Ah, sorry.
What is depicted are two toroids around a coaxial conductor. When the current within the coax and the current on the braid are exactly equal and opposite, the toroid sees NO net current flowing through. When the low level input signal is being transferred from source to amp, nothing happens.
When a ground current is flowing on the shield conductor but not within the core wire, the toroid sees the net current flowing through it. As a consequence, the wire on the input side of the opamp will pick up the signal that is on the shield conductor. The left hand toroid is acting like a 1:1 transformer comprised of two one turn coils.
The opamp is configured to drive the right hand 1:1 transformer toroid using the signal it amplifies, that of the error input to it's terminals. The net result is, the opamp will attempt to zero it's input error signal by driving the ground loop current in the opposite direction. The worst case current I've ever heard about was bill whitlock, 58 mA AC. A single chip solution should be sufficient for this design.
This design can be used standalone, it can be used in a source box or an amp box, it can be used to reduce pin one currents in a balanced pro configuration.
Be careful not to split out 2 unbalanced coax cables however, as the return signals in an umbalanced stereo rig will split 50/50 back to the source. In that case, either put both rca's through the toroids together, or put the device on the power cord.
Sorry, I thought the design was obvious to the most casual of observers..😀
(I couldn't resist that).
jn
Last edited:
hitswire.
I think we all or most of use have no problem with John discussing his circuit topology and how he got there. It is only when he throws in for some reason the other things like Bybee or carbon conductive wires that the feathers get ruffled and we get into some nonsensical back and forth here. I don't know if he does that on purpose or for fun or what but it never gets past those who wait to pounce on that stuff. It would be like me discussing the evolution of astrophysics and then adding that the sun revolves around the earth. Messes up the entire conversation and takes it into the rants that you just saw.
I think we all or most of use have no problem with John discussing his circuit topology and how he got there. It is only when he throws in for some reason the other things like Bybee or carbon conductive wires that the feathers get ruffled and we get into some nonsensical back and forth here. I don't know if he does that on purpose or for fun or what but it never gets past those who wait to pounce on that stuff. It would be like me discussing the evolution of astrophysics and then adding that the sun revolves around the earth. Messes up the entire conversation and takes it into the rants that you just saw.
On a DSC (Differential scanning calorimeter )project I worked on some years agowe were resolving 1/10,000 of a degree with K type thermocouples, + & - measurements with absolutely no dead zone to be found.
What I'm saying is that the reaction here to JC and the ByBee reminds
me of the mainstream reaction to Copernicus and heliocentric .....
Other than Copernicus having actual analysis and evidence. 😀
I think the better analogy is the reaction to claims of perpetual motion.
Again, I can't seriously believe that John is stupid, so his periodic touting of nonsense would appear to be more a device to get attention.
I beg to differ. Feathers get sucked up into my vacuum much faster than apples. Try it yourself.
se
> Other than Copernicus having actual analysis and evidence.
At the time he was proposing his theory,
his "analysis and evidence" were given the
same type credence that ByBee gets here.
At the time he was proposing his theory,
his "analysis and evidence" were given the
same type credence that ByBee gets here.
Your history is a bit off. The main opponents were philosophers and theologians (most notably Tolosani), not scientists (such as there were in those days). The theory and evidence were so powerful that within a few decades, the basics of his theory had overtaken all of astronomy.
Comparing that to a fraud like Bybee (who offers zero evidence and analysis and whose claims have been experimentally shown to be false) is rather ridiculous.
Comparing that to a fraud like Bybee (who offers zero evidence and analysis and whose claims have been experimentally shown to be false) is rather ridiculous.
Absolute nonsense, Mike. There has been no analysis and evidence presented by Bybee.
I'm really getting sick of people trying to equate quacks, charlatans and frauds to the likes of Copernicus and Galileo.
se
Yes, Copernicus and Galileo.against the Roman Catholic Church. It was shut up or die as a heretic, how is that the same as what is going on with Bybee who could but wouldn't under the guise of Top Secret military technology present any evidence of anything relating to science and Dr. Vdh coming up with something that just doesn't have any validity? Those wires may work well under the hood of your car to stop RF and that is just about it.
Here we have talked about the termination of a wires and all the other things spoken of by JN and SW and we are arguing the use of carbon high impedance cables?
Here we have talked about the termination of a wires and all the other things spoken of by JN and SW and we are arguing the use of carbon high impedance cables?
Just speculating and relating some thoughts,
but I'll rest my case lest Steve pukes ....... 🙂
but I'll rest my case lest Steve pukes ....... 🙂
Hi John, could you elaborate please...ie how did you 'zap' your cognac, and with what ?.
Dan.
Hitswire,
" Bybee lives" John Curl.
And you wonder why people think there is something wrong here? Pure BS and he knows it or should, or perhaps he really is that naive or gets some money out of this? He can not state one scientific thing to prove the things work, and others have purchased them and taken them apart and showed that they were nothing but a resistor. This is why he gets the feedback and ridicule here, sometime he more than deserves it.
I won't puke but it is very disheartening when someone like John spouts this BS. He deserves all the negative comments that he asks for.
" Bybee lives" John Curl.
And you wonder why people think there is something wrong here? Pure BS and he knows it or should, or perhaps he really is that naive or gets some money out of this? He can not state one scientific thing to prove the things work, and others have purchased them and taken them apart and showed that they were nothing but a resistor. This is why he gets the feedback and ridicule here, sometime he more than deserves it.
I won't puke but it is very disheartening when someone like John spouts this BS. He deserves all the negative comments that he asks for.
- Status
- Not open for further replies.