Shareware Overload Trio 2

home *** CD-ROM | disk | FTP | other *** search

/ Shareware Overload Trio 2 / Shareware Overload Trio Volume 2 (Chestnut CD-ROM).ISO / dir28 / tod.zip / TOD.ASC next >

Wrap

Text File | 1994-01-29 | 23KB | 463 lines

(word processor parameters LM=8, RM=75, TM=2, BM=2) Taken from KeelyNet BBS (214) 324-3501 Sponsored by Vangard Sciences PO BOX 1031 Mesquite, TX 75150 There are ABSOLUTELY NO RESTRICTIONS on duplicating, publishing or distributing the files on KeelyNet except where noted! January 29,1994 TOD.ASC -------------------------------------------------------------------- This SUPERIOR file shared with KeelyNet courtesy of fellow researchers Lee Trippett and Dan Davidson. -------------------------------------------------------------------- Lee received a set of KeelyNet files several months back. After studying various files, he decided to work with the concepts as described in Bearden's paper on "The Final Secret of Free Energy". The following description requires the schematic file TOD.GIF so that you can also build and experiment with this apparent overunity device (approximately 1:25 gain). We here at KeelyNet urge you to please share your findings and resist the temptation to patent or otherwise control free energy technologies. Such devices have been discovered many times in the past and the main reason we don't have them in practical use TODAY is because of secrecy, greed and/or ego. Some were anomalous or unstable and difficult to reproduce but would it not be to the world's best interests that what IS known should be available to everyone so that we could quantify and improve on it? -------------------------------------------------------------------- The Trippett OverUnity Device (TOD) (Lee didn't name this, I did <g>..JWD) written by Lee Trippett My experiments with Tom Bearden's switching circuit theoretical concepts seems to show a significant power gain. This is supposed to be against all the textbook rules which are currently in vogue. With the my version of Bearden's switching circuit it is easy to show a dramatic increase in current through a fixed load, even while the battery current decreases. This gives the impression and calculation of a power gain but there are other considerations. Many major national suppliers of electrical conducting wire have been called and not one had any wire with a specification relating to relaxation time, i.e. the time it takes for electrons to start moving after a potential is applied. (This is not the same as the time for a signal to travel along the circuit.) The "Handbook of Chemistry and Physics 1993" and "McGraw-Hill Encyclopedia of Science and Technology" were checked, without success, for a listing of relaxation times for various conducting Page 1 materials. Therefore, I tried to simulate a delay by placing silicon diodes or a very long wire between the battery, switch, and 'collector'. These two 'delay items' were placed in a synchronized flexible switch circuit which was developed according to the Bearden circuit requirements. (See Bearden's KeelyNet file 'FREENRG4.ASC' method 2, datum 1-214-324-3501. This is a free BBS. Other related files are Sweet*.*, ZPE*.*, Reply*.*, & Polarize.*) A sharp (20 nanosecond rise/fall time) ON switch pulse of 1 to 5 microseconds is directed to a power MOSFET (Q2) between a battery (V2) and 'collector' with a following synchronized ON pulse directed to Q3 which is up to 10 times greater than the time constant between the 'collector' and load. (See schematic.) Data has been plotted for the current, voltage, and time of carbon zinc batteries. These are cheaper and quicker to run down for measuring energy loss. Bearden's theory requires very fast switching times. Anything less than one microsecond is very expensive. This is where I decided to try Mr. William Price's suggestion of 1500 feet of solid copper wire (see KeelyNet file 'RELAX1.ASC'). This length should give a delay of 1.5 microseconds. The first observation was a reverse in the direction of current in the load circuit (mA3) and it (this reversal) was much more than the battery current (mA2). Regardless of the switching rate, on/off ratio, capacitor 'collector' size, or presence of diodes the 'energy loss' curve for these 9V batteries is remarkably consistent when the average current is held constant. (40ma for a 9V carbon zinc battery seems optimum for an energy curve that is consistent and can be seen in a short time of 20 to 30 minutes.) For a wire 'collector' the energy drain for the battery (V2) is considerably less for a 40 ma 'load current'. (See chart.) For a wide range of on/off