A Free Energy Idea

originally posted by: moebius

originally posted by: p75213

originally posted by: moebius

originally posted by: p75213

originally posted by: moebius

originally posted by: p75213
a reply to: moebius

The pancake coil.

But the coil is driven by the capacitor, is it not?

The total energy (electric and magnetic) of the coil is equal to the energy of the capacitor.

The energy of a coil is contained in the magnetic field. The formula is e = LI^2. Where e = energy, L = inductance and I = current(magnetic field). However, in this case the capacitor receives extra charge in the shape of the external electric field of the pancake coil. So each time the capacitor is charged it receives more than the previous time.The same applies to the coil.

Again. Where does the energy for the external electric field of the pancake coil come from if not from the capacitor? Something has to provide the energy to create that external electric field. What is the source?

A battery would be required to start. After that it's the interaction between the coil and capacitor. The extra energy, which is not accounted for in a normal rcl circuit, comes from the external electric field of the pancake coil. This is possible because of the geometry of the coil and capacitor. Also the proximity of both.

I can't explain it any better than that.

The problem is that you choose not to account for the "external" electric field in your circuit.

You are considering it when charging the capacitor, but ignoring it when discharging.

The coil energy is the sum of the magnetic and the "external" electric field. What I mean with that that when the capacitor is discharging its energy goes into both. An electric field can not just "magically" appear.

When discharging it returns to the coil.

originally posted by: p75213

originally posted by: moebius

originally posted by: p75213

originally posted by: moebius

originally posted by: p75213

originally posted by: moebius

originally posted by: p75213
a reply to: moebius

The pancake coil.

But the coil is driven by the capacitor, is it not?

The total energy (electric and magnetic) of the coil is equal to the energy of the capacitor.

The energy of a coil is contained in the magnetic field. The formula is e = LI^2. Where e = energy, L = inductance and I = current(magnetic field). However, in this case the capacitor receives extra charge in the shape of the external electric field of the pancake coil. So each time the capacitor is charged it receives more than the previous time.The same applies to the coil.

Again. Where does the energy for the external electric field of the pancake coil come from if not from the capacitor? Something has to provide the energy to create that external electric field. What is the source?

A battery would be required to start. After that it's the interaction between the coil and capacitor. The extra energy, which is not accounted for in a normal rcl circuit, comes from the external electric field of the pancake coil. This is possible because of the geometry of the coil and capacitor. Also the proximity of both.

I can't explain it any better than that.

The problem is that you choose not to account for the "external" electric field in your circuit.

You are considering it when charging the capacitor, but ignoring it when discharging.

The coil energy is the sum of the magnetic and the "external" electric field. What I mean with that that when the capacitor is discharging its energy goes into both. An electric field can not just "magically" appear.

When discharging it returns to the coil.

What returns to the coil?

a reply to: p75213

A charge on the surface of a conductor creates an electric field (electrostatic field)

Unless you plan on this thing operating in the THz range, the skin capactance is negligible.

TheRedneck

The electric field of a coil.
www.physics.wisc.edu...

originally posted by: p75213
The electric field of a coil.
www.physics.wisc.edu...

Yes, depending on your frame of reference the electromagnetic field can appear as a pure magnetic or electric field or a mixture of both.

But you don't need to go that far to analyze your problem. All you have to do is to properly account for all energies.

The electric field will increase many times when the magnetic field collapses. On that note pulsed DC would be a better way to go rather than ac. Building it will prove weather its a goer or not I suppose.

originally posted by: TheRedneck
a reply to: Nickn3

Incorrect.

The circuit will, at resonance, operate with extremely high efficiency as an oscillator. Inductive and capacitive reactance are not additive in themselves, only in their phase angle.

TheRedneck

Remove the input current and see what happens.

a reply to: p75213

If it was that easy we would have had free energy for a long, long time. It should be pretty obvious that this has been tried and provides no free energy.

originally posted by: hombero
a reply to: p75213

If it was that easy we would have had free energy for a long, long time. It should be pretty obvious that this has been tried and provides no free energy.

No - It's not obvious at all. How do you know it's been tried?

All of this is contingent on a magical electric field that stays constant even with a load.

Come on man. This is BS and a failure of basic electronics.

originally posted by: p75213
The electric field will increase many times when the magnetic field collapses. On that note pulsed DC would be a better way to go rather than ac. Building it will prove weather its a goer or not I suppose.

Capacitors filter DC, try again.

a reply to: p75213

Because everything you described are circuits that have already been created.

originally posted by: p75213
A battery would be required to start. After that it's the interaction between the coil and capacitor. The extra energy, which is not accounted for in a normal rcl circuit, comes from the external electric field of the pancake coil. This is possible because of the geometry of the coil and capacitor. Also the proximity of both.

I can't explain it any better than that.

The only way I can interpret that is that you are thinking that the geometry of your circuit will somehow magically make extra energy. The great thing about science is, you don't have to take anybody else's word that it won't magically create extra energy, you can build it yourself and find out for yourself. I think you will find what everybody has been telling you, the conservation of energy laws seem pretty solid and clever geometry is not going to break them. You'll never prove them wrong with words since too many experiments have failed to do so, but if you build a device that breaks conservation of energy laws, you should get a Nobel prize for that.

Bearden built an alleged over-unity electronic device, and another experimenter duplicated it and "confirmed" it was overunity, but an analysis of the data showed it's not really over unity. The experimenter's understanding of electric circuit calculations was lacking and his own data showed it wasn't over-unity, but he didn't understand that.

originally posted by: p75213
Free energy devices have been around for decades but not available on the open market. EV Gray and Henry Moray are two inventors that come to mind. There are plenty more.

Your knowledge of free energy devices is as lacking as your knowledge of circuits. Yes Henry Moray patented an energy device which worked using well-known laws of physics, but it was anything but free. On the contrary, it was an extremely expensive source of energy, which is why it was never commercially successful.

Do you want to see a real "free energy" device? They exist but you're on the wrong track. These devices extract energy from external electromagnetic fields, but no conservation of energy laws are broken in this case because unlike you, I can say exactly where the energy for the external electromagnetic fields is coming from and that energy is definitely conserved with this "free energy" device. It's cool and may have limited applications, but it's not the solution to our energy problems.

New Printable Antenna Can Harvest Ambient Energy To Power Small Electronics

The energy is "free" to the person collecting it, but technically it's not really "free energy" since you can trace the source which usually traces back to some kind of EM transmitting antenna powered off electronics connected to the electric grid, like the television station mentioned in the article, for example.

a reply to: Nickn3

It will show a decaying resonance waveform.

TheRedneck

I would be happy if someone got this for me:

Wizzkid, hope im not wrong....
www.youtube.com...

a reply to: Arbitrageur

If energy is abundant and freely available, how come it costs us so much to extract and harness it?

originally posted by: surfer_soul
a reply to: Arbitrageur

If energy is abundant and freely available, how come it costs us so much to extract and harness it?

Because extracting enough of it to be useful is prohibitively expensive with our current technology.

It's still more cost effective to use other sources.

originally posted by: Miccey
I would be happy if someone got this for me:

Wizzkid, hope im not wrong....
www.youtube.com...

Taylor Wilson is a fraud and so is his dad who put him up to it.

Several people who are EEs and EETs crapped all over his BS. Here's one example:





People like this bank on the fact that most people don't know a damned thing about electronics and electricity. It might as well be magic.

One big flag for all the great answers and advice that he obviously is gonna ignore.
Entertaining

It boils down to one thing. Is the electric field through the capacitor from the coil strong enough to overcome the losses in the system?