I don't recall seeing them using the coil and spark gap.
But as far as the unit in PA goes... as I have shown, in the interview with Sterling on PESN he tells the truth (sort of) about the PA Prototype.
1. It was never "run" for 150 hours. It was _driven_ for perhaps 1.5 hours, many times, in the "resonance mode", and James estimates a total of about 150 hours being driven in that mode.
2. The _peak_ power measured by clampon meters, DMMs and the oscilloscope was a bit over 9 kW and the _average_ was "probably" between 4 and 5 kW. Although he did not say so specifically I think we know that he is referring once again to peak-to-peak readings multiplied together and not the true "average power" which is Vrms x Irms -- just as they have done with all subsequent "OU in VARs" claims.
3. No... James specifically says the unit never actually ran itself.  He complains about building it in his barn, not having the necessary inverter, etc etc but after all the hemming and hawing is done the fact remains: they "released" this device to the "public" based on the "resonance" and misinterpretation of their measurements and the device _never_ in fact produced any OU or ran itself.

So in order to show everyone that the PA prototype does what _he_ claimed, all he need do is show the Resonance and some bulbs lighting up, and some squiggly colored lines on the scope. He really never claimed anything more than that.

When HypeGirl said the thing "works" and had "run for 150 hours" she was deliberately trying to give the impression that she meant "self running while producing extra power output" which is the usual meaning of "working" and "running" in our community. Isn't it? However this was clearly not the case and James himself told us so in the interview. Nothing that has transpired since has trumped that set of statements from JR. And the problems that caused them to be unable to make the PA Prototype "work" remain: the thing has never made any OU and never will, so all efforts trying to make it self-run are futile.

TK,

I realize Jamie never said he had accomplished a self-runner, but did he not say in the PESN interview that he had connected loads to the output (a heater or the like) that supposedly drew more than the input to the motor?  I'll try to find the time to listen to it again more closely.

If all the claims are in error because of his misuse of pk to pk vs. rms values, then he should just own up to that.

PW

In the image below you see a system that has a high degree of reactive power circulating in the resonant "primary" on the left. It is much greater than the input power drawn as DC from the battery. This reactive power is "transformed" by the air-core transformer whose secondary is now powering a real resistive lightbulb load, on the right. This system is doing exactly the same thing electronically that the QEG device is doing electromechanically, and it's doing it a lot more quietly and a lot cheaper.

I can haz cheezburger now?

TK,

Nobody trusts you around cheese anymore...

PW

Some reference pages for the Be-Do-er's about the "Magic" of resonance.

The Physics of Resonance
http://www.intuitor.com/resonance/circuits.html

Scholarly Articles on resonance.
http://scholar.google.com.au/scholar?q=oscillating+power+in+resonant+systems&hl=en&as_sdt=0&as_vis=1&oi=scholart&sa=X&ei=sFa-U5joCIrLkwXe-oC4BA&ved=0CBoQgQMwAA

Yes the true magic of resonance.

@TinselKoala:
Hi,
Just a basic calculus to start with a parallel tank circuit: i=sqrt(-1) and ω=2*Pi*F
Zc=i/(C*ω) and Zl=i*L*ω, Zr=R so Zlr=R+i*L*ω
1/Z=1/Zc+1/Zlr
and with the help of MatLab
Z=R/(ω^2*(C^2*R^2 + 2*L*C) + C^2*L^2* ω ^4 + 1) + i *( ω *(C*R^2 + L) + C*L^2* ω ^3)/(C^2*L^2* ω ^4 + C^2* ω ^2*R^2 + 2*C*L* ω ^2 + 1)
This is the complex impedance of the tank, and can be use to calculate the voltages and currents
in the tank circuit when voltages and currents are sinusoidal. (With excel for example, I do
and it's in perfect accord with the simulation).
With L=160nH, C=60nF, R=0.25 ohm, F=793kHz: and ω=2*Pi*F you get:
  Z=0.162+i*0.654 |Z|=0.6735 Phase shift=76°

As V input=24Vrms=68Vpp   then I input= 35,6Arms !!! (yes 35.6)
and Power input=206W really....
Vc= 24rms           VL= 23.9Vrms       VR=21.1Vrms
Ic = 7.2Arms        IL = 29.8Arms       IR=28.7Arms
phase Shift=90°   phase shift=-90°    Phase=0
Power(C)=0W       Power(L)=0W        Power(R)=206W

So, with this near perfect circuit, we need 206W input to have 24 Vrms=68 Vpp on the entire
tank...
But how much current out of the battery?

2- Your DVM max input current  is = 10A and Vbat=12A, the max power the DVM can measure is 120W!
With an efficiency of 100%(as hypotheses), all the power goes to the tank output (C in // with
L+R). So 120W to the tank is 10Arms and 206W is 17.6Arms...

If the DVM is overload, it can continue to display bad information. Some of this low prices devices do not block the display, and you can read anything....
Did you test the DVM with this this LCRF values?
And can you let me know the R of the to 2 coils L1 and L2?

Do not hesitate to ask me any more information on this simulation.
See the simulation in attachement...
@+

Sigh....

Not to much exciting happening....  "The bench technician and the IP telephony guy and the teleported hippie girl that changed the world."

The Florida clips..... what can I say?   You should see what it's like when I try to play a guitar.

Here is a dodgy video showing a large tank activity with a tiny input. At about 2:45 in the video I scope the primary coil and show
150 volts point to point but it's not sinusoidal, primary coil is ten turns of 1 mm wire. Frequency about 840 kHz around about.

The input is in the order of 4 watts with all that tank activity. I would not call it reactive power, I call it oscillating power.

Video is from 2 years ago take it easy on me.  I still have the equipment.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=TJd8TNC75AI

..

..