Professor Jones, many congratulations for your grand-daughter!

I tested some of the circuits guys showed here but wasn't able to get smaller power inputs. My best is around 6uW. I'm really not sure there is any kind of OU or anomalous phenomena going on in these circuits just because there is a coil involved. Maybe the original circuit had some kind of special setup that produced an anomalous behavior but, there has been so many variations that i believe there is simply normal physics working. Electronic engineers work with coils for a century and don't see anomalous behaviors. I’ll wait with interest the measurements made with the calorimeter.

Watching all the efforts in this thread to minimize power consumption i asked myself the question of what is the minimum power required to dimly light a led, forgetting about coils, back EMF and OU. To answer this, i used a simple pulse generator with controllable frequency and pulse width (circuit 1). I used very very narrow pulses with low frequency and used a bipolar\mosfet transistor to switch the led on for the duration of the pulses. The result was very low power consumption.

Using circuit 2 or 3 (without coils) i was able to light a led, dimly and flickering with around 1uW. The pulse generator uses a battery but it doesn't contribute with energy/power to light the led. All the power to light the led comes from the discharging capacitor that is pre-charged to the desired voltage. In circuit 3, there is no current flowing through the mosfet gate. In circuit 2 there is current going through the base of the transistor but it isn't used to light the led.

Then i introduced a coil in the circuit and the led is lighted with the energy that is stored in the coil's core when current flows – pulse (circuit 4 and 5). The minimum power to light the led is also around 1uW.

It’s hard to compare the circuits with and without a coil since the coil generates pulses with higher voltage. Without a coil, the led brightness decreases more rapidly as the capacitor discharges, than with a coil.
Using a coil and discharging the capacitor from 2.50v to 2.00V i was able to get average input powers from 0.7 to 1.6 uW. Using a mosfet instead of a BJT did little difference. In fact it seems to decrease efficiency.

I hope this approach and info helps in some way. My feeling is that this race will achieve very efficient circuits to light leds but with no anomalous phenomena.
I propose a different contest that in my view is more interesting: Wins the one who is able to transfer the greatest percentage of energy stored in one capacitor, to a different capacitor. Several requirements can be added like the minimum energy/voltage stored in the primary capacitor.

Regards,
Jaime.

Steven

congratulations to you and your family!!

welcome to the Grandpa Club! - now it's a question of patience, waiting 'til you can share the wonders of science with a developing mind and help inspire a new generation 

of course, the waiting's not hard because in the meantime you get to rediscover those same wonders watching a new life unfold

pleased to hear that they picked up on the breech in good time

6lb 12oz - that's a good weight for a future physicist, isn't it? 

Yes, that's a good start for a future physicist.    Thanks, NP and everyone.

I must say about this energy-truth community, you guys have made me feel welcomed and quite at home.  Thank you sincerely.

@Laneal -- thank you for the circuit suggestion- - I'm anxious to try it.  May have to wait for a visit today to the future physicist, though. I should note that the baby and mother are doing well -- but are located in a hospital 70 miles distant from our small town.  So it's a bit of a drive.
We got home this am at 4:30 am, so I'm also a bit tired.  But worth the effort!

@Jaime -- interesting work.  Would you do me a favor -- I routinely place a resistor R in SERIES with the LED and measure the Power input (consumption).  I find that the LED gives out close to the same light (per my eye, not too bad a measure for sameness IMO) for R values up to 69 ohms, then the LED gets dimmer.  At R = 21 ohms, I found with a Xee2 circuit that the Pinput was right around 4 microwatts uW.
   Would you check the Pinput for 21 ohms and for 69 ohms (approx is fine) for YOUR circuit?   This will provide IMO a useful comparison.
It is true that eventually (soon) we will wish to compare Pout and Pin.
   Also, I'm not so sure that your signal generator to the base of the transistor is NOT adding energy to your circuit...  my guess is that it does add energy to the system (increasing your Pinput).  Remember, we're now working at the uW level; and transistors are not perfect gating devices.

@DrStiffler -- interesting points -- yes, agreed that:

Therefore if we could feedback via a self charging method one must insure that the circuit itself does not change it operational point as a result of a higher Vcc. If one uses a regulation method, the regulator will convert energy into lost heat via its normal operational mode.

This is a valid concern, and underscores the difficulty in self-running.
Curious -- what do you think of RomeroUK's device that uses a DC-to-DC converter and which appears to be self-running?

Now lets say we want to make heat in a load (resistor). Sounds good, but is there such a thing as cold electricity and isn't it written in the old literature that it does not produce heat? Why do LED's appear to be thermal-neutral when operating on systems such as SEC exciters? So if you want to show OU in the form of heat can it be done in a resistor or does another medium need to be present, say a gas plasma?

