A Natural Asymmetry in Electrical Systems with Far-Reaching Consequences

This text demonstrates unexplored far-reaching consequences from some naturally existing
asymmetries in electricity. One such discrepancy is the disappearance of current offset even when
there is offset in the voltage applied on a resistor and capacitor connected in series. Evidence is
presented proving that when the average slope of the theoretical energy-time dependence (the
average power) is calculated accurately, voltage offsets exist whereby the input power becomes
not only practically zero but can be of negative value despite the current flowing through the
circuit. In other words, it is a standard, albeit overlooked, electrical phenomenon that by just
simply adjusting the voltage offset not only can energy spent per unit time be made less than the
energy produced per unit time but the input energy can be made to practically vanish and even
be negative.

It has been established that constructions exist interval, is

which allow for a spontaneous displacement under Z T
the action of a conservative force. This means that it f rom integral 1
is possible to obtain energy without depleting a pre- Pin = E 0 (t)dt =
T 0
existing energy reservoir. There has been experi-
1 T
Z
mental evidence showing the production of more en- A sin(ωt + Θ)(F + Vm sin(ωt))dt =
ergy than the energy spent in some electric circuits. T 0
The apparent cause for such disbalance could be that 1
A sin(ωt + Θ)(F + Vm sin(ωt))|T0 =


under certain conditions part of the input energy that T
would match the output energy? , is saved. AV mcos(Θ)
Here we show that such possibility is a phe- = const (3)
2
nomenon inherent in the essence of electricity.
The function expressing the input energy at any Alternatively, the integration can be done even by first
time τ due to flowing of current Iin driven by voltage carrying out the integration numerically using Simp-
Vin is son’s rule and then applying the Riemann way of solv-
ing the integral. Thus, for 1000 element discretization
it will be
f rom integral
Z τ Pin =
E(τ ) = Iin Vin dt = Z T
0 1 @1003 − @3
Z τ A sin(ωt+Θ)(F +Vm sin(ωt))dt =
T 0 T
A sin(ωt + Θ)(F + Vm sin(ωt))dt (1) (4)
0

where @1003 and @3 are the values of the integral

in the spreadsheet cell 1003 and 3 in the column @
The first derivative (slope) of that function at a given containing the results from the integration.
point τ within the interval [0, T ] is On the other hand, since, as seen, A sin(ωτ +Θ)(F +
Vm sin(ωτ )) is the slope of the function E(t) at time
τ the average slope (the average power) within the
interval [0, T ] can be expressed as:
Z τ
d
E 0 (τ ) = Iin Vin dt = Iin Vin |t=τ = f rom
Pin series
=
dτ 0
n    !
A sin(ωτ + Θ)(F + Vm sin(ωτ )) (2) 1 X T T
lim Asin ωi + Θ F + Vm sin ωi
n→∞ n+1 i=0
n n
(5)
where Vm is the amplitude of the applied voltage, V;
As is known, the value of the integral (eq.(3)) is the
F is the offset voltage, V; ω = 2πf is the angular
limit of the corresponding Riemann sum, while series
velocity, rad s−1 ; f = T1 is the frequency, Hz; T is
(eq.(5)) is not a Riemann sum, although it expresses
the period, s; t is the time, s; A = q Vm 1 2 and the same thing as (eq.(3)) (respectively, eq.(4)). Never-
R2 +( 2πf C )

1
 theless, it is expected that eq.(3) (respectively, eq.(4))
Θ = arctan R2πf C . and eq.(5) should produce the same result which, in-
Therefore, the average value of the first deriva- deed, they do when the offset voltage is F = 0. How-
tive (slope) of that function within the entire interval ever, contrary to the expectation, when the offset volt-
[0, T ], which constitutes the average power within this age is F 6= 0, unlike the integral, eq.(3) and eq.(4), the
30

series, eq.(5) show a result which is dependent on F . The first derivative (slope) of that function at a given
This can only be checked numerically since there point τ within the interval [0, T ] is
is no analytical way to check what the series (eq.(5)) Z τ
converges to. Numerical methods are based inher- 0 d 2 2
Rt=τ = A2 sin2 (ωτ +Θ))

