Cold Heat from Canada, a documentary.

[Xena E]

TimFox

I submit that it has never happened that the energy required to operate an appliance has been priced into its purchase.
After buying a horse, the rider needs to purchase fodder to feed it.

Obviously you have never owned a horse where I have a few. I call them my "lawnmowers" which require little maintenance and no fuel.

Thanks for that Electrodynamic... I laughed so fucking hard I nearly pissed my panties!

Completely off topic, however:-

My horse is on my land and therefore has free grass keep... however if he's in anything more than moderate work he requires supplementary feed. If you take a horse on a metaled road regularly they need to be shod...  farriers don't work for free, nor do veterinarians... then there's tack... insurance... I reckon I get it cheap, perhaps 5 grand a year to take care of him reasonably well, any less could probably be considered neglectful...

I run a small car for less... especially so if taking mileage into account.

I'm glad you found it so funny.

We have a couple older horses, no shoes, no tack, no insurance and the only real expense is the $60 farrier. They have free reign on 10 acres of grass and stay fat. Winter feed is basically free because I do a 50/50 cut and bale with the neighbor. In the winter I roll a couple big round bales into the feeder once a month and I'm done. Water is free because I dug my own shallow water well for the horse waterer and hit all the water I could want at 14 feet. For this small expense I get 10 acres of perfectly cut grass all summer. I still have about three acres of grass around the house I cut with the tractor. So my annual expenses are closer to $200 per horse.

Well lucky old you. If all your horse ownership is for is to have a few field ornaments to keep the grass down and you've a vast acreage of worthless land to let them self care then that's fucking great for you, but most horse owners have to pay for grass keep or livery, that was the point of my comments when you commented about horse feed to Tim.

Barney, my horse, shares an acre and a half with a paddock pal belonging to a friend... I'm fighting to keep the land green because the local authorities want it to build housing. When I no longer have Barney I shall sell to the developers and retire, the land has outline planning for dwellings.

If you don't have insurance on a valuable horse here and it needs treatment by a vet you loose the horse what then? If you can't pay and neglect the animal that's you prosecuted by the welfare authority, If you don't insure against the horse causing loss to others perhaps in road work you get sued.

Your life is golden, give thanks to your diety if you have one and enjoy it.

Here my costs are minimal compared with some, I'm quite happy.

The trick I found is to have the foresight to streamline everything for the least effort and expense. So if your spending a lot of time and money that's more a reflection of you than myself.

Different use cases and situations not lack of organisation

As well, how do you think wild horses manage to stay alive with no human intervention?. Do you think people secretly run out there at night to feed and manicure them?.

Rreductio ad absurdum!
What do you think people in towns had to do when their only choice was to own a horse for whatever reason? Put them out in their 10 acre back gardens! They had mews stables and bought hay and hard feed, possibly had to employ a groom...

This is pointless!

Face it man, you talk complete drivel, all for what? a feeling of superiority?

[Chet]

It's pretty obvious that the big oil companies put pressure on governments and regulators to slow the rollout of anything allowing people to create free energy like solar/wind, since that is reducing their profits.
But their power and abilities to pull off massive coverups are pretty limited vs what people think.
I really doubt they could suppress any technology that actually works for long. It's more likely that they keep buying technology that doesnt work because they were tricked into thinking it does.

Now, we know why Pres. Eisenhower said, "beware of the military industrial complex" during his farewell address since he had first-hand experience which convinced him that his stint as commander in chief of the Allied forces doesn't mean much outside of that venue. Just because he was made president of the mightiest nation on earth doesn't mean that he was on top of the heap. Far from it. Exxon Oil toppled that fantasy of his if he had one.

WWII was the biggest incentive for the militarization of commerce. We entered into that arrangement and have remained there ever since.

The president is a puppet and commanders in chief of military forces are a local endeavor not to be considered to be worth much outside of that context. That's what I take away from Eisenhower's experience.

So, who's in charge? The researchers and philanthropists involved with the Cold Heat from Canada device appealed to the wrong people for assistance. The usual suspects are not who they appear to be which leaves the scientist who focused all of his attention span on the development of his technology is left wondering if it takes clairvoyance to figure out how our global society operates because it's a mistake to think that it's a simple answer.

