https://www.eenewseurope.com/en/are-we-witnessing-a-major-breakthrough-in-magnetic-fields
https://glipgeneration.com/zerg

295 kg for a 150 kW unit. Might this actually include the generator and offer a 150 kW output terminal?

Which or you shed lab heroes can help get to the bottom of these claims please? It's beyond my technical limitations.
If promising, can the richest of you please get 2 or 3 of these babies?

If this "simply" doubles output, then having two of these, the first (partially) looped back on itself via an extra prime motor or mechanical feedback transmission, might we here have a self looped 150 kW OU device that only needs a good push to start up? Add a battery system and go wild.

I'm curious what range of imput power this works ofr. Might it run and double to output with 35-40 kW input as well? Lower?

Mounting two units and some looping bits on a platform, might a 150 kW generator be about 1,000 kg or less? Certainly when putting all the guts into a new confinement? With a low enough startup threshold and "revving", a tiny battery system would be enough to get it going. A few RC car LiPo packs.
Kind of heavy to replace an ICE or state of the art MGU system, but for 24/7 use if indeed possible for a good amount of years, it would be pretty awesome. I bet it could be made to fit on an F350 style pickup truck. If the output generator is placed behind a torque converter and/or clutch I could see this doubled ZERG loop driving the existing drive shafts and differentials. More simply might be somehow putting the rear axle drive unit from for instance an F150 Lightning on the F350 OU truck. It might still also drive the front axle if there is enough space for the existing drive shaft situation. Yes the whole looped system might fit onto the bed of an F150 Lightning or Rivian R1S or Hummer EV, but that would be toying with payload limits, and the fat low placed batteries designed around are now largely obsolete.

This appears to be a mechanical input system, and that's fine, even if a bit clumsy adding bulky parts and at best only replacing a fuel tank. If a solid state derivative can be open sourced, that would be pretty amazing. Is that at all viable? Even commercial deployment would be great to get competition in the OU space. Whatever device gets decent output, it will NEED to be optimized for power-to-weight and cost-per-kW and lifecycle/maintenance.

Once you have a 150 kW self-looped system...
0.15 MW * 24= 3.2 MWh per day. That's nice business, if you have a buyer for the electricity. At a modest $0.10/kWh that's $320/day. But parked in the right location could easily hit $1,000/day easily. Weed farmers and crypto miners will love this. give them $1000 worth of daily power for $500/day. A decent fleet operator or BEV charging location can easily use this to offset grid costs, never mind being location independent.

With a decent battery and not too much of a load or mountains to fly over, 150 kW might even suffice for a decent semi truck. A plane...that's going to be more of a squeeze, but it may well allow a battery electric plane to be converted to "never charge". Small battery for take-off power. Offset battery mass reduction with looped system and ideally added payload, even a higher cruiose power for shorter flights.

Is this the real deal? Who can make a good assessment please?

Well... it does say 'sin'...

LOL @ sin

Honestly Cloxxi I looked at the website and I would stake a large amount of money on the fact that they do not even have a prototype.

Their "team" is a joke.  The 'data' is non existent and no proper torque in energy out performance math.  No photos of device.  All computer gen pictures.  No schematic.  No patent

Many of those "news" sites are paid infomercial links

The Patent ?
https://patentimages.storage.googleapis.com/71/ca/13/44b5499aa352ba/US10566861.pdf


Shared by a long time member/builder
Respectfully
Chet K

The Patent ?
https://patentimages.storage.googleapis.com/71/ca/13/44b5499aa352ba/US10566861.pdf


Shared by a long time member/builder
Respectfully
Chet K

Thanks Chet K,
A brief look at the diagrams and I know not to waste time on the document. And I thought Holcomb was bad. It pales in comparison to this absurdity. Must be a bad joke from our neighbors to the north.
bi

Thanks Chet K,
A brief look at the diagrams and I know not to waste time on the document. And I thought Holcomb was bad. It pales in comparison to this absurdity. Must be a bad joke from our neighbors to the north.
bi

Well it's a costly document to devise if utter BS, and you need to get an actual expert to sign off on it being genuinely new.
The inventor thinks it's worth patenting (and makes fornds and time available), and the examiners grants it a patent for being new.
What do you now that the inventor and examiner don't?

Sure, many inventors are delusional, but it still needs to be signficantly new. Not just in your language.

A brief look at the diagrams and I know not to waste time on the document. And I thought Holcomb was bad. It pales in comparison to this absurdity. Must be a bad joke from our neighbors to the north.
bi

That comment is self explanatory - "pretty much says it all!"

If you can't figure out Holcomb by now, you'll never get this one...

But I did figure out Holcomb.
bi

Good - then you understand how it works and why it works.

So you are there then - should not be too hard to figure out how many of these other
technicques work - great, looking forward to more of your insightful technical input.

There have been highly respected inventors whose patents were far from an easy build blueprint.
Let's not pretend a good invention will always come with a patent that makes it easy to understand or replicate.

At the same time, if they undertook all this effort and cost to get to a patent, a process that took them a few years as per usual, we need to understand what drove them to. Understand whether they actually built something, whether they even have the advertised 150 kW running somewhere. Understand what keeps them from looping it and milking more money than most can spend. "Lack of funding" doesn't really apply when so much was invested into "protecting" the technology.
It's perfectly scalable up and down, they say. So a couple 20 kW units would turn a run of the mill PHEV into a never-charge BEV. Which, when parked by a premises that taken power 24/7, earns back more in electricity than a fancy BEV car brings in monthly hire fee.

If real, they look to need some help (yes, the website smells funny by lack of external reviews and real pictures).
If scam, they need to be exposed. Anyone googling them, should find a thread on here that quickly explains it.
If deluded or "almost there" inventors, and several lurkers on this forum may be such, they need some help as well.