Language: 
To browser these website, it's necessary to store cookies on your computer.
The cookies contain no personal information, they are required for program control.
  the storage of cookies while browsing this website, on Login and Register.

GDPR and DSGVO law

Storing Cookies (See : http://ec.europa.eu/ipg/basics/legal/cookies/index_en.htm ) help us to bring you our services at overunity.com . If you use this website and our services you declare yourself okay with using cookies .More Infos here:
https://overunity.com/5553/privacy-policy/
If you do not agree with storing cookies, please LEAVE this website now. From the 25th of May 2018, every existing user has to accept the GDPR agreement at first login. If a user is unwilling to accept the GDPR, he should email us and request to erase his account. Many thanks for your understanding.
Amazon Warehouse Deals ! Now even more Deep Discounts ! Check out these great prices on slightly used or just opened once only items.I always buy my gadgets via these great Warehouse deals ! Highly recommended ! Many thanks for supporting OverUnity.com this way.

User Menu

Plug Heater

Powerbox

Smartbox

3D Solar

3D Solar Panels

DC2DC converter

Micro JouleThief

FireMatch

FireMatch

CCKnife

CCKnife

CCTool

CCTool

Magpi Magazine

Magpi Magazine Free Rasberry Pi Magazine

Battery Recondition

Battery Recondition

Arduino

Ultracaps

YT Subscribe

Gravity Machines

Tesla-Ebook

Magnet Secrets

Lindemann Video

Navigation

Products

Products

WaterMotor kit

Statistics


  • *Total Posts: 511057
  • *Total Topics: 15227
  • *Online Today: 44
  • *Most Online: 103
(December 19, 2006, 11:27:19 PM)
  • *Users: 4
  • *Guests: 14
  • *Total: 18

Author Topic: Gyroscopic Inertia Generator  (Read 92681 times)

Offline MileHigh

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 7617
Re: Gyroscopic Inertia Generator
« Reply #90 on: November 20, 2014, 12:56:18 PM »
Scorch:

Quote
Or, if one makes the claim "it doesn't work", then one still suffers the burden of proof of his claim such as: conducting the actual experiment multiple times, under a multitude of various conditions, in order to PROVE it doesn't work under ANY condition and must include certified documentation and supporting evidence. Otherwise it's merely a frivolous (unproven) claim.

I do not know what the results of this experiment may be and I conduct this experiment without any specific expectation beyond the expectation that it should actually run when I turn it on.
The rest is absolutely UNKNOWN and I would be an ignorant fool to make any specific claims about that which I have no knowledge such as a device I have not built, operated, or tested yet. . .

I think that we have been down this road before.  I never stated "it doesn't work."  Nor are you qualifying what that means.  Please do not put words in my mouth.  What I have repeatedly stated is that your build will work like any other pulse motor will work.  It can be a $5000 pulse motor or a $30 pulse motor, they will both work in approximately the same way.

Relative to your statements, I absolutely do not have to prove that it doesn't work.  I am making no special claims and you are once again falling into the trap of reversing the burden of proof.  The burden of proof rests on the shoulders of anyone making extraordinary claims not on the person that states that that there are no extraordinary claims.  This process is never going to change so you are going to have to live with it.

When Aaron tries to claim that Bedini motors are under unity except for the case of a special "magic" configuration by John Bedini that uses a cap pulser to run indefinitely as an over unity free energy machine, 1) it's absolute crap, a lie, and 2) if Aaron and John want to prove it then the burden of proof rests with them.

As far as the results of your experiments with the motor go, I can tell you will 100% certainty that your pulse motor will act like a regular pulse motor and not show any behaviour out of the ordinary whatsoever.  That is a specific claim and I stand by it.  You would have to be an ignorant fool to have any kinds of expectations that something out of the ordinary will be observed with any pulse motor configuration.  You actually can make predictions about things that have not been built or tested when they are just applications of basic and simple electronics where everything is mundane and ordinary.

I hope that my point of view is now 100% clear to you.

MileHigh

Free Energy | searching for free energy and discussing free energy

Re: Gyroscopic Inertia Generator
« Reply #90 on: November 20, 2014, 12:56:18 PM »

Offline synchro1

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 3693
Re: Gyroscopic Inertia Generator
« Reply #91 on: November 20, 2014, 01:58:34 PM »
Scorch:

I think that we have been down this road before.  I never stated "it doesn't work."  Nor are you qualifying what that means.  Please do not put words in my mouth.  What I have repeatedly stated is that your build will work like any other pulse motor will work.  It can be a $5000 pulse motor or a $30 pulse motor, they will both work in approximately the same way.

