Free Energy | searching for free energy and discussing free energy

Solid States Devices => solid state devices => Topic started by: steve_whiss on August 24, 2006, 01:06:27 PM

Title: Is this the same? Gundersons Solid State Electric Generator Patent
Post by: steve_whiss on August 24, 2006, 01:06:27 PM

On first glance this looks like the same device as Steve Marks ring - or uses a variation on the same principle; Graham Gunderson's built his magnets in and has explained how it works in the Patent.

http://www.magneticpowerinc.com/mpi-patentapplication.pdf

With the magnets fixed in, would this one stop if you turned it over??

SteveB
Title: Re: Gundersons Solid State Electric Generator Patent has no relation to Marks!
Post by: Overtone on August 30, 2006, 09:30:38 PM
This is an entirely different invention. 

It is much more complex than it appears.  More details will emerge when the Patent is issued. 

Since we are a patent licensing firm, it would be irresponsible to reveal anything more until that time.

Mark Goldes, CEO
Magnetic Power Inc.
Title: Re: Is this the same? Gundersons Solid State Electric Generator Patent
Post by: hartiberlin on August 31, 2006, 01:40:47 AM
Hi Mark,
isn?t the patent already issued ?

Or are you waiting to get a licensing investor to buy it and
build products with it ?

When do you expect to be able to show working hardware ?

Many thanks.
Regards, Stefan.

P.S. I also think, the Steven Mark units are much different
and are more related to selfresonating
and feedbacked Barkhausen resonance.
Title: Re: Is this the same? Gundersons Solid State Electric Generator Patent
Post by: AdamMarquis on August 31, 2006, 10:11:30 PM
Overtone, I believe it's not as complex as you imply it is.
Sure it depends on magnets more than S. Mark's devices,
but still!!

To me it looks deceptively simple, (yet...
that damn flux is puzzling me!) here's why.

When one looks at electromagnetics from a moving electron standpoint
(without an unless magnetic field abstraction, take a look at the New Magnetism
of Distinti @ http://www.distinti.com )
the most simple alternator is this one, from a guy in Laval, Quebec, Canada
US Pat. Application 20050099081 @ http://pat2pdf.org
A magnet being a one wire loop of n amperes, it's easy to conceive and
even calculate what's going on.

The Magnetic power Inc device make the Disk Alternator almost
obsolete, since it's  the same basic idea, except the magnets are
not moving. Now, if we take into account the 5-6 thousand
hertz Steven Mark was able to pulse its cores at, it would
mean that the solid state electrical generator is similar to
a disk alternator driven to circa 70,000 RPMs!!

Adding to that the toroidally wound generator in the Sullivan patent,
20030025416 @ pat2pdf.org
and the low-loss rotating flux transformer patents from Westinghouse
4639610 and 4595843 @ http://pat2pdf.org
one can get understanding of what possibilities are out there.
Basically, saturate the core of the CEG to get free energy out of a
no-moving part flywheel, at least it's what I understand about it.

The CEG,  20030168921, is the 4595843 patent applied to electrical
energy generation. The best way I know of implementing the
blaxbox box is SHE (Selective Harmonic Elimination) sinewave synthesis,
more commonly known as Magic Sinewaves.

========
(additional material added in the post, in reply to Overtone)

Regarding the drive coil of the Gundersons device, one has to think
Fynn et al 's Parallel Path technology (newest patent 6342746).

The Parallel-Symmetric coil idea by Erl Koenig is worth of mention too.
It is contained in this US patent, 4806834, which state 25% current
reduction for the same magnetic effect is possible. (His 4584438
patent is a great application of this parallel-symmetric coil idea,
along with the more recent 5977707) It smells bifilar winding.

The Anonymous poster's explanation of the Marks device
http://www.overunity.com/index.php/topic,712.msg10964.html#msg10964
mention at the very first point the transistorized bifilar 
kicker of Bedini, which is similar in action to the Time Energy Pump
project, which material might relate to the Mark device.
http://jnaudin.free.fr/html/scalwidx.htm

I'm pretty sure the Gunderson device is home buildable from
the combined information in the aforementionned patents.

I recently read the first few S.M. comments about the
difficulties of understanding his device, will read the others
as soon as I get time to give.
Title: Re: Gundersons Solid State Electric Generator is not simple to build!
Post by: Overtone on September 01, 2006, 01:02:10 AM
There will be more to the final version (or versions) of this patent (or patents) that will explain my earlier statement.  As a licensing firm, we cannot disclose information prematurely. 

