Tesla Free Energy Patents

Nikola Tesla 1856-1943

Nikola Tesla - Bifilar Coil for Electromagnets

Tesla - Coil for Electromagnets - 1894

Nikola Tesla Patent 512340

USP 512,340 Page 1, Page 2 Line 97-105, Page 3 Line 1-6 Claims 1-2

Study on Double Resonant Performance of Air-core Spiral Tesla Transformer Applied in Repetitive Pulsed Operation

Resonant Charging Performance of Spiral Tesla Transformer Applied in Compact High-Voltage Repetitive Nanosecond Pulse Generator

On the Optimum Design of Air-Cored Tesla Transformers

To the theory of a flat coil

3 Methods of using Tesla´s bifilar coil and differences between a monofilar and bifilar coil

Tesla Pancake Coil Joule Thief 1.2V to 180VDC

Master IVO

Nikola Tesla's Fuelless Generator by Oliver Nichelson

Tesla's Fuelless Generator and Wireless Power Transmission

Tesla's magnifying transmitter principles of working by Dr Jovan Cvetic

Simple Transmission Line Representation of Tesla Coil and Tesla’s Wave Propagation Concept

Design of Solid State Tesla Coil Using 555 Timer and IRFP460N MOSFET

Automated Transformer Coil Winding Machine

Funderburg - Electromagnetic Motor - 1979

Funderburg Patent 4179631 Page 7 Claim 1C

Funderburg - Electromagnetic Motor - 1980

Funderburg Patent 4228373 Page 10 Claim 2

From Wilbert B. Smith Research The New Science citing from Chapter X: There is a very interesting factor which enters the picture at this point called the Principle of Inversion. If a region is selected in which there are two fields of the same kind, same magnitude and same direction, such that very nearly half the Reality of each is within the region, then the two fields are just on the edge of becoming coherent. If the fields are not coherent the total energy in the region is the sum of the energies of the two fields, i.e., twice the square of the field intensity of each integrated over the region.

If, however, the fields are coherent, the total energy is the square of twice the field intensity integrated over the region, or twice the energy of the two fields incoherent! This relationship is most significant as it represents the "packing energy" of the bits and pieces in atomic nuclei, and also points the way to the precipitation of energy out of the cosmic background. Perhaps

Koenig USP 4,806,834 Electrical circuit for inductance conductors, transformers and motors explains how to actually do this trick of releasing energy from the background electron or positron aether field.

Regards
Ole

Hi Simon,

You who are very familier with different kinds of transformer. Do you understand why Koenig USP 4,806,834 works?

http://gratisenergi.se/koenig4806834.pdf

Testing has indicated that there is a reduction of about 25% to 33% less current used.

column 5 line 3-5.

Best Wishes, Hermes

P.S is it hot weather where you live? I suggest drinking much cold

water! In my town we will have +30C the coming week.

I store a 1½ liter bottle in the refrigrator.

Hi Hermes,

How do you know it works (since you are stating it works)?

Simply put, the coils are wound in opposition, and though this is termed "non-inductive" there is going to be some imbalance in various locations so you get a bit of magnetic field produced that's dependent on exactly where you do the measurement. If you actually wind bifilar, the imbalances become a lot smaller but, critically, don't actually fully go away.

That bit of "accidental" magnetic flux produced here is what's performing the job. I'm not certain why the transformer produced 6V rather than 3V, but not particularly worried about that since the effective number of turns depends so much on the detail here.

This looks like the sort of thing where many people will have tried to replicate it because it's simple to do and the claims are stark (and wrong, as it happens). Thus you need to ask how many people have tried this (and failed) in 36 years. After all, if it actually worked you'd likely have heard of it a long time back and everyone would be using it.

Note the high resistance quoted for the coils there - 250 ohms. That doesn't look that efficient, since resistance turns useful energy to heat. Also of course means that some reduction in inefficiency is easy to find, and people in Free Energy circles tend to think that lower losses is overunity.

As usual, you need to try this experimentally to really show where the measurements are wrong, and that it really doesn't work. I'd say it probably isn't worth the effort, though, since there's nothing there that breaks symmetry. YMMV....

Odd that you keep chasing these historic things that clearly don't work when I've told what will work.

