Tesla's Pierce Arrow Electric Car Experiment of 1931

[Vinyasi]

At the end of the day, the devices shown in the pictures are lossy oscillators that come to a stop after finite time.

The above image is well known to slow down and stop. But my discussion implies a pair of questions...

Would response time shorten between both ends if more spheres are added in the middle to validate an acceleration of longitudinal shock waves passing through these stationary spheres?

If true, then the next question is...

Could escalation of momentum, of the rising and falling spheres, occur if two of these cradles are mechanically connected in series/parallel with each other ...



...to form a closed loop equivalent to a similar arrangement among a closed loop of two capacitors and two inductors - each capacitor being equivalent to one set of stationary spheres and the terminals of each inductor embodying the behavior of the rising sphere/s at the end of one cradle and the falling sphere at the end of the other cradle?

 

[Vinyasi]

Series Resistance is a Serious Mistake not to Include in an Electronic Simulator

After angrily responding to the latest criticisms on YouTube, I finally absorbed some of that criticism by agreeing with the over reactance of Paul Falstad's simulator and committing myself to do something about it. So, I went into the software code and added series resistance to coils and caps. Then, surprise surprise, I went and designed two circuits using series resistance - in fact, they're dependent on it...

http://is.gd/refinedpa

http://is.gd/1halfdcpa

Then I had a discussion with Byron Brubaker, who calls himself **broken link removed** on YouTube, in which he brought up how Tesla magnified power by the use of the analogy of a child on a swing which invokes Q factor (which he had to explain to me by way of an excerpt from Radio Amateur Handbook 1976) and resonance. He's not a believer in 'free energy' nor of 'overunity' which I can respect since I know, now, better that these catch all phrases belie an ignorance of something spooky that defies a broader, or more accurate, viewpoint until such time as we know better how to explain a seemingly anomalous occurrence.

I say this because when I was evolving what became my ...

http://is.gd/lightning_oscillator

... into what became a few different varieties of battery charging...

http://is.gd/portablebatterycharger
http://is.gd/acevpower

..., I discovered that there is a finite limit to how much size of a battery pack can be charged without severely reducing the rate of recharge to atto Amps (?e-18). Although the limit is extremely small, it's there.

Our discussion included time, since if an amount of energy is bled off from an oscillation at a rate less than it is accumulating due to a high Q exhibiting resonance and a standing wave, then it can erroneously appear to be 'free energy' when in fact all it's doing is accumulating voltage at a rate faster than what ever the load is dissipating. So, it's not enough to say that: "energy IN has to equal energy OUT" since "rate of energy transfer IN vs rate of energy transfer OUT" is also important. This says the same thing but is vastly more accurate and to the point.

Time is a very important consideration. It's equivalent to saying how big a garden hose is filling a bucket at what rate of flow versus how many and how small are the holes in that bucket leaking out the water? This, unfortunately, bypasses paying strict attention to the voltage source, alone, to also include considering the layering effect of standing waves provided with new influxes of power at just the right moment to accumulate over time. Which is a lot better than a mere voltage multiplier circuit which merely multiplies up to a limit without accumulating beyond any fixed limit.

 

[betwixt]

I cant find any lossless GigaHenry inductors or GigaFarad capacitors at my local store. Does anyone have some lying around I could borrow?

Brian.

 

[Vinyasi]

I cant find any lossless GigaHenry inductors or GigaFarad capacitors at my local store. Does anyone have some lying around I could borrow?

Brian.

Step inside a thundercloud.

- - - Updated - - -

...snip.

Then I had a discussion with Byron Brubaker, who calls himself **broken link removed** on YouTube, in which he brought up how Tesla magnified power by the use of the analogy of a child on a swing which invokes Q factor (which he had to explain to me by way of an excerpt from Radio Amateur Handbook 1976) and resonance. He's not a believer in 'free energy' nor of 'overunity' which I can respect since I know, now, better that these catch all phrases belie an ignorance of something spooky that defies a broader, or more accurate, viewpoint until such time as we know better how to explain a seemingly anomalous occurrence.