Our goal is mass production of these and several other types of self-sustaining generators, both solid-state and rotary, as rapidly as possible - with the widest distribution so that they can be affordable even in very poor countries. 

There are many aspects of this invention which are not obvious and not simple.  As work proceeds in the lab, we are learning how practical devices can be prototyped and later produced. 

Bringing down the cost will involve the development of new materials.  The early examples are expensive to produce.  We are confident we can accomplish the goal mentioned above, but it is not easy, nor can it be done on a shoestring. 

Think of the history of the transistor.  That is perhaps a good example of a device that was initially very difficult to make.  Today, they are mass produced by the millions at extremely low cost. 

We hope the process moves much faster with energy production, but that is not helped by individuals believing they can make it in a home workshop.  I assure you that in such a case, it will not be Over Unity.
Title: Re: Is this the same? Gundersons Solid State Electric Generator Patent
Post by: supersam on September 04, 2006, 06:09:22 AM
 ;)adam or manix

whicih part of to take full advatage of this device YOU HAVE TO GET INTO THREE DIMENSSIONS DO YOU NOT UNDERSTAND!?  LOOKING AT ANYTHING IN A CIRCLE IS LIKE PLAYING DEAD TO A SPHERE.
Title: Re: Is this the same? Gundersons Solid State Electric Generator Patent
Post by: supersam on September 04, 2006, 06:12:15 AM
i am not going to do the math for you. but the math exists. look at the relationship of pi and phi and i think you will find the harmonics you seek!
Title: Re: Is this the same? Gundersons Solid State Electric Generator Patent
Post by: supersam on September 04, 2006, 06:14:22 AM
try looking at a sphere in a sphere?
Title: Re: Is this the same? Gundersons Solid State Electric Generator Patent
Post by: giantkiller on September 04, 2006, 06:31:59 AM
Here is my take on this issue...
I will now attempt to dispell any unknowns presented by prestidigation or techno smoke.

In regards to Stephen Mark rings: Let's go back to basics. The first coil is 3", the 2nd coil is 6", and the 3rd coil is 17" in dia.
All devices have their electronics in the middle. The 3" and the 6" have lumps. The 17" has clearly visible drivers of some type in the center.
I will focus on the 3" coil. In the videos, the operator reaches in the center to the lump and presses something and states 'to engergize the device'. He presses a switch. The operator also states that 'there are no batteries involved that could produce the measured output'. Correct and nice speak. But if one were to have 4 AAA batteries to a two stage transistor ocsillator at 5k, one could achieve(with the right amout of turns) a step up transformer capable of the output shown. The device could be Telsa coil of some sort. The 6" and 17" are just bigger versions.
In the videos we haven't seen any devices left on for a real life time of usage, as in "what's the battery life?". That is a small factor to overcome. But still.

Why doesn't Stephen produce a schematic? At least the core material, input/output wire gauge, turns ratio and maybe the drive electronics and battery configuration. Not asking too much, am I?

If I could get the schematics just for the 3" then reproduction could be incredibly cheap. Make a gaggle of them and position them in different horizontal / vertical formations and see what happens. Also with the electronics put externally, the experimenter could submerge the devices and see the vortex or pump action. Why? I gotta bullet with your name on it if you need instructions. The object is so very simple: To play!

Oh, by the way. The 3" coil drive and the 6" coil drive electronics are the same. The operator continously misrepresentes things, like batteries, device on/off  techniques. Things are misrepresented on purpose.

Instead of the smoke and mirrors and trying to play god or God, or some materialistic goal, does anybody stop to think of the outcome if a shatload of these things were released to the public. More on that later.

I mean, how long has the clandestinism have to go on. Let's go back in history. Galileo and two pieces of glass. 6k years of alcohol and we've only been fighting infection for 150 years?, Davinci and the helicopter, Jesus and love your neighbor(my God that's been 2k years), Plato and his descriptions of Thermo Nuclear plants with electricity generation(its in the public library), the egyptians had copper wire and magnets. Man, are we stupid or what?, phoentians in 2000 bc had compasses. We are soooo slow it's killing me.

