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: 514353
  • *Total Topics: 15304
  • *Online Today: 44
  • *Most Online: 103
(December 19, 2006, 11:27:19 PM)
  • *Users: 3
  • *Guests: 13
  • *Total: 16

Author Topic: Confirmation of OU devices and claims  (Read 191590 times)

Offline a.king21

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 1611
Re: Confirmation of OU devices and claims
« Reply #1500 on: July 22, 2019, 12:16:15 PM »
The fact is that no-one has disproved Rick's claims. When someone shows a video with 75 receiver coils looking just like Rick's video and says it's not ou then we have a challenge to his claim and no more.
At the moment the hard facts are that there are NO challenges that are credible to his claim.
  Get over it.
So from a pure science perspective the score is

RICK 1, NAYSAYERS  0

EE theory goes nowhere (so far)  in a claim situation like this. (Unless you embrace Rick's theory)



And in case you missed it -  Rick did not patent his claim.  He gave it to the world for FREE.

Free Energy | searching for free energy and discussing free energy

Re: Confirmation of OU devices and claims
« Reply #1500 on: July 22, 2019, 12:16:15 PM »

Offline WhatIsIt

  • Full Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 153
    • At The End It Will Matter!
Re: Confirmation of OU devices and claims
« Reply #1501 on: July 22, 2019, 01:22:47 PM »
And in case you missed it -  Rick did not patent his claim.  He gave it to the world for FREE.

King,

Dont get me wrong. Even after 100 pages I still dont know Rick's setup.
When he explain how he does it, then I can try to do the same and convince myself in the stuff you claim.

Otherwise it is Mobius loop of claims and no real try done.
You can speak and claim as much as you want, but if nobody can replicate it, what is the purpose of all of this talk?

Offline lancaIV

  • elite_member
  • Hero Member
  • ******
  • Posts: 3018
Re: Confirmation of OU devices and claims
« Reply #1502 on: July 22, 2019, 02:34:46 PM »
The fact is that no-one has disproved Rick's claims. When someone shows a video with 75 receiver coils looking just like Rick's video and says it's not ou then we have a challenge to his claim and no more.
At the moment the hard facts are that there are NO challenges that are credible to his claim.
  Get over it.
So from a pure science perspective the score is

RICK 1, NAYSAYERS  0

EE theory goes nowhere (so far)  in a claim situation like this. (Unless you embrace Rick's theory)



And in case you missed it -  Rick did not patent his claim.  He gave it to the world for FREE.

I  have got nothing against Mr.Friedrichs' claims,without to know what his claims really are  !
Instead 75 coils 75 and more bulbs


Reading : https://patents.google.com/patent/WO2004100349A1/en

and  knowing that beside Volt and Ampere the European net-grid works with "stable" 50 Hz frequency.
Seriell resistors effect : frquency and/or duty cycle divider ? bulb filament actio/ reactio behaviour ?

Light elements are "physiological" indicators,without real output  measurements by appropriate instruments

related

"flickering" (1/10,1/100,1/1000 sec cam sequences ) and/or

lux/lumen and/or

heat units/ calori)

we do not know about the real output/input ratio.

Other example :

https://patents.google.com/patent/US5130608A/en
PRR : pulse repetition rate ( and our eyes reaction delay)

Before : 100 W lamp consume             with module : 4 Watt lamp + 8 Watt ( the modul consume)

                                                                                            lumen/Watt ? calori/Watt
A power saving device, not claimed : OU

We have to disclose ( and differ) physical and technical peak and average power consume ( with/-out feed back circuit)

Free Energy | searching for free energy and discussing free energy

Re: Confirmation of OU devices and claims
« Reply #1502 on: July 22, 2019, 02:34:46 PM »
Sponsored links:




Offline gyulasun

  • without_ads
  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 4005
Re: Confirmation of OU devices and claims
« Reply #1503 on: July 22, 2019, 03:20:45 PM »
Rick,

Thanks for your answer of https://overunity.com/17491/confirmation-of-ou-devices-and-claims/msg537327/#msg537327

For now I quote these from that post:
Quote

"In my motors there was a dramatic difference in the output with and without the gate driver while the input power was the same with or without."

