Melnichenko's Effect

Jagau posted this 15 February 2022 - Last edited 08 June 2022

Just a little reminder for the operation of a diode, forward and reverse bias.

Jagau

Liked by

Admin

Chris posted this 15 February 2022 - Last edited 08 June 2022

My Friends,

This is an Excellent Thread!

I would like to inject a small snippet: The Source

In Symmetrical Electromagnetic Induction, we have a singular Input and a Singular Output, symmetry exists between these two Inductors, MMF is equal and opposite, Output is Input minus Losses, or Losses = Input - Output.

In an Asymmetrical System, we have multiple Sources!

Input Inductor, POC_One and POC_Two are all inputs to the System, and two are also Outputs all at the same time!

Think on this, because each Coil works with the other, to Push, Pull and Push again in the System. MMF = InputMMF + POC_OneMMF + POC_TwoMMF = POC_TwoMMF. Or: 1 + -1 + 1 = 1.

So we have Force in the System, over and above the Input Symmetry that so many expect to see, it doesnot work that way!

You can say: Input Coil is POC_One's Source, POC_One is POC_Two's Source and POC_Two is the Input Coils Source.

This is why your Input Current comes down by a factor, as POC_Two's Current gets stronger, the Forward MMF reduces your Input Coil MMF from the Input Power Source!

So, to the Point, Diode Conduction, Forward Bias, is depends on what Source Created the Applied Voltage, so take a little time to see why there can be more than One Source in a System, an Asymmetrical System!

Best Wishes,

Chris

Liked by

Jagau posted this 16 February 2022 - Last edited 08 June 2022

Exactly my friend very good suggestion, there will be several and surely an asymmetry of more than two coils and more than one source.
I am only at the beginning of the demonstration and we will see during the evolution of the study of the Melnichenko effect, that this is due to an asymmetric system, this is what we will discover together.
I'm going very slowly so that everyone understands well and this with examples that are easy to study and that others can replicate (at least I hope so) as the thread evolves.
I think we owe it to Andrey Melnichenko with all the efforts he makes to educate us.
Jagau

Liked by

Admin

Chris posted this 16 February 2022 - Last edited 08 June 2022

Hey Jagau,

I agree, sorry!

Happy to assist, and experiment when you're ready 😉

Best Wishes,

Chris

Liked by

PutuGede posted this 17 February 2022 - Last edited 08 June 2022

Hi Jagau,

Maybe my note will speed up this experiment :

Mosfet should have fall time <10 nS, Iam using Infineon 6r099c6, use original one.
Use POC as L2, like what Wistiti does with his joule thief.
Find best Freq & duty cycle while there is no load on L1 & L2
Start with very low duty cycle, monitor on the mosfet drain, no load on L1 & L2
Adjust the load on L1 to find best result on L2 load.
Switch diode direction on L2 to find minimum input power, exactly the same as Wistiti experiment.

Hopefully this note will help.

Best regards

Putu

Liked by

Jagau posted this 17 February 2022 - Last edited 08 June 2022

Experiment no1 with the schematic here above;

On the first image I powered L1 with 2 X 1.5 V batteries and my oscillator circuit that you know. I placed an ammeter a on the negative of the 2 batteries in series in order to have an idea of the consumption of this one. Both coils have 75 turns 3 inch radius without core (air core)

As you can notice in the first image the total consumption is 26 ma just to power the circuit at 3 volts DC when no load is connected i.e. Led1 off and Led2 off.

On the second image I connected Led1 as a load and the consumption went from 26 ma to 16ma, so at this moment a drop of 10 ma. You will notice channel 1 (yellow trace) connected to the base of Q2 on the SRO when the pulse collapses at OFF time the blue trace, connected to Led1 appears and led1 lights up.

At the third image, it starts to be more interesting, when I connect the Led2, the consumption does not increase it remains at 16ma. This is called energy which is normally wasted and recovered on Led 2

Andrey Melnicehnko with his basic circuit demonstrated how to recover this wasted energy but he did much more than that, it is in the sequel that it is even more interesting. As my friend Chris said, the second source that was thus created will serve us for something just as interesting.The demonstration here is with Leds later in a subsequent experiment we will be able to admire all of Melnichenko's work with incandescent lamps.

My SRO, autonomous oscillator

More to come

Jagau

Liked by

Jagau posted this 17 February 2022 - Last edited 08 June 2022

We wonder why the consumption drops when we connect a load (led)?

I would explain it this way:
when the load is connected to the negative half wave in the secondary winding (i.e. when the core is demagnetized), less energy is spent on its magnetization, as evidenced by the drop in the current consumed when load 1 and load 2 are connected.

So the load consumes energy in the absence of a pulse in the primary winding, and thus, the work is done only on the magnetization of the air core. (L2 help L1, imagine with an iron core)

Andrey explains that with this basic circuit you can do it. But he did more than that.

Jagau

Liked by

Jagau posted this 19 February 2022 - Last edited 08 June 2022

The design of the second circuit experiment of A. Melnichenko will be this one.
A photo of his set up,

with the circuit used, original circuit of Andrey Melnichenko

By using incandescent bulbs instead of LEDs

I will be able to better gauge the wattages that occur in this type of arrangement.

Jagau

Liked by

ISLab posted this 19 February 2022 - Last edited 08 June 2022

Thank you Jagau for sharing and teaching with these very interesting experiments!

Can you share what is the frequency at which the SRO operates with these coils?

I'm still working on my current coils and will post shortly with details. But I have two questions that come as doubts even in my readings:

1. Is input current read through a digital ammeter reliable? What if there are narrow pulses of current drawn that it does not register? Can you check with oscilloscope on input current just in case?

2. When I get the current drop on adding a load, could it be that earlier (with no load) the current draw was higher as the secondary was shorted and was also drawing more current; and now that we added a load, the secondary draws less current and hence the primary also draws less? Can you check to ensure this is not the case?

Please don't misunderstand my intention here. I know there is OU here because this is the basis for the eternal torch. But when taking such readings, it would be useful to ensure that we eliminate all potential issues.

I myself am testing rigorously for such things before I post the results with my current coils.

Thank you again for this valuable sharing!

Liked by

Jagau posted this 19 February 2022 - Last edited 08 June 2022

Hey Islab
Thank you for your questions that I imagine everyone is wondering.

For your first question the frequency of SRO is Frequency 55.7 khz
At this frequency, especially if it is pulsed, the precision of a DDM is not there. At a maximum of 2 kHz the Fluke 115 has an accuracy of 2% whereas at 55 kHz we are far from accurate. Do not forget that the DDM is directly at the output of the batteries and not on the pulsed consumption of the LEDs.The oscilloscope is the ideal tool to measure accurately at these frequencies. As the experiment is only at its beginning, other experiments will come on precision. But with a DDM it only gives us a good idea of an increase or decrease.
Imagine A. Melnichenko used an analog meter to get just an idea if there is an increase or a decrease. Some analog meters can also read up to 2 and even 3khz but they are very expensive and designed on request only.

For the second question which is the whole basis of the explanation of Andrey's experiences, I am just beginning to have an idea of what is happening and a lot of questions still to be answered. But you will see in the following experiment with incandescent lamps and with frequencies close to 1.2 to 2.5 khz the responses with a DDM take on their full meaning. A. Melnichenko worked at these frequencies.

Unfortunately on the net there is not much replication of this experience, I am in research mode like you and the experience is still young. I suggest to all those who want to accompany me in this experience to come and replicate it with me, so that the experience will be more interesting for all.
Hope this answered
Jagau

Liked by

Mimo posted this 19 February 2022 - Last edited 08 June 2022

Hello all,

you can follow Andreї's posts here:

https://vk.com/id285085326

and Youtube : https://www.youtube.com/channel/UCEtqI2EhN32Mvq7Wp5G9Vpg/videos

Mimo

Liked by

Jagau posted this 19 February 2022 - Last edited 08 June 2022

Yes thank you Mimo
I know his VK site well.
I am registered as one of his fans
Jagau

Liked by

ISLab posted this 23 February 2022 - Last edited 08 June 2022

Hope this answered

Yes, thank you Jagau!

I suggest to all those who want to accompany me in this experience to come and replicate it with me

I hope to do that once I finish my present explorations.

Looking forward to your further steps and explanations!

Liked by

Brian posted this 24 February 2022 - Last edited 08 June 2022

Jagau thankyou for sharing your experiments

You ask the question

So the load consumes energy in the absence of a pulse in the primary winding, and thus, the work is done only on the magnetization of the air core. (L2 help L1, imagine with an iron core)

So I decided to try one of the cores I wound for the Eternal Flashlight.

Current draw with L1 and L2 unloaded was 13ma @3VDC

I then loaded L1 and current draw dropped to 10ma???

But Loading L1 and L2 increased current up to 22ma???

Why do we get these very different results between types of coils? I don't have that answer yet. Clearly I have more work to do understanding this.

I also seek to understand why you settled on the size air core you chose? Understandably a air core resonates at a higher frequency, but I need to investigate the effect of diameter of these. Why 3 inches and not 1 inch?

Thank you for sharing your experience Jagau and I look forward to the next lessons.

Kind Regards

Brian

Liked by

raivope posted this 24 February 2022 - Last edited 08 June 2022

Hi Jagau!

Interesting thread!

Yes, you need to test with incandescent bulbs for better amps, you need higher voltage, low resistance mosfet and right proportion of coils to be asymmetric.

If Melnichenko system works - I am sure it works on the same principle (saturation asymmetry) as I have seen a working device with a COP 1.7..2.1, running purely from the grid at 50hz. Kilowatt range and not a toy. I saw it and double-measured when I visited one inventor long ago.

But I want to make sure that you understand that there are different working principles of AU devices. Some start working even on low-freq and in a nonlinear range, some want fast transients (RF), wire length matches - those or more like RE devices. In RE devices you might need a ground and cannot connect the output directly to input.

But I am afraid that Melnichenko does a measurement error - because he measures only amps, which do remain constant, but there will be a phase shift, which is not recorded and actually it will not be AU. Althought his circuits do look professional and detailed.

I do not want to be pessimistic, I really do encourage you to continue testing. You may use magnet to give the iron a saturation bias, where it may enter also a decreasing permeability zone - might be interesting.

Any info of other replications or did his 75kW devices really work?

All the best,

Raivo

Liked by

Jagau posted this 24 February 2022 - Last edited 08 June 2022

Hi Brian
If you follow the first circuit well, the most important thing is the phasing of the coils.
When L2 is in demagnetization mode it does not consume anything, so the current at the output does not affect the current at the input, check the phasing you will have good results.
Glad to see you're not afraid to experiment and ask questions.

@Raviope
Andrey has 3 patents on what he discovered so after my first test it seems conclusive, yes with incandescent it requires more voltage and current than with Led. I have lowered the operating frequency to about 2khz, it will be easier to follow for everyone and also for measuring instruments such as DDMs and to have convincing readings.
For the measures he takes don't forget that he knows what he is doing. He has worked in electronic engineering in his country and by studying his videos you can see very well what he is talking about, trust him
Jagau

Liked by

Brian posted this 25 February 2022 - Last edited 08 June 2022

Thank you Jagau

yes you are correct - I have fixed the phasing.

Kind regards

Brian

Liked by

baerndorfer posted this 25 February 2022 - Last edited 08 June 2022

when i played around with Andrej M. circuit and 2 e-cores i got pretty good results very fast.

this is what i build..

on the left we can see the primary coil which is switched by mosfet and the trigger.

the secondary on the right has a POC coil as usual

now look at the thermal image and you know where the energy comes from..

regards!

Liked by

Admin

Chris posted this 25 February 2022 - Last edited 08 June 2022

Hey Baerndorfer,

Beautiful work My Friend!

This reminds me of the work of both Paul Raymond Jensen, and another Researcher, Harold Aspen.

Harolds work is almost exactly the same:

Harold had so much trouble from the Nutty Establishment, simply because the lack of basic understanding of the simple processes of Electrical Energy Generation!

Paul Raymond Jensen used a feed back winding on the center leg Coil, this gave a better end result, in the same configuration:

Your work always impresses me B!

Best Wishes,

Chris

Liked by

Jagau posted this 26 February 2022 - Last edited 08 June 2022

Nice build Baerndorfer

Indeed the small gap, between the two cores, it looks like Andrey's assembly
Have you had time to take some power readings? It would be interesting to know.

Thanks for sharing

8 years ago, another had done well, with English subtitles.

Watch the schematic of the T2 you will notice something familiar, and yes it is a POC configuration,T1 is just a standard step down Xfo.

Jagau

Liked by

Jagau posted this 27 February 2022 - Last edited 08 June 2022

The last video above is of Mykhaylo Balush he is a Ukrainian by birth.

These are people like us who want to live and I have a thought for them with everything they are going through right now. I myself have a lot of difficulty concentrating on my experiences at the moment, pretending that everything is fine is an understatement.

Jagau

Liked by

Jagau posted this 01 March 2022 - Last edited 08 June 2022

For the rest of the experiment I used an IGBT as a switch at the frequency of 1.55 Khz
I used 3coils for this experiment and 2 lamps. The one on the pole is 12 volts 3 watts and the yellow one on the right is 115 volts 3 watts.
The readings of the ammeter and voltmeter DDM will be more believable because in these frequencies they can measure more accurately.
On the first image;

Both lamps are off and we can see a consumption without any load of 6.01 watts

On the 2nd image the 2 lamps are lit with the same consumption, the two lamps are not lit at full power

You will notice that I used Andrey's configuration with 2 lamps and 3 coils, one coil of which is inserted in the open air core, there is no magnetic link between them. Even if one or the other of the two 3-watt incandescent bulbs is closed, the consumption remains the same.

It is all the same an interesting configuration to study it is as if other sources of tension seem to appear. The next ones will be on a resonant circuit.

Jagau

Liked by

Brian posted this 02 March 2022 - Last edited 08 June 2022

Hi Team

Thought it might be helpful to share a really simple build with great results styled on baerndorfer build.

I used a E Core, wound 1 meter as the primary and 4 meter as POC1 (CW) and POC2 (CCW) using Jagau SRO circuit.

Unloaded you note a current draw of 34mA (this is the same if I complete the transformer with a unwound core)

Then positioning the wound POC coils with a slight gap you can see the current draw decrease to 24mA while delivering about 5mA to the load LED

I have upscaled Jagau SRO circuit somewhat in another build using TIP31 and TIP32 for higher power and can deliver higher current to a larger load. But feel there is probably more tuning that can be done on the coil design. I welcome suggestions on how I might design these coil windings for better efficiency and possibly OU.

Kind Regards

Brian

Liked by

Jagau posted this 02 March 2022 - Last edited 08 June 2022

Nice demonstration Brian.
Indeed when Melnichenko discovered his effect, it was with an E core and a spacing like you did Brian and in this way he had a great success.

His first youtube setup, 5 years ago

Yes the SRO can be modified at will with more powerful BJT and with Mosfet too.

Bravo Brian

Jagau

Liked by

Admin

Chris posted this 02 March 2022 - Last edited 08 June 2022

Hey Brian,

One Meter of Wire will have a Resonant Wavelength around: 299,792,458.0 Hz or 299.792458 MHz, a very High Frequency for the average home Lab Equipment and difficult to achieve! Copper Wire is 96% of this Speed, due to latency of Copper.

In our Calculator, we have the ability to calculate this:

Resonance is important, this is where B, V and I are at maximum.

Energy Gains can be achieved when one finds Magnetic Resonance.

Best Wishes,

Chris

Liked by

Brian posted this 03 March 2022 - Last edited 08 June 2022

Thanks Jagau and Chris

Please accept my apology for my knowledge in this area. I ask if you may provide a little more guidance?

From my experiments and research on the core I used, I feel that practically these are only suitable for frequencies in the Khz range not Mhz required for magnetic resonance with the short windings used. The calculator shows that in order to get into the range of around 300khz I will need a primary winding of around 1000 meters. Which is not practical. So I expect that tuning with a Cap is required. Taking 1 meter again as a example we calculate that a 0.0047 pF cap is required, which again is difficult to tune given that there is some internal capacitance in the coil also which is difficult to measure at these sizes.

This is showing for practical design a much longer primary is required and probably ferrite cores are not ideal. Air cores might be more practical?

Which brings us back to Jagau's experiment with air cores.

Is this correct thinking or am I off track?

This experiment has prompted me to go back to the eternal flashlight builds and retest with a small air gap in the pot cores. I will report back on this on that thread.

Kind regards

Brian

Liked by

Jagau posted this 03 March 2022 - Last edited 08 June 2022

hey brian
The field of research is something very vast and captivating. In order to reproduce as faithfully as possible the experience of the Melnichenko effect, I proposed a first diagram with an Ecore. In order to understand the diagram I have with various biases trying to simply show what is going on.

Over time, it became apparent that the air core combination with a large condenser achieved the desired ends better. There is no saturation in an aircore like Don Smith did, so we don't have to worry about that detail. In addition, it has gone from 2 coils to 3 coils. The third coil having no magnetic relationship with the first two, as he so often describes.
One could then think of working on a POC and a parametric recovery of the voltages produced.

This will be the subject of the next experiments.

Jagau

Liked by

Brian posted this 03 March 2022 - Last edited 08 June 2022

Thanks Jagau - I look forward to following these.

Liked by

Admin

Chris posted this 03 March 2022 - Last edited 08 June 2022

Hi Brian,

Hey thats why we are here! To Help!

The tickle under the chin can be in the Duty Cycle, as Energy is Gained in the Time Domain, and a very short narrow Duty Cycle can act as a High Frequency, when in point of fact the Frequency can be down in the 10's of Killohertz or less, and the Duty Cycle may be 10% or less!

We also have to remember, a Voltage is "Generated"!

This means, as a function of Faradays Law, Voltage is a product of the Magnetic Field changing in Time and the Turns.

In other words: EMF = -N dΦ_B / dt

This means, in a well designed machine, the Voltage is classically a function of Faradays Law. Resonance can be Specified by Design, pretty much.

The Value of B, the Magnetic Field Density, is an important aspect in any Electromagnetic Machine. Most of the machines shown have had very minimal Magnetic Fields!

Soon, we will have more, we are at the point now, where steps ahead are going to be very much further that we are now! Of course, surrounding ourselves by Genuine People should be our main priority for now, as a group we need status and reliability in the eye of the Main Stream!

We have much of this already, visits are at an all time high.

Closely observing the T_On, when the Coils are at Maximum Interaction and Opposition Starts, of the Partnered Output Coils, is where one can make massive steps forward! Most overlook this, even though I have shown this in the Thread: Some Coils Buck and some Coils DONT

Observing this T_On time, and what the Coils are doing at this time, and maximising this Effect, in other words, getting the Magnetic Field, the Voltage up as high as possible, within reason, should be the Goal! Energy Density is a product of the Amplitude of these Quantities!

POC_One and POC_Two can reach very High Amplitude for very little Energy Input! But only when Parameters are met!

Best Wishes,

Chris

Liked by

Jagau posted this 09 March 2022 - Last edited 08 June 2022

Other pictures with

the 115 volt lamp only on

the 12volt lamp only lit

And power remains stable.

Jagau

Liked by

Jagau posted this 11 March 2022 - Last edited 08 June 2022

Before continuing Andrey's experiment, I think it would be a good time to verify the non-additive law of magnetic waves. We will come back to it later according to the results found. I'm actually doing a separate thread so as not to overload this thread which will surely be appreciated by many.