Relative to your statements, I absolutely do not have to prove that it doesn't work.  I am making no special claims and you are once again falling into the trap of reversing the burden of proof.  The burden of proof rests on the shoulders of anyone making extraordinary claims not on the person that states that that there are no extraordinary claims.  This process is never going to change so you are going to have to live with it.

When Aaron tries to claim that Bedini motors are under unity except for the case of a special "magic" configuration by John Bedini that uses a cap pulser to run indefinitely as an over unity free energy machine, 1) it's absolute crap, a lie, and 2) if Aaron and John want to prove it then the burden of proof rests with them.

As far as the results of your experiments with the motor go, I can tell you will 100% certainty that your pulse motor will act like a regular pulse motor and not show any behaviour out of the ordinary whatsoever.  That is a specific claim and I stand by it.  You would have to be an ignorant fool to have any kinds of expectations that something out of the ordinary will be observed with any pulse motor configuration.  You actually can make predictions about things that have not been built or tested when they are just applications of basic and simple electronics where everything is mundane and ordinary.

I hope that my point of view is now 100% clear to you.

MileHigh


@Milehigh,


Why not wait until the motor's built and tested before drawing final conclusions you pompous ass!

Offline MileHigh

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 7617
Re: Gyroscopic Inertia Generator
« Reply #92 on: November 20, 2014, 02:09:02 PM »
Scorch:

We can characterize how a pulse motor works by just looking at a single pulse.  A single pulse contains a finite and measurable amount of electrical energy so we just have to look at where that energy goes:

1.  Resistive losses in the wire of the coil.
2.  Mechanical energy that gives the rotor a push to keep it spinning.
3.  The recovered back-EMF pulse that normally goes into the charging battery.

1. Resistive losses in the wire of the coil.

You can measure the resistance of the coil and the RMS current going through the coil, and the pulse frequency.  That gives you all the information that you require to calculate the number of Joules per pulse that turn into waste heat in the resistance of the wire of the coil.

2.  Mechanical energy that gives the rotor a push to keep it spinning.

As TK said, you can calculate or measure the moment of inertia of the rotor.  Then you can record ticks when doing a rotor spin-down test.  The deceleration of the rotor is proportional to the slope of the RPM vs. time for the rotor spin-down test.  With that information and the pulse frequency you can calculate the mechanical energy per pulse required to keep the rotor spinning at any RPM.

Note: All of the mechanical energy put into the rotor per pulse instantly becomes waste heat energy via the bearing and air friction.  This is where Aaron has a fundamental lack of understanding because he mistakenly believes this is "unmeasured useful output" that can be added to the COP calculation for the Bedini motor.  This is absolutely and utterly wrong.  It's also possible that Aaron is just faking and knowingly making a false statement because it's good for business to add a fake mystique to the Bedini motor.

3.  The recovered back-EMF pulse that normally goes into the charging battery.

Here you can emulate the charging battery with a big fat cap that sits at the charging battery voltage and a variable resistor to ground.  You measure the average charging battery power and with the pulse frequency you then know the amount of energy in each back-EMF pulse.  In order to make the measurement more accurate you also will add the measurement of the energy that is dissipated in the diode and the wire itself per pulse.

So, then you can check your measurements and see how well you did.  So to check your measurements, you make as accurate a measurement as you can of the average electrical power the pulse motor is consuming and then convert that into the average energy per pulse.

Here is what you check:

Battery energy per pulse = resistive losses per pulse + mechanical energy per pulse + charging energy per pulse.

You can do this for different RPMs.  You would expect to see that at higher RPMs the proportional mechanical energy per pulse will increase because of the increasing air friction.

If your goal is to make the motor as efficient as possible in terms of RPM per unit of input power, then you want to figure out a way to keep the proportional charging battery energy per pulse as low as possible.  In other words you want as much of your battery energy to become mechanical energy that drives the rotor while having as little energy as possible going in to the back-EMF spike.

If your goal is to maximize the charging energy per pulse then eliminate the pulse motor all together and then just pulse a coil, sometimes called a "solid state Bedini."

