US Patent No. 512340 and 685012 and Tesla free energy

[massinissa]

Hello,

Being passionate about the idea of ​​free energy, I tried to reconstruct some processes that related to so-called unitary systems but my results were disappointing (total failure) especially since it becomes discouraging because no one has been able to successfully replicate at least one of the hundreds of these "patented" processes. If someone has been successful in this area, I would ask them to tell me which system to bet on.
I looked for issues in all directions (parity violation, vortex and anti-vortex…), these subjects are beyond me; but how to get out of this labyrinth of free energy without leaving it soulless?

So a semblance of courage and we continue by invoking a few conceptions:
Part A) Has Tesla Ever Solved the Energy Problem?
1) US patent N ° 512340 from Tesla “Coil for electromagnets”: www.tfcbooks.com/patents/coil.htm
Is the EMF force (Lenz's law) lowered in these bifilar coils? How do you get the ideal resonance for these coils? What would be their optimal uses of free energy? Does the Möebius coil get the same effect?
2) US Patent N ° 685012 from Tesla “Means for increasing the intensity of electrical oscillations”: www.tfcbooks.com/patents/super_c.htm A passage from this patent particularly caught my attention: “The receiving coil B 'is energized stronger in proportion and induces currents of greater intensity in the circuits A'. It is evident from the above that the greater the number of the freely-vibrating circuits which alternately receive and transmit energy from one to another the greater, relatively, will be the gain secured by applying my invention “.
If I understood correctly Tesla announces an increase in the intensity of the induced current, but what will be the consequence on its voltage? This century-old patent indicates a resistance problem hence the need to cool its circuits, can this problem not be solved with the use of superconducting coils (whatever the costs)? Can we supply its circuits with direct current and loop it with batteries !!!?
For me, I just discovered this process, I have not yet understood how it works, for this I need more informed opinions before experimenting.

3) Some references concerning the study of coils in conical or flat spirals:
http://ww.tesla-coil-builder.com/FlatSp ... ifilar.htm
www.patentstorm.us/patents/5642049.htm , www.vortexengine.ca/index.shtml , http://jnaudin.free.fr/html/atep1.htm ...
I understand through several sources dealing with these forms of coils that at least one gets an intense magnetic field (gains compared to normal coils) even in DC, so I am simply asking myself the following question: why this type of coils are not used to improve the efficiency of AC or DC electric motors, depending on the type to which they can be applied?

Part B) Cold electric energy as opposed to magnetic fields:
I found theoretical analyzes (pushed at the level of elementary particles) on electricity and magnetism in the pages of http://magnetism.otc.co.nz/index.htm among which an explanation of the operation of Searl's disk tempted me to believe in an analogy with flat tesla coils: movement of electrons in a flat spiral in both cases except that one uses motion and the other injects current. http://magnetism.otc.co.nz/Magnetism.htm#SearlDisc
An experience reported in the “Precession and the Isotope line” page http://magnetism.otc.co.nz/Precession.htm reveals a creation of electrical energy (surprisingly): a thin copper plate is introduced and inclined at 45 ° between two powerful magnets forced into opposition, no movement is applied neither to the plate nor to the magnets and yet the end of the plate became cold, the effect of this experiment in the words of the author: "A cold energy collects near the end of the extension piece which is colder further from the magnets".
Probably there has been a displacement of electrons in the plate towards the part bathed in the two compressed magnetic fields, this remains to be confirmed.
In the same vein, the treatment of water exposed to opposite uniform magnetic fields reveals that the compressed field of two poles SS expands water by adding a positive electric charge and that that of the two poles NN contracts the water by adding a negative charge. The most informed will say that it is only the movement of water in the pipe that causes these effects.

