Quanta Magnetics Experimental Kits

[TinselKoala]

@MH: Now you've got me looking at the MHOP again! Remember this one:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xajlH6wkj_0

[Scorch]

Forgive my failure to be more specific and here is the correction of my communications errors as per nunc pro tunc-

Rescinded-
["In consideration I am in regular communications with the inventor and actually posses a G1 kit, would you believe I might know a thing, or two, about the system that was withheld or not very obvious in the video?"]

Clarified-
In consideration I am in regular communications with the inventor and actually posses a G1 kit, would you believe I might know a thing, or two, about the development of the system that was not very obvious in the video?

Rescinded-
["I am the first to admit I know nothing about G1 at this point so do not expect any answers from me until I actually know more about it through my own hands on experience and testing."]

Clarified-
I am the first to admit I know nothing about G1, that I have never seen (his) and haven't built yet (mine), at this point so do not expect any answers from me until I actually know more about it through my own hands on experience and testing.

Rescinded-
["Is this arrogance?"]

Clarified-
Is it arrogant to claim true knowledge regarding the unknown?
Such as the system I am about to build and intend to share here provided I do not find myself distracted by to much negativity here.

nunc pro tunc
As it was now it is.
Said and done.

Thank you for pointing out my failure(s).   

This is why I am here. To learn.  Why are you here?

I came here to share and learn from my brand new experience of building this brand new experiment.

What did you come here for?

Would you like me to share my stuff here including any knowledge I might gain from this experiment?

Kindest regards;

}:>

Or is it just another case of someone who doesn't actually know what he doesn't know, and much of what he thinks he does know... is wrong? And I am not talking about MH here.


MHOP:
http://www.youtube.com/playlist?list=PLml9VdOeqKa8F1PebS_EX7AX2aA_ZZtb9

And one choice video from the list:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=T5I_BM4E00E&list=PLml9VdOeqKa8F1PebS_EX7AX2aA_ZZtb9&index=10

[MileHigh]

Scorch:

I can see exactly where you are coming from.  So have fun playing with your pulse motor.  From your perspective you are "exploring the big unknown."  From my perspective I can clearly see that it's just another pulse motor, the behaviour of which is fully understood.

Why would I say that I can practically analyze any pulse motor in my sleep?  The answer is because when you look at a pulse motor on a scale of 1 to 10 in terms of complexity and difficulty to understand and analyze, it's only a 1 out of 10.  So yes, present me with an electronics circuit with a 1 out of 10 difficulty level, and I can understand it with my eyes closed. Present me with an electronics circuit that's an 8 out of 10 in terms of complexity and difficulty, and I would have to work seriously on it.

So it's not arrogance, it's simply because it's a circuit that is so simple and straightforward.

This is a scale that is relative to someone that has education and training in electronics.  So I hope that you now understand the context.

When you talk "Schumann resonance" you are leading yourself down a garden path.  What precisely is the Schumann resonance?  How could the Schumann resonance possibly interact with my pulse motor?

It appears that you don't have the answer to either of the two aforementioned questions.  All that you are doing is blindly believing that there must be something going on there because you have read it many times in the realm of free energy and the forums.  The entire notion is complete and utter crap.  So if you are a serious and responsible researcher and you do your research and testing, then you should come back and post, "I did my research and now I understand that discussing the Schumann resonance in relation to my pulse motor is nonsense.  I retract all statements relating the Schumann resonance and my pulse motor."

So, you can see clearly that you are starting out on the wrong foot when it comes to this Schumann business.  It's just one of many myths that is pervasive on the free energy forums.  That's why there is a thread here called, "Magnet Myths and Misconceptions."  It's an attempt to break the vicious cycle.

Good luck testing your motor.  Be very cautious and don't buy into a lot of stuff just because you heard it on a free energy forum and you think it is true.  Do your own due diligence.

In a best case scenario after several months you would come back and say, "Yes, my pulse motor is a very simple device with a typical efficiency of about 30%-40% power-in to power-out.  In the final analysis I realize that a pulse motor does not really do anything of practical application, although it does have merit as a teaching tool to learn about some aspects of electronics."

That's the real deal on pulse motors and I realize that it's a long shot that you would really and truly get up the leaning curve and come to that realization.  I can already see the pattern.  It takes years to really learn about electronics.  Going back to the motor itself, that's one of the main reasons that it's crazy to spend upwards of $4000 on one, it doesn't actually do anything of practical value.

MileHigh

[TinselKoala]

I believe he's talking about the Schumann resonance in the context of the QEG and the "7MHz" frequency, not in some relation to the Quanta design or other pulse motors.

Why am I here? This question is not new. Among other reasons, I see a lot of really creative and talented people wasting their time on things that have no hope whatsoever of working out as they believe. Gravity wheels ala Bessler and permanent magnet motors  are two such things. Bedini variants like the Quanta design are fun to play with but they will never attain any kind of real "OU" and in fact will ruin good batteries fairly quickly. In some cases they can rejuvenate sulfated batteries but there are even better ways to do that. So when I see people spending lots of money, lots of time, and lots of creative energy on something that is a known and proven dead end, I speak up about it. And I usually get insulted for it... but nobody has refuted me yet. Meanwhile I build and test various things that appeal to me along the way, and I think that it is at least arguable that I am producing effects that are as interesting, or more so, than the run of the mill Bedini motors, Slayer Exciters, and etc.  I think I have helped a few people understand their oscilloscopes a little better, I have uncovered a few false claimants and I have shown that some claimed effects are actually real, if misinterpreted by their claimants.  My feeling is that people who are trying to replace the old paradigm with a new one, need first to understand the old one. If you are claiming OU performance, like the resonating QEG Morocco team did, then I for one think that you should be able to make proper measurements, interpret and calculate with them properly, and your measurements should support your claims. SO when I see people making claims without support, like the "7MHz Schumann resonance" claim... I want to see support for it. If support isn't forthcoming then I know into which category to file the claim.

[tinman]

@MH: Now you've got me looking at the MHOP again! Remember this one:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xajlH6wkj_0

Schematic for the ring oscillator please TK,as i couldnt quite make out the exact conection from the birds nest.

Cheers