COP 20.00 (2000%) Times, Reactive Power Energy Source Generator,

[a.king21]

Fair enough. But consider my circuit (and the SERPS thing) as a "black box" that is given an input and produces an output. How does the output "know" whether it was produced by an ordinary fixed L-C oscillator, or a parametric oscillator? What is the difference in the output? Does a parametric oscillator produce some particular, special kind of Reactive Power that is somehow different from the Reactive Power in a tank circuit with fixed L and C?

If so, what is the difference, how is it special?

Then here is the million dollar question.  Can you convert reactive power to real power without destroying the oscillation?


I believe that TK can do it.




To that applause question.   TK is taking the P out of Hope girl's video.  The "applause" is from Hope Girl's video.

[TinselKoala]

Then here is the million dollar question.  Can you convert reactive power to real power without destroying the oscillation?


I believe that TK can do it.




To that applause question.   TK is taking the P out of Hope girl's video.  The "applause" is from Hope Girl's video.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JkXrhRqlQE4
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xyVZWkYAvkk

Actually... the applause in the first video may _sound_ like it's from one of HypeGirl's videos, but it is actually a free sound effect from this website:
http://www.pacdv.com/sounds/index.html

[web000x]

What is the difference between the "SERPS concept" and what I showed in the video linked above?

By the way, the Video URL has changed: It is now
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=MCdrAE_IZ74

Same video, just a different URL.

To be honest, TK, I am a jackass.  I watched the video while I was getting ready for work in the morning and not fully paying attention.  I caught the total wrong impression of the video because I heard the applauses and "Texas Resonance" thinking you were debunking the QEG as it stands from the hype generated over standard reactive power measurements.  My apologies.

I watched your video more closely and like what I've seen.  Hopefully i've got something to share soon..

Dave

[a.king21]

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JkXrhRqlQE4
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xyVZWkYAvkk

Actually... the applause in the first video may _sound_ like it's from one of HypeGirl's videos, but it is actually a free sound effect from this website:
http://www.pacdv.com/sounds/index.html

Maybe Hope Girl used the same sound effect library lol


So what happened to the loop back?


BTW if you want to sell your queg, I'll buy one.

[TinselKoala]

To be honest, TK, I am a jackass.  I watched the video while I was getting ready for work in the morning and not fully paying attention.  I caught the total wrong impression of the video because I heard the applauses and "Texas Resonance" thinking you were debunking the QEG as it stands from the hype generated over standard reactive power measurements.  My apologies.

I watched your video more closely and like what I've seen.  Hopefully i've got something to share soon..

Dave

No, you're not a jackass. I absolutely am trying to get people to think clearly about the FTW QEG claims and posted measurements. Note the high similarity between my waveforms and those shown in the most recent "who we work for" video from James Robitaille. My MicroQEG does _the same thing_  as theirs (even if it isn't a parametric oscillator), but at a higher frequency and with a greater ratio of VARs to input power. And it does it cheaply and silently. And the schematic is freely available, works the first time and doesn't require some expensive core assembly that shorts out and needs to be rewound at great expense.  Yet nobody has given me hundreds of thousands of dollars. Why is that, since I've shown even more evidence of "Overunity" performance -- "OU in VARs" that is -- than any of the FTW QEG builders or the Robitailles themselves? Think about it.