Jagau

Liked by

scalarpotential posted this 15 March 2022 - Last edited 08 June 2022

Hi all,

I see two coupled inductors that operate as flyback coils, the fields and voltages don't collapse instantly but slowly like a POC, they decay slowly through mutual inductance and currents, creating 2 regauged potentials with a working time longer than the duty cycle.

Is this a somewhat correct description of the circuit?

Ingenious if it works.

Cheers

Liked by

Jagau posted this 15 March 2022 - Last edited 08 June 2022

Melnichenko's experiment is Nonlinear inductance energy generator composed of 3 coils.

The basic premise as well explain Andrey is:

During demagnetization (break, decrease in current in the coil on the first rod) on the second ferromagnetic capacitor ) a special removable winding (third coil) is set which connects to the load only during demagnetization (does not participate not to magnetization) ). Thus, all the energy of the deposited secondary magnetic field can be transformed into additional useful energy per cycle.

Jagau

Liked by

Jagau posted this 15 March 2022 - Last edited 08 June 2022

Before going any further here is what I am trying to prove in another thread

The wave energy is determined by the wave amplitude.

On thread additive or not

Jagau

Liked by

Admin

Chris posted this 15 March 2022 - Last edited 08 June 2022

Hey Guys,

I agree with Jagau!

I would like to add, there are two phases, and not just the one:

Magnetisation Phase. ( Regauge )
Demagnetisation Phase. ( Work Region )

There must be a Magnetic Resonance, on the Magnetisation Phase, so as to achieve Maximum Voltage Potential, for a Minimum Input Power! Which requires some work to find this optimum Frequency and Duty Cycle, for a given Input Power.

On the Demagnetisation Phase, the Coils will release Energy, your Input is off, at their natural rate, depending on the Magnetic Fields Energy Density, which oppose. Bucking Magnetic Fields!

Magnetic Fields Buck, for both Magnetisation and Demagnetisation Phases.

Magnetic Resonance has nothing to do with Core or anything else, other than the Coils Natural Parameters. In other words; there is NO Magic here, its simply Magnetics!

The process becomes an Asymmetrical, Sawtooth Waveform, which we have shown many times on this forum! Energy is gained in the Time Domain!

I hope this helps?

Best Wishes,

Chris

P.S: Standing Wave Mechanics require specific configurations for 2B and or 2E, I have not figured out how to achieve 2B and 2E at the same time, B must be 0 to achieve 2E.

Liked by

scalarpotential posted this 16 March 2022 - Last edited 08 June 2022

Please look at 17:00, it is the same as the simple Melnichenko design, but it has a separate primary magnetizing coil:

Liked by

raivope posted this 16 March 2022 - Last edited 08 June 2022

Hi,

I have a theory that a bit differs.

If you have the ordinary flyback system it is not OU. Its requirement is to have coils further of each other, to create 2 superpositions in fields i.e. 2 dipoles, especially when they are opposing. NS and NS. But during the collapse you will have fluxes glued together - a single dipole NNSS. Magnetic material has a permeability (thus inductance) increase as well and this is where gains come from.

If this is not that simple then maybe there is needed some RF reflection magic to shake it that depends on wire length where the radiation does the dipole splitting-joining that happens by design. Sometimes external Tesla Transformer is used to inject RF into it. Did Akula use copper sheets in a coil that got RF from transients?

Thus I do not fully agree with that:

Magnetic Fields Buck, for both Magnetisation and Demagnetisation Phases.

During magnetisation (like Melnichenko) - even when there is no load - the core material has eddy currents that create opposition. POC has a diode short to do that. But during the demagnetisation - the idea is to have most of the core covered with coils to take energy out from everywhere. Exactly like Melnichenko does - he takes it from the primary and secondary creating one dipole.

Some say that you can collect energy from BEMF - its free? Not at all - if you take out from any part the energy it reduces the field bubble. Thing is that you get free when permeability is parametrically increased and that is done where you put collection coils.

I have seen a working system (transformer) long ago 50hz and sinewave (from grid). No RF. Worked when asymmetric load was put on it and went into saturation.

Does POC work on the different principle?

First question is - does POC work with sinewaves? Or does it require fast transient to generate a wave that reflects? If so - RF is a requirement.

Did VTA work on 60hz sinewave? Was there any magnetic field hack NS NS to NNSS?

What happens in Don Smith generator, where coils are wrapped (OPPOSINGLY) on stator magnets: N//S | N\\S?
Is there the same dipole thing happening? NS NS to NNSS?
Is the same dipole-splitting-joining thing happening in DS secondary (double mirrored coils) during modulation?

Just some thoughts...

Raivo

Liked by

Jagau posted this 16 March 2022 - Last edited 08 June 2022

Hi

Very good reflection Raviope, indeed A. Melnitchenko do not uset an ordinary flyback and it is based on the principle of superposition of the fields.
The gain comes from the parametric effect of the inductors involved and the increased energy density thus produced and the fields generated.
As you may have noticed in the experiment I did, the primary is an air core and the secondary is wound on a ferromagnetic core. As you probably know ferromagnetic materials have what is called zero inductive impedance (resistance) so no eddy current here. During demagnetisation, this is where all the work happens with proper phasing of the diodes acting as the key.

Jagau

Liked by

Admin

Chris posted this 16 March 2022 - Last edited 08 June 2022

Hi Raivo,

You are very far ahead in this field!

I will study your post in further detail, but on first read, I believe we are on the same page, only we see a slightly different view of the same things.

If you have the ordinary flyback system it is not OU.

This is true and must be realised by all readers! The Bedini SG was never an AU Machine by itself! As are all machines that follow this same basic concept! Flyback is NOT AU! Raivo is Correct!

Yes, the VTA worked on Sine Waves as do POC, but only in a specific configuration. I will cover this in more detail at a later date, some I have already covered.

DC Pulsing is, I believe easier to understand.

Regarding RF, this is an excellent point! There is what could be considered an RF Component in DC Pulsed POC but not so in AC POC, but primarilly due to the Mosfet Switching Characteristics, and not so much due to the Coils themselves, however, the Magnetic Resonance component may fall into the RF Domain depending on the Coils Geometry and Design that the individual chooses.

This may be true even if your frequency is not in the RF Domain! This is a broard topic and requires much more detail to cover properly.

Partnered Output Coils are the exact same principle as the Conventional Electric Generator, we have only added Asymmetry to a purely Symmetrical System!

The Electron's in each Copper Coil go through the very same processes in POC as they do in a Conventional Electric "Generator"! The Copper Cu Atom each having 29 Electrons, Each can be Freeed and Accelerated, depending on Magnetic Field Strength of each Opposing Field!

Magnetomotive Force Frees the Electron and Accelerates it, giving the Electron a Velocity, required for Current, and the Magnetomotive Force to do this is largely Free, due to the applied Asymmetry!

I do wish people would listen, as we have said here many times, Flyback is NOT the principle here!

Best Wishes,

Chris

Liked by

Melendor posted this 16 March 2022 - Last edited 08 June 2022

Hello Chris.
Lots of Information here for all the people that hear what you say.

I would like to add, there are two phases, and not just the one:

Magnetisation Phase. ( Regauge )

Demagnetisation Phase. ( Work Region )

There must be a Magnetic Resonance, on the Magnetisation Phase, so as to achieve Maximum Voltage Potential, for a Minimum Input Power! Which requires some work to find this optimum Frequency and Duty Cycle, for a given Input Power.

On the Demagnetisation Phase, the Coils will release Energy, your Input is off, at their natural rate, depending on the Magnetic Fields Energy Density, which oppose. Bucking Magnetic Fields!

Magnetic Fields Buck, for both Magnetisation and Demagnetisation Phases.

The process becomes an Asymmetrical, Sawtooth Waveform, which we have shown many times on this forum! Energy is gained in the Time Domain!

Gold Information here guys.

I always blocked POC1 in the Magnetization phase , so that no current flows when the DC power supply is ON.
However from what you have stated above , current must flow both when Mosfet is ON and OFF.

Will try the experiment with the new information as soon as posible.

