Is joule thief circuit gets overunity?

[ltseung888]

Mark Dansie will be testing the FLEET devices at G-LED USA in a couple of hours.
Independent verification of the technology is starting.
Expect at least 10 teams to finish their verification before Christmas 2012.  Photos and test results will be posted.

[conradelektro]

Mark Dansie will be testing the FLEET devices at G-LED USA in a couple of hours.
Independent verification of the technology is starting.
Expect at least 10 teams to finish their verification before Christmas 2012.  Photos and test results will be posted.

I hope there will useful information because the information at http://www.overunityresearch.com/index.php?topic=1516.msg26794#new is totally useless.

Greetings, Conrad

[TinselKoala]

Lawrence, your graph is largely uninterpretable without knowing the exact conditions under which the data were obtained. In addition, several things _are_ interpretable about the graph. First, both traces go below the zero baseline toward the end of the interval. This indicates either nonconservation of Miracles, or a certain imprecision or error in your data, or both. Secondly, the magnitude of the difference at any given time is on the order of the value of the measurement itself. In other words, you are seeing a difference of a few milliWatts in a signal whose amplitude is a few milliWatts.

In such conditions it is imperative that results be shown _not_ from a single trial, but averages from multiple, even many trials, and error bars or some other measure of the variance in your data also shown. This will allow the signal-- any real differences-- to rise above the "noise" or random variations that can affect the results from single trials. And if the variance in the data -- the "error bars" -- is of the same order as the differences noted, then it is likely that the difference is not real and only due to chance variations in the noise level or the data.

I have already discussed some of the problems with your data collection methods, and I believe that if you have collected and used the data in that manner, to make this graph, that you are once again making extravagant claims without _real_ support from your experiments.

[TinselKoala]

I hope there will useful information because the information at http://www.overunityresearch.com/index.php?topic=1516.msg26794#new is totally useless.

Greetings, Conrad

I just took a look at the spreadsheet.
http://www.overunityresearch.com/index.php?action=dlattach;topic=1516.0;attach=8782
If I am reading it right, the circuit is powered by the charged-up capacitor and allowed to run. As it runs the frequency changes a bit as the cap runs down. The data collection begins at 1 kHz and continues for 20 minutes. The data is gathered like this, since Lawrence's scope only has two channels. The output power measurements are made and recorded first, and then the probes are unhooked, moved to the input power measuring points, and the input power is measured. Then for the next measurement pair the probes are moved back to the output power, etc. This moving around takes a minute, according to the notes in the spreadsheet.

So for the final comparison, the output power measurement at time t is paired with an input power measurement at time t+1 minute, in a system with constantly decreasing input voltage from a capacitor.

Am I getting that right?

[conradelektro]

I just took a look at the spreadsheet.
http://www.overunityresearch.com/index.php?action=dlattach;topic=1516.0;attach=8782
If I am reading it right, the circuit is powered by the charged-up capacitor and allowed to run. As it runs the frequency changes a bit as the cap runs down. The data collection begins at 1 kHz and continues for 20 minutes. The data is gathered like this, since Lawrence's scope only has two channels. The output power measurements are made and recorded first, and then the probes are unhooked, moved to the input power measuring points, and the input power is measured. Then for the next measurement pair the probes are moved back to the output power, etc. This moving around takes a minute, according to the notes in the spreadsheet.

So for the final comparison, the output power measurement at time t is paired with an input power measurement at time t+1 minute, in a system with constantly decreasing input voltage from a capacitor.

Am I getting that right?

@Tinselkoala: I am afraid it is a total waste of time to discuss data which is created with a secret device. The data can be everything.

One would have to know the circuit, the components used and the measurement methods.

But you are right, analysing the presented data, it even look fishy when making educated guesses.

Let's hope the many alleged validation teams are better when doing electronics and may be Marc Dansy is really looking at this and will do measurements.

It definitely does not look good. Again they refer to god. Are they praying for help? Or is it blasphemy?

Greetings, Conrad