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

User Menu

Custom Search

Author Topic: World's first real Free Energy Flashlight - no shaking - no batteries! No Solar  (Read 186873 times)

txt

  • Full Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 106
BTW, I have plotted Skywatcher's test data into a chart, so that you can better visualize the discharging curves. The first day (blue line in the graph) the flashlight was on for 2 hours and 10 minutes, when it dropped from 28000 lux to 11400. 24 hours later, the batteries were supposed to be fully recharged. The 2nd test (orange line) have shown only slight increase of intensity to 13800 lux, but it started to drop instantly. This slight increase of the intensity was possible due to the battery relaxation effect, already described here earlier (normal and well know property of batteries).

I describe it in bigger details at Metabunk here: https://www.metabunk.org/claim-harvesting-energy-from-schumann-resonances-and-earths-em-field-adgex.t7285/#post-176216

MileHigh

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 7600
Just for a laugh, I will quote myself from Revolution Green:

<<<
What's so funny about this, and not to detract from the serious battery investigations going on, is that we all have already experienced this phenomenon in our daily lives.  When I was a child in the 1960s and playing with my battery-powered toys, I became fully aware of how batteries discharge and then can recover somewhat and then the recovery cycles became shorter and shorter.  I am sure everybody remembers flashlights when they had incandescent bulbs in them.

I literally had a very good feeling for the nature of this battery phenomenon by the time I was five years old.
>>>

skywatcher

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 441
I already browsed through +20,000 flashlights at Alibaba (ufff..) and did not find it there. I still believe that it is a standard product of some Chinese manufacturer, just perhaps not in their public catalog, or simply just not on Alibaba. Or perhaps it is not correctly cataloged (I only browsed through AA flashlights).

Even if we find out that it's a standard product, this would mean nothing, because it would make sense to use a standard product.
If there is anything special in this lamp, it's the batteries. Not the lamp itself.

txt

  • Full Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 106
Even if we find out that it's a standard product, this would mean nothing, because it would make sense to use a standard product. If there is anything special in this lamp, it's the batteries. Not the lamp itself.
Just another nail into the coffin that is already pretty tightly closed. The flashlight does not contain anything at all - no electronics, no antennas, no technology, nothing but batteries, a LED, and a simple switch.  Mr. Ivchenko of ADGEX demonstrated it during the disassembly demonstration video, and he claimed that it is the body of the flashlight that is the "resonator" amplifying the ambient energy. In their own words, there is no other technology for harvesting the energy than the simple aluminium tube. So if we accept this claim, then it would be extremely surprising finding a mass produced common flashlight with a revolutionary overunity hi-tech resonator already included for just a few cents (Chinese flashlights of this type typically cost under a dollar in wholesale). If the "resonator" works in ELFE without any additional equipment, it means those original Chinese flashlights must self-recharge too.

Otherwise, I agree that although there is no chance that the thing works (and your data confirm it indeed doesn't), we still need more of the hard evidence, so I am looking forward to the next results from the tests. Just to exclude they don't use some miraculous batteries in regular flashlights, despite their claims. I see no such chance, but evidence is evidence.

skywatcher

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 441
....
 So if we accept this claim, then it would be extremely surprising finding a mass produced common flashlight with a revolutionary overunity hi-tech resonator already included for just a few cents (Chinese flashlights of this type typically cost under a dollar in wholesale). If the "resonator" works in ELFE without any additional equipment, it means those original Chinese flashlights must self-recharge too.

Otherwise, I agree that although there is no chance that the thing works (and your data confirm it indeed doesn't), we still need more of the hard evidence, so I am looking forward to the next results from the tests. Just to exclude they don't use some miraculous batteries in regular flashlights. I see no such chance, but evidence is evidence.

The explanations we get from ADGEX about the principles of operation are all BS in my opinion.
It's not possible to get useful energy out of the earth's magnetic field or from Schumann waves.