Best regards, Simon

Hi Simon,

Give me your opinion about teslas bifilar coils:

https://www.mooker.com/thread-404-lastpost.html

and the DC transformer:

https://www.mooker.com/thread-405-lastpost.html

A transformer with secondary open cct is an inductor. It will store energy E = 1/2LI²

If the secondary is short-circuited, this short circuit will reflect back to the primary as a short circuit, hence your primary inductance goes away. You have a controllable inductor.

What about applying DC current to primary of transformer while secondary is shorted, hence small charging energy due to low inductance.

But then you remove the secondary short while the primary DC current is still flowing. This increases the primary inductance. Then discharge the primary field. More energy will come out because the inductance is bigger than when it was being charged. Current is the same value.

Could this work?

Best Wishes, Hermes

Hi Hermes,

When you put current through a wire, there's some energy put into the field when the current increases and some energy comes out of the field when the current falls. Every little section of that wire in every orientation has its own energy interactions (with the 3-dimensional field) as the current through it changes. The various equations for coils and inductances are ways to easily tell you what the sum effect will be for various standard configurations, and generally ignore the small effects of the connecting wires and some other effects that are generally small enough to ignore too.

It's good to remember though that your wires and currents are the integral of all the little infinitely-small sections of current that make up the whole thing. Also that the further away you look from each infinitesimal length of current there is a smaller field from it but also a light-speed delay. There may be no limit to how far away those effects stretch in space and time, too, though they may get exceedingly small and take a very long time to get an echo.

Why this is useful when considering those bifilar wires and shorted transformers: the wires put energy into the field, and that is then the amount that the wires can take out again even if you reconfigure the wires to have a different summed inductance. You'll find other examples in other Free Energy ideas based on coils that people think should work but obviously don't (since if they worked we'd have been using them a century ago, given that they are frequently rediscovered).

That trick of changing the primary inductance of a transformer by shorting/not shorting the secondary has been seen (and tried) by many people. Let's face it, it's pretty obvious as an exploit based on the equations for energy stored by a coil. Problem is that the description is wrong, because the energy isn't stored in the coil or in the inductance, but in the field. Thus with the transformer, you'll find you get less energy out than in (that short on the secondary will heat up).

You can simulate this in LTspice and it should give you the right results with a lot less effort and expense than winding a real one. Might have problems if you choose a K (coupling factor) of exactly 1, so perfect coupling between coils, but should run OK at K=0.99 or 0.999. Real coils maybe get to around 0.98 or so. Similarly, set the coil resistances to some fairly-reasonable value of at least a milliohm so any oscillations (from artefacts at the start of the simulation) don't persist too long.

In some ways, the concept of inductance is a useful fiction, being a way of describing the coupling between the wire current and the field. Thus note that for a coil the inductance depends on the square of the number of turns (though there's a dependence on how closely each loop couples to the rest, too). It's much simpler to deal with than the integral of all the infinitesimal current flows and directions using Biot-Savart, though.

OK, this idea or variants of it have been proposed for producing Free Energy for a very long time, probably will keep coming up because of how we simplify the coupling to the field as a simple inductance number. Also, though we can describe and demonstrate what that field does, we really don't know how it does it and that lack of knowledge is generally ignored and hand-waved away by repeating the description of what it does. Similarly, we don't actually know what energy is, though again we do know what it does (at least mostly).

If you can find a significant break in symmetry, you should be able to make energy. I think I may have a way, but could be wrong. Given that it hasn't been done yet, though, you need some sneakier physics than some coils and switches. If it was that easy, it would have been done already.

Best regards, Simon

Measurement on a low voltage winding frequency transformer. Parts are 1 rod of 10 88mm long weldingrods. The spools are 38mm long and 26mm diameter. The spools are filled with 0.75 mm diameter wire. The transformer is made with 1 input coil and 1 output coil.

The input/output voltage has been measured with a 30 Mhz 2-channel oscilloscope and a 1 Mhz frequency generator and the frequency counter using a 2-200 khz multimeter. The input sinewave frequency was 21khz4 and the input current was measured over the 47 ohm input resistor. The output current was measured over the 1 kohm output resistor.

