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

A-Ads

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: 514295
  • *Total Topics: 15303
  • *Online Today: 44
  • *Most Online: 103
(December 19, 2006, 11:27:19 PM)
  • *Users: 4
  • *Guests: 15
  • *Total: 19

Author Topic: Confirmation of OU devices and claims  (Read 190696 times)

Offline rickfriedrich

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 446
Re: Confirmation of OU devices and claims
« Reply #1395 on: July 20, 2019, 02:21:47 AM »
Gyulasun,
The first part I already answered and you deflected so I answered again.
The next part of your long reply actually is not even part of the point of discussion. It is just a show of numbers. I run the same sort of numbers when I am doing different things. You are trying too hard to impress people with numbers. I am trying to show people the issue at hand in an non-convoluted way. Notice your deflecting the point again. You claim that you are referring to my comparison of the frequency generator with the gate driver. But your explination does not actually address the issue as I have repeatedly pointed out. It is an ignoration elenchi that misses the point of what I am saying. So this is a deliberate attempt to divert the point with a bunch of words to make it look like you are responding to the point. The point is that if the frequency generator powered by the metered power supply draws substantially the same power as the gate driver, then we have a gain demonstrated because of the fact of the rate of change and not because of all your gymnastics.

What you do at the end is then argue from ignorance. You say in the end that you just haven't been proven a point. Well none of this can be proven at all. You are fine with all the information from Itsu or me up to a point you do not want to believe. Again, I am not expecting you to believe any of this. But I am showing how you are playing deflecting games. We all heard your understanding of impedances but the whole point of all of this was that I made the point that the rate of change makes a difference in the output when substantially the same input. This was seen in my motors over the years when I added the gate driver the motor efficiency went up but the output much more. This is one key principle of gain, just as oscillatory energy, with Tesla.

You could have saved everyone the words and just said, well Rick, the input must equal the output no matter what you say or show over the internet. And the input will go substantially down out of resonance, while the input will go substantially up in resonance to comply with conservation. But the problem Gyulasun, is that the amount of radiation produced between these two does not correspond to the input. And everyone knows this, even you. Nice try!

And I already addressed the bulbs. I made them just so bright as to make it obvious as well. This is just arguing like the other guy about me running my boat for three years rotating the batteries is not any indication at all of OU because I didn't log EVERY trip. All you guys do is seek to disprove things you disagree with while you believe equally shown things you agree with. This is why I showed all this as I did. To bring out this double standard.

I understand that in a working setup shown in the video, the 1.153 MHz AC output from one of the receiver coils might be used instead of an FG to drive the input of the gate driver IC so the FG could be dispensed with. 

BUT my explanation refers also to your example you often mention like in the above quote: [BLA BLA BLA deflection follows] when you drive the TX circuit from the FG you get 250 V at resonance across either the L or C and when you drive this same TX circuit from the gate driver you get 1300 V. The explanation I gave includes impedance matching issue when using the FG's 50 Ohm output resistance and matching is better with the gate driver IC's 1 Ohm or so output resistance.  And there is much less loss across a 1 Ohm generator resistance than across a 50 Ohm generator resistance. The missing 50-1=49 Ohm is what enables a much higher  current in the TX coil versus the current the FG would be able to insure and higher coil current does increase the EM field, ok?  And Tesla used mainly charged up capacitors as voltage sources that had very small equivalent series  resistances hence the internal loss was also very small. And his fast mechanical switches (often in combinations) determined the rate of change he mastered to quasi perfection, they did the disruptive dicharges from the (mainly HV) charged up capacitors.   

So it is not the fast rate of change which caused the high voltage across your L or C but the higher current due to much better impedance matching between the series LC circuit and the output impedance driving the LC circuit.  And this is valid whenever the driver IC feeds a load comparable to its low output resistance: internal power loss is much less than that of
a FG with the 50 Ohm output resistance.  That loss not present in the driver IC converts directly to an enhanced output current. I did mention that I am aware of the switching speed data involved both for an FG and for gate driver ICs (including the very fast 5 ns or so families you mention).  There is no as much difference in speed between them as to cause the high voltage change. 
Of course, when you pulse a coil and no resonance involved, the fast rate of change does count: the higher the switching speed the higher the induced peak voltage across the coil at the moment the magnetic field collapses.

You also wrote: "Anyway, you don't acknowledge any gains in impulse and rate of change as determining the amount of gains, as well as oscillating energy as a gain, with higher Q and higher CPS as determining the amount of gains."

I never wrote any of what you listed. I did write about voltage gain across L or C at resonance, I explained how much the energy content the created EM field can possess due to the higher current the gate driver IC insures under the better impedance matched condition.  Understand now? 

You also wrote: "The missing point was that the input was about the same when the tank was in or out of resonance.
And that was my point from the very beginning that you wouldn't address."