Thank you !!!

~~~Melendor the Wizard

Liked by

Jagau posted this 16 March 2022 - Last edited 08 June 2022

Even if Andrey calls it a flyback energy device it's much more than that, if it was as simple as that many would have been able to copy it a long time ago.

To avoid repeating myself, read the entire thread to better understand the effect in order to replicate.

Jagau

Liked by

Admin

Chris posted this 16 March 2022 - Last edited 08 June 2022

My Friends,

This thread is an excellent example of why we are the best, most advanced Forum in the World, in the Energy Field!

We put others to shame, those gurus cant even figure out the most basic things!

I am so proud of you all! This is awesome!

Best Wishes,

Chris

Liked by

scalarpotential posted this 17 March 2022 - Last edited 08 June 2022

Magnetomotive Force Frees the Electron and Accelerates it, giving the Electron a Velocity, required for Current, and the Magnetomotive Force to do this is largely Free, due to the applied Asymmetry!

True, this is according to Faraday's law. But to have a current, the loop must be closed and the current must flow through the EMF source, like a battery or in this case the coil. Or else an electret could sustain a current, but no current can flow through it.

Liked by

baerndorfer posted this 17 March 2022 - Last edited 08 June 2022

the video shows what happens, when a sharp pulse (1,5kV/50ns) goes through the powercoil.

https://gab.com/tankcircuit/posts/107973111062784772

the flames happen, where the maximum compression takes place - this is what i think...

if someone can make this video appear within this post - would be great

always a pleasure to read your content.

regards

EDIT by Chris, Video Added as requested 😉

Liked by

Jagau posted this 17 March 2022 - Last edited 08 June 2022

Hi Baerndorfer

It seems that you have 5 and maybe even 6 coils including the red circle in your setup,

tell me a little about it?

Jagau

Liked by

baerndorfer posted this 17 March 2022 - Last edited 08 June 2022

hi jagau,

on the left side centered you can see the powercoil (where the flames happen).

on top of left core is the triggercoil.

second e-core on right side - here is the POC coil
the red ring is another output - i use it for powering the fan to have some cooling.

regards!

Liked by

Admin

Chris posted this 17 March 2022 - Last edited 08 June 2022

Hey Guys,

This is great work!

Baerndorfer is a superb, first class experimenter! Neat tidy professional Builds!

I would like to urge all here to think about the Magnetic Field in Terms of Energy Density.

Coils, or Inductors have the Parameters:

Current I
Turns N
Length l
Permeability μ₀
Relative Permeability μ_r

Which define's the Magnetic Field in both Density B, and Strength H, which is related to M.M.F via a Length Component.

Energy Density has an Area Component, and is normally in Joules per Meter Cubed: J/m³.

M.M.F, or the Magnetic Field Strength H, is also Current Density and this is Joules per Meter Squared: J/m².

This means we have a direct relationship between Energy, M.M.F and Area! So the more we increase Area, with the same turns, and Current, with shorter Coils, as Baerndorfer has shown here, the more Energy per unit volume we have access to.

This is for Scaling our Machines, which will be important for our future!

Its all in the Understanding!

Best Wishes,

Chris

Liked by

Jagau posted this 18 March 2022 - Last edited 08 June 2022

Hi Baern
If I can afford a little advice to avoid sparks and flames. melnichenko used cables with very thick insulation such as RW90 or TFF, with 1kv insulation and more, maybe that would solve your problem.

Thanks for the feedback, nice job.

Jagau

Liked by

Jagau posted this 21 March 2022 - Last edited 08 June 2022

In order to evaluate the technical performance of the circuit, I am building a power performance evaluation tool. In Brief: As power equals voltage squared divided by R so

the magnetic generation index = ((Vdem^2)/10000) / ((Vmag^2)/10000)

i will used a 10K resistor in parallel with a 22uf capacitor

the demagnetizing (V demag) voltage squared on an R of 10K divided by the Magnetising Voltage (V mag) over a 10K
This is the same technique that N.Zaev and JL Naudin used to measure the power delivered on a circuit

Jagau

Liked by

Jagau posted this 22 March 2022 - Last edited 16 August 2022

Hi all

Melnichenko coils are a very interesting subject to study.

Demagnetisation over magnetisation, power coefficient we obtain 27.77, the result is convincing.

Jl Naudin had reached 13.7 with his 2SGEN and N. Zaev 16.3with nanoperm 81

you could read all details here with N. Zaev pdf http://jnaudin.free.fr/2SGen/html/s2genep7en.htm

P.S. Comment from Vladimir Utkin: The load must be chosen so as to get the maximum amount of power flowing into it. Very low loads and very high loads will both have close to zero energy flowing in them.

Jagau

Liked by

Admin

Chris posted this 23 March 2022 - Last edited 08 June 2022

Would be great to see more join in here!

What we share may sometimes be beyond some, but if others follow closely, it is obvious. V² / 10,000 = Power, can you see a Gain here if you do the Math?

5.18² / 10,000 = 0.00268
27.18² / 10,000 = 0.07388
0.07388 / 0.00268 = 27.5671

So, as Jagau has pointed out, the Magnetic Generation Index is: 27.5671. This may be ±5% Resistor error, but still, a very good result!

Achieved for a very simple, very cheap 20 minute experiment.

Best Wishes,

Chris

Liked by

Jagau posted this 23 March 2022 - Last edited 08 June 2022

Hi all
Indeed Chris it is a very simple and useful circuit to build to keep for your future experience which comes from JL Naudin. I may have expressed myself badly by using the term power coefficient

I should have called it the magnetic generation index, exactly as N. Zaev called it and which was taken up by Jl Naudin as the magnetic power coefficient . I have attached Zaev's pdf to read more specifically about it.

It should be noted that this has nothing to do with the COP (coefficient of performance) which is completely different from the magnetic generation index to use Zaev's term.

Jagau

Liked by

Admin

Chris posted this 23 March 2022 - Last edited 08 June 2022

Hey Jagau,

Fixed and updated as requested.

Best Wishes,

Chris

Liked by

scalarpotential posted this 25 March 2022 - Last edited 08 June 2022

Hi Jagau,

Just thinking along:

It may be interesting to see scope-shots at DMM1 and DMM2, and also shots without the smoothing capacitors which hold DC voltage by storing charge, notice: Tdc=15%/2200=0.068ms, Tau=RC=0.22ms.

Also, the negative part of the demag ringing goes through the 'magnetizing' measurement and add charge to the cap before magnetizing. This can be seen without the caps.

Then, you can derive joules by looking at volt-seconds (P=V²/R, W=P*t, t=time that the voltage is there in phase with current).

Maybe I miss some fact. Not (yet) sure what Magnetic Generation Index really is.

cheers

Liked by

Admin

Chris posted this 25 March 2022 - Last edited 08 June 2022

My Friends,

Energy in Joules = Power P x Time T, and Power P is the same as Watts W, Please do not confuse Time t in the Watts W Equation.

Power P = Voltage V x Current I x cos( Theta θ )
Watts W = Voltage V x Current I x cos( Theta θ )

If there is no Phase Angle, Theta θ, for example in a DC Situation, then Voltage V x Current I is sufficient.

Time is not factored into Watts W until you convert to Joules J.

More can be read on this Here.

Power is not hard, but it does take a little bit to learn, one has to force ones mind to Facts and avoid Guesses.

This is perhaps the worlds most simple experiment, Jagau has shared with you all, for those wanting to learn, its worth replicating.

Best Wishes,

Chris

Liked by

scalarpotential posted this 26 March 2022 - Last edited 08 June 2022

Oops. W=Work in Joules, I used W as a symbol for Work, not as a unit Watt. Maybe using E was less confusing.

Liked by

Jagau posted this 29 March 2022 - Last edited 08 June 2022

Hi all

This project is still being improved.
For the moment the power of the input is equivalent to that of the output and this even if we add two equivalent incandescent loads in addition to operating the circuit without any load.

In Andrey's theory, there is a way to give more than we receive, experiments continue in this direction, I will keep you informed of recent developments.

Magnetic generation index, as N. Zaev called it, is really a good tool to use for your project.

Jagau

Liked by

Selekolela posted this 30 March 2022 - Last edited 08 June 2022

I have been doing my head in with this picture and had a flash, what if, (how do I put this into words), the primary coils are the loosely coupled ones on the outside, and the load coil is attached to the core, when the load induces a bemf into the core we swing the polarity of the primary coils and drive the magnetic field in reverse, at resonance, though the zero point and bounce it the other way as the same thing will happen in the negative region we reverse again and drive it the other way, in my head something wonderful will begin to happen,

Liked by

Jagau posted this 30 March 2022 - Last edited 08 June 2022

Hi Selekolela
Welcome to the site,
Yes, that's the right way to make melnicehnko coils.
If you notice in my setup the 2 outer coils are a loose coupling on a 3.5 inch plastic tube, the third coil is on the iron sheet core as you ca see on my second experiment.

You have seen well, the magic is when one succeeds in obtaining more than what one gives, it is in the moment what I am trying to discover.

One thing is certain is that the excess energy is due to the fact that with a nonlinear or parametric resonance if you will, that is what is at stake here.
The following diagram helps us understand parametric resonance,

just place the phases and keys in the right place. I've had success with this arrangement before in another thread, I'm just going to put it here.

Many who try to repeat Melnichenko's experiment make the mistake of thinking it's an ordinary transformer or even less a torus like JLNaudin experiment.

The principle of field separation field with an air core at a calculated distance from the nucleus makes all the difference in this experiment, do not try to carry out this experiment with good results if you do not apply these first two principles. When we short secondary side there is no reaction on primary which is not the case in an ordinary xfo

Many people have trouble understanding this last diagram on parametric resonance.
The 3 coils are not all in magnetic link but think more in terms of transmitter and receiver. What is important is the amplitude of the fields which is important here and not their magnetic addition. Thus a combination of air core and magnetic core (iron sheet) is important. We are talking about non-linearity in this case, in this kind of combination

Jagau

Liked by

Admin

Chris posted this 30 March 2022 - Last edited 08 June 2022

My Friends,

@Selekolela, Welcome!

Its worth studding in detail: Andrei_Melnichenko_Inventions.

A simplification, and also seen in the GLED Videos, is the concept that the combination of L1 and L2 are twice the length of L3.

The shorter Coil becomes the trigger Coil, which must be triggered at Magnetic Resonance, which is the same as Antenna Resonance, but may be slightly different in Frequency because of the added Capacitive Coupling due to the Geometry.

In my thread: Chris's replication of Andrey Melnichenko's GLED shows the basic layout, and shows the required Asymmetrical Regauging seen many times.

The reason this machine is difficult to replicate, is due to Fitting the Coils to the Circuit, and not fitting the Circuit to the Coils. In other words, one winds the Coils, finds Magnetic Resonance and then builds the Circuit around the Known Coils Parameters, not the other way around due to too much guess work being required.

Electrical Energy is "Generated", this fact should always be in the front of every researchers mind first and foremost, E = -∂A / ∂t which is the Time Varying Magnetic A Vector Potential. This comes from E = v x B by default, via Faraday's law: ∮A.dl = Φ, and we have covered this already in all its genius, The Motionally Induced Electromagnetic Induction!

There is no doubt, Andrey Melnichenko, discovered what Tarriel Kapanadze also discovered. The only difference is Scale!

Best Wishes,

Chris

Liked by

Admin

Chris posted this 31 March 2022 - Last edited 08 June 2022

@Jagau,

My Friend, for your information, and other interested readers, Itsu has replicated your work: Here

He has done a good job as usual!

There is more here my friends! Think in Dualities, or in terms of Asymmetry. Every time Current Changes: di/dt, we have a Source of Energy that can be used.

Best Wishes,

Chris

Liked by

Admin

Chris posted this 31 March 2022 - Last edited 08 June 2022

My Friends,

Itsu and Partzman have done some good analysis over on Itsu's Workbench. Worth a read!

Itsu made the statement:

So what about the FEMM simulation here: http://jnaudin.free.fr/2SGen/indexen.htm#simulation

In the video it says: "..the magnetic field outside the toroidal coil is null..."

And the Magnetic Field is, we have covered this here already, one place is the thread: Connecting the dots to Energy - The A-Field

The Magnetic A Vector Potential Varying in Time: E = -∂A / ∂t is the same as the Motionally Induced Electric Field, is the Source of Energy for Induction of the Secondary Coil. Here is an Image again:

If we recall Floyd Sweets statement on the very same topic:

Electromagnetic induction with no measurable magnetic field is not new. It is well known that in the space surrounding a properly wound toroidal coil there is no magnetic field. This is due to the superposition of the fields.

...

Ref: Floyd Sweet Nothing is Something

Walter Lewin also shows in his Long Solenoid Experiment, the Induction of a Voltage when there is no Magnetic Field:

I hope this gives you some answers as to why an E.M.F is "Generated" in this configuration, the Magnetic A Vector Potential is responsible for this remarkable feat, when there is no Magnetic Field.

Best Wishes,

Chris

Liked by

Jagau posted this 01 April 2022 - Last edited 08 June 2022

Hi Chris

I rarely go to this site but I went to see. After verification, it only reproduces the part of JL Naudin's experiment on the tool that Naudin had created and share with all (generation index) in order to check if Naudin was using the correct method using the magnetization index tool .

He does not reproduce my experience on the Melnichenko effect, he just wants to know if Zaev and Naudin used the right method, he doubts their method. Zaev and Naudin used the right method I have no doubt that Naudin and Zaev were very competent people much more than me and them.

The experiment is very different from Melnichenko's, I don't use a toroid with a magnet as a pulsed transmitter, Melnichenko uses an air core as a pulsed transmitter without a magnet and there are other important differences that I will develop later. But it's still very interesting as you say to read about ways to create energy.

On this site there are too many people who have drastic responses and are very negative and disrespectful towards people like Tom Bearden it's a real shame, there is no control over bad influencers who think they know everything. I have no interest in returning to this site, I hate bickering I'm here on Aboveunity to talk about energy that's all.

Jagau

Liked by

Admin

Chris posted this 01 April 2022 - Last edited 08 June 2022

Hey Jagau and all Readers,

I fully agree! For example, I just now read the last few comments, new ones since I last read, and saw this one:

Ref: Smudge's Comment

Now I have to say, the first line is just a Horrendously Absurd Comment to make:

It is nonsense to imagine that an air cored coil has a difference between magnetized field energy and demagnetized field energy.

I have a deep respect for Smudge, but I 100% Disagree with his statement!

I am going to focus on this statement, from what the OUR community may consider the most advanced member in the group, Smudge, is totally false and just a nonsense statement! We have experiments here at Aboveunity.com that prove this statement wrong every day of the week:

Ref: Chris's Non-Inductive Coil Experiment

I have shown, a 10% Duty Cycle, on Time, and 90% Off Time, yet we get output through the entire 90% of the Off Time, when the Mosfet is Off, and actually sending Energy Back to the Input, already shown:

Ref: The Input Coil

Which as we all know, is Asymmetrical Regauging:

Ref: Asymmetrical Regauging

I am horrified and shocked that Smudge is so certain, in his mindset, that this Statement had to be made! This is the root cause of Dogma! We have undisputable proof that Smudges Statement is Naïve at best and False at minimum!

I just cant believe this sort of mindset still exists! Many here have seen the same as I have just shown! Many here have the same evidence I have just given, and this is the problem we face, in TOO Many peoples Mind, it cant be done, yet the proof shows, unequivocally, it can, its easy and cheap to reproduce!

Ask yourself: Is this Statement not the very Basis of Above Unity Machines at its Root? So to disbelieve, makes Above Unity Machines Impossible for the individual to reach the Goal, in the first place, does it not? Because one has already Ruled out the very means for Above Unity Machines! This mentality of: Something for Nothing is a display of Ignorance, for Energy is still Conserved in Above Unity Machines, its simply the case, we have another Source of Energy we have introduced into the Machine that the very Actions of a Magnetising Current brings about in the first place! Importantly, this Magnetising Current does not need to be from the Primary Coil!

Historical Evidence shows: Floyd Sweet put 33 micro Watts in, and got 500 Watts out, so is this not evidence enough? In his later machines, Zero Input, 5KW Output, and the Statement made is now sounding sillier and sillier!

Smudges statement should read:

The difference between Input magnetizing field energy and Output magnetizing field energy is where Above Unity Machines fall within reach.

The fact of the matter is simply, Current I through Turns N, is a Magnetising Force, known as Ampere Turns NI. Ampere Turns NI, requires a specific Energy. This Energy is Mathematically defined by Ohms Law, as the Coil Impedance Z can be used as R, and the Voltage V, between the two Terminals, can be calculated: I = V / Z, or given we know the Current, P = I² x R, either way, we only need two accurate values, to determine the others, for an accurate Energy Result.

That's why I have had to slowly bring information out, to help others see Truth!

In Time, this will become main stream and everyone will accept it as evidentiary, but that time is still a ways off yet!

Best Wishes,

Chris

Liked by

Jagau posted this 01 April 2022 - Last edited 08 June 2022

To tell you seriously, I had the same conception as him a while ago.
When I started to evolve and read successful inventors like John Bedini and Floys Sweet that's when everything changed.
I had the chance to work a large part of my life in a field that I adore, that of electronics, and there were phenomena that I observed but that I could not explain at that time. Today with a certain hindsight and a lot of experimentation I found that it was possible to go beyond unity as you know we have experiments carried out here on this site which confirm it but are not published for the moment it will come.

As Chris has told you before and I tell you too don't let others think for you and influence you in your experiments. Try and go for it, aboverunity already exists, you just have to use it.

Jagau

Liked by

Jagau posted this 03 April 2022 - Last edited 08 June 2022

Hi all

Update
When JLNaudin built his demagnetization index tool, he took into account very important parameters such as

the impedance path ( Z )

As I operate in the same frequencies and coils inductance, I did not have to modify the circuit he designed. If you change the frequency and the coil you will have to do some calculations on the impedance of your circuit.

Jagau

Liked by

Admin

Chris posted this 04 April 2022 - Last edited 08 June 2022

My Friends,

The debate on Measurements has begun over at our.com. The method that some are recommending, I do not agree with!

@Itsu, I believe, if you do the Integral( A x B ) on a straight DC Load, and see what answer you get, you will be surprised at the answer!

Current is Current, and Voltage is Voltage, and over Time, the Energy Product will be Correct only one way and not by adding Math into the equation that is not part of the overall Energy Product Equation!

Electrical Energy is defined as: V x I x Cos( θ ) = Wats W, and Energy is defined as: V x I x Cos( θ ) x t = Joules J.

There is no Integral defined there, although the Modern Oscilloscope should do a full integral over the Scope Buffer anyway, which will be: Instantaneous V x I through the Scope Buffer. If the Scope Buffer has 10 Million Points, then this is V x I + V x I + V x I... 10 Million times. Which is the same as Integral( V x I ) but not Instantaneously.

All I see is people trying to overly confuse what would other wise be a simple, already very well defined procedure which every Modern Oscilloscope can handle by default.

Best Wishes,

Chris

Liked by

Admin

Chris posted this 08 April 2022 - Last edited 08 June 2022

My Friends,

I just want to note, on initial perusal, I agree with the measurements Itsu has done here.

Magnetisation Phase: 0.259uJ
Demagnetisation Phase: 9.943uJ
Magnetic Generation Index is: 9.943uJ / 0.259uJ = 38.39

However, one or two things I could point out. Like White trace is slightly off screen, and time base could be set better, and the waveforms look odd for this experiment. However, Itsu has done a good job, from the data Itsu has supplied, accurate enough to make a determination, to warrant further exploration.

Apparent Power is VA and is when a Phase Angles Exists! Small Phase angles are there, maybe 10 Degrees, or less, but the scope will account for this in its Math. The use of Apparent is non-sensical! It is apparent that some do not wish to learn simple things, is a statement that comes to mind!

I was not understanding the original post, about the Integral, above, and no mention of Cursors was mentioned for Scope Waveform Selection.

It is worth noting, again, I believe Itsu has done a good replication of the effect Jagau is working on showing you, but the approach I believe is different, if you re-read Jagau's first post. It is nice to see some are paying attention to important effects!

@Jagau, sorry for the distractions here, I will stop posting now and let you continue. 😉

Best Wishes,

Chris

Liked by

Jagau posted this 11 April 2022 - Last edited 08 June 2022

That's very good Chris
The advantage here in this site, is that one can emit ideas and discuss them without bickering. I appreciate all comments.

An update is coming with new results.

Jagau

Liked by

Jagau posted this 15 April 2022 - Last edited 08 June 2022

The Melnichenko coils use reactive energy to light the first lamp and since the core of the system is not magnetically linked by a ferric conductor but rather by a flux link the second lamp also lights only with the supplied flux. by the fields shared by the system.

The magnetic flux is at 90 degrees to the induced current in the coil.

It is this second lamp which is the free energy.

The first lamp consumes all the energy that will be lost and wasted and is equal to the input consumption of the system. the consumption does not change even if the two incandescent lamps are closed. The second lamp is currently weaker than the first but it is free energy. These are two incandescent lamps of 115 volts AC and 4 Watts each lamp of power. The second coil in the center of wider one is completely removable as Anrdey quote.

I used IGBT switching type with TL494 oscillator with DTC and Frequency adjustable. Frequency is about 1.1 khz and 43% DTC

Jagau

Liked by

Jagau posted this 17 April 2022 - Last edited 08 June 2022

After doing some experimentation with the Melnichenko effect, I would simply describe it as automatic cascading amplification.

