Research website of Vyacheslav Gorchilin
2015-01-31
Methods of energy conversion. The efficiency of the second kind

Try to calculate what percentage of the electrons transforms its reactive energy into active in the circuit: power + incandescent lamp. For simplicity, let's imagine that we have a current permanent (for AC — will be similar calculations), the voltage on the lamp — 220 V, its power is 220 watts.

The number of electrons $$N$$ are involved in the process is of the well-known formula: $N=\frac {It} {e}$ where: $$I$$ — circuit current, $$t$$ — time of the process $$e$$ — the elementary charge of the electron. Remembering the formula (2.4) from the previous section, and given that the power in the circuit is given by $P_{max}=\frac {W_{e}N} {t},$ we find the power that we could obtain at maximum conversion of the energy of all involved in the process of the electrons: $P_{max}=\frac {m_{e}c^{2}} {2e}I = \frac {m_{e}c^{2}} {2e} \frac {U} {R}, \qquad (3.1)$ where: $$U$$ is the voltage on the bulb, $$R$$ is the resistance of the spiral. It is easy to calculate that for the given experiment parameters $$P_{max}$$ is equal to 257 kW! But in the proposed scheme, the light bulb gives only 220 watts. It turns out that such a scheme is about only 1 electron of the thousands of his converts reactive energy in active!

Therefore, we can talk about a certain ratio of "free energy" — the conversion factor reactive energy charges in the active. Given that active power, given the light, is computed by the formula: $P=I^{2}R = \frac {U^{2}} {R},$ we get this ratio: $\eta_{2} = \frac {P} {P_{max}} = U \frac {2e} {m_{e}c^{2}}. \qquad (3.2)$ let's Call it an efficiency of the second kind and note that it depends only on the voltage. The physical meaning of this formula is that to increase $$\eta_{2}$$ have the same number of charges is relatively cost-free to give as much greater potential difference. Or on the contrary — for the same potential difference relative to no cost you need to get as many charges. And the better we adhere to this principle, the more the internal energy of the charge we will be able to extract. Therefore, the resulting parameter can be called a utilization ratio of a substance — KIV.
In other words, it is about the process of cold nuclear synthesis (has), but which, as the kernel acts as an electron from its internal energy. By analogy with gas, we can even give him a name — KHES (cold electronic synthesis). Every day, including light or other electric appliances, we are launching this process: some of the electrons transforms its reactive energy into active and part — and continues its way through the wires. Our task is to change this ratio to make better use of internal energy of the electron!
The result can be explained by the following example. Take two lights: first — 220V 75W x, the second 12V x 4W. The current flowing through them will be approximately the same, hence the number of electrons per unit of time. From the same number of Pendants we have in the first case, 75W, and the second — only 4W.

The efficiency $$\eta_{2}$$ can be derived for the mechanics, but since all mechanical interactions contain basically electrical in nature, then we will go "electric way"

Familiar to us efficiency, which now we call the efficiency of the first kind, is, as the ratio of received power to spent. It is not directly related to the above, the efficiency of the second kind, but still, under certain conditions, increasing $$\eta_{2}$$ leads to an increase $$\eta_{1}$$.