That's why the answer is so elusive.

[SteveThackery]

Face it man, you talk complete drivel, all for what? a feeling of superiority?

DELETED THIS POST, because it was an unprovoked ad hominem attack on @Electrodynamic which said far more about me than it did about him. I have my own opinions, but I don't think it is right to unduly influence other people's.

[Zero999]

True, but it's still technically possible to find something that appears to be over-unity and only discover where all the excess energy has been coming from N years later.

Ummm...

You mean like... energy that is leaking through into our reality from another dimension, that is harvested by some purely empirically developed means, its true source only to be discovered when 'new science' uncovers it's origin?

Ya right

 

There is loads of free energy around.

There's lots of heat energy where I'm sitting.

Trillions of air particles are randomly moving around my office.

The earth has lots of kinetic energy, as it rotates and orbits the sun.

In reality, it's not energy which performs useful work, but the difference in energy levels.

All that heat energy is useless, if everything is as the same temperature. A temperature difference is required to perform work.

If the average speed of the air particles is the same, their motion can't be used to perform useful work. A pressure difference is required to perofm work, hence the requirement for large wind turbines which rely on the weather and this isn't free.

The earth's kinetic energy can only be harvested by tapping into the difference in motion between the earth and and the moon and sun, which requires huge bodies of water, hence tidal power, which isn't free.

[Xena E]

True, but it's still technically possible to find something that appears to be over-unity and only discover where all the excess energy has been coming from N years later.

Ummm...

You mean like... energy that is leaking through into our reality from another dimension, that is harvested by some purely empirically developed means, its true source only to be discovered when 'new science' uncovers it's origin?

Ya right

 

There is loads of free energy around.

Agreed.

However, with respect, if you're answering my post
Where did I say there was no "free energy"?

My point in the quote is that it's very unlikely that a new source of energy could appear and be harvested without understanding its nature... those kinds of massive dumb luck events are all used up,  and no amount of dipshit inventors with coils and magnets are going to harvest free energy from the vacuum, or create over unity energy sources... new sources could be discovered but not without real effort, for example, as with the continued development of efficient PV for solar.

[Xena E]

Face it man, you talk complete drivel, all for what? a feeling of superiority?

The more Electrodynamic writes, the more I think he is a full-of-shit narcissist. Personally I believe him to be a fantasist, too. On the other hand, he seems so desperate to impress us with how smart he is, and how accomplished he is, I do wonder if he's over-compensating for a massive inferiority complex.

Fuck it, who cares? He says Einstein was wrong because anyone who thinks time is "variable" (his word) needs psychiatric help.

That's what I like to see: a really well constructed argument with a firm mathematical basis and demonstrating a thorough understanding of the current science. </sarcasm>

Don't know the reason for the narrative, I have my own issues, but always interested in the human, by different reply strategies its sometimes possible to gauge what the personality is.

I don't disagree with all of Electrodynamic statements, and after all we can all stuff up, the narcissism is off the scale... but... it's the vague, irrelevant, analogies (logical fallacies), that he associates with a point then using the words 'like' and 'you', to make thinly vieled personal attacks based on them.. often completely erroneous ones at that.

Near work there stands a burger van most days, really good food they tell me, smells good but middle age approaches and all that... The guy who runs it is just like that. On the subject of a local man who was recently arrested for a serious assault, he was heard to say and I quote my colleague:-
 
"That's the reason we don't need any more immigration... we've got enough criminals of our own!"

I thought of our friend and laughed.

We can all do that. And the perpetrators don't like it thrown back at them.

"You admire Tesla so therefore you want to fuck pigeons" being a favourite of mine..

(I know, no filters, sue me)

I'd like to meet Electrodynamic, really would, and Chet. Think it would be interesting, I did ask to meet @Farringdon when he was a member here, he is complex I think, even offered him an interview for a job travel expenses paid, but no response.

[paul cotter]

Naughty, naughty, Xena, we won't be having any bestiality here.

[TimFox]

Thermodynamics is a little bit more complicated than that: a heat engine uses the difference in temperature  between two objects to extract useful energy (work).  There are important differences between random motion (heat) and non-random energy (battery, head of water against gravity, etc.).

