Author Topic: Energy from the Ground - Self powered generator by Barbosa and Leal (Read 1745812 times)

pomodoro · « **Reply #1485 on:** April 12, 2015, 02:31:48 PM »

Man, this threat went Ape Shit and Clarance got nailed to a cross. Let's see what Bro Mikey and his motley crew can do with Clarance's plans over there. Those pole pigs could have another use after they give up with Gerard's delusions.

tinman · « **Reply #1486 on:** April 12, 2015, 04:19:45 PM »

Quote from: ramset on April 12, 2015, 01:16:08 PM

here is the link for the new dedicated thread [which I will most definitely be contributing to]
http://www.energeticforum.com/renewable-energy/20091-barbosa-leal-devices-info-replication-details.html.

Chet K

Aaron should have a book out in no time-->the secrets of the Captor Loop Transformer

Only $29.99

ariovaldo · « **Reply #1487 on:** April 12, 2015, 04:58:00 PM »

Sorry, but I'm in the middle of a big plant start up, with a lot of big medium voltage motors, vfd's, softstarters, plc and etc, and I don't have to much time to the forum.[/size]
As we guys know, I had my hands on Barbosa device. I tested it, I made measurements and I dissembled it as well. Probably I'm too DUMB to find how the device works, but something caught my the attention.
Why they installed a tc in the secondary to show high amps, other than lead people to get this high " amps" and multiply this value by the income voltage and say from there, that the device can "generate" high power?
I used a very good grounding system, close to a lake, several rods and very big cable. Also, through a friend, I drew some circuits ( PWM's and oscillators) that was sent to Nilson.

Ariovaldo

MileHigh · « **Reply #1488 on:** April 12, 2015, 09:44:59 PM »

Tinman:

Great reply to my long posting and I pretty much agree with most of what you said.

This is off-topic, but I wanted to respond to this:

Quote

Many so called experts said heavier than air machines could never fly

In essence, this is not true.

Everybody uses it to argue everything from magic energy from the ground, to super-luminal scalar waves, to magic resonating batteries, to Dini motors being over unity, the list is nearly endless.

However, it is not true. It's one of the great gaffes that is used to justify any speculative cockamamie wonder stories that you can read on the forums. All of those justifications for "believe my unfounded, no-evidence, crazy speculative theory" stories fall flat in a way because they are using a sample story that is not true. It can get tiring to read it all the time!

When you have a free hour, I suggest that you research the subject and see what you find!

MileHigh

MileHigh · « **Reply #1489 on:** April 12, 2015, 10:11:31 PM »

I looked at the "captor" and with the aid of some pictures of setups finally figured out what Clarence's strange incomplete simplified schematic really means.

Note to Clarence and others: You NEVER put some kind of a transformer in a schematic with adding the dots, i.e.; the "dot convention."

I would not be surprised if Clarence was blissfully unaware of this, all the more reason to shift from sycophant to critical thinker. Anybody at EF listening?

So I am going to throw this out there to interested parties on all of the forums. Can you explain what the captor does and explain it referencing the schematic and explain it using the language of electronics?

Now you guys, you are supposed to be "free energy researchers," correct? A researcher is supposed to look at things and discuss them amongst their peers and try to figure out how something works, even before they build it.

So how is the captor supposed to work, what is it supposed to do? In fact, we can split this into the following:

What is the claim for how the captor is supposed to work?
What is the claim for how it does this with respect to the circuit, and explain the claim using the language of electronics?
vs.
How do you think the captor actually works in your opinion?
How does the captor actually do what it is supposed to do, in your opinion, using the language of electronics?

This is especially directed at all the enthusiasts at the Energetic Forum.

Here is the background issue and it's very important: If you claim that you are a "free energy experimenter" or a "researcher" then that means you are supposed to think aloud about how things work, and debate the issues in the open with your peers. If you don't do this then you are faking it, and you are just a non-thinking replicator, a paint-by-numbers drone.

That's an important issue. With respect to this device, and specifically the "captor" are you a "creative artist with a fresh canvas to work on," or are you just a paint-by-numbers guy that just fills in the colours and the shapes like you are told without thinking?

