ET Transformer



ET Transformer


Measurement error or Cold electricity:

Hi All,

Glenn Steckling director of the George Adamski Foundation:

https://www.adamskifoundation.com/

said in one of Rene Erik Olsen's Youtube conversations:

https://www.youtube.com/@wantingtoknow244

that the aliens use free energy generators with no moving parts. Take a ferrite rod and wind the turns of the father coil clockwise. upon it wind a child coil turns clockwise or anti-clockwise and upon it wind the turns of the mother coil anti-clockwise.

The Father coil and the Mother coil are the primary coils and can be connected either in parallel or in series. Remember that the north-south poles are reversed in the mother coil. The child coil is the secondary coil which is connected to a 1 ohm resistor. The frequency is 175 khz or more due to it being a ferrite rod with only one layer of each coil.

When I connected the primary coils in series I could load the child coil with a 1 ohm resistor and still get a 2 volt peak to peak voltage across the 1 ohm resistor. It will be 2 amps peak to peak, through the resistor. But the 1 ohm resistor which was 1/4 watt was cold. I have done many free energy experiments and always ended up using a decade resistor box 1 ohm-100 kilo ohm.

It is the first time that I get such a large output voltage, at such a low resistance. All other attempts have produced less than 100 millivolts. I use a frequency generator that is built into the oscilloscope and when I tested it by loading it without a transformer, it put out 25 volts peak to peak and about 20 milliamps. It gives an output power of max 0.5 watts. In the experiment with series-connected primary coils, the input voltage was 15 volts peak to peak. For lower frequencies, you can use transformer sheet metal as an iron core.

Best wishes, Hermes

Hi Everyone,

Now I have measured my ET transformer. I used the Voltcraft 632 FG 30 MHz Oscilloscope to measure the voltage from the frequency generator built into the oscilloscope as well as across the 1 ohm resistors. The frequency was measured with a TES 2208 Multimeter and the inductance of the transformer coils with a Voltcraft LCR-9063. The direct current resistance in the inductances is a maximum of 0.1 ohm.

Best wishes, Hermes

Kone wrote:

Hi Hermes

Wow thats pretty good!

What is the resistance in ohms of the father, the mother, and child coil?

- 0.1 ohm in each coil.

How many turns in each?

- don't know. I just used 1 of 2 flyback transformer cores from an old TV. Actually I have many flyback transformers from a surplus store.

What is thickness of wire?

- it's 0.75 mm

Is it just one layer?

- Yes one layer each coil.

Is it a ferrite core? How long and what diameter?

- Yes a ferrite core from an old TV. The core was wind 3 cm long and 1.5 cm diameter. You will find a photo of the transformer core from an old TV at:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=e2p58tWIxNc

- I used 1 of 4 parts of the core. It has no magnetic loop. I just wanted to test it similair to a ferrite rod with open ends.

Really good!

Maybe those ET fuckers really do have something going on haha

I watched that Adamski video part one and two pretty interesting I always thought he fake but I have read too much garbage on internet (like wikipedia)

I did not hear where he described this transformer design in parts one and two at least. Where did you hear about it?

- I might remember wrong on the videos, but I do remember that Glenn Steckling said that the ET secret of free energy is to use two input coils - one clockwise wind and the other anti clockwise wind. It was up to me to figure up what he mean.

I liked the blown up photo of the alien hiding behind hill - spooky....

I would like to try this at 60hz with laminate steel core from a MWOT instead of ferrite- maybe U-shaped?

- just remember after winding the "father coil" clockwise on the laminate steel core. You have to wind the "child coil" clockwise over (upon) the "father coil" and the "mother coil" anti clockwise over (upon) the "child coil".

Also could be awesome motor coils with "counter direction" induced pickup winds sharing core with motor coils as described last post.