I have not yet done experiments to measure these effects on static materials, but I have a wacky idea that contradicts the law of induction. Too bad being out of ideas, I still don't have the least worse than this one: if we have four powerful magnets, two are forced in South-South opposition and the other two in North-North opposition, the magnetic fields are compressed to the maximum by bringing the magnets as close as possible, I think that a weak current will flow (from NN to SS) in a conductor connected between two copper plates placed at 45 ° in the two fields compression zones. If we manage to measure any current (without any movement of the copper or the magnets) we can look for the material (ferromagnetic, paramagnetic, diamagnetic, with doped junctions, ...) or the chemical solution which will react ideally to each of the two compression zones magnetic fields. Excuse me for adding another delirium: will the application of compressed magnetic fields to a chemical dipole have an effect of restitution or improvement of its charge? If and only if this is possible we can use two conical coils (with an intense magnetic field) supplied with DC by a battery, these coils must be oriented to focus their magnetic fields from two sides of the battery and in opposition NN to each other. the other, the electrolyte bathing in the compression zone of these fields will perhaps have an effect of recharging the battery and the energy not consumed by the coils will be returned to it (on condition that their resistances are reduced: less resistive conductors or get by with solutions such as liquid nitrogen). If the charge gains exceed the consumption of the coils, then where do the additional electrons come from? At this stage we will know how to manage to find a mathematical device and explanations of the photon type and their interactions with the vortices in matter (ascending and descending vortices observed by tunneling microscopes) while the balance between these vortex is disturbed by compressed magnetic fields; in short, this is only imagination, the experience may give us something else.

My head is scrambled, I hope that you will help me see more clearly or that you will convince me to pick up the phone.

Friendships.
MASSINISSA.

[the middle]

these games there, I find them dangerous:
http://fr.youtube.com/watch?v=iO7j5LKmd ... re=related

[Bibiphoque]

Hello,
Magnetic precession ?? Amazing, to say the least!

Here, see here a little:
http://www.amasci.com/freenrg/sukdynam.html

and especially there:
http://amasci.com/tesla/dipole1.html


@+

[jonule]

hello to you massinissa!

no on this forum nobody knows Nikolai TESLA!

if you want good info I advise you:

for Muller's generator, the "Tesla coil":
mounting details of the Neogen (for New Generator): http://overunity.ifrance.com/
superb "accessible" replications to achieve:
http://www.theverylastpageoftheinternet ... licate.htm
http://www.theverylastpageoftheinternet ... etmenu.htm
http://picasaweb.google.com/sellier.bru ... lerParAPOC

for Stanley Meyer's hydrogen cell:
the "tesla switch", or charge pumping, you will have this information by using the "search" button.

[caribou]

no one has been able to successfully replicate at least one of the hundreds of these "patented" processes.

It is worth remembering that a patent is in no way a guarantee of the efficiency of a process or a device. The patent relates only to intellectual and / or industrial property, it is a question of trade, not of technique. When we apply for a patent, the job of the people who take care of it is to verify that it does not already exist and that it has not already been filed, not to see if it works.
To caricature I could very well file a patent on a machine to make electricity from a solution of bread crumbs in fresh water as long as it has not already been done. It does not work or is infinitely worse than a simple battery, but the question of the patent is not about efficiency.

[Leo Maximus]

no one has been able to successfully replicate at least one of the hundreds of these "patented" processes.

It is worth remembering that a patent is in no way a guarantee of the efficiency of a process or a device. The patent relates only to intellectual and / or industrial property, it is a question of trade, not of technique. When we apply for a patent, the job of the people who take care of it is to verify that it does not already exist and that it has not already been filed, not to see if it works.
To caricature I could very well file a patent on a machine to make electricity from a solution of bread crumbs in fresh water as long as it has not already been done. It does not work or is infinitely worse than a simple battery, but the question of the patent is not about efficiency.

It's a fact, you can patent anything but the average citizen thinks that if it's patented then it's an invention that works. For example, a French inventor discovered cold fusion and patented a process in 1964:

http://v3.espacenet.com/origdoc?DB=EPOD ... =FR1584953