Hoi Poloi on Assumptions of Ohms Law Currents in AC Resonance
- This little bit of hoi poloi has set work on the 666 machine back considerably, as for several months now no experimentation in that regard has taken place. Because of doubters of my thesis and statement that no practical inductor will come into perfect series resonance in a solitary state, things came to a head whereby it becomes necessary for me to proove the Status Quo's opinion is wrong; and to make a demonstration to proove this. This idea was at first demonstrated with 500 ft 14 gauge spools of ~11mh @ at alternator frequency of 465 hz; where it was at this point all the the connections to the 666 machine were removed, so that solitary testings of a single 11 mh inductor @ 1.3 ohms as the hardware coil could be tested for resonance.
X(L)= 2 pi *F *L , given 465 hz and .011 H gives 32 ohms.
If that solitary coil were to achieve a perfect series resonance whereby its conduction achieved the equivalent ohms law value of AC amperage given the ohmic resistance of the coil , the voltage rise factor dictated by Q = X(L)/R would have risen to 32/1.3 = 24.7 if the inductor could be perfectly resonated. Tests show only a Q of 5-6 for those circumstances. It was further shown that if two stacked coils were tested, since the mutual induction was relatively small at 10-15 %, the Q factor by X(L)/R ratio should not be much improved, but now double the q FACTOR WAS FOUND NEAR 10. But both of these values were far below what a ohms law conduction of over 20 fold q factor voltage rise would allow. No tapings were made in that experimentation, but I may tape them soon when I return to that alternator 465 hz experimentation.
I then decided that for my statement to be perfectly valid, it should instead should be conducted at 60 hz using the same 11 mh inductors. In the alternator tests it was noted that the higher Ht/Diam. gave double the Q factor, so two of these coils placed together in mutual inductances placed in series @ 2.6 ohms for 60 hz resonance test which were conducted inside the house, where I have formerly made many 60 hz resonance tests, and this time a different combination of LC circuits presents itself for examination, and perhaps other important information becomes relevant here;
90 Volt input to 60 hz resonances, top pair produces 1000 volts between them. Bottom air core secondary has input of .49A from primary,@ 435 volts resonant voltage rise producing 135 volts secondary volts with bulb taking 35.7 ma from coil/cap circulation of 143.1 ma.
What has now been constructed along the similar lines is a pair of 14 gauge primaries@ 2.6 ohms @ conduction 60 hz resonance that enables perhaps 4/5ths of the current that a strict interpretation of AC cuurent by ohms law subscribes to as a condition of resonance. This essentially is the "best" circuit that will try to model what is taught in the electrical schools, and believe me this will be posted there to show the errors of their ways, and to make corrective measures in their descriptions of how ideal circuits model real ones where the ideal predictions are always mental machinations of mathematical models that resembles an ivory tower retreat from reality to make the circuit behave as if all the capacitive and inductive reactances were truly cancelled and the ohms law value of conduction would be permitted to enter the circuit. No amount of reactive balance combinations will yield the full current amount.
Now enter the idea of balancing these currents by starting out with a primary tuning made to be on the inductive side, meaning that it has a higher ohmic value as X(L), then its counterpart X(C) value. We leave those values constant as the primary input, so that in a no load action it is inductive in nature having more weight of inertia and phase angle lag. However when the proper amount of tuned LC loop is brought forth by secondary loading on the primary fields magnetic openings into space: we wind up with the row assembly of four coils together for mutual induction, with the primaries in the middle producing identical magnet fields in unison, and the higher turn 2.4 H coils as dual secondaries wired in series from the primaries exit poles as seemingly effective secondary coupling of magnetic fields. In this tested case a 15 volt primary input will ignite a 120 volt nightlite between the secondaries with common line opposite to load line as is the practice concerning connecting isolated voltage rises together, and deriving the best common line placements for the total of four combinations between four points of the circuit, where typically a misbalance of current combinations will be shown by two of the four common line placements. Irregardless however of these supposed efficient secondary extractions; this extraction must have reduced X(L)'s reactance down to a lower level so that now it can resonate with X(C) as equal value, and the tuning is instead made to be negotiated by the presence of the secondary, so that in fact the actual currents on the primary, AND the amounts of current appearing on the secondary get counted together as delivery of power, and not the normal thinking of primary/ secondary division of power.
In any case we have a 15 volt air core primary of 14 gauge coils enabling a 23 gauge 120 volt bulb load of ~30 ma: using specially tuned secondaries whereby this machine demonstrates the special principle of the RAISING the ampearge of the primary input under secondary load, rather then the normal lowering of primary input, if what I have seen tonight is correct. It is this factor then that allows more of the missing 1/5th out of the extracted 4/5ths of primary amperage to appear by ohms law, and thus the primary then may show itself to be more ideal in it's actions.
Will soon try picture and then video