- I have no idea if it could work, maybe you can try. And I have no idea why the inductance differ between the coils. I just wind the coils a layer each. I have a suggestion. Because the voltage was so small (0.8 volt) from the "child coil". You can wind the "child coil" with more layers, maybe 4 to 7 layers more than the "father coil" and the "mother coil" Maybe it works the same as the transformer theory with different primary and secondary windings?

- Best Wishes, Hermes

- And I want to correct a mistake I did on the et_transformer drawing. It should be 3 volts input. Not 5 volts. I have no idea why it loads down the voltage output of the frequency generator when lowering the frequency from <1MHz.

Kone

and here is two others ideas:

Magnetic Field Transformer (MFT)

Hubbard Coil


Hi Hermes,

It's a fair bet that Rossi cheated some way. Thing is that he's found he doesn't need to be that careful hiding the scam because there still remains a lot of people who want to believe him and will swallow explanations that don't make sense.

For the transformer ideas you're talking about, you won't get OU unless some important symmetry is broken. Bear in mind that in electromagnetics the symmetries are very strong - you put energy into the field, and that's pretty-well all you can get out again so OU is difficult. The only small breakage in perfect symmetry I see there is that the speed of light is finite and so Lenz's law is not valid during the time that a wave has been emitted by the source and the response from the destination hasn't yet been received back. That is generally a very short time, and you need to change your source current significantly during that time-span and also set things up that *something* happens during that time that exploits that very short delay and delivers some energy.

Because that time is so short, you need to use high frequencies, and that in turn means using few turns of any coils and probably high voltages to get enough of a change in that time. You also need to figure out how to get something happening that will deliver you some energy before the system "notices" that the change has happened and gets back into equilibrium. Not that easy to figure that last bit - use a coil and it simply reacts to the magnetic field change, which induces current in the coil, which then tends to zero the magnetic field, and that wave then goes back to the source.

Since induction works on amp-turns, and to get the frequency response you need few turns or single turns, getting a large magnetic field isn't easy, and getting a large output from a single turn needs a large magnetic field change.

Generally, when it comes to people winding transformers in an unusual way and claiming it's OU, they're getting the AC measurements wrong and the phase isn't what they think it is - may be measuring it wrong, may be some unexpected phase-shift in the measuring kit. The absolute test here is to rectify the output power, charge a capacitor with it, and measure it as DC power output, and then run the circuit and some other load on that output. If it can't run itself and a load, it simply isn't OU no latter what your measurements tell you - there's something wrong in the measurements.

Another thing here is to look for things that don't make sense. If you're putting 2V p-p AC through a 1 ohm resistor, and assuming sine-wave, it will have 1A peak current through it, and will dissipate around 0.5W, and you'll be able to feel it getting hot if it's a 1/4 watt resistor. If it doesn't get hot, that means your measurements must be wrong in some way. Real electrical power will heat a real resistor, so if it doesn't heat then you're measuring imaginary power and you've cocked up on the phase measurement.

Problem with OU is not that it's impossible, since logically it isn't (just break the right symmetry). However, a lot of people have tried a lot of ways and claimed they got it working. If they had done, then we'd be using it for power generation, though the original inventor might not end up profiting from that. Thus it's a fair bet that unless someone is running their own house on it, and also the people they've told are also using it for that, and gone off-grid with no power bills, it's not real. May be a lie, may be a scam, may be just a mistake, but it doesn't actually produce more energy than you're putting in.

Thus the question to ask here is "what symmetry is being broken?", because if you can't see what symmetry is broken then it won't be OU and you're most likely getting the measurements wrong. Again, it needs to be able to run itself and a load, and if it can't do that it's not OU. It's thus easy to test, and you'll note that most people claiming OU don't show it running itself and a load. Showing meters "proving" OU is not convincing....

Best regards, Simon


Hi Simon,

http://gratisenergi.se/et_transformer.htm

I highlighted a part of your answer in bold, because it should be read by all free energy researchers.

Tell me if you don't like it and I will change it back to normal.

