Author Topic: PLEASE READ THIS-MAJOR BREAK THRU FROM BILL MEHESS (Read 175731 times)

JouleSeeker · « **Reply #120 on:** August 16, 2011, 09:01:17 PM »

Quote from: billmehess on August 16, 2011, 07:24:56 PM

I think I see where you may be going with this so let me clarify a bit

All batteries require some kind of electrolyte to work , even the so called dry cell battery use an electrolyte in paste form.
Batteries have materials that are consumable
Lazerlight did some great work with a dry cell which had mgnesium strips interacting with a carbon center no electrolytes but the magnesium was consumable
Batteries increase in voltage when connected in series and in current (amperage) when connected in parallel.

My device:
No electrolyte
No Consumables
New Information for all of you:

The individal modules increase in both amperage AND voltage when connected in parallel
There is a strong non moving mechanical component

Thanks for your replies Bill, and for the new information.
One correction, you wrote:

Quote

Batteries increase in voltage when connected in series and in current (amperage) when connected in parallel.

Actually, batteries connected in parallel will have the same voltage (assuming batteries of the same voltage) and therefore the SAME CURRENT (across a resistor, for example) by Ohm's Law, I = V/R. Perhaps a minor point, but as a retired professor of physics, having taught EM for many years, I sort of jump in on points like that. Habit, I guess.

Quote

The individal modules increase in both amperage AND voltage when connected in parallel
There is a strong non moving mechanical component

I'm very curious just how the "The individal modules increase in both amperage AND voltage when connected in parallel" and "There is a strong non moving mechanical component" what this is component? I guess we'll find out on 31 Aug Wednesday!

Thanks again, Bill.
StevenEJones

PS -- I was "early retired" at age 57 from a major university (full Professor of Physics) ... having a conscientious dedication to the truth regardless of political consequences. And I very strongly support novel energy approaches; and will do all I can if asked to get around suppression efforts -- with which I'm very familiar from personal experience.

FatBird · « **Reply #121 on:** August 16, 2011, 09:24:53 PM »

@ Bolt,

GiantKiller you are 100% correct! Any time you contract with a government dept or agency you have just given up all of your RIGHTS and converted them to restricted PRIVILEGES. In effect you have sold out when you contract to the government for anything. This includes so called health care and unemployment benefits or even to contract with them to hold a driving license. You need to know people the government in the US UK or almost anywhere do NOT represent the people they are corporations and are only interested in supporting their own interests as 100% commercial ventures.

Once you ask for a Patent you have just exchanged your invention and converted it to restricted contract privilege in other words you are now BEGGING to be allowed to use your invention alike a child asking for Candy! Be aware they can and often say NO to OU devices then you are totally 100% screwed as you just contracted with them by patent application and can be denied with the full force of the law under National Security. This means they are afraid you will damage THEM the corporation as the Government of the United States has nothing to the with the people of the united states.

So you see GK is correct you become a Terrorist and so many people believe wrongly the Patriot Act is for terrorist running around in caves, setting off bombs on buses and hijacking planes but the real terrorist they are afraid is is the people of the united states becoming non compliant and thus a Terrorist by definition is one who disrupts "the system". There is only one way.... FULL and open disclosure with nothing hidden whatsoever.

The bottom line is this you try to Patent an OU device then kiss your ass good bye it will NEVER see the light of day.

=======================================================================

Very Well Put Bolt. You are exactly right.

.

billmehess · « **Reply #122 on:** August 16, 2011, 09:50:54 PM »

Quote from: e2matrix on August 16, 2011, 07:43:24 PM

Because there are paid trolls here as well as trolls who have a vested interest in keeping the oily polluted status quo. And as someone else noticed also I'm sure you mean Aug 31st which is Wednesday and the date you originally posted. Wish I could make it.