"Now it doesn't matter to me if it was merely an impedance issue as that is very important. But it is still an impedance issue in a different way."


Yes, when you pulse coils at off resonance, then the rate of change does count i.e. how fast the coil current is interrupted and the magnetic field collapses. The higher the switching speed the higher the voltage spike amplitude that appears across the coil just after the current is switched off.  This is okay.

It is also okay that a gate driver can provide very fast switching speeds constantly and in a dependable way.

Please perform the following simple test for yourself,  it takes only a few minutes and you have the TX coil (around 150 uH) and the capacitor resonating the TX circuit around 1.2 MHz, at your disposal (I think). 

Drive it with the gate driver IC as usual and check the coil voltage with the HV scope probe, you will surely find some kV peak to peak sine wave amplitude, right?  Receiver coils nearby are not needed for this test. 

Now just insert a 50 Ohm non wire wound resistor in series with the output pin and drive the same series LC circuit in the same setup. In fact any resistor value between 47 and 56 Ohm would do or some series and / or parallel combos of some resistors to have the near 50 Ohm value.  Of course you can insert the resistor at the bottom end of the series LC circuit where it goes to the common negative rail of the IC, instead of directly in series with the IC output pin at the LC top end, it does not matter.

Now please explain why you find that the some kV amplitude the coil has had earlier now has gone down to a few tens to max a few hundred volt amplitude ? (to any value between say 50-300 Vpp, much depends mainly on the TX coil DC resistance) 

Nothing has changed in your setup but the Q quality factor (XL/R) value of the LC circuit,  the fast switching speed of the driver IC has remained the same,  resistive loads do not affect switching speed of such driver ICs at all (but capacitive or inductive loads do, their data sheet includes the specs). 

And if you use the metered DC power supply to feed the driver IC for the above test, you would nicely see how the DC power draw changes: maximum draw manifests without the series 50 Ohm (no receiver coils present) and a much lower power draw manifests when the 50 Ohm is inserted. 

Anybody can test this for himself, although a HV scope probe is not commonly possessed by most and without reducing the kV amplitude below the 300 Vpp level which is safe for most scope channel inputs, such tests are not recommended. A random search on a how to make a 100:1 scope probe is here but there are several other designs if you search, (on youtube there is even a 1000:1 probe design).   
https://how-to.fandom.com/wiki/How_to_make_a_100X_oscilloscope_probe 
For such test only a comparison is needed between a high and a relatively lower voltage amplitude, no need for lab precision. Safety rules when dealing with HV should strictly be adhered to of course.

Gyula

Offline Void

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 2371
Re: Confirmation of OU devices and claims
« Reply #1504 on: July 22, 2019, 03:46:32 PM »
The fact is that no-one has disproved Rick's claims. When someone shows a video with 75 receiver coils looking just like Rick's video and says it's not ou then we have a challenge to his claim and no more.
At the moment the hard facts are that there are NO challenges that are credible to his claim.
  Get over it.
So from a pure science perspective the score is
RICK 1, NAYSAYERS  0
EE theory goes nowhere (so far)  in a claim situation like this. (Unless you embrace Rick's theory)
And in case you missed it -  Rick did not patent his claim.  He gave it to the world for FREE.

A.king, It is of course not for others to 'disprove' various people's unsubstantiated claims. :)
It is for Rick, or anyone else, to actually demonstrate their own stated or implied claims in some sort of reasonable way,
if they want people to take them seriously. Instead what Rick does is back peddle and claim or imply that he never made
any such 'OU' claims, all the while implying that it is 'OU'. Do you really not see how underhanded that is? At any rate, I have
already showed that lighting LED lights fairly brightly only takes a relatively small amount of power, and what Rick demonstrated is
within what would be expected for that sort of input power level. There is no question about that.  Just because you
choose to blind yourself to such things, doesn't make them any less true.

