Look, another topic about the VIC :-)

[Login to see usernames]

I wanted to share my deapest thoughts on the VIC.
I re did a setup, like the one we all have tested many many many times.
Its the coil to wfc to fet and a diode for the back spike of the coil and cell.

I made some models trying to understand what and why this works.
I can create more amps going into the cell then i pull from the powersupply. Almost double.
X blade called it a buck converter.
But what is really happening?
Why did Hydrocars and me ran the alternator years ago with charging the rotorcoils with power of the wfc?
This is what is happening from my current perspective. Its a combi from Meyers EEC and what reseachers are telling about charging the wfc with radiant energy etc etc

I can make some drawings, but i try first like this:
The WFC works with 2 primary coils...........
Now its your turn to react on this statement.
Small hind: When the cell is running (so not the first second after starting up) the first primary is charged by the powersupply and the second primary will be charged by ............??

Please your reactions!

Steve

[Login to see usernames]

I do know scottske diodes are different from a basic diode because the basic diode is a silicone to silicone type. I Scotty died is a silicone to metal not silicone to silicone the downfall is the back EMF voltage is usually 50 volts in the low voltage area. In other words a backward spot can damage those top dots almost immediately however if you look at Stan's patents he used a silicone controlled rectifier to convert this spike. I sensitive and due to voltage as the circuit is Stan learned he could use a auto coupler or infrared transistor to control the scr. If you look at a three-legged Scottsdale that resembles a mosfet or transistor those are ideal but one should read into the data sheet closely as they can handle much faster signals in the waveforms are much more pure. As far as the alternator can be thought of is a super transistor amplifying circuit. When you reach that sweet RPM that we was hitting the alternator takes an amplifies far more greater than the gain of 1000 Hfe transistor. This means it really wasn't exactly the fuel cell that was igniting the alternator but rather the RPM and high amplification of the transformer that I given frequency due to the pulley set up. If we had not inserted the mosfit between the primary and secondary of the alternator it would have locked up completely with a load of the fuel cell the resistive load.

Stevie a twisted ring counter or three phase pulse coil computer controlled with a primary and 3 secondaries can mimic I kinetic spinning armature. With this type of setup Stevie, it is possible for a small computer a primary and three secondaries using a twisted ring counter three-phase method to tap into the same thing the alternator done. Instead of using a spinning armature you would then be using a computer controlled program although the magnetic properties of the armature would be far greater than the frequency itself it would be possible with the fuel cell because they sell itself carries a light charge at all times then you would have to have means necessary to reduce power going from secondary cold traveling to primary coal by use of a mosfit to reduce current flow because this setup amplifies and uses amplification therefore it must be reduced, therefore it powers itself.

The Vic that I was working on currently is nothing more than a isolation transformer with a high voltage coil there in between with a secondary split as bifler chokes, this allows a very small power consumption at its primary and a very large current flow at its secondary. The secondary is not thousands of volts but rather very low votes and very massive amp flow. Try using an isolation transformer at 10,000 Hertz and 5khz. With a shunt capacitor of course and AC type. No diode

Also keep in mind electronics need a few bolts to start working p due to that fact it will be more problematic

I would also like to add Stanley mayor got a patent on his alternator because it was not a over-unity device. it was not over unity because the power consumption of the driver motor. If he had removed the driver motor from his circuit they would not allow the patent to go through. Because then it would have been several hundred percent over unity.

[Login to see usernames]

Thanks Brian for your reply.
I am thankfull that you share your current tests.
This topic is about me trying to understand the typical dave lawton circuit , that is acting in its way as it is.
For years, i thought i knew why it works, but i was so wrong.
I will make some drawings....That makes it a bit easier to understand.

Cheers!

[Login to see usernames]

Bifilar coils are known for overunity devices. Google overunity bifilar coils.