Bill seeing your last post regarding "New Information for all of you:
The individual modules increase in both amperage AND voltage when connected in parallel There is a strong non moving mechanical component." I have to ask if this has been validated. I didn't want to bring up the error I saw in your Peltier thread but as was pointed out by many sharp members with anything I know of you can't connect individual components in series or parallel and get a multiplication of power like you were calculating in that thread. If an individual component puts out .004 watts than 960 of them in series or parallel is going to be less than 4 watts not over 3600 watts as you had posted there. At least unless you have figured out some way to bypass Ohms law and basic electrical laws. I'm all for that if you have but I'm truly hoping this is not a calculation error. I believe you really have something of great interest here so please don't take this in a bad way but I feel obligated to check this data since you have now posted that individual modules increase in both voltage and amperage when in parallel. I may even be wrong here in assuming this is not possible under normal conditions much less whatever you have come up with but would be interested in any confirmation on these thoughts.

Yes I remember my peliter mistake , this is not the case here. The device absolutly works in the parallel mode. If I take say 4 modules that are putting out 100 mv ( they do not all put out exactly the same amount I am using this to simply) if I put them in series my voltage is around 170mv if I connect them in parallel the voltage is around 380mv.
One of the other devices setting next to it has 6 modules and in parallel they put out around 510 mv
and in series 185 mv

?
Also the current increases as it should. I know this because I can connect the device to a capacitor (I usually use a electrolytic 25 4900 mf for this purpose) and in one hour I can record the voltage in the cap. The voltage is always directly perportional to the number of modules in parallel, which of course is the way it should be.
If this is not strage enough get this. When I take the 6 module group and connect in series to the 4 module group I get an expected increase.
My 6 mod group is putting out around 510 mv and my 4 mod group (again all hooked up in parallel)
is putting out 360 mv in series this raises to around 700 mv. Not quite the 870 mv I would expect.
But at this point since I have wires everywhere I most likely am experiencing some voltage loss.
It's a mystery
Bill

Mark69 · « **Reply #123 on:** August 16, 2011, 09:51:17 PM »

Hi Bill,

Want to ad my congrats to you if your device can do what you say... Please stay the course and show your device, then please share with the world so we can end oil company domination over the masses. I hope that is your plan. Staying tuned.....

JouleSeeker · « **Reply #124 on:** August 16, 2011, 10:21:28 PM »

Quote from: billmehess on August 16, 2011, 09:50:54 PM

[snip]
Also the current increases as it should. I know this because I can connect the device to a capacitor (I usually use a electrolytic 25 4900 mf for this purpose) and in one hour I can record the voltage in the cap. The voltage is always directly perportional to the number of modules in parallel, which of course is the way it should be.
[snip]
Bill

Bill, I very much appreciate empirical results like this. I'm fine with looking at this as a "black box" for now; and having some data to pique our interest.

Quote

My 6 mod group is putting out around 510 mv and my 4 mod group (again all hooked up in parallel)
is putting out 360 mv in series this raises to around 700 mv.

My question -- as you hook up this latter device to your 4900mF cap (did you mean, 4900 uF?), how LONG (in seconds) does the cap take to go from 0 volts up to, say 0.5V? From this and the value of the capacitor, one can estimate the power output, which would be very instructive I think.

JouleSeeker · « **Reply #125 on:** August 16, 2011, 10:29:44 PM »

Quote from: FatBird on August 16, 2011, 09:24:53 PM

@ Bolt,

GiantKiller you are 100% correct! Any time you contract with a government dept or agency you have just given up all of your RIGHTS and converted them to restricted PRIVILEGES. In effect you have sold out when you contract to the government for anything. This includes so called health care and unemployment benefits or even to contract with them to hold a driving license. You need to know people the government in the US UK or almost anywhere do NOT represent the people they are corporations and are only interested in supporting their own interests as 100% commercial ventures.

Once you ask for a Patent you have just exchanged your invention and converted it to restricted contract privilege in other words you are now BEGGING to be allowed to use your invention alike a child asking for Candy! Be aware they can and often say NO to OU devices then you are totally 100% screwed as you just contracted with them by patent application and can be denied with the full force of the law under National Security. This means they are afraid you will damage THEM the corporation as the Government of the United States has nothing to the with the people of the united states.

