Author Topic: Selfrunning cold electricity circuit from Dr.Stiffler (Read 1481243 times)

DrStiffler · « **Reply #375 on:** October 31, 2007, 06:12:28 PM »

Quote from: k4zep on October 31, 2007, 06:06:08 PM

Quote from: hartiberlin on October 31, 2007, 05:48:12 PM
Now Ron?s new video is online and he makes
me very exciting to see,if he can disconnect the battery
and the LEDs stay ON.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=h2QjJWn-bzE

Ron has a sense of humor......waiting for #10 now......talk about a clifhanger! How about disconnecting the battery AND the ground?

Of course I'll disconnect the ground. It's only there to T off certain people that are look for shells to hide under. Thought it was time to do some feedback as they have nothing better to do.

hartiberlin · « **Reply #376 on:** October 31, 2007, 06:15:45 PM »

Yes, Ron?s humour makes me very exciting now !

What about disconnecting the battery and the ground wire and
put all the circuit again in the alu pan and just only watch through the
hole again, if the circuit still runs ?

This would be the definate answer, that there is no
power coming in via the 50KWatts AM radio station not too far away...

DrStiffler · « **Reply #377 on:** October 31, 2007, 06:31:02 PM »

Quote from: hartiberlin on October 31, 2007, 06:15:45 PM

Yes, Ron?s humour makes me very exciting now !

What about disconnecting the battery and the ground wire and
put all the circuit again in the alu pan and just only watch through the
hole again, if the circuit still runs ?

This would be the definate answer, that there is no
power coming in via the 50KWatts AM radio station not too far away...

@hartiberlin
Okay you have insulted my ability for the last time on this damn RF issue. I'm off your list.

hartiberlin · « **Reply #378 on:** October 31, 2007, 06:54:23 PM »

Ron,
I am sorry.
It was not meant to be an insult, but just to check for Murphy?s law
with the wording:

"What can go wrong will go wrong..."

There really could be some kind of induction into your ground cable
via the about 1Meter long ground cable,
especially, when there is a 50 KWatts AM station around your neighbourhood.

Okay, it might not be lamba/2 or Lambda/4
for the right voltage, but you never know.

As you never stated exactly, what you did to
be sure that this was not the case, I just wanted to point this
out.
I believe you that there is a power amplification coming through the
coil-core, but for the hardcore skeptics on this board,
it would be wise to disconect the ground wire and
do again the alu pan faraday cage test then.

So I am sorry again, when I have hurt your feelings,but I
guess this is just a missunderstanding as we don?t know
what measurements you have already done to
know, that it is not a RF induction.

Regards, Stefan.

k4zep · « **Reply #379 on:** October 31, 2007, 10:43:33 PM »

Quote from: RStiffler on October 31, 2007, 06:12:28 PM

Quote from: k4zep on October 31, 2007, 06:06:08 PM
Quote from: hartiberlin on October 31, 2007, 05:48:12 PM
Now Ron?s new video is on line and he makes
me very exciting to see,if he can disconnect the battery
and the LEDs stay ON.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=h2QjJWn-bzE

Ron has a sense of humor......waiting for #10 now......talk about a cliffhanger! How about disconnecting the battery AND the ground?
Of course I'll disconnect the ground. It's only there to T off certain people that are look for shells to hide under. Thought it was time to do some feedback as they have nothing better to do.

Dr. Stiffler, I hope you don't leave, it is most refreshing having so knowledgeable a person to watch at work.. The reason I mentioned the ground is because of that fascinating circuit in your original group of schematics that had two coils, two sets of LED's and was ground driven, with .5 amp peak in the ground wire!! Now that got my attention.

Your latest device with the on-board Colpitts Osc. is most refreshing! There is so much to experiment with and so much to learn, I'm spinning my wheels as fast as I can.