I think the most interesting observation would be to measure the trend where for higher RPM you get proportionally less back-EMF spike power.  Hence if you want to design a Bedini motor to charge batteries as efficiently as possible, the actual RPM of the running motor is not a relevant variable.  You want to put as little mechanical energy into the rotor as possible and as much proportional energy as you can into the back-EMF spike.

MileHigh

Free Energy | searching for free energy and discussing free energy

Re: Gyroscopic Inertia Generator
« Reply #92 on: November 20, 2014, 02:09:02 PM »
Sponsored links:




Offline MileHigh

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 7617
Re: Gyroscopic Inertia Generator
« Reply #93 on: November 20, 2014, 02:37:26 PM »
Scorch:

Let's rearrange this equation:

Battery energy per pulse = resistive losses per pulse + mechanical energy per pulse + charging energy per pulse.

To:

Mechanical energy per pulse = battery energy per pulse - resistive losses per pulse - charging energy per pulse.

Note everything on the right side of the equation is easy to measure.  So you can easily derive and make a decent estimate of the mechanical energy per pulse.  So then a fun challenge would be to actually measure the mechanical energy per pulse with the spin-down test and then compare it with the calculated mechanical energy per pulse.  If the two values are say within +/-5% then it would give you confirmation that your measurements are good.

MileHigh

Offline synchro1

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 3693
Re: Gyroscopic Inertia Generator
« Reply #94 on: November 20, 2014, 03:43:07 PM »
@Milehigh,


Quote:


"All of the mechanical energy put into the rotor per pulse instantly becomes waste heat energy via the bearing and air friction".


Where does that leave an (evacuated)* frictionless levitating diametric neo magnet sphere spinner like mine? The asterisk denotes theoretical.


I can improve the BEMF recovery ratio higher then 30% by wrapping the power toroid coil conventionally; Tight with coil wires next to one another, rather then lash style. I realized the inferior lash design caused the Lenz delay with the output spiral, but the design does nothing to increase the efficiency of the power spiral compared to an ordinary Bedini style window coil.


Gadgetmall went OU with his piggyback output coil looped back to source SSG Bedini, although no one could understand why at the time. Placing the output coil six inches from the rotor at the end of a welding rod core caused the retardation in the output coil pole formation, and the consequent Lenz propulsion. I have noted at least five ways to accomplish this kind of "Lenz Delay Propulsion".


Milehigh's overly simplistic, pseudo scientific formulas are nothing but ivory tower egg head rubbish!


Here's my 100% certain formula: Lenz propulsion output coupled with BEMF recovery equals overunity!

Free Energy | searching for free energy and discussing free energy

Re: Gyroscopic Inertia Generator
« Reply #94 on: November 20, 2014, 03:43:07 PM »
Sponsored links:




Offline Scorch

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 264
    • Scorch's Private Contractor Site
Re: Gyroscopic Inertia Generator
« Reply #95 on: November 20, 2014, 06:22:49 PM »
11/20/14

What if? . . .

What if I were to state that I do not intend to perform any extensive testing beyond this humble attempt to confirm that internal system voltage may rise while system is operating and possibly powering an LED light while maintaining or increasing voltage?

What if I were to state this is all I care about?

If there is ANY evidence this might be accomplished then; all you experts are certainly welcome to perform all this proposed testing to determine specific performance.
And, of course and if they need a machine to test, I would certainly be willing to rent my asset to them for the purposes of testing.  8)

While I, on the other hand, will then pursue bigger and better things while all you eggheads can do ALL the work to solve whatever problem(s) you might decide to have with the revealed evidence....  ;)

See how that might work?
If I were to make an actual claim of a specific performance then; everybody will certainly demand  that I perform all this work and prove it beyond my own believe system.
This would be a huge burden of proof thrust upon me by way of my own claim...
And if system actually is operating within the variable source energy fields and charging batteries that are subject to various conditions including temperature and even plate forming that occurs over time, and system performance changes merely depending on location, orientation, time of day, solar system cycles and other factors; how does one possibly quantify this and provide any specific performance results?

So why would I, Mike, John, Aaron, Peter (or anybody else for that matter) make any such claims subject to such demands and burdens?!?

It would appear that if anybody makes a specific claim then others, such as yourself, will certainly demand proof.
In this hypothetical, "what if?", scenerio; the proof would already be there for those with open minds to learn, ears to hear and eyes to see.
BUT they have to actually see, touch, and hear it in order to obtain the true knowledge they seek!