So you see GK is correct you become a Terrorist and so many people believe wrongly the Patriot Act is for terrorist running around in caves, setting off bombs on buses and hijacking planes but the real terrorist they are afraid is is the people of the united states becoming non compliant and thus a Terrorist by definition is one who disrupts "the system". There is only one way.... FULL and open disclosure with nothing hidden whatsoever.

The bottom line is this you try to Patent an OU device then kiss your ass good bye it will NEVER see the light of day.

=======================================================================

Very Well Put Bolt. You are exactly right.

.

Question especially for Bolt, GiantKiller and FatBird:

What if it is a Provisional Patent -- do your comments still apply? I eagerly await your responses, taking into account what Chessnyt earlier said about Provisional Patents:

Quote

chessnyt
The patent that Bill has filed (or plans to file) is a PROVISIONAL PATENT. Itâ€™s NOT a conventional patent and they are NOT even examined by the USPTO. NEVER!!! EVER!!! Only conventional (full NON-provisional patents) are examined. If Bill chooses to convert his provisional patent into a full patent, he has a year in which to do so. It will be examined if he does convert it or is rejected and resubmits it.

How do I know the preceding statements are true? Because I have filed a provisional patent and converted it before it expired for an invention that I had in the past. If you doubt me one bit, just ask a licensed patent attorney. I found this information out the day I retained the patent attorney who filed my application.

Chess

billmehess · « **Reply #126 on:** August 16, 2011, 10:34:53 PM »

Quote from: JouleSeeker on August 16, 2011, 10:21:28 PM

Bill, I very much appreciate empirical results like this. I'm fine with looking at this as a "black box" for now; and having some data to pique our interest.

My question -- as you hook up your device to a 4900mF cap (did you mean, 4900 uF?), how LONG (in seconds) does the cap take to go from 0 volts up to, say 0.5V? From this, one can estimate the power output, which would be very instructive I think.

Yes this would certainly help me , and yes I meant to say uf not mf. When I connect the two sets of modules together in series I get again around a 700 mv out put , but the total of the summation of all the individuals is around 1400 mv, voltage loss?
Anyway at 700 mv connected to the cap. and using a multimeter and starting with the cap reading 0.00 the cap will charge at the rate of about 180 mv/hour.
Now I have a way to increase the current output substanially to radically improve the amperage available.
Based on these figures could you calculate the power output.
The physical size of the 10 modules is around 12" x 5" x 5" total for all 10. This can be scaled down greatly but that size is not really of concern to me at this point in the game.
Bill

I just re-read above the voltage on the cap after 1 hr is 280 mv not 180 mv.

jeffsmathers · « **Reply #127 on:** August 16, 2011, 11:40:59 PM »

Hi Bill,

we are excited to see someone advance at least some in this endeavor! Have you tried to build or cover your system with a Faraday Shield of some sort to see if there is an effect? Perhaps you could time the rate of charge with and without the shield in place.

Good luck and good science, Jeff Smathers Molalla, Oregon

JouleSeeker · « **Reply #128 on:** August 17, 2011, 12:01:06 AM »

Quote from: billmehess on August 16, 2011, 10:34:53 PM

Yes this would certainly help me , and yes I meant to say uf not mf. When I connect the two sets of modules together in series I get again around a 700 mv out put , but the total of the summation of all the individuals is around 1400 mv, voltage loss?
Anyway at 700 mv connected to the cap. and using a multimeter and starting with the cap reading 0.00 the cap will charge at the rate of about 180 mv/hour.
Now I have a way to increase the current output substanially to radically improve the amperage available.
Based on these figures could you calculate the power output.
The physical size of the 10 modules is around 12" x 5" x 5" total for all 10. This can be scaled down greatly but that size is not really of concern to me at this point in the game.
Bill

I just re-read above the voltage on the cap after 1 hr is 280 mv not 180 mv.