Ben K4ZEP

abassign · « **Reply #380 on:** October 31, 2007, 11:18:26 PM »

Dr. Stiffler has done an experiment with all the device inside a metal container, it was clear that the LED was remaining on ... If Stefan has some doubts it is good that he places them with clearness so that Stiffler can define a new set of experiments. However, if the phenomenon described by Stiffler is reproduceable, it will not delay to come outside other. Stiffler has the advantage to have done experiments for many years and therefore he obtains better results.

amigo · « **Reply #381 on:** November 01, 2007, 12:18:50 AM »

Nice flurry of activity in just one day, I'm glad doc stuck around when I asked him to, but I'm worried with the last developments he won't be coming back

@Stefan

For GOD'S SAKE what are you doing man? As a moderator and an admin even, you should be the first one to set an example not to do what you are doing.

When someone starts a thread on any subject, posts in that thread usually stay on that subject and if they don't MODS make sure they do. Granted, some digressions are permitted but in this case you do not go banging on all doors insulting the person making the claim by questioning their intelligence, especially in a situation like this where the goal and purpose of all of us being here is to find alternative sources of energy. We are all on the same side here, if that's not possible then we might as well disband and go our own merry ways.

If an OP starts a thread and makes a claim (or an original inventor is brought into the thread), then discloses a principle and practical replication guide, he's asking everyone to try to replicate his claim and report back on the success (or failure). Instead there were half a dozen other attempts in butchering the original claim (one by yourself included) which swayed from the original claim ultimately leading to a disaster as evident from the last post by Dr.Stiffler.

To make matters worse, latest posts have nothing in common with the original claim and do not belong in this thread whatsoever. Yes it's cute to see dozens of LEDs light up on a pulsed DC or work in any other way, but that's not the principle of the claim. You as a mod/admin should step in and do your "job" - moderate - tell the posters to stay on topic or kindly start their own threads.

All that has been accomplished here was bomb the thread after 26 pages and make the inventor leave it, insulted.

@all

I'm sorry to preach about this, but it seems to me many of you do not know or understand what "Netiquette" is or how to act accordingly. Have you all just learnt about the Internet recently or what?

I will repeat for absent Dr.Stiffler: The main claim circuit principle (to best of my understanding) is based on a decoupling link of C1 and L1 in the primary - they are mandatory. You do not remove them and plug ground or signal generator without those components. That's not the basic claim and you are doing a dis-service in your feeble attempts of replication without them.

Once you stand upright then you can walk, so once you achieve the basic circuit operation as outlined in the primary claim, then you can move on to removing parts and experimenting and posting your findings here. Just because Dr.Stiffler has removed them in his other circuits does not mean that everyone should jump in and butcher the circuit out. He had said that he expects everyone to first replicate the basic circuit and report on their findings and positive outcome.

Otherwise start a new thread and call it "Dr.Stiffler's circuit - modification experiment"...

My 2c.

rickMave · « **Reply #382 on:** November 01, 2007, 02:35:23 AM »

Quote from: abassign on October 31, 2007, 11:18:26 PM

Dr. Stiffler has done an experiment with all the device inside a metal container, it was clear that the LED was remaining on ...

Is this true? The video I saw with the circuit in a metal container was not all inside - it had a lead coming out of it and going to earth. None of his circuits seem to be able to work without some similar sort of "earth" or aerial. We know from Dr Stifflers measurement on circuit #7 in figure 15 and 16 that there may be ~200mA RF flowing in that earth lead. That would be enough to light ~20 LEDs in parallel (10 pointing one way and 10 the other) if there was enough voltage also on the lead. So maybe the circuit #7 would light an additional 20 LEDs wired in this earth lead! Unfortunately Dr Stiffler did not see fit to look for a voltage there.

If only he could provide this measurement (as I requested earlier) then we could know what power flow this current represents. But maybe that is part of the tease to get others experimenting.

Maybe even he himself doesn't want the answer to that question - it might be very discouraging to find that all the power was flowing in from outside. But I think that such a strange effect would be just as interesting to investigate and probably just as useful from a power generation point of view. Who cares where the power is coming from as long as it is easy and free!