Otherwise; they lazily claim "you faked the video"...  :P
So. . . why would we want to subject ourselves to such attacks?!?

Would it be acceptable if I merely attempt to replicate what was presented in the video to the satisfaction of myself while also sharing my experience here for all to see?
Would it be acceptable if I merely allow others to find the proof they seek to support their own belief systems?

Want true, first hand, experiential knowledge and undeniable proof?
Then build and/or and test it yourself silly!   ;D

}:>


Scorch:
 So you can easily derive and make a decent estimate of the mechanical energy per pulse.  So then a fun challenge would be to actually measure the mechanical energy per pulse with the spin-down test and then compare it with the calculated mechanical energy per pulse.  If the two values are say within +/-5% then it would give you confirmation that your measurements are good.

MileHigh

Offline MileHigh

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 7617
Re: Gyroscopic Inertia Generator
« Reply #96 on: November 20, 2014, 09:00:08 PM »
Scorch:

That was a generic example for any pulse motor, nobody is asking you to do the same tests.  Those were just some examples for illustrative purposes.  If I recall, in the clip Mike Kantz states that something interesting might be going on.  I think he switches out the power supply and runs the motor off of the big capacitor bank (the "internal system voltage") and at the same time the generator section is pumping power back into the main capacitor bank.  He is vague about everything, which is normal, and the main capacitor bank "might" be increasing in voltage when this is happening.

Woo!  Is there an anomaly going on there?

For starters, how vague can staring at the voltage readout on a digital multimeter for 10 minutes really be?  You would think that Mike Kantz would be capable of doing that and making a definitive statement, wouldn't you?

So it would be most welcome if you made goods tests here to clear up the cloud of vagueness associated with that Quanta Magnetics clip.  And no, you won't become an "egghead" if you do some good experimenting.

If you see the increasing voltage, the next things you should be asking yourself are why and how.  It looks to me like, for some reason, when he switches over to the cap voltage, there is some excess rotational energy in the rotor that drives the generator to charge the capacitor bank.  This might last a minute and then it will start going down.  For example, if the battery voltage was 12.6 volts and the cap bank voltage is 12.0 volts, when the switchover is done to the cap bank, the rotor will indeed recharge the cap bank for a short while like I described.  Obviously, the normal running RPM at 12.0 volts is going to be slower than the same thing at 12.6 volts.  The excess RPM in the rotor is "burned off" by charging the cap bank.  It's all 100% normal.

MileHigh

Free Energy | searching for free energy and discussing free energy

Re: Gyroscopic Inertia Generator
« Reply #96 on: November 20, 2014, 09:00:08 PM »
Sponsored links:




Offline Scorch

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 264
    • Scorch's Private Contractor Site
Re: Gyroscopic Inertia Generator
« Reply #97 on: November 20, 2014, 10:09:54 PM »
11/20/14

Managed to complete some more assembly work today.
I used a cheapo arbor press to press the magnets into the intermediate rotors which do appear to be polycarbonate and are same diameter as primary motor rotor at 11".
Magnets are 18 pcs of 1.75" Dia x 0.25" Thick N42
www.kjmagnetics.com/proddetail.asp?prod=DXC4

The manufacturer calls these "secondary" rotors but I call them "intermediate" rotors because there is-
1. Primary motor rotor.
2. Intermediate rotors. (qty. 3)
3. Final alternator rotors. (qty. 2)

I also stacked all the moving parts onto a scale including all rotors, magnets, shaft, hubs, timing disk, flywheels and hardware in order to get an idea of what the total rotational mass might be.

The total kinetic mass in this device is right around 27 pounds.

And, yes, all these rotors do tend to 'couple' with each other.
Had to use lots of styrofoam spacers just to make sure they don't all lock together on the scale.

I also placed the motor and generator sections side by side for a size comparison.
It does appear the motor section is substantially larger than the alternator it will drive along with the flywheel.

That is all for now.

Kindest regards;

}:>

Offline Scorch

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 264
    • Scorch's Private Contractor Site
Re: Gyroscopic Inertia Generator
« Reply #98 on: November 20, 2014, 10:19:13 PM »
11/20/14

No. I would not.