OK -- running, but quickly (someone pls check my math) I get:

E = 1/2 CV**2 - 0 = 1/2 * 4900 uF (0.280V)**2 = 0.192 Joules

Then, since 1 hour is 3600 seconds, the power is:

P = E/time = 0.192 J/3600 seconds = 53 microwatts

altrez · « **Reply #129 on:** August 17, 2011, 12:31:45 AM »

Can you run anything from your device without charging a cap first? For example say a Joule Thief?

Thanks!

-Altrez

billmehess · « **Reply #130 on:** August 17, 2011, 12:33:39 AM »

Quote from: JouleSeeker on August 17, 2011, 12:01:06 AM

OK -- running, but quickly (someone pls check my math) I get:

E = 1/2 CV**2 - 0 = 1/2 * 4900 uF (0.280V)**2 = 0.192 Joules

Then, since 1 hour is 3600 seconds, the power is:

P = E/time = 0.192 J/3600 seconds = 53 microwatts

Thank you very helpful
Bill

loosecannon · « **Reply #131 on:** August 17, 2011, 12:52:28 AM »

Bill,
I have just read through all the posts in this thread to make sure no one has asked this already, and they have not.

a yes or no answer will suffice just fine.

Do you know why your device works?

TO ALL:
lets remember that if the gov. does come to Bill, take his device from him, and make him sign a NDA, then he will not be able to come here and tell us that it happened to him.
We will not hear from Bill again if this happens.
LC

bourne · « **Reply #132 on:** August 17, 2011, 01:04:36 AM »

Quote from: loosecannon on August 17, 2011, 12:52:28 AM

TO ALL:
lets remember that if the gov. does come to Bill, take his device from him, and make him sign a NDA, then he will not be able to come here and tell us that it happened to him.
We will not hear from Bill again if this happens.
LC

What an odd thing to say.

Is this a veiled warning?

tak22 · « **Reply #133 on:** August 17, 2011, 01:07:51 AM »

with apologies to dr. seuss and my 8th grade english teacher,

I am Bill
I am Bill
Bill I am, that Bill-I-am!
That Bill-I-am!
I do not like
that Bill-I-am

Do you like
free source and overunity?

I do not like them,
Bill-I-am.
I do not like
free source and overunity.

Would you like them
Here or there?

I would not like them
here or there.
I would not like them
anywhere.
I do not like
free source and overunity.
I do not like them,
Bill-I-am

Would you like them
in a house?
Would you like them
with a lab mouse?

I do not like them
in a house.
I do not like them
with a lab mouse.
I do not like them
here or there.
I do not like them
anywhere.
I do not like free source and overunity.
I do not like them, Bill-I-am.

Would you try them
in a faraday cage?
Would you try them
while in a rage?

Not in a faraday cage.
Not in a rage.
Not in a house.
Not with a lab mouse.
I would not try them here or there.
I would not try them anywhere.
I would not try free source and overunity.
I do not like them, Bill-I-am.

Would you? Could you?
in a car?
Try them! Try them!
Here they are.

I would not,
could not,
in a car

You may like them.
You will see.
You may like them
in a tree?

I would not, could not in a tree.
Not in a car! You let me be.

I do not like them in a faraday cage.
I do not like them in a rage
I do not like them in a house
I do mot like them with a lab mouse
I do not like them here or there.
I do not like them anywhere.
I do not like free source and overunity.
I do not like them, Bill-I-am.

A train! A train!
A train! A train!
Could you, would you
on a train?

Not on a train! Not in a tree!
Not in a car! Bill! Let me be!
I would not, could not, in a faraday cage.
I could not, would not, in a rage.
I will not try them with a lab mouse
I will not try them in a house.
I will not try them here or there.
I will not try them anywhere.
I do not like them, Bill-I-am.

Say!
In the park?
Here in the park!
Would you, could you, in the park?

I would not, could not,
in the park.

Would you, could you,
in the rain?

I would not, could not, in the rain.
Not in the dark. Not on a train,
Not in a car, Not in a tree.
I do not like them, Bill, you see.
Not in a house. Not in a faraday cage.
Not with a mouse. Not in a rage.
I will not try them here or there.
I do not like them anywhere!