That is to say, we pulse a first air coil (wider one) which also produces an external field on two other coils (removable coils) whose center has a ferromagnetic core and during demagnetization the reactive energy which has been recovered by the set of diodes on the air coil core and added to the energy recovered during demagnetization is amplified in cascade by the 3 coils during demagnetization.

In fact we pulse 1 coil and we harvest on 3 coils. It is the only way to get free energy. You have an example described above.

Jagau

Liked by

Admin

Chris posted this 19 April 2022 - Last edited 08 June 2022

Hey Jagau and all Readers,

It would be great if more would join in and share! It would be great to see more replications of this very simple and cheap to replicate effect!

Problem is, so many are either Lazy, or too busy with life!

This effect has been verified by myself and Itsu Here. It is NOT a spurious Effect, it is verifiable and simple to observe. We have been showing you this for quite some time now! It is the path that leads to Free Energy Systems, once understood properly!

I am very pleased, the website is much more stable now, much faster and much much more pleasurable to visit and use! So please share your experiments as we do with you!

Other forums, they have very little to nothing to share! They are lost! We have the Technology and have shared all of it with you, all you need do is learn it and make steps to progress. We will help!

Why do I say this, well, History has shown many machines, none of them have been understood, and or replicated:

No one was successful, many tried! The quote: Little Steps for Little Feet - Sir Richard Feynman, is true!

Best Wishes,

Chris

Liked by

hermesatar posted this 20 April 2022 - Last edited 08 June 2022

Jagau,

Your setup with one aircoil and two ferromagnetic core resamble one version of the Hubbard Coil.

I have always consider that there could be an outer air coil that is loosly coupled to the 9 inner ferromagnetics coils.

I have 9 long ferrite cores so I only have to wind them with copperwire and then wind an outer coppercoil over the 8 ferrite cores.

The reason why I haven't done it before is because I have always seen the conversation of energy in the hubbard coil.

But seeing the outer air coil as an transmitter coil and the 9 ferrite cores as reciever coils changes my line of thinking.

Only test will show if there is an energy gain or conversation of energy. I link to my hubbard coil page:

http://gratisenergi.se/hubbard.htm

Best Wishes, Hermes

P. S Jaugau, thank you very much for your explanations of this interesting topic and Chris I too are very satisfied with the speed of this very important website.

Liked by

Admin

Chris posted this 20 April 2022 - Last edited 08 June 2022

Hello Hermes,

Pleased the speed is much better! Thank You for letting me know!

Your Statement:

But seeing the outer air coil as an transmitter coil and the 9 ferrite cores as reciever coils changes my line of thinking.

This is right, but there is more! Each and every Current changing in time can be a Transmitter and a Conductor of the same length or a multiple of, is the Receiver. This is true of any Coil Arrangement. of arrangement of Conductors.

Antenna Theory, especially the concepts of Wave Mechanics is the exact same analogy:

The concepts covered in the above videos are the same, especially with the Superposition Concepts: @ 1 : 50 of the second video.

Best Wishes,

Chris

Liked by

Jagau posted this 20 April 2022 - Last edited 08 June 2022

Hello Hermesatar

Welcome to AU.com
Your website is very interesting thank you for sharing it.

I don't know the Hubbard coil very well, but I will take the time to study it because it interests me a lot.
At first sight it seems that there is a lot of similarity between the two projects.

thank you for letting me know and as I do not know Hubbart very well, I will come back to you with my observations in another post.

Jagau

Liked by

Jagau posted this 20 April 2022 - Last edited 08 June 2022

Hi Hermesatar

I looked at Hubbard's patent and as you say there is a lot of similarity to Melnichenko's.
The principle of field separation is present and also the external coil which will transmit others connected to a core in the case of Hubbard several core.

The big difference is that it probably uses round iron screens to delay the max and minus current phases.
They should in principle be very thin or even like thin pin hole screens. The hardest part is adjusting the phases, that's what I'm working on right now.

Jagau

Liked by

Jagau posted this 21 April 2022 - Last edited 08 June 2022

For those who want to build I use this concept

3 coils,

coils number 1 is transmitter and two other coils are receiver

Jagau

Liked by

Brian posted this 23 April 2022 - Last edited 08 June 2022

Hey Jagau

I have started with the replication, but the first challenge was to find a suitable core for the POC coils. I did not have a transformer core of suitable size so tried an out there idea I had read some time ago using a bundle welding blast rods I had left over. These are basically carbon rods coated in copper. Initial results are not promising. I have also thought of using a bundle of iron 4" nails. But I think I need to go to the dump and find a old transformer of reasonable size. Is this what you have used for the core?

Are you able to supply the details of your primary and POC coils diameter, turns and wire length?

Thank you for sharing your work.

Kind regards

Brian

Liked by

Jagau posted this 24 April 2022 - Last edited 08 June 2022

Hi Brian

If you study this video well, everything is written at the bottom of the schematic. Print it

The suggested numbers of turns for N1 and N2

The frequency if you used a transformer core or ferrites core

The powers, the voltage of tubes, everything is there

Have a good experiment

jagau

Liked by

Jagau posted this 25 April 2022 - Last edited 08 June 2022

Hi all

I made a test of new HTML editor

During the construction there are important parameters to calculate this depending on your construction and how you made it.
To help you, I have placed the main calculation formula and the definition of each of the items in the image below. You will thus be able according to your needs to calculate your output voltage for a coupled inductor with very low coupling coefficient (K)

ok chris it works very well for me thank you for everything

Jagau

scalarpotential posted this 26 April 2022 - Last edited 08 June 2022

The formula of the stored energy in a coil is based on conservation of energy, not on the actual energy of/in the field. Its energy is equal to 0.5*LI^2 a function of current integrated over time. Which variables must be manipulated to get demagnetizing energy > magnetizing energy?

Liked by

Jagau posted this 26 April 2022 - Last edited 08 June 2022

The Melnichenko effect is based on the fields séparation and of total accumulated energy amplitude of the fields wth its effect squared.

The formula given above is for those who want to build with very specific starting parameters and voltage you want to reach.

It would be too simplistic to only use what one can have as stored energy without knowing how to make it.

Jagau

Liked by

baerndorfer posted this 26 April 2022 - Last edited 08 June 2022

what i've learned so far...

when i switch a coil with a mosfet, then i get this sharp pulse with a damped oscillation behind the trailing edge. the frequency of this ringing is coming from the core-material. so the material is answering my knocking.

now when i switch this coil with this frequency or a harmonic one, the material is ringing/shaking.

every coil that is part of this core will get an extra amount of energy which is caused by that shaking.

i don't know if it is acoustic resonance or magnetic resonance. it cannot be magnetic nuclear resonance...

still trying to build an analog circuit that can manage this.

regards!

Liked by

raivope posted this 26 April 2022 - Last edited 08 June 2022

Hi Jagau,

Tested my Melnichenko setup where primary was 30m wire 1.4mm on a 110mm sewer pipe. It makes about 80 turns. There was a secondary as well but it is not important right now, it did not affect the process.

What I was afraid of that and what happened was that I cannot run the power supply above 4V or the primary's CEMF (collapsing EMF) voltage goes over 100V that is the MOSFET voltage rating. Mosfet starts to clip it. Of course I had the UF4007 (fast) diode and load in a CEMF cycle as well, but it was not fast enought to catch the primary's reversed voltage.

I guess it is wise to use a SCR (Thyristor) instead of MOSFET, because SCR shuts down automatically when current ceases, but this becomes more complex, because then I have to use single rectified AC period input power instead of DC supply and trigger the SCR at the right moment. Heh, it looked easy, but... back to the drawing board.

There is also an option to reduce MOSFET turn off speed, protect it from the peak with a small capacitor.

Best,

Raivo

Liked by

scalarpotential posted this 26 April 2022 - Last edited 08 June 2022

what i've learned so far...

when i switch a coil with a mosfet, then i get this sharp pulse with a damped oscillation behind the trailing edge. the frequency of this ringing is coming from the core-material. so the material is answering my knocking.

now when i switch this coil with this frequency or a harmonic one, the material is ringing/shaking.

every coil that is part of this core will get an extra amount of energy which is caused by that shaking.

i don't know if it is acoustic resonance or magnetic resonance. it cannot be magnetic nuclear resonance...

still trying to build an analog circuit that can manage this.

regards!

I think it's a mechanical vibration in the audible acoustic range.

https://www.researchgate.net/publication/322482698_Acoustic_noise_characteristics_of_inductor_according_to_magnetic_powder_core_building_structure_for_inverter_application

Liked by

Jagau posted this 26 April 2022 - Last edited 08 June 2022

Hi Raivope and baerndorfer

The best way to pulse this type of circuit is to use an IGBT
At low frequencies they are easier to configure, moreover, it is their strong point and, moreover, it is the method that Andrey Melnichenko uses in high side mode.

With this large reactive power produced by the primary, if you use a mosfet the gate must be very well isolated by a 10k, and the reactive power must be picked up in a load, otherwise your MOSFET failed. An SCR is too slow for this type of circuit. So IGBT is the right way.

The core is only used for the secondary in this configuration.

This is where we get the power greater than 1

Tell me what pulse circuit did you use?

Jagau

Liked by

raivope posted this 26 April 2022 - Last edited 08 June 2022

There is no big difference between IGBT and MOSFET to my knowledge. IGBT is slower, it has a mosfet-on-transistor inside. Some IGBT-s do not have inner diodes.

I used quite advanced circuit - using galvanic isolated ultfafast comm IL610 mediated signal that uses mosfet driver about 30ohm impedance to gate for floating pulses. Pulsed the coil from the positive rail. I could have had SiC diode on CEMF line for better collection speed.

Because the primary has an aircore, it tends to have very high peak response. I can lower the speed by buffer capacitor in parallel to mosfet-switch, perhaps 100n 400V.

[Edit] Will try out also mini capacitor in parallel to diode and coil. So many ways todo it.

Raivo

Liked by

Jagau posted this 26 April 2022 - Last edited 08 June 2022

Hi Raivope

In this project I try as faithfully as possible to reproduce Melnichenko's experiment.
Melnichenko used an IGBT because even if the frequency which is slower than a MOSFET but here we used it at very low frequency between 400 hertz and 1.1 khz for this project, the IGBT is very easy to configure in high side mode (very important), it is very well insulated against ESD (eloctrostatic discharge) a significant advantage and therefore it is not disturbed when overvoltages and strong currents occur, which is not the case with a Mosfet.

So I think it's the right choice as the inventor uses it, but it's your choice if it works well for you. That's the beauty of trying and experimenting. Yes as you said many possibility others wayto do it. Inventors never say everything, even in their patents they give that the principle in general is up to us to seek and find.

As you are interested I will tell you a little more, in his video he does not say everything, as an example it is not the right way to recover reactive energy, you must have two separate ground to succeed in this project. One for power supply and one for reactive energy recovery.

Jagau

Liked by

Admin

Chris posted this 01 May 2022 - Last edited 08 June 2022

My Friends,

@Itsu, I believe you should keep working on this subject, if you wish. You will see greater benefit if you keep going!

@All Other Readers, this is a simple experiment, that shows something that no other Forum has ever been able to show! Jagau has given you great advances!

There is always more, so stay tuned, to the only Forum in the world that has answers!

Best Wishes,

Chris

Liked by

Jagau posted this 01 May 2022 - Last edited 08 June 2022

How is the energy transported related to the amplitude?
As the amount of energy carried by a wave is related to its amplitude. The amplitude of a wave therefore refers to the maximum amount of + and – displacement and the energy that is transmitted to a pulse will only affect the amplitude of that pulse. It will not change any parameter other than the amplitude.

You have a way here to create more energy than you give out.

At Aboveunity.com you have a way to do it and we want it to be shared.

Jagau

Liked by

Jagau posted this 02 May 2022 - Last edited 08 June 2022

Work on the Melnichenko effect is progressing slowly but surely. The latest tests show that the effect can be increased by delaying or adjusting the phases of the currents between the input and the output.
As Tesla explained with its patent 433702 this is possible.

Eexperiments are currently in progress,
Jagau

Liked by

baerndorfer posted this 02 May 2022 - Last edited 08 June 2022

hi jagau,

can you point out where the tesla patent describes the effect from melnichenko?

i studied this thing couple of times but canot find a link to andrej.

do you think, that shielding a coil with a magnetic circuit has the same effect as we can see on the 2 e-cores?

have a nice day!

Liked by

Jagau posted this 02 May 2022 - Last edited 08 June 2022

Hi Baerndorfer

Yes I think that is what is not said in Melnichenko's video. The shield when it reaches a certain saturation, allows the voltage to pass quickly and corrects the phases of the primary and secondary current.
Tesla describes it very well in 433702 :

t he lag of the primary behind the impressed electro-motive force may be diminished by loading the secondary with a non inductive or dead resistance-such as incandescent lamps-whereby the time interval be tween the maximum or the periods of the primary and secondary currents is increased.

I realized that an incandescent lamp which is a dead resistance and thus increases or decreases the effect so a shield does the same thing.

My experiences are not finished on this point but it looks very good.

Jagau

Liked by

Jagau posted this 02 May 2022 - Last edited 08 June 2022

By calculating the correct secondary capacitor value, the light is more intensively

bright without any change in power consumption at the input.
It was enough just to adjust the power correction factor PF and it works.

Jagau

Liked by

Jagau posted this 02 May 2022 - Last edited 08 June 2022

The effect is really interesting! I can definitely say
that to avoid negative factors and limitations, you should move away from using a ferromagnetic core on the primary,

i.e. use air coils on the primary and ferromagnetic on the secondary.
The Melnichenko effect is truly an aboveunity system. You will see it in the next video
Jagau

Liked by

Jagau posted this 02 May 2022 - Last edited 08 June 2022

My experiments on this phenomenon are at the beginning and I believe to have good results. Is it possible to make Lenz Law non-existing, I believe melnicehnko solved some of this problem by making a nonlinear transformer this way:

The primary is air core and the secondary is ferromagnetic, nothing new yet but with an air gap between the two the output does not affect the input.

I would explain the Melnichenko effect this way: Lenz's law is almost non-existent or negligible because we use this type of non-linear transformer arrangement as there is no load connected to the secondary (idle).
The load is only connected in the demagnetization phase to the secondary.
Read this you will understand what I mean in the principle of Melnichenko
https://www.physicsclassroom.com/class/waves/Lesson-2/Energy-Transport-and-the-Amplitude-of-a-Wave

For other questions about Lenz's law, I invite you to follow this demo by Professor Walter Levine from MIT, you will have your answers well explained

Jagau

Liked by

baerndorfer posted this 02 May 2022 - Last edited 08 June 2022

what i can add is, that this works also without an air-gap. but then you will need POC-coils for the 'magic' to happen. like wistiti did in his thread.

regards!

Liked by

Jagau posted this 02 May 2022 - Last edited 08 June 2022

It is the principle of the separation of the magnetic fields which is a basic condition in the Melnichenko effect, if there is not this condition, it does not work, I have checked it. There is no POC in this configuration.

There are different ways to achieve aboverunity, each principle is different.

If you have different evidence show it, but surely not the Melnichenko effect.

If someone has done something similar to Melnichenko effect show it to me.

The subject of my thread is important and requires a lot of time and experimentation, we have to stay on the main subject.

Jagau

Liked by

baerndorfer posted this 02 May 2022 - Last edited 08 June 2022

yes melnichenko uses 2 e-cores seperated by air-gap and showed, that there is more energy in the whole system. this is fact.

but when you know what he did and when you know what POC can do. why not combining both ideas?

have a great day!

i do not want do destroy your thread - peace!

Liked by

Jagau posted this 02 May 2022 - Last edited 08 June 2022

In order to properly situate us in the thread I made a short summary and for those who want to build.
When he started his research, Melnicenko had this type of arrangements like this:

At that time he used 2 ferrite E core with a well calculated air gap, where he placed a dielectric material. You have in this image all the useful information for the construction.

The performance of his device as youca see at this time was, for an input of 140 watts he obtained 235 watts of total power output. Which gives us a yield of about 1.7

He then builds a new arrangement with a large air core like this:

and one or two coils inside this large air coil.

It is with this arrangement that I am experimenting at the moment and

the performance results compared to that of Melnichenko are about the same.

For an input of 4.5 watts I get 7 watts at output, this is the best performance so far that I have managed to get since I built devices like this.
1.56 is an excellent result to date.

So I confirm that melnicehnko's device is really abovetunity machine.

Jagau

Liked by

Admin

Chris posted this 02 May 2022 - Last edited 08 June 2022

My Friends,

I would really like to see Members Join In, with their own thread: "<Member>'s Melnichenko's Effect Replication", replicating this as Jagau has laid out.

As you all know, L1 and L2 both are Output Coils at T_Off on the Mosfet, Partnered Output Coils! Pumping Current well beyond the Period of Natural Flyback. Tuning for this optimum range of Dutycycle and Frequency is glimpsed by this video:

Aboveunity.com offers many opportunity's to advance well beyond the current Community Standard, well past Science's current Dogmatic, and truly Ignorant Position. Any Serious Researcher would jump at these opportunities!

We will help and support you in your Journey!

Best Wishes,

Chris

Liked by

Jagau posted this 02 May 2022 - Last edited 08 June 2022

As I have publicly stated you have an above unity system here and you can see it.

As I have, to date, no serious replication on the site here, so I will continue to share only when there are serious replications, because there are still many other interesting things to know.

In order to understand yourself well, study the energy that there is in a wave, you will be able to understand afterwards.

see thislink

https://www.physicsclassroom.com/class/waves/Lesson-2/Energy-Transport-and-the-Amplitude-of-a-Wave

Jagau

Liked by

Admin

Chris posted this 02 May 2022 - Last edited 08 June 2022

I agree Jagau,

Until others, not including our normal hard working Members, join in and start paying attention and sharing the work load, I think it is wise to hold back sharing too much!

That's a great link and it ties in very well to our work here on Electromagnetic Waves and also others research to the very same phenomena:

The energy transported by a wave is directly proportional to the square of the amplitude. So whatever change occurs in the amplitude, the square of that effect impacts the energy. This means that a doubling of the amplitude results in a quadrupling of the energy.

And, as we know and have covered, Andrey Melnichenko said:

The essence of the effect lies in the fact that the addition of electromagnetic fields (constants and variables) are added no energy, and the field amplitude. The field energy is proportional to the square of the amplitude of the total electromagnetic field. As a result, the simple addition of the energy fields of the total field can be many times the energy of the initial fields separately. This property of the electromagnetic field is non-additivity of the energy field. For example, when added to a stack of three flat circular permanent magnet energy of the total magnetic field is increased to nine times!

Ref: Andrey Melnichenko

And Floyd Sweet also said:

The underlying principal (forget Millikan’s experiment) has been derived in that magnetic effects vary on the square of the current.

Ref: Floyd Sweet

And:

These measurements indicate that field intensity is directly proportional to the square of the current required by the load placed on the device.

Ref: Floyd Sweet

So, it is easy to see, the basic phenomena is not only simple, but its universal and already well known, only it has not been applied to the right field, Power Engineering, because Power Engineering is an incomplete and forgotten about field by Dogmatic, Ignorant, people that have merely memorised a few textbooks that were written a century ago! Which are simply unable to think for themselves!

I wish others would join in! The Answers stare you right in the face!

Best Wishes,

Chris

Liked by

Jagau posted this 02 May 2022 - Last edited 14 June 2022

To help you build, I offer you the first part of the circuit in order to arrive at the final circuit.
If you succeed in this very important first part, the sequel will come for the Melnichenko effect.
You will notice the position of the IGBT and that of the two different masses that I had already mentioned in a previous post.
The proposed circuit

When the circuit is in operation, if you remove the lamp, the power at the input does not change, but the accumulation of energy in the capacitor is very fast and high, that is why it takes a capacitor in the around 10,000 uf. Melnicehnko advised 2 x 6000uf.
so be careful, this is not a circuit for beginners.

Jagau

Liked by

SonOfLuck posted this 07 June 2022

I just want to leave this(the original thread's pdf version) here:
Melnichenko's Effect

Liked by

Admin

Chris posted this 07 June 2022 - Last edited 08 June 2022

Thanks SonOfLuck!

I still don't know what happened to this thread, however, whatever happened, it is now able to be rebuilt and read from scratch thanks to SonOfLucks PDF!

What a great team we have!

I have the thread in Backup, but I cant restore without loosing other information.

Best Wishes,

Chris

Liked by

Admin

Chris posted this 08 June 2022 - Last edited 08 June 2022

Thanks to a few Members / Readers manual Backups, I have been able to restore this thread from those manual Backups without making any major changes to the database and loosing other Posts and threads!

I am still working on Images and Post specifics, so this is still a work in progress!

I bet Jagau will be happy as many other readers will also!

