Richard VIALLE's new theory about negative mass and overunity

[tim123]

Hi Verpies,
  Pascal, on COS, made a very fair comment in response to your questions about the measurement of OU:

"The only answer is that person din't do the measurement. "

http://www.conspirovniscience.com/forum/index.php?s=b5ae51d1f0280696b70b9930c4822192&showtopic=1504&st=60#

It's a super-easy thing to replicate. It's not a Rarenergia machine, or LENR, just tube and wires... Do you do replications?

Regards, Tim

[Khwartz]

Dear tim, I am since long enough in the communities to note when someone just tries to attack me or just share one's informations. There are specific traits and words used and the behaviour has nothing to have with a true friendly approach. (Note that has nothing to have with the relevant aspects of the objections.)

I know he has nothing against you, so it is not the same and study well his posts they were not exactly presented and not with the same emotion or attitude than the one he started to use at the very beginning when he addressed to me, and I can tell you, I saw it immediately and fully clearly, same way anyway he used in an other thread I had created he borred me so much I left him alone. ..

But tim, be sure I have no problem with positive, honest and RESPECTUL criticism, but don't ask me to be nice with the guy who still walk on my foot and intends to stay on!

What I won't never accept is his way to presuppose wrongness when he still not have the data and think he is "the only one" to know something in electronics and physics.

When he will grant more credit to our work and the honesty we invest in it in France, been able to recognise the positive aspects too, could be I will change my mind about him, but I have no reason to be nice with someone who has actively tried to insidiously denigrate my work here. Sorry for that.

Now, as you can see on my previous report, I have no problem to be contradicted and even could ask for!  and indeed, verpies's objections helped me to find other very relevant data for the community here (even if these are not what I would expect ).

Expressing objections is one thing, the way to do is an orher...

Best regards,
K.

[Khwartz]

Hi Khwartz,
  I thought so... So perhaps the QDC is the most efficient design - at least in terms of space... Perhaps that answers wistiti's question.

I just got an ebay bargain - I could use to drive a QDC... - I got a 1-500MHz Linear amplifier - 150W... For cheap.

But I would need to analyse the autogenerator - and impedance match it - to make sure I don't blow up the amp... Hence my interest in VNAs etc... I also don't have a sig-gen for that frequency ATM... Would have to make one... Maybe from an NE602...?

My feeling is that Keely-physics is the real physics...


Tim

Go ahead with your ideas of experimentations!  Tim, any tries if made with application, care, and well analysed is always useful

I still know nothing about Keely, but why not? 

Have a nice day there!
K.

[tim123]

Wow, when people say that arduino's are easy to program, they're right... Since I last posted, I've built & compiled a library to run the DDS, and tested one to run the LCD...
Not tested the DDS yet - need connectors... Debugging might be a challenge...

[verpies]

Pascal, on COS, made a very fair comment in response to your questions about the measurement of OU:

I read his reply, but I have an impression that I have been misunderstood.

Quantization error is created by any ADC. 
It is a vertical error - not a horizontal one (such as clock jitter or undersampling and aliasing).

With two channels (one for current, one for voltage) these quantization errors get multiplied during power calculation.
See the graph attached below how that appears in an extremely bad case or read this thread where someone else makes a bad power measurement because ignoring these vertical quantization errors.

Note that I never wrote that a 2-ch scope is incapable of measuring power accurately.
Also, I never wrote that power measurement by 2-ch scope is good only for pure sine waves. 

P_MEAN = MEAN(U_I *I_I)         , where the subscript "_I" denotes "instantaneous".
is a universal method of power measurement if done with due diligence* and it will correctly measure any waveform, regardless of waveform shape and I-V phase offset.*

However this:
P_MEAN = U_RMS * I_RMS * cos(Φ)
is not a universal method of power measurement.  It is good only for pure sine waves.  Even if the waveform is pure, then it is still subject to the frequency limitation of the multiplier inside the RMS converter. 
BTW: you cannot determine if a sine wave is pure just by looking at it on the scope's screen in time domain. 
See this video for what I mean.

Do you do replications?

When I see an anomaly then I do.


*  In this case "due diligence" means ensuring simultaneous sampling of the voltage and current channels (non interleaved sampling), ensuring that ENOBs of ADCs are fully utilized (thus quantization errors are minimized), ensuring that the current sensing resistor is really non-inductive with HF spectral measurements,  not undersampling any of the channels - preventing aliasing, arithmetically averaging the instantaneous U_I * I_I multiplication results to obtain average power (not performing any RMS operations on them!).