...snip

Our discussion included time, since if an amount of energy is bled off from an oscillation at a rate less than it is accumulating due to a high Q exhibiting resonance and a standing wave, then it can erroneously appear to be 'free energy' when in fact all it's doing is accumulating voltage at a rate faster than what ever the load is dissipating. So, it's not enough to say that: "energy IN has to equal energy OUT" since "rate of energy transfer IN vs rate of energy transfer OUT" is also important. This says the same thing but is vastly more accurate and to the point.

Time is a very important consideration. It's equivalent to saying how big a garden hose is filling a bucket at what rate of flow versus how many and how small are the holes in that bucket leaking out the water? This, unfortunately, bypasses paying strict attention to the voltage source, alone, to also include considering the layering effect of standing waves provided with new influxes of power at just the right moment to accumulate over time. Which is a lot better than a mere voltage multiplier circuit which merely multiplies up to a limit without accumulating beyond any fixed limit.

There's a catch, though, negating these analogies of a bucket and a garden hose or a child on a swing...
The energy gain is exponential (a sort of compounded interest rate) while the energy usage is linear subtraction. So, all that is needed is to wait sufficient time for the gain to reach usable levels at which point usage won't exceed gain at that point in time whose consequence is that from that point in time moving forward it never will ever again at that usage rate ensuring a runaway circuit. Byron assured me that Ham radio guys stay away from this since it wrecks havoc on their systems being blown up.

 

[D.A.(Tony)Stewart]

Step inside a thundercloud.

- - - Updated - - -



There's a catch, though, negating these analogies of a bucket and a garden hose or a child on a swing...
The energy gain is exponential (a sort of compounded interest rate) while the energy usage is linear subtraction. So, all that is needed is to wait sufficient time for the gain to reach usable levels at which point usage won't exceed gain at that point in time whose consequence is that from that point in time moving forward it never will ever again at that usage rate ensuring a runaway circuit. Byron assured me that Ham radio guys stay away from this since it wrecks havoc on their systems being blown up.

I see no value in this discussion of ideal components that are impractical without superconductors and otherwise impossible by laws of physics and geometry.

BTW a thundercloud has no inductance.

 

[Vinyasi]

I see no value in this discussion of ideal components that are impractical without superconductors and otherwise impossible by laws of physics and geometry.

BTW a thundercloud has no inductance.

If series resistance within coils and capacitors fails to bring them closer to the reality of physics and geometry, then what will? Everything and anything can be programmed into a simulator or left out due to oversight and negligence.

As you already know, electronic simulators are designed based on the laws of electrodynamics.

That leaves geometry as a legitimate complaint. So, what's geometrically impractical in...
https://is.gd/refinedpa
or
https://is.gd/1halfdcpa
?

- - - Updated - - -

BTW a thundercloud has no inductance.

Where ever there is current discharged from one electrostatic charge to another, there is inductance.

 

[andre_luis]

As you already know, electronic simulators are designed based on the laws of electrodynamics.

That leaves geometry as a legitimate complaint. So, what's geometrically impractical in...
https://is.gd/refinedpa
or
https://is.gd/1halfdcpa
?

Let's give you some tips:

1) Simulators do what you tell it to do. If I were to draw the electric circuit representative of a physical phenomen, I should have to take into account reactive and dissipative effects, what means that it would not be expected that anything would keep running in a steady condition forever.

2) Regarding the circuit presented in the link - totally symmetric and assembled with ideal components - it is not representative of any material or phenomenon in the real world, and therefore there is no question at all.

3) Still referring to the circuit, it presents a behavior in the simulation totally unreal after tapping in the left pressed button, namely an exponential ramp. This is due to error of convergence in the simulation due to the residuals of calculation in the numerical analysis; in other simulators (eg Spice) I believe it would generate a Warning message and would not proceed. I'm not a theorist, but I would guess that it is due to the charges at the whole circuit between both top and bottom capacitors being unreferenced (at a float potential), therefore any computational error (a well known parameter of simulators) would cumulate indefinitely, which not occurs in real world.