I did, look at my previous posts, I gave one of my earlier stl files away for free
I agree with steven greer
~60% of your adult personality is genetic according to the twins study.
You cannot be a pedophile without also being a spychpath. No one who is not a spychpath can take pleasure from inflicting real pain on outside of vengeance or competition on another person, especially a child.
We will suffer from pedophiles and murderers until we decide that psychopathy and sociopathy are death sentences.
I'm making progress, I just put together a variation on the design that makes unexpected power.
I actually have to re-design things because, I discovered with high voltage, printed PLA might not be conductive, but it doesn't insulate against 60+ kilovolt arcs....
That being said, I produced 100x the current I was expecting. Not sure why.
It's a good thing, but it's also unexpected.
It's not quite like that, you have to think of it more like a heat pump. It's not about how much static is ambient, it's about how much charge you can move from one side, to the other side and contain on the other side.
In other words, you are creating charge separation, quite litterally: you charge capacitor plates and then you physically separate them and create a very large charge separation.
It's creates electron density differentials, it uses electrostatic forces to do it, but it doesn't rely on drawing electrons in from anywhere, unless you attach a capacitor, in which case, you will pull electrons from one capacitor plate and concentrate them in the other.
It's really an electric analog to a heat pump.
So it's not like electrons are coming from somewhere, you're just surface ionising different parts of the circuit (providing capacitive static charge) and separating the charge.
It's a completely different approach to power generation. Normal generators force charge to move by establishing a temporary electric field with a changing magnetic field. This machine actually physically separates charge.
You are understanding how this works now. Yes, these machine can be thought of as electron concentrators, like a high pressure electron pump.
Now get this: the machine is easier to spin under load 😅.
When you don't have a load drawing current, the charge concentration starts to make back pressure that you can feel in the wheel, when you relieve the back pressure by providing a load, the machine spins easier.
So when you make one of these, you can spin it unloaded and find out the maximum physical resistance to turning by forcing the machine to short circuit.
This is why I know for a fact I have overunity, that maximum physical resistance is nothing.
Like I know it isn't litterally nothing, but I can't feel the difference when I spin the little 10 mm drive shaft with my fingers, I litterally can't feel the difference between it working with electrode on it vs it working without electrode on it.
After the glue messed up my machine I spun it with a recycled 48 watt fan motor from an old walmart house fan.
The drive shaft is all messed up and crooked and the bearings are shot, so I took the fan apart because it was shaking like pain mixer and I've had the motor lying around for a year. Any ways, if I held it at the right angle and let it vibrate my hand a bit I could line it up right with a printed fitting to spin the machine.
It did, at first it was a little slow, then when I lined everything up perfect and the speed picked up, the vibrations became easier to hold and I was able to keep the tip of the output shafter steadier to drive shaft and I must have spun the barrel at like twice the speed the drill made it go.
I did that after my barrel got ruined just to see if the motor could spin it.
If it can spin it with the electrodes in place, even if the barrel is shorted, that means it can spin it when the barrel is not shorted to me because I cannot feel the difference between working and not working in terms of resistance to spinning.
The new barrel is even better, the plates stick out of the surface of the barrel by a bit, so the electrodes don't need to contact the barrel in between plates, it'll be even easier to spin.
So the maximum voltage these machines make, not the voltage I made in a "does it even work" test, is determined by the distance between the plates on the disk/barrel.
In my case, from anode to neutralizer bar to cathode, the electricity would need to jump across 8 plate gaps.
Because of the distance between plates my machine will only short out internally at 208 KV on the current barrel and 216 KV on the new barrel, so that's the maximum voltage my machine can match to push electrons.
These can also be thought of like voltage matching current supplies to an extent because they will raise their output voltage until the the current flow in the circuit matches what the machine is trying to produce.
This is why they spark so far, stick these in an insulating gas like helium and they produce megavolts because you eliminate interplate sparking.
The amperage these machine produce is given by the formula C = 26.55uA x A x RPM (according to the engineering department at the federal university of RIo De Janeiro ) where A is the surface are in square meters that is used to transfer charge in a rotation.
In my case I have 10 mm by 170mm strips (18x180 on the new barrel) and there is 30 of them
So with that surface area the original barrel produces 1.37 uA per rotation.
Since I have that, I can just multiply by my set speed and tell you what amperage the machine will push at what RPM.
The voltage will climb until those amps get pushed out of the machine through the circuit. As long as I don't exceed the internal short circuit voltage.
So I can provide those milliamps at a maximum of that voltage.