I have built a prototype of the 3". I went to a salvage yard and bought a 3" dia. 2" piece of iron pipe. I used 50' of dual conductor 16 gauge speaker wire(one turn = 2). I have 66 turn toriod, 33 turn double wound. I used a 555 timer @ 5k hz to drive a tip41 npn transistor to the coil. Since the turn ratio is 1:1. I put 12 volts in, get 12 volts out. Ok, so I dont get over unity. I can now PLAY! What does anybody else have besides speak? Consider the gauntlet thrown.  And the weight? you guessed it: 1lb. No surprise here.

On another note:
In the 'Nicola Telsa' movie. The one that starts out with the shots of Niagra falls and the the statue of Magnetic Nic, himself. There is a tour through the museum in Belgrade and what is shown are the 3 steps to create a rotating magnetic field, which the movie never goes into. But the device is deceptively simple to make a magnetic vortex. This is one of those things that if you don't have it to play with you can't see the benefits. Besides, Tesla had big iron and copper to play with. A Tesla link: http://www.amasci.com/tesla/tesla.html

Anyway, on to further on...
I'd be willing to bet that if 3 rings were on and phased correctly to create a rotating tercerary field. My assumuption(if I am allowed) is that there is a field displacement. Yeah I know, unproven so why speak about it. If one coil exhibits gyroscopic torsion then why can't that be magnified, spun, twisted, angular focused changes. I am playing again. And this is a long diatribe. I must go. But, if we can get lift, then just think of it. "Tonight I dine in Morroco and sleep in italian vineyards. I'll breakfast in Malaysia, and chase roos in AUk. Or my RV takes me to Jersey for free".

My device tryouts could be the community breadboard. Any doubts, go put yourself outta my misery.
And yes, I have looked at John bedini, JLN, David Hamel and all the other sites and done the experiements. We are sooo close. If you google: 75 dead scientist, there are 76. Guess what the odd man out is. That's right, dead! Dr. Eugene Mallove (http://freeenergynews.com/newstuff/archive/2006/Feb.htm) went to publish his knowledge on overunity motors. It is truely a brave new world and it still stinks of greed.

This one is cool: http://pesn.com/2004/12/10/6900057_Perendev_Taking_Orders/
 
Title: Gundersons Solid State Electric Generator Patent has no relation to Marks!
Post by: Overtone on September 04, 2006, 06:16:37 PM
It would seem a good idea to move the Marks materials to a Marks thread. 

The analogy might be diesel and gasoline fueled engines.  They are completely different. 

Title: Re: Is this the same? Gundersons Solid State Electric Generator Patent
Post by: EMdevices on October 08, 2006, 09:37:31 PM
 ::)
Title: Re: Is this the same? Gundersons Solid State Electric Generator Patent
Post by: gyulasun on October 09, 2006, 10:36:06 AM
...  Magnetic and Electric fields are linear fields!  (mediums might not be)

What does this mean?   

It means that Etotal = E1 + E2 + ...  , so if you have a field that fluctuates among other stationary fields, as from some magnets etc.,  the only field that CAN PRODUCE WORK IS THE TIME VARING FIELD.  (if its coupled to the output coils, the other stationary fields don't do anything)

So, in the patent, the input coils wound around the toroid, producing the oscilatory fields,  are not COUPLED to the output coils, which snake in and out the toroid in the radial plane.  Coupling means the net flux from one coil through another is not zero but in this case its zero, no coupling. 

The main point is this:   The input coils do not BEND the magnetic flux of the permanent magnets to somehow cause indirect coupling.  The field components simply add, static ones remain static, dynamic ones fluctuate but since they are not coupled, no power flows.  I notice a lot of patents that don't understand this basic principle, including the famous Berden and friends patent (I think its called the MEG? )  I guess people get exicited and have plenty of money to part with :)

Hi,

Basically you are right that if a change in the flux is not coupled to another flux then nothing or very little  happens.  However, a change in the flux can cause certain effects that may influence a change in the other flux. See this link: http://www.intalek.com/Index/Projects/Research/magcore.PDF

Here is another link that supports possible coupling between seemingly uncoupled fluxes:
http://www.intalek.com/Index/Projects/Research/VTA_Conditioning.pdf

So if the patent really works as stated I think a similar effect may happen in the ring core: a change in the core's permeability evokes a change in the permanent magnets' flux. You think it's possible?