*Input Coil*	Electromagnetic Coil	Bifilar Electromagnetic Coil	Electromagnetic Coil	Bifilar Electromagnetic Coil
*Output Coil*	Electromagnetic Coil	Electromagnetic Coil	Bifilar Electromagnetic Coil	Bifilar Electromagnetic Coil
*Input Inductance*	1mH825	2mH24	1mH680	1mH99
*Output Inductance*	1mH642	1mH666	2mH24	2mH24
*Input coil voltage*	0V6	0V6	0V6	0V6
*Input voltage over 47 ohm serial resistor*	0V2	0V2	0V2	0V2
*Output coil voltage over 1 kohm parallell resistor*	0V1	0V1	0V1	0V1

Conclusion: The Bifilar Electromagnetic Coil has the same numbers of turns as the Electromagnetic Coil and does not create more magnetic energy for an overunity transformer than the Electromagnetic Coil. The ampere*turns is the same in an Bifilar Electromagnetic Coil as in the Electromagnetic Coil and creates no additional electric energy. Every patent claiming additional energy from Bifilar Electromagnetic Coil are bogus. However the Bifilar Electromagnetic Coil wire had been wound with deep and not flat as in Nikola Tesla patent. There is a small possibility that Nikola Teslas flat Bifilar Electromagnetic Coil can convert unknown energy to electromagnetic energy after a sparkgap.

- Hermes Atar Trismegistus

From what I've heard the bifiler back EMF it much higher voltage and can be used to charge a secondary battery. the normalback EMF is never high enough to do that. it creates a spike in the return energy. also some were I read in Rex research long ago that out of gordan Utah a Corp ran test on bifilar pan cake coils and only at resonance did they see a eight fold magnetic increase over a standard pan cake coil.

James

Hi James

Perhaps "bifilar backemf" (the inductive kickback spikes from a bifilar coil) Is of greater power when first you split then combine the inductive kickback spikes produced. This means bifilar half A is fed the.pulsed DC power (or alternating polarity pulsed DC for AC) And steering diodes capture the kickback spike into cap (s). Then the other half (B) of bifilar is not driven by direct power feed but rather is only induced by bifilar half A. Now either combine kickback spikes from each into common cap or fill up separate caps for each bifilar half. Could be creating a "coherence" condition as Ole speaks about, from W B Smith writings. The capacitors filled need to be disconnected from the coil whenever they discharge to load for real power to be seen with no reflection back to primary input.

Kone

Hi Kone,

The energy has to be input as two separate parts and then mixed into a coherent single part to be extracted for driving the load. Look at how Pierre Cotnoir did it. His device didn't require resonance which makes it drive different loads without having to readjust everything. He has overcome the tuning bitch. I'll try something like that. But the progress is going very slow. This far two MOSFET hex bridges are completed and working.

Mixing energy is not just mixing voltage or mixing current as both of those parts as well as time (actually change) are parts of energy. Think of energy and not just the parts making up energy. Energy comes in quite many types. It's the output energy that has to be greater than the input energy to be able to extract free energy. The excess free energy is then extracted out of the cosmic background or aether of electrons (or positrons).

Regards
Ole

When air is compressed it becomes hot and the heat can be used to warm drops of water to make steam. The four stroke dieselengine is used to heat air and then water is injected in the combustion chamber.

Intake: Air is feed from a compressor to the motorchamber.

Compression: Air is compressed to the combustion chamber and becomes hot.

Power: Water is injected into combustion chamber where it turns into steam by the hot air.

Exhause: The steam escapes the motorchamber through a pump.

The compression ratio must be at least 14:1.

Hermes,

Lots on the page which experiment did you perform?

Noticed the data on water in a diesel engine. One should be trepidatious with this concept as there used to be water injection kits for Diesel engines but they are no longer available as they had a tendency to bend connecting rods and or score main bearings. A gasoline engine can accept water vapor without issue but for some reason diesels can be killed likely due to the expansion from water vapor having more phase change expansion volume than the Diesel oil so likely requires more advance before injection or less compression.

Mick

ONE SHOULD ALSO BE TREPIDATIOUS (CAREFUL) WHEN installing water injection on a gasoline engine !! I installed water injection on my HOT ROD 500 hp and BENT A ROD !! SO JUST NEED TO BE CAREFUL ON THE AMOUNT THAT IS INJECTED!!