Rick has not (so far) demonstrated anything that anyone with any degree of understanding of electronics
and physics would view as possibly 'OU'.  Sorry. All the trolling in the world is not going to change that.

A person actually has to demonstrate proper measurements in a reasonable way, or
show a self sustaining setup, again in some sort of reasonable way. Now if Rick ever shows a self sustaining
demonstration setup along the lines of what I posted a link to here previously, then I would say, OK, maybe there is something there. 
Maybe then it would be worth trying to replicate if all the exact details of the setup were posted here.

Cult mind is a scary thing. Beware of those who promise the moon but who only deliver rocks from the road.


Free Energy | searching for free energy and discussing free energy

Re: Confirmation of OU devices and claims
« Reply #1504 on: July 22, 2019, 03:46:32 PM »
Sponsored links:




Offline seaad

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 306
Re: Confirmation of OU devices and claims
« Reply #1505 on: July 22, 2019, 04:32:23 PM »
I  have got nothing against Mr.Friedrichs' claims,without to know what his claims really are  !
Instead 75 coils 75 and more bulbs


Reading : https://patents.google.com/patent/WO2004100349A1/en

and  knowing that beside Volt and Ampere the European net-grid works with "stable" 50 Hz frequency.
Light elements are "physiological" indicators,without real output  measurements by appropriate instruments

related

"flickering" (1/10,1/100,1/1000 sec cam sequences ) and/or

lux/lumen and/or

heat units/ calori)

we do not know about the real output/input ratio.

Other example :

https://patents.google.com/patent/US5130608A/en
PRR : pulse repetition rate ( and our eyes reaction delay)

Before : 100 W lamp consume             with module : 4 Watt lamp + 8 Watt ( the modul consume)

                                                                                            lumen/Watt ? calori/Watt
A power saving device, not claimed : OU

We have to disclose ( and differ) physical and technical peak and average power consume ( with/-out feed back circuit)

The brain is saving (remember)  light?
Did Rick use FWB's as Itsu?

No I don't think so if this sudent follows his master;
 https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=adAxB-Dtl1U

Arne

Offline steeltpu

  • Jr. Member
  • **
  • Posts: 75
Re: Confirmation of OU devices and claims
« Reply #1506 on: July 22, 2019, 05:33:24 PM »
The fact is that no-one has disproved Rick's claims. When someone shows a video with 75 receiver coils looking just like Rick's video and says it's not ou then we have a challenge to his claim and no more.
At the moment the hard facts are that there are NO challenges that are credible to his claim.
  Get over it.
So from a pure science perspective the score is

RICK 1, NAYSAYERS  0

EE theory goes nowhere (so far)  in a claim situation like this. (Unless you embrace Rick's theory)



And in case you missed it -  Rick did not patent his claim.  He gave it to the world for FREE.


WRONG!   


Argument from ignorance (from Latin: argumentum ad ignorantiam), also known as appeal to ignorance (in which ignorance represents "a lack of contrary evidence"), is a fallacy in informal logic. It asserts that a proposition is true because it has not yet been proven false or a proposition is false because it has not yet been proven true.This represents a type of false dichotomy in that it excludes the possibility that there may have been an insufficient investigation to prove that the proposition is either true or false.

Free Energy | searching for free energy and discussing free energy

Re: Confirmation of OU devices and claims
« Reply #1506 on: July 22, 2019, 05:33:24 PM »
Sponsored links:





Offline gyulasun

  • without_ads
  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 4005
Re: Confirmation of OU devices and claims
« Reply #1508 on: July 22, 2019, 05:47:12 PM »
The brain is saving (remember)  light?
Did Rick use FWB's as Itsu?

No I don't think so if this sudent follows his master;
 https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=adAxB-Dtl1U

Arne
Hi Arne,

A.king21 wrote somewhere that Rick uses MR16 type LED bulbs, these are rated between 3 and 12 W or so and made for both 12 V DC and AC and as such they must have a diode bridge inside.