Why?
Because if he makes a definitive statement; somebody would then call him a liar and demand proof of his claim.  ::)

And, more than likely, he has much higher priorities to be concerned with than spending a lot of his time attempting to convince multitudes of internet skeptics, 'debunkers', or disinformation agents who have not actually studied the experiment in person in real time as I am currently doing...  8)

Kindest regards;

}:>


Scorch:

You would think that Mike Kantz would be capable of doing that and making a definitive statement, wouldn't you?

MileHigh

Free Energy | searching for free energy and discussing free energy

Re: Gyroscopic Inertia Generator
« Reply #98 on: November 20, 2014, 10:19:13 PM »
3D Solar Panels

Offline synchro1

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 3693
Re: Gyroscopic Inertia Generator
« Reply #99 on: November 20, 2014, 11:15:06 PM »

Anyone who has watched those Mike Kantz videos should be able to identify the inventor in this 2008 video from the voice: Check out the capacitor and the alternator at the end of the rotor!


https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hgkoxbS5rHk&feature=channel


It's easy to see how he's coupled "Lenz Propulsion" with the diversion of back spike to coil pulse, satisfying my two requirements for overunity! Mike's self charger is the real McCoy folks, don't anyone doubt it!

Offline tinman

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 5160
Re: Gyroscopic Inertia Generator
« Reply #100 on: November 21, 2014, 02:12:11 AM »
k
11/20/14

What if? . . .

What if I were to state that I do not intend to perform any extensive testing beyond this humble attempt to confirm that internal system voltage may rise while system is operating and possibly powering an LED light while maintaining or increasing voltage?

What if I were to state this is all I care about?

If there is ANY evidence this might be accomplished then; all you experts are certainly welcome to perform all this proposed testing to determine specific performance.
And, of course and if they need a machine to test, I would certainly be willing to rent my asset to them for the purposes of testing.  8)

While I, on the other hand, will then pursue bigger and better things while all you eggheads can do ALL the work to solve whatever problem(s) you might decide to have with the revealed evidence....  ;)

See how that might work?
If I were to make an actual claim of a specific performance then; everybody will certainly demand  that I perform all this work and prove it beyond my own believe system.
This would be a huge burden of proof thrust upon me by way of my own claim...
And if system actually is operating within the variable source energy fields and charging batteries that are subject to various conditions including temperature and even plate forming that occurs over time, and system performance changes merely depending on location, orientation, time of day, solar system cycles and other factors; how does one possibly quantify this and provide any specific performance results?

So why would I, Mike, John, Aaron, Peter (or anybody else for that matter) make any such claims subject to such demands and burdens?!?

It would appear that if anybody makes a specific claim then others, such as yourself, will certainly demand proof.
In this hypothetical, "what if?", scenerio; the proof would already be there for those with open minds to learn, ears to hear and eyes to see.
BUT they have to actually see, touch, and hear it in order to obtain the true knowledge they seek!

Otherwise; they lazily claim "you faked the video"...  :P
So. . . why would we want to subject ourselves to such attacks?!?

Would it be acceptable if I merely attempt to replicate what was presented in the video to the satisfaction of myself while also sharing my experience here for all to see?
Would it be acceptable if I merely allow others to find the proof they seek to support their own belief systems?

Want true, first hand, experiential knowledge and undeniable proof?
Then build and/or and test it yourself silly!   ;D

}:>
John, Arron, Peter have made many claims to self running free energy machines, but never once backed up said claims with hard evidence-nothing out of the ordinary there.
Be true to your self Scorch-search for the truth through testing.

Remember, John, Arron, Peter are all for making money, and the longer they hide the truth, the more money they make.

Free Energy | searching for free energy and discussing free energy

Re: Gyroscopic Inertia Generator
« Reply #100 on: November 21, 2014, 02:12:11 AM »
3D Solar Panels

Offline TinselKoala

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 13859
Re: Gyroscopic Inertia Generator
« Reply #101 on: November 21, 2014, 03:49:22 AM »
Quote
What if I were to state that I do not intend to perform any extensive testing beyond this humble attempt to confirm that internal system voltage may rise while system is operating and possibly powering an LED light while maintaining or increasing voltage?

What if I were to state this is all I care about?

If that's all you care about you can do it for under 5 dollars, with no moving parts.

Skip ahead to 11:00 and watch from there, for a demonstration.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BQi4jz2puio

Offline Scorch

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 264
    • Scorch's Private Contractor Site
Re: Gyroscopic Inertia Generator
« Reply #102 on: November 21, 2014, 07:15:53 PM »
Is this is a logical assumption these men are only motivated by greed?
Do we actually know what motivates these other individual men such as that beyond mere greed?
Are they actually receiving substantial income from this or do most of them still maintain a 'day job'?

