Is Modern Electricity Theory Wrong? Could Free Energy be Real? With Possible Explanation/(s)?

[Windevoid]

(I tried posting this on two science forums, but the results were almost all short complaints.)


Is Modern Electricity Theory Wrong/Incomplete?
And/Or
Could Free Energy be Real?
With Possible Explanation/(s)
(Warning!……Somewhat Technical)

A steel fork does not make spark when touch either side of a battery.

Connecting either side of a battery to a steel fork via wire does not make sparks.

Sparks occur when circuit stops being fully complete with enough voltage (about 2.7 volts) (2 AA NIMH).

(untested) Capacitor charges (only when circuit is near complete separated only by the gap between the plates)

Battery-provided electricity lights up an LED through a capacitor (all components in the same series circuit).

Battery doesn’t repel or attract steel silverware.

Battery voltage decreases over time with use (not new).

Battery-created electrical energy can go through a capacitor to light up an LED to the same brightness as when the capacitor isn’t in the circuit at all.

Nickel-Metal Hydride battery self-recharges for a minute of use whenever it run out.

Multimeter results/measurements appear to defy entropy by going up. Putting the multimeter test lead wires next to each other seems to cause increase as well.

A battery terminal connected to a spoon-sized piece of metal creates an AC voltage of around 80-200 millivolts.

Still ceramic magnet touched by leads to a multimeter heavily affects the voltage up to 200 or more millivolts either direction.

Electric fan voltage defies Newton’s Third Law and maybe Lenz Law by only going down to 2.3V from 2.7V.

Parallel circuit LED brightness defies explanation, stays the same even with at least 9 resistors all in their own circuits parallel to LED.

A hand-crank-generator-flashlight I unscrewed ran an LED in parallel with 8 resistors or so and a capacitor as easily as just the LED. The LED didn't seem dimmer as far as I remember.

(The last observation was not included in any manuscripts.)

Opinions and Possible Explanations

It would seem that the magnitude of the Lenz Law is a seventh or less of what it should be.

It would seem that rather than just electrons moving, some unknown “force” or “fluid” drags electrons, and the “fluid” can go right through the insulation on capacitors.

Then perhaps capacitors, batteries, and maybe even magnets, can create energy by charging and discharging.

In today's science, there is this "Law of Conservation of Energy". And all motion is supposedly kinetic energy and comes from potential energy.

But I noticed one day that in Newton's three laws of motion, motion is created not by energy or potential energy, but by an "unbalanced force".

And I remember that fridge magnets can give off "endless" force apparently without any electrical energy input.

So, wouldn't it be theoretically be possible to break the "Law of Conservation of Energy" using this "force-energy gap"?

Maybe it's possible, with capacitors/solenoids/electromagnets/batteries to get more energy out of output force plus waste energy than total energy put in.

Then:

Work (energy) is FD∙cos(ө)

But, if a machine can move magnets and/or coils by changing the force without moving a magnet or a coil, by, say, changing polarity like a motor, or turning on and then off repeatedly, then maybe it can do work without using work, or by using very little work (only enough to move electrons a small distance).

And perhaps all motors create energy, just by being pulse/polarity-dependent devices.

Notes
I tried to send this to 7 peer-reviewed journals, but they all rejected it eventually.

I’m starting to wonder, then, whether peer-reviewed journals are really as good and important of a news source as scientists and other people seem to think they are.

More

I have a digital multimeter that I am using with a battery. First, I tried to run the battery out of as much voltage/energy as I could. My multimeter said about 12mv or 6 mv. The battery's voltage wouldn't seem to hit and stay at zero.
I then took it out of all circuits it was connected to. Then I let it sit there for several days. for the first day or 2, It only went up to about .1V and seemed to be staying more or less around there, consistent with what I would expect of a capacitor effect.

But then on day 5 and 6, I checked the battery, and it said .895V and was at 1775 or so microvolts.
I then tried to run that out of amps and on the next day it was right back there at .893-.892V."

Suggestions

I created a solenoid coil of about 85 turns ( a normal coil that would move toward or away from a magnet when on and under enough amps). I tested it, and it ran the same amperage when running far away from a magnet (about a foot away) as when running right next to it.

The solenoid used only 1 ohm while the LED I had used about 200 kohm.

Also. I learned in DC electrics class, if I am remembering correctly, that magnetic force of a wire/solenoid is dependant on amps and turns of wire, not volts or power.

So I could presumably run AC current through a transformer and maybe or maybe not a diode to get equal force out of less power.

Although the LED I was using seemed to limit amps and prevented the solenoid from working, maybe more amps or power than the 4 batteries I had could force the solenoid to work. Maybe not.

 

[Goggs Mackay]

I think there are a few problems with your basic understanding of some of these concepts. Perhaps it's just the wording used - 'solenoid used only 1 ohm' is an example. Things either have a resistance that remains the same and some materials/circuits can have variable resistances, but nothing 'uses' ohms - it can't be equated to a use of energy/power.