So the challenge is out to the people on this thread that are interested in this alleged technology, you know who you are, and the stream of lurkers that will check this thread regularly from the other two main forums.

I challenge you to discuss the captor and explain how you think it works.

I will wait a few days to see if there is any discussion. I am honestly not optimistic. Typically this is where the "researchers" and the "builders" have nothing to say. I think that's sad, because in the end, it just means that many of you talk the talk but when the challenge is out there you reveal by your inactions that the truth is you are mostly paint-by-numbers replicators just hoping and praying that the device will work.

What is the deal on the captor?

MileHigh

Pirate88179 · « **Reply #1490 on:** April 12, 2015, 10:36:45 PM »

Quote from: MileHigh on April 12, 2015, 09:44:59 PM

Tinman:

Great reply to my long posting and I pretty much agree with most of what you said.

This is off-topic, but I wanted to respond to this:

In essence, this is not true.

Everybody uses it to argue everything from magic energy from the ground, to super-luminal scalar waves, to magic resonating batteries, to Dini motors being over unity, the list is nearly endless.

However, it is not true. It's one of the great gaffes that is used to justify any speculative cockamamie wonder stories that you can read on the forums. All of those justifications for "believe my unfounded, no-evidence, crazy speculative theory" stories fall flat in a way because they are using a sample story that is not true. It can get tiring to read it all the time!

When you have a free hour, I suggest that you research the subject and see what you find!

MileHigh

Very true. The US government was working on heavier than air flight prior to the Wright Brothers. I doubt that they would have worked on this project if the consensus was that it was impossible. Many others were working on this as well. Even Leonardo had designs for heavier than air flight way back when. The Wrights got there first, as we all know.

The other old tale is that the bumble bee can not fly according to modern aerodynamic theory. This, of course, is not true at all either. The flight of the bumble bee is easily explained by modern aerodynamic theory. I have no idea where these false ideas get started but, you are correct in that we see them time and time again...and they are accepted as "truth".

I wonder if the Wrights had failed, if back then folks would have claimed that Big Railroad suppressed them?

Bill

MileHigh · « **Reply #1491 on:** April 13, 2015, 12:22:50 AM »

I read the OUR forum thread on this. Someone said that Clarence hasn't made any real measurements yet and he hasn't done any serious longer-time testing on the device.

If this is true, then what the hell is this statement from Clarence then?

Quote

I have attached the HOW, WHY, AND METHOD information I spoke of. please remind the members that there in no need for experimentation with this unit. if they will just look at the latest photo I have attached and do just like what they see it will work without a hitch.

We are back in La La Land, and I suppose that the enthusiasts will be in denial until the bitter end.

Why would you spend $2000 and dig up your back yard if no measurements have been made and no proof has been offered? Instead of that, why not buy old P4 computers for $40 and fix them up and donate them to underprivileged children in your local area? (Like I have done.)

Shaking my head....

Pirate88179 · « **Reply #1492 on:** April 13, 2015, 01:17:36 AM »

Quote from: MileHigh on April 13, 2015, 12:22:50 AM

I read the OUR forum thread on this. Someone said that Clarence hasn't made any real measurements yet and he hasn't done any serious longer-time testing on the device.

If this is true, then what the hell is this statement from Clarence then?

We are back in La La Land, and I suppose that the enthusiasts will be in denial until the bitter end.

Why would you spend $2000 and dig up your back yard if no measurements have been made and no proof has been offered? Instead of that, why not buy old P4 computers for $40 and fix them up and donate them to underprivileged children in your local area? (Like I have done.)

Shaking my head....

MH:

Wait. Someone on EF actually asked (demanded) for measurements? Well, that will be the end of that. Clarence will most likely pull out of there as he did here. We can not have folks asking for proof or measurements. All that does is drive these inventors to other forums where this info is not asked for. Worse case, it might make the inventor burn all of his notes and give up thereby depriving the world of yet another free energy device.

This is really sad. I thought that EF banned those types of questions years ago.

What will Chet think about this?

Bill

MileHigh · « **Reply #1493 on:** April 13, 2015, 01:40:00 AM »

Perhaps there are Inverse-MIB anti-measurement goon squads that patrol the forums that can track you down.

