## Tesla’s pierce arrow electric car experiment of 1931 – page 2 electricity quiz grade 9

After angrily responding to the latest criticisms on YouTube, I finally absorbed some of that criticism by agreeing with the over reactance of Paul Falstad’s simulator and committing myself to do something about it. So, I went into the software code and added series resistance to coils and caps. Then, surprise surprise, I went and designed two circuits using series resistance – in fact, they’re dependent on it…

Then I had a discussion with Byron Brubaker, who calls himself MX6Maximus on YouTube, in which he brought up how Tesla magnified power by the use of the analogy of a child on a swing which invokes Q factor (which he had to explain to me by way of an excerpt from Radio Amateur Handbook 1976) and resonance. He’s not a believer in ‘*free energy*‘ nor of ‘overunity’ which I can respect since I know, now, better that these catch all phrases belie an ignorance of something spooky that defies a broader, or more accurate, viewpoint until such time as we __know better__ how to explain a seemingly anomalous occurrence.

Our discussion included time, since if an amount of energy is bled off from an oscillation at a rate less than it is accumulating due to a high Q exhibiting resonance and a standing wave, then it can erroneously appear to be ‘free energy’ when in fact all it’s doing is accumulating voltage at a rate faster than what ever the load is dissipating. So, it’s not enough to say that: "energy IN has to equal energy OUT" since "rate of **energy transfer** IN vs rate of *energy transfer* OUT" is also important. This says the same thing but is vastly more accurate and to the point.

Time is a very important consideration. It’s equivalent to saying how big a garden hose is filling a bucket at what rate of flow versus how many and how small are the holes in that bucket leaking out the water? This, unfortunately, bypasses paying strict attention to the voltage source, alone, to also include considering the layering effect of standing waves provided with new influxes of power at just the right moment to accumulate over time. Which is a lot better than a mere voltage multiplier circuit which merely multiplies up to a limit without accumulating beyond any fixed limit.

Then I had a discussion with Byron Brubaker, who calls himself MX6Maximus on YouTube, in which he brought up how Tesla magnified power by the use of the analogy of a child on a swing which invokes Q factor (which he had to explain to me by way of an excerpt from Radio Amateur Handbook 1976) and resonance. He’s not a believer in ‘**free energy**‘ nor of ‘overunity’ which I can respect since I know, now, better that these catch all phrases belie an ignorance of something spooky that defies a broader, or more accurate, viewpoint until such time as we __know better__ how to explain a seemingly anomalous occurrence.

Our discussion included time, since if an amount of energy is bled off from an oscillation at a rate less than it is accumulating due to a high Q exhibiting resonance and a standing wave, then it can erroneously appear to be ‘*free energy*‘ when in fact all it’s doing is accumulating voltage at a rate faster than what ever the load is dissipating. So, it’s not enough to say that: "energy IN has to equal energy OUT" since "rate of __energy transfer__ IN vs rate of __energy transfer__ OUT" is also important. This says the same thing but is vastly more accurate and to the point.

Time is a very important consideration. It’s equivalent to saying how big a garden hose is filling a bucket at what rate of flow versus how many and how small are the holes in that bucket leaking out the water? This, unfortunately, bypasses paying strict attention to the voltage source, alone, to also include considering the layering effect of standing waves provided with new influxes of power at just the right moment to accumulate over time. Which is a lot better than a mere voltage multiplier circuit which merely multiplies up to a limit without accumulating beyond any fixed limit.

The energy gain is exponential (a sort of compounded interest rate) while the energy usage is linear subtraction. So, all that is needed is to wait sufficient time for the gain to reach usable levels at which point usage won’t exceed gain at that point in time whose consequence is that from that point in time moving forward it never will ever again at that usage rate ensuring a runaway circuit. Byron assured me that Ham radio guys stay away from this since it wrecks havoc on their systems being blown up.