There could be a (small) possibility that it works, but in this case it would work completely different.
When we look at the parts, the only possibility for 'exotic effects' could be the batteries, which might contain some 'special sauce' allowing them to self-recharge.
Forget about resonators etc... this is complete BS.

txt

  • Full Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 106
There could be a (small) possibility that it works, but in this case it would work completely different.
When we look at the parts, the only possibility for 'exotic effects' could be the batteries, which might contain some 'special sauce' allowing them to self-recharge.
Forget about resonators etc... this is complete BS.
Yes, exactly. The 'special sauce' seems to be the well known Battery Relaxation Phenomena (BRP). And your results have confirmed it too, that there was no recharging at all, besides the small voltage increase due to the conventional BRP. We only need more data to independently confirm your measurements, but so far all evidence shows no recharging.

TinselKoala

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 13958
It would now be interesting to do some comparison discharge/recharge curves using ordinary batteries, like alkaline or NiMH etc. This could even be done with a separate set of LEDs, in effect making another flashlight which could be compared to the ELFE unit.

txt

  • Full Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 106
It would now be interesting to do some comparison discharge/recharge curves using ordinary batteries, like alkaline or NiMH etc. This could even be done with a separate set of LEDs, in effect making another flashlight which could be compared to the ELFE unit.
As far as I know there are three users making tests with standard flashlights. The first of them is Stuart Campbell, a moderator at PESN, but his test is useless because he chose to use a halogen bulb instead of LED. LEDs have exponential luminosity/voltage curve, while at incandescent bulbs it is close to linear. It means the halogen bulb will deplete the battery much more and deeper at each burn, leaving so much less room for the relaxation phenomena. The other  ones, using standard LED flashlights, are Martin Berger in the FB group, and I believe Mark Dansie at Revolution-Green. Both are getting comparable results to ELFE, but unfortunately none of them uses a luxmeter, so we cannot consider those tests truly objective either.

BTW, my prediction of today's results from Skywatcher for this evening, based on the theory of the Battery Relaxation Phenomena (BRP):

Yesterday at 00:00 the ELFE was emitting 260 lux. 19 hours of rest later, at 19:00, the voltage raised due to the BRP to allow 1280 lux 30s after the start, dropping to 963 lux at 90s. The discharge of 90s at ~3% of the maximal luminosity was totally negligible, hence we can expect the same or higher values today. Higher values are more likely, because unlike yesterday with the resting time of 19 hours, today he will test after 24 hours, so the recovery time is 5 hours longer, and the BRP may be slightly higher. If the "self-recharging" of ELFE worked, the ELFE lamp would have to emit at the maximal brightness again - over 28000 lux. However, already anything above 5 or 10 kilolux would be rather surprising too.

skywatcher

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 441
BTW, my prediction of today's results from Skywatcher for this evening, based on the theory of the Battery Relaxation Phenomena (BRP):

Yesterday at 00:00 the ELFE was emitting 260 lux. 19 hours of rest later, at 19:00, the voltage raised due to the BRP to allow 1280 lux 30s after the start, dropping to 963 lux at 90s. The discharge of 90s at ~3% of the maximal luminosity was totally negligible, hence we can expect the same or higher values today. Higher values are more likely, because unlike yesterday with the resting time of 19 hours, today he will test after 24 hours, so the recovery time is 5 hours longer, and the BRP may be slightly higher. If the "self-recharging" of ELFE worked, the ELFE lamp would have to emit at the maximal brightness again - over 28000 lux. However, already anything above 5 or 10 kilolux would be rather surprising too.

According to the 'specs' it will take up to 14 days to recharge if the lamp has been discharged almost completely.
So i would not expect that it has been fully charged in 24 hrs. If it would gain 10% every day it would meet the spec.