I don't know about "cold electricity".  But for a device to be useful, there will need to be a means to extract power from the device and if used in some appliance (etc) that extracted power will produce heat.  Right? so it seems there must be some way to extract useful heat-producing power.  Are you saying that this new energy, by its nature, will not yield useful heat-producing power?

Oh -- photos of our physicist later.  The ones we took in the wee hours of the morning did not turn out too well...

 You know one thing that I have noticed in all of these systems it that there is a conversion to a higher voltage potential of a high current storage device. This conversion based on the magnitude of the transformer gets to a point where very little is lost in the transfer but they get an extreme potential raise that can be transformed yet again to net a gain in current.
 What that point is has yet to be established but I think Tesla was onto something with his "magnifying transformer" that he used to simulate static discharges of the Wimshurst machines. With statics we all know surface area is the most important aspect and I believe it is the same with this technology.

 You are going in the right direction looking for the lowest input because if you could get it to that point it would start to pull in tremendous potentials from the surrounding area.

 I had great luck in using a device that the good Doctor was researching a while back. We coined the phrase "Captret" and it seemed to connect with the source without pulling to much current. Although I don't believe this is the correct method to tap the source. Something in the capacitive end of the spectrum is like a filter. It keeps the flow of current very low and allows the potential to swing wildly or effortlessly enhancing the force by giving it momentum with very little input. Think of it as a biased modulator, with the bias being the cap voltage level. The swing comes from the capacitors ability to pass ac at that point enhancing the swing of the ac signal, in effect giving it more punch.

 I'm starting research on ways to have this separation of load to the source. This will have to be done through caps hooked up in such a way that there is no direct link to the load. Each side of the battery will have polarized caps on it and a third cap to act as a swing tank. Three caps hooked to the source. Like I said I'm starting research in this area so nothing was done yet just some ideas from what I have been seeing in all these peoples experiments.

@All -- attached is a photo of our budding physicist and her mother...

Jaime -- use of an optocoupler is a good idea.  Awaiting your result with the resistor(s) added... for comparison with a JT-type circuit.

@JouleSeeker

In answer to your question about RomeroUK, I have absolutely no opinion or knowledge other than passing interest in what it was. As with everyone we have our pet ingrained opinions and beliefs and one of mine is that a mechanical device will not cohere energy and if it appears to be doing so, analysis will show that indeed the coherence is coming in at such point that it could be done without all of the mechanical fuss.

Sad we can not discuss Cold Electricity as it is the the total opposite to what one normally works with and manifests. I'm sure the over the years you will be drawn in that direction and because of its controversial nature I no longer go into it in open forum.

'Just a suggestion' You might think of making you device available in a constructed research form and the reason being the 'Grab Bag' syndrome. It would indeed provide a certified (your device) for researchers to look at and work with.

  I have borrowed a copy of the Bedini-Bearden book on "Free Energy" -- but I'm most interested in EXPERIMENTAL evidence for Pout/Pinput > 1.   As with high-temp superconductivity, which was a stunning breakthrough, the theory can come later.

 

@All -- attached is a photo of our budding physicist and her mother...
[...]

they both look a picture of health - the bonding starts here!

the little one may spend of a lot of her early hours sleeping, but i bet she's already dreaming of things like quarks, electron affinity and fun stuff which she will eventually pioneer 

 

@Jouleseeker
I would agree, history is littered with persons having dreams of grandeur and an overwhelming sense of self-importance but the result of their efforts usually evaporates into thin air. Thus we could say any technology no matter how grand which is not utilized by the masses is basically useless and of benefit to very few. I believe our future has little room for people of this character who place their needs first, are motivated by profit and recognition, and it is an antiquated concept I think our great, great grandchildren will find quite amusing. I think many people have a sense that this experiment we call the "American Dream" has run its course and proven to be unsustainable as it should be obvious no system based solely on consumption, continuous growth and greed is sustainable.
Personally I have a great deal of respect for persons who are selfless, who openly give all their knowledge to others in spite of the criticism they usually recieve for doing so. Keep up the good work
Regards
AC

I always thought the definition of the American Dream was the ability to work for something and gain in return, not to have it all handed to you, can not understand where incentive and motivation would ever come from if you were assured of a few taking care of the masses.

But this is a political difference and not a science difference. You have a right to you view and I to mine, although it is questionable and uninformed that you feel you can speak of my motivations.

  Thanks for the discussion.  Must say I personally resonate more with the views of AC.

they both look a picture of health - the bonding starts here!

the little one may spend of a lot of her early hours sleeping, but i bet she's already dreaming of things like quarks, electron affinity and fun stuff which she will eventually pioneer 

No doubt!  Cute ain't she?  smart little cuss...