For those not considering that a LED is a diode I notice that when fed from AC voltage a single LED draws current during every second half wave of the AC periods, thus its drawn power from the AC source is much less than in a rectified AC voltage case, so the loaded Q of an LC tank that feeds such LEDs as the attached picture shows may remain relatively high. Also, there is not current draw from the AC source whenever the instanteneous AC voltage amplitude is under a certain threshold level below the forward voltage. 

Gyula

Free Energy | searching for free energy and discussing free energy

Re: Confirmation of OU devices and claims
« Reply #1508 on: July 22, 2019, 05:47:12 PM »
3D Solar Panels

Offline a.king21

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 1611
Re: Confirmation of OU devices and claims
« Reply #1509 on: July 22, 2019, 06:01:25 PM »
Hi Arne,

A.king21 wrote somewhere that Rick uses MR16 type LED bulbs, these are rated between 3 and 12 W or so and made for both 12 V DC and AC and as such they must have a diode bridge inside.

For those not considering that a LED is a diode I notice that when fed from AC voltage a single LED draws current during every second half wave of the AC periods, thus its drawn power from the AC source is much less than in a rectified AC voltage case, so the loaded Q of an LC tank that feeds such LEDs as the attached picture shows may remain relatively high. Also, there is not current draw from the AC source whenever the instanteneous AC voltage amplitude is under a certain threshold level below the forward voltage. 

Gyula
Correct, so you have to take into account the further losses incurred by passing the current through the bridge rectifier.

Offline TinselKoala

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 13971
Re: Confirmation of OU devices and claims
« Reply #1510 on: July 22, 2019, 06:10:13 PM »
I  have got nothing against Mr.Friedrichs' claims,without to know what his claims really are  !
Instead 75 coils 75 and more bulbs


Reading : https://patents.google.com/patent/WO2004100349A1/en

and  knowing that beside Volt and Ampere the European net-grid works with "stable" 50 Hz frequency.
Seriell resistors effect : frquency and/or duty cycle divider ? bulb filament actio/ reactio behaviour ?

Light elements are "physiological" indicators,without real output  measurements by appropriate instruments

related

"flickering" (1/10,1/100,1/1000 sec cam sequences ) and/or

lux/lumen and/or

heat units/ calori)

we do not know about the real output/input ratio.

Other example :

https://patents.google.com/patent/US5130608A/en
PRR : pulse repetition rate ( and our eyes reaction delay)

Before : 100 W lamp consume             with module : 4 Watt lamp + 8 Watt ( the modul consume)

                                                                                            lumen/Watt ? calori/Watt
A power saving device, not claimed : OU

We have to disclose ( and differ) physical and technical peak and average power consume ( with/-out feed back circuit)
Exactly !! And this must be done in a clear manner, repeatable by anyone "familiar with the art".


Data, data data. Does a claim of overunity or enhanced efficiency involve the brightness and power consumption of some kind of light source? Then at the very least some kind of calibration should be presented. Like this one, which is for a small Grain-Of-Wheat incandescent bulb. The principle is the same for whatever kind of light source load one may care to use. Measurements that are repeatable by anyone, data that is solid and not the result of a single anecdotal trial. Are you using LEDs for your load? Then a graph similar to this one should be obtained for that load, so that one knows what to expect in the straight DC or "normally powered" condition.
Can Rick present such a graph, or similar, for his LED loads? Does anyone think that such comparison data is _not_ required, when testing an OU claim that involves light output?


