Come Cross Test Circuit Theory in Simulation, Over Unity Cir

[The Flavored Coffee Guy]

If I were a woman, I would think were all fat and lazy. Because, my
ultra fine ass, with my perfect breasts have seen this circuit, and
you can't have any. Cause your fat.

 

[The Flavored Coffee Guy]

Shit, I bet any one of you sat and argued as much with your
instructors in class. The first three component pissed you off and
did work. 3 transformers and 3 capacitors are just too fucking hard
to pick up. If you did, you wouldn't be here arguing.

 

[Jim Thompson]

On Tue, 12 Feb 2008 12:31:25 -0500, Ned Forrester
<n_f_orrester@whoi.edu> wrote:

Jim Thompson wrote:
On Tue, 12 Feb 2008 01:04:22 -0600,
hal-usenet@ip-64-139-1-69.sjc.megapath.net (Hal Murray) wrote:

Machinery/Energy Conversion: White/Woodson and Woodson/White ;-)
I had Woodson for 6.06. That was back in '64 or '65.

It was one of the most enjoyable courses I've ever taken.

Steve and I were getting to his office at 9AM on Friday morning
to get our homework back. (Neither of us were morning people,
but it was worth it.) It usually took 5 or 10 minutes to go over
our homework. Then for the rest of the hour, we stood at the
whiteboard and he would toss problems at us. They were all easy
after you saw how to do it. As soon as we got one, he'd toss us
another. It was a lot of work, but a lot of fun.

I teched in Woodson's MHD lab from '59-'62. Woodson was a really nice
guy. Used to go to his house for BBQ.

Prof. Jackson was my thesis adviser.

Jim Melcher was a grad student, working on his PhD under Woodson, at
the time and was teaching one of the active circuits courses as
well... don't remember the course number, but it was the course where
I was the only one in the class to get the start-up limit cycle right
for a tube oscillator.... after being graded the only one wrong, I
convinced Melcher I was right ;-)

Melcher went on to become head of the EE Department, but died young of
colon cancer, just like my youngest son :-(

I had Melcher for 6.014 (6.04) and 6.601 in the mid '70s. He was by far
the best teacher I ever had, though I had other good ones. He
understood the material so well that, rather than missing the point of a
student's question, as is common, he could put two examples on the board
illustrating the student's confusion and the correct way to view the
problem. It was a shame he died so young.

One of my favorite texts is "Electromechanical Dynamics, Pt I", by
Woodson and Melcher. Appendix B has the clearest review of E+M that I
have ever seen, and in only 38 pages. I don't know if it was Woodson or
Melcher that wrote that part, but I am sure that Melcher could have.

Just bought a used copy... figured I owed it to myself to have a
collector's item ;-)

Since I knew both men well I'll try to decipher who wrote it.

...Jim Thompson
--
| James E.Thompson, P.E. | mens |
| Analog Innovations, Inc. | et |
| Analog/Mixed-Signal ASIC's and Discrete Systems | manus |
| Phoenix, Arizona Voice480)460-2350 | |
| E-mail Address at Website Fax480)460-2142 | Brass Rat |
| http://www.analog-innovations.com | 1962 |

America: Land of the Free, Because of the Brave

 

[The Flavored Coffee Guy]

When I build it, I don't give a flying fuck about your opinion of it,
or what you call a test. I see it this way. I send the schematic,
the circuit model, and from your opinion you may or may not have ran
the simulation. I was being honest about having constructed and
breadboarded this circuits, and they do work. If there were a secret
key that I have failed to give anyone who is honestly interested in
Over Unity, that was in the final stage for the plasma tube.
Bascially, you need to hit a voltage high enough to ignite a plasma in
an ionizing tube. Second, the circuit is constructed as follows:
Secondary of the final output stage, coil in parallel with secondary,
in series with a ionizing tube to replace a piece of wire in a
parallel tank circuit, connected in parallel with the coil across the
secondary. Then the transfer of energy can reach peak, and in the
circuit example that I had giving a link to, it didn't include where
the ionizing tube would be placed. Coil first, ionizing tube to
replace a piece of wire, and capacitor in parallel with the coil.