ratio and frequency the current in both loops is always the same when any size ordinary capacitor is used as the 'collector'. This is for fixed resistor loads of 1, 2, 4, 12, 33, and 190 ohms. For Bearden's portion of the circuit, the computation of 'power in' by V2 x mA2 x (on time)/(on plus off time) is always greater than the computation of 'power out' by mA3 squared times load resistance. (I have no means for measuring average voltage for a complex waveform.) With a dual trace scope on the 'source' of Q2 and Q3 one can see clearly the synchronized switching action and the charge-discharge curves. The 'energy' drain on the battery (V2) is always directly related to the average pulsed current in the battery circuit. This is equivalent to the energy drain for the same current in a directly connected non-switched load to the battery. For a wire 'collector' and a rather narrow range of pulse width and frequency (see schematic notes) the current in loop Q3 reverses Page 2 direction and can be more than 40 times the current in loop Q2. (I've measured as much as a 60 to 1 ratio.) Note: The wire does not need to be in a coil form. The circuit represents a 'current (and power?) amplifier' for a wire 'collector' and a 'power control' for a capacitor 'collector'. This conclusion is based on a measured 1 ma, 8 volt value in loop Q2 which calculates as 8 mw. The corresponding values in loop Q3 can be up to 40 ma through 1 ohm which is 1.6 mw for a significant power loss instead of a gain. However, when the input power computation is adjusted for the actual 'time-on' for the battery (V2) there is a computational show of power gain by as much as a factor of 25. However, actual current flow is not only determined by the voltage and load but also by: 1) pulse width for both loops; 2) time constant for both loops; and 3) on-off period (frequency). For a dramatic visual demonstration of a 'current gain', do this: set a specific value of pulse width and frequency for an ordinary 1 uf metal film capacitor 'collector' so that current in both the Q2 and Q3 loops is 4 ma. When a wire coil of 40 ft. #22 solid magnet wire is substituted without changing anything else the current reverses direction in the Q3 loop, the current in loop Q2 drops to 1 ma, and the current in loop Q3 increases to 40 ma. How can 40 ma (10 times more output current with 4 times less input power) be pushed through exactly the same load by simply (and only) replacing a capacitor with a chunk of wire? Because a 1 ohm load for a 9 volt source should theoretically allow 9 amps. It is the switching characteristics, time constant, and frequency which have a greater control on the resulting current than does the load or supply voltage. The attached battery energy drain curves look like a very promising 'power gain' but can be easily misinterpreted for the reasons just stated. (By the way, the current in mA1 remains unchanged in this switch of passive nonlinear 'collector' components. This current is about 10 ma and could probably be much less by using a small signal FET inverter stage. This current is the same without any connection to the two FET's Q2 and Q3.) When using a wire 'collector' the current ratio increases as the voltage for V2 increases. This seems to confirm Bearden's theoretical discovery but the surprising results I assume are the result, in part, of an autotransformer effect by means of self induction. The current ratio decreases as the load increases. The current ratio increases as the 'coil collector' resistance decreases. The load current increases as the period of the on/off cycle decreases. Page 3 Two experienced electronic engineers are convinced there is something wrong with the circuit or instruments and that it is impossible to have a power gain. They are unwilling to admit that the vacuum of the universe is indeed a plenum full of energy. It will be hard for many to realize that it is impossible to have a 'closed system' with the new insight of reality as summarized by Tom Bearden. Lee Trippett, 2025 Rogue River Dr., Eagle Point, OR 97524 -------------------------------------------------------------------- The following is the description for components used in the circuit TOD.GIF. Part Part Part Radio Shack Estimated Designation Type Number Number Cost TL555 CMOS Timer TL555 276-1718 $1.39 Q1-Q3 Power MOSFET IRF510 or 511 276-2072 1.99 R1 Potentiometer 10,000 ohm R2 Potentiometer 5,000 ohm R3 Potentiometer 5,000 ohm R4 Potentiometer 5,000 ohm R5 Potentiometer 5,000 ohm R6 Potentiometer 5,000 ohm C1 Capacitor 0.1 or 0.68uf Potentiometers R1 through R6 should be set at the following approximate values