Regards
Gyula
Title: Re: Is this the same? Gundersons Solid State Electric Generator Patent
Post by: gn0stik on October 09, 2006, 07:07:42 PM
Hello Mark,
glad you are part of this forum.   After learning about Steven Marks videos I let a friend know about it and he came back to me with the magneticpower patent,  glad to see that its not the one related to Steven Mark. 

The only patent I know of that is related to Steven Mark has to do with an invention related to audio, not Free energy, or any device that claims it. If you know of another patent that is related to SM please feel free to post the patent number.

Quote
I had doubts about that patent anyway, from the first time I saw it.  I belive it does not work!   and you have confirmed this for me saying that you have to prototype etc.  I will share a bit of wisdom for whoever is inclined to listen.  Magnetic and Electric fields are linear fields!  (mediums might not be)

What does this mean?   

It means that Etotal = E1 + E2 + ...  , so if you have a field that fluctuates among other stationary fields, as from some magnets etc.,  the only field that CAN PRODUCE WORK IS THE TIME VARING FIELD.  (if its coupled to the output coils, the other stationary fields don't do anything)

So, in the patent, the input coils wound around the toroid, producing the oscilatory fields,  are not COUPLED to the output coils, which snake in and out the toroid in the radial plane.  Coupling means the net flux from one coil through another is not zero but in this case its zero, no coupling. 

The main point is this:   The input coils do not BEND the magnetic flux of the permanent magnets to somehow cause indirect coupling.  The field components simply add, static ones remain static, dynamic ones fluctuate but since they are not coupled, no power flows.  I notice a lot of patents that don't understand this basic principle, including the famous Berden and friends patent (I think its called the MEG? )  I guess people get exicited and have plenty of money to part with :)

Thanks for the update on standard EM theory, we all needed it. See thing is, if we actually find FE, it probably won't be in the boundaries of known EM theory, but rather one of the other 14 calculations related to Mr. Maxwell's equations that we are no longer taught in physics classes.

Longitudinal waves are not linear. You'll notice that they are a common theme in FE research.

Rich.
Title: Re: Is this the same? Gundersons Solid State Electric Generator Patent
Post by: EMdevices on October 09, 2006, 08:22:30 PM
 ::)
Title: Re: Gundersons Solid State Electric Generator Patent Simply Needs a Fact Added!
Post by: Overtone on October 09, 2006, 08:33:00 PM
Hi,

You are mistaken.  The patent application is simply incomplete.  A Continuation in Part will be filed, with a key fact added, that we discovered is necessary for it to function Over Unity.  It will not exceed unity as presently described.

This work, as with all inventions by Magnetic Power Inc., grows from laboratory experiments rather than theory.  We have discovered that widely accepted theory is incomplete or incorrect. 

Details are proprietary.

Those who can understand the math may want to read Carver Mead's thin volume entitled Collective Electrodynamics.  His book is about superconductivity, but it illustrates the difference between textbook knowledge and laboratory experiments. 

Mark Goldes
Chiarman & CEO
Magnetic Power Inc.



Title: Re: Is this the same? Gundersons Solid State Electric Generator Patent
Post by: Liberty on October 10, 2006, 03:54:41 AM
I wonder if permanent magnet high density flux saturation levels of the core, interferes with the more powerful operation of the Gunderson Solid State Electric Generator?  (It is my understanding that it so far works at low power levels).  I would guess that core saturation might be a limiting issue in attempted higher magnetic strength and power models because of the limit of saturation in a magnetic core.  I hope not, but as I think about it, I would wonder about that being an unfortunate limitation of the design???  Maybe Overtone would be able to speak about this, whether it is an issue, and if not, how it can be avoided?  Perhaps the core material that is used is key here or just make the core very large and laminate the core using silicon steel?
Title: Questions re Gundersons Solid State Electric Generator Patent Application
Post by: Overtone on October 10, 2006, 06:11:07 AM
Sorry, as I have mentioned, I cannot comment on proprietary technology issues.

All will be revealed when the final Patent documents covering this invention are published.



Title: Re: Is this the same? Gundersons Solid State Electric Generator Patent
Post by: JackFrost on October 17, 2006, 08:09:18 PM
Hello Mark,

How is the validation coming along?

JackFrost
Title: Re: Is this the same? Gundersons Solid State Electric Generator Patent
Post by: Overtone on October 18, 2006, 02:49:57 AM
Hi Jack,

We have two devices that may prove out in the rotary lab and two in the solid-state lab, with the possibility of one more in each.