You do not like
free source and overunity?

I do not
like them,
Bill-I-am.

Could you, would you,
on a ship at sea?

I would not,
could not.
on a ship at sea!

Would you, could you,
at Portland OMSI?

I could not, would not, at Portland OMSI.
I will not, will not, on a ship at sea.
I will not try them in the rain.
I will not try them on a train.
Not in the park! Not in a tree!
Not in a car! You let me be!
I do not like them in a faraday cage.
I do not like them while in a rage.
I will not try them in a house.
I do not like them with a lab mouse.
I do not like them here or there.
I do not like them ANYWHERE!

I do not like
free source and overunity!

I do not like them,
Bill-I-am.

You do not like them.
SO you say.
Try them! Try them!
And you may.
Try them and you may I say.

Bill!
If you will let me be,
I will try them.
You will see.

Say!
I like free source and overunity!
I do!! I like them, Bill-I-am!
And I would try them at Portland OMSI!
And I would try them on a ship at sea...
And I will try them in the rain.
And in the park. And on a train.
And in a car. And in a tree.
They are so good so good you see!

So I will try them at Portland OMSI.
And I will try them on a ship at sea.
And I will try them in a house.
And I will try them with a lab mouse.
And I will try them here and there.
Say! I will try them ANYWHERE!

I do so like
free source and overunity!
Thank you!
Thank you,
Bill-I-am

=======================================

Does it work in your house, your yard, the nearest field, under a transmission line, etc, etc? Always the same output? You might want to buy a ticket to OMSI just to be sure ....

tak

billmehess · « **Reply #134 on:** August 17, 2011, 01:11:04 AM »

Quote from: loosecannon on August 17, 2011, 12:52:28 AM

Bill,
I have just read through all the posts in this thread to make sure no one has asked this already, and they have not.

a yes or no answer will suffice just fine.

Do you know why your device works?

TO ALL:
lets remember that if the gov. does come to Bill, take his device from him, and make him sign a NDA, then he will not be able to come here and tell us that it happened to him.
We will not hear from Bill again if this happens.
LC

Yes I do

As to Takk 22 and Dr Suess I think someone has got way to much time on his hands (but it did put a smile on my face)

News:

User Menu

Author Topic: PLEASE READ THIS-MAJOR BREAK THRU FROM BILL MEHESS (Read 175731 times)

JouleSeeker

Re: PLEASE READ THIS-MAJOR BREAK THRU FROM BILL MEHESS

FatBird

Re: PLEASE READ THIS-MAJOR BREAK THRU FROM BILL MEHESS

billmehess

Re: PLEASE READ THIS-MAJOR BREAK THRU FROM BILL MEHESS

Mark69

Re: PLEASE READ THIS-MAJOR BREAK THRU FROM BILL MEHESS

JouleSeeker

Re: PLEASE READ THIS-MAJOR BREAK THRU FROM BILL MEHESS

JouleSeeker

Re: PLEASE READ THIS-MAJOR BREAK THRU FROM BILL MEHESS

billmehess

Re: PLEASE READ THIS-MAJOR BREAK THRU FROM BILL MEHESS

jeffsmathers

Re: PLEASE READ THIS-MAJOR BREAK THRU FROM BILL MEHESS

JouleSeeker

Re: PLEASE READ THIS-MAJOR BREAK THRU FROM BILL MEHESS

altrez

Re: PLEASE READ THIS-MAJOR BREAK THRU FROM BILL MEHESS

billmehess

Re: PLEASE READ THIS-MAJOR BREAK THRU FROM BILL MEHESS

loosecannon

Re: PLEASE READ THIS-MAJOR BREAK THRU FROM BILL MEHESS

bourne

Re: PLEASE READ THIS-MAJOR BREAK THRU FROM BILL MEHESS

tak22

Re: PLEASE READ THIS-MAJOR BREAK THRU FROM BILL MEHESS

billmehess

Re: PLEASE READ THIS-MAJOR BREAK THRU FROM BILL MEHESS