and should be adjusted for the maximum gain for your circuit, they adjust the on/off time of the 555 timer : R1 - ~7K resistor R2 - ~100 ohm resistor R3 - ~470 ohm resistor R4 - ~190 ohm resistor R5 - ~190 ohm resistor R6 - ~2.2Kohm resistor (These initial values may vary depending on the Qn MOSFETs) -------------------------------------------------------------------- The Power MOSFETs are used as high speed switches. The Load is a 1 to 4 ohm fixed resistor. Greater resistor values will reduce the current ratio when using a wire coil as a collector. Current is always a function of the settings for R1 and R2. Adjust the frequency to about 3kHZ with a pulse width of about 2 microseconds for a current amplification of at least 40 to 1 which translates to a 25 over-unity gain in power out. The "collector" is a wire coil. Coils which give similar results are ; (1) 500 foot coil of solid core, 12 gauge copper wire, (2) 100 foot coils of 22 gauge solid hookup wire, and (3) 40 foot coils of #22 magnet wire. Page 4 The important thing to note is the inverter should be setup so Q2 is ON and Q3 is OFF and vice versa and the pulse shapes are preserved as much as possible going into Q2 and Q3. The MOSFETs must be REALLY OFF or parasitic current losses will occur. -------------------------------------------------------------------- The following is an excerpt removed from the file FREENRG4.ASC as written by Tom Bearden. (2) The second way is to "trap the electron gas electrons" in a separate collector, feed "current-free potential" to the collector from a primary battery or other source of potential, and collect a bunch of excess energy (potential) in the collector's "penned up free electron 'horses'" waiting to carry the excess energy to the load and dissipate it there, once they have been released. Then, one switches the primary potential source away from the collector, while the "energy-loaded horses" are still trapped and straining at the bit, so that no work can be done __ by those agitated horses when they stampede out of there __ on the internal resistance of the primary source, to destroy or reduce it. In the same switching action, the collector with its "snorting but still trapped electron horses" is switched across the load to form a totally separate circuit with it, having nothing at all to do with the original primary source of potential. Then, the agitated horses are released, and thunder out through the load, scattering their riders (excess energy) in all directions in the load, producing work/heat and powering the load. They will also charge on around to the reverse side of the collector, and kill its charge separation (kill its potential) as well, just as does any ordinary circuit. The major disadvantage of method 1, as we presently have seen it done (however, check Barrett's demonstration that Tesla's patented circuitry is capable of doing it by circuitry alone), is that time-reversed electrical energy is produced. So Method 1 has some serious drawbacks. "Time-reversed energy stuff", which should stay in the atomic nucleus as Newtonian 3rd law reactions and 3rd-law energy exchanges, is dragged out. Unusual effects on biological systems can occur. Antigravity effects can occur. Other hidden processes in the universes, that affect the atomic nucleus, can be gated into the external circuitry, causing disaster. Monopoles can be deposited in the magnets, causing them to explode like hand grenades. Most of the new "massive time-reverse energy" phenomenology is still unknown. One cannot at this stage of ignorance adequately guarantee human safety. I presently don't see just how this kind of energy can pass an Underwriter Laboratories' testing and certification, until a lot more exhaustive work is done to understand the new phenomenology. Page 5 Method 2, however, yields ordinary, garden-variety, positive-time electrical energy. The method presented in the paper is my own discovery. No unusual time-reversed phenomena are involved. It would appear to be eminently practical to produce and certify power units based on Method 2. The phenomenology and risks are the same as for ordinary, time-forward power systems. Method 2 has another unique characteristic: as a system, all the subsystems are already in the literature and validated. They have just not previously been put together in this fashion. So development of the system really represents an "integration" problem only, after one first does a little development of a proper degenerate semiconductor material (DSM). In other words, one first develops (and tests) the exact doping materials and percentage, to get a DSM material that