With the coil first, voltage leads, and ignites the plasma. Since the
plasma tube/ionization tube places the capacitor in parallel with the
inductor, it then should the frequency of the circuit be high enough,
will not allow the plasma to cool off or reduce it's conductivity. It
then heats up more and more sucessively with each cycle make the
plasma more and more conductive eventually resulting in a plasma so
conductive that there is no difference between it and a straight piece
of wire in the circuit between the coil and the capacitor.

Then you center your plasma tube in a magnetic field and heat sink.
And convert back to usable power 166.00$ per 20 module :
http://www.hi-z.com/

 

[Chuck Harris]

Stuart Brorson wrote:

: The Flavored Coffee Guy wrote:
[... insanity ...]
:> Then you center your plasma tube in a magnetic field and heat sink.
:> And convert back to usable power 166.00$ per 20 module :
[... more insantiy ...]

Then Chuck Harris <cf-NO-SPAM-harris@erols.com> wrote:
: As I have told you, bring me a prototype, let me observe it, and verify
: there is no fraud going on (hidden batteries, etc)... And when you have
: shown me it works, you will have won the lottery. Bill Gates will look
: street urchin poor compared to you.

Chuck,

Forget about marketing his ridiculous power generating device. I say,
market the stuff he is using to flavor his coffee! That must be one
wicked powerful brew!

Stuart

Hi Stuart,

I have no expectations that he will ever have anything to market. He
is typical of the over-unity crowd: minimally educated. He knows just
enough to get his hopes up.

It is fascinating to watch people try and use Startrek as a starting
point for basic research.

"Cap'n we 'ave an overload in the plasma couplers! They're gonna
blow any second now!"

-Chuck

 

[Stuart Brorson]

: The Flavored Coffee Guy wrote:
[... insanity ...]
:> Then you center your plasma tube in a magnetic field and heat sink.
:> And convert back to usable power 166.00$ per 20 module :
[... more insantiy ...]

Then Chuck Harris <cf-NO-SPAM-harris@erols.com> wrote:
: As I have told you, bring me a prototype, let me observe it, and verify
: there is no fraud going on (hidden batteries, etc)... And when you have
: shown me it works, you will have won the lottery. Bill Gates will look
: street urchin poor compared to you.

Chuck,

Forget about marketing his ridiculous power generating device. I say,
market the stuff he is using to flavor his coffee! That must be one
wicked powerful brew!

Stuart

 

[Chuck Harris]

The Flavored Coffee Guy wrote:

When I build it, I don't give a flying fuck about your opinion of it,

Which must be why you keep responding.

Please quote the original article so people can tell what you are commenting
on. Google groups is just one way of viewing your thread.

or what you call a test. I see it this way. I send the schematic,
the circuit model, and from your opinion you may or may not have ran
the simulation.

You are not understanding what your simulation is telling you. You are
seeing the reactive current and getting all excited about the power you
think you can extract from it. You are forgetting that power requires
both current and voltage.

Any means you use to extract power from that current will produce a burden
that will be real power that comes from your source.

I was being honest about having constructed and

breadboarded this circuits, and they do work.

No you weren't. You were lying through your teeth. You hope they would
work, but they cannot.

I play with plasma every time I fire up my arc welder. When I strike
an arc, the plasma gets verrrry hot. But my welder cables don't, so
all the thousands of watts of power from my welder is going into heating
the plasma.

Power=IxIxR

There is no power to heat the plasma if there is no resistance in the plasma
stream.


If there were a secret

key that I have failed to give anyone who is honestly interested in
Over Unity, that was in the final stage for the plasma tube.
Bascially, you need to hit a voltage high enough to ignite a plasma in
an ionizing tube. Second, the circuit is constructed as follows:
Secondary of the final output stage, coil in parallel with secondary,
in series with a ionizing tube to replace a piece of wire in a
parallel tank circuit, connected in parallel with the coil across the
secondary. Then the transfer of energy can reach peak, and in the
circuit example that I had giving a link to, it didn't include where
the ionizing tube would be placed. Coil first, ionizing tube to
replace a piece of wire, and capacitor in parallel with the coil.