Werner

David McCLINTOCK - Air Engine

Cleo L. McClintock patented air motor had a compression ratio of 27:1 and you can see and read his patent here:

Cleo L. McClintock - Air Engine

USP 2,982,261

Design and Computational Analysis of 1 kW Tesla Turbine

Investigation of Tesla Turbine

A Review of Tesla Turbine

Proposed applications with implementation techniques of the upcoming renewable energy resource, The Tesla Turbine

A Review on Bladeless Tesla Turbine

Bladeless Turbine - A Review

Tesla Disc Turbine

“Evalution of Tesla Turbo Machine as Turbine”

Design and Operation of Tesla Turbo machine - A state of the art review

Experimental and numerical investigations of Tesla turbine

Investigations of Aerodynamics of Tesla Bladeless Microturbine

The strenght and dynamic analysis of the protoype of Tesla Turbine

Optimization of Tesla Turbine Using Computational Fluid Dynamics Approach

Design, Fabrication and Analyis of Hydro Operated Bladeless Turbine with Power Generation

The fluid dynamics of the rotating flow in a Tesla disc turbine

The evaluation of numerical methods for determining the efficiency of Tesla turbine operation

Numerical Simulation of the Flow Field in a Friction-Type Turbine (Tesla Turbine)

Design and Experiment of Rotating Fluid Flow in a Tesla Disc Turbine

Fabrication and Study of the Parameters Affecting the Efficiency of a Bladeless Turbine

Design and Development of a Small-Capacity Tesla Turbine for Rural Applications

The Design and Construction of a Multiple Disk Turbine

Design of a Bladeless Wind Turbine

Design and Fabrication of Tesla Bladeless Turbine to Convert the Waste Pressure Energy into Electricity

Design, construction and testing of a Tesla Turbine

Performance Evaluation of low Pressure energy recovery Tesla turbine

Preperation a process cycle for Tesla Turbine

Comparison of Methods for the Determination of Tesla Turbine Performance

A theory of Tesla disc turbines

Design analysis of Tesla micro-turbine operating on a low-boiling medium

Performance enhancement of a 100 watts class Tesla turbine

A revised Tesla Turbine concept for 2-phase applications

An Experiment on Performance Comparison of Two-Type Tesla Turbine Application in Organic Rankine Cycle

A Study on Performance comparison of two-size Tesla Turbines Application in Organic Rankine Cycle Machine

Improvement in Mechanical Efficiency in Tesla Turbine by the Employment of Carbon Fiber Disc

FEA Analysis and Performance Evaluation of Tesla Turbine Manufactured by FDM Process

Introducing Tesla turbine to enhance energy efficiency of refrigeration cycle

The Application of a Thin Liquid Film at the Outlet of a Tesla Turbine

Performance Analysis on a Tesla Bladed Disc Pump

Hermes!!!

The Tesla Turbine was designed by Nikola Tesla to be run on a "Condensibale Fluid" in closed loop.

The nozzles were of "DeLeval" design to deliver a supersonic shock wave to drive the boundary layer on the runners (disk). The whole turbine was an "Implosion Vortex" system to deliver such high efficiency.

Out of "all" that have presented documentation and conference presentations, non have found the "True Tesla Turbine"!

The reason Tesla had for employing Alles Chalmers to build and test his Turbine was their use of DeLeval supersonic nozzles in there Steam Turbines.

Having built several Tesla Turbines and did the test for efficiency can I speak of them.

BTW!!!! I used refrigerant R123 for motive fluid since it fits perfectly the temperature profile needed in a condensable vapor to drive Turbine.

Norm

Hi Simon,

Norm claims COP=20 with his heat pump. But he never tried to loop it. Isn't it too expensive to mass produce? My friend Bert Harju designed a heat pump that used carbon dioxide as a heating medium with COP=5. But it was never mass produced. Because it was too expensive to manufacture.

Best Wishes, Hermes

Hi Hermes,

Looks a bit expensive, yep....

I can't see anything there that gets you beyond Carnot efficiency, so the CoP will depend on the temperature difference you're trying to produce, and getting a CoP of 20 is quite achievable in theory without exceeding Carnot efficiency with a temperature difference of about 15°C around room temperature. Seems to be about what he's showing here, with 40°F and 70°F. If you get the friction and other losses very low, and of course with Tesla turbines in general they are pretty low, you'll be in the right ballpark here.

See Australian patent AU2024200773 (A1) for something that's cheap to manufacture and gets you beyond CoP 20 by some sneaky physics. That should be on sale this year or maybe next.

