What I'm presenting is reality.

What I'm presenting has been analyzed theoretically, has been tested experimentally and can be demonstrated at once using PSpice. This is the only electrical solid-state device that I know of that is conclusively proven to be OU.

The experimental data are available. @teslaalset gave a link to one such set of data which I've posted here during my studies last summer. Anyone with a decent scope can check it out at any time. Doesn't take much (except for having the adequate equipment, of course).

The simulation with PSpice confirms what was found experimentally. That's to be expected, otherwise none of the major universities using PSpice would ever consider it as a teaching and research tool.

The effect I've found has been missed (or, perhaps, deliberately suppressed), although it's inherent in the very essence of the theory of electricity. Like I said, there are other area of physics, other than the theory of electricity, with similar omissions which I'll discuss in due time.

Like I said, I'm posting it here because this is a place where I traditionally do the posting. Other than that I don't see at this point the reason to preach to the converted by going to other OU forums. What I'm doing, though, is to go outside of the OU community into the mainstream. The response so far is either outright ban or lack of words. I'll be reporting further down the line what's happening with these efforts of mine. Just pay attention.

Did I say that or I said exactly the opposite? I'm approaching the mainstream which is the real peer-review. Preaching to the converted is not peer-review. Basking in the warmth of approval by like souls is easy. Go fight the enemy, that's the real thing. That's what I'm doing.

As for posting the experimental data, I already said I've done that and @teslaalset gave a link to it. Probably, now that I'm saying it the second time you'll manage somehow to hear it.

My finding has to become mainstream. That's the goal. I like all these fellows and I may post something there eventually but that won't help for the mainstream to accept it. Other avenues are to be sought and that's what I'm trying to figure out now.

@Omnibus . A couple of observations from a self confessed numbskull . First , the circuit diagram in your reply number44 .Is that not the circuit of Prof Turturs Zero point machine ? In his set up the power source is a simple permanent magnet alternator , that can absorb energy sent back to it by speeding up . In post 49 , you talk about a circuit that produces heat from a resistor , whilst recharging its own battery . Isn't that what Rosemary Ainsley is demonstrating on the 14th day of this month ?

No, not at all. You have to understand what I've done first. I'm studying the power balance of the simplest known, well-studied circuits -- RC and LRC. What I'm discovering is that the standard theory of electricity has hidden sides which have been overlooked (or maybe suppressed). There's nothing esoteric, fantastic or non-standard in my studies. They are standard electric theory in every possible respect, properly analyzed. The Joule heating across a dissipative (active) resistor is well known. Returning power to the source by reactive elements is also well known.What has been missed is that there are intrinsic asymmetries in these standard circuits, especially due to the presence of capacitance, which allow for the asymmetric return of power to the source together with the release of Joule heat. As a matter of fact, I have discovered similar production of excess energy due to saving from the input many years ago during electrolysis of water in an undivided electrolysis cell. I have published in peer-reviewed journals and even used to have a patent on that (the institution that I worked for at that time made me file for a patent despite my very well known dislike of patents). As a matter of fact exactly that production of excess energy due to saving from the input is the major effect in the so-called 'cold fusion' (in addition, probably,to some minor nuclear effects). I did not continue with these studies because I found out that not only the public at large but even self-proclaimed experts such as those at MIT and Caltech are just not up to the task. It's a difficult matter which even the so-called experts don not understand well, it turned out. I met with such incompetence in some ostensibly prestigious institutions that it was just appaling. As a matter of fact, I also published in peer-reviewed journals analysis of their own data which was showing positive effect despite their conclusion to the contrary due to incorrect assessment of their own data as well as outright fraud.

Anyway, I can tell you a lot about this but what I really wanted to tell you is that Istarted looking for some simpler and more comprehensive analogs of the 'cold fusion' effect and that is when I found the a simple device such as a magnetic propulsor isalso an OU device. I went further in my studies and after visiting Steorn in Dublin I decided to replicate what they were doing because I was veryimpressed by what I saw there. So, step by step (you can see it in thelink @teslaalset provided) I started finding out that there is OU effect in transformers, then in coils with cores, air coils and so on and so forth until I stumbled onto the simplest of the simple circuits -- RC and LRC. I found with astonishment that the power balance studies, if there had been such at all (mind you, friends at MIT and elsewhere told me that the professors there won't touch measuring power balance of a transformer with a ten foot pole; student are never given hands on assignments to that effect and are only taught generalities and models), were all flawed. Across the board. Hard to believe but that's the sad truth. Obviously, such studies are strongly discouraged and now we know why.

In addition to the studies I mentioned I found a whole set of problems in the fundamentals of physics which, as I said, I will discuss in due time.

To finish this rant, let me mention again that so far there hasn't been any convincing demonstration of OU other than the studies in question and many claimants are incurring more damage than good to the cause of OU research putting a bad name on it with their aggressive incompetence. As for zpe, there is no such real effect. I've said it more than once, zpe is just a defficiency in quantum mechanics. Quantum mechanics (unlike the so-called Einstein's "theory" of relativity which an ugly nonsense) has vary progressive sides to it although there are many aspects which are non-physical. One of these aspects is zpe. I can pinpoint some other problems in qm and all these stem from the uncritical acceptance of the complete physicality of the Hilbert space. So, one thing for future study is to delineate the boundaries within which Hilbert space is physica. Now, that, of course, is a subject of a separate conversation. For now I think to end here and if you have more questions you're welcome to present them here.