ently on partitioning the studied interval [0, T ]. How- E (τ ) = Iin Rdt = Iin
dτ 0
ever, when considering numerical calculation, one (7)
should note that too small a partition would lead to
too rough an approximation while too large a parti- Therefore, the average value of the first derivative
tion will lead to greater rounding errors as well as (slope) of that function within the entire interval [0, T ],
floating point errors. Therefore, a partition P = 1000 which constitutes the average power within this inter-
is chosen as a compromise. val, is
It can easily be seen by using a standard spread-
T
sheet program that when numerical integration is
Z
f rom integral 1
carried out for P = 1000 both for offset F 6= 0 and for Pout = E 0 (t)dt =
T 0
offset F = 0, the result, as was already noted, is prac- Z T
1
tically constant for all values of F and is practically A2 sin2 (ωt + Θ)dt =
equal to the value AVm cos(Θ) = const of the integral in T 0
2
eq.(3). RA2
= const (8)
The more accurate numerical calculation, namely 2
that of the series in eq.(5), for the same P = 1000 and
Alternatively, as when calculating Pin
offset F = 0 also gives as a result a value practically
equal to AVm cos(Θ)
2 = const. Z T
f rom integral 1
However, when that more accurate numerical cal- Pout = RA2 sin2 (ωt + Θ) dt =
culation, namely, the numerical calculation of the se- T 0
ries in eq.(5), is carried out for the same P = 1000 @1003 − @3
(9)
but the offset now is F 6= 0, then the result becomes T
a function of the offset F . For values of F > 0 the
series becomes more and more positive with the in- On the other hand, since, as seen, A2 sin2 (ωτ + Θ) is
crease of F . The opposite is observed when F < 0. the slope of the function E(t) at time τ the average
For values of F < 0 not only is the series tending slope (the average power) within the interval [0, T ]
towards zero, but after a certain F value it becomes can be expressed as:
negative. The negative value of power means that n  !
power is returned to the source despite the fact that f rom series 1 X T
Pout = lim RA2 sin2 ωi + Θ
there is current flowing through the circuit generat- n→∞ n + 1 i=0 n
ing positive output power I 2 R. (10)
Of course, there are physical limits to the de- The values of eq.(10) can be calculated numerically
crease (respectively increase) of F . However, the ob- for the given R, C, Vm , ω and Θ. For accuracy, the
f rom series
served dramatic effects in changing the Pin value of the momentary (Pin )t = (Iin Vin )t and (Pout )t
value, (eq.(5)), compared to the constant value of the 2
= (Iin R)t must be calculated individually, point by
f rom integral
Pin , (eq.(3)), and, most importantly, com- point, for every t within [0, T ] at the chosen level of
pared to the output power I 2 R, are observed even discretization (the higher the level of discretization
at modest physically viable values of Vm and F , on the higher the accuracy) and the results averaged
the order of volts. over the interval.

Discussing Pout Conclusions Pertaining to Experiments

Although the point of this paper is already made It should be noted that experimentally, provided
we may also observe the output power both from the current is measured with a Hall effect current
f rom integral f rom series probe which would ensure high accuracy and the
integral, Pout and from series Pout .
We can express these quantities in the same way we value of the Ohmic resistance and the capacitance are
did for the input. well known, the correct measurement of voltage is of
The function expressing the output energy at any crucial importance if one is to answer positively as to
time τ due to flowing of current Iin through the re- whether or not the data shows the effect discussed
sistance R is above. At that, it is not so much the amplitude of the
Z τ Z τ voltage as is the voltage phase shift with respect to
E(τ ) = 2
Iin Rdt = A2 sin2 (ωt + Θ)dt (6) the current that has to be measured with utmost accu-
0 0 racy. It can be seen from the theoretical calculations
 31

