Okay so I looked at the simplified schematic.  I marked it up and attached it.

Look, I see this:

Battery -> Inverter -> (load and smart charger) -> back to the battery.

The conductivity between the "Ground Grid Input" and the "Ground Grid Return" is going to be very high and you can treat it as a short circuit.

I have no clue what the pair of toroids is supposed to do and the connections are "strange" but it doesn't really matter. 

Connect a shorted coil across a toroid and see for yourself. If you cannot understand the basics you won't be taken seriously.

The output of the sine wave inverter is directly connected to the input of the smart charger.  The funky toroids may as well not even be there.  Anybody that truly understands electronics would see this right away.  This is the old tired, "battery connected to the charger connected to he battery" nonsense.

It's only absurd if your preconceived notions have blinded you.  That sounds like something you would say to me, no?

MileHigh

Hey, Did you figure out the magnet is causing the oscillation? Change the magnet and you'll get another frequency. Here's your chance to change the title of the video from 'unknown source' and actually do something useful 

Lol-no,incorrect-->but who am i to spoil your fun.

Connect a shorted coil across a toroid and see for yourself. If you cannot understand the basics you won't be taken seriously.

Lol,you get a big induction heater,as one person here that has built the wonder transformer found out lol.

Void:
I would agree with your posting about some folks here just want to experiment as a hobby.  I do not recall any posts of MH calling anyone down for doing that.  What gets folks like him, TK, MarkE, myself, and many others perturbed is when someone makes a claim of self-running, O.U., free energy, etc with no basis for doing so.  Then, when someone asks for some data, or dare I say "proof' of these claims, the insults start flying.  Your hobbyist experimenter is now really put out that anyone might dare ask for such a thing.  So put out, in fact, that they pack up their marbles and go home.  Then, others claim that world would now have free energy if only such a question were not asked.  The inquisitor is now blamed for depriving the world of yet another free energy device.
I have seen this happen waaaay to many times here...following exactly the script as written above.

Hi Pirate88179. I am sorry, but what you are saying is nonsense. I am sure at some level you may
actually believe such things, but it really is just nonsense. The people such as you mentioned often make
very rude and condescending statements and then claim that all they have been doing is so innocently 'asking
for some data', as you also say. This is not a formal peer reviewed scientific journal/forum, no matter what some people
here may imagine. No one is under any obligation here to supply any 'data' just because some full of them self person is
demanding it. I have seen time and time again where certain people here are making all sorts of arrogant and insulting
statements and unsupported accusations, and then when someone asks them to stop or gets annoyed with them, these
people gang up on that person and say how dare you attack us innocent people who have only been asking for a little data.
Who do you think you are fooling?

Some other people here have a technical background but do not get upset in the slightest if people do
not 'present data' or 'show proper measurements' or whatever else. Why is that? It is because they do not
have any investment in belief about whether over unity is possible or not. If I had a strong belief or inclination
that over unity was impossible, then I might also be motivated to start going around insulting and goading people
and 'demanding data' from people, and accusing all sorts of people of being frauds and scammers and what have
you even though I don't have any actual evidence to support such a claim. This is the way people commonly
act when they are trying to support a belief that is important to their world view. It is all about protecting a world view,
and in reality such behavior typically has little to do with just having an interest in seeing some 'data'.

When I see that people are making statements that they can't really support, I either just move on or
just point out that without some more clearly done experiments or proper measurements or whatever that
there is no way to see what is really going on there. If the person responds well to the suggestion, then great,
if they don't, then no worries, that is their own prerogative. Again, because I don't have any world view
that is threatened by someone making some claims about over unity, I have no motivation whatsoever
to start insulting such people or insinuating that they are frauds or idiots or anything else. That is what
it really boils down to in these informal discussion forums, and anyone who suggests otherwise is either
very dishonest, or very out of touch with reality.

Enough with the jihadism already. All a person has to do is politely point out once that they don't think
there is sufficient reason to come to a conclusion that someone may have come to, and point out why they
think that, and if people are interested in their further opinions and advice they will ask for it. Let people learn
in their own way. The world will not end if people make some unsupported statements or make some improper
measurements. Not at all.

All the best...

I can't find the hatchet anywhere.....?

But we gotta bury something around here ??

maybe a few ground rods?   

Void
maybe we can draw a line in the sand and move forward....
Tooo much nasty been floating around ,...while I have seen much worse
its time to turn the page .

PLEASE ??

lets prepare a feast for Clarence the Great ...?
FESTIVAS...

for his return !!

besides that we have the good news that the Scopes arrived yesterday for the experimenters
and to be clear... its a good day .

thanks again to the contributors ..

Chet K

I'm not jabbing at Clarence,I truly want to hear what he has to offer, Humor has always been
a tool to calm the beast... and cause a pause...
to reflect on whats really important.
I suspect that Clarence has a good sense of humor .

I truly hope That He will give Pause and a thought to what really matters and come back and share his findings here.

respectfully

Chet

 

Connect a shorted coil across a toroid and see for yourself. If you cannot understand the basics you won't be taken seriously.

Your comment is laughable Bringdown.  You have tried a few times to pretend that I don't know anything.  The problem is that I have been around for a long time and my "technical street cred" is fully established.

I'm not trolling Void, the points I made are legitimate and worth consideration.

Let's look at the case of the grounding rods.  Clarence said something like you needed 20 grounding rods, then 30, then 40.  You had to bury the cables in the ground and then bring them all together to make the "common ground input" ground tie point.

What's the difference between having 20 grounding rods and 40 grounding rods for the "common ground input."  Did anybody ask that question?  I don't think anybody did.  I think Clarence said that more grounding rods increased his voltage measurement.  Since there is no logical reason for there to be a difference between 20 grounding rods and 40 grounding rods you have to wonder.  Since there is no logical reason for some kind of voltage measurement to increase you have to wonder.  Precisely what voltage was he measuring and did he demonstrate that?  I don't think he did, he just made a text claim.  Why in God's name would you have to bury all the cables?  What's the difference if the cables aren't buried?   The real answer is that the difference is zero.

So you end up with a whole backyard full of grounding rods, 40 of them are the "ground grid input" and five of them are the "ground grid return."  Why?  Is there really any difference between the "ground grid input" and the "ground grid return" considering that they are all essentially identical grounding rods stuck in the ground?  And what about your back yard?  Can you envision your wife after four months telling you to dig up that foolishness and return your back yard to normalcy?

That's just an example of a discussion that should take place in my opinion.  Instead you get "Big Fish" stories about how from week to week you need more and more grounding rods.

MileHigh

Your comment is laughable Bringdown.  You have tried a few times to pretend that I don't know anything.  The problem is that I have been around for a long time and my "technical street cred" is fully established.

You have nothing to show yet again. You are talking about a device which you know nothing about. What a waste of time you are. It's a good thing Clarence is not responding to your questions.