Efficiency ratio and efficiency of the 2nd kind
Recently engineers began to use an unusual characteristic in the operation of the device, which determines the ratio of received power to spent in super device. For example, modern air conditioning, this ratio can reach up to six and is called coefficient of efficiency or $$\Bbb{COP}$$. But air is an open system and receives additional power from nilpotently energy of the surrounding air environment.
Let's define this coefficient for a closed system. For this you need to calculate how the charge efficiency at the output compared to the input. This can be done, if we divide $$\eta_{2}$$ the output $$\eta_{2}$$ input: $K_{\eta 2} = {\eta_{2 out} \over \eta_{2 in}} \qquad (3.3)$ Thus we find the growth rate of power/energy that makes the device as a result of the algorithm of its work. But still the usual efficiency ($$\eta$$), which is used by the device for heating wires, radiation, reactive energy, etc. Then the real efficiency must be displayed to account for these losses: $\Bbb{COP} = \eta K_{\eta 2} \qquad (3.4)$ This is the formula for determining the coefficient of efficiency for a closed system.
The generators of first and second kind
Consider the generator as a material object of our world. Obviously, the potential of internal and external energy of such an object is virtually inexhaustible. About the internal energy of matter speaks well the famous Einstein's formula: $$W=mc^2$$, and the external is manifested in all the tumult surrounding the numerous fields of natural phenomena and cosmic processes. Our generator is in the middle. So, if the generator is seen and works without the use of internal and (or) the external energy, he refers to the first kind, if it does something to the second.
Now any generator can be directly classified. For example, mechanisms that use the combustion of fuel in a closed system: the internal combustion engine, the firebox of a steam locomotive, etc. — all generators of the first kind. Electric motor powered from the network — also belongs here, since neither external nor internal additional sources he uses not only the energy of the network.
But a heat engine, for example, air conditioning — uses an external low-grade energy source and belongs to the generators of the second type. The same can be said about nuclear energy — it is operated, the internal energy of a substance. Interestingly, thermal power plant (TPP) is a generator of the first kind, and nuclear (NPP) in the second.
If you trace the history, it is obvious that the evolution of such systems: first came the generators of the first kind, and then the second. This evolutionary transition involves a lot of complexity, both in our minds and in socio-economic sphere. Therefore, the transition to the generators of the second kind, which should be the basis for our future, such a difficult.
It is logical to divide the generators of the second kind for generators with internal and external additional source of energy. It is also clear that can be the generators of a mixed type. Contemporaries of Tesla — Smith, Kapanadze and others are mostly used in their devices is a mixed principle.
Signs of free energy
These generators are of the second kind and are of interest to seekers of free energy. They can have interesting characteristics, which can be guided in the creation of such devices and using them — correctly estimate the direction of the search.
1. A source of energy. Need to clearly imagine the additional (external or internal) energy source. For electric generators, this may be the source of the charges, increasing the voltage at a constant number or pulse compression [11]. For magnetic — reconnection magnetic field lines (example).
2. Pump. How is the transfer or conversion of additional energy to the energy of the battery. Example.
3. Battery. His task — to save a portion of transformed energy, and then give it to the load. It can be seen as a fulcrum between a source of additional energy and the generator output.
4. If all three signs are obtained, it remains to perform the last paragraph: it is necessary that the energy produced in the battery (see paragraph 3) for the same period was more than required for the generator to create this process.
Ways and methods of increasing efficiency
A pioneer of such solutions can be considered to be Nikola Tesla, who for more than 100 years ago said about the ocean of energy and opened the radiant produced by the creation of very short pulses and displacement currents. One of the most delicate approaches to the problem highlighted Karasev M. D. in 1959 [5], where it is proposed to apply a negative reactance for obtaining excess power. Constantine and Stanislav Avramenko in 1993 and 1994 described the principle and patented the transfer of energy from one wire using prodolny waves [6,7]. The method of charge separation and the work of BTG has offered the inventor Donald Smith on behalf of the Tesla Symposium in 1996 [8]. In 2007, Kasyanov G. T. suggested another way of obtaining additional energy from the internal energy of charged particles [9].
There are several more methods for increasing $$\eta_ {2}$$: work on displacement currents, parametric, which applies inductance variation, at the expense of redistribution of the magnetic field along the inductance, by redistributing charge along the capacitor system and Jump method. The method standing wave displacement may also be interesting for research. And in this work mathematically accurately shows the areas in which the increase $$\eta_{2}$$ is not worth looking for; they will help our readers to use their time more efficiently to search for free energy. The most common approach to search free energy in parametric circuits of the first kind described here, second -- here, and a special calculator that calculates the energy of such circuits is presented here.

The materials used
1. Wikipedia. Electrostatic machine.
2. Wikipedia. The classical electron radius
3. I. Misuchenko. The last mystery of God. Formula 5.3 and 5.11
4. Generator TS-TK. Tungus
5. M. D. Karasev. Some General properties of nonlinear reactive elements
6. New Energy News, Aug 1994: "Solid State Space-Energy Generator" by Stanislav and Konstantin Avramenko
7. The Russian patent: PCT/GB93/00960, May 10th, 1993 by Stanislav and Konstantin Avramenko
8. Donald L. Smith. The most comprehensive guide
9. Kasyanov G. T. electron Accelerator with closed cycle
10. Spintronics
11. M. L. A. Magnetic pulse generators. Moscow: Soviet radio, 1968