I'm not having a go or anything and I agree that science should be willing to re-look at accepted concepts. The example of LED with resistors in parallel, I think it might be that although it appears that
the LED is behaving the same even when you have effectively reduced it's supply, is it not the case that LEDs are either on or off? As in they do not dim/brighten with changing supply. As long as a certain p.d is reached, it will light.
I suggest finding the lowest voltage at which a single LED lights up, and then to have resistors in parallel and see if it still lights up?

Anything to do with batteries can be affected simply by temperature - something to consider.

There is still plenty about magnetism that is not known, like gravity and it is very interesting that all public discourse on magnetic anti-gravity research just disappeared in the 50's. I am convinced that all such research was made the highest of classification of secret and discouraged elsewhere strongly for the argument that anything that made flying and transport cheaper and not dependent on oil products, was to be suppressed so as not to adversely affect the petro-economical model society we have.

 

[boomerang]

(I tried posting this on two science forums, but the results were almost all short complaints.)

At the risk of sounding picky, much of this seems to be at odds with what little I know about electricity and electrical components. Admittedly, I have picked things out of context:

A steel fork does not make spark when touch either side of a battery.
Connecting either side of a battery to a steel fork via wire does not make sparks.

Connecting any ungrounded conductor--steel fork, wire or whatever--to just one side of a battery would not be expected to produce current flow. Not sure what this means.

Battery-provided electricity lights up an LED through a capacitor (all components in the same series circuit).

Battery-created electrical energy can go through a capacitor to light up an LED to the same brightness as when the capacitor isn’t in the circuit at all.

A capacitor should not pass the direct current (DC) produced by a battery. Capacitors pass AC. You might, however, see time limited current flow as the battery is charging a capacitor. This does not mean there is electron flow through the capacitor. Positive and negative charges are building up within the capacitor--on opposite "plates". But not passing through it.

Although the LED I was using seemed to limit amps and prevented the solenoid from working, maybe more amps or power than the 4 batteries I had could force the solenoid to work. Maybe not.

LED's (as far as I know) are very current sensitive devices. This is why they are often used in series with a current limiting resistor. The amount of current needed to actuate most solenoids would probably make quick work of an LED if placed in series.

Sorry to sound critical and maybe I am missing something. If you have pics or diagrams, please post as that might help. And, if you have assembled a device you think is really over-unity, you can always take to Hal Puthoff in Austin who specializes in analyzing such things.

 

[Windevoid]

I got somebody telling me the device was actually a 1k ohm thermistor. Thing is, the resistance doesn't seem to affect volts and amps. Even for the normal resistor. Maybe the multimeter is messing up. No, I think it's still working right.

 

[Windevoid]

I think the data on the parallel circuit may have been mistaken because of a design flaw of the multimeter, where it can show volts as amps.

 

[Windevoid]

But I had a strange idea once. Maybe the power of a circuit doesn't come from the battery. Maybe it comes from the wires, and it forces chemicals in the battery to react, rather than chemicals in the battery reacting and forcing the wires and lightbulbs to react.

 

[starise]

In cases where I have used LEDS I noted that they sometimes stay on for quite some time after the circuit is unpowered. Throwing a voltage in series through a battery>capacitor>LED might replicate this residual effect mainly caused by the capacitor storing residual voltage. You could also have a leaking/shorted capacitor. Mfd range and voltage may also play a part in the effect you got. If it was a capacitor commonly used in a DC circuit and the polarity was wrong this may have an effect on releasing stored voltage.An AC capacitor wouldn't have mattered as much. It wouldn't take much for an LED to stay lit for a long time.

Comparing a battery in behavior to a rare earth magnet doesn't yield a lot of similarity. A rare earth magnet doesn't chemically generate a voltage nor does it have only one point of polarity but more of a polarity determined by the alignment of the atoms which is more of a weaker to stronger rather than a one point specific location. This is why a battery won't oppose or attract an object.There are no lines of force.Powering a coil from a battery can make a magnet though.

I agree with you that there are so many things we don't know...Maybe those super colliders will help.

 

[Windevoid]

If they say it was a thermistor instead of a capacitor, I suppose it was a thermistor.

 

[Jimi H.]

But I had a strange idea once. Maybe the power of a circuit doesn't come from the battery. Maybe it comes from the wires, and it forces chemicals in the battery to react, rather than chemicals in the battery reacting and forcing the wires and lightbulbs to react.

Interesting thought, but in such cases I think you should always consider the cause and effect. In short, we know how the physical (chemical) components actually cause a physical effect, in this case current: Electrons wander along the path of the current from the negative pole, because they are attracted to the positive pole. The poles are created chemically.

(edited to clarify my point)