In my case for the test yesterday morning, I had a 1 cm gap. In order to arc accross that, the machine needs to match the ionisation potential of the air which is 30 KV/cm.
So my machine matched the required voltage to make the spark, after which point, all of the produced current could flow and then the voltage stabilised because the current flow out of the machine matched the current production of the machine.
The voltage only rises when current production exceeds current draw.
In order to produce 210 KV like I want to, I'm going to need to either provide an extremely high impedance/resistive load or tune a spark gap.
But yesterday I spun at 1600 rpm and I made a continuous 1 cm spark and with my machines dimension and the engineering parameters, I made 63 watts.
Will do, but if calculations from the Electronic and Computer Engineering Department of the Polytechnic School, and at at COPPE, Electrical Engineering Program, Federal University of Rio de Janeiro (UFRJ) are correct then at that rotaional speed, my machine provides 2.106 mA of current, since I know all the condiitons for the spark gap, I can tell you my voltage was 30 KV.
That means that I made 63 watts with my generator this morning... it's really not hard to spin.
These are like vandergraphs, except they are way, way more efficient. Van Der Graafs use belts and friction to make static with the tribo-electric effect.
They are inherrently unreliable and lossy because you can't avoid the fact that friction=heat and friction = wear and tear.
These are a little different. These charge capacitor plates in an environment that's friendly to being charged and then separates them and forces the voltage on the plates to rise in response, then stores that increased voltage in a capacitor or dissipate it in a circuit.
The way these things are set up, they kind of create a positive charge vortex on one side of the machine and a negative charge vortext on the other side. The vortexs continuously siphon electrons from the positive side to the negative side until something gives because the voltage got too high or you use some of the built charge to do something.
I have a tiny bit of video from right before it got ruined, I spun the shaft with my fingers and my daughter was holding the wires between 1 cm and 2 cm appart and she was watching the sparks go.
I don't want to share video of my daughter though... It was the last sparks I got to make before the foil tape got all messed up.
It's alright though, in 60 hours I'll have a new barrel and It'll be even better.
Damn right! If they can convince you that you are on a team, and that team is separate from other teams and convince you that other teams might be a threat to your team. That's perfect for them.
Then we all fight each other and they win.
It depends on what you do in terms of what charge is in the middle plate at the start.
If you connect it to ground, it will be negative, if you connect it to an antenna, it will be positive.
if you use arial electrodes for both (a spark gap), whatever residual charge may or may not be there will start it. Bennet doublers are "self exiting".
If there's absolutley nothing, rub your feet on the carpet and touch a plate
The bennet double is an amazing visual. It's the absolute best way to explain the theory of opperation of an electrostatic influence machine, but it is not the best design of one.
Ideally, you want a rotating design that maximises the size of the charge surfaces and allows for high speed rotation as the ammount current produced is proportional to the surface area of charge carriers passing the collection point.
I'm currently working on a barell based design that tries to maximise the effects from Lord Kelvin's Replenisher. I've decided to switch gears and do this instead because contrarotation is mechanically complex. This will be much simpler and way more reliable.
I have a 180 mm diameter barrel with 30 170 mm long 10 mm wide plates on the barrel.
I'm going to be electrically insulating my design more and elimate coronal losses in the machine so that the voltage can go higher than 15 KV.
Because of the barrel design my surface area is huge.
According to the professors equation, I should be able to provide over a milliamp of current at a rotational speed under 1000 rpm, the only question will be how much I can mitigate the coronal losses incumbent in the original design so I get the voltage to climb to where it should actually be.
Spark gaps are cheap and effective, just have to do a little math. A common meter wouldn't work.
We're looking at hundreds of microamps being supplied at hundreds of kilovolts. Highest number output voltage I found for a machine like this was a sector less one (a bonetti machine) which was 6 megavolts.
The other thing is that the power may not necessarily be useful in equipment that was designed for high amperage and low voltage.
Wow...
Alright well. Leave me alone.
I don't want to interact with you any more.
Your following me and interacting with me is unwelcome.
I consider your name calling harassment.
Don't follow me across any more posts just to call me names.
If you don't want to talk that's fine. But following me across posts to name call and harass is inappropriate.
You've followed me across posts already now to continue a accusation/name calling campaign.
Also, if you refer to question 3 that I asked chat gpt you can see that the discharge time has no bearing on the sum total stored energy.
P = E/t
So yeah, if you calculate for just the duration of the spark time, the wattage number would be decieving, I instead assume that I will capature and condition the power, so for my purposes averaging the current flow into amp-seconds makes more sense and it allows me to present wattage as a smaller and more realistic number.
