FIGUERA'S AETHER MAGNETIC FIELDS LINEAR PUMP, REVIVED

[greybeardmike]

What is going to be intereting to figure out as we go forward is what mechanism we might have to come up with to maintain the current we want since we do not have a torque load on our system.  It could be that when we get this system refined it may not need any compensation for torque as long as we don't overload the system.  That is what I am thinking will be the case.  But only further research will show if that is true.

Carroll

Having a working load management system would be great but just making it work to charge a battery would be a giant leap forward.  Being able to charge a battery bank without a fuel powered generator or an intermittent source of power like the wind or solar would be a game changer. We already have the technologies in place for electric vehicles and home power banks.

greybeardmike

[Classic]

The solution might be easier than we think.
1. A voltage dependant resistor must be fitted at output to protect against self destruction of the device, this will work in conjunction with feed back control mechanism.
2. Feedback can be done using a split output and adding an isolation 1:1 transformer to feed the input the system, this means the more you draw with the load the more you increase the input until voltage dependant resistor will stop the device, preventing overload situation.

At least this is how I see the solution and probably all devices must be designed for certain range power output.

Grounding may help with introducing reference points, earth grounding or air grounding should work fine when proper designed for specific static or mobile applications.

[Ufopolitics]

Hello to All,

Thanks for all you posts, they all have very interesting points and suggestions, that I will carefully review each one of them...

As for the test yesterday, I will still have to review it deeper, and find a better way to show the real voltage the exciter system is generating.

Sometimes this positive double switching, with a common ground (negative), can fool us all...by splitting (+) power to AC Caps, amplifying it, because it takes place at different timings, and sending it to cap bank...regardless of any coils actions. So, we have to be careful and not misinterpret it.

So, I ran some more tests this morning that were pending from last night, and I found out that I do not need the extra four diodes (two on each side bank)...since the two diode bridges protect from power getting back to AC Caps and to coils.

Therefore, I am cleaning out the circuit...then I want to work with the Two Field Banks individually first.

Regards

Ufopolitics

[Ufopolitics]

Hello to All,

Ok, I have done more testing about the Exciter System...and there was a LEAK from Input, on the video I have shown yesterday.

Like I wrote on my previous post, this double switching through resistance coils in between, plus depending on the brush positioning, can mislead your conclusions...and yes, it did it to me.

By just turning power on, and NOT moving the brush. The Caps start to fill up, of course they will never reach the 100+ Volts we saw on video without running the Fields back and forth...but somewhere around 36 to 40 volts will get leaked on caps from direct input.

Therefore, the voltage results shown on yesterday video, were not fully coming from the mutual induction from Exciter system.

I apologize for it.

I am moving on, away from this testing, and taking apart all the setup, to make the additional coils for Fields 1 & 2.

Cheers

Ufopolitics

[Ufopolitics]

Hello,

To specify the reason of the leak...

It took place through the Two Diodes Bridge Rectifiers, that I have installed on each AC Cap, the DC Input on both ends made it to the two Electrolytic Caps, as soon as I turned on the input power, without moving the switch.

When just the two AC Caps are installed, there are no leaks, when reading AC with a meter on both caps, AC dies as soon as the rotary switch is off...


Ufopolitics