Rick, your claimed 8 W output power versus 0.75 W or so input has not been verified by replications yet so until then how can I comment your point meaningfully? 

You also wrote: "One more  point is that I showed in the video that the added grounding changed the output even more. 
The input did not increase as well." 

I wrote earlier that one cannot estimate power levels by the naked eye, by simply watching the brightness of LED bulbs.
I watched in your video how the brightness increased (or decreased) when you put the ground wire onto the different
RX circuit points. I understand the difficulty of measuring output power of the receiver units and I also explained earlier
to A.king why the ground wire brings in more TX energy from the enviroment. It is the same effect a crystal radio receiver
manifests by giving higher (lauder) audio output when a ground wire is attached. The ground wire opens higher receiving
area / surface for the RX units when ground is connected to the proper circuit point. You say the ground wire brings in
extra electrons, this might fit here too but actually how much power this would add to that of the received by the EM near
field radiation should be estimated by measurements. Naked eye brightness observations are good for fine tuning to
achieve maximum transfer. 

Gyula

Free Energy | searching for free energy and discussing free energy

Re: Confirmation of OU devices and claims
« Reply #1395 on: July 20, 2019, 02:21:47 AM »

Offline partzman

  • Full Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 241
Re: Confirmation of OU devices and claims
« Reply #1396 on: July 20, 2019, 04:18:42 AM »
Like I just wrote, you don't know what you are talking about.

Rick,

You know, I searched thru the posts here trying to find where you said the above but I could find nothing.  Then I thought "wait a minute"' and sure enough, you had posted that on OUR.  That is really poor forum etiquette sir and not very commendable!

Plus, do you realize that you and those in control of this forum may be bordering on libel with your statement above? 

As I stated on OUR, you are not worth wasting anymore time on.

Carry on-
Pm

 

Offline rickfriedrich

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 446
Re: Confirmation of OU devices and claims
« Reply #1397 on: July 20, 2019, 06:47:29 AM »
 ::)

Rick,

You know, I searched thru the posts here trying to find where you said the above but I could find nothing.  Then I thought "wait a minute"' and sure enough, you had posted that on OUR.  That is really poor forum etiquette sir and not very commendable!

Plus, do you realize that you and those in control of this forum may be bordering on libel with your statement above? 

As I stated on OUR, you are not worth wasting anymore time on.

Carry on-
Pm

Free Energy | searching for free energy and discussing free energy

Re: Confirmation of OU devices and claims
« Reply #1397 on: July 20, 2019, 06:47:29 AM »
Sponsored links:




Offline rickfriedrich

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 446
Re: Confirmation of OU devices and claims
« Reply #1398 on: July 20, 2019, 06:53:00 AM »
All right M, you said you were a troll. Prove to us the Conservation of energy is a universal.

Why are you even entertaining this idiot?
Clearly he knows nothing about basic science. Conservation of energy baby, never gonna beat it, stop kidding yourselves.
rick f = scam con-man, bs-artist and liar just like TrollMan

Offline a.king21

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 1611
Re: Confirmation of OU devices and claims
« Reply #1399 on: July 20, 2019, 01:08:08 PM »
DON'T FEED THE TROLLS


 Although originally a non-offensive reference to fishing by trolling for comments or suggestions, the term in Internetspeak has evolved and now refers to someone who engages in discussions purely to provoke or annoy. Because trolls take away from productive work, the ideal response is to starve the troll of attention by ignoring it and going about your usual business. People being people, though, someone usually takes the bait, which is why trolls are so notorious.
The term "troll" derives from Norse mythology, where a troll is also an unhelpful being, in some descriptions appearing to be like a normal human and others to be quite ugly and slow-witted.
Many presume that troll refers to the ugly monsters who eat people alive, but the term derives from the practice in fishing of dragging a baited hook or lure behind a moving boat (trolling).[2] In other words, trolls are looking for some sucker who'll bite.


Moral:  "DON'T FEED THE TROLLS"


I've seen this person on other sites and he is just a kid. They go through those phases. Usually when they are about 12 years old.

Free Energy | searching for free energy and discussing free energy

Re: Confirmation of OU devices and claims
« Reply #1399 on: July 20, 2019, 01:08:08 PM »
Sponsored links:




Offline AlienGrey

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 2936
Re: Confirmation of OU devices and claims
« Reply #1400 on: July 20, 2019, 01:26:41 PM »
This was taken from an interesting collection on information on one of Richards web Sites.
Rick Friedrich
Published on Nov 12, 2017
This goes into the idea that regular circuits do not tap into all the energy available in the process of power transfer and utilization. They are 90 degrees out in collection.


perhaps Rick could explain the 90 degrees phase shift principle when he can find and divert some time to whats highlighted since this thread is about .
 Confirmation of OU devices and claims

I'm sure we would all find this 'very' interesting.