Thank You All, this is great to see!

Best Wishes,

Chris

P.S: Please feel free to edit your own posts if you see it needs attention!

Liked by

Admin

Chris posted this 09 June 2022 - Last edited 19 October 2022

My Friends,

СВОБОДНАЯ ГЕНЕРАЦИЯ Андрей Мельниченко translates to: FREE GENERATION Andrey Melnichenko

Andrey Melnichenko's YouTube Channel is: www.youtube.com / channel/UCEtqI2EhN32Mvq7Wp5G9Vpg/videos

If you want to Create Your Own Thread and share your experiments on this topic, please feel free.

What is shown here, it is a very small part of a MUCH BIGGER Picture!

Best Wishes,

Chris

Liked by
and 1 others

Admin

Chris posted this 12 June 2022

My Friends,

After all the work restoring this Thread after it suffered a catastrophic error, and its now stalled and stopped?

That's a bit disappointing!

Best Wishes,

Chris

Liked by

Admin

Chris posted this 14 June 2022

@Jagau,

For an input of 4.5 watts I get 7 watts at output, this is the best performance so far that I have managed to get since I built devices like this.
1.56 is an excellent result to date.

So I confirm that melnicehnko's device is really abovetunity machine.

I wonder if you would like to publicly discuss the point of Magnetic Resonance, or where each Coil hits its Peak Voltage, for the minimum Input Power? This point is tuned for, both Frequency and Duty Cycle, to obtain maximum Output Power for the least Input Power.

Best Wishes,

Chris

Liked by

Jagau posted this 14 June 2022 - Last edited 14 June 2022

Hello Chris

The first success in accomplishing the Melnichenko effect starts with understanding the first part.
The last schematic published here is a simple modified flyback,

this first part must be realized and understood before going further in the project.
I am waiting to see replications before going further and continuing to explain.

It's not even a great effort required to do by the members here.

Jagau

Liked by

Admin

Chris posted this 14 June 2022 - Last edited 14 June 2022

Hey Jagau,

I agree with this:

The first success in accomplishing the Melnichenko effect starts with understanding the first part.
The last schematic published here is a simple modified flyback, this first part must be realized and understood before going further in the project.

It is simple, again here is Jagau's Circuit:

@Jagau, I believe there is an error in this Circuit, please confirm.

Pretty much, this is a Bedini SG Circuit, and everyone is no doubt familiar with this Circuit! Its very Easy to Build!

Those Members searching for Answers, that have not already found Answers, and many have already and not Publically acknowledged it, please join in and Create your own Replication Thread: <Member>'s Melnichenko's Effect

Best Wishes,

Chris

Liked by

Jagau posted this 14 June 2022 - Last edited 14 June 2022

When the circuit was copied on the site it was too pale and conductors are missing this one is the good one

The second ground was barely visible.

you'll notice there are two grounds in this circuit, so one doesn't affect the other, it's a modified flyback.

Jagau

Liked by

Jagau posted this 20 June 2022 - Last edited 05 August 2022

I've been very busy these last few days, I couldn't wait to go back to my experiences.

So I made myself a little gift, sometimes you have to have a little fun according to your budget, with a very special purchase, a TEK P5021 current probe. It's not the latest model but it works very well with my scope.

So still great experiences made and shared.

Jagau

Liked by
and 1 others

Admin

Chris posted this 26 June 2022

Jagau is correct,

When Jagau says:

The crowd is not huge but many watch without speaking, as usual.

We get in the order of 10K Reads on this site a day, sometimes much more! Yet there is only about 1% joining in!

1% Trolls or ex-members that have wronged this site in one way or another! Because they have nothing to share of their own! Trolls trying to stop us because they are terrified of us!

So, Ronee, I appreciate you joining in and Sharing, I also wish to Thank You for doing so!

Learning about Asymmetrical Electromagnetic Induction is a very important step forward for Humanity!

Best Wishes,

Chris

Liked by

Admin

Chris posted this 02 July 2022 - Last edited 02 July 2022

Hey Jagau,

Can you add any more information to my last post? More the merrier I guess.

For others watching and reading, we have done experiments where we can see a very large amount of Power Coming back to the Input:

This is on the Input Measurement Block: -1.63 Kilowatts! Of Negative Power, not Positive Power, Power in the Spike going back to the Power Supply!

For the moment, I am not going to show where this is from, or discuss it further, as I already know what's possible, and seen this sort of thing for a very long time! I share this, because it will be of assistance to other researchers!

Other forums just do not ever discuss such things, because they cant understand it!

Best Wishes,

Chris

Liked by
and 1 others

Jagau posted this 02 July 2022 - Last edited 02 July 2022

Hi all
It is always easier to understand how a system works by comparing it to examples of other known systems. In the case of the Melnichenko effect, I do not claim to have full mastery of the system but I will explain how I understand it.
Like many other functional existing systems everything is based on the big question:
How to circumvent the famous law of Lenz?
Whether it's the Adams engine or the latest Holcomb System, circumventing Lenz's law results in overunity. Electric iron or a high permeability material allows these systems to achieve this goal.

Quote from Dr. Robert Adams, the inventor of the well-known motor/generator:

One would expect the magnetic polarity reversal to be instantaneous in a rotating machine between the rotor magnet and the stator. However, this is not the case. I recently discovered that the inversion is exponential in the transition from one polarity to the other. When this happens, the magnetic radiation from the rotor pole(s) doubles without an external power supply. As a result of this attempt, I had meanwhile made an important discovery regarding magnetic polarity reversal, in that it was not necessary for the machine to be in motion or to apply external energy for it causes the reversal of magnetic polarity.

In the Adams generator, the rotating edge of the magnets and a synchronization at a very precise geometric angle produces this effect, in the Melnichenko effect the pulsed magnetic field of the coil L1 and with the rapid passage from one polarity to another produces a doubling of the magnetic radiation on the magnetic core of L2. As L2 is around this core it produces a doubling of magnetic radiation, as Dr. Adams said.

When degaussing L1 and modifying the flyback as in the drawing, this produces a BEMF at the closure of the pulse on the IGBT which is almost fully recovered in lamp no 1 minus the losses, that is why the consumption of the power source does not change.

In L2 when the current phases are well adjusted, this is the most difficult part, the L2 lamps light free without constraint of Lenz's law. Remember that the polarization by a magnetic field of a magnetic core has no resistance, is free and produces a doubling of radiation because the magnetic field of L1 is always there and has no constraint on L2 and as said if well Andrey is in no way magnetically bound to L1.

Quote from Andrey Melnichenko:
For the generation, a weak mutual polarization of the ferromagnetic cores through the gaps is also used in addition to the magnetic field of the magnetizing coil. In the axial position, it is optimal to insert two relatively long cores into the coil with their ends and bring out the main magnetic vortices from the ferromagnet,
when the induction of the magnetic field drops to zero or results in a partial reversal of the polarity of the magnetic field if the power source has a small current pulse polarity reversal or is supplied with alternating current with a component of constant current. Reversing the polarity of the magnetic field greatly reduces the transient process and the current decay time. This gives both a sharper induction decay front and an increase in EMF in the winding on a ferromagnet, which reduces source cost.

Do you remember this?

This is how I understand the Melnichenko effect.

P.S.

I forgot to tell you with the A.U members calculator you have what number of turns your L2 will have for maximum efficiency

that you coould find here:

https://www.aboveunity.com/thread/proof-of-coil-interactions-following-antenna-theory/

Jagau

Liked by
and 2 others

Admin

Chris posted this 02 July 2022 - Last edited 02 July 2022

Hey Jagau and all Readers,

Another excellent Post Jagau! Thank You!

Your statement:

How to circumvent the famous law of Lenz?

It is exactly correct and a very important fact for any Serious Researcher to Focus on! I mean, this IS the Ultimate Goal!

If I may, I see an avenue where confusion could set in for other Readers, so if you wouldn't mind me making a small point here?

First, I want to point out a passage from Floyd Sweet:

If the directions of the two signals are such that opposite H-fields cancel and E-fields add, an apparently steady E-field will be created. The energy density of the fields remain as calculated above, but the value of the E-field will double from E/2 to E.

I think its important to address what it is we are talking about when we see any Value of something double, or more, in Amplitude.

Of course, we are looking for a total Gain in Electric Power, over and Above, the Input Power. Therefore the arrangement we are focusing our attention on, must allow for a "Generational" aspect greater than the Input Power is essentially capable of by its self.

My opinion is, as the saying goes, a Picture is worth a thousand words:

Ref: Andrey Melnichenko - Transgeneratsiya electromagnetic field energy

If one is to evaluate the Vector Directions of each Field Individually, then one will see that a Superposition does occur, meaning there are some Vectors that Sum to Zero, for example: 1 + -1 = 0

Of course, the Vector Equation: 1 + -1 = 0 is Conventional Electromagnetic Induction, a frivolous approach to an almost 200 year old technology on Science's part!

There is more!

Asymmetrical Electromagnetic Induction is seen right there! This Vector Equation becomes: 1 + -1 + 1 = 1, of seen in Melnichenko's form: H1 + H2 + H3 = H3.

The Magnetic Field does not change Polarity, as in this case, a DC Source is the Supply, the Magnetic Field only changes in Amplitude, of Intensity, as the Magnetic Field Grows and Decays. So there is no AC, or Alternating Current seen, per se, its a DC Current Source for the most part, but the Primary Voltage Polarity flips between Mosfet T_On and T_Off. So there is confusion seen amongst Researchers that have not yet put the work in!

Best Wishes,

Chris

Edit:

P.S.

I forgot to tell you with the A.U members calculator you have what number of turns your L2 will have for maximum efficiency

that you coould find here:

https://www.aboveunity.com/thread/proof-of-coil-interactions-following-antenna-theory/

Hey Jagau, that thread is not currently Tier I, so some members will not be able to see it.

Do you think we could discuss allowing it to become public domain? I want to be sure we are ready to share more with the general public.

Liked by
and 2 others

Jagau posted this 02 July 2022 - Last edited 19 October 2022

I made correction for member calculator

accessible for all

https://www.aboveunity.com/thread/aboveunity-com-member-calculator/

jagau

Liked by

Admin

Chris posted this 07 July 2022 - Last edited 19 October 2022

My Friends,

Ironically, OverUnityResearch.com Member Itsu, several weeks after turning down an Invite, is now doing a replication of Jagau's work, Here!

My present replication of this basic circuit looks like this:

With this as diagram:

Some data on the used circuit:

L1 primary air core 80 turns: 726uH
L2 secondary 2x 144 turns ferrite cores separated by 1.5mm gap: 4mH (this L2 is not yet in use in the present basic circuit!!).

When inserting L2 into L1 in the next step, the L1 inductance raises to 850uH.
When shorting this inserted L2, the L1 induction drops to 710uH.
But again, this L2 is now not in use!

FG running 1.4KHz @ 9% duty cycle (adjust to get ~120V across Lamp1)
Lamp1 120V / 4W

Initial power measurements shows for:

input power: 4.57W, see screenshot 1 (yellow: voltage, blue: current through csr and red calculated power)
IGBT power: 4.63W, see screenshot 2 (yellow: voltage, green: current and red calculated power)
Lamp1 power: 4.66W, see screenshot 3 (yellow / blue voltage (differential) , green: current through lamp1 and red calculated power)

As can be seen in the screenshots, the measured signals get more and more erratic and accurate power measurements gets harder to make.
I had to use the differential probing technique and advanced math function to measure the Lamp1 power due to its floating state.

It also shows that in this basic setup, almost all input power is being consumed by the Lamp1

Next step i guess would be to insert L2 into L1 and attach a load to L2 to see if this load (lamp2) can be lit for free (so without any
influence on the input power and Lamp1 power.

Side note 1: AboveUnity.com is often offline for some periods, so you might get some time outs.
Side note 2: the input DDM's (and PS meters) show lightly less current (thus power when calculated) as compared to the scope probaly due to the current AC component
in the signal.

Regards Itsu

NOTE: In the above image, you can see Itsu does have a Negative Power Component, pointed out in our thread: The Input Coil, which is Positive Voltage x Negative Current = Negative Power!

A Major Error seen, is the use of RMS Power Values! You can NOT use RMS Power Values on the DC Input Power, see our: Measurement Thread for an explanation!

Schooling the Gurus again, we are!

I have said it before, Itsu is a good Builder! He does good work! If Itsu was able to see through his projects and gain a greater understanding, he could be very successful!

I wish Itsu Luck, I truly hope he is able to see this Experiment through to the Knowledge required, However, I see a very important issue, that we here at AboveUnity.com have warned about before, do you see them? Digital Multimeter's? Yes? Don't use them! They are not accurate!

Also an Interesting observation:

AboveUnity.com is often offline for some periods

Yes, I have covered this, many times, its the Infrastructure I have had to put in to get up and running. We have limited Services, and also many cyber attacks against us, trying to take us down!

Best Wishes,

Chris

Liked by
and 2 others

Admin

Chris posted this 10 July 2022 - Last edited 10 July 2022

My Friends,

I believe we see more strife:

Doing some more accurate measurements on this new setup which includes L2 and its load see above post #2

Ref: Itsu's A Melnichenko effect replication

Now, I am sorry, but Itsu is no where near the mark! There is problem after problem after problem seen here!

Itsu states:

Input power: 4.71W see screenshot 1

and we see:

Still Itsu is using RMS Voltage and Current Measurements, this is wrong and can not be used! This is NOT how you measure DC Input! This is In-accurate! Very Wrong!

Itsu's wave forms:

Itsu's waveforms are not inline with ours! I have no idea what itsu is doing! I mean, this is VERY Important to get right!

Of course, a bit of the Sawtooth waveform is seen clearly in Jagau's Screenshot, all three traces, it's not present at all in Itsu's!

Jagau showed early on:

Totally different Waveform, Totally different Effects! Totally Outside of the guidelines Jagau has set out... And Itsu is showing final measurements saying:

So this present setup with L2 does not show any special effect, but there are several tuning options which can be explored.

Sorry Itsu, your Work shows nothing special, this is certain!!! Your work, however, is NOT what Jagau has been showing everyone, you're comparing Apples and Oranges!

I am sorry, but the terrible attention to detail, when making a representation to our work, really does frustrate me beyond belief!

Itsu has not accurately replicated what we are showing!

Hmmmm, Accurate? No, not at all !!!

Best Wishes,

Chris

Liked by

Jagau posted this 11 July 2022 - Last edited 11 July 2022

In most of our experiments taking measurements is the most important and at the same time the most difficult thing to do, especially since we use different waveforms. Don't get confused with pure DC and sine wave voltage, the way of calculating them is very different and moreover in my case at the input I have to take into account the duty cycle of the pulse

The voltage efficiency (average voltage) applies to a battery or DC voltage which is constant and does not vary over time,

this is what I am using in this Melnichenko experiment at input.

At the input we only have DC max volt or max amplitude pulsed. At the output we calculate it in RMS because we have a rectified sinusoidal output

and as you know RMS is the DC equivalent used for a sinusoidal curve wich varies over time.

Below you will find valuable help on which formula to use and in which case of the waveform,

The one that is of our interest is the PULSE WAVE

Jagau

Liked by
and 1 others

Admin

Chris posted this 11 July 2022 - Last edited 12 July 2022

My Friends,

Jagau is Correct, and, Schooling the Guru's Again! Thank You Jagau!

A MUCH better result from Itsu:

Ref: Itsu's A Melnichenko effect replication

I would strongly recommend increasing the size of the inner core, by at least three times, and use a much bigger gauge wire to reduce the Coils Impedance. This will allow a greater Power Output on this Coil.

Jagau may want to share more on the optimum output gain for the Secondary Coil? We have a method of calculating the optimum Coil Length / Inductance.

For Itsu:

Continuing the search.......

For Chris:
?t=312

Your Input is NOT AC Itsu!

RMS is Not Correct for DC Measurements on the Input! Sorry the Video you shared does very clearly show that RMS is ONLY Accurate for AC Sinusoidal Source Waveforms! I urge you to do some very simple Math that can very easily prove this simple fact. Please see our: Measurements Thread!

It is NOT correct to use RMS on a DC Source, period. Sorry, but this basic fact must be realised by any Serious Researcher. A Non-Linear Load can also prove this fact, and give the greatest margin of Error from a DC Source. I would put this to Verpies, he is the only one over there that can verify this simple fact. 😉The others just don't have the expertise! See Here for a little extra information.

A DC Source designed for Conventional Current:

Conventional current flows from the positive pole (terminal) to the negative pole. Electrons flow from negative to positive. In a direct current (DC) circuit, current flows in one direction only, and one pole is always negative and the other pole is always positive.

Is physically unable to supply Negative Currents, and in this Case, RMS is all inclusive of Negative Currents, adding them to the Input:

Including the Red part of the above Image as Input Power, when it is NOT! Its Negative Power!

Power Flow in a Four Quadrant Argand Diagram

RMS Math:

Instantaneous Readings:

1 Volt x -1 Amp = -1 Watt
√((1 Volt x -1 Amp)² / 1) = 1 Watt = INCORRECT !!!

Again, please do the Math, this will prove it to you and show the voices that are in your ear, to be completely WRONG AGAIN !!!

Of course, a DC Power Source is Incapable of Supplying Negative Conventional Current when it is designed to Supply a Positive Conventional Current!

EG:

1.28 Watts RMS
0.0957 Watt's Average

Isn't it? Well? Honestly... Does anyone not see a problem with the guru's stupidity? Can a DC Source Supply the Reverse Current? No! Its then an AC Source isn't it !!!

Please Itsu, do your own Homework, careful who you listen to!

Schooling the Gurus again, we are!

Load Impedance is important, we have said this for quite some time now, and yet LED's are not the best load. Don't use CFL's:

LED bulbs refer to artificial lighting devices that use tiny solid-state semiconductors to produce light. On the other hand, CFL bulbs connote the lighting device that uses electrical discharge to induce the gases present in the tube, that releases UV light, that affects the phosphor to produce bright visible light.

I am pleased to see Itsu's effort, and the humble approach now adopted, Thank You Itsu!!!

Best Wishes,

Chris

P.S: I see some Trolls joining the party over there... Maybe they might learn something, one never knows with Trolls!

Some of the dumbest things are said by the dumbest people sometimes! 🤡Shame!

Liked by
and 3 others

Jagau posted this 12 July 2022 - Last edited 12 July 2022

Hi all

As for the dimensions of the core, I refer you to line 009 of the attached document.

There is no ready-made formula, it is through experimentation that we find.

You have to work a little to succeed and it's those who work who succeed, not those who only copy.

A few years ago Adrian S. Nastase Phd Electronic engeenering said:You can think of it like this:

You can think of it like this: A pulse signal with its amplitude between 0 and Vp (its peak value)and a duty-cycle d, has the average value:
VpulseAverage = d*Vp

Jagau

Attached Files

Liked by

Admin

Chris posted this 12 July 2022 - Last edited 13 July 2022

My Friends,

I am sad to report, the response from Itsu is not a sensible, logical approach:

For Chris,

the beauty of power measurements with a scope is that the scope does not care what kind of signal it has, DC, AC, peak, square, sinuous etc.
It just takes millions of samples of the signals (not rms, not mean, not ...) from its buffer and multiply (in this case) those instantaneously getting millions instantaneous power values which then get averaged (mean) presenting the average power across that buffer.

So nobody is using rms value's to calculate power, those rms value's you see on the voltage and current are JUST a representation of the signals measured by the scope, it does NOT use them for calculating power.

I don't pretend to be a guru in anything, so please anyone with extended knowledge on scope power measurement techniques step forward and either confirm, deny and/or improve on my above statement.

Concerning the dimensions of L2, i did use several different L2's, see above post #7, but all shows similar output value's (65 to 160mW), so i hope Jagau can shed some light on what dimensions he uses to get cop > 1.

Regards Itsu

Itsu

Ref: A Melnichenko effect replication

I understand what you are saying Itsu, I understand very well how a Scope works, Thank You.

Your Scope is taking the RMS Values for that Channel:

You are averaging: Instantaneous V _RMS x I _RMS = P in Watts

1.657 V _RMS
267.4 mA _RMS

Which is Wrong! You cant do it this way, not on DC Input! I know this scope shot is not your Input... But using this as an example.

Very simply, compare a Sinusoidal Waveform with each channel, one Mean and one RMS, the difference will amaze you! I have already shown this in the: Measurements Thread, if you go and Read it!

However, any setting on RMS means you have the Scope Calculating RMS for the Buffer Size across the data points captured.

RMS is Specifically designed for AC, Alternating Current Only! It can NOT be used for DC, Direct Current, at all.

RMS or root mean square current/voltage of the alternating current/voltage represents the d.c. current/voltage that dissipates the same amount of power as the average power dissipated by the alternating current/voltage. For sinusoidal oscillations, the RMS value equals peak value divided by the square root of 2.

Ref: RMS Current

The Oscilloscope will take the RMS Value, if you capture the RMS Value, again, which is wrong! Please do the Math!

The term “RMS” stands for “Root-Mean-Squared”. Most books define this as the “amount of AC power that produces the same heating effect as an equivalent DC power”, or something similar along these lines, but an RMS value is more than just that.

Ref: RMS Voltage Tutorial

Its a real shame, because not a single measurement can be accurately represented, unless the Correct Data Points are Calculated! Its sadly a fact, that these are the same people, telling Itsu how to measure incorrectly, that have been telling everyone for decades, that their Measurement Data is wrong! I can show you thread after thread that states that you should use RMS on a DC Source, when you absolutely Should NOT !!!