With respect to the EF, I don't know much about "magnetic maps" and they put one up for Australia. I haven't researched what they are for and what they mean but I have some sneaking suspicions. How do you use that map with respect to this project? What are you supposed to do with the data? How does that affect your grounding rod layout? What is the relationship between the ambient magnetic field and your setup?

Will there be a serious discussion about this issue? Or is it just a bunch of nonsensical and non-applicable fluff that doesn't even apply? That's for the participants on the EF thread to determine for themselves. In a related thought, there is nothing worse than BSing yourself.

Of course, the Earth's magnetic field is for all practical intents and purposes a very weak DC unchanging field. Anybody that knows anything about magnetic fields know that in the vast majority of cases an unchanging DC magnetic field has zero affect on anything, it may as well not even be there. It's one of the very first things you learn about magnetic fields.

So do you keep it real or do you just have a circle-jerk round of BSing?

Void · « **Reply #1494 on:** April 13, 2015, 01:43:42 AM »

Quote from: ariovaldo on April 12, 2015, 04:58:00 PM

Sorry, but I'm in the middle of a big plant start up, with a lot of big medium voltage motors, vfd's, softstarters, plc and etc, and I don't have to much time to the forum.[/size]
As we guys know, I had my hands on Barbosa device. I tested it, I made measurements and I dissembled it as well. Probably I'm too DUMB to find how the device works, but something caught my the attention.
Why they installed a tc in the secondary to show high amps, other than lead people to get this high " amps" and multiply this value by the income voltage and say from there, that the device can "generate" high power?
I used a very good grounding system, close to a lake, several rods and very big cable. Also, through a friend, I drew some circuits ( PWM's and oscillators) that was sent to Nilson.
Ariovaldo

Hi Ariovaldo. I agree with you that it was very odd that they had the current transformer reading
the shorted secondary current. It doesn't seem to make sense. It seems a very suspicious thing to do.
I can't imagine what reason they would want to monitor that, unless it was to make sure the secondary
current doesn't exceed some maximum value, but it seems to me they could have a fuse or breaker for that.
All the best...

MileHigh · « **Reply #1495 on:** April 13, 2015, 01:48:23 AM »

Quote from: ariovaldo on April 12, 2015, 04:58:00 PM

Sorry, but I'm in the middle of a big plant start up, with a lot of big medium voltage motors, vfd's, softstarters, plc and etc, and I don't have to much time to the forum.[/size]
As we guys know, I had my hands on Barbosa device. I tested it, I made measurements and I dissembled it as well. Probably I'm too DUMB to find how the device works, but something caught my the attention.
Why they installed a tc in the secondary to show high amps, other than lead people to get this high " amps" and multiply this value by the income voltage and say from there, that the device can "generate" high power?
I used a very good grounding system, close to a lake, several rods and very big cable. Also, through a friend, I drew some circuits ( PWM's and oscillators) that was sent to Nilson.

Ariovaldo

Ariovaldo:

Thank you for the information. I understand that you are busy so I just have some quick questions. I read somewhere that you bought a non-working device? In that true or was it supposed to be working when you bought it?

What were your final results, more power out than in, or less power out than in?

MileHigh

tinman · « **Reply #1496 on:** April 13, 2015, 02:53:12 AM »

From a member over at EF.

Quote: Hello Clarence. Thank you for all the info on your build setup. I see that you mentioned you have run your build for about 4 hours, and I guess you mean with the battery and inverter and battery charger in a loop, as shown in your schematic drawing? I think you said your build was around $2000 or so, so it would be helpful if you can provide some more details here about how your build is performing.

What is the longest you have run your build in self looping mode with the battery, and what specifically did you have connected as a load for those tests while it was self running, and what was the battery voltage at the end of the run before you switched everything off? As you no doubt know, you have to measure the battery voltage while everything is still running and the battery is still under load at the end of the test, before you switch anything off, because the battery voltage can start to climb back up once it is no longer under a load. I am sure I am probably not the only one who would like to hear some more details about how long you have run your build in self looping mode, and what kind of battery voltage is maintained throughout the test runs while the battery is under load. You must have no doubt run your build in self looping mode with the battery for much longer periods than just four hours to confirm that it can self run for a long length of time without the battery voltage starting to drop?

