There ARE NO "overunity circuits" !!! Using pancake, Tesla bifilar, solenoidal, multilayer or any other kind of coils, stimulated in any way at all. NONE.

Except that the YouTube and many forums are full of them. We can for example ask Nelson Rocha what he thinks about it - he already got nice money for it and he isn't still prosecuted as a cheater. So that one can be sure, that people who did pay him (and another ones, who are still paying him for similar project) aren't idiots. IMO you're just getting jealous about it and you're upset, that you weren't successful with it yet. You're not the first guy, who is behaving in the same way here. The people with highest number of posts are just these ones most frustrated with their effort.

Another question is, what the people who don't believe that overunity exist are looking for at just overunity forum? There are so many other forums, much better suited for their orientation - why they're visiting just this one? Why just the people with highest number of posts are most opposing the overunity here? Why they're wasting their time like this? Such a people are suspicious for me automatically, because they don't apparently do what they claim they believe in. Once the people don't do what they believe, then the money or struggle for power are usually involved. Are they agents of fossil fuel lobby, mainstream science trolls or what? At any case, such a people are diluting/polluting all overunity discussions being OT automatically. If you don't like cats, you shouldn't post in forums about cats, because this forum is designed for people favoring and interested about cats. Of course, it's possible you're liking dogs more and this is normal - why not. But after then you should visit forum about dogs - or you're not normal anymore.

Every strange behavior has its hidden reason. At any case, I tend to ignore the opinion of people, who don't act according to their own words and proclamations. Or better to say, I tend to believe in exactly the opposite of what they're telling me.

Partzman:

I find it hard to believe that you are not questioning your data.  The period of the pulse train is about 260 nanoseconds.  You are sampling at 2.5 GHz.  One nanosecond corresponds to one gigahertz.  So you have about 650 samples per period of the pulse train.  That sounds half-decent but look at the high-frequency ringing in your waveforms.  They are barely being sampled enough to give me confidence that you are not accumulating errors.  Plus all of your conversion on these scopes is a rough 8-bits, right?  There is another source of error.

Now, are the sampling errors and very possible subsampling errors and the quantization errors all supposed to average out and cancel each other out?  I think that might be the case but only if your trigger event time is random.  But if you are triggering on the falling edge of the square wave I am not sure if that is the case.  For example, the trigger might be synchronous enough with the waveform such that you get consistent subsampling errors on the very high frequency ringing that is in one direction only.

Now, I am no metrology expert by any means.  But let me just throw this idea out at you.  It's probably not the best way to do it with the current state of the art, but I think that at least the principles I will state are sound.

For all I know the input power or the power supplied to the device under test could be accurately measured with a Clarke Hess power meter but I don't know anything about them so I will go the analog route.  Presumably you can make a very accurate measurement of the capacitance of a large capacitor bank.  I have seen Luc's amazing volt meter with five digits of precision after the decimal point.  So suppose that you will run an experiment for 10 minutes where the energy provided to the device under test comes from a large capacitor bank that discharges from say six volts to say five volts, all measured with five digits of precision after the decimal point.   So we will presume that you have a quite accurate measurement of the energy supplied to the device under test.

I am going to assume that you can measure the ON resistance of the Ixys high speed fet driver circuit and make an accurate measurement of how much energy is burnt off in the switching circuit over the 10-minute test.  I am going to assume that the net energy delivered to the device under test is the supplied capacitor bank energy minus the switching circuit energy.

So for the output energy you have a special closed test tube with embedded electrical contacts so you can make a nice clean connection to the 50 ohm 1% Caddock non-inductive film resistor which is sitting in a precise amount of mineral oil.  You know the thermal capacity of the test tube to very high accuracy.  You know the thermal capacity of the mineral oil to very high accuracy.  Naturally the test tube is sitting in some kind of professional-grade insulated box.

So you run the test for the ten minutes, then take out the test tube and lightly agitate it for five seconds, the wait another five seconds, and then take an accurate temperature reading of the test tube.  Then crunch the numbers from the temperature difference, and the thermal capacity of the test tube, the oil, and the resistor, and determine the thermal energy.

Do ten runs like that with all of the required error bars and see what you get.  If you saw over unity like that, then at least two other competent individuals with the proper equipment would have to replicate your results.  Then there might be something interesting going on.

Just my two cents worth.

MileHigh

Thanks for the clear explanation MH.  I have used your analogy of a coil and flywheel several times times since you first told me about it several years ago.  Most people understand that analogy better than the conventional explanation.  The only exception seems to be the ones that stubbornly stick to the idea that the current reverses when the coil discharges.  For some people there is no hope they will ever learn.

Carroll

@Citfa,

I have a quote from you on my "flyback current reversal" thread over at Energetic Fórum as Allen Burgess, where you impudently state that current runs in one direction and one direction only in the Ruhmkopf coil secondary. Do you still cling to that outrageous and pig-headed claim?

@Citfa,

I have a quote from you on my "flyback current reversal" thread over at Energetic Fórum as Allen Burgess, where you impudently state that current runs in one direction and one direction only in the Ruhmkopf coil secondary. Do you still cling to that outrageous and pig-headed claim?

So... you are EF's Allen Burgess? That explains a lot, for sure. You get yet another ROFL, and nobody will ever look at your posts here in quite the same light again.

@ MH, TK, Zephir,

Yeah, you guys are right!  Only a fool would rely on stupid scope measurements and I wanna know, how do these guys at Tektronix sleep at night?

pm

Lol   Nowadays we are arrested for having and not having.
If you do not show them any shot scope, they would ask for those same shot scope ...

Then they will say that it needs to be validated by people competent for this work ... I can only think of someone with enough knowledge to do this validation, MH or TK Team marvel. or should i call cheezburger team ?

Nelson Rocha

The oscilloscope is great until you're tinkering and if you need to find a working point of transistor or resonance frequency of circuit - but once you claim overunity, then the self-looped (self-running) circuit cannot beat any preliminary test. The power measurements are notoriously unreliable due to (displacement) power factor poorly defined at high frequencies, crosstalks of signal into scope probe and so on..

an inductor does not give you OU so why should a pancake coil give you OU

Because the pancake coil has the evanescent scalar wave phenomena enhanced - whereas the normal inductors have them suppressed. The tunneling of EM wave through evanescent field runs with superluminal speed, whereas EM wave in classical circuits always propagates with speed of light or lower. The overunity is extradimensional, normal causality violating effect in essence and the normal spreading of EM waves along conductors cannot achieve it.

Because the pancake coil has the evanescent scalar wave phenomena enhanced - whereas the normal inductors have them suppressed. The tunneling of EM wave through evanescent field runs with superluminal speed, whereas EM wave in classical circuits always propagates with speed of light or lower. The overunity is extradimensional effect in essence and the spreading of EM waves along conductors cannot achieve it.

Before you get into your esoterica I suggest that you read the thread that Carroll linked to and try to understand how a coil discharges.  The dawning of the Age of Aquarius is going to have to wait.