[SteveThackery]

I'd like to meet Electrodynamic, really would, and Chet. Think it would be interesting.....

I'm not a people person, and wouldn't be interested in meeting Chet or Electrodynamic. I think we can get a reasonable measure of a person's character by observing what they say and do on this forum.

[paul cotter]

Count me out too, I am not into that level of masochism.

[Chet]

True, but it's still technically possible to find something that appears to be over-unity and only discover where all the excess energy has been coming from N years later.

Ummm...

You mean like... energy that is leaking through into our reality from another dimension, that is harvested by some purely empirically developed means, its true source only to be discovered when 'new science' uncovers it's origin?

Ya right

 

There is loads of free energy around.

Agreed.

However, with respect, if you're answering my post
Where did I say there was no "free energy"?

My point in the quote is that it's very unlikely that a new source of energy could appear and be harvested without understanding its nature... those kinds of massive dumb luck events are all used up,  and no amount of dipshit inventors with coils and magnets are going to harvest free energy from the vacuum, or create over unity energy sources... new sources could be discovered but not without real effort, for example, as with the continued development of efficient PV for solar.

The Earth is a capacitor, or sorts, with lots of electric charge. A mast with sufficient height to generate a mild difference between its tippy top and its grounded bottom would be enough to replace the 6V battery towards the left of this circuit so as to serve as an access point to the Earth's stronghold of amp-hours....whatever that may be.

All it takes is negative impedance, built up to sufficient degree in the course of running a variation of Bill Fogel's patented transistor ideal, to pull rather than push current from out of the ground and erupt into St. Elmo's Fire.

It doesn't matter if there's not enough ground current in the local vicinity to warrant such a venture since negative impedance has the potential for building up enough of its own potential for imposing a very strong pulling force to gradually move distant instances of current within reach of the device's point of contact with the Earth.

[TimFox]

As I have told you before, negative resistance (the in-phase or “real” part of impedance) only exists in two-terminal devices that are externally powered, e.g tunnel-diode or transitron circuits.

[Electrodynamic]

Xena E

Don't know the reason for the narrative, I have my own issues, but always interested in the human, by different reply strategies its sometimes possible to gauge what the personality is.

I don't disagree with all of Electrodynamic statements, and after all we can all stuff up, the narcissism is off the scale... but... it's the vague, irrelevant, analogies (logical fallacies), that he associates with a point then using the words 'like' and 'you', to make thinly vieled personal attacks based on them.. often completely erroneous ones at that.

It may help to explain that where I grew up in Alberta we talk more about experiences and analogies. We don't say the truck moved fast as a statement we say I saw a truck and I thought it moved fast unlike you who may think it's slower. It's may seem more personal and subjective but it's not meant to be narcissistic.

As a result we tend to think others talk a little weird. You might say that truck is fast and I think, who?, you think it's fast?, how fast?, compared to who or what?. When most people start making statements or talking second person as if they are not saying what they are it seems weird.

For example, when we were talking about horses and acreages I wasn't bragging about the stuff I have. It was describing what I have done and how things are set up because I thought might be helpful. If you told me the same thing I wouldn't think it's bragging but useful information I can use. Everything revolves around experiences, analogies and applications.

"You admire Tesla so therefore you want to fuck pigeons" being a favourite of mine..
I thought it was really funny as well. I get this picture in my head of tesla bending a big pigeon over a park bench. I don't think we are so different and the fact we both have an acreage and horses say's a lot. Would you go back to the city?, I would when hell freezes over.
 

[paul cotter]

Tim, you are wasting your time as Chet has a fixed delusion that a "negative resistor" exists. The problem arose from misunderstandings of Gabriel Kron's work on network analysis where the CONCEPT of negative resistance is used. The story eventually became one that G. Kron had invented the negative resistor and this was then sequestered(so as the power companies could continue to bill us). Same old, same old. One could of course model a diesel generator as a negative resistor but to keep it in the negative domain it would need a constant supply of fuel.

