Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE

hanon · April 03, 2016, 10:00:58 AM

Norman,
I did not get fine results with that circuit. The signals shape was good but I could just get 12 watts output with around 30 watts input. I posted the results in the thread.

Wistiti,
If you look for a post I did on the 4th of July 2015 you will find an attachment with more OU devices with this same concept of polarity in repulsion.

About the Canary Island in those years: Figuera developed his first genetator in Canary Island in 1902. As he worked as engineer for the Spanish State he was moved to Barcelona between 1904 and 1906, I do not remember it fine. His last design in 1908 was done there, where he started his commercial relation with Buforn who continued his work after Figuera's death.

wistiti · April 03, 2016, 10:14:56 AM

Quote from: hanon on April 03, 2016, 10:00:58 AM
Norman,
I did not get fine results with that circuit. The signals shape was good but I could just get 12 watts output with around 30 watts input. I posted the results in the thread.

Wistiti,
If you look for a post I did on the 4th of July 2005 you will find an attachment with more OU devices with this same concept of polarity in repulsion.

About the Canary Island in those years: Figuera developed his first genetator in Canary Island in 1902. As he worked as engineer for the Spanish State he was moved to Barcelona between 1904 and 1906, I do not remember it fine. His last design in 1908 was done there, where he started his commercial relation with Buforn who continued his work after Figuera's death.

Sorry but the last post from you i am able to see is from april 2013..??

hanon · April 03, 2016, 10:35:22 AM

Sorry. Post corrected. Post on the 4th of july of 2015, not 2005 as I wrote, jeje

Curiously I did the same last year in New Year Eve when I sent a message to some friends saying Happy New Year 2005. One of them answered me: "I think it was a good year"

hanon · April 03, 2016, 10:48:37 AM

Quote from: wistiti on April 02, 2016, 11:07:28 PM
I wonder if it is better to have a core for each coil with a small gap betwin the coil or one unique core for the set of 3 coils... Have you a input on this?

Hi again,
If you look at the pictures posted by Ignacio on the 28th of march there a plastic aislant (insulator) between each core. I think he explained in the spanish forum that this is to fix the place for the poles. With just one unique core you do not know where the poles are located when moving the fields. I do not understand it perfectly but that is what he told.

wistiti · April 03, 2016, 10:53:06 AM

Quote from: hanon on April 03, 2016, 10:35:22 AM
Sorry. Post corrected. Post on the 4th of july of 2015, not 2005 as I wrote, jeje

Curiously I did the same last year in New Year Eve when I sent a message to some friends saying Happy New Year 2005. One of them answered me: "I think it was a good year"

Ok ive got it!

Thanks!