Such an easy measurement, and so useful an answer. How sad that he is gone now.

k4zep · « **Reply #383 on:** November 01, 2007, 03:52:11 AM »

Quote from: rickMave on November 01, 2007, 02:35:23 AM

Quote from: abassign on October 31, 2007, 11:18:26 PM
Dr. Stiffler has done an experiment with all the device inside a metal container, it was clear that the LED was remaining on ...
Is this true? The video I saw with the circuit in a metal container was not all inside - it had a lead coming out of it and going to earth. None of his circuits seem to be able to work without some similar sort of "earth" or aerial. We know from Dr Stifflers measurement on circuit #7 in figure 15 and 16 that there may be ~200mA RF flowing in that earth lead. That would be enough to light ~20 LEDs in parallel (10 pointing one way and 10 the other) if there was enough voltage also on the lead. So maybe the circuit #7 would light an additional 20 LEDs wired in this earth lead! Unfortunately Dr Stiffler did not see fit to look for a voltage there.

If only he could provide this measurement (as I requested earlier) then we could know what power flow this current represents. But maybe that is part of the tease to get others experimenting.

Maybe even he himself doesn't want the answer to that question - it might be very discouraging to find that all the power was flowing in from outside. But I think that such a strange effect would be just as interesting to investigate and probably just as useful from a power generation point of view. Who cares where the power is coming from as long as it is easy and free!

Such an easy measurement, and so useful an answer. How sad that he is gone now.

I sure hope he keeps on with this at least on his home site and YouTube anyway. I have this weird suspicion that the whole device in Circuit 7, Fig. 15, 16 is acting as sort of a top loaded antenna reference to ground and somehow, the LEDs and coils are a form of Osc. if you read all he has to say about that circuit!, Just look at the scope shot, the damn thing is burst oscillating. I also suspect if you added a 3rd coil set same as L1/L2 at the top of the schematic and fed it in reverse with a simple long wire broadband antenna, output would be shall we say LARGE? I have also seen the circuit before on a crazy Texans site who said he generated Kw's of energy from an outside antenna referenced to ground! He didn't have a clue as to how it worked, just said it did.......at the time I thought he was nuts. I also read an article several years ago about an "energy sucking antenna", I think this circuit and its brothers are basically this! More "Power" to this type of circuit........What a Pun!

Remember what Ex President Clinton said Ron when he was heckled..................."If you will shut up and listen, I'll talk" or something like that!

Later,

Ben

AhuraMazda · « **Reply #384 on:** November 01, 2007, 06:47:33 AM »

Dr Stiffler,
This list does not belong to one person. On the whole, I would say people on this thread are fascinated by your circuit and are all intelligent enthusiasts and naturally have questions. I know you have a lot more tricks up your sleeve with this so, where would you direct your fans?

abassign · « **Reply #385 on:** November 01, 2007, 07:13:54 AM »

@all

A certain Russian scientist called Stanislav Avramenko in 1993 has performed an energy transmission experiment without return to mass, that is with an only cable, with very low losses and very high energy density respect the conductor's area.
The experiment is very simple, from a side is a generator with perticolar characteristics which finishes with an only thread, this, much thin and completely isolated by earth, there it takes the current (if we can so call her) towards the utilzer. A rectifier system by fast diodes and a condenser complete everything. Some time ago the experiment was much advertised, French Jean Louis Naudin has been repeated and documented by a researcher (JLN).

http://jnaudin.free.fr/html/afep012.htm

Since the beginning of the Stiffler experiment I have thought to a similitude between this experiment with Avramenko experiment. This similitude can help us to reflect on the characteristics of the experiment and the better one road to reproduce and optimize it.

abassign · « **Reply #386 on:** November 01, 2007, 07:37:03 AM »

@ All

I add also the USA Stanislav Avramenko patent. Must however pay attention to the thin explored fact that she has never been at the end the Avramenko experiment. For instance few researchers have worried of the fact that the thread of transmission of the current can be extremely thin, it calls of one little passage of electrons.
This would confirm the experiment with an oscillator and the 9V battery. I would like to know whether other have done the experiment with the oscillator and 9 V battery and they have observed a greater duration of the battery.

samedsoft · « **Reply #387 on:** November 01, 2007, 08:57:55 AM »

Quote from: abassign on November 01, 2007, 07:13:54 AM

@all

http://jnaudin.free.fr/html/afep012.htm

Since the beginning of the Stiffler experiment I have thought to a similitude between this experiment with Avramenko experiment. This similitude can help us to reflect on the characteristics of the experiment and the better one road to reproduce and optimize it.

