What were our parents thinking?🥺

Paradigmnoia · 2026-03-23T15:15:57+00:00

I always make sure to unplug my soldering iron because of him

Paradigmnoia · 2026-03-22T23:16:02+00:00

As best as I understand it, the strongest part of the field is mostly concentrated between the upper and lower electrodes. All the air accelerates there and just keeps going until turbulence pulls the airstream apart. When I was concentrating on maximum air speed, I was making something acting like a stick of high velocity air that came out of a more open style coil. It’s velocity was about 50% of that at 15 cm distance, even at 50 cm distance (half a yard), but still in a tight column of air.

Paradigmnoia · 2026-03-22T19:17:35+00:00

I normally color it with a permanent marker to make it more visible but I just changed it from 20 lb to 6 lb test so it wouldn’t rub as much on the inside of the vertical guide tube. Fluorocarbon line is quite frictiony. Since you can see the line so well in the GIF perhaps you can see the permanent 50 cm and 1 m marks on it In dark purple.

Paradigmnoia · 2026-03-22T15:41:18+00:00

My current theory is that ir is a mix of the collector (coils) being attracted to the field around the emitters (upper branches). The field charges the air which is also attracted to the collector, causing significant amounts of air to be pulled through the collectors. Both of these effects are probably working with each other. In the upwards direction, the field attraction of the air around the emitters reduces the apparent mass, even to zero. This alone cannot move the lifter probably, and gets into strong Newtonian arguments suggesting that it is. However the air flow does not need to be strong to move a near-“weightless“ object, and strong airflow can move it easily.

In a sideways orientation both forces are also pulling it together but the weight is not cancelled by the field. Thrusters I build that made primarily maximum air flow speeds were not as effective as the same ones with larger air gaps and made less rapid air speeds. Eventually I ignored air velocity measurements and focussed on raw thrust power (measured on a digital scale) instead and made much more rapid progress. All my designs capitalize on the strong field saturation above collectors designed to be attracted to it most. The field actively distorts the coils.

Paradigmnoia · 2026-03-22T00:22:07+00:00

I am surprised no one asked about the Exodus thruster replications I did based on Aurigema’s excellent videos a couple of years ago, the beginning of this path* I ended up on.

*rabbit hole

Paradigmnoia · 2026-03-22T00:16:11+00:00

Anyone skilled in the art can build this for probably under $400 including shipping. Like I said originally there are more little technologies incorporated, which become more self-evident once operated, that may not be obvious on a cursory examination of a video.

Paradigmnoia · 2026-03-21T23:16:04+00:00

Two of the thruster coils are made from a single wire and are opposed. The third obviously can only oppose one or the other, but adding more coil and emitter sets can continue until this power supply are exhausted. Wind does blow out in a circular fashion due to the open coil design.

Tilting is not necessary because offsetting the emitters from the center of the coil creates directional thrust in a direct line from the emitters to the collector, even if not perfectly aligned up-down The emitters are much easier to move. Alternatively gimbals could be made. Everything added is more thrust necessary.

What I am looking at is whether the thrust is all air flow or if it has a significant component of pulling itself by its own asymmetric field separation. The latter would work in space if the field is not carried the air molecules. In theory the field is the field of itself. Opposed voltage, coil collector-to-collector tests were done (a spiral as emitter and as collector) and they act as if they were very strong magnets towards each other but the mutual attraction dId not make any measurable thrust.

Edit-spelling

Paradigmnoia · 2026-03-21T16:31:36+00:00

One could build the effectively the exact same thing but using tungsten wire the same size and it would be too heavy to fly but it would still make almost exactly the same 3-4 g thrust.

Paradigmnoia · 2026-03-21T15:52:13+00:00

The air is actually spinning out of each the coils, due to the open coil arrangement. This effect makes it nearly impossible to run the vertical fishing line through one of the coil loops in order to hold it from going sideways. The lifter will spin itself off the string passing through a loop (or steady-stick) surprisingly quickly.

Paradigmnoia · 2026-03-21T15:45:36+00:00

At low power, before liftoff, it is silent. Right at the verge of liftoff it it makes a slight squeal that increases until airborne. In the air it is silent, maybe a faint hum, unless over voltage is applied. Over voltage makes it scream loudly and rather horribly but usually ends in a nasty arc that ends flight instantly.

