I just started to read this patent, and I am interested ! I might like to try this idea. Can't hurt me that is for sure. 

The attached Annis Eberly patent is related to the Kunel patent (diversion of main flux by a perpendicular flux)  and IMO it is even better, e.g. it contains scopeshots and even experimental test run results !

  quote from Verpies:
"The only reason is the insulation thickness.
Besides this, for transformer windings, a stranded wire is better than solid.
Litz wire is the best for HF applications"
                                                          end quote
   
  Ok, well, I hope that's true.
  The solid wire as is used in house construction also has plastic insulation, although it may be a bit thinner than the stranded wire insulation. Or the wire itself may be thinner as there is no spaces between the strands.  This I'll have to verify.
  Most solid core wire that is used for transformer use, is magnet wire, without the plastic insulation, just the thin lacquer coating. But, like you say, the stranded wire may work as well for our purpose. Who knows.  I'm just trying to replicate Geo's diagram as close as possibly.

  I sent an e-mail to Igor Mopoz (or Moroz) today, and got a reply back saying that he doesn't know what videos of his that I'm mentioning. I didn't mention any of his videos, just said that I've been watching most all of them religiously. And asked him for advice on a feed back circuit design for my replication of the Geo/Mazilli circuit, of which I send several pictures of.
He didn't know what I was talking about and said:
 "
 To Me                Today at 3:44 PM    "Sorry, buddy, I think you're wrong address. I do not understand what video you're talking about."

  Wrong address???  Ok, well, it's the one that he gave out on YouTube,   igor.mopoz@gmail.com   as a reply to a comment on one of his videos.
So, now I don't know what's up with that. Any way, I tried...

  Geo probably knows Igors correct e-mail address, as he's been in touch with him.
But, neither of them seam to want to mention anything about the feed back circuit path.
  Makes me wonder... 
  "The Shadow Knows"...  But, he ain't saying...
 

Hi Farmhand,

Thanks for that link.

The detail over at rexresearch is also pretty good.

I was simply amazed that Verpies stated that he had viewed a machine that self ran.

Regards, Penno

How I would love to hear more regarding the pmm Wesley type motor.

It was the configuration shown in Fig.2 with the frame cut out of plexiglass.
It did not resume working after I had reassembled it.  Apparently it had to be "tuned" critically.

 Hoppy and All:
  I changed the flyback core and additional ferrite filled air coils back to the yoke core that I had on it previously.
  The results were that I could light 500 watts worth of bulbs (5, 100 watt, 110v bulbs), using the yoke core.
  So, there is nothing wrong with the Mazilli circuit, as it works as it had previously, or  even better now.
  But, the problem is that I'm back to having the heat issue, as the fets get very hot only after a few seconds, and can't be touched after one minute run time. Even when lighting only a 25 watt bulb by itself. If I add a PC fan to the circuit, the fets still overheat, but not as much.
Adding tuning caps did not help to keep the heat down. But, I'm ordering some more tuning caps today, to see IF that will help.

  After looking at Akula's original yoke circuit video, again, I think that I'm getting fairly close similar result. As he had a heat issue, also, and his fets and rectifier were getting too hot to touch, as well. Although he could make the circuit self run, at least for a short while before a possible meltdown might happen.

  So, my main concern is to obtain a working feed back path, as well as to resolve the heat issue on the yoke set up. As the yoke core puts out much more output than the flyback/air coils do.
  Any ideas are welcome.

  P.S. 
  Will whoever added an image to the other Kapanadze thread, over the recommended 1200 pixels wide, please remove it and re-size it. Or you'll keep messing up that thread.
  Thanks, in advance.

@verpies
I was curious why conventional mind got involved into unconventional approaches and you just answer to my question

There were two reasons.
1) One was the discovery of a simple physics error that has been cascading through science unnoticed since 1687.
2) The second one was the Wesley Gary motor, that I saw replicated in an inventor's convention and contradicted the laws of physics as I knew them at that time.

Those two events made me realize that there are some areas of science that need "revision" and that some "impossible devices" are possible indeed.  At that point in time I was transformed from a respectable mainstream scientist into a "crackpot" which got me into a lot of trouble with my colleagues despite that I never objected to the entire conventional science - just the pieces of it, that were obviously erroneous and could not be verified experimentally or did not follow logic.

I guess, the old idiom is true: seeing is believing

What error from 1687 ? related to newton Principia ?

Yes