Won't work. Sorry. If you want to extract 20 watts of heat from your
plasma, you are going to have to put at least 20 watts of power into your
plasma.

With the coil first, voltage leads, and ignites the plasma. Since the
plasma tube/ionization tube places the capacitor in parallel with the
inductor, it then should the frequency of the circuit be high enough,
will not allow the plasma to cool off or reduce it's conductivity. It
then heats up more and more sucessively with each cycle make the
plasma more and more conductive eventually resulting in a plasma so
conductive that there is no difference between it and a straight piece
of wire in the circuit between the coil and the capacitor.

Then you center your plasma tube in a magnetic field and heat sink.
And convert back to usable power 166.00$ per 20 module :
http://www.hi-z.com/

These modules are simply peltier devices such as are used to cool CPU's,
and beer coolers. They extract power from heat, and give electricity by
cooling down the heat... in this case your plasma.

As I have told you, bring me a prototype, let me observe it, and verify
there is no fraud going on (hidden batteries, etc)... And when you have
shown me it works, you will have won the lottery. Bill Gates will look
street urchin poor compared to you.

I won't hold my breath.

-Chuck

 

[Chuck Harris]

The Flavored Coffee Guy wrote:

Takes money to make money, that's always the rule. It doesn't take
any money to know how, it takes money for patent attorney's, patent
rights, and concept patents don't pay unless some-one wants the idea.
When you think about how sceptical you are, and then consider how many
sceptics there really are, it's a hopeless situation. Sure, cons make
a point but they invest in fraud. I provide schematics, ain't looking
for investors, destroyed the potential of any concept patent with
making theory public access, and prevented any monopoly. That only
leaves device patents, and anything I invent could use that circuit.
If you really study patent law, you'll find that electronic circuits
are not protected. Why? Simple enough, a circuit is usually buried
under a list of other simple circuits, and in the end preforms a
seperate or different task. How many ways you can assemble a circuit
to accomplish the same task is like comparing the Blackberry to text
messaging and cell phones. There isn't a real difference. Tuned to
another frequency than the original proof and that's proof enough that
it's not the same circuit in court. The major companies are all
picking up radios, televisions and none of them are arguing so often.
An attorney is trained in law, not electronics. If you look deeply,
there are a few who will take your money to protect your circuits, but
they really can't. Electronics is right up there with chemical
compounds, and that which an attorney cannot understand nor identify
is not truely protected.

Some of the transformers I've mentioned are only experimental and are
versions I have not tested.

You are balmy mate! Oh, and try quoting some of the text from the
article you are responding to so folks can figure out what you are
talking about.

If your basic principles worked, you would be able to cheap together
a model, and show me a shoebox with a 100W lamp on it that is powered
(free standing) from a 9V battery. You would let me observe it from
all angles, run through a few 9V batteries, and make my tests, and when
I was satisfied, I would give you all of my money, and the deed to all
of my property in return for that prototype.

If you truly believed you were correct, you would go around to all of
your friends and family, and beg them for money to invest. You would
mortgage your house, and sell your car. You would hock your golf clubs,
and your wife's diamond ring. You would make your wife take a second
job, and your kids mow the neighbor's lawn. You would do anything to
get enough money to make a prototype that demonstrated you could get
your over unity something for nothing.

We are talking about a nearly instant payoff of billions of dollars!

You aren't doing these things, you have no prototype, so no, I don't
believe you.

I've spent a whole lot of money, and most of my life developing a working
understanding of the principles of electronics, electricity, and mechanics.
I know the currents you are chasing, and they cannot be exploited for
power, because as soon as you attempt to harness them, they no longer
exist. There is nothing magical about plasma. It is hot is because
you have dumped a lot of energy into making it that way.