[Zero999]

Thermodynamics is a little bit more complicated than that: a heat engine uses the difference in temperature  between two objects to extract useful energy (work).  There are important differences between random motion (heat) and non-random energy (battery, head of water against gravity, etc.).

That's the point I was making above.
https://www.eevblog.com/forum/dodgy-technology/cold-heat-from-canada-a-documentary/msg6254761/#msg6254761

True, but it's still technically possible to find something that appears to be over-unity and only discover where all the excess energy has been coming from N years later.

Ummm...

You mean like... energy that is leaking through into our reality from another dimension, that is harvested by some purely empirically developed means, its true source only to be discovered when 'new science' uncovers it's origin?

Ya right

 

There is loads of free energy around.

Agreed.

However, with respect, if you're answering my post
Where did I say there was no "free energy"?

My point in the quote is that it's very unlikely that a new source of energy could appear and be harvested without understanding its nature... those kinds of massive dumb luck events are all used up,  and no amount of dipshit inventors with coils and magnets are going to harvest free energy from the vacuum, or create over unity energy sources... new sources could be discovered but not without real effort, for example, as with the continued development of efficient PV for solar.

The Earth is a capacitor, or sorts, with lots of electric charge. A mast with sufficient height to generate a mild difference between its tippy top and its grounded bottom would be enough to replace the 6V battery towards the left of this circuit so as to serve as an access point to the Earth's stronghold of amp-hours....whatever that may be.

All it takes is negative impedance, built up to sufficient degree in the course of running a variation of Bill Fogel's patented transistor ideal, to pull rather than push current from out of the ground and erupt into St. Elmo's Fire.

It doesn't matter if there's not enough ground current in the local vicinity to warrant such a venture since negative impedance has the potential for building up enough of its own potential for imposing a very strong pulling force to gradually move distant instances of current within reach of the device's point of contact with the Earth.

How is that simulation supposed to show?

You do realise that simulators aren't perfect?

[TimFox]

Tim, you are wasting your time as Chet has a fixed delusion that a "negative resistor" exists. The problem arose from misunderstandings of Gabriel Kron's work on network analysis where the CONCEPT of negative resistance is used. The story eventually became one that G. Kron had invented the negative resistor and this was then sequestered(so as the power companies could continue to bill us). Same old, same old. One could of course model a diesel generator as a negative resistor but to keep it in the negative domain it would need a constant supply of fuel.

That's why I prefaced it "as I have told you before".
I have used practical negative-resistance devices (defined as showing a negative derivative dV/dI near the operating point, where polarities are defined to get positive resistance for a normal passive resistor).
Specifically, the two I mentioned:  tunnel diode (biased to an appropriate voltage to see a region of negative resistance or conductance) and transitron (a clever connection of a vacuum pentode to see a negative slope in the voltage at the "screen grid").  Both circuits require external power to operate and do not show negative resistance away from the bias point.

[paul cotter]

I fear no amount of telling him will work. My two examples showing transient negative di/dv would be the gas discharge lamp and the unijunction transistor(the device, not the poster!) peak to valley region.

[TimFox]

I only reply since I worry that a novice may see long discussions with misused technical terms, misleading grammar, and apparent technical references and not recognize blatherskite when he sees it.

[Xena E]

Xena E

Don't know the reason for the narrative, I have my own issues, but always interested in the human, by different reply strategies its sometimes possible to gauge what the personality is.

I don't disagree with all of Electrodynamic statements, and after all we can all stuff up, the narcissism is off the scale... but... it's the vague, irrelevant, analogies (logical fallacies), that he associates with a point then using the words 'like' and 'you', to make thinly vieled personal attacks based on them.. often completely erroneous ones at that.

It may help to explain that where I grew up in Alberta we talk more about experiences and analogies. We don't say the truck moved fast as a statement we say I saw a truck and I thought it moved fast unlike you who may think it's slower. It's may seem more personal and subjective but it's not meant to be narcissistic.

As a result we tend to think others talk a little weird. You might say that truck is fast and I think, who?, you think it's fast?, how fast?, compared to who or what?. When most people start making statements or talking second person as if they are not saying what they are it seems weird.