Progress is slower than we would like, but continues.  Part of what slows us down is the continuing shortage of working capital, ironically, that will end with validation. 

There is also some wonderful and important new work, which interferes with attempts to schedule, as it represents insights that can help with several of the future commercial and demo machines.  Invention does not lend itself to a rigid schedule.

Finally, EarthTech has relocated in Austin and coordinating visits may prove a bit of a challenge. 

My present guess is we will end up with it all done sometime next month. 

Title: Re: Is this the same? Gundersons Solid State Electric Generator Patent
Post by: JackFrost on October 18, 2006, 09:08:42 PM
Mark,

If evaluation will cure the working capital issue then I suggest focusing on the single device that can be produced most expediently and with  the greatest chance of initial success rather than several devices.  You risk having multiple incomplete devices, no evaluations, and no capital.  The longer it takes - the more it take - monitarily that is.

You stated before that you have a working prototype (when the patent application was filed) - take it to Austin.  Like LTSeung888 mentioned - Steorn forced their hand and they have to move much faster than anticipated - you do too.

Also, send this link to Cyril:
http://www.physics.ucla.edu/demoweb/demomanual/electricity_and_magnetism/electrodynamics/vector_potential.html

If the deflection of the galvanometer isn't A-Field induction, then what is it?
Title: Re: Gundersons Solid State Electric Generator Patent
Post by: Overtone on February 03, 2007, 10:08:26 PM
Jack,

We have a sharp focus on OU devices that we expect will soon be independently validated.

Attached is a Press Release you and other readers might find of interest.

Mark

Title: Re: Is this the same? Gundersons Solid State Electric Generator Patent
Post by: MeggerMan on February 04, 2007, 12:34:10 AM
Hi Mark,
What strikes me about your mystery device is that I have never come across any photographs of your device except the 3 small images found on peswiki.

Are there any photos of your device apart from what is on peswiki?

Regards
Rob
Title: Re: Is this the same? Gundersons Solid State Electric Generator Patent
Post by: Overtone on February 04, 2007, 01:22:52 AM
No.

The photos are of a different device in an early experiment. Patentable versions are not shown.

No photos of our generators will be released until more patents have been filed, not only in the USA, but in several other countries, including Taiwan and South Korea.

In those countries, release of a photo can immediately end patentability.

Mark

Title: Re: Is this the same? Gundersons Solid State Electric Generator Patent
Post by: Grumpy on February 04, 2007, 04:29:39 AM
Overtone,

Where have you been, Mark?  Been quiet without you.  Hmm, who's "RTS"?

You might take a look at this link which shows some fine renderings of a device that appears similar to the MPI/Gunderson device:

http://www.overunity.com/index.php?PHPSESSID=98821b619bdb6a8515e3314d84a51183&topic=1827.0

Guess the image and description in the patent was enough for someone to take a crack at it.  Sure would be a pisser if someone brought out your device before your validation. 

How's the validation coming along?  Been about 6 months now, still a month out?

Sorry, I'm being facetious.

Pass this on to Cyril Smith:

"There are no fields, only the potentials."



Title: Re: Is this the same? Gundersons Solid State Electric Generator Patent
Post by: MeggerMan on February 04, 2007, 07:39:06 PM
Hi Mark,
So I take it that you are not going to help on this forum in any way, no pointers, no hints, no clues, no nothing really except pointing out how much publicity your company MPI is getting.

What would happen if a copy-cat device was released to the public before yours?

Can I ask how much overunity are you getting with your latest device?
Is it self running?

Regards
Rob
Title: Re: Is this the same? Gundersons Solid State Electric Generator Patent
Post by: Overtone on February 05, 2007, 02:11:43 AM
We do not yet have a self-running device, but all of our commercialization efforts are based on achieving such units.

Our focus is getting generators and demonstration devices into production asap.

Everything else has to be much lower in priority.

There are too few of us and too much work to be done to spend much time on this or any other forum.

Three very large domestic firms have begun evaluating our work and are potential licensees.

Mark
Title: Re: Is this the same? Gundersons Solid State Electric Generator Patent
Post by: Overtone on February 05, 2007, 02:20:10 AM
Grumpy,

RTS is our subsidiary, formed in 1993 to develop polymer Ultraconductors(tm).