I think you are a desperate man who wants attention, and wants folks
to marvel at how brilliant you are, when you really aren't. You are
using what very little knowledge you have about electrical circuits,
and are chasing things that others fully understand, but really are
magic to you.

Good luck in your quest. Bring me that shoebox prototype, and I'll get
you money beyond your wildest dreams.

-Chuck

 

[The Flavored Coffee Guy]

Takes money to make money, that's always the rule. It doesn't take
any money to know how, it takes money for patent attorney's, patent
rights, and concept patents don't pay unless some-one wants the idea.
When you think about how sceptical you are, and then consider how many
sceptics there really are, it's a hopeless situation. Sure, cons make
a point but they invest in fraud. I provide schematics, ain't looking
for investors, destroyed the potential of any concept patent with
making theory public access, and prevented any monopoly. That only
leaves device patents, and anything I invent could use that circuit.
If you really study patent law, you'll find that electronic circuits
are not protected. Why? Simple enough, a circuit is usually buried
under a list of other simple circuits, and in the end preforms a
seperate or different task. How many ways you can assemble a circuit
to accomplish the same task is like comparing the Blackberry to text
messaging and cell phones. There isn't a real difference. Tuned to
another frequency than the original proof and that's proof enough that
it's not the same circuit in court. The major companies are all
picking up radios, televisions and none of them are arguing so often.
An attorney is trained in law, not electronics. If you look deeply,
there are a few who will take your money to protect your circuits, but
they really can't. Electronics is right up there with chemical
compounds, and that which an attorney cannot understand nor identify
is not truely protected.

Some of the transformers I've mentioned are only experimental and are
versions I have not tested.

 

[The Flavored Coffee Guy]

How it works is a long lecture and discussion in detail. Since, I've
already started the discussion on another BBS and will not keep any
secrets or hide any schematics, I'm callenging all of you and the
pros. This over Unity Device Really will work. Join the discussion.

http://boards.startrek.com/community/messages.html?s=bb7cc215d317e9e36f2cda1ec5297c8b;act=ST;f=10;t=33309396

 

[Chuck Harris]

The Flavored Coffee Guy wrote:

How it works is a long lecture and discussion in detail. Since, I've
already started the discussion on another BBS and will not keep any
secrets or hide any schematics, I'm callenging all of you and the
pros. This over Unity Device Really will work. Join the discussion.

http://boards.startrek.com/community/messages.html?s=bb7cc215d317e9e36f2cda1ec5297c8b;act=ST;f=10;t=33309396

There is no need for discussion, you are mistaken.

As to your simulator proofs, simulators make tons of assumptions about
reality. There are holes the size of a football field in most of those
assumptions. When an engineer uses a simulator, he does so with an
understanding of the limitations of the underlying models, or he gets
garbage for his results.

-Chuck

 

[Jim Thompson]

On Mon, 11 Feb 2008 04:24:11 -0800 (PST), The Flavored Coffee Guy
<elgersmad@rock.com> wrote:

How it works is a long lecture and discussion in detail. Since, I've
already started the discussion on another BBS and will not keep any
secrets or hide any schematics, I'm callenging all of you and the
pros. This over Unity Device Really will work. Join the discussion.

http://boards.startrek.com/community/messages.html?s=bb7cc215d317e9e36f2cda1ec5297c8b;act=ST;f=10;t=33309396

Over Unity == Under Educated

But what do you expect from someone who posts via Googlegroups ?

...Jim Thompson
--
| James E.Thompson, P.E. | mens |
| Analog Innovations, Inc. | et |
| Analog/Mixed-Signal ASIC's and Discrete Systems | manus |
| Phoenix, Arizona Voice480)460-2350 | |
| E-mail Address at Website Fax480)460-2142 | Brass Rat |
| http://www.analog-innovations.com | 1962 |

America: Land of the Free, Because of the Brave

 

[Helmut Sennewald]

"The Flavored Coffee Guy" <elgersmad@rock.com> schrieb im Newsbeitrag
news:05b78448-794e-4849-9079-f90fc9613767@c4g2000hsg.googlegroups.com...