Best regards, Simon

Hi! Hermes

In your last post of Inventions, scroll down to the dialog on My schematic on heat pumping using

Mechanical Vapor Recompression technology.

In My presentation at the Tesla Extraordinary Energy Conference, 2016, I did not go into detail on this heat pump technology.

https://youtu.be/xI1QWFNArNA?si=MwpY0qEgxQMmU-Qp

On my research farm, I had the huge roof top solar flat plate pool heating panels set up on huge "A" frame facing South. 160 sq ft of flat black "glazed" collection surface. Normal sunny day, these panels would yield 180 degree F circulating water. By using "MVR" Which in a Low Lift scenario yields a 40:1 "COP"! This technology is used in Industrial heat pumping. Example ! Roof top factory/warehouse shallow roof top ponds with flat black membrane lining. Easy water temps of 150F.

By using a good refrigerant in role of "heat scavenging " there is a low lift to motive steam. By scavenging all sources of "BTUs" we can drastically reduce operating cost.

Our use of this technology was to replace Power Generation cooling towers. Each pint (pound) of water condensed yields 144 BTU (condensation energy) plus the cool down contribution. See: we have "re-gained" the energy used to "evaporate" (144 BTU/lb.) at the head end steam raising step. In addition, we have re-clsimed the water and not loose it to the atmosphere. MVR high lift example is your home heat pump. COP now around 6:1. Some "Folks", people out there do not understand the term "Looping"! A solar driven power plant outputting megawatts is an "open system" deriving it's energy from the Sun. Same with Nuc, Coal and Gas fired systems. "External source of energy "!

A "Looped System" (totally closed) absolutely no external source of energy is a "super rare" critter.

Norm

Hi Simon,

Do you know if anybody has followed up Nikola Tesla Earth Current Research?

The article from: St. Louis Post-Dispatch St. Louis, Missouri Sun, 15 Mar 1896 Page 39

If it impossible to resize the attachment you will find it on the following links:

https://www.beyondunity.org/thread/nikola-tesla/?p=1&order=all#comment-6cd6b652-e0eb-4ed8-b4e6-b360003ed780

https://www.newspapers.com/article/st-louis-post-dispatch/44669203/

Best Wishes, Hermes

Hi Hermes,

You should find a lot of stuff if you look up telluric currents. If you look at the Earth, basically it's a Faraday Homopolar Generator where all the conductive paths will end up with a potential across them and the main problem is going to be the return path, which needs to go through the core but you get various efficiencies at various depths of return conductive path. Different paths between two points will have a different potential across them, and thus a net current flow in one direction rather than another.

Since the Earth is pretty large, there's quite a bit of power available for one person to use. On the other hand, if everyone wanted to use it, it wouldn't be a lot per person and might charge a toothbrush. Basic problem of the actual "free energy" in the world that is actually real is that it's limited so that if a few people harvest it there's lots for each person but if everyone used it there's very little of it per person.

Same sort of problem for using air ionisation, potential gradient in the atmosphere, or similar, and there's the added problem with a lot of them that they vary over time and may not deliver when you want it.

That's the bit that most people missed here. May find a natural energy source and find it's enough to run some device, and think it's inexhaustible because it's natural. Instead, it's limited, and there may be side-effects if you use it too much. Funny thing about wind-turbines is that they reduce the amount of wind in their shadow, and the shadow of a big wind-farm can stretch 100km or so. Also changes the air humidity downwind, reducing rainfall. They change the climate....Solar panels also change climate by producing a local hot-spot. Changing the local albedo to something that's absorbing a lot more sunlight rather than reflecting it has consequences.

Net here is that there are a lot of natural sources of power from harvesting some movement of something. Some might be practically useful quantities (if you have the space, looks like using an electret wire to collect air ionisation electricity could mostly run a house) and be cheap enough to be worth doing and save money on your power bill overall. OK until you tell everyone "hey, use this!" and they do and the power available to you goes down a lot.

That's why we need to figure out how to break the symmetries and thus the normal conservation laws. That will have other downsides, and we'll need to be careful about the Earth's overall energy balance - one person can make a lot of energy and the overall effect is small, but if everyone did the same the effects might be a problem. The question you need to ask is "what happens if everyone did this?".

Best regards, Simon

back to linkpage
suggestion
read and sign my guestbook