If there is so much money to be made in this field of providing educational materials and experimental kits for a specific consideration-compensation; then why aren't there a lot more than just few men doing this?

If a man wants to be 'in it for the money'; is this a logical choice for a man to choose such a controversial field in which 'proof positive' is not always forthcoming and history has proven that those who try are always subject to a LOT of personal ridicule, attacks, legal challenges and even death?
And if one does, in fact, provide hard evidence the second law needs a serious revision, does mainstream science and other factors such as the energy and banking cabals merely roll over, play dead, follow their lead and immediately revise the second law?  Which ALREADY faces something like 12 known challenges and, yet, remains unrevised despite revisions to many other laws.......

Do good teachers, such as a college professor, merely provide hard evidence to 'back his claim' or does he actually encourage and challenge his students to construct and perform the experiments for themselves so they may gain their own experiential KNOWLEDGE?
Has anybody ever bothered to replicate the original single battery "school girl" device that won the science fair?
(I suspect they have but haven't seen one. So I will probably have to build it myself based on the new information I just received.)

I see no evidence or record that John, Arron or Peter are perpetrating a "hide the truth" fraud or they are in this ONLY for the receiving of compensation for their time, services, or goods or that anybody expecting or receiving compensation for their time, services, or goods is actually a 'bad thing' and I believe no such evidence or record exists.  :)

Is there anything to "remember" beyond these mere assumptions, presumptions, or opinions regarding what might be the motives of other men?

In consideration of ALL the ridicule and personal attacks already revealed here in these OU forums; would it be logical for me to make any "earth shattering" claims about the specific performance of this experiment?

Does this serve as even more evidence to WHY these and many other men (such as Ed Leedskalnin) may be VERY reluctant to reveal their truth in this context of said ridicule, personal attacks, highly competitive attitudes and seriously destructive wars?

Kindest regards;

}:>

John, Arron, Peter have made many claims to self running free energy machines, but never once backed up said claims with hard evidence-nothing out of the ordinary there.
Be true to your self Scorch-search for the truth through testing.

Remember, John, Arron, Peter are all for making money, and the longer they hide the truth, the more money they make.

Offline Scorch

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 264
    • Scorch's Private Contractor Site
Re: Gyroscopic Inertia Generator
« Reply #103 on: November 21, 2014, 07:53:28 PM »

Thank you for the information, I have watched the video in it's entirety and is very interesting, but appears to be out of context. Or, otherwise, not quite what I might care about in terms of usefulness and the fact this experiment is not even in the same class, requires a powered transmitter, and appears to only be a demonstration of the wireless transmission of energy that is NOT demonstrating how much potential is consumed by transmitter versus how much potential back out from the receiver or anything beyond typical characteristics of electrolytic recovery which is similar to that of a battery electrolyte that also recovers some voltage after load removed. Nothing new here. . . .  :P

Please show me a joule thief that does not require a powered transmitter and is charging my 12 volt car battery... then I might care about that!  :D

For clarification regarding said hypothetical "what if" scenario; this scenario is in regards to a system that appears to be operating in an electrical-mechanical resonance providing well over 13 volts to power a bank of sixty LEDs or charge a common 12 volt battery or a bank of nine 350 farad ultra capacitors.

The video of the $5 experiment, producing 1-2 volts, does not appear to be anywhere near the useful 13+ volt lighting-charging output I might care about and is not an electro-mechanical system also providing a rotational 'shaft output'.

Please forgive me; but I do love mechanical, spinning, devices operating within, or even in conjunction with, this solar system and my Mother earth.  :)
But, of course, if there is a solid state device producing more useful output, such as a 'giant' joule thief that doesn't require a transmitter, then I might care about that as well.  ;)

Kindest regards;

}:>

If that's all you care about you can do it for under 5 dollars, with no moving parts.

Skip ahead to 11:00 and watch from there, for a demonstration.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BQi4jz2puio

Offline synchro1

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 3693
Re: Gyroscopic Inertia Generator
« Reply #104 on: November 21, 2014, 09:55:47 PM »
Tinsel(Mythbuster)Koala apparently found the hamster in Mike Kantz's motor alternator!

 

OneLink