How it works is a long lecture and discussion in detail. Since, I've
already started the discussion on another BBS and will not keep any
secrets or hide any schematics, I'm callenging all of you and the
pros. This over Unity Device Really will work. Join the discussion.

http://boards.startrek.com/community/messages.html?s=bb7cc215d317e9e36f2cda1ec5297c8b;act=ST;f=10;t=33309396

Hello,

Have you ever heard of reactive power?
In your circuit energy is only exchanged between
capacitors and inductors.

I will tell you now how to measure power with LTspice.

Run your example stage1.asc.

Press the Alt-key and keep it pressed.
Move the cursor over the output capacitor C1.
It will change to a thermometer.
Click the left mouse button.
Now the power in this capacitor will be plotted. V(N003)*I(C1)
It's roughly +/-1kVA. Watch it's plus and minus!

Activate the plot window.
Press the Ctrl-key and keep it pressed.
Click with the left mouse button on the plot label V(N003)*I(C1)
A small dialog will appear: Average 3W
This is the average power dissipation in the capacitor.

There is nowhere 1kW power dissipation in this circuit.
There are only a few Watts in the componenents due to
their specified series resistance.
The sum of all the losses in the components is the same
as the power delivered from V1. It's simply a proof of
power conservation as known since hundred(s) of years.

Best regards,
Helmut

 

[qrk]

On Mon, 11 Feb 2008 04:24:11 -0800 (PST), The Flavored Coffee Guy
<elgersmad@rock.com> wrote:

How it works is a long lecture and discussion in detail. Since, I've
already started the discussion on another BBS and will not keep any
secrets or hide any schematics, I'm callenging all of you and the
pros. This over Unity Device Really will work. Join the discussion.

http://boards.startrek.com/community/messages.html?s=bb7cc215d317e9e36f2cda1ec5297c8b;act=ST;f=10;t=33309396

I suggest you learn about power factor. Try find "A Course in
Electrical Engineering, Volume II, Alternating Currents"; Dawes,
Chester; McGraw-Hill; 1947. It has chapters of wonderful information
that modern books don't cover about power factor and how to measure
power.

Hey Jim T., did you know Arthur Casey or Jordan Miller back in MIT? My
copy of the above book was used by them back in the late 1950s. Book
was only $4.90 (used) back then.

---
Mark

 

[Jim Thompson]

On Mon, 11 Feb 2008 19:46:31 GMT, qrk <SpamTrap@spam.net> wrote:

On Mon, 11 Feb 2008 04:24:11 -0800 (PST), The Flavored Coffee Guy
elgersmad@rock.com> wrote:

How it works is a long lecture and discussion in detail. Since, I've
already started the discussion on another BBS and will not keep any
secrets or hide any schematics, I'm callenging all of you and the
pros. This over Unity Device Really will work. Join the discussion.

http://boards.startrek.com/community/messages.html?s=bb7cc215d317e9e36f2cda1ec5297c8b;act=ST;f=10;t=33309396

I suggest you learn about power factor. Try find "A Course in
Electrical Engineering, Volume II, Alternating Currents"; Dawes,
Chester; McGraw-Hill; 1947. It has chapters of wonderful information
that modern books don't cover about power factor and how to measure
power.

Hey Jim T., did you know Arthur Casey or Jordan Miller back in MIT? My
copy of the above book was used by them back in the late 1950s. Book
was only $4.90 (used) back then.

---
Mark

Nope.

My "core curriculum" was...

Fields: Fano/Chu/Adler and permutations thereof.

Circuits: Notes (no books) by H.B.Lee and Melcher; and books by
Zimmerman/Mason and permutations thereof.

Machinery/Energy Conversion: White/Woodson and Woodson/White ;-)

Calculus: Thomas (who else ?)