is still a good conductor but has a relaxation time of __ say __ one tenth of a millisecond. One builds the wires from the battery to the collector out of this new DSM material. If one uses a capacitor for the collector, the plates must be made out of the new DSM material, not out of normal "pure conductor" material. Then one develops a switcher that switches in one tenth (or less) the relaxation time of the DSM, or in this case in one hundredth of a millisecond. That switching time, of course, is easy for any decent electronic technician or electronic engineer. One also develops a timing circuit that will (1) sense the status of the discharge of the collector energy through the load, and (2) trigger the switching at the correct times so that a smooth two-cycle (collect, discharge) process results. Note that the lengths of cycle one and cycle two are not necessarily equal at all. One may use multiple collectors/loads simultaneously, cascaded collectors/loads, etc. Hundreds of variations are possible and feasible. It is not possible to do anything with this discovery in a normal manner. I would dearly like to be economically independent, so I could work full time in my efforts on free energy, antigravity, extended EM healing, cancer, etc. Many orthodox scientists will also fiercely resist this upstart notion of "overunity" electrical machines to the bitter end. When powerful economic interests realize one has such things for real, one is certainly going to be stopped, jailed, or killed, or he may just "mysteriously vanish" and never be seen again. So I just freely released and distributed my discovery of method 2, in the paper "The Final Secret of Free Energy". It is deliberately targeted toward technicians, junior engineers, and educated laymen. (The principles and definitions raised, however, can be debated to the nth degree by knowledgeable foundation scientists). The paper has already been distributed worldwide. Now the principles and definitions are available to everyone. If they are in error, shortly that will be proven in spades. If they are correct, that will also be established shortly. Page 6 Anyone who wishes can develop and patent a particular application. There's no longer any way to stop this information from being disseminated and utilized. I hope that a flurry of development and patenting activity will result around the world. Get cheap, clean electrical energy to everyone. Bring on the electric auto, clean up the noxious auto exhausts, get rid of giant oil spills, and clean up the biosphere. Tom Bearden, March 12, 1993 -------------------------------------------------------------------- Vangard Note The above information relates to Bearden's observation that potential can be trapped in such a way as to avoid the flow of current. It is easy to think of this in the following manner: Current flows on the surface of conductors, not on the interior. When voltage is applied to a conductor, it must "fill it up" from the inside out. That voltage "filling" effect is where the circuit is coming to unity with the voltage source and so, in a manner of speaking, is creating a "well" or hole that must be filled. There is no current actually passed OVER the surface UNTIL the conductor has filled FROM the inside TO the outside. At that point, the voltage "translates" into current. It is at this point, that the voltage (potential) must be removed from the circuit, that is, BEFORE current actually can flow. The relaxation time of the conductor is thus how long it takes the conductor to fill up. The circuit must be timed so that the potential fills up the "collector" (coil of wire), then is rapidly switched INTO the load where it dissipates in the form of heat or work. The collector is then switched back to again "fill up". All of us here at KeelyNet look forward to future exchanges of information or research results and we wish you success in your experiments. You can print the TOD.GIF circuit by using Windows Paint, or download VUIMG.ZIP from KeelyNet. -------------------------------------------------------------------- If you have comments or other information relating to such topics as this paper covers, please upload to KeelyNet or send to the Vangard Sciences address as listed on the first page. Thank you for your consideration, interest and support. Jerry W. Decker.........Ron Barker...........Chuck Henderson Vangard Sciences/KeelyNet -------------------------------------------------------------------- If we can be of service, you may contact Jerry at (214) 324-8741 or Ron at (214) 242-9346 -------------------------------------------------------------------- Page 7