Multi-Dimensional Electrical Current - Sully DC [SDC]

I once tried that but I ended up in the same place just the same.

0 Replies

spendius wrote:

I once tried that but I ended up in the same place just the same.

The term "multidirectional DC" seems to be a hot button for some people, and indeed presents an oxymoronic image. The point Mr Sullivan is making with the term is that, the way the four terminals are switched, the current WITHIN ONE ELECTRODE reverses direction, and has zero average value at the center. At the same time, the voltage BETWEEN ELECTRODES is a constant DC value, ignoring switching transients. Thus, "multidirectional DC" refers simultaneously to the multidirectional intra-electrode current and the invariant inter-electrode current.

0 Replies

ArchAngel432 wrote:

Quote:
You should look up the definition of AC. AC must change polarity.

I didn't have a textbook so I looked it up at wiki.

Quote:
An alternating current (AC) is an electrical current whose magnitude and direction vary cyclically, as opposed to direct current, whose direction remains constant.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Alternating_current

Its not called reversing current for a reason. There are exceptions to the pole reversal rule you would impose on alternating current such as AC with DC offset which is Alternating Current, but does not change polarity.

There is a huge difference between changing direction, and reversing directions.

How is "changing direction" any different than "reversing direction" ?
Either way, when a reverse of direction takes place, the polarity is also reversed since polarity is determined by the EMF generated by the moving current.

0 Replies

I should say that's not the only way to determine polarity. But if you're simply speaking of "poles" it works. Electrical polarity would be determined by the electron source and the electron sink. And since electrons ALWAYS flow from the source (more negative) to the sink (less negative), there is no way to reverse the flow of electrons (electricity) without reversing the polarity.

0 Replies

ArchAngel432 wrote:

Quote:

To expand; AC voltage switches - reverses - polarity, AC current flow switches - reverses - direction, each as an absolute, interdependent, concomitant function of the time of the cycle.

SDC Voltage does not reverse polarity, but current flow does change direction.

Without reversing directions....

ArchAngel, get your act together. Wholly apart and separate from the purported "New Current", you made an assertion pertainining to DC offset and AC current.

ArchAngel432 wrote:

Its not called reversing current for a reason. There are exceptions to the pole reversal rule you would impose on alternating current such as AC with DC offset which is Alternating Current, but does not change polarity.

Which you reitterated here:

ArchAngel432 wrote:

I showed an example where polarity does not reverse, and instead of acknowledging it you tried to explain why it was undesirable.

I was not talking about the desirability, I was talking about its existance.

DC offset exists without question, and so long as the DC component of the current flow is measured, regardless its voltage or amperage, its polarity and current flow direction do not change; that's what DC is. However, regardless what the DC component of the energy flow might be, the AC component of that energy flow behaves in no manner other than that in which AC behaves, again regardless the AC voltage or amperage. DC is what DC is, AC is what AC is, DC does what DC does, and AC does what AC does, period. I explained that in some circuits DC offset is undesirable, in some circuits inconsequential, and in some circuits a necessary working component of the desired energy usage product. Your assertion that " ... AC with DC offset which is Alternating Current, but does not change polarity" was incorrect. Whether or not this alledged "Sully DC" is anything is entirely beside the point relevant to this particular subdiscussion; you made a statement which has been refuted.

Now, as to "Sully DC", I remain skeptical. Having carefully looked at the drawings and perusing the information available on Sullivan's website, I remain skeptical. From what I know of electromagnetic field theory (which includes and accounts for "multidimensional currents", btw) and of circuit design and application, there's nothing there - apart, perhaps, and only theoretically perhaps - from an electromechanical artifact created as a consequence of AC current inducing an alternating, or vibrating, magnetic field - a resonance effect impacting the electrodes. I can understand and accept why meters connected to the described circuit would behave as they are reported to; that is precisely what would be expected given the circuit described. It would be useful to see an additional metric; that provided via a gauss meter. Also helpful would be viewing assorted parameters of the energized circuits performance overlaid on one another on an oscilloscope - I notice Mr. Sullivan provides neither, nor does he mention either.