For example, when we were talking about horses and acreages I wasn't bragging about the stuff I have. It was describing what I have done and how things are set up because I thought might be helpful. If you told me the same thing I wouldn't think it's bragging but useful information I can use. Everything revolves around experiences, analogies and applications.

"You admire Tesla so therefore you want to fuck pigeons" being a favourite of mine..
I thought it was really funny as well. I get this picture in my head of tesla bending a big pigeon over a park bench. I don't think we are so different and the fact we both have an acreage and horses say's a lot. Would you go back to the city?, I would when hell freezes over.
 

OK. Wall of text time, for @Electrodynamic. Anyone else may scroll away unless you want to be part of this ongoing train wreck of an interaction.


The truck thing...

That (to me) seems bizarre, and a rather verbose and confusing way of communicating. Why would you say, I may think a truck moves slower than you perceive, saying a truck moves fast is not a frame of reference in itself.


Perhaps someone else can help out incase it's cultural.


I was born in Germany and lived there while I was in primary education, my father is German and my mother Welsh, English was a third language at home. Even now my understanding of grammar and nuance is somewhat hard won.


I don't care what anyone else owns, and if they are prideful of their possessions, though I think it's amusing when people find a need to brag and constantly have to mention their wealth, it just shows that the locus of their identity is external to them. Most Germans would consider it incredibly gauche to brag about position, power, or possessions.


One may say of another, "he/she has been successful! they have a nice home, car, clothes".... but that person would be unlikely to say, "I'm more successful than you, because I... ... ..."


We all end up with the same.


...


The original premise of my (latest) annoyance was that @Tim Fox stated correctly that with most products that need a power source to be operated, that it was not usual to have the cost of that power included in the original purchase for perpetuity.


You then picked up on Tim's analogy of a person buying the horse doesn't get the animals ongoing feed included in the price by the seller, they have to provide it themselves at cost, your argument was that in your case you have grassland that was sufficient to feed all your horses and that the energy came from the sun and your horse ownership was therefore free... great, good for you, nobody is arguing... However the feed is something that you as the owner have to provide, and in most owners experience that comes at some cost, although if it's free, (your grass), bought, or stolen, (your horse eating your neighbours grass), that is immaterial to the argument, the person who sold you the horse doesn't bear the cost.


Do you get that?


...


I work in a city, (Cambridge) but live just five miles out in a village, I have a semi detached cottage with a small garden. The "acreage" is separate about a half mile out. I did live in an apartment in the city, it was OK apart from a robbery I suffered and so decided to get out, and no I wouldn't go back.


...


Tesla...

Very clever man, initially a shrewd business man as well, though has a lot credited to him as an inventor, but in reality mostly only a developer and patentee of ultimately dead end technology, his development of practical two phase AC was clever yes, but the modern world would still have existed without it... 3 phase ac distribution was ultimately more cost effective and practical, it was developed independently and consecutively... Bullshit claims from fanatics about cover up conspiracies to hide fantastical technology haven't done his reputation any good, that's apart from his own wild claims about failed experiments to basically extort cash, and then his descent into madness...  and the pigeon thing... his life apart from early brilliance was mostly spent with him becoming a charlatan and fraud.

That's fifteen minutes of my life I'm not getting back.

[Chet]

Tim, you are wasting your time as Chet has a fixed delusion that a "negative resistor" exists. The problem arose from misunderstandings of Gabriel Kron's work on network analysis where the CONCEPT of negative resistance is used. The story eventually became one that G. Kron had invented the negative resistor and this was then sequestered(so as the power companies could continue to bill us). Same old, same old. One could of course model a diesel generator as a negative resistor but to keep it in the negative domain it would need a constant supply of fuel.

That's why I prefaced it "as I have told you before".
I have used practical negative-resistance devices (defined as showing a negative derivative dV/dI near the operating point, where polarities are defined to get positive resistance for a normal passive resistor).
Specifically, the two I mentioned:  tunnel diode (biased to an appropriate voltage to see a region of negative resistance or conductance) and transitron (a clever connection of a vacuum pentode to see a negative slope in the voltage at the "screen grid").  Both circuits require external power to operate and do not show negative resistance away from the bias point.

