meaning, capable, educated and considerate people, those with your attitude and approach are exactly why new energy developments are not yet mainstream.
Yes, most here are open minded and considerate plus quite willing to listen to anyone who is willing to actually explainsomethig when asked to do so no matter how basic or complex it is which pretty much make the lack of your ability to give proof of your claims your fault and not ours. We are listening so get to talking and showing us where we are factually wrong in our views!
Whereas I am following the full and time honoured scientific method of practical experimentation, gathering data, (in this case based on nearly 60 years of research and patents by others), repeating and validating such data and then contributing to the theoretical framework,
those with your attitude and approach are exactly why new energy developments are not yet mainstream. On a global scale its called 'Fear' and 'Vested Interest'.
What attitude? The one of being skeptical because you type can never and have never once produced a single shred of workable proof of your claims to anyone anywhere? How is that the fault of the recipient and not the source?
You want us to believe so get to showing us something we can confirm ourselves on any level even if we have to use your own proclaimed scientific processes to do it no less. If you had to have learned what you know from someone else so why is it so impossibly hard to convey that same teaching and learning process to anyone beyond you now?
If there is some scientific process you have that we need to see then show us what it its so we can learn to use it. Our ignorance, due to your lack of you teaching us something new is not at fault here. You have no clue as to what any of us does onrdoesnto know so until you show us something you cant know that reality any better than we can know yours. The bottleneck in all of this not on the recipantend because you have no idea what anyone where does or does not understand.
For all you know I do in fact have my own OU/PM machines that do in fact run every energy consuming aspect of my life while giving me the capacity to not have to work for a living like anyone else unless I want to. Prove me wrong!
There are two types of sceptics in this world; open minded and closed minded. Only the former can lead to new discoveries and technological developments. I know which one I am and it's seems increasingly evident which one you are.
Yes and you have quite solidly proven that when confronted with those who want to learn from you you cant produce squat while also feeling its their fault you can't. You have no clue who knows what or does or does not have the capacity to understand anything you may say yet proclaim you do and to such a level you cant be bothered to show your work while at the same time obviously can be bothered to argue out pointless excuses for your not producing anything that is remotely useful in supporting any of your claims.
The ball is still very much in your court so get to producing. We are all very much still listing here even if you have mistakenly convinced yourself otherwise.
I and others made an active efor to give a few tips on how to improve the theoretical efficiency of your device so wheres your counter contribution to that? Obviously we are listening and thinking so why try and blame us for your lack of ability to produce anything?
I also think that if you were genuinely interested in testing new ideas in this area you would get the blueprints and information yourself for they are freely available with only a little digging and make your own investigations.
What makes you think that I and many other here don't already own and have read a libraries of such data and have not spent countless hours just trying to make any of it work only to find every given design is utter crap and that every person like you who comes along is as equally useless in showing us what we are supposedly missing as the one who came before you and the one before them and so on?
I did not come on here with a mission to change anyones mind for there aren't enough hours in the day and its not my role to short circuit the process of you discovering what is real or unreal in this universe and what does or does not work. I came on with a simple technical query.
And you don't have to change anyone's minds. Just one will do, so get to doing it by answering our technical queries in fair response to our answering yours and the rest will follow! You came here ask a simple set of questions and get answers that are easy knowledge for us to understand so why do we not get the return of that from you?
If on the other hand you had said "well what sort of information do you have that makes you think it worth spending time, money and effort exploring this type of generator and electronics" then I might well have shared all sorts of published docs.
But I and we did! several of us asked for proof and you promptly dropped the ball and wen onto blaming our knowledge base you know nothing about for it. That seems pretty arrogantly shallow and dang near petty stupid from our views.
However, I am not a scapegoat for your sentiments about new ideas and I'm not going to share anything with someone who thinks it's ok to attack me for getting on with my own personal projects and enquiries. Who would!
But you are the one who refuses to give up any info on you proclaimed concepts. We aren't. Nobody attacked you, unless you think that being asked questions so that we can better understand what you are doing is an attack. Which if so, then why the hell did you come here and attack all of us with your questions? Did you think that if you attacked us nobody here would reciprocate that back to you?
By your own definition of attacking someone you are very much the primary perpetrator here given you are who made the thread! We didn't go looking for you. You came here and willingly attacked us first so own up to it!
The best person to test an interesting idea is the person asking the question and not some third party. We all take on faith the findings of others in most areas of our lives but there are some areas where, for a host of reasons, it is appropriate to find out for ourselves. That's what I'm doing and it should have no impact whatsoever on you and your journey.