Here is a great resource where you can quickly calculate the energy stored in a capacitor:
So you are spreading lies.
Which ones? I asked you to bring up issues with my math and you won't.
Where's my mistake/lie.
I am asking you to highlight it and bring it up, which is a pretty small ask for an argument on a forumn considering you want me to dox myself.
You won't even tell me which part of the math you think I get wrong so that we check it.
Which part of the math did I get wrong?
Why should I participate with anything you ask? You don't want to have a discussion, which is what a forum is for, you're being a jerk.
Am I asking for money? Am I telling everyone how to do it for free?
You're free to disagree bud, but my posts are a mathmatical proof. If you have an issue with the math then raise it.
I'm asking people to replicate. Without my involvment.
If I post a video you'll shift the goal post and call it fake no matter what I do in the video, no matter how many angles i show.
You have to do it yourself. WIth parts you make or find so you see how everything fits together and there's no tricks.
I'm not your employee. I'm not going to do what you want me to just because you don't like the information I'm sharing for free.
Possible, I know that you get approximately 1 nanofarad for a leyden jar of 563 ml in size as a reasonable estimate.
Here you can see electroboom makes a leyden jar of 1.45 nanofarads and it's pretty tiny.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xjW-isgOijs
So winky's jars are probably at least 1 nanofarad, that's why a I say 1, I've seen small jars with larger capacitances, but I'm actually trying to be a little conservative.
obviously there's no great way to tell, but the 563 ml figure is considering that you are using a glass jar.
Considering each spark is worth 61.32 joules and he makes one at a frequency of 1 hz at his top speed. It's pretty wild to see him make 60 watts (rounded down to the tens) with one hand like it's nothing and see more sparks fly off as the wheel slows down after he lets go eh?
Blew my mind, I worked on and around heavy industrial generators and motors. When you have a geny on load it doesn't take that long to slow down from the back emf.
When I see the operation of that machine, I see proof of overunity in the sense that it looks to operate with a COP and the energy differential is useful to us, making 60 watts is not easy. Like a heat pump, but instead of creating thermal kinetic energy potentials you can create charge potentials.
I am working on proving it. But I would very much appreciate it if 1000 other people independantly proved it because the government will kill you.
So I imagine that the reason you don't mind heat pumps is because the differential being created is of an energy type that we are bad at utilizing as well as "the heat already existed, were just talking it from one location and concentrating it in another"
Am I correct? Or are there other reasons... Maybe you hate heat pumps, I don't know.
But I can spend 100 watts electrical energy and relocate 180 watts of thermal kinetic energy even with the cheapest air conditioner around. I could move 700 watts with a ground source heat pump.
If I have two insulated chambers and a heat pump I can create differential energy states that are multiples of the energy I used to make them.
No one bats an eye when you do it with a heat pump. In fact they set the thermostat to 18 and tell you to put on a sweater if you're that cold.
So as far as I'm concerned, creating energy differentials that contain more energy than the work required to make them is possible.
Heat pumps are proof that the phenomena can occur with thermal kinetic energy, what makes you so confident it is only possible with thermal kinetic energy?
One way or another, people can build these for free and generate power for free.
That's still free energy in my books.
You would need more of them, but yeah that's basically my plan once I design the most efficient and safe version of this I can.
I'm going to fully enclose my final model so that I can achieve megavolts. I'm building a benotti style one at the moment. It makes AC current due the capacitors overdraining from the suddent release of the extreme high tension.
The caps overdrain and flip the polarity of the entire machine with every spark lol.
It's also less lossy than a wimshurst and can put out higher voltages (megavolts), and it's a simpler design.
Also, the second video is a series in 4 parts building from beginning to end
Also, someone else found and shared the plans.
Yes it is and it's beautiful
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=v_K9bMGcaug
Now is it the most efficient build on the planet.....no....could you spin it with a fan in the wind? probably
Don't follow me up, follow the link in the second video, learn how to build one, prove it to yourself and then prove it to your friends.
If I have to do this by myself or on a team, I'm going to end up dead, If I get 1000 people to do it independantly and show their friends, the whole world wins forever.
You actually don't want big capacitors for this unless you're gannging multiple disks to work in unison.
Ideally, you would find the max speed that you are willing to opperate the disks at, then you would use a variable capacitor to tune the pulsing to 60 HZ so that you could just run it through a step down transformer transformer to drop it to 120 or 240 V.
This is a series of posts. I kept nothing secret, I gave away everything, just look at my post history