Offline a.king21

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 1611
Re: Confirmation of OU devices and claims
« Reply #1401 on: July 20, 2019, 02:14:37 PM »
AG  That site has been reorganised (Cheniere)  to offer information for sale. It is or rather (used to be) Tom Bearden's site.  I don't know who controls it now as apparently Tom is too old now.


Rick covers much of the Heavyside component here:  https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=eW-Q77slGAw   for free.

Free Energy | searching for free energy and discussing free energy

Re: Confirmation of OU devices and claims
« Reply #1401 on: July 20, 2019, 02:14:37 PM »
Sponsored links:




Offline popolibero

  • Jr. Member
  • **
  • Posts: 81
Re: Confirmation of OU devices and claims
« Reply #1402 on: July 20, 2019, 03:29:52 PM »
Hi Rick,


if I may ask, with the setup on your boat (or similar setups you've used), did you charge the batteries straight negatively with conversion on the input side of circuit or did you charge the batteries with cap dump. If cap dump, at how many volts did you dump the cap?


thanks,
Mario

Offline tinman

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 5240
Re: Confirmation of OU devices and claims
« Reply #1403 on: July 20, 2019, 03:48:12 PM »
since this thread is about .
 Confirmation of OU devices and claims

I'm sure we would all find this 'very' interesting.

I'm sure you will not find anything at all,nor will there be any confirmation of an OU device in relation to the topic at hand.


Brad

Free Energy | searching for free energy and discussing free energy

Re: Confirmation of OU devices and claims
« Reply #1403 on: July 20, 2019, 03:48:12 PM »
3D Solar Panels

Offline tinman

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 5240
Re: Confirmation of OU devices and claims
« Reply #1404 on: July 20, 2019, 03:49:21 PM »
It is or rather (used to be) Tom Bearden's site.  I don't know who controls it now as apparently Tom is too old now.


Tom is also broke,and still hooked to the grid  ::)


Brad

Offline tinman

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 5240
Re: Confirmation of OU devices and claims
« Reply #1405 on: July 20, 2019, 03:55:16 PM »
Prove to us the Conservation of energy is a universal.

It is not. The fact that the universe is expanding at an accelerating rate,is proof that the conservation of energy dose not apply in an open system ,nor dose it hold.

The conservation of energy only applies to closed system's,and is not a universal law.


Brad

Free Energy | searching for free energy and discussing free energy

Re: Confirmation of OU devices and claims
« Reply #1405 on: July 20, 2019, 03:55:16 PM »
3D Solar Panels

Offline AlienGrey

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 2936
Re: Confirmation of OU devices and claims
« Reply #1406 on: July 20, 2019, 04:19:48 PM »
It is not. The fact that the universe is expanding at an accelerating rate,is proof that the conservation of energy dose not apply in an open system ,nor dose it hold.

The conservation of energy only applies to closed system's,and is not a universal law.


Brad
Really thats what i said, create an disruption pulse faster than the rise time of an electron through a piece of wire ( current / magnetic influence) a 'nano pulse' you can fill a capacitor at light speed.

Offline TinselKoala

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 13971
Re: Confirmation of OU devices and claims
« Reply #1407 on: July 20, 2019, 04:28:26 PM »
Really thats what i said, create an disruption pulse faster than the rise time of an electron through a piece of wire ( current / magnetic influence) a 'nano pulse' you can fill a capacitor at light speed.
Maybe you can, but I can't, and I don't know anyone else who can either. I have a fair amount of experience filling capacitors one way or another and measuring how long it takes, and so do my friends and colleagues. Also in generating "nano pulses".

So please demonstrate. Not by linking to some sketchy theoretical document, but by showing your own work and measurements. Is that really too much to ask, even in _this_ thread where claims apparently don't need support?




Offline TinselKoala

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 13971
Re: Confirmation of OU devices and claims
« Reply #1408 on: July 20, 2019, 04:31:39 PM »
AG  That site has been reorganised (Cheniere)  to offer information for sale. It is or rather (used to be) Tom Bearden's site.  I don't know who controls it now as apparently Tom is too old now.


Rick covers much of the Heavyside component here:  https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=eW-Q77slGAw   for free.
Too bad there aren't any True Experiments in there. If Effect A is alleged to be caused by Cause B, not only do you need to show that A occurs in the presence of B, but that Effect A _does not occur_ unless Cause B is present, and that no other Cause can result in Effect A. Get it? Null hypothesis testing.

Offline TinselKoala

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 13971
Re: Confirmation of OU devices and claims
« Reply #1409 on: July 20, 2019, 04:35:43 PM »
I'm sure you will not find anything at all,nor will there be any confirmation of an OU device in relation to the topic at hand.


Brad
Yep. Almost a hundred pages of non-confirmation, of no OU devices.... but plenty of claims!

I swear, I've never seen anyone outside of politics be so incapable of answering a "yes or no" question with a simple Yes or No.

 

OneLink