You might find intellectual profit in cuddling up with a good book - I suggest
The Feynman Lectures on Physics: (3 vols.) Feynman, R.P., Leighton, R.B., Sands, M.
1971, Addison-Wesley, Menlo Park CA (1989 ed.)
ISBN 0201500647

Oh, and if you'd care to check out an actual, demonstrated, truly innovative, very-high-probability-of-forward-practical-application development in the field of electricity, check out This.

0 Replies

USAFHokie80 wrote:

I should say that's not the only way to determine polarity. But if you're simply speaking of "poles" it works. Electrical polarity would be determined by the electron source and the electron sink. And since electrons ALWAYS flow from the source (more negative) to the sink (less negative), there is no way to reverse the flow of electrons (electricity) without reversing the polarity.

And there is one of the points you are missing. Its ions, not electrons flowing through the medium. The flow is through a fluid medium, not a solid.

The flow of electorns through the coil electrode changes directions without switching polarity while the flow of ions between electodes does not reverse directions. The multi-dimensional fluid nature of the electrolyte allows a change of direction without reversing directions.

0 Replies

Quote:

How is "changing direction" any different than "reversing direction" ?
Either way, when a reverse of direction takes place, the polarity is also reversed since polarity is determined by the EMF generated by the moving current.

In a one dimensional world the only way to change direction is to reverse direction, but thats not true in a milti-dimensional world.

The change in current direction through the coil-electrode is accomplished by switching which end of the wire is connected to the anode or cathode, but current flow between electrodes across the fluid medium does not reverse directions. Anode and Cathode do not switch, but direction does change.

0 Replies

As one with a Physics major, I must concur with Timber.

... and for anyone who still entertains the idea that there is any validity to this cockamamie theory, I would point out that a wire is quite one dimensional.

In a wire there are only two directions... and changing direction is most certainly the same thing as reversing direction.

And as my son learned in 6th grade science... electrons move from a negative "pole" to a positive "pole". Changing polarity is also the exact same thing as reversing (and thus changing) direction.

0 Replies

http://www3.upload2.net/download/mfVqRliO3rH13v6/sdcva.jpg

Note that current flow through the wire changes direction without changing polarity, and curent flow through the fluid medium does not reverse direction.

0 Replies

Quote:

... and for anyone who still entertains the idea that there is any validity to this cockamamie theory, I would point out that a wire is quite one dimensional.

An electrode is not, and neither is a fluid medium capable of carrying current such as water with an electrolyte added.

0 Replies

The flow of electricity is via electrons. Ions are simply atoms/molecules with an extra or missing ion, but in either case, they are still acting as an electron donor or a sink. This is basic chemistry/physics. The flow of electrons CAN NEVER be reversed without reversing the sink and source. Polarity is a relative term to describe the negativity of the "ends" of a circuit. The "positive" (which actually means "less-negative") is the sink, the place to which electrons flow. And the "negative" (actually, more-negative of the two) is the source. For electricity to reverse its flow, you must reverse the poles, plain and simple.

0 Replies

ArchAngel432 wrote:

Quote:
... and for anyone who still entertains the idea that there is any validity to this cockamamie theory, I would point out that a wire is quite one dimensional.

An electrode is not, and neither is a fluid medium capable of carrying current such as water with an electrolyte added.

I don't think you even understand what you are saying. Electricity exists in 3- (rather 4-) dimensional space, but its path can still be considered 2-dimensional since it will always travel in the straightest path of least resistance. It doesn't matter if it flows through water or copper, it will still seek the most direct route. If it has to excite a few atoms into ions or plasma, such as my xenon headlights or a neon sign, that does not change the fact that it is still moving in a direct path across this medium.

