Simple to build isolation transformer that consumes less power than it gives out

[poynt99]

In my tests I used 220 V / 50 Hz mains.

Simulation does not match real world in this case.

We have seen replications from forest and TheCell, I picked up 3 V from forest's results. I think it was voltage drop across bulb A, so this needs verification. Bulb A shows almost no light while bulb B shows light.

Please provide a link to any replication substantiating a claim of OU.

If the source voltage is 220V, obviously U1 can not be 3V.

[Jack Noskills]

At the moment I am not aware of successfull replication. I wanted to ask this question because I think conclusions made from earlier replication attempts may not be correct.

But, lets say U1 is 3 volts, would you consider this circuit to be OU or not ?

[poynt99]

At the moment I am not aware of successfull replication.

Why did you say this then?

We have seen replications from forest and TheCell, I picked up 3 V from forest's results. I think it was voltage drop across bulb A, so this needs verification. Bulb A shows almost no light while bulb B shows light.

So in other words, you admit that no one else has been able to achieve OU with this simple circuit, except yourself. And you are not able to demonstrate it by video. Is that correct?

Surely you must know someone with a video camera?

And don't you find it odd that despite the simplicity of the setup, no one else can replicate your purported OU results, and no one else is jumping all over this idea?

[TinselKoala]

Jack, in your hypothetical, "If" U1 were three volts, then the output voltage would not be 120 volts and the device would not be overunity. "IF" U1 were only three volts _and_ your output values were as listed, and if pigs had wings and takeoff clearance from the tower, you could fly.
But the only way I can think of that U1 could be three volts with an input of 220 VAC, is if the connection of U1 to the bottom wire of the input line is on the other side of that load, which then removes that load's power dissipation from your reckoning. And with that heavy a load you aren't then going to get the output you've listed unless something very strange is going on. At this point we simply need to question the figures given, make sure the schematic is correct, and repeat the data gathering. It is a simple enough process, if all parties are actually rational.

[Jack Noskills]

poynt99, I said replication, not successfull replication. I should have said replication attempt.

In fact, replication attempts show similar behaviour with the bulbs so I think they are good enough to get those figures.

So U1 cannot be 3 volts, but voltage drop across bulb A is 3 volts. Only reason then is that voltage on the other side of bulb A and between L is 217 volts right ?
When load at B is increased then also bulb A begins to shine so voltage rises and my watt meter begins to show watts are consumed. I find this odd.

I don't understand why there needs to be video so you could see with your own eyes the same thing. Maybe all I got is a measurement error, crappy watt meter, bad behaving light bulbs or bad eye sight. It is also a fact that tuning cap makes bulb A to go out completely while more light comes to bulb B. This is simple enough to try for anyone. If you got ferrite then you can try it using higher frequency and less turns.
If you are into experiments and have suitable trafo to use then give it a go.

And btw pigs will fly if you put them in high enough magnetic field. Some university in Holland floated a frog in 2 T magnetic field. Frog was not harmed during experiment.