So Do You Think Dr. Stiffler actually replicated a Russian Scientist work?

Dr. Stiffler, you are a good man World will know you as a good man, life is short and you have very good respect and honor within this international community. You have very creative soul and please try to be more open...,

All

Please check http://www.cip.physik.uni-muenchen.de/~wwieser/elec/oscillator/LTC1799/ adress for a very compact low cost oscillator based on LTC1799. this design is a small footprint 50% duty cycle square wave oscillator with variable frequency from 10kHz to 30MHz

Best Regards from Turkey

abassign · « **Reply #388 on:** November 01, 2007, 12:07:06 PM »

I want to remind you that Stiffler calls his experiment (http://www.drstiffler.com/): "Single Wire Excitation and Amplification", Avramenko entitles his patent as: "Method and apparatus for single line electrical trasmission". The difference of the two names is born of the fact that Avramenko concentrates his research in a system of current transmission with only one wire, Stiffler, tries the transmission of the current and also to obtain his amplification.

There are very much difference between the Stiffler experiment and Avramenko experiment, for instance:

1. The frequency of the oscillator in the Stiffler experiment is 1000 times more high.
2. The form of the envelopments that Stiffler uses for L2-L3 is completely different. The Stiffler envelopments have an only connected terminal, the other is left free!
3. How for the wires which transports the current in the Avramenko experiment, the L2 thickness is extremely thin and is theoretically not sufficient for the current necessary to power 50 LEDs (50 * 20 mA = 1 A).

@plengo
Is it possible repeat your experiment using a much thinner wire which connects the generator of signals with the device and verify his heating for Joule effect? Actually the adopted disposition in your experiment is the most like that of Avramenko, however it lacks the transformer.

@k4zep
Like the experiment of Stiffler, but with a few not clear differences, can you do us an electric scheme?

@amigo
Your experiment is the several equal to the one realized by Stiffler with the oscillator, have fact of the progress?

tinu · « **Reply #389 on:** November 01, 2007, 12:12:47 PM »

Quote from: abassign on November 01, 2007, 12:07:06 PM

...
3. How for the wires which transports the current in the Avramenko experiment, the L2 thickness is extremely thin and is theoretically not sufficient for the current necessary to power 50 LEDs (50 * 20 mA = 1 A).

What?!
The LEDs are series connected, aren't they?

News:

User Menu

Author Topic: Selfrunning cold electricity circuit from Dr.Stiffler (Read 1481243 times)

DrStiffler

Re: Selfrunning cold electricity circuit from Dr.Stiffler

hartiberlin

Re: Selfrunning cold electricity circuit from Dr.Stiffler

DrStiffler

Re: Selfrunning cold electricity circuit from Dr.Stiffler

hartiberlin

Re: Selfrunning cold electricity circuit from Dr.Stiffler

k4zep

Re: Selfrunning cold electricity circuit from Dr.Stiffler

abassign

Re: Selfrunning cold electricity circuit from Dr.Stiffler

amigo

Re: Selfrunning cold electricity circuit from Dr.Stiffler

rickMave

Re: Selfrunning cold electricity circuit from Dr.Stiffler

k4zep

Re: Selfrunning cold electricity circuit from Dr.Stiffler

AhuraMazda

Re: Selfrunning cold electricity circuit from Dr.Stiffler

abassign

Re: Selfrunning cold electricity circuit from Dr.Stiffler

abassign

Re: Selfrunning cold electricity circuit from Dr.Stiffler

samedsoft

Re: Selfrunning cold electricity circuit from Dr.Stiffler

abassign

Re: Selfrunning cold electricity circuit from Dr.Stiffler

tinu

Re: Selfrunning cold electricity circuit from Dr.Stiffler