Is joule thief circuit gets overunity?

[plengo]

Hmmm... I can imagine how a transformer gets overunity but in inductor im still double thinking. If the inductor really has more power in bemf or when the magnetic field is collapsing, then it will self oscillate when a capacitor is added because the extra energy from the bemf sustain the oscillation.

I am not saying that BEMF is more power back than we put it in. BEMF will be much less.


BTW, it is funny how IGNORANT people are to overunity. Look at this video from Newman (he has been doing this for decades) http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=RMYo1QlvK5g&list=PL4E7C4E1A7713B3D8&index=1&feature=plpp_video, it is very clear that his machine 2000 pounds is running in voltage only.


I want to see how any one can explain this to not be overunity. 2000 pounds doing work, pumping water is NOT fake and it is not running on current, since ALL the batteries are in series.


If this is not the power of induction at work, I don't know what is power than.


Fausto.

[plengo]

and to show more work: http://youtu.be/N1Fj4r-we84


This video is a trial replication of Lasersaber Joule Ringer Cross Over. I did not replicate it 100% BUT I did replicate the input energy growing effect. I had to burn about 30 or so transistors.


Very difficult this circuit. Extremely sensitive.


Fausto.

[ltseung888]

Happy Thanksgiving to you all.  I think that we can settle the question of whether a JT can be overunity once for all.  Please refer to Nov 22a.zip in the following:
http://www.overunityresearch.com/index.php?topic=1516.msg26471#msg26471

If we believe in the formula:
Instantaneous Power = Instantaneous Voltage x Instantaneous Current
and that the Instantaneous Voltage value can be obtained from the DC Coupling of the Oscilloscope, then all we need to do is to examine the oscilloscope results.

The oscilloscope result for case 4 was obtained with the battery removed.  The capacitor was connected for some minutes.  The Output Voltage frequency increased from 1.4KHz when the battery was disconnected.  As the both the Input and Output Voltage dropped, the frequency increased.  At this state, the Output Power was negative and the numerical value of the COP was greater than 1.  This can be reproduced from the Lead-out Energy Research kit components from BSI.

God Bless.

A Picture is worth a thousand words.  Four pictures may be worth 4 thousand words.  Refer to the above link and the nov 22a.xlsx file for full details.
All Glory and Honor to the Almighty.  I am just the humble Server of the Divine Wine.

[TinselKoala]

@LTseung: I'm glad you are taking me seriously. Thanks for posting the scopeshots.
Yes, you are right that instantaneous power = instantaneous voltage x instantaneous current, at each _instant_.  This automatically takes into account phase angles, complex waveforms and the lot. However there are other considerations.

First, and perhaps most importantly, Power is NOT energy. Power is not necessarily "conserved" because you can take lots of small chunks of power and concentrate them into a bigger chunk. ENERGY is conserved. To sustain a claim of overunity performance you must show that energy out > energy in.
How do you find the energy? By integrating the instantaneous power curve over an appropriate time period.
So your COP claims based on power are still incomplete.

Second..... if you load samples from your DSO into your spreadsheet and have the spreadsheet integrate the values making up the instantaneous power curve, you need to make sure you aren't "looking at your data thru a picket fence".  That is, all DSOs are _sampling_ instruments, they do not read continuous values from your signal. They sample it at discrete intervals. Digital Sampling Oscilloscope.  Many DSOs... high end ones....have very large sample rates like 1 Gs/sec. Clearly..... if you are sampling a waveform at 1 Gs/sec..... you are going to have a +lot+ of samples per cycle. A lot of data for a spreadsheet CSV file. On the other hand if your scope is a basic one, it probably has a much slower actual sample rate, and may even be interpolating between sample intervals rather than giving you actual measurements.
This means that using a spreadsheet to integrate a complex signal with fast risetimes, based on data dumps from a low-end digital scope is a process that is.... er.... um...... "fraught" as someone once said. Fraught with difficulty and opportunities for error, that is.
It is better, in general, to use an integrating power meter like the Clarke-Hess power analyzers, or in especially problematic cases, even bolometric power analyzers, or to beg or borrow a high-end scope with huge sample rates and built in integration math, and have the scope perform the necessary integrations on-board.

Finally (for this post anyway) you must use the _input power used to charge the capacitor_ as your "input" for your COP calculations on capacitor-powered devices. This is actually the benefit of using caps: the input power can be much more precisely known than otherwise by measuring the charging voltage and current and, again, doing the inst. mult. and integration. The _energy_ that is on the cap at any given time can be known simply by computing E in Joules = (CxVxV)/2 where C is the capacitance in Farads and V is the measured voltage in volts.
So you charge a cap to a certain voltage. You know the energy it took to charge the cap.... and you know the energy ON the cap. Then you compare these to your output _energy_ value over a suitable period of time.

[TinselKoala]

and to show more work: http://youtu.be/N1Fj4r-we84


This video is a trial replication of Lasersaber Joule Ringer Cross Over. I did not replicate it 100% BUT I did replicate the input energy growing effect. I had to burn about 30 or so transistors.


Very difficult this circuit. Extremely sensitive.


Fausto.

Here's my first complete demo:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Ro36zIieP3w

And another one coming in an hour or so.

But I've only burned out two transistors.....I must be doing something wrong.....