Do you find any fault in the following *.pdf not written by me?

http://gratisenergi.se/magnetic_field_transformer.pdf

Best Wishes, Hermes


Hi Hermes,

IIRC you actually tested one of those transformers with multiple cores a while back. Though I don't recall the exact results, I'm pretty sure you didn't get OU, and of course I wouldn't expect OU for any of the schemas shown in that file.

There's no point in putting the effort into winding these things unless you have a pretty good idea that it will work, yet whoever wrote that file can't have found any of them OU (since otherwise you'd be able to buy them ready-made and *someone* would be making a big profit from them) so the implication is that this is only someone's idea of something that ought to work but they haven't yet found one that works.

Of course, if you look at this as the input energy going into the field, and then you can take that energy out AND NO MORE, then there's no way you'll get any configuration to work. OK, you'll get power out, so it'll likely work by one definition, but you get less power out than in and it warms up so it won't be OU.

Might be some bit of symmetry broken if you apply a magnetic field across the ferrite (that is, direction of field along the core axis), since you might know that this changes the speed of light between the clockwise route around the core and the anticlockwise route. Look up microwave circulators and how they work. Thus you have two waves of magnetic flux arriving at the output coil from different directions at different times (relative delay somewhere in the few nanoseconds range). I haven't really put any design time into that, since it's hard to get the inductance low enough for the frequency needed, but there might be some loophole there. Might need to place the coils non-symmetrically too. Point being that the waves from the output coil getting current induced and this heading back to the source coil will also end up with two waves separated by a few nanoseconds, and everything gets back to being in balance and obeying Lenz's law over a timespan of a few more nanoseconds. So you have to grab that energy quickly before the whole system reaches balance again. AFAIK that doesn't apply to an Iron core, in that you can't adjust the speed of light in it by applied magnetic field, so you need the right ferrite.

No guarantees this can be made to work, though. Need to figure out what's happening nanosecond by nanosecond, and see if there's any asymmetry actually happening that will deliver energy without simply reducing the total energy in the magnetic field. Note that you need to check on the waves through the air, too. I figure that if it works it will likely only be a very low power - maybe just enough to be reasonably sure it's there, not enough to be useful. Plus of course you need high frequencies or fast edge rates and a high repetition rate. Not easy.

As I've said, that light-speed time delay is the only asymmetry I can see in these systems. It's only a slight asymmetry in almost every case - just takes a little longer (nanosecond range normally) before total symmetry is reasserted after some change. If the change isn't very sharp (as fast as the delay) then the asymmetry becomes smaller, and of course at high rates of change the inductance of the wire slows those changes further. Thus once you're putting in frequencies less than 1KHz as most do you're not going to see anything anyway, and ditto if you put a lot of turns on.

So this is hard to do. If it was easy it would have been done, after all.

Best regards, Simon


From https://www.mooker.com/showthread.php?tid=142

magluvin Wrote:

thanks for the info. is it that the mother coil needs to be wound counter clockwise, or could it be clockwise and connected oppositely?

Hello magluvin. I have not tested winding the mother coil in the same direction as the father and child coils. Bad news is that, when connecting a capacitor in series with the child coil for resonance, the circuit is not above unity: 7.5 kHz Input power: 50 mA*6 volts = 0.3 watts. Output power: 400 mA*0.4 volts = 0.16 watts. I think it is phase shift in the transformer. It is inductive but the load is resistive.

But considering that the child coil is wound with the same number of turns as both the father coil and the mother coil and consumes more milliamps, maybe the et_transformer can be used as a motor coil in a permanent magnet motor? Like the Robert Adams electric motor?

http://gratisenergi.se/adams.htm Best wishes, Hermes

P.S has anyone built a motor that consumes reactive power? I mean ampere turns?

P.S 2 all three coils must be wound on the same ferrite rod or on the same transformer leg. They must be wrapped over each other. The father coil is wound on the core, the child coil over the father coil and the mother coil over over the child coil.



back to linkpage
suggestion
read and sign my guestbook