So, what you're saying, is that only in the land of simulation theory can it occur that an arrangement of various impedances can pull more current from out of a voltage source (of scant voltage) or generate more current which moves into voltage sources (of scant voltage) than (by comparison) the quantity of current which is recharging said voltage sources?



PS - I think the polarity sign of the last moment of each of the five graphs, in the image above, and their magnitudes relative to each other (rather than focusing on their values relative to zero) is more significant for what the simulation is hinting at.

[TimFox]

Please re-phrase that, possibly using mathematical notation, to have an answerable question.

[Chet]

Tim, you are wasting your time as Chet has a fixed delusion that a "negative resistor" exists. The problem arose from misunderstandings of Gabriel Kron's work on network analysis where the CONCEPT of negative resistance is used. The story eventually became one that G. Kron had invented the negative resistor and this was then sequestered(so as the power companies could continue to bill us). Same old, same old. One could of course model a diesel generator as a negative resistor but to keep it in the negative domain it would need a constant supply of fuel.

That's why I prefaced it "as I have told you before".
I have used practical negative-resistance devices (defined as showing a negative derivative dV/dI near the operating point, where polarities are defined to get positive resistance for a normal passive resistor).
Specifically, the two I mentioned:  tunnel diode (biased to an appropriate voltage to see a region of negative resistance or conductance) and transitron (a clever connection of a vacuum pentode to see a negative slope in the voltage at the "screen grid").  Both circuits require external power to operate and do not show negative resistance away from the bias point.

So, what you're saying, is that only in the land of simulation theory can it occur that an arrangement of various impedances can pull more current from out of a voltage source (of scant voltage) or generate more current which moves into voltage sources (of scant voltage) than (by comparison) the quantity of current which is recharging said voltage sources?

(Attachment Link)

PS - I think the polarity sign of the last moment of each of the five graphs, in the image above, and their magnitudes relative to each other (rather than focusing on their values relative to zero) is more significant for what the simulation is hinting at.

The inductor, L1, is generating ten times less than negative 3.6 watts at the last moment since its wattage is negative with a considerable magnitude peaking at ten ^ 22 since I measured merely one inductor and assumed the same value among the other nine. Meanwhile, ...

The capacitor, C1, is absorbing ten times less than positive 7 watts at the last moment peaking at 10 ^ 20 since I measured merely one capacitor and assumed the same value among the other nine. Meanwhile ...

The sine wave generator, V1, is peaking at positive 120 micro watts and negative 40 micro watts indicating that it is absorbing more than it is generating by a factor of 3 to 1.

The 6V battery, V2, representing a grounded mast, is absorbing positive 22 watts times ten ^ 12.

So, ...

Inductors normally absorb while capacitors generate oscillations, so the inductor is acting like a capacitor and the capacitor is acting like an inductor thereby demonstrating negative impedance among them both. Plus, the inductor is generating 50 times more power than its partnered capacitor is absorbing. Thus, ...

L1 x 10 --> 3.6e+22W
C1 x 10 --> 7e+20W
L1(10) / C1(10) = 3.6/7 and 22-20 = 1/2 x 100 = 50
and
L1(10) is left with a surplus of generating:
L1(10) - C1(10) = 3.6e+22W - 7e+20W = 3.53e+22W

Meanwhile, ...

V1 --> ( +1.2e-4W + (-4e-5W) ) = total +8e-5W
V2 --> +22e+12W
V1 + V2 = +8e-5W + (+22e+12W) = 22,000,000,000,000.00008W ~= +22e+12W

This does not account for everything, such as the neon bulbs, or the resistors, nor the transistors, etc.

[Xena E]

Suggestion Chet.
You go to Long Island and get this built:



When you're done with that, come back and I will have personally arranged to have your "negative resistance" device ready for you.

 

[paul cotter]

Electrical theory consisting of voltage/current, resistance/conductance, impedance/admittance, capacitive/inductive reactance and sources/sinks is RELATIVELY simple if one has a basic grasp of mathematics. How a post as confused as #46 can arise has got to be a bewildering mystery. 

[mikeselectricstuff]

Being shut down by "Big <insert industry>" is a classic line from the free-energy nutjobs whose wishful thinking exceeds their uderstanding of  physics. Nothing to see here.