We will see in half an hour... stay tuned.  :)

txt

  • Full Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 106
According to the 'specs' it will take up to 14 days to recharge if the lamp has been discharged almost completely.
Yes, that's true, that was an incorrect claim from me about the full recharging today. It means if there is only a small increase of luminosity, we won't know much, because it would fit both options, and we will have to wait for several days more. If the level stays about the same or lower, then the charging doesn't seem to exist, but again, more days will tell it better.

skywatcher

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 441
Update:

18.02.16    00:00:00    260       
               
                                     t=30sec    t=60sec    t=90sec
18.02.16    19:00:00    1280         1090         963
19.02.16    19:00:00    1770         1460        1260

The value for 'fully charged' would be > 28000.

Looks not so bad...  but i don't know it it's only 'bounce' or if it has gained some charge...  i think we have to wait some days to come to a conclusion.

txt

  • Full Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 106
Looks not so bad...  but i don't know it it's only 'bounce' or if it has gained some charge...  i think we have to wait some days to come to a conclusion.
Well, I expected around 1500 lux with the battery rebounce after longer rest, but there are too many factors to guess it precisely, and the margin of error of the measuring is also unknown, so I would tell it is the expected value, and it should be around the same, or again just a bit higher tomorrow (it will be after almost 70 hours of rest, with just 3 minutes of very tiny discharge current in that time). If the thing truly self-recharged, I would expect the increase of minimally 10% of the maximum value - increase of some 3000 lux (it measn around 4000 lux at the beginning). But realistically, if there was any charging current, the charging curve of all batteries is very steep at the beginning and flattens to the end of the charging cycle, so within the first day, the charge of up to 50% would be more expected

skywatcher

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 441
Well, I expected around 1500 lux with the battery rebounce after longer rest, but there are too many factors to guess it precisely, and the margin of error of the measuring is also unknown, so I would tell it is the expected value, and it should be around the same, or again just a bit higher tomorrow (it will be after almost 70 hours of rest, with just 3 minutes of very tiny discharge current in that time). If the thing truly self-recharged, I would expect the increase of minimally 10% of the maximum value - it means increase of some 3000 lux (it measn around 4000 lux at the beginning). But realistically, if there was any charging current, the charging curve of all batteries is very steep at the beginning and flattens to the end of the charging cycle, so within the first day, the charge of up to 50% would be more expected

We don't know if the recharging process (if any) is 'constant current' or anything else. So we can only make some predictions based on known battery charge process and compare it with the measurements of the next days. Tomorrow we will see if the brightness curve is linear, or if it's above or below of the linear extrapolation. Because we measure only the brightness we can not say much about actual values of voltage, current etc.

e2matrix

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 1956
Most Smartphones can work as a Lux meter - you just grab any one of several apps off the play store and you will have a fair Lux / Lumen meter.   It's how most smart phones determine auto-screen brightness and when to blank the screen while you are holding it to your head talking.

txt

  • Full Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 106
EDIT: sorry, I did not notice the post above, when writing mine, so I repeat it partially below!

BTW, as it was already written, other owners who are currently testing their ELFE flashlights, like TheCell or Esaruoho, should definitely consider measuring the light brightness with something else than the naked eye, because Skywatcher's own experience clearly shows that even a very steep and deep change is hard to spot by the naked eye. If you do not want to spend money on a luxmeter like Skywatcher did, you can use a DSLR camera, many compact cameras, or even a phone luxmeter application. The following short video tutorial demonstrates how to use a DSLR camera for taking the illumination values. You will find many more descriptions for such proceedings on the web if you search for "measuring lux" and "camera" or similar terms. This is the video tutorial:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_xU0pWjugTo

The measuring by a DSLR camera may be a bit more reliable. The absolute accuracy of phone sensors is questionable, but it should be fine for the approximate comparison of the flashlight in different periods of the test, and definitely much more objective than the naked eye, or than comparing photos or video frames. You should only try to keep the level of the environment light as constant as possible, or measuring in contact with the flashlight reflector screen (trough some translucent filters), like Skywatcher does - it eliminates the external influences better.

Search for "luxmeter" in the stores of your phone OS for a suitable application. There are plenty of them.