I'm using at the moment a green LED, Jameco 333542.  I decided to connect this simply to a cap, in series with a 1Mohm variable resistor -- this is the "control expt" -- and compare the green glow with what I get from the xee2 circuit, with 21ohms in series with the green LED.  True, the comparisons are by EYE, so this is just an indication -- not a quantitative result.
@2.3 volts in the control circuit, I get much the same glow intensity per my eye as in the Xee2-primed circuit (I've modified it a bit).  R-control was found to be 24.8Kohms for this condition, and the Power drawn in the control circuit is 54 uW... whereas the power drawn in the X2 circuit is about 5 uW, so about a factor of ten LESS than the control circuit.

  Now, we'd like to get a quantitative measure of the total output power.  Rather than building "my own" calorimeter based on heat rise in a single (output) resistor as discussed above, I've been thinking for months of dropping the whole circuit into a sensitive calorimeter and measuring the TOTAL heat output.  With Pinput from a cap.  Easy...?? 

  Yesterday, I finally got word back from a retired Professor/friend, who is expert in calorimetry and who has access to top-notch calorimeters...  and he is somewhat FAVORABLE to doing the experiment I've proposed (on a few DUT's), but would want to talk first.... so, wish me luck...

    Unfortunately, he is traveling right now in Europe (which is why I've had trouble reaching him), and he'll be back in a FEW WEEKS...

You see, the work we've been doing lately leads to a few DUT's that I'd like to drop into the CM for evaluating the total Poutput. 

And I WELCOME a few more devices to test. 
HERE we have a contest that most will probably agree to -- and another 100-buck incentive (sorry, I'm not rich) to the device that gives the BEST n = Pout/Pin, with Pout = total Pout measured in the calorimeter, and Pin by a COMMON capacitor for the input. This X-contest named after my smart g-daughter (here name starts with X).
  The prize jumps to $300 bucks if you get Pout>Pin with your device, plus lots of cheers from the public...  (I also must practically guarantee a lot of derision and headaches from the globalist-elitists, whatever you want to call them, but there is a good sized community here that will help get the device out to humanity...)

   Note that once I calibrate the input Cap, I propose to use that same CapIn for all DUT's tested (for ease and consistency -- see what I mean?).

   Here's my plan, and I welcome comment:

1.  Control experiment -- also to calibrate the energy in the physical capacitor =
   CapIn + R + LED, as described above.
I charge the cap, drop the control circuit (CC) into the Calorimeter (CM) and let it drain the cap, measuring the total Pinput...    Hmmm...The LED turns off at a certain voltage...  I may therefore simplify the above and go with:
   CapIn + R, no LED, and just let the Cap drain to ~ zero volts.  At the few-mV level, the energy left in the cap is negligible... 
    E = 1/2 CV**2...  and that equation should give an energy comparable to that measured in the calorimeter CM... 
   This is our check on the analysis system.

2.  Next, we drop the DUT into the CM and let 'er run, and measure the TOTAL Poutput...

3.  Problem:  how to turn the DUT on and off INSIDE the calorimeter.  I welcome comments on that!  Ideally, we charge the cap to a fixed voltage for a given DUT, then turn it on (easy enough) and turn it OFF just before the LED would go "off"... or just let the LED go off, and let the system slowly drain the cap anyway (no OU for that last part, no doubt).   A means to turn OFF the DUT would be great, and I welcome ideas... (perhaps a Zener would do the trick, but we don't want to mess up the DUT).

I'm sure some will predict Poutput = Pinput in such a system, but that's what we determine via Experiment only. 
(But -- pls let me know why you think the DUT will not show OU in a calorimeter, if that's what you think.)


Ah, more fun!  finally getting to the nitty gritty (use of a calorimeter as I and others proposed long ago on this thread and elsewhere)...

Again -- I cannot "promise" that Prof. H will allow me to use his calorimeter...  but I think he'll let me conduct a FEW tests...  quite optimistic.  What do you all think?

Hello to All,
as I am currently on a vaccation trip through Scandinavia with my girlfriend
in my old used Mobile Van car,
I visited today Per-Johan in Abod Öglunda, Sweden to work on the Prof. Jones circuit..
I just stopped by Per-Johan´s place on my trip to say hello,
as I was near him and he was very friendly and showed me his Prof. Jones circuit he was working on.

Then we tweaked it all a bit and got the battery to charge up in voltage while running it lighting the LED.

Look at the circuit diagram in the video.

We used 4 x 1N4148 diodes for the FWBR diodes, but with
better diodes this would work even better.

We also tried to selfloop it via a capacitor instead of the battery,
but we only had an hour of time to play with it at my visit, so there were too many
losses and also the 2 x 1 Ohm resistors were still in there, so the pickup coil
with the bridge puts out less current than the whole circuit  consumes, but due to the voltage spikes the battery does charge indeed a bit up during runtime of the circuit.

Other conclusions could not be drawn in the short amount of time of the visit.

Many thanks to Per-Johan and his wife for the friendly hospitality and the nice talks we had.

Watch::

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cdY87mXqi1o



Regards, Stefan.