Transverter

OleHow are you doing with you Transverter experiments?The last time we heard, you had success with an adjustable inverter you had made, I believe?The beauty of the transverter concept is that there are no moving parts, and no capacitor switching to start up.It remains the big mystery, just how it compares with the 1.614, or 1.618 experiments using the rotoverter. How can it not be more efficient?
Further, it might have the ability to just be switched on, or off, with nothing additional needed, if you have a fixed load of some kind.This might make it practical for some applications, to run with out attention, unlike the rotoverter, which, as you know, must be adjusted, at start up.I know robots can take up the tedious work, like an Arduino, but keeping it simple is a commendable goal.How are you doing with these investigations of yours?Cheers Warren
Sent from Yahoo Mail on Android

Sorry Ole, I was actually addressing Sven's work,  with his inverter drive.Sorry Sven, I have made the error twice now. I certainly hope it is not a touch of senile dementia, on my part. Non the less, I am interested in your progress Sven,  with Hector's Rotoverter, as it is a most practical idea, if it can be made to work.My apologies, and CheersWARRENom Yahoo Mail on Android
 
 
  On Wed, 5 Dec 2018 at 9:13 AM, Warren Keillor<[email protected]> wrote:   OleHow are you doing with you Transverter experiments?The last time we heard, you had success with an adjustable inverter you had made, I believe?The beauty of the transverter concept is that there are no moving parts, and no capacitor switching to start up.It remains the big mystery, just how it compares with the 1.614, or 1.618 experiments using the rotoverter. How can it not be more efficient?
Further, it might have the ability to just be switched on, or off, with nothing additional needed, if you have a fixed load of some kind.This might make it practical for some applications, to run with out attention, unlike the rotoverter, which, as you know, must be adjusted, at start up.I know robots can take up the tedious work, like an Arduino, but keeping it simple is a commendable goal.How are you doing with these investigations of yours?Cheers Warren
Sent from Yahoo Mail on Android

Hi Warren,

I'm not doing transverter experiments. I did buy a small voltage stabilizing transformer which is a ferroresonant transformer. But I have never gotten time to start a transverter project. The closest thing is helping Sven with his transverter project. My latest research was coupling a bunch of small ferrite transformers each having four windings to something resembling Pierre Cotnoir's self-running device. Instead of the motor/generator stator with its shared magnetic path the small transformers were used only sharing the currents with the magnetic fields distributed between them. There were several currents being mixed between the separate transformers just like in Pierre's stator. My version hasn't given any overunity. Pierre does claim to have a secret that isn't revealed.

The actual project I'm doing right now when time permits is along the way of the patents of Clemente Figuera or an electronic version of the mechanical device of Kapanadze. All of this is done by solid state switching by using power MOSFETs. Electronics can be scaled up and down which means that by making a tiny or a big model all other sizes can be made too within the limits of the components available. Thus I see no point in making a big expensive device without knowing if it will work or not. First goal is to prove the principle.

I wonder how you're measuring that high accuracy of 1.614 or 1.618. That requires quite good measurement equipment. Cheap oscilloscopes often only have 8 bit resolution which is only 256 different values and about one fourth of the values that is represented by three digits. 10 bits are required for 3 digit resolution and 14 bits for four digit resolution. If mixing two waves the way W.B. Smith describes in his book the theoretical output is double the input. If having three similar input sources the theoretical output after mixing is 3 times the total input power. This is what Dr. Andrey Melnichenko claims melted his microwave wave guide. Pierre Cotnoir may have mixed six waves which theoretically gives six times the input power. Of course he had loss in heating a resistor and probably heating wires and other components too.

My progress is going slow as this is only amateur research being done during my spare time. Most progress is done when having vacation to be able to work for several days in a line. There are lots of interesting researches that ought to be done. Searching the internet reveals other people doing their own research which reveals interesting information. It may be waste of time doing research that is already done by others. The Edison way of proving how things don't work is in my opinion a total waste of time. The interesting thing is proving how it does work to be able to make devices that do work.

Regards
Ole
 

---In [email protected], <schoonersolsticemoon@...> wrote :

 Ole How are you doing with you Transverter experiments?
 The last time we heard, you had success with an adjustable inverter you had made, I believe?
 The beauty of the transverter concept is that there are no moving parts, and no capacitor switching to start up.
 It remains the big mystery, just how it compares with the 1.614, or 1.618 experiments using the rotoverter. How can it not be more efficient?
Further, it might have the ability to just be switched on, or off, with nothing additional needed, if you have a fixed load of some kind.
 This might make it practical for some applications, to run with out attention, unlike the rotoverter, which, as you know, must be adjusted, at start up.
 I know robots can take up the tedious work, like an Arduino, but keeping it simple is a commendable goal.
 How are you doing with these investigations of yours?
 Cheers Warren
 Sent from Yahoo Mail on Android https://go.onelink.me/107872968?pid=InProduct&c=Global_Internal_YGrowth_AndroidEmailSig__AndroidUsers&af_wl=ym&af_sub1=Internal&af_sub2=Global_YGrowth&af_sub3=EmailSignature

Hi Warren,

My apologies too as I didn't observe this last mail of yours.

Regards
Ole
 

---In [email protected], <schoonersolsticemoon@...> wrote :

 Sorry Ole, I was actually addressing Sven's work,  with his inverter drive. Sorry Sven, I have made the error twice now. I certainly hope it is not a touch of senile dementia, on my part. 
 Non the less, I am interested in your progress Sven,  with Hector's Rotoverter, as it is a most practical idea, if it can be made to work.
 My apologies, and Cheers
 WARREN
 om Yahoo Mail on Android https://go.onelink.me/107872968?pid=InProduct&c=Global_Internal_YGrowth_AndroidEmailSig__AndroidUsers&af_wl=ym&af_sub1=Internal&af_sub2=Global_YGrowth&af_sub3=EmailSignature
 
 On Wed, 5 Dec 2018 at 9:13 AM, Warren Keillor
 <schoonersolsticemoon@...> wrote:

 Ole How are you doing with you Transverter experiments?
 The last time we heard, you had success with an adjustable inverter you had made, I believe?
 The beauty of the transverter concept is that there are no moving parts, and no capacitor switching to start up.
 It remains the big mystery, just how it compares with the 1.614, or 1.618 experiments using the rotoverter. How can it not be more efficient?
Further, it might have the ability to just be switched on, or off, with nothing additional needed, if you have a fixed load of some kind.
 This might make it practical for some applications, to run with out attention, unlike the rotoverter, which, as you know, must be adjusted, at start up.
 I know robots can take up the tedious work, like an Arduino, but keeping it simple is a commendable goal.
 How are you doing with these investigations of yours?
 Cheers Warren
 Sent from Yahoo Mail on Android https://go.onelink.me/107872968?pid=InProduct&c=Global_Internal_YGrowth_AndroidEmailSig__AndroidUsers&af_wl=ym&af_sub1=Internal&af_sub2=Global_YGrowth&af_sub3=EmailSignature