Free Energy | searching for free energy and discussing free energy

Re: Confirmation of OU devices and claims
« Reply #1510 on: July 22, 2019, 06:10:13 PM »
3D Solar Panels

Offline a.king21

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 1611
Re: Confirmation of OU devices and claims
« Reply #1511 on: July 22, 2019, 06:29:27 PM »
To those of you new to this; the claim is: At resonance there is a gain and this gain is realised through magnetic resonance. Each receiver coil also creates it's own magnetic field and re-transmits the signal. The procedure occurs because of magnetic resonance. You can also place further coils above and below the current picture.  I believe Rick claims that each mr16 light consumes approximately 1/2 watt although I am not sure if that relates to this picture.  I find the opposing vitriol unbelievable to be quite frank. This was not the case in the past when people simply accepted a claim and tried to verify it in their own way.
Also the rudeness to an inventor is only going to put other inventors off.  That's why some do not do videos.  So we all lose in the end.  Think about it.
Would you post a claim here after seeing the vitriol against an inventor ie Rick? The kit is called the Resonance Induction Coupler Kit.

Offline Void

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 2371
Re: Confirmation of OU devices and claims
« Reply #1512 on: July 22, 2019, 06:30:59 PM »
Correct, so you have to take into account the further losses incurred by passing the current through the bridge rectifier.

Oh yes, a handful of milliwatts here and there is going to make all the difference in the world. ;)


Offline rickfriedrich

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 446
Re: Confirmation of OU devices and claims
« Reply #1513 on: July 22, 2019, 06:40:36 PM »
In view of Brad's (TinMan, who started the threads on both forums) apology today, and the fact that the debates have really come to an end (the only thing happening now is people embarrassing themselves and heaping insults), I wrote the below response on Overunityresearch.com. I'm sure the principles will be debated, and that is what I am hoping for. After all, that is what science is about. The true principles will be clarified, illustrated, demonstrated and developed over centuries to come. It will never be perfect or finished. Hopefully this will mark a change in the free energy community from the impulsive blind mad rush for some free energy mystery circuit quest to the principled approach in having an informed foundation so that endless varieties of parts can be used to experience practical results.

"All right.
So at this point I'm just going to continue with the new website that will attempt to present the principles of free energy in the context of people proving or disproving such to themselves. The heated exchange on these forums has been useful to bring out the points that need to be focused on. But it does not give the ability to systematically develop and address very much. Principles need to be the focus, not individuals.
I may linger around here to see if you guys progress anywhere in your attempts here, but I think I'll let the new website take it from here.
I appreciate the invitation to come here, and I'll take everything shared into consideration.
I really wish you all the very best.
Rick"

Offline Void

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 2371
Re: Confirmation of OU devices and claims
« Reply #1514 on: July 22, 2019, 06:40:38 PM »
To those of you new to this; the claim is: At resonance there is a gain and this gain is realised through magnetic resonance. Each receiver coil also creates it's own magnetic field and re-transmits the signal. The procedure occurs because of magnetic resonance. You can also place further coils above and below the current picture.  I believe Rick claims that each mr16 light consumes approximately 1/2 watt although I am not sure if that relates to this picture.  I find the opposing vitriol unbelievable to be quite frank. This was not the case in the past when people simply accepted a claim and tried to verify it in their own way.
Also the rudeness to an inventor is only going to put other inventors off.  That's why some do not do videos.  So we all lose in the end.  Think about it.
Would you post a claim here after seeing the vitriol against an inventor ie Rick? The kit is called the Resonance Induction Coupler Kit.

Hi a.king. Don smith presented such a general arrangement way back in the 90's.
If there is an 'inventor', it is Don Smith. ;) I am not aware of anyone ever demonstrating OU from such an
arrangement. Unfortunately what Rick is showing in that picture appears to be within an expected normal
performance range for the stated input power, as has already been pointed out a few times now.

Instead of piling up more and more words, perhaps you would care to show some actual proper power
measurements of your own setup so we can have a look? Surely you must have reproduced this and made proper
measurements to claim that you think something unusual is going on...
This is not energetic forum where proper measurements are greatly feared and considered taboo.

If someone can show some proper measurements or a self-looped setup which points towards
possibly something unusual going on, then great. Let's have a look! So far I haven't seen it.


 

OneLink