Ask yourself, why have they insisted on RMS for so long? Is it a means to falsify the Data just in case others did get something of Value?

RMS can NEVER Measure any Negative Power, RMS is ALWAYS Positive, never accounting for any Reverse Currents! It Should NOT be used on DC if one wants Accurate Measurements! Should we not expect measurements to be accurate if measurements are to be given?

For those providing Measurements, they should be providing accurate Measurements, that are in-line, with Industry Standard Definitions, and Defined Values and Guidelines!

I have provided the evidence, the proof is right here, with References, if you persist to make in-accurate measurements, I can no longer assist.

This is Jagau's Thread and I do not wish to waste any more resources on his Thread, Sorry Jagau!

Best Wishes,

Chris

Liked by

SonOfLuck posted this 13 July 2022 - Last edited 13 July 2022

( Hi Chris

(I'm pretty sure I will be labeled a troll for this, which i'm not)

You are averaging: Instantaneous V _RMS x I _RMS = P in Watts

1.657 V _RMS

267.4 mA _RMS

_{1.657 * 0.267 = 0.442419 ~= 442mW
This is not the value that Itsu reported for this image.
Itsu stated 381 mW wich is the mean of ( V measures multiplied by A measures )}

itsu measurment

_{And you saying that's the correct way. Every wattage reported by Itsu was calculated this way, you can check.
Sorry Jagau! )}

Liked by

Admin

Chris posted this 13 July 2022 - Last edited 13 July 2022

Hi SonOfLuck,

Yes, I have done the math, which is not a conclusive answer to the problem!

If Itsu can show in Scope Math Functions where he is setting Mean or Average Values for each Channel, I will accept his answer, however, currently, the Scope is showing RMS Values! Of course I have already pointed this out.

EDIT:

Post 1:

Post 12:

There you have it, Margin of Error: ≅ 0.5 Watts, a large error! 10.43%

Even with less cycles on the screen...

If a Scope Shot is shown, then the Scope Shot should show the Correct Values! Other wise its misleading and incorrect, Accurate Measurements can NOT be assumed, again as is pointed out.

Mean or Average, same thing, must be used on DC Input!

Best Wishes,

Chris

Liked by

Admin

Chris posted this 13 July 2022

Thank You Itsu:

Thank You for showing Correct and much more Accurate Measurements. More coming soon, stay tuned...

FYI, Brian's Thread has some more data.

Best Wishes,

Chris

Liked by

Jagau posted this 13 July 2022 - Last edited 13 July 2022

Taking measurements in our ongoing experiments is as important as the experiment itself.

I have no objection to everyone contributing in the way of taking measures that will have a certain value. However, we must do it with a certain order and respect for others because we are all here to learn and we do not all have the same skill to experience.

That being said I congratulate here on this forum and all those who experiment on the Melnichenko effect as well as Itsu who is a member of another forum and who also makes great efforts to achieve this experiment. If other forums want to experiment and well by my humble little thread on the Melnichenko effect, I will be delighted and the whole community of researchers will make sure that we succeed together.

It seems misunderstood that when we are in the presence of different waveforms the way of calculation is different , in our case here i will explain how take measurements in the presence of a pulsed voltage from 0 to Vmax.

It will be the subject of the following post

Jagau

Liked by
and 1 others

Admin

Chris posted this 13 July 2022 - Last edited 13 July 2022

Hey Jagau,

You're a noble, honorable, and very skilled Member! Thank You for all your Efforts! Its a pleasure to have you here with us!

It is a shame, that none of the so called experts, came to Itsu's aid! - What happened there?

FYI: 2015 Do NOT use RMS:

which generates an instantaneous power waveform, then take the _average_ (not RMS) value of that IP waveform.

Ref: Accurate Measurements on pulsed system's harder than you think.

Interesting read, observe Names and Recommendations for more insight!

I am sure the non-public thread over at the other forum is filled with panic and desperation right about now... What are they Cooking up now I wonder?

Best Wishes,

Chris

Liked by
and 1 others

Admin

Chris posted this 14 July 2022

My Friends,

Jagau has given us an Equation that Calculates the Average Voltage:

You can think of it like this: A pulse signal with its amplitude between 0 and Vp (its peak value)and a duty-cycle d, has the average value:
VpulseAverage = d*Vp

Lets look at some examples:

Voltage Peak V_P = 10 Volts
Duty Cycle d = 50%
V_Average = d * V_P = 0.5 * 10 = 5.0 Volts Average

Another:

Voltage Peak V_P = 10 Volts
Duty Cycle d = 10%
V_Average = d * V_P = 0.1 * 10 = 1.0 Volts Average

These Average Values, they are logical! They Make sense for an Average Value.

Thank You Jagau!

Best Wishes,

Chris

Liked by

Jagau posted this 14 July 2022 - Last edited 14 July 2022

Hi Chris
Maybe an example with an image is easier to understand.

It is very very important that this applies that in the case of a square wave which does not go down below 0 volts, it is always positive. If you have a square wave varying from plus to minus you should not use this formula.

Jagau

Liked by

Admin

Chris posted this 15 July 2022 - Last edited 15 July 2022

Hey Jagau,

With your Statement:

It is very very important that this applies that in the case of a square wave which does not go down below 0 volts, it is always positive.

I completely agree with this statement!

I posted this image to Brian's thread, and think it is sensible to also post here:

I have a problem with the math, not with what you are saying, but with the Area Under the Curve. In other words, the Integrated Area in a Single Cycle.

We have Data Points that are recorded on the Scope, and all Area under the Waveform, above Zero is Active Area that is to be used in the Calculations of Power. Some well known Area Equations:

Square area formula: A = a²
Rectangle area formula: A = a * b
Triangle area formulas:
- A = b * h / 2 or
- A = 0.5 * a * b * sin( γ ) or
- A = 0.25 * √( ( a + b + c ) * ( -a + b + c ) * ( a - b + c ) * ( a + b - c ) ) or
- A = a² * sin( β ) * sin( γ ) / (2 * sin( β + γ ))
Circle area formula: A = πr²
Circle sector area formula: A = r² * angle / 2
Ellipse area formula: A = a * b * π
Trapezoid area formula: A = ( a + b ) * h / 2
Parallelogram area formulas:
- A = a * h or
- A = a * b * sin( angle ) or
- A = e * f * sin( angle )
Rhombus area formulas:
- A = a * h or
- A = ( e * f ) / 2 or
- A = s² * sin( angle )
Kite area formulas:
- A = ( e * f ) / 2 or
- A = a * b * sin( γ )
Pentagon area formula: A = a² * √( 25 + 10√5 ) / 4
Hexagon area formula: A = 3/2 * √3 * a²
Octagon area formula: A = 2 * ( 1 + √2 ) * a²
Annulus area formula: A = π( R² - r² )
Quadrilateral area formula: A = e * f * sin( angle )
Regular polygon area formula: A = n * a² * cot( π/n ) / 4

If we use: 10 Volts_Peak, and a Duty Cycle of: 50% and set our Area to 100 Squares, for One Cycle:

I have to say, I am not in agreeance with Dr Adrian S. Nastase. We get a result that does not appear to be correct:

RMS of 10 Volts_Peak = 7.07106781 Volts, or 70.7106781 Squares above the Zero Line in One Cycle.
Average of 10 Volts_Peak = 5.0 Volts, or 50 Squares above the Zero Line in One Cycle.

Taking One Cycle, at 10 Volts and 50% Duty Cycle, then we get:

100 Squares x 0.5 = 50 Squares at 10 Volts, and 50 Squares at Zero Volts.

Over one Cycle, we have an Average Voltage of 5 Volts, so the Green line makes sense to use, as the RMS gives a greater usage of Voltage, by 2.07106781 Volts. Because the Sine Wave is Non Symmetrical between Zero and Peak, I fully understand why RMS is used for Sinusoidal Waveforms:

RMS means ‘Root Mean Square’ in mathematics. It is also referred to as quadratic mean. The RMS is very useful in many fields, particularly in electrical engineering and in the domain of signal amplifiers. RMS is very useful when the random variables in the data are negative and positive such as sinusoids.

Read more: Difference Between RMS and Average

I just cant make sense of this Jagau, sorry My Friend, but to me, this is not Correct?

For alternating electric current, RMS is equal to the value of the constant direct current that would produce the same power dissipation in a resistive load.

I just can not agree that RMS is valid for Square Waves, or on a DC Input Source. I am sorry My Friend... 😉

Which means less Input in the end.

Chris

Liked by

SonOfLuck posted this 15 July 2022

Hi Chris,

Consider this....

1V peak pulse(0 bottom) with 50% duty cycle on a 1 ohm Resistor gives us 1A peak pulse.
if you multiply the measured data points you get 1 W peak pulse.
Now you average it and you get 0.5 W.

Now if you average the 1V pulse and 1A pulse, that gives us 0.5V and 0.5A, this value feels right ( to me at least) in the individual context, but if you multiply them that's 0.25W.

Now if you RMS the 1V pulse and 1A pulse, that gives us 0.707V and 0.707A. For me its weird to say that

1+0+1+0+1+0+1+0+......+1+0

a series like this the average value to be 0.707, BUT if you multiply the values that's 0.5W.

From this it's seems like RMS is king, but we don't need to go far to see that's not truly the case.
itsu measurment

Here the RMS V and A multiplication gives different W than the measured and averaged value, 381mW vs 442mW.

Best regards,
SonOfLuck

Liked by

Admin

Chris posted this 15 July 2022 - Last edited 15 July 2022

Hey SonOfLuck,

Some good points there! I am running an experiment at the moment. Long winded math to show the RMS and Mean are totally different Math Problems and that RMS should not be used on DC or even Pulsed DC Systems, in General.

If you look at the Pro's, Graham Gunderson, he uses Mean:

Graham Gunderson is a very high level Electronics Engineer in my opinion, he has worked in many High level positions and is a professional at what he does.

TinselKoala, TK has a very extensive history in Metrology and he uses Mean, recommends to NOT use RMS:

which generates an instantaneous power waveform, then take the _average_ (not RMS) value of that IP waveform.

Ref: Accurate Measurements on pulsed system's harder than you think.

Interesting read, observe Names and Recommendations for more insight!

I have to agree, when you say:

From this it's seems like RMS is king, but we don't need to go far to see that's not truly the case.

Here the RMS V and A multiplication gives different W than the measured and averaged value, 381mW vs 442mW.

Its not hard to show mathematically, that RMS is not always Correct! However, like Jagau said:

It is very very important that this applies that in the case of a square wave which does not go down below 0 volts, it is always positive. If you have a square wave varying from plus to minus you should not use this formula.

Generally, RMS and Mean, in most Positive going V and I, the Values will be pretty similar. I showed this in my video here:

RMS is an AC, Alternating Current Calculation:

For DC and Pulsed DC Systems, generally Mean or Average Should be Used. This is especially true when one has a Non-Linear Load.

Best Wishes,

Chris

Liked by

Admin

Chris posted this 16 July 2022

My Friends,

Itsu's center coil:

does anyone see a problem with it?

Increasing CSA by packing the core with tape?

Best Wishes,

Chris

Liked by

Jagau posted this 17 July 2022 - Last edited 17 July 2022

Hi Chris
Sorry for the long return, very busy with my family these days.
In the meantime, what we are doing here is very important, we will establish the basics of a simple but effective calculation for our projects like this. There is no forum on the planet that has actually done to date.
Let's be patient and take the time to find the solid and certain formula.
I will make other comments later to discuss this very interesting point.
jagau

Liked by

Admin

Chris posted this 22 July 2022 - Last edited 22 July 2022

@Jagau - Should we let the cat out of the bag?

@Itsu, work with this in mind:

Voltage is "Generated", via Charge Separation.
Current is Pumped. via M.M.F Opposition.

Making a few Coils do More Work in the System is very easy when one realizes that one can manipulate the Magnetic Field to do the Generation for you...

Best Wishes,

Chris

Liked by
and 2 others

Admin

Chris posted this 31 July 2022 - Last edited 31 July 2022

@Itsu,

You need to study what CSA or Cross Sectional Area is! How it works and why its IMPORTANT!

You're wasting your time with this:

Ref: WTF Man?

I really don't know why some people persist with something that is not going to work!

If you happened to study Melnichenko, you would see, as I have already told you, the Core is about three times bigger:

СВОБОДНАЯ ГЕНЕРАЦИЯ Андрей Мельниченко translates to: FREE GENERATION Andrey Melnichenko

Andrey Melnichenko's YouTube Channel is: www.youtube.com / channel/UCEtqI2EhN32Mvq7Wp5G9Vpg/videos

Andrey Melnichenko's Core is about three times the size of Itsu's at minimum!

A Replication requires some Attention to Detail!

Best Wishes,

Chris

Liked by

Admin

Chris posted this 31 July 2022 - Last edited 31 July 2022

My Friends,

See what I mean:

gyula has asked me to comment on Melnichenko's statements he posted in Reply#40 above. The set up Itsu has just tested can be modeled in FEMM using the axisymmetric method which is a true 3D solution. I have done this modeling the core with greater mu in the r dimension (the radial dimension) than the z dimension (the length dimension). I used mu = 10,000 for the radial dimension and mu = 100 for the length dimension. There is no overunity in that situation. Melnichenko is correct in making observations that the anisotropy of the core will affect the magnetic energy stored for a given ampere turns of current, but I can find no evidence that this can lead to OU. My opinion on his other statements of dividing the core into individual sections each with its own winding is that also will not produce OU. I will have a go at doing a simulation of such an approach and report back.
Smudge

Ref: A Melnichenko effect replication

Hey good idea, try to simulate this, "a true 3D solution" WOW... That will give you a definitive answer... For SURE 🤪

Just maybe, a simulation of something you have ZERO Idea about will give you some answers?

AH: I really don't think so!

Hmmm, well, it can and does, go Above Unity, when this is done correctly, but by all means, write this off before you even understand how Above Unity Machines Work! That's a good idea!

Smudge is completely Wrong, Entirely Wrong! When Smudge realises why The Generator Shaft has nothing to do with the Electrical Energy output on the Electric Generator, that Shaft Torque is a By Product of the Electrical Energy and not the Cause, then maybe he might have a bit more success...

Hmm, all I can do is shake my Head!

Best Wishes,

Chris

Liked by

Jagau posted this 01 August 2022

Hi friends
Back from a trip, I will take the time to read, a little late to resume.
Jagau

Liked by

Jagau posted this 03 August 2022 - Last edited 03 August 2022

When Melnichenko talks about three-core this is what he's talking about.

This image taken from a video of Melnichenko

The center air core or magnetization coil and the other two at the T-shaped ends, wth 3mm insulation in red

Jagau

Liked by

Admin

Chris posted this 03 August 2022 - Last edited 19 October 2022

My Friends,

I can confirm, Jagau's recommendation will, under specific conditions, work as is intended!

Don't forget however, Coil Geometry defines the Magnetic Field, the Magnetic Field defines Voltage "Generated" via Charge Separation, and the Current Pumped via Opposing M.M.F's! So, Design is an important factor here.

Best Wishes,

Chris

Liked by

Jagau posted this 03 August 2022 - Last edited 03 August 2022

Hi Chris

In the arrangement of the air core on the magnetic core,

the coupling coefficient is a paradox, it works in reverse,
Statement from Melnichenko, at line 39 his patent 2022

It is important to simultaneously increase the magnetization and, at the same time, weaken the magnetic coupling of the ferromagnet with the inductor

This is one of the most important things about his invention,

it shouldn't have almost any magnetic feedback effect on the primary,

but as he says in his videos there is always a little.

Jagau

Liked by

Admin

Chris posted this 03 August 2022 - Last edited 03 August 2022

Hey Jagau,

You are correct! The equation: H1+ H2 + H3 = H3 also shows this, also the equation I came up with: 1 + -1 + 1 = 1 also verifies this.

However, one must have a very good Magnetic Resonance! Slightly out of resonance and this is changed greatly!

Floyd Sweet was down in the Microwatts, I am still in the Milliwatts so still have some work to do yet. Magnetic Field H, or M.M.F. is a Factor, increase H or the M.M.F, and this helps!

@All Readers

Please Note, Jagau has succeeded simply because he has put in the work! Study and also experiment! Jagau has followed the path with an open mind, and investigated phenomena properly!

If you do the same, you will succeed also! We will help you all the way!

Best Wishes,

Chris

Liked by

Admin

Chris posted this 03 August 2022

Appologies to Jagau for posting Itsu's work here, please say and I will move to another thread if you wish?

I want to quote:

I did some measurements on this new BIGGER L2 coil made of 3 stacked ferrite toroids as core

Using a 100 Ohm 1% induction free resistor as lamp1 and a 12V / 5W lamp as lamp2, i have a 219 / 211V BEMF spike across L1 @ 36V input voltage.

FG:1.5KHz @ 10% duty cycle

The input power in that situation is:

with lamp2 load off: 3.2W
with lamp2 load on: 3.2W

The power into the 100 Ohm lamp1 load is:

with lamp2 load off: 3.2W
with lamp2 load on: 2.1W

The power into the lamp2 load is:

with lamp2 load off: 0mW
with lamp2 load on: 855mW some light in the 12V / 5W lamp

At 36V input voltage, the lamp2 load when switched on does take / shares its power from Lamp1 once again.

Efficiency with:

Lamp2 load off: 3.2W / 3.2W = 1 = 100% Max. efficiency up till now with L2 off
Lamp2 load on: 2.95W / 3.2W = 0.92 = 92%

Itsu

@Jagau, any Recommendations for Itsu?

I have many, but will wait for others to share their opinions first!

Best Wishes,

Chris

Liked by

Jagau posted this 03 August 2022 - Last edited 03 August 2022

Hi Chris

Itsu's works are going very well here, he makes a lot of effort to get a good result and I respect his ideas, he does various tests and several kinds of experiments like the last one with a linear load at the nput.

This is how we advance by experimenting.
The most important recommendation is taking measurements, input versus output.

I'm pretty sure many have tried the Melnichenko effect but don't understand how to take and interpret their measurements and they may have been successful without knowing it.

I confess that I would like to see as many efforts of the members here. Many read here and don't share anything.
Jagau

Liked by
and 2 others

Admin

Chris posted this 03 August 2022

Hi Jagau,

I agree 100% with your statements!

Any Recommendations for Itsu?

Best Wishes,

Chris

Liked by

Jagau posted this 03 August 2022 - Last edited 03 August 2022

Yes I made them in the last post with the 3 photos,

don't worry he will understand,

he still likes to read here like many.

Jagau

Liked by

Admin

Chris posted this 04 August 2022 - Last edited 19 October 2022

My Friends,

Jagau is correct, some Coils work better than others! Largely this is due to the Coils Geometry!

However, If I may,

I would suggest Itsu stay with his current coils only checking the V_Out individually on each Coil at T_OFF on the Mosfet. Comparing V_Out in a Single Scope Shot. Making sure the Scope Triggering is set to L1 only so we can see the Timing.

Then I would like to see a scope shot of L1 and L2's Currents, making sure the Phase is correct and the method defined, e.g: Conventional Current or Electron Current. Of course, this is to inspect the function of L1 and L2's Opposing Magnetic Fields, a Very Well Known Requirement as we all know!

Itsu needs to find the Resonant Frequency of the Coils individually, but in the current configuration! We need to know the range in which we are working in and compare to current frequencies!

Itsu last stated:

FG:1.5KHz @ 10% duty cycle

So, lets see where Resonance lays and compare. Don't forget, Reducing the Duty Cycle is like a Change in Frequency you could almost say. Coils behave according to Antenna Theory, so the fundamental Resonances are Important!

Region of Interest:

ROI ≅ L_{1 Resonance} + L_{2 Resonance} / 2.

Lastly, if Itsu can confirm the Turns on L2 vs L1, as L2 needs to be more turns, and we can go into this later on.

Some advice, stay on track! Look at the Effects First, then the Measurements! I expect you should have seen one or two anomalies on the scope about now! I guess if you're not looking?

Itsu, look for this:

Your 10% should be the Regauge Period! Look for this and work on this, this is Asymmetrical Regauging and once done right, you will see a whole new world open up for you! Your Input will be Insignificant compared to the Output! You know you have something when you gain this operation! Which is really easy!

Best Wishes,

Chris

P.S: All this has been covered here for many years now 😉

Liked by
and 1 others

Admin

Chris posted this 07 August 2022 - Last edited 19 October 2022

My Friends,

For some time I have shared little bits of work, a trail of crumbs if you like, to what I found. Few follow this path with any accuracy!

I want to be clear: Andrey Melnichenko is responsible for the GLED:

Akula Replicated the GLED:

As have I, and I have given demonstrations and examples:

Ref: Chris's replication of Andrey Melnichenko's GLED

I have pointed people in the direction to observe the required effects for a long time now:

My Friends,

This thread is soon becoming one of the most important threads here on this forum.

Time ( t ), time is a critical factor, it is a dependant factor in Electrical Energy; which is defined as Joules ( J ) per second. One Watt Hour ( Wh ) is: Joules ( J ) per second x 3600, because there is 3600 seconds in one hour. So, one Watt Hour ( Wh ) is equal to 3600 Joules ( J )

So, the "Generation" of Energy, is time dependant.

Lets observe this image in some detail:

You can see, we have Triangles in the Blue Waveform, clearly seen:

In the Blue Waveform, we see there is a line up of the Spikes, I have marked this in Red. These Triangles are the same as I have pointed out above:

This is where the Coils build up a Potential, this "Generates" Current, the Pump, the Tap is open for a Flow. Currents are Equal and Opposite. Lenz's Law, a Natural State, a state that Nature requires for a System to come back to Equilibrium. A closer look:

Its hard to see in a Sinusoidal System, DC Pulsing is a lot easier to see what's going on. Lets listen to one example:

Lets look at two examples:

Ref: Tinman ( Bradley Richard Atherton ) - The Rotary Transformer.

Ref: Graham Gunderson - The MIT.

Many times we have seen examples of this Triangle Waveform, its the same as I have described here:

As long as we have a Voltage on the Y Axis, we have a Pump that can Pump Current for the time indicated on the X Axis.

All we need do, is create the Voltage, its Asymmetrical Regauging, described as:

Ref: Tom Bearden - The Tale of Rajah

Right here we see not just one, but four examples...

Chris

P.S: Some of my videos have been removed from YouTube and there is no explanation why.

Now I have to say, some seem to pay attention and succeed: Captainloz is one example! Some do not!

Itsu posted an image as requested, by my last post:

Ref: Itsu's Thread - A Melnichenko effect replication

This is wrong, its not how the Melnichenko Effects Works! L₂ should be conducting a few micro seconds, D₂ V_Conduct or break over Voltage, Delayed Conduction, D₂ Conducts just after IGBT T_On! Itsu's Polarities are Incorrect!

I want to point out more, but at the moment, this is the first and most important issue!

Please go and read Itsu's post and thread if you have not already.

So, I cant help but get frustrated when I see these sorts of comments:

I was waiting for certain people to publish the secret, hasn't happened.

Ref: Ronee - Itsu's Thread - A Melnichenko effect replication

Its like saying:

I was waiting for Mummy to put her tit on my mouth!

