«PACS-classification: 84.60.-h, 89.30.-g, 98.62.En, 12.20.-m, 12.20.Ds, 12.20.Fv Summary of a Scientfic Work by Claus Wilhelm Turtur Germany, ...»
▪ In section 4.3 two tests with the same angular velocity are reported (this is one turn in approx 2 … 3 hours) in air and in the vacuum, but the voltage for the rotation in air was only 10 kV, whereas the voltage for the rotation in vacuum was 16 kV.
▪ From section 4.2 the proportionality between the driving torque M and the voltage U is known, namely M U 2.
With the notation M A, L torque according to the mechanism (a.) in air, M B, L torque according to the mechanism (b.) in air, M A,V torque according to the mechanism (a.) in the vacuum, M B,V torque according to the mechanism (b.) in the vacuum (by principle it is M B,V 0 ),
we can deduce a relation between the driving forces as following:
M A, L M B, L M A,V because of the equality of the angular velocity.
(i.) 4.4. “Over-unity” criterion for the exclusion of artefacts 57
This means that for one given rotor and constant geometry (not to mix with a change of the geometry as shown in fig.15) the torque M B, L due to recoils of ionized gas molecules (of due to some other unknown classical mechanism) is larger than the torque M A, L due to Coulombforces on the basis of the conversion of vacuum-energy. We see now, that the recoils of ions is existing (and even dominant under air), but the main awareness of the experiment under vacuum is, that the Coulomb-forces due to the conversion of vacuum-energy really exist. And this is an important result of this experiment. Further experiments and even stronger results are following in the next sections.
4.4. “Over-unity” criterion for the exclusion of artefacts Repeatedly the argument was heard, that a final proof of the conversion of vacuum-energy (a final verification that the rotation of the rotor is really due to the conversion of vacuumenergy and nothing else), is only give for sure, if the produced mechanical engine power is less than the electrical power losses, which occur because of imperfections of the electrical isolation due to the maintenance of the electric field [Kah 08] within the machine converting vacuum-energy. Only if this comparison of power (electrical and mechanical) is clear, experimental artefacts can be excluded for sure. The background of this argument is, to exclude all imaginable paths of energy transport from electrical energy into mechanical energy, in order to be sure, that the mechanical energy is really coming from the vacuum, because the mechanical energy could not come from anywhere else. And this is only verified with absolute certainty by the power comparison. Let us denominate this argument the “Criterion of net power gain” or the criterion of “over-unity” as some people do. The successful verification of this criterion is the topic of section 4.4.
In fact this proof was brought with a vacuum-energy rotor with an electrical power loss of Pel 2.87 0.89 10 9Watt in comparison with a produced mechanical engine power of approx. Pmech 1.5 0.5 10 7Watt, so that at least the difference of Pmech Pel is taken from vacuum-energy for sure [e17].
As observed in section 4.3, especially in (1.68) with comment, gas ions transport electrical charge (even if not all ions produce a driving torque), so they produce an electric current, which is just an electrical power loss and thus has to be avoided for our power measurement.
Indeed the electrical power loss under air is larger then the produced mechanical power.
Because of this reason, the verification of the “Criterion of net power gain” has to done in 58 4. Experiments to convert vacuum-energy into classical mechanical energy
Rotor and field-source have been put together with a cylindrical oil container of a diameter of
9.7 cm into a vacuum chamber with an inner diameter of a bit more than 10 cm as can be seen in fig.22.
4.4. “Over-unity” criterion for the exclusion of artefacts 59
Inside the vacuum chamber (made of high-grade steel, drawn in black colour, the acrylic glass of the top flange drawn in violet colour) there is the aluminium tub (blue) with vacuum oil (yellow). The polypropylene floating body (green) is swimming on the oil, carrying the aluminium rotor, which consists of four rotor blades (light blue). The rotor blades are electrically connected by copper filaments (dark blue, diameter 30 µm) with each another and with the bottom of the oil container. The oil container and the rotor are electrically insulated with ceramic insulators (red) against the vacuum chamber. Every electrical charge taken up by the rotor must flow through the Picoamperemeter Keithley 486 („pA “) and is detected there. With a well-known value of the high voltage (grey, equipment „Bertan ARB 30 “) the electrical power taken by the rotor is determined (if there is such power at all).
The electrostatic field for the drive of the rotor is produced by the field-source made of aluminium (dark blue), which is mounted at the top flange held by a ceramic isolator. In order to avoid a damage of the Picoamperemeter in the case of electric breakthrough, a resistor of 20 Megaohms is put between the electric power supply and the field-source. In the real measurement 20 Megaohms is such small resistance (in comparison with the disconnection between field-source and rotor), that it will not be noticed at all.
Only if the experimentation parameters are adjusted properly (which is not yet under complete control and thus has to be found by trial and error), the rotor begins to spin as soon as the high voltage is switched on – if the torque which the rotor takes up inside the electric field is strong enough to surmount the friction of the oil. Actually, there is a threshold, which must be exceeded by the torque, so that the rotor can begin to spin. (Obviously, the oil behaves like a thixotropic fluid.)