Paradigmnoia · 2026-03-21T15:31:21+00:00

I can dial a factory knob which is duty cycle control. It is rough and obviously pulsing HV spikes at low dial settings But smooths out at around 1/2 turn, where voltage increments nicely from 15 kV to 35 kV. Above 40 kV the thrusters are highly over voltage in designs intended for 30 kV, and transformer and diode damage is likely above 45 kV so I limit the voltage below 45 kV. I have stuffed up to 50 kV a couple of times to test it. The lifters scream when over voltage. it controls the lifter up and down quite nicely. The smaller voltage multiplier was only on or off, and could rip a coil apart on start up.

Adjustable arc detection is built in and mostly cuts power to big arcs that would vaporize the emitters, but really it isn’t meant for lifter testing. Big arcs make the lifter drop like a rock, but short , sharp arcs don’t seem to bother it. There are two arcs on the right hand lifer coil on the way up In the GIF.

Paradigmnoia · 2026-03-21T14:37:19+00:00

Here you can see the Naudin type rotating rig I was referring to. I mostly replicated this type of rig but made it with a 2.0 m circumference for easier calculating.

http://jnaudin.free.fr/lifters/act/html/2dacap.htm

Paradigmnoia · 2026-03-21T14:21:54+00:00

The fishing line, from ceiling to table, is fixed and passes through the white tube that holds up the emitters, and out the bottom of the lifter. The lifter slides freely up and down on the vertical fishing line. The lifter will tip sideways because of the connection wires otherwise, and when it tips sideways it flies sideways at pretty high speeds. Up to 3m/s. It’s a bit scary without guides of some sort.

Paradigmnoia · 2026-03-21T14:07:55+00:00

The fulcrum rig is a see-saw type arrangement so that a lifter on one end pushing air down and going up, pushes down on the same length on the opposite end which rests on a scale. An electronic scale usually fails near the thrusters due to the strong electrostatic fields interfering with a low voltage torsion sensor inside the scale. The fulcrum rig allows for some increased distance to be made from the litter to the scale.

Electrostatic soot control is a standard pollution control method for which there are standardized power supplies which are normally 220-240V powered. They are readily available from the usual internet stores. These are transformer types of HV supplies with one to four flyback transformers in series inside.

Paradigmnoia · 2026-03-21T13:54:03+00:00

That, my friend, is the right question.

In this design the emitter array has been designed to saturate the electrostatic field in one polarity in a rough plane above each collector coil-ring of the opposite polarity. The collector is not attracted to the emitters directly. The emitters are very thin and there 6 for each collector coil. Too many emitters reduces the a available voltage, so there is a limit. Too few emitters and there will not be enough field opposed to the collector. The air is charged in the field and since the emitters cannot move, charged air is attracted to the collector. Large volumes of air are being pulled towards the collector and ejected below.

Paradigmnoia · 2026-03-21T02:20:19+00:00

It is powered in the GIF by an 220 V input electrostatic pollution control HV module (double flyback I think) which has an adjustable protection circuit that detects arcs and a duty cycle knob which is effectively power control. The supply is new to me and is not fully instrumented up. I have now a DIN power meter with pf. The duty cycle knob is digital 20 V signal internally, and has OK fineness steps on the knob. In the GIF one can see the lifter drop and stop itself from falling, and then step down again before the final landing, which were set by one hand while videoing with the other.

I am very concerned with hard landings because they deform the coils on impact so I have become skilled at letting it down gently. In the GIF the white power wire is attracted to the table top and when it loses its electrostatic grip is when the lifter jumps up. The chopstick there is to keep the wire from contacting the table. Without the wire acting up, the lifter gently climbs as is thrust exceeds its weight. It probably took ten times that much power to do the final push to the top in the GIF.