described above that while the percent difference in

TABLE I: Numerical solution of the integrals and the series
the measured amplitude, which is well within the er-
ror limits of a typical 8-bit oscilloscope, compared to
the actual amplitude, will only give ostensible Pout in
Item Quantity Value∗∗ Ref.
excess of Pin no more than just percents, the same
percent inaccuracy in voltage phase shift would cause 1 Pin = AVm cos(Θ)
2
2.26969283346722×10−6 eq.(3)
ostensible Pout in excess of Pin , already on the order 2 Pin = @1003−@3
T
2.26969283348716×10−6 eq.(4)
AV ERAGE(@3:@1003)∗
of times. 3 Pin 2.26742540805888×10−6 eq.(5)
AV ERAGE(@3:@1003)
Now that the reality of excess energy production 4 Pin 3.06451263274804×10−11 eq.(5)
2
has been established definitively, based on the very 5 Pout = RA 2.26969283346724×10−6 eq.(8
2
essence of the electric phenomena, one may suggest 6 Pout = @1003−@3 2.26969283346722×10−6 eq.(9)
T
that it very well may be that some of the observed AV ERAGE(@1003:@3)∗
7 Pout 2.27196010963275×10−6 eq.(10)
experimental effects when offset F = 0 could be due AV ERAGE(@1003:@3)
to experimental errors. The origin of these errors, if 8 Pout 2.27196010963275×10−6 eq.(10)
at all, can now be clearly identified. One possible ex- ∗
no offset; i.e. F = 0
∗∗
perimental error may be due to the phase shift which raw data from spreadsheet
the voltage probe measures in its own circuit, which
may differ and yet be attributed to the circuit under
study, as if it is the actual phase shift of V with re-
spect to I in that circuit under study. inherent in the phenomena.
On the other hand, even for offset value F = 0 (no It should also be noted that the production of en-
offset, that is) factors external to the RC circuit such ergy in excess of the energy spent observed here
as the transformer core or a way of winding the coils can be explained away only if one proves that while
(double-wound, for instance) may cause the phase be- spreadsheet programs such as Excel give correct re-
tween I and V to acquire values sults at every other possible calculation it suddenly
 in the studied circuit starts to be inaccurate when the offset F in eq.(5) be-
1
different from Θ = arctan R2πf C , corresponding comes non-zero. Obviously, it is untenable to suggest
to the values of the RC circuit components. Thus, that such proof can be presented and therefore this
the new phase shift, different from the phase shift ex- study adds to the categorical proof based on analy-
pected for the concrete R and C values of the studied sis of the magnetic propulsor? ,? and electrolysis in
circuit, can lead to a dramatic effect expressing itself an un-divided cell? that it is possible to violate the
in the obtainment of true excess energy. Such gen- principle of conservation of energy.
uine excess energy even at F = 0 has been observed
experimentally in a number of cases, in transformers,
coils with cores, air coils, double-wound coils etc. It Numerical Example
is felt, however, that more precise measurements are
needed to protect these findings from being vulner- Here are the formuli to check the above conclu-
able to criticism which may dilute the firm findings sions directly in a spreadsheet such as Excel based
presented in this paper, conclusively proving that the on a sample physically consistent set of values. These
possibility to produce excess energy is inherent in the values could be as follows: resistance R = 9.9244Ω,
electric phenomena. capacitance C = 115pF, frequency f = 800kHz, volt-
age amplitude Vm = 1.17V and voltage offset F =
−3.356V . The current values are in column B of the
Discussion spreadsheet

As can be seen from this analysis, the possibility
to obtain more energy than the energy spent is in-
herent in electricity phenomena and it should be ex-
plored along these lines. As seen, the excess energy
in the output when F 6= 0 (the slight excess energy
seen in Table I even when F = 0item 7 compared
to item 3is not even mentioned here in view of the
dramatic excess energy values that can be obtained
when F < 0) is obtained due to saving of energy from
the input. This is exactly what happens in ’cold fu-
sion’, electrochemically. Here we have another so
far unnoticed example of this way of producing ex-
cess energy due to the discrepancies or asymmetries
=(1.17/SQRT(9.9244^2+(1/(2*PI()*800000*
0.000000000115))^2))*SIN((2*PI()*800000*A3)+
ATAN(1/(9.9244*2*PI()*800000*0.000000000115)))
and the voltage values are in column C
=-3.356+(1.17*SIN((2*PI()*800000*A3)))
for times starting at time t = 0 in cell A3 with an incre-
ment of 1.25×10−9 s pasted up to cell A1003. Each cell
in column D calculates the momentary input power,
momentary
Pin . This, for instance is the calculation in
cell D3
=B3*C3
32

while each cell in column E calculates the momentary =(F1003-F3)/(A1003-A3)

momentary
output power, Pout . This, for example, is the
calculation in cell E3
=(G1003-G3)/(A1003-A3)
=B3*B3*9.9244
On the other hand, cells H5 and I5 calculate the aver-
The cells in F and G columns calculate the input and age value of all the momentary power values in the
output energy up to the corresponding time, calcu- cells of columns D and E, respectively, thus producing
lated after the the integration of the momentary val- the value of the average input and output power.
momentary momentary
ues of Pin in column D and Pout in
column E, respectively. This is an example of such
calculation done in cells F3 and G3, respectively =AVERAGE(D3:D1003)

=I2+(ABS((A4)-(A3))*(((D3)+(D2))/2))
=J2+(ABS((A4)-(A3))*(((G3)+(G2))/2))
The H4 and I4 cells calculate back the value of the
Riemann integral from that last and the first value of
the energy.
=AVERAGE(E3:E1003)
At the end the ratios = I4/H4 and = I5/H5 can be
calculated in cells J4 and J5, respectively, of the PPout
in
calculated via integration as well as through the se-
ries. The values obtained are presented in Table I