If you read my posts, you will see that nobody is likely to succeed in making an Over Unity generator based on the present patent application. It is far more difficult and expensive to develop than is apparent.

We welcome all competitors. The world needs this type of technology urgently and we cheer anyone on who tries to develop it. 

Cyril is well aware of the point of view reflected in the comment you made and has been for many years.

Best to all,

Mark

Mark
Title: Re: Is this the same? Gundersons Solid State Electric Generator Patent
Post by: MeggerMan on February 05, 2007, 12:06:44 PM
Hi Mark,
Quote
We do not yet have a self-running device, but all of our commercialization efforts are based on achieving such units.
Ah, I thought you did have a self running unit. 
Are you confident that it can be made self running?
If not then that puts into question a lot of other devices like the MEG.
So when you apply for a patent, you may show a device that shows over-unity only but does not need to be self-running?

Surely you would build at least one prototype self running unit before you commit to a production run.

Regards
Rob
Title: Re: Is this the same? Gundersons Solid State Electric Generator Patent
Post by: acp on February 05, 2007, 02:56:39 PM
overtone, you really are a funny guy.................
Title: Re: Is this the same? Gundersons Solid State Electric Generator Patent
Post by: Hoppy on February 05, 2007, 04:47:13 PM
Overtone wrote: -

Quote
"We do not yet have a self-running device, but all of our commercialization efforts are based on achieving such units."

How big were the batteries powering the TPU's shown in the video then?
Title: Re: Is this the same? Gundersons Solid State Electric Generator Patent
Post by: Overtone on February 05, 2007, 06:27:58 PM
Many patents have been issued for inventions that never functioned or could function.

We expect to be required to bring a self-sustaining device into the patent examiner as proof that our generators deserve a patent. The work toward self powered units is proceeding very well.

MPI has never made any video. You are confusing us with someone else.

Mark

Title: Re: Is this the same? Gundersons Solid State Electric Generator Patent
Post by: acp on February 05, 2007, 07:15:19 PM
Wow..................  :o
Title: Re: Is this the same? Gundersons Solid State Electric Generator Patent
Post by: Sauron on March 04, 2007, 09:45:44 PM
Hi Jack,

We have two devices that may prove out in the rotary lab and two in the solid-state lab, with the possibility of one more in each.

Progress is slower than we would like, but continues.  Part of what slows us down is the continuing shortage of working capital, ironically, that will end with validation. 

There is also some wonderful and important new work, which interferes with attempts to schedule, as it represents insights that can help with several of the future commercial and demo machines.  Invention does not lend itself to a rigid schedule.

Finally, EarthTech has relocated in Austin and coordinating visits may prove a bit of a challenge. 

My present guess is we will end up with it all done sometime next month. 



HMMM october 18,

So can we order one yet ?  ;D
Title: Re: Is this the same? Gundersons Solid State Electric Generator Patent
Post by: Overtone on March 06, 2007, 04:44:36 PM
MPI is a licensing firm and not a manufacturer.

We are making good progress in the labs and if it continues to go well, licensees could have prototypes later this year.

How long it takes them to gear up for production remains to be seen.

Generators will be priced and sold by manufacturers as of present plans.

Our website has been updated:  www.magneticpowerinc.com

Mark
Title: Re: Is this the same? Gundersons Solid State Electric Generator Patent
Post by: acp on March 06, 2007, 05:53:53 PM
Yawn.................
Title: Re: Is this the same? Gundersons Solid State Electric Generator Patent
Post by: Topguner2 on March 06, 2007, 06:59:11 PM
MPI is a licensing firm and not a manufacturer.

We are making good progress in the labs and if it continues to go well, licensees could have prototypes later this year.

How long it takes them to gear up for production remains to be seen.

Generators will be priced and sold by manufacturers as of present plans.

Our website has been updated:  www.magneticpowerinc.com

Mark


Please hurry!
Title: Re: Is this the same? Gundersons Solid State Electric Generator Patent
Post by: acp on March 08, 2007, 08:00:31 AM
Mark explaining the magneticpowernc principal.

(http://img242.imageshack.us/img242/8150/winner110txaw7.gif)
Title: Re: Is this the same? Gundersons Solid State Electric Generator Patent
Post by: Thaelin on March 08, 2007, 04:20:02 PM
 A real tear jerker without the tears, Huh!  Good clip tho.

suggie