So if we have an resonating E-Field high in impedance and an H-Field low in
impedance... put them 90 degrees to each other .. the coupling will be NILL in
any material you choose! Also.. in the near field of antennas in resonance..
the 90 degree far field phase difference (in 377 ohm intrinsic impedance free
space) is NOT 90 any more. It is a complex impedance where the phases
are not stable.. due to the fact that impedances are so high...close to the
antenna. Remembering that the power density does not change propagating
from the antenna.. with these complex impedance changes... I really do not
see how this comcept of "seperate E and H fields" at 90 degrees would work.
when you extract any power from the field...the "meter" or "sensor" will have
a FIXED impedance and thus.. any high R or low R will look like a BAD VSWR
coupling to the field.
Just do not see how two seperate impedance fields can be combined.
v/r Ken Carrigan
Electromagnetic Engineer
>On Sat, 13 Mar 1999 15:45:09 -0500, Ken Carrigan wrote:
>
>> Electrostatic implies that no power is needed to sustain the field, when
>=
>> in fact there
>> are losses to keeping any high potential in free space. Now if one =
>> tries to use this
>> electrostatic energy for work, then the field will start to either =
>> deplete or require more
>> current to sustain itself. In other words... the field is NOT free. =20
>>
>> What we should be looking at HARD, is an energy supply that is NEVER =
>> depleted.
>> One that if we try to use the field supply, it would allow us to use it =
>> without depleting.
>> Like an endless river supply. PERMENATE MAGNETICS!! Free B-Field!! =
>> This is
>> our key to endless energy, but we have to get the static magnetic field =
>> to become
>> oscillatory. If you can make a magnetic field from a permenate magnetic
>=
>> oscillate
>> by either machanical means or field modulation means, there would be =
>> your answer.
>> Now, this mechanical or field modulation (FM) means would also have to =
>> be free..
>> or at least the magnetic field oscillations (integrate for power =
>> extraction) would have
>> to supply the oscillations means. =20
>
>>> The spatial harnessing of resonance goes beyond a simple schematic
>that conveys a two dimensional idea. The idea of tapping energy from
>resonance must be accomplished by extracting energy from the potential
>without diminishing the potential. This is not as impossible as it sounds.
>If an electric field exists at right angles to a magnetic field a Lorentz
>force interaction can take place which will exert a force on a moving
>charged particle that is at right angles to both the causitive forces. That
>movement does not deplete the potential in the electric field because it
>moves parallel to the potential.
> In this scheme of things it is first necessary to procure the
>condition that more energy can tranfer between electric and magnetic fields
>in osscillation than the amount of total losses mostly expressed as I
>squared R heat losses on the inductor. This is well within possibility at 60
>hz by using a large air core inductance. Using a 56 H coil I note 15 watts
>I^2R heating loss but 45 watts of energy transfer between fields as
>expressed in joules /sec in a typical 23 gauge coil of 1000 ohms.
> The several problems involved with this idea is that a material must
>be chosen to share both the electric and magnetic fields: I see water as
>this candidate. Secondly the idea is said to be beyond a simple schematic
>because a schematic can show the inductance L and the capacitance C and
>their respective values that will resonate at 60 hz on a diagram. But how do
>I make that diagram show that I am adding the fact that C will exist inside
>L at right angles in what I call the spatial harnessing of resonance.
> Another complication with this idea is the fact that at 60 hz the
>volume of space needed for C will exceed the available volume inside the
>inductor L. However by increasing the frequency input a corresponding
>exponential decrease in C is obtained which also increases the ratio
>between energy transfered between fields and that wasted in heat loss.
> Even another complication is the fact that displacement currents
>across a water capacity are extremely small, thus making this lorentz
>reaction extremely small. A way to throw the system into a high frequency of
>over one hundred thousand hz is needed to make the displacement current in
>the water capacity appear as greater values.
> I have experimentally noted that a similar kind of lorentz reaction
>that should produce no increase of current conduction from a battery current
>through water does in fact increase the conduction. It seems that the
>lorentz reaction that should oppose conduction is returned or bounced back
>off the source emf (battery) in the following pulse where the lorentz
>reaction aids the battery current. HDN
>> Any takers for this kinda project? The TOMI is close..where magnetics =
>> are used to=20
>> rotate a ball bearing. If one could produce that...ball bearing =
>> rotating continually..
>> I'd have to say.. you would be 75% there to answers to free energy.
>>
>> v/r Ken Carrigan
>>
>> PS... it also could be that high frequency oscillations are the answer =
>> vice slower or
>> lower oscillations. Something like a car.. for gas milage? Too fast =
>> and wind velocity
>> friction decreases effieciency but too slow also reduces efficiency. =
>> There could be this
>> relationship for oscillating magnetic field for extraction of power. I =
>> have done some
>> research on a faraday disk and it does hold true about the magnetic =
>> field rotation versus
>> velocity.... k*V^3 is frictional losses. =20
>
>
>
>
>
>
>_______________________________________________________
>Get your free, private email at http://mail.excite.com/