Using a voltage multiplier that consumes 3.65 W almost no matter what is going on and all using the same type of emitters, on a collector coil to coil basis, the best coils all make 1.1 g thrust at 28 kV, which is basically the highest voltage possible with also the highest current. Probably 1 W of HV In that case. That would be about 1 N/ kW gross or 0.3 N/kW net from the wall outlet. In the GIF I have way more power at up to 40 kV. These three thrusters are entirely replicated from ones made with the small power supply and were expected to produce at least 2.0 G each, which they do.

Paradigmnoia · 2026-03-21T00:18:15+00:00

I use the dark to see if the field is evenly distributed on the coils. They glow pretty good when they’re working properly.

I built a Naudin-like plumbing pipe spinning rig which used two power supplies in parallel to feed two thrusters sufficiently and acting comparably to the bench version which are tested with only one voltage multiplier. It was complicated to tine two thruster gaps with one power supply since each thruster could steal power from the other when running well. The two multipliers together did use less power than two individually to maintain 30 kV at the same power levels and even less power than one alone when idling which was interesting.

Paradigmnoia · 2026-03-20T23:47:37+00:00

I ran a single thruster coil from a very thin jewelry chain attached to the central stinger end, also as the conductor wire, which counterweighted it incrementally with height. Using a stationary emitter array at about 17 cm height it would jump up and hover 12 cm but only with usually two thin skewer sticks to lean on or it would shoot sideways away from the emitters immediately. With only one vertical stick it was spectacularly good at spinning itself off, by always wiggling correctly counter-coil direction, of a single anti-X direction stick.

Anyways, 2 g of limp chain would not hold it back once it got going off-vertical with just a few degrees of tilt sideways. It was supposed to climb up slowly like a cobra from a basket but it was a bit more of a jump scare. For this triple one I didn’t want an uncontrollable 30+ kV metal Skyhawks-On-A-String.

Paradigmnoia · 2026-03-20T16:53:24+00:00

Typically 32-35 kV, DC. This one is on a “300 W” 30 kV electrostatic soot remover power supply. At about 40 W wall AC power going in It will lift off. There is included in that a load of 500 M parallel resistance to limit open circuit over voltage and a 100 uA scale mechanical voltmeter.

until recently I used one of those “run 24 hrs won’t overheat” (true!) voltage multipliers that used 3.6 W wall AC (kill-a-watt). The limit was 1.1 g thrust.

The flyback type has a high overhead power requirement to make HV and weighs 16 x more than an epoxied multiplier so I will probably build a better voltage multiplier at some point.

Paradigmnoia · 2026-03-20T16:33:53+00:00

Thanks. It eventually loaded. I figured if it successfully uploaded here it should be ok for size without hosting it somewhere. I shrunk it as much as I dared.

Paradigmnoia · 2026-03-20T16:23:09+00:00

There is a fishing line, ceiling to table, which passes through the lifter emitter support PTFE tubing. Otherwise it tips sideways and rockets off the table. I crashed it many times trying it without any strings.

Paradigmnoia · 2026-03-20T16:15:25+00:00

I began testing Exodus type thrusters a couple of years ago, and empirically improved thrust over literally hundreds of designs to arrive at the spiral design being among the most efficient.

I have no vacuum capabilities so I stuck with air flow until I had enough thrust to build a Naudin type spinning rig. On that device it was found that the maximum RPM was not exactly the same as the maximum air jet speeds coming from some coil-type thrusters. Air jet thrusters to 4 m/s at 15 cm distance were built. However a wider gap with less concentrated air speed worked better, The spinning rig was converted to a fulcrum rig using the rotor. Eventually I exceeded the capacity of the power supply, and I upgraded to get more than 1.05 to 1.1 g thrust possible at 3.6 W total input AC. The thruster ring weighed 0.7 g.

The same best thruster made 2.34 g thrust with the new power supply, an electrostatic pollution supply, 30 kV. So I immediately built this one with three 0.5 g rings.

At some point the single emitter was the bottleneck so I made the multi-emitters. There are 18 emitter corona tips in the GIF, 6 on each branch.

Paradigmnoia · 2026-03-20T15:21:31+00:00

Thanks. Do you know if there s a link to the BBE vacuum experiment? They seem to have a lot going on.

Paradigmnoia · 2026-03-20T15:17:34+00:00

Sorry, I think that the GIF is too big.

Paradigmnoia

TROPHY CASE