Why? I don't think he was talking about empty circuits.

Isn't the point of this thread to understand how variations of voltage multiplier configurations work.

Have you not seen his video, he removed everything from the circuit, and still only the side opposite to ground oscillates in the simulation.

 

Have you not seen his video, he removed everything from the circuit, and still only the side opposite to ground oscillates in the simulation.

That's why I use my brain to reason instead of trusting simulation. It's just picking a ground reference as zero potential most likely.

 

That's why I use my brain to reason instead of trusting simulation.

That is exactly what i meant.

 

That is exactly what i meant.

Sure, it's not a wrong result from point A to point B. You just need to understand the simulation context of the measurement result.

 

Sure, it's not a wrong result from point A to point B. You just need to understand the simulation context of the measurement result.

There is nothing to understand, simulation is misleading.

 

I don't understand why changing the ground REFERENCE changes which side oscillates, nothing changes in the circle, it's just a reference.

Changing a reference changes everything. There’s a car on a highway, traveling 60mph.

You are on the other side, also traveling 60mph. The other car appears to be traveling at 120mph.

Now you change the reference. You are behind the other car traveling 60mph. The other car appears to be standing still.

The only change is the reference. Yet is the car traveling 120mph or standing still?

 

Changing a reference changes everything. There’s a car on a highway, traveling 60mph.

You are on the other side, also traveling 60mph. The other car appears to be traveling at 120mph.

Now you change the reference. You are behind the other car traveling 60mph. The other car appears to be standing still.

The only change is the reference. Yet is the car traveling 120mph or standing still?

It's not the same. Take a good look at what happens in the simulation and how it relates to reality. It's misleading.

 

All I can do at this point is to just drop the microphone and walk away. The simulation is really not misleading, it's not I promise, but I don't know how to break it down any further for you to see what's going on. ... best regards, I'm out.

 

All I can do at this point is to just drop the microphone and walk away. The simulation is really not misleading, it's not I promise, but I don't know how to break it down any further for you to see what's going on. ... best regards, I'm out.

I agree, he seems to be unable to see the forest because of the trees.

 

Regarding the multiplier Dave is also not fully correct that top side is alternating and bottom DC. If you look carefully what happens

All I can do at this point is to just drop the microphone and walk away. The simulation is really not misleading, it's not I promise, but I don't know how to break it down any further for you to see what's going on. ... best regards, I'm out.

You have not broken down or explained anything. Your simulation shows only the side opposite to "ground" oscillating and you promise it's not misleading but you never said even a single word WHY is it so. Funny.

There is no need for branching, we can simplify this circuit to just AC source and two conductors like this. Each side can be "ground" since ground is just a reference point, according to your simulation, only the side opposite to "ground" is oscillating. Do you see this is nonsense and not realistic situation. Even if ground was actual, earthed ground, both sides are still oscillating relative to measuring points as depicted above.

You are wrong.

 

I agree, he seems to be unable to see the forest because of the trees.

Firstly, don't speak of present people in third person. Secondly, if someone is not seeing the forest for the trees, it's you. I am not going to brag with my understanding in electronics and physics, but i assure you it dwarfs yours by orders of magnitude. Just saying.

 

Firstly, don't speak of present people in third person. Secondly, if someone is not seeing the forest for the trees, it's you. I am not going to brag with my understanding in electronics and physics, but i assure you it dwarfs yours by orders of magnitude. Just saying.

https://www.physicsforums.com/members/nsaspook.351035/

You misunderstand my statement completely. Because you have this genius level understanding in electronics and physics it's harder for you to see the simplistic behaviour of the simulator.

 

https://www.physicsforums.com/members/nsaspook.351035/

You misunderstand my statement completely. Because you have this genius level understanding in electronics and physics it's harder for you to see the simplistic behaviour of the simulator.

No need for sarcasam. It's not that i don't see the simplistic behaviour of the simulator, i only say it's misleading. If you claim it's not EXPLAIN IT, none of you have so far. Remember both sides are indeed oscillating relative to both measuring points.

 

You were speaking in 3rd person and made a sort of accusation. It's not that i don't see the simplistic behaviour of the simulator, i only say it's misleading. If you claim it's not EXPLAIN IT, none of you have so far. Remember both sides are indeed oscillating relative to both measuring points.

It wasn't an accusation, it was my personal observation to another person
AND
If you notice, I put a like on your comment about misleading when you posted it and edited it to delete a line about the simulation being wrong..

 

It wasn't an accusation, it was my personal observation to another person
AND
If you notice, I put a like on your comment about misleading when you posted it and edited it to delete a line about the simulation being wrong..

Your obeservation was wrong.
You should not have edited my post.

 

Your obeservation was wrong.
And i noticed it.

Peace brother. I guess I'd better restudy my electronics and physics books so one day I can be at your level.

 

Peace brother. I guess I'd better restudy my electronics and physics books so one day I can be at your level.

You know saracasm is a sign of insecurity, "brother".
And still no explanation why only one side is oscillating in most simple AC circuit.
As for your restudy, let me ask you if you know how to build a generator in which lenz in canceled, did they teach you that. Or maybe i should ask you to list 4 distinct ways in which electricity can be used to control gravity. Oh, they didn't teach you that either.. Do you even know what gravity is, not even that? Funny isn't it.

Here is another one for you, my electronic bro, are flux lines of the primary in toroid transformer cutting even a single wire of the secondary. No you say... then HOW is voltage induced? Something tells me they didn't teach you that either.. I could go on for pages but what would be the point.

 

You know saracasm is a sign of insecurity, "brother".
And still no explanation why only one side is oscillating in most simple AC circuit.
As for your restudy, let me ask you if you know how to build a generator in which lenz in canceled, did they teach you that. Or maybe i should ask you to list 4 distinct ways in which electricity can be used to control gravity. Oh, they didn't teach you that either.. Do you even know what gravity is, not even that? Funny isn't it.

Here is another one for you, my electronic bro, are flux lines of the primary in toroid tranformer cutting even a single wire of the secondary. No you say... then HOW is voltage induced? Something tells me they didn't teach you that either.. I could go on for pages but what would be the point.

Sorry, but electrogravity, are you joking? Sure, I've investigated things like lifter technology as a curious youth but it's sure not electrogravity.

 

Sorry, but electrogravity, are you joking? Sure, I've investigated things like lifter technology as a curious youth but it's sure not electrogravity.

I can't wait to see where this is going...

 

Sorry, but electrogravity, are you joking? Sure, I've investigated things like lifter technology as a curious youth but it's sure not electrogravity.

Eh, prepare for a cold shower. Here is a little preview for you what a neutral force can do with no more than 75 watts.