...Jim Thompson
--
| James E.Thompson, P.E. | mens |
| Analog Innovations, Inc. | et |
| Analog/Mixed-Signal ASIC's and Discrete Systems | manus |
| Phoenix, Arizona Voice480)460-2350 | |
| E-mail Address at Website Fax480)460-2142 | Brass Rat |
| http://www.analog-innovations.com | 1962 |

America: Land of the Free, Because of the Brave

 

[Hal Murray]

Machinery/Energy Conversion: White/Woodson and Woodson/White ;-)

I had Woodson for 6.06. That was back in '64 or '65.

It was one of the most enjoyable courses I've ever taken.

Steve and I were getting to his office at 9AM on Friday morning
to get our homework back. (Neither of us were morning people,
but it was worth it.) It usually took 5 or 10 minutes to go over
our homework. Then for the rest of the hour, we stood at the
whiteboard and he would toss problems at us. They were all easy
after you saw how to do it. As soon as we got one, he'd toss us
another. It was a lot of work, but a lot of fun.

--
These are my opinions, not necessarily my employer's. I hate spam.

 

[Jim Thompson]

On Tue, 12 Feb 2008 01:04:22 -0600,
hal-usenet@ip-64-139-1-69.sjc.megapath.net (Hal Murray) wrote:

Machinery/Energy Conversion: White/Woodson and Woodson/White ;-)

I had Woodson for 6.06. That was back in '64 or '65.

It was one of the most enjoyable courses I've ever taken.

Steve and I were getting to his office at 9AM on Friday morning
to get our homework back. (Neither of us were morning people,
but it was worth it.) It usually took 5 or 10 minutes to go over
our homework. Then for the rest of the hour, we stood at the
whiteboard and he would toss problems at us. They were all easy
after you saw how to do it. As soon as we got one, he'd toss us
another. It was a lot of work, but a lot of fun.

I teched in Woodson's MHD lab from '59-'62. Woodson was a really nice
guy. Used to go to his house for BBQ.

Prof. Jackson was my thesis adviser.

Jim Melcher was a grad student, working on his PhD under Woodson, at
the time and was teaching one of the active circuits courses as
well... don't remember the course number, but it was the course where
I was the only one in the class to get the start-up limit cycle right
for a tube oscillator.... after being graded the only one wrong, I
convinced Melcher I was right ;-)

Melcher went on to become head of the EE Department, but died young of
colon cancer, just like my youngest son :-(

...Jim Thompson
--
| James E.Thompson, P.E. | mens |
| Analog Innovations, Inc. | et |
| Analog/Mixed-Signal ASIC's and Discrete Systems | manus |
| Phoenix, Arizona Voice480)460-2350 | |
| E-mail Address at Website Fax480)460-2142 | Brass Rat |
| http://www.analog-innovations.com | 1962 |

America: Land of the Free, Because of the Brave

 

[Ned Forrester]

Jim Thompson wrote:

On Tue, 12 Feb 2008 01:04:22 -0600,
hal-usenet@ip-64-139-1-69.sjc.megapath.net (Hal Murray) wrote:

Machinery/Energy Conversion: White/Woodson and Woodson/White ;-)
I had Woodson for 6.06. That was back in '64 or '65.

It was one of the most enjoyable courses I've ever taken.

Steve and I were getting to his office at 9AM on Friday morning
to get our homework back. (Neither of us were morning people,
but it was worth it.) It usually took 5 or 10 minutes to go over
our homework. Then for the rest of the hour, we stood at the
whiteboard and he would toss problems at us. They were all easy
after you saw how to do it. As soon as we got one, he'd toss us
another. It was a lot of work, but a lot of fun.

I teched in Woodson's MHD lab from '59-'62. Woodson was a really nice
guy. Used to go to his house for BBQ.

Prof. Jackson was my thesis adviser.