Very little Studding, Research and Observation done!

All Answers lay right under your Noses! On the ONLY,True, Open Source, Energy Forum in the World that has Real, Live, Working Answers, for all of Humanity! All Backed by Independent Replication, Sciences Verification of Truth!

Best Wishes,

Chris

Liked by

Jagau posted this 07 August 2022 - Last edited 07 August 2022

Yes as you say Chris
Andrey has posted 293 videos on this topic.
Did it clearly reveal how to do it??
No

So why is so much expected of us?
Work a little it does not kill anyone. Tried to understand above all, not to copy paste...

I wouldn't say that for Istu who made great efforts to find, thank you Itsu.

And others here who try thank too

Jagau

Liked by

Admin

Chris posted this 08 August 2022 - Last edited 19 October 2022

@Jagau I agree, sadly... However, we have ALL Answers right here!

@All Readers,

The old Folk Tale of Sisyphus keeps coming to mind:

In Greek mythology, Sisyphus or Sisyphos was the founder and king of Ephyra. Zeus punished him for cheating death twice by forcing him to roll an immense boulder up a hill only for it to roll down every time it neared the top, repeating this action for eternity.

Sometimes I think this is in need of a more broad interpretation! I think we Humans have some VERY Bad Habits of doing things the absolute Hardest and sometimes most Impossible ways! We must think Simple! We must FORCE our minds to think Simply about things:

Very Simple: The Coils must Generate excess Voltage and Current, this is done by Magnetic Resonance and Asymmetrical Electromagnetic Induction! Nothing more simple!

Power the Load, with 2 B x V, and do not over complicate Simple Things!!!

Best Wishes,

Chris

Liked by

Admin

Chris posted this 08 August 2022

My Friends,

Itsu's Response:

Concerning the polarization of L2 in the above screenshot with the voltage and currents, it deliberately is chosen that way so that the power induced into L2 comes from the "demagnetization phase" aka "collapsing magnetic field phase" aka the "bemf phase" of the cycle, as that is, according to Melnichenko and Jagau, where the free energy comes from.
Jagau correct me when wrong!

The below screenshot is from when the L2 connections are swapped, so showing the other polarization effect of L2:

We see that now the Power into L2 is induced during the magnetization phase of the cycle which is, according to melnichenko and Jagau, NOT where the free energy comes from.
Jagau correct me when wrong!

If those signals are still wrong, even when they are coming from a close replication of the circuit used by Melnichenko, then the circuit is wrong or the effect claimed is not there.

Itsu

Ref: A Melnichenko effect replication

I just want to point out again, on this thread:

Yes, this image of the current is very important and

I confirm that I also find it in the Melnichenko thread effect.

Jagau

Ref: Partnered Output Coils - Free Energy

The Conduction of the Diodes only stops if the applied voltage polarity changes or drops below the break over voltage! All Coils should not change their polarity during One Full Cycle! I have no idea what you're talking about? This is purely a DC System!

Potential goes Up, Potential comes Down:

Itsu, please try harder and follow the very simple instruction we have given!

Best Wishes,

Chris

Liked by

Admin

Chris posted this 09 August 2022 - Last edited 09 August 2022

My Friends,

I see Itsu's frustration:

Concerning replications:

When an inventor (Melnichenko) or a replicator (Jagau) claims a certain effect (like COP > 1 by both), and REQUESTS other replicators to join them to confirm this claim,
it is IMHO the DUTY of the claimant to provide the replicators with ALL information needed to come to the same result (COP > 1).

If you want to entertain people by presenting puzzles to them, you should not REQUEST for replicators to join, but puzzle enthusiasts.

Throwing bread crumbs and expecting the replicators to figure out how it works without showing the used circuit, some in- and output measurements, components used, etc.
will quickly raise the suspicion that the claimant does NOT have anything special to show and is provoking the replicators to connect the dots and find the effect for him.

I know Jagau is not such a person and there are probably some other factors involved why he is so reluctant to provide details of his working circuit, but this leads to
nothing and only gets the honest working replicators frustrated (not to mention the costs involved).

We are all in this for the benefit of humankind, so playing games on "who is the best" or "who is light years ahead" or "who knows it all" is childish the least and bordering to unacceptable behavior IMO.

Itsu

And, in defense of Jagau, I advised against sharing too much information! Sharing too much Information makes one a Target and one is ENDLESSLY Harassed like Captainloz was and as a result the researcher ends up going quiet and no longer being an active part of the community!

Captainloz gave you 100% of the data, as has Jagau, and you still cant make it work!

In the end, we have given you 100% of the data! Its all here on THIS Website!

Polarity of L₁'s Voltage changes at Mosfet T_Off, the CURRENT Does NOT!
Polarity of L₂'s Voltage and Current do NOT Change!
This is purely a DC System and there is no AC Component here!
Voltage is Generated in L₂ at Mosfet T_On and the Potential of BOTH L₁ and L₂ increase to V_Max over Time t, at this point the Mosfet is turned Off, T_Off, and the Demagnetisation Phase occurs!
The Demagnetisation Phase must always be longer in Time t than the Magnetisation Phase!
Through this entire period, L₁ and L₂ oppose each other!

Jagau is NOT Responsible for Itsu's lack of Understanding! And is not responsible for the lack of Required Study!

Of course, for the community, we need to make sure that Good people get enough information to make a replication, and the Greedy, Capitalistic, Opportunistic, just looking for a Patent Score, are left in the Wind! No one wants these sorts of people around! There is no progress when one steals it and patents it is there!

So, Itsu, I feel your pain, but at the end of the day, your frustration stems from a lack of basic understanding in Electromagnetic Induction and How Coils can show Interactions that are not currently in any literature, anywhere, except on this site: www.aboveunity.com with Hundreds of Examples and Demonstrations!

Captainloz removed some of his videos because he was being harassed so much by the way and he and I communicate outside the forum now! How sad is that!

Best Wishes,

Chris

@Jagau - Just ignore the Harassment! I have had it for years! It doesn't go away, but focusing on the evidence shows how much others still yet have to learn!

We can NOT LEARN FOR THEM!

Also, don't forget, some are out to make a Mockery of the Evidence and try to make it look like machines don't work when the truth is they do! Some are Paid Dis-Informationilists with very low IQ's! I have your back My Friend!

P.S: Some of these people were the Super Trolls I had nothing but problems with over at one of the other forums! Itsu was not one of Them! Read more Here and Here! Remember this Girls? Wow have we set fire to a bunch of Trolls! Trust the Plan!

Liked by

Admin

Chris posted this 10 August 2022 - Last edited 10 August 2022

Gyula,

thanks for the extensive point by point analysis, this is a skill i lack still and very useful.

Like Chris, i would like to see some different kind of signals coming out of this circuit (less input and more output preferable), but the scope does not lie and presents these conventional signals belonging
to this conventional fly back circuit.

I can not magically change those signals to something more promising, it is what it is.

I tried both the original Melnichenko circuit and the modified by Jagau circuit with several coils and cores, but they all stay within the conventional 70 to 90% efficiency range.

I still have some modifications pending on the L1 and L2 coil / core, presented by Jagau, so we will see if it will change much.

Regards Kees

Ref: A Melnichenko effect replication

Hello Itsu,

You need to think Simply about this and NOT complicate these very simple things that entry level Electrical Engineers have mastered: Standard Buck Boost Converter

Waveform:

Any Alternating Current there? Or is it Purely a DC System? Hmm Trolls everywhere!

Which is as we have shown!

Yes, this image of the current is very important and

I confirm that I also find it in the Melnichenko thread effect.

Jagau

Ref: Partnered Output Coils - Free Energy

As Tariel Kapanadze said, pointed out here, Andrey Melnichenko was on the right track:

Ref: Current and Voltage Amplification key to Energy Machines

Very Simply, follow what we have given you! There is nothing hard, complex, or difficult to any of this!

Only Trolls try to over complicate simple things! They Lie, Cheat, Steal and make a concerted effort to confuse others! That's their job! Stupid people with big mouths and very very low IQ's also qualify BTW!

That's why we are Light Years Ahead! We have eliminated all Trolls! We have made massive progress because we are a Troll Free Zone!

Best Wishes,

Chris

P.S: A Well Designed Buck Boost Implementation can be around 99% Efficient! So how do we push this Dogmatic Boundary? The Answer is right in front of everyone's face! Plain, Simple, Straightforward! Cheap and Easy! Aboveunity.com has given it to you!

Liked by
and 1 others

Aetherholic posted this 11 August 2022 - Last edited 11 August 2022

My first post in a long time.

COP = 20 in a different but not too far removed configuration. And no im not going to post it, just to ratify the effect is real. (measurements verified by scientific report) and loopback self running. Trust in Jagu and Chris and all the information Chris has provided. 2000% the truth.

PS:

Put black tape over your psu meters. Use an integrating power meter with high sampling rate rate for the input power. Alternatively, use oscilloscope and use the calculation I will post in a separate thread tomorrow which is a simple verified equivalent. OU is being hidden in measurement errors.

Aetherholic - One truth, One field

Liked by
and 1 others

Jagau posted this 11 August 2022 - Last edited 11 August 2022

hi all

Finally back from another excursion.

I took the time to read some statement and all I wanted to do is close the topic and not share anything more. When I read the last message from Aetherholic it gave me hope to continue but it didn't take long for me to stop all that.

Some wants to make me pass like a madman but unfortunately this is not the case, extremly disappointed with the attitudes of other researchers on other forums. I never thought one day I would be hated because I got a little ahead of the others. I agree with Chris's thoughts and I understand even better now that it is not good to share everything, cursed jealousy. Whenever someone finds something interesting, we make him look crazy. I even received several disturbing private messages.

You do well Aetherholic not to say everything and shared I understand you, thank you for the encouragement. Don't make the same mistake I made of sharing too much.

Finally for those who think they have tried everything, you have misread Melnichenko's patents. No one has yet told me about current phase shift and reverse magnetization, re-read the patents don't wait for me to tell you what to do that won't happen.

All I've seen of you all so far are just very simple little flybacks, A beginner in electronics can do this easily. You are supposed to be valuable researcher, stop relying on others to succeed, experiment, it doesn't hurt and for those who talk to me about the cost, stop it right away you are not on the right track. There is no enigma here, learn to read and understand Melnichenko's patents, I didn't write them. Maybe you think he's crazy too.

@Itsu, as replicators and like thousands of other replicators around the world, get out of the way that I owe you something and it's the same for you, you owe me nothing. We are entirely free to reply or not to reply, there is no obligation, blame yourself and the misinterpretation of Melnichenko's patents if you have not succeeded. I trusted you and you lost it, your true personality came out. I must say that I had been warned.

Jagau

Liked by

Admin

Chris posted this 11 August 2022 - Last edited 13 August 2022

My Friends,

And there you have it... Troll Strike Thwarted AGAIN! 😎

My Friends, here on this Forum, are Successful and have given EVERYTHING you need to succeed! Aetherholic was kind enough to verify this, and give you all Excellent Advice!

COP = 20 in a different but not too far removed configuration. And no im not going to post it, just to ratify the effect is real. (measurements verified by scientific report) and loopback self running. Trust in Jagu and Chris and all the information Chris has provided. 2000% the truth.

PS:

Put black tape over your psu meters. Use an integrating power meter with high sampling rate rate for the input power. Alternatively, use oscilloscope and use the calculation I will post in a separate thread tomorrow which is a simple verified equivalent. OU is being hidden in measurement errors.

Aetherholic - One truth, One field

Thank You Aetherholic!

I want to say a massive Thank You to Jagau!

Jagau is a First Class Human Being! I am proud to call My Friend, as is Aetherholic and all here! We ONLY Ban Trouble Makers!

The TRUTH is Right here and its Easy and Cheap, you only need implement it as we have!

Here in Australia, we have a Term: Numb Nuts, seems this fits well in this situation where the Stupidity we have seen from some people, just threw Gasoline, onto the already Burning Trolls, we set Fire To! Oh dear, how sad, never mind! These people are very very low IQ Buffoons!!!

Stupendously Stupid People always say and do Stupid Things! There is no helping these people! They cant help themselves!

To Be Clear: Itsu does not fit these categories! I am not talking about Itsu! Itsu could do so much better if he removed the Noise from his Ears and more closely followed instruction! I am not sure he wants to however? Itsu should have been able to manage a: Standard Buck Boost Converter don't you think?

It is true, some have no idea about Energy Machines and they choose to stay Blatantly Ignorant on these same machines, all while pretending to have special interest in them! That's why they have many decades of Continued Failure! A Constructed Failure, like a Movie would have a Plot to Fail! Its called Paltering, pdf attached.

We are Light Years Ahead! This Thread and many more here, are Proof!

Best Wishes,

Chris

Attached Files

Liked by
and 2 others

Jagau posted this 15 August 2022 - Last edited 15 August 2022

Beyond making a nice flyback, a more advanced electronics is an integral part of the Melnichenko effectt,

there are 3 important points to understand: taken from video by andrey melnichenko

cos phi

Magnetic flux versus voltage

and current, flux and voltage

I mean the maximum and minimum to observe.

The magnetic flux is expressed in Weber or Volt .second

The integral of the magnetic flux density (B) multiplied by a defined area (dA) gives us the magnetic flux of our system.

Jagau

Liked by

Admin

Chris posted this 15 August 2022 - Last edited 15 August 2022

My Friends,

Jagau is correct!

Beyond making a nice flyback

We could not be more disappointed with Itsu's effort to fail! The simplest Circuit, and Itsu tried his utmost to fail at it! We are absolutely astounded at the publically visible effort to fail at the most Simplest Circuit!

One must think more broadly about this Circuit and what it is doing!

The Sawtooth Waveform is the defining waveform for Pumping Current! You need the Sawtooth Waveform!

The Sawtooth waveform Pumps Current! This is the Pump, Amplifying Current! Voltage, it is "Generated" and Faradays law gives you the equation for this! Amperes Law gives you the Magnetic Field Density and Strength!

It surprises me how little effort some people put into understanding the most simple things! Those with decades of experience are either really really dumb or Trolls trying to distract and deceive the Community! There is no possibility of failing for this long other wise!

Best Wishes,

Chris

Liked by

Jagau posted this 16 August 2022 - Last edited 16 August 2022

An interesting link on the correction of Cos phi (PF) which will be useful to you,

with an example of correction at the end.

https://www.electronics-tutorials.ws/accircuits/power-factor-correction.html

which will guide you in power factor correction.

Jagau

Liked by

thaelin posted this 16 August 2022

@Jagau

Ok, this seems something simple even I can do. I have on hand 2 rolls of standard lamp cord. This is easy to strip down into a single wire but is stranded inside. Will this work for the coils? I have some 1/2" cold roll rod that can be used for cores. Past orders for ferrite came broken to pieces.

If I am going to do this, I want to know all the right things up front. Me and POC coils had a real adventure. Seems I did it right but never could see the wave form Chris shows. Did fair but not good. Power supply is a Rigol 0 to 30 @ 5 amps and can limit current draw with it. Many sig gens around at the moment. Even have an arbitrary wave generator as well.

So give me a heads up if this will fit the needs for this. I do want the crew here to know I am experimenting in the background but mostly silent. I usually feel as if I have nothing worth while to say. Even was told once to go back and study electronics 101. That was an insult far as I am concerned.

thay

Liked by
and 1 others

Admin

Chris posted this 16 August 2022 - Last edited 19 October 2022

Hi Thay,

Re:

Me and POC coils had a real adventure. Seems I did it right but never could see the wave form Chris shows.

Its really really easy to see a Triangle Waveform! Its the Natural Waveform for Lenz's Law.

I was showing this waveform in the thread: Some Coils Buck and some Coils DONT where I showed the difference in Waveforms and how the winding of a Coil does make a difference to a machines operation:

Ref: Some Coils Buck and some Coils DONT

Lenz's Law is by Default, a Sawtooth Waveform and this is about as easy as Breathing, to show implicitly on the bench! The Buck Boost Circuit shows this simple operation every day of the week, its a very basic, beginner level circuit that any one can manage with no trouble at all!

The trail of Bread Crumbs shows us:

There are some that will show you a Rock and tell you its a Diamond, these people can not be trusted!

Best Wishes,

Chris

Liked by
and 1 others

Jagau posted this 17 August 2022 - Last edited 17 August 2022

Hi Thaelin
We are all equal here Thaelin, we experiment and do it at our own pace, no one is rushing us and as I said before you are under no obligation to anyone and the same for me.

For the Melnichenko effect that you have seems satisfactory and for the ferrites they can be replaced by iron in small insulated plates as mentioned by Melnichenko.
Good experiences

Jagau

Liked by
and 1 others

Jagau posted this 22 August 2022 - Last edited 25 August 2022

Hi all

As Aetherholic said:

Put black tape over your psu meters. OU is being hidden in measurement errors.

Since the DC values measured at the input change over time, you must integrate these calculations in order to have a correct measurement.

To calculate the average DC input power of your circuit the voltage and the current will have to be integrated over time.

The average power of a flyback in DCM for discontinuous conduction mode is calculated this way

since we are in pulsed DC not changing in polarity:

Average Power = Average Voltage X Average Current

a second formula in DCM if you know I peak is

I ave = 0.5 X D X I peak

first 0.5 is for half of square wave, because we have a triangle waveform and we take only half.

To find I peak

as you notice, we take into account here the duty cycle and the frequency T=1/f

With this formula of the average integrated current and the value of your inductance you can check if you have the right pulsed current value by doing the reverse calculation. Allow yourself a 5% margin of error due to inductor losses and parasistic inductance.

More simple for voltage calculation

note than in DC Rms and Ave have same value

V ave or Rms = Vin x square root of D

These two formulas well known to flyback manufacturers are derived from integration.

D stand for duty cycle

T = ! / frequency in usec

Lm is magnetisation inductance in uh

Vin = maximum input voltage

Jagau

Liked by
and 1 others

Aetherholic posted this 23 August 2022

Here is my input calculation in Joules together with a corresponding Flyback calculation that Jagu just posted. So now you have two ways for calculating the power from different measurements.

Input Power Calculation

This was done in SMath Solver which I like because it verifies the units so its a great check for calculations. Smath Solver is freely downloadable.

Aetherholic - One truth, One field

Liked by
and 2 others

Jagau posted this 23 August 2022 - Last edited 23 August 2022

Thank you for your great post Aetherholic. I see that some have understood that integral calculus is important in our steady-state circuit input measurements as described so well by Atherholic.
We now have 2 ways to measure ourselves and be sure of our measurements.

Now to advance even further in power electronics input measurements, I am attaching a video from EVblog
which explains in detail the integration function that only the most advanced oscilloscopes have.

You will notice that this function is used to measure the consumption at the input of its microcontroller, the way it does this is by the integration function which calculates the peak to peak voltage of the integral of the curve.

We are talking here about a voltage related to time called Time domain value.

That is why there is fortunately another way to calculate it accurately with the formulas that I and Aetherholic have provided to you.

Jagau

Liked by
and 3 others

Admin

Chris posted this 24 August 2022 - Last edited 24 August 2022

My Friends,

I agree 100% with these measurement techniques! Most of which are here in these pages and covered very well in this video also:

Jagau and Aetherholic have given you First Class Advice! Very Simple!

Best Wishes,

Chris

Liked by

Jagau posted this 26 August 2022 - Last edited 26 August 2022

Found a video clearly explaining how to calculate the parameters of a flyback with the formulas you will recognize.
She is a young E.E. who explains very well flyback configuration parameters in DCM mode.

Jagau

Liked by

Admin

Chris posted this 26 August 2022 - Last edited 26 August 2022

Hey Jagau,

It seems the Guru's are having all sorts of simple Measurement Related Troubles:

To minimize the loading effect of the probe, clamp it at the low or ground end of a component lead when possible. This method also minimizes noise or stray
signal interference. This is a Tektronix recommendation

On this side you have the magnetisation

Si Itsu you are correct on the low ground side

Ref: Spark2 - A Melnichenko effect replication

Correctly Drawn Circuits with Measurement Points should be provided as standard. How about we give them a leg up and let them know where we take our measurements from in the Circuit?

Best Wishes,

Chris

Liked by

Jagau posted this 26 August 2022

Itsu asks very good questions, and he is an outstanding experimenter
we are in discussion
Jagau

Liked by

Admin

Chris posted this 26 August 2022 - Last edited 26 August 2022

Hey Jagau,

I hope Itsu Respects your effort and ability and Reliably follows your Advice and Guidance Jagau!

I hope he Respects your Assistance!

Itsu should be measuring the Input Circuit also and NOT all the spirrious Components he has added before the actual Circuit:

Itsu should be measuring after C1 and NOT before C3 which is not marked. This is a very bad Measurement Practice! Very Bad! These Components are NOT Part of the DUT and should NOT be Measured as part of the Input to the Circuit!

This Circuitry consists of High and Low Pass Filters, including the Common mode Choke, and other components, which will skew the Signals entirely! Why Filter a Signal you're attempting to measure? All of these components have their own Losses also which is NOT Considered!

This is VERY BAD Measurement Practice!

This is how the Input Measurement should be measured:

Replace the 0.1R Resistor, R1 by the Isolated Current Probe if you have one!

Jagau has given you the Correct advice already:

Any Accurate Measurement should always be as Close as Possible to the DUT, Device Under Test and an effort should be made to exclude any Un-Necessary Circuitry that is NOT Part of the DUT!!! This is really Important and is basic Engineering Knowledge!!!

What we have seen is VERY BAD Measurement Practice!

Best Wishes,

Chris

Liked by

Mitza84 posted this 27 August 2022

First i salute Chirs and Jagau and also the other guys who worked on this project i am amazed by the results ,while watching youtube experimenters i come acros Master ivo wich have nice experiences ,so i think there is a connection with the work you are doing here on melnicenko efekt if you watch the video carefully you will notice some similarity with this experiment ,please watch till the end to understand exacly what is going on , he uses bifilar coils and he extract the usable energy with less consumtion . tesla sad in his bifilar coils patent that by using bifilar coils he amplify the magnetic fiel of the coil very much so this is the video i hope it helps on this project and can be improved . and the bifilar coils dose not necesarly have to look like pancake , this is the video

keep up the good work

Mitza

Liked by

Admin

Chris posted this 27 August 2022 - Last edited 28 August 2022

My Friends,

Congratulations to Itsu for achieving some success:

Ref: A Melnichenko effect replication

I think Jagau's Guidance and Patience is to be commended! Truly a Genuine and Humble Human Being!

Itsu now needs to figure out how to extend the Demagnetisation Phase:

Ref: A Melnichenko effect replication

And in comparison to the Magnetisation Phase:

Ref: A Melnichenko effect replication

My Friends, focus on the Area Under the Green Current Trace:

Is there More Current on the Demagnetisation Phase or the Magnetisation Phase? Its Asymmetrical Right?

Please Note: This set of scope shots do not show AU, we have no conclusive evidence Itsu has yet achieved AU yet! More work is needed! At least Itsu now has a Waveform that should be represented!

Best Wishes,

Chris

Liked by
and 2 others

baerndorfer posted this 28 August 2022

the area under the curve represents the amount of magnetic flux which is actually present.

the guy in the video from university did not mention, that energy is stored inside the coil. maybe he thinks all of the audience knows that but i'm sure most of them did not.

it is also funny, that if someone wants to step voltage down from 24V to 12V the ON-time from halfbridge has to be 33% - does this sound logic? we can produce voltage for nothing they told us... why is it not linear? 😎

have a nice day!

Liked by
and 3 others

Jagau posted this 30 August 2022 - Last edited 30 August 2022

It is very important to make the difference in using the right formula.
When your circuit operates in CCM mode Chris provided you with a video and this is the one used,

If your circuit works in DCM , Like that of Melnichenko, the formula used is very different and this is the one used.

This formula is derived from an integration.

And the cuurent look like that,green curve. Photo provide by Itsu

You probably know that an inductor or a capacitor does not consume power because it is returned to the circuit.
It then becomes very difficult to calculate the input power of a flyback. Its instantaneous power can easily be found for a short period but for a long period it must be calculated in rms voltage equivalence in order to have an idea of the input power because the RMS voltage and current are defined based on the mean power: each one is derived from the square root of the mean power.

The average power absorbed by a purely inductive circuit will always be equal to 0 watts
The instantaneous power of a purely inductive circuit can be calculated but will give us information on one cycle only and can change from moment to moment. As Chris has already discussed, this power can be positive as well as negative.
So you can see that it's not always easy to give the right answer as some people think, but we're working on it here.

Jagau

Liked by
and 1 others

scalarpotential posted this 30 August 2022 - Last edited 30 August 2022

the area under the curve represents the amount of magnetic flux which is actually present.

the guy in the video from university did not mention, that energy is stored inside the coil. maybe he thinks all of the audience knows that but i'm sure most of them did not.

it is also funny, that if someone wants to step voltage down from 24V to 12V the ON-time from halfbridge has to be 33% - does this sound logic? we can produce voltage for nothing they told us... why is it not linear? 😎

have a nice day!

Hi, the area under the voltage curve is volt-second and is equal to ΔΦ, the total flux, like you said. 33% duty cycle for half voltage is logical: during 33% the coil is charged, magnetized with 24v, during twice that time it i demagnetized with 12v (or actually -12v) at steady state.

current steepness=V/L=di/dt, higher voltage over L, steeper current ramp. .

Liked by
and 2 others

Jagau posted this 30 August 2022 - Last edited 30 August 2022

Hi all

Maybe off topic but I wanted you to benefit from an excellent YT which was shared by birdeye on the other forum which I find very very instructive to study. Take a good look at how he handles the bicycle wheel.
It made me understand in a visual and very simple way, what is the Larmor frequency as well as other terms which will seem familiar to you, you will appreciate it I think.

There is an equally interesting sequel on his YT channel.

Jagau

Liked by
and 1 others

Admin

Chris posted this 01 September 2022

My Friends,

So Pin = 33 x 0.102 = 3.37W, which is close to my earlier calculated input power of 3.6W.

Do you think Itsu actually understands what's been said and what's actually required to measure Input vs Output? I believe his buddy has Zero Idea what so ever! Itsu is getting closer, but still some ways off yet, in both measurements, Understanding, and actual Experiment!

Why is Itsu still a ways off in his Experiment? Why has he still not achieved the actual Operation which has been laid out HERE by Jagau?

I do so very much wish others would pay attention!

Do you see why WE are world Leaders and the other Forums are still Light Years Behind! Please catch Up!

Best Wishes,

Chris

Liked by

Jagau posted this 01 September 2022 - Last edited 01 September 2022

Hi Chris
I admit that it is not easy to understand, but when you dwell on it there is an explanation for all of this.

To make a real-life analogy, most large energy consumers face this problem. Especially those that use big powerful motors.
Fortunately there is a solution to this and it is called power factor correction. There is therefore a way not to lose everything that has been read by the standard meters in order to pay a fair bill to what it is meters read by correcting Cos phi.

The average power absorbed by a purely inductive circuit will always be equal to 0 watts

To come back to the example of Melnichenko's experiment, we are in the presence, at primary side, of a purely inductive circuit.
So the phase angle between the voltage and the current will be close to 90 degrees (in an ideal lossless xfo). But it is well known in the real world that there will be a small loss and most of that power will be returned to the input minus small losses.

So if we recover almost entirely the power lost, the actual consumption at the input will only be a few milliwatts (the lost).

Melnichenko, in order to recover this loss of power, placed an incandescent lamp in the primary and in this way he almost completely recovers the power in this incandescent lamp which otherwise would have been lost.

But without any increase power at the input.

There is no miracle here, it's just that he took Tesla's advice in a patent already mentioned earlier in this thread.

If you think this is the Melnichenko effect, that's not the melnichenko effect, then you misread this thread. Reread the principle of the separation of fields and the non additvity of waves.

Jagau

Liked by
and 1 others

baerndorfer posted this 01 September 2022

this is how it looks - 2 e-cores like A.Melnichenko uses. in my build i use POC-coils as output coils because for me it makes perfectly sense.

when you got the right frequency you will see how the output is pumped (CH4 - this is where the load is connected). my input is from halfbridge topology (CH2). CH1 is my primary which is in series resonance with capacitor. CH3 is one leg from POC output coil.

regards!

Liked by
and 4 others

Admin

Chris posted this 01 September 2022 - Last edited 02 September 2022

Jagau, Baerndorfer,

You guy's Rock! You're awesome!

@All Readers trying to catch Up, look for Key Words and focus your Attention on the Key Words and what's actually being said in this Thread! Baerndorfer is correct, once one has a slight understanding, it makes perfect sense!

Jagau is also 100% Correct, but if I may add, its about Separating Charge and Accelerating Charge in an Asymmetrical fashion, at no cost on your Input side, this we have done!

All Electromagnetic Machines are Symmetrical Today! A Transformer, its Symmetrical! An Electric "Generator", its also Symmetrical! This means all Output, you must Input, in the form of, Mechanical Force or Torque, on a "Generator's" Input, which is Equal to what you get on the Output, Electrically, minus Losses! That's why Science tries to terribly explain Mechanical Force is Transformed to Electrical Force, or E.M.F. The WORST and possibly MOST INCORRECT Statement Science has ever made! In the case of a Transformer, the Force is M.M.F, which Negatively effects your input, and as a result your Input Current goes up as you add more load to the Output through Impedance on the Coils being Reduced! This means, always there will be a relationship of: Output = Input minus Losses! Always a Below Unity Machine! Never Above Unity!

We have introduced Asymmetrical Electromagnetic Induction, where all Force in the Machine does not ever Negatively effect your Input, so the Symmetrical Equation: Output = Input minus Losses does not apply here! We do have Symmetrical Forces, in the Form of M.M.F, Magnetomotive Force, between the two Output Coils, Partnered Output Coils! But we also have an Asymmetrical Component consisting of the Input Coil! WOW, how revolutionary is this you say! Its so simple you just cant wrap your head around it until you do some simple cheap experiments! As you see how this works, it makes more sense! You can clearly see that the Magnetic Force Component is NOT Conserved as the Electric Component is! The Magnetic Field can be entirely Asymmetrical, meaning you can have Three Magnetic Fields in a single Machine, and each can have a varying Coupling Coefficient k, associated with it independently of the other. Each Magnetic Field: Act, React and Counter-React with Each Other in a Positive way, actually Reducing your Input!

It is the Change in Magnetic Field that makes these machines possible: ΔΦB / Δt, and Lenz's Law, the E.M.F will be Negative, which is Floyd Sweets Equation: E = ( B x V ) + ( -B x -V ) = 2 B x V

We are building Asymmetrical Charge Pumps!

Aboveunity.com Members have shown you, as I have, we are all showing you, how this works. It takes time to learn these things. So we have had to go slow!

I have spent many millions of hours doing this, and many here have also done the same! All so Humanity can Live Better, Freer, and we can Evolve past this Slavery we have been bound to for so long! Knowledge is Power, and Freedom!!!

Best Wishes,

Chris

Liked by
and 4 others

Admin

Chris posted this 03 September 2022 - Last edited 04 September 2022

My Friends,

Well one thing is for sure, we here at Aboveunity.com have taken the Guru's to School for Electrical Engineering Lessons!

However, it seems the same silly mistakes are being made all the time! WTF Man!!!

Ref: Itsu's - A Melnichenko effect replication

VERY very Bad Measurement Practice!

Again, Measurements should always be taken as close as possible to the Device Under Test WITHOUT Adding Unnecessary Components!

This is VERY very Bad Measurement Practice!

Itsu is basing his experiment around the PBE, or Power Balance Equation: P_In = P_Out, which does not hold when Power is Generated! Excess Charge is separated and Accelerated!

5.1.3 Power balance mode control (PBMC)

In the PBMC, the difference between the calculated inductor current i_L* and the detected inductor current i_L is added to the output signal of the voltage compensator. The responsiveness of the output voltage is determined by the crossover frequency in the open loop transfer function. Therefore, the change in the inductor current’s reference value (calculated inductor current i_L*) is much slower than the change in the detected inductor current i_L. Therefore, if the reference value of the inductor current is regarded approximately as the DC value in the steady state, it is almost equivalent to the configuration of the CMC.

REF: https://www.intechopen.com/chapters/64980

As Chris has already discussed, this power can be positive as well as negative.

Ref: Jagau's Post above

I should also note, as we have stated already, Itsu has not yet seen ANY Negative Power! in his current experiments We have shown exactly what we are talking about, but Itsu has not seen a Whisker! What is Itsu Doing???

This means several things:

Input Power can not be reduced by a factor of Magnitude due to this Negative Power going back to the Input!
Itsu still does not have the Device correctly Built!
Itsu has not stopped to actually try to understand Energy and how Coils can have multiple Interactions with each other all at the same time.

Remember we have shown this:

Where:

Purple Trace is the Math, showing Positive and Negative Power.
Pink Trace is the Gate Signal to the Mosfet.
Yellow is the Input Voltage.
Teal Trace is the Input Current, both Positive and Negative.

Remember: This is the very reason you can NOT Use RMS Measurements on the Input! See Measurements Thread and see the above Figures:

Average: 95.7 mW
RMS: 1.28 W

A Huge error here! 1.28 - 0.095 = 1.185 Watts. 13.474 times!

RMS is totally Wrong! Remember, your Zero Graticule Line is very important:

above: Positive
below: Negative

So, we have shown you how to do this, and it seems, the Gurus still cant even get a simple machine to remotely look like its going to do what it should!

Yet they shove FASLY Represented Figures down your throat, showing you it does not work... Hmmm Yeah, I see what they are trying to do! Its going to fail, like it always does!

The Four Quadrant Power Flow, Argand Diagram:

We have already proven they are wrong and have not correctly represented the Device Under Test, this is what we have seen for Decades now! There is no Time or Room

I dont know if Jagau is still helping Itsu, but I hope Itsu does not waste Jagaus Time!

Learn about Negative Power, it will save you Decades of Head Aches!

Best Wishes,

Chris

Liked by

Jagau posted this 05 September 2022 - Last edited 05 September 2022

Hi all

In the current project here, on the primary side the pulse on the primary (air core) produces negative energy as predicted by Lenz's law. The energy thus stored in the inductor produces this negative electricity and is almost entirely recovered by lighting the first lamp.
In addition, the air core is not magnetically linked to the other two ferromagnetic cores, which pick up the air core's magnetic fields for free with almost no magnetic link.

This is the first principle of the Melnichenko effect and it is called the principle of field separation. It is essential to fully understand this basic principle before going any further.

Jagau

Liked by
and 1 others

Admin

Chris posted this 05 September 2022 - Last edited 05 September 2022

Hey Jagau,

I agree! Your statement:

principle of field separation

Its a very important concept to grasp, yet very simple!

NOTE: The Magnetic Field Lines never touch each other!

Magnetisation Phase:

Demagnetisation Phase:

The Trolls wont believe this simple MIT Logic though!

Best Wishes,

Chris

Liked by

Jagau posted this 05 September 2022 - Last edited 05 September 2022

Hi all

For those who want to understand it, even Bill Alek EE in Magnetic Flux Transformer patent US9620280B2, does the same calculation as me when calculating the average power in an inductor Pavg = almost 0 watt with some very minimal losses.

An inductor does not consume a watt same for capacitor.

The energy (joule) stored in an inductor momentarily can be calculated, the voltage (V) BEMF as well as the current (I) peak.
But at no time the power in watt, because it is almost entirely returned to the source or as in Melnichenko it is used to light the first lamp, then it becomes the consumption of this first lamp which otherwise would have been returned to the source.

The meters measure the positive energy supplied to the source only.

Jagau

Liked by
and 4 others

Jagau posted this 06 September 2022 - Last edited 06 September 2022

If we take a good look at the output configuration of Alek's SFT you will notice that the two output coils are in partnership configuration.
Look in the yellow circle.

What Chris always said. Although others don't speak highly of his measurements, I find them to be correct. It's because he's a little ahead of the others and they have trouble understanding what he's saying, so they try to contradict him.

Jagau

Liked by
and 2 others

scalarpotential posted this 07 September 2022 - Last edited 07 September 2022

Jagau, this patent you're sharing is gold! Many thanks.
It closely explains how Chris' system is working, and what he has been telling all along but in less technical terminology. Phase-conjugate :

In operation, the system causes the split-flux transformer (SFT) to function as a pumped phase conjugate mirror (PPCM), which transforms conjugated electromagnetic (EM) energy to real EM energy. Very high transformer efficiencies have been realized with this technology. The PPCM occurs by splitting the flux equally between the two transformer cores. The two cores include secondary output coils wrapped around each core and wired in Such a way that the resulting magnetomotive forces oppose one another. This is a special bifilar output coil configuration, which has a benefit of greatly lowering the output impedance of the coils. The output coils may be wired in series or in parallel In addition to lowering the output impedance of the coils, little power is reflected back to the primary due to the mutual coupling of the coils. Therefore, power delivered to the primary coil is highly conserved and not wasted on impedance. Nuclear non-recoil action emits both real EM wave and its phase-conjugated replica EM wave. While the real EM wave is a time-forward wave, its phase-conjugated replica wave is time-reversed. The phase-conjugated time-reversed wave is present everywhere in the universe as negative energy and is utilized and transformed by the PPCM as real EM energy.

I think POWER FROM MAGNETISM HAROLD ASPDEN on hyiq may help to improve understanding of the Melnichenko setup. At the surface it's a dual flyback, the trick must lie in the gap and material (I may be wrong).

Liked by
and 3 others

thaelin posted this 07 September 2022

@Jag

I am ready to wind up the coils. Will use the rods I have for now and order ferrite from a local source here. I am a bit unsure of the turns count tho. I have a 4" form and 3 layers on it with 50 turns is only 2.7" . Is 50 enough or should I go more and double that for the inside coil?

thay

Liked by
and 1 others

Jagau posted this 08 September 2022

In his Y.T video

you will find the recommendations and frequencies of Melnichenko, look in the red square.

jagau

Liked by
and 2 others

scalarpotential posted this 13 September 2022

SRO, clever circuit. I wanted to see what's happening, here's a falstad schematic:
https://tinyurl.com/2zp8ylne

Liked by

Jagau posted this 03 October 2022 - Last edited 03 October 2022

In order to have a reloading of the pages of this thread faster I will make a continuation in a new thread which will be;

Melnichenko effect 2 following

A discussion will be made on the different means of switching when using two grounds at the same time.

Swinching using optocouplers with Mosfet will be studied.

Jagau

Liked by

Admin

Chris posted this 07 November 2022 - Last edited 08 November 2022

My Friends,

It seems we have another confirmation, of the Other Forums Measurement Practice being totally Un-Satisfactory for Accurate Measurements on a Running Machine:

The practice of insisting on Filtering a Main Buss, that affects the actual Operation of the Machine Under Test, or Device Under Test is BAD Measurement Practice and should NOT be done!

We now have confirmation, from Itsu, that was insisting on this Filter in the First Place, to make Bad Measurements, that this is now in fact the case!

I believe I have been telling others that this is NOT a good idea and is Bad Measurement Practice for some time now! Skimming through this thread will show you!

Remember, some of these people have been telling you for decades that DUT was a "Measurement Error" - Mostly Fake and False Information!

My Friends, this is why we are Light Years Ahead of the Other Forums!

Best Wishes,

Chris

Liked by

thaelin posted this 07 November 2022

How does that go, at first you get ridiculed then well maybe and then should have been all along or something like that.

Liked by

Admin

Chris posted this 07 November 2022 - Last edited 08 November 2022

Hi Thaelin,

The Input Bus, both Positive and Negative, are very important factors in the actual Machine Operation!

Many times we have covered that there is Energy being sent back, from the DUT/MUT back to our Input, which reduces the Input Power Required to Operate the Machine!

Here is an example:

Where:

Purple Trace is the Math, showing Positive and Negative Power.

Pink Trace is the Gate Signal to the Mosfet.

Yellow is the Input Voltage.

Teal Trace is the Input Current, both Positive and Negative.

I must apologise, I have better examples of this, but do not wish to confuse everyone. This example is sufficient to show what I am talking about.

Again, marked in Red, Positive Voltage and Negative Current, you have Negative Power. Not Negative Energy, Negative Power, I hope people do not confuse this as I believe people have in the past.

I hope this helps others when doing experiments, knowing what to look for is very important!

Remember: This is the very reason you can NOT Use RMS Measurements on the Input! See Measurements Thread and see the above Figures:

Average: 95.7 mW

RMS: 1.28 W

A Huge error here! 1.28 - 0.095 = 1.185 Watts. 13.474 times!

Its not a new phenomena! Its actually VERY well known, Reactive Power is the very same phenomena, in the Time Domain!

Any and ALL Electrical Engineers should be very well aware of this and should be looking for it when taking any Measurement of any kind!

However, it is very conveniently Ignored, entirely, by all of the people trying to disprove what we have done! There is an active effort to show, at any cost, no matter how totally ridiculous, that these machines do not operate as we consistently show! Of course, its a Troll Tactic to lie and mislead the Public on such things so they don't see the truth! The truth that we are Consistently showing!

It seems we have another confirmation, of the Other Forums Measurement Practice being totally Un-Satisfactory for Accurate Measurements on a Running Machine:

The practice of insisting on Filtering a Main Buss, that affects the actual Operation of the Machine Under Test, or Device Under Test is BAD Measurement Practice and should NOT be done!

We now have confirmation, from Itsu, that was insisting on this Filter in the First Place, to make Bad Measurements, that this is now in fact the case!

I believe I have been telling others that this is NOT a good idea and is Bad Measurement Practice for some time now! Skimming through this thread will show you!

Remember, some of these people have been telling you for decades that DUT was a "Measurement Error" - Mostly Fake and False Information!

My Friends, this is why we are Light Years Ahead of the Other Forums!

Filtering out this phenomena is about as un-wise as anyone could get!

This is why we are Light Years Ahead of the Other Forums!

Best Wishes,

Chris

Liked by