Is joule thief circuit gets overunity?

[TinselKoala]

Are you even reading my posts?

[poynt99]

Are you even reading my posts?

No, he doesn't. Lawrence only cherry picks things that support his fantasies.

Trying to teach Lawrence is somewhat similar to trying to teach Rosemary Ainslie; it's a futile endeavour.

[TinselKoala]

No, he doesn't. Lawrence only cherry picks things that support his fantasies.

Trying to teach Lawrence is somewhat similar to trying to teach Rosemary Ainslie; it's a futile endeavour.

Hey, at least I got him to consider the AC vs DC coupling issue. Maybe only because it makes his output power measurements look larger when DC coupled, but at least he tried it, instead of trying to tell me I was fos like Ainslie does.

[ltseung888]

I got comments that the nov 22a.xlsx file was too big (>5M) and some people could not open it.
I shall break it up in pieces and explain each piece in detail.
The file consisted of the following main parts:
1. CSV file of Input and Output of the basic JT using components from the Lead-out Energy Research Kit.
2. CSV file of the same but with the 2.3V 10F capacitor connected in parallel with the battery.
3. CSV file of the same but with the battery disconnected at minute 0.
4. CSV file of the same but with the battery disconnected after 3 minutes.
DC coupling was selected.  Case 1,2,3 showed COP < 1 but case 4 showed COP > 1 (-6.4)!
Case 4 was then repeated and the same result occurred.
After double, triple checking, 30 of these oscilloscope-test-ready boards will be sent to top Universities.  They will have the top-of-the-line oscilloscopes to confirm the results.
Meanwhile my explanations will be on the results of the Atten Oscilloscope without the 4 channel and the maths functions.  There are limitations which I know about.  You are welcome to point them out again or point out new doubtful areas.
Those of you who can build JT and have 2.3V 10F capacitors can repeat the experiment now.  make sure you use DC Coupling on your DSO.

[MileHigh]

Fausto:

We are going to revisit the mechanical power issue again.

I am going to quote Mark Euthansius from the comments from the recent PESN article about Jue Newman:

The video lined in the current article says 900gph = 15gpm which looks about right.  Given that and the pump inlet height of no more than 1 meter, translates to less than 10W mechanical power. It's more of the same old story:  Bad assumptions about input versus output lead to unsupportable claims of free energy.  For Joe Newman, this has been going on for 30 years.

Do you understand now Fausto?  The Joe Newman video linked to in the October 2012 PESN article is showing about 10 watts of mechanical work being done to pump water (I think you linked to the same video).  You now understand that a bunch of alkaline AA batteries in series can easily do this.


Another Mark E. quote:

the mechanical power required to lift the claimed 900
gph of water 1 meter is less than 10W.  That's within the reach of 10 AA cells. 
It is a light load for the 80 9V 522 alkaline cells shown in the video.  If you think that pumping that modest quantity of water by that small height requires 300hp, then you have very funny ideas about power.  The machine's mass is irrelevant.

I note also that TK showed some calculations showing that it was feasible for the water pumping to get done.  So what Joe Newman is showing is nothing of any significance.  What you have to do when you look at video clips like this is is do the calculations and find out for yourself.  Don't believe me and especially don't believe Joe Newman, check things out for yourself.

TK:

Yes indeed, after I made that posting I was thinking that Joe probably spins up his big honking rotors by hand before he powers them with the AA batteries.  So I salute you in your Brownie Point wisdom.  lol

Once the big honking rotor is turning it acts like a mechanical low-pass filter and the AA batteries can happily run the pump without worrying about the varying mechanical resistance of the actual pump itself.  The rotational inertia of the rotor smooths things out.

Fausto:

Another interesting quote from the PESN article, this time from Asterix:

Newman, on his website (joseph newman dot com) claims that it is possible to do work using voltage only with no current.  This is pure babbling.   It's entirely possible to have a charge (voltage) with no current flow--we know it as static electricity.  But the moment that the charge is dissipated, a current flows--and work is performed.  Potential energy changes to kinetic energy.  No laws of physics broken (sorry, Sterling).  P=IE--as easy as pie.

Sorry again, Sterling, but the same potential-to-kinetic energy relationship holds regardless of the force involved:  gravitational, intertial, electrostatic or magnetic.   Your #1 and the "looped"  MG sets on your list must follow the rule; it's the way our universe is constructed.

So that's where you are getting your statement about "voltage only with no current" or "voltage only with so little current it's not worth mentioning."

I hope that you realize now that what Joe says is a lie.  Power is voltage times current and there is no such thing as a Newman motor that runs on voltage only.

MileHigh