0 Replies

Quote:

It doesn't matter if it flows through water or copper, it will still seek the most direct route.

http://i11.photobucket.com/albums/a175/archangel432/sdcva.jpg

Electrons will flow through the wires to all points where the electrode is in contact with the fluid medium. In the second half of the cycle the current flow comes from the other end of the wire.

It changes direction without changing polarity, and the flow across the medium does not reverse directions.

0 Replies

USAFHokie80 wrote:

The flow of electricity is via electrons. Ions are simply atoms/molecules with an extra or missing ion, but in either case, they are still acting as an electron donor or a sink. This is basic chemistry/physics. The flow of electrons CAN NEVER be reversed without reversing the sink and source. Polarity is a relative term to describe the negativity of the "ends" of a circuit. The "positive" (which actually means "less-negative") is the sink, the place to which electrons flow. And the "negative" (actually, more-negative of the two) is the source. For electricity to reverse its flow, you must reverse the poles, plain and simple.

The point Mr Sullivan is making that, the way the four terminals are switched, the current WITHIN ONE ELECTRODE reverses direction, and has zero average value at the center. At the same time, the voltage BETWEEN ELECTRODES is a constant DC value (ignoring switching transients). Thus "multidirectional DC" refers simultaneously to the multidirectional intra-electrode current and the single direction inter-electrode current.

0 Replies

ArchAngel432 wrote:

The point Mr Sullivan is making ...

The point is we been had, kids; a rigorous search for "Sully DC" turns up not one, zero, zip, nada, zilch, as in "Ain't none", reference on any legitimate journal, academic, or professional website, absolutely no independently reproduced and verified experiment, no mention whatsoever, in fact, anywhere one reasonably would expect to find news of scientific breakthrough. However a buncha hits turn up in all sortsa open membership/open viewership forums (such as this one), newsgroups, and discussion boards, some dating back to March of this year and continuing throgh the present, in many if not mosta which a posting member having a username some cognative of "ArchAngel" is a principle player. In some forums there appears as well someone purporting to be Sullivan himself. In the discussions taking place in venues frequented by serious heavy-duty science/electricity/electronics sorts, skepticism is too kind a term, by far, for the responses generated by "Scully DC".

In short, we been spam scammed ... about all that's been accomplished in this thread is to toss some feed at a troll.

0 Replies

Just like I always say.

Everything that is true is on the Internet... but not everything that is on the Internet is true.

0 Replies

You were warned timber-

Quote:

Oh timber- you are so,so expert that I almost wish I was a lady and could become inflamed by your display of expertise. It must be really,really exciting and it really,really is so frustrating to be missing out on it just because my old man hiccuped on the vinegar stroke.

It's the old "pop-out" trick.

0 Replies

Quote:

The point is we been had, kids; a rigorous search for "Sully DC" turns up not one, zero, zip, nada, zilch, as in "Ain't none", reference on any legitimate journal, academic, or professional website, absolutely no independently reproduced and verified experiment, no mention whatsoever, in fact, anywhere one reasonably would expect to find news of scientific breakthrough.

Thats because its a new discovery, and Mr. Sullivan has not published a paper on it yet. One is in the works along with a shorter rebuttal to the X-Bridge critics. First the patent, then the lecture and paper, then the independent reproduction, and finally media recognition. It would be nice if the process were in a later stage, but you can still expect support and verification from a reputable PhD soon. Applications will likely be limited, but where it is employed you simply cannot do it any other way.

0 Replies

Uhhh-hunh, yeahsure ... we understand. C'mon back and play again when you have multiply independently reproduced and verified corroborative evidence.

See ya, and do take care now.

0 Replies

timber-

What's the point of-

Quote:

reproduced and verified corroborative evidence.

when you can do assertions with a stamp of the foot like Setanta can't stop himself doing due to factors too trite to mention on a science and mathematics thread.

0 Replies

Multi-Dimensional Electrical Current - Sully DC [SDC]

Related Topics

Quick Links

My Account

able2know