Jim Melcher was a grad student, working on his PhD under Woodson, at
the time and was teaching one of the active circuits courses as
well... don't remember the course number, but it was the course where
I was the only one in the class to get the start-up limit cycle right
for a tube oscillator.... after being graded the only one wrong, I
convinced Melcher I was right ;-)

Melcher went on to become head of the EE Department, but died young of
colon cancer, just like my youngest son :-(

I had Melcher for 6.014 (6.04) and 6.601 in the mid '70s. He was by far
the best teacher I ever had, though I had other good ones. He
understood the material so well that, rather than missing the point of a
student's question, as is common, he could put two examples on the board
illustrating the student's confusion and the correct way to view the
problem. It was a shame he died so young.

One of my favorite texts is "Electromechanical Dynamics, Pt I", by
Woodson and Melcher. Appendix B has the clearest review of E+M that I
have ever seen, and in only 38 pages. I don't know if it was Woodson or
Melcher that wrote that part, but I am sure that Melcher could have.

--
NOTE: to reply, remove all punctuation from email name field

Ned Forrester n_f_orrester@whoi.edu 508-289-2226
Applied Ocean Physics and Engineering Dept.
Oceanographic Systems Lab http://adcp.whoi.edu/
Woods Hole Oceanographic Institution, Woods Hole, MA 02543, USA

 

[The Flavored Coffee Guy]

Somewhere you guys missed the point.

Any piece of wire can be replaced by plasma. So, if there 2KW here or
there and a piece of wire completes the circuit, a plasma could
replace it. Sure, that energy is there and bucking around and hardly
anything you can tap into, in most cases. But, a plasma when it's hot
enough, will conduct as well or better than a piece of wire. The
whole trick is keeping the plasma hot enough between cycles, and the
only real way to that in the radio frequency ranges, around 1MHz and
up.

One guy looked at the simulation models, and he gave a confused
answer. I went to college too, and I got ahead, and then I would fall
behind and then catch right up again. Here's what happened, I kept
running simulations of this circuit, then bringing in hand wound
toroids and other coils to duplicate the simulations and see if I was
in reality. The power is there, and yes I've loaded it up and found
out things about transformers that I never knew, until then. What I
learned was not in the books. The circuit is connected from component
to component by wire. Between any coil and capacitor in parallel,
replace 1 piece of wire with a plasma tube and you can have 13KW of
heat. I updated that zip file name Proof.zip and there's a circuit
that achieves 13KW from I think it was 30W, and if you ignite a
plasma, it's all usable as heat.

Some parts of the circuit consits of parts you cannot buy but must
construct yourself. Otherwise, there is no power to use.

 

[The Flavored Coffee Guy]

For all intensive purposes, there is a big difference in using Toroids
over Bobbin Wound Transformers.

A bililar winding will pretty well be locked in at whatever inductance
value primary verses secondary. Using an E core, and two bobbins the
coils magnetize the core and the core passes the magnetic lines
through the secondary.

An iron core Microwave transformer I have that's bobbin wound, has a
primary inductance of 68.2mH on the primary when the secondary is
open. When I short the secondary and measure the inductance of the
primary again, then the meter only reads 13.02mH. The inverse is also
true, when the primary is open the secondary reads 15.5H, and when the
primary is shorted the secondary reads, 3.375H.

In a circuit, this is where that makes a difference. XL = XC at the
resonant frequency. Z=1/((1/Q + LC)) Where Q is the Q of the
inductor at the resonant frequency. Z must be greater than the output
impedance of the previous transformer. Everything is fine using
toroids up to the last transformer stage. But, the primary of a
bobbin wound transformer reads the load on the secondary as a change
in the primary's inductance. So, two seperate windings on seperate
bobbins on either an E core or a C core should solve the problem.
Then you can calculate XL and find XC at the same operating frequency
of the circuit.

The speed of magnetization of a material bobbin windings, from top of
the core to bottom in an E core, or from left to right in a C core,
verses bifilar windings on a toroid, and the speed of magnetization of
material under the conductors at a very short distance. An E core or
a C core will follow generator physics and a bobbin core will be
inductively coupled and pretty well winding A will be locked at the
initial inductance value A no matter what the load on the secondary.