Clarence has answered every other question others have asked except this one-->interesting.

Pirate88179 · « **Reply #1497 on:** April 13, 2015, 03:12:04 AM »

Quote from: tinman on April 13, 2015, 02:53:12 AM

From a member over at EF.

Quote: Hello Clarence. Thank you for all the info on your build setup. I see that you mentioned you have run your build for about 4 hours, and I guess you mean with the battery and inverter and battery charger in a loop, as shown in your schematic drawing? I think you said your build was around $2000 or so, so it would be helpful if you can provide some more details here about how your build is performing.

What is the longest you have run your build in self looping mode with the battery, and what specifically did you have connected as a load for those tests while it was self running, and what was the battery voltage at the end of the run before you switched everything off? As you no doubt know, you have to measure the battery voltage while everything is still running and the battery is still under load at the end of the test, before you switch anything off, because the battery voltage can start to climb back up once it is no longer under a load. I am sure I am probably not the only one who would like to hear some more details about how long you have run your build in self looping mode, and what kind of battery voltage is maintained throughout the test runs while the battery is under load. You must have no doubt run your build in self looping mode with the battery for much longer periods than just four hours to confirm that it can self run for a long length of time without the battery voltage starting to drop?

Clarence has answered every other question others have asked except this one-->interesting.

He will never answer these types of questions...not because he does not know the answer...but, because he does know the answer. I am sure he started out like everyone else, with good intentions...but later discovered, like everyone else doing things like this, that his source battery dies over time. He does not want to admit this to anyone, including himself.

He will not last long of EF.

Bill

TinselKoala · « **Reply #1498 on:** April 13, 2015, 03:22:09 AM »

Quote from: ramset on April 12, 2015, 01:16:08 PM

MH
Just paying attention .
@ TinMan
sums it up nicely. [on another note yah shuddah Gone fishin Too...

here is the link for the new dedicated thread [which I will most definitely be contributing to]
http://www.energeticforum.com/renewable-energy/20091-barbosa-leal-devices-info-replication-details.html.

Chet K

Can't see the images unless you are a member and logged in. "Open source" at EF is a secret, open only to a select few, remember?

And I am not a member, ever since I got banned by Err-on for demonstrating 1) that Rosemary Ainslie's claims were not true; 2) that her published 555 timer circuit made an inverted duty cycle from what was claimed; 3) that Err-on did not know how to use his fancy oscilloscope; and 4) that Ainslie and Err-on and many others did not understand that the Voltage on the Drain of a mosfet configured as a switch in the Ainslie circuit will be High, at battery level, when the mosfet is OFF.

MileHigh · « **Reply #1499 on:** April 13, 2015, 03:28:41 AM »

This guy?

News:

User Menu

Author Topic: Energy from the Ground - Self powered generator by Barbosa and Leal (Read 1745812 times)

pomodoro

Re: Energy from the Ground - Self powered generator by Barbosa and Leal

tinman

Re: Energy from the Ground - Self powered generator by Barbosa and Leal

ariovaldo

Re: Energy from the Ground - Self powered generator by Barbosa and Leal

MileHigh

Re: Energy from the Ground - Self powered generator by Barbosa and Leal

MileHigh

Re: Energy from the Ground - Self powered generator by Barbosa and Leal

Pirate88179

Re: Energy from the Ground - Self powered generator by Barbosa and Leal

MileHigh

Re: Energy from the Ground - Self powered generator by Barbosa and Leal

Pirate88179

Re: Energy from the Ground - Self powered generator by Barbosa and Leal

MileHigh

Re: Energy from the Ground - Self powered generator by Barbosa and Leal

Void

Re: Energy from the Ground - Self powered generator by Barbosa and Leal

MileHigh

Re: Energy from the Ground - Self powered generator by Barbosa and Leal

tinman

Re: Energy from the Ground - Self powered generator by Barbosa and Leal

Pirate88179

Re: Energy from the Ground - Self powered generator by Barbosa and Leal

TinselKoala

Re: Energy from the Ground - Self powered generator by Barbosa and Leal

MileHigh

Re: Energy from the Ground - Self powered generator by Barbosa and Leal