As soon as the rotor spins, the goal of the measurement is the following:
On the one hand, the mechanical engine power (produced by the rotor) has to be determined;
on the other hand, the electrical power loss has to be determined, which is inevitable in a real existing setup because of practical reasons. At least some very small creepage or leakage currents result in a loss of electrical charge on the field-source, and this amount of charge 60 4. Experiments to convert vacuum-energy into classical mechanical energy being lost has to be replaced in order to keep the electric field constant. Of course, in the case of ideal isolation, no electric charge would be lost and thus no electrical power loss would arise. But in reality, at least some atoms of the residual gas inside the vacuum chamber will produce some loss of electrical charge. A successful proof of the conversion of vacuumenergy is given, if the electrical power loss is clearly smaller than the mechanical power driving the rotor, because in this case the electrical power can not be sufficient to explain the spinning of the rotor. This is a clear definition of the goal: It consists of two measurements, namely the mechanical power and the electrical power.
Same as in the practical performance of the experiment, also the report here shall begin with the mechanical power, because from its knowledge we see the requirements for the electrical power measurement.
Part 1: Measurement of the mechanical engine power The mechanical power has been measured „ex-situ“ outside the vacuum chamber, with the rotor swimming on the oil within the oil tub, which was located at the bottom of a rack as shown in fig.23. The driving torque was produced by a thin copper torsion-filament (diameter 50 m ) being twisted by a well defined angle, thus producing a well defined torque in the following way: At first it was waited until the came to its rest position, this is a torque of zero. Than the torsion-filament was twisted at its top end with a hand wheel, so that it produces a well defined torque making the rotor spin. From the knowledge of the torque and the angular velocity of the rotor, the mechanical engine power driving the rotor could be determined as shown below. With the means of such measurements, a mathematical connection between the duration for one turn and driving engine power was determined for several values of angular velocity.
And this is the procedure how to determine the measurement of the mechanical engine
Step 1: Characterization of the copper filament (torque versus the angle of torsion) As a preliminary work it was necessary to determine the torque of the filament as a function of the angle of distortion. For this purpose the rotor at the bottom end of the filament was replaced by a hollow plastic sphere (diameter ra 39.7 0.1 103 m, mass m 2.732 0.002 103 kg ) not using any oil in this phase of the experiment. Now the rotating wheel on the top was deflected, resulting in an oscillation of the sphere (duration of one period T 19.76 0.02 sec., length of the filament l 409 1 103 m ). With elementary formulas of technical mechanics [Dub 90], [Tur 07], the mathematical expression G π R4 2.902 0.016 10-7 Nm was calculated ( G shear modulus of the copper and Q 2l R radius of the filament), which is a factor of proportionality between the torque and the angle of the torsion, namely M Q . This is a calibration of the copper torsion-filament.
4.4. “Over-unity” criterion for the exclusion of artefacts 61
Step 2: Determination of the rotor’s moment of inertia of rotation Because of the irregular shape of the rotor with its rotor blades, it is not sensible to calculate the moment of inertia theoretically, but it is more accurate to measure it. Therefore, the hollow plastic sphere at the bottom end of the filament was replaced by the complete rotor with the floating body, still not using any oil. Now the rotating wheel on the top end of the filament was deflected again, resulting in an oscillation with a duration of one period of Tb 33.70 0.06 sec. at a filament length of l2 383 2 103 m, leading to an expression of G π R4 3.099 0.025 10-7 Nm. The torque at this filament length is now M 2 Q2 .
Q2 2 l2 With standard formulas of technical mechanics we come to moment of inertia of Q2 Tb2 8.916 0.078 106 kg m 2 for the rotor together with its floating body.
Y 4 π2 At this phase of the experiment, the torsion-filament is characterized as well as the rotor together with its floating body, as far as it is necessary for the determination of the mechanical engine power as a function of the angular velocity of the rotor on the vacuum oil.
This function will be determined now:
62 4. Experiments to convert vacuum-energy into classical mechanical energy Step 3: Determination of the mechanical engine power as a function of the duration per turn Because of practical reasons, namely because of the proper adjustment of the rotor on the surface of the oil, the length of the torsion-filament had to be changed once more, namely to l3 420 2 103 m, corresponding with a value of Q3 2.826 0.022 10-7 Nm.
Now the rotor could easily be driven by different well known values of the torque by turning the rotating wheel for a given angle because of the proportionality M 3 Q3 . From the torque M and the angular velocity u, the engine power P M u Q3 2π is T calculated. The result is plotted in fig.24, where we see the engine power as a function of the duration T of a single turn. The engine power at a duration in the range of 1 2...1...2 hours should be memorized, because this is, what we will observe later at the rotor inside the vacuum.
Part 2: Measurement of the electrical power loss This part of the measurements was done in the vacuum as said above.