Then you clearly have no clue what the real scientific process is and how it works to prove what is real and what is not. Independent third party confirmation of your process of discovery is exactly what the scientific process is about. It's not about everyone else proving your idea and concept is real. Its about you proving it to everyone else to where they can dissect and then replicate it and confirm your discovery.
Utter failure of your ideas to take off is not the fault of those wishing to confirm your work. It's yours for your utter lack of providing workable instruction and references for them to go from and there is no excuse you can come up with that make your lack of ability to produce anything viable everyone else's fault for their not being able replicate and confirm your work.
Extraordinary claims require extraordinary proof and the viability of that proof to stand up to conformational scrutiny only comes from the source of said claim. You made a outrageous claim then got asked to own up to it, and didn't, and it got you called out on that failure, and you don't like it and clearly wish to blame your accusers, for your failing to provide proof of your claims to them.
So you stay safe with the 'a priori' views of your secret 'Mythbusters' group, or whatever it thinks of itself as, for you are obviously well matched. Bon voyage!
Yea, run away and hide. We all knew it was going to end this way. It always does without exception, as if it was some sort of unbreakable scientific law behind OU/PM discussions.
i'm an engineer. as an engineer, my goal in life is to solve problems. it's engineers who made human slavery obsolete by inventing machines to efficiently replace humans in many types of back breaking work. as an engineer, i would love to solve the world's energy needs in as simple and inexpensive a way as possible, because the consequences of not doing so, would be a return to slave labor. i would be the last one to suppress any technology that solves the world's energy needs. however, the laws of physics set some limitations on what's feasible. one of those limitations is that if i put 100 units of energy into a system, i won't get 100 units of work out of it. the only way to break this deadlock is to add some more energy continuously to keep the system doing work. this additional energy in many cases is some type of fuel, either chemical or nuclear, or electromagnetic. i would include solar panels in the electromagnetic category, and gasoline is a good example of chemical energy, and U235 in a reactor is a good example of nuclear fuel. since we already know (many of us by experience) that a machine is less than 100% efficient, then the answer to the worlds energy needs lies not in making a machine that is more than 100% efficient, but in making machines that approach 100% efficiency, and finding as abundant and inexpensive a fuel source as possible. no, we are not "suppressing" or "hiding" anything. you brought something and put it on the table and asked us to help you figure out how to make it work. to do that we need to analyze the device, to know what makes it tick. there are several anomalies in the way this device is designed. there seem to be several assumptions made in the design that don't add up. there doesn't seem to be any input mechanism to fuel the system. when asked what the energy input was you told us, basically that the motor/generator element essentially drives itself. you seem to get offended when we tell you that the thing leaks heat all over the place.
TL;DR, don't waste your time and effort bucking the laws of physics, physics always win. if you put the same time and effort into improving the efficiency of machines, or finding the "fuel of the future", you might actually accomplish something.
as an engineer, i would love to solve the world's energy needs in as simple and inexpensive a way as possible, because the consequences of not doing so, would be a return to slave labor. i would be the last one to suppress any technology that solves the world's energy needs.
Pretty much everyone's is in that same boat and even if any joint group work did produce such a device we all know somebody in that group would leak the findings out to the world for either huge personal gains or honest betterment of society which pretty much say that all claimed designs that are obviously not in the real world doing what they are claimed to do are that way because they don't work.
Between human greed, lust for fame, or simple honest want to make the world a better place such designs if even one did work would never stay suppressed for long let alone every single one of them for as long as they have been claimed to exist.
As for those who use "TL;DR" as and excuse for not reading something because they are too lazy, ignorant or afraid of a little 'butthurt bad feels' for having reality shoved down their throat, I have come to associate that not with 'Too Long; Didn't Read' to mean 'Took Laxative; Didn't React', as in they are full of sh!t and can't get over themselves!
i'll keep that in mind.... i've always taken TL;DR as being in the same vein as "to sum it all up", and that's how i use it. i don't use it to say "never mind all the stuff i just wrote"
I only learned of it a few weeks ago myself as the - Too Long; Didn't Read - version. Before that I can't say I ever saw it enough to remember it in any way good or bad.
I guess it's the new weak fake superiority/self importance based insult thing for a certain type of internet troll that feels they are too important (more like too afraid of butthurt feelings from being proven wrong) to need to actually read anything that might possibly inform or refute their position on something and I rather expect it to start popping up a lot more with those types. They hate being ignored so it's only fitting they would think it would bother everyone else as much as it bothers them too.
This site uses cookies to help personalise content, tailor your experience and to keep you logged in if you register.
By continuing to use this site, you are consenting to our use of cookies.
