Richard VIALLE's new theory about negative mass and overunity

[Pascuser]

On the contrary of what you could think, Richard VIALLE doesn't need somebody to design a device he invented and work only in his head.

His devices work since years in the real world, and he did it, not only invented an idea which could work or not.

Is his theory completely correct or not I can't say, but his devices show gravity anomalies and overunity, time modification too. And wether it is his theory that describes it or not is not very important, here I come to give you the way to replicate the devices and state yourself according to your interest: gravity anomalies and/or overunity electricity generation.

But as he designed it according to his theory and it worked, we could say that the theory has a not so bad heart of truth.

When you will have the same overunity statement than him and me (I did it in 2009) you will be able to see if you can do better. Because he extracted 10 watts only, but with a possibility to have 3000 Watts according to his theory, and with an accidental adjustment he once had 10 centimeters sparks bruning the while electronic: more power is so possible as he forecasted.

[conradelektro]

On the contrary of what you could think, Richard VIALLE doesn't need somebody to design a device he invented and work only in his head.

His devices work since years in the real world, and he did it, not only invented an idea which could work or not.

Is his theory completely correct or not I can't say, but his devices show gravity anomalies and overunity, time modification too. And wether it is his theory that describes it or not is not very important, here I come to give you the way to replicate the devices and state yourself according to your interest: gravity anomalies and/or overunity electricity generation.

But as he designed it according to his theory and it worked, we could say that the theory has a not so bad heart of truth.

When you will have the same overunity statement than him and me (I did it in 2009) you will be able to see if you can do better. Because he extracted 10 watts only, but with a possibility to have 3000 Watts according to his theory, and with an accidental adjustment he once had 10 centimeters sparks bruning the while electronic: more power is so possible as he forecasted.

Thank you for your very good responses.

In my opinion it would be very useful to concentrate on just one working device which produces more energy than is put in. This device should be carefuly documented. Especially the measurements which seem to show OU.

All OU machines which I have heard about so far exhibit the same flaw:

One could extract free energy, but some little problems persist.

It is always difficult to show OU with small outputs.

I admit that the effect is mind boggling and it should be examined carefully. But it is not very helpful to talk about huge energy gains befor they can be demonstrated clearly.

I will try to read all the information you provided (fortunately I can read French) and I will look at all the nice videos.

Again, please direct me to just one device that clearly shows OU. But I am not so very much intersted in the OU effect, lifting something by help of electricity (spinning a disk) is good enough.

Sorry, I got side tracked by the OU talk (OU never has been proven consistantly by any one). Richard VIALLE has discovered something very interesting. The OU angle and the OU claim will scare many people and is not helpful at all.

Greetings, Conrad

[conradelektro]

Then I have replicated it during 8 months; starting from the basic concept to his lat one. I have measured minimal COP of 300 with not a great precision. COP>100 000 has been measured with a physic measurement institue in Swiss and COP>10 000 has been measured with an individual with HF wattmeter.

This is not theory only, Richard VIALLE has designed a theory and has realized devices according to this theory and I have worked with him concerning 2 of the 3 main devices, to replicate, test with him and measure independently.

A version of his generator produces about 10 Watts of electricity while recharging the batteries powering it. I only worked with version with inpout/output measurement, not a looped one like the one with batteries, because electronic with low power to achieve it muste be designed. I use lab material to power; so no loop. But you can build the loop version if you can design electronic device to power it with low loss; so you have a better proof than an input/output measurement.

The claim that a Swiss measurement institute measured COP > 10 00 has to be carefully documented (and published), nobody will believe it from hear say.

Please publish the measurements concerning "2 of the 3 main devices" you mention.

"A looped back device" (a self running device) which can be observed running uninterrupted for some days and which can be measure by independent observers would be a big help. And it is exactly that which nobody can provide when making OU claims.

Greetings, Conrad

P.S.: Again, Richard Vialle discovered something very interesting, you have collected information and you have made good videos about something interesting, but the OU claim needs something really substantial and carefully documented and freely published, or you will be just one of the many people claiming OU without substance. Claiming OU is not a light matter, you go against several hundred years of science. And to make people believe you, more than words or paper is necessary. It is particularly bad to say "this is a secret, I can not tell you that, this will be protected by a patent therefore I can not tell or show you that, and so on". If there are secrets to be guarded, please shut up and keep them.

[Pascuser]

Big COP has been measure with equipement I have not. I have no HF wattmeter nor physic test equipement of an official measurement institute.

But with a poor equipement you can have COP>300 or COP>500 as I got.

If you aren't interested of COP>1 process and need COP>10 000 measure to be interested, I can't do nothing.

Loop system has been described but I did not realize it myself beacuse electronic must be designed to have a low loss (because you have 10 watts only outoutting) oscillator+ pre-ampli+ampli and that costs a little. I have done affordable things: using the lab materiel I have.

Big COP have been measured at an official institute. What can be done is to give you the adress where the measurement was done. Do you wait that I buy such equipement for your pleasure? I am not a millionnaire. You can do like me and having hundreds of COp with little investment.

And you can design your own powering electronic device to have a loop if not convinced of your measurements. I have not designed such an electronic. But Richard VIALLE has had sponsors who did it. Their powering electronic is their intellecual property and will not be given; but it is not something weird: normal oscillator+ pre ampli+ ampli. I did not design it because it cots about 1000$ to design it as a self running system. For what? For a loop. But it will not give something more than a loop with 10 watts.

What is more interesting is to have more output power, so the loop will be easy: using output power to power lab material.

Anybody claiming proofs and demanding to have me or anybody buying material to have so can wait eternally. All is given here so everybody can do it himself and measure himself. If one is not satisfied, he can buy himsel material to measure or go to his local physic institute to bring his built replica and have his proof.

I am here to spread what has been made by Richard VIALLE. I made him myself, and one of his friend too. We verified that it worked are our mission on earth is not to satisfy everybody asking to do this or that to have their proof. I present what we get, honnestly; we did it with individual money and time and if you want to be fed with your ideally proof, you can provide yourself; I can't do more.

This is a working forum for people willing to work on project, this is not a drive service "please the proof, with film, reports, and hurry". We give what we have. You want to reproduce or test by yourself: it is great. You want more than we have: you won't have. if you want things like you want, do it yourself! YOU can test, measure and see. schema is affordable to reproduce for somebody with lab material (oscillator, generator , amplificator). If you have so it will cost additional 30$ to design the system, if you don't have, then see those who will do it. I myself could'nt do many things because I have not the material.

[conradelektro]

Pacuser you say "Big COP have been measured at an official institute. What can be done is to give you the address where the measurement was done."

Well, is there any documentation at this official institute? If there is, it might also be interesting for you to get it and to publish it here. It would enhance your credibility.

An OU claim does not work by saying "build it yourself and you will see".

If you make an extraordinary claim, please back it up by extraordinary evidence.

What I see in your videos is a very slow moving balance using up electricity to drive a disk. How one can ever extract even the energy used by the motor driving the disk, is beyond me. That would be a really difficult engineering task.

When I say, I am more interested in the "gravity effect", is does not mean that I believe the OU claim. Since this is an OU forum, I addressed the OU aspects of the system.

I see the same pattern as in all OU claims.

Greetings, Conrad