World's first real Free Energy Flashlight - no shaking - no batteries! No Solar

[Pirate88179]

I have found a hilarious video of a Russian guy who received his ELFE flashlight already at the end of November, and took it apart. All he found inside were 3 AA rechargeable batteries. No coils, no antennas, no electronics, just the LED. Additionally, the case is metallic, hence perfectly shielded against any EM field (including Schumann resonances).

The batteries have "2600" marked on them - if that is their capacity (2600 mAh at 1.3V), and need 14 days to recharge, then it needs the continuous power of only 8.4 microwatt (not milliwatt!!). That would be within the reach of known EM harvesting technology for a device of this size, but with the battery case being metallic and empty, there is no way it could work. Besides that, the Russian guy told it took 10 hours before the battery died. Unfortunately my Russian is not perfect, so I do not understand all in the video, but machine generated English subtitles, and Google translate of the comments make it clear that the battery did not recharge, and that the author (and all others) screams about scam. They also posted a link to a Russian website describing other scams of Viktor Uzlov, and I found more on the web too (all in Russian only, though).

Anyway I never understood what a $99 flashlight that needs 14 days to charge is good for. You can buy a small solar flashlight for $3 and it charges much quicker.

Videos:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KJP9iC0_qc8
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xO6YghleF-0

Links:
http://transnet-rus.livejournal.com/17350.html
https://web.archive.org/web/20151103115044/http://uzlovu.net/
http://marslanov.com/2014/09/10/audit-kompanii-adgex/

Very good find!  I see one of the comments on the first video says something like now it has been proven to be a scam.  The comment is in English so, maybe the commenter understands Russian too?  Or, just sees that there is nothing inside to support their claims?

I do not think any apology is due to the manufacturer just yet.

Bill

[TinselKoala]

Speaking of deceptively simple circuits like the one in the screen cap from the Russian video, I have a pet name for what happens when the batteries start to get low.

I call it the "dance of death."  In the "dance of death" configuration the LED can remain illuminated at a lower level for a very very long time.  Perhaps somebody out there can venture to explain why that is.

I know why... and so do you.     



Three rechargable AAs in there and that's _all_??

OK, TheCell, take yours apart as soon as possible.

Don't even bother with testing for days/weeks. If there is something else in there besides just batteries, then you can put it back together for comprehensive testing. But if it just has the three batteries... well then, I think we can draw some definite conclusions from that. And the sooner you know, the sooner you can (try to) get your money back.

[TheCell]

Yesterday it was switched on for 4 hours. After the first 2 hours the light slightly darkened , after the complete 4 hours you could only see the middle of the spot. At this morning , when switched on , the light has regained intensity with no doubt.
But I will test it , if this is true on the long run.
Next it will be drained completely and it will be tested , if it will be able to recover to whatever extend.
I have this thing lying on the table and will nail down facts that I observe, and eventually depending on results write some harsh comments, that Mr M. will have to focus on other 'business models' in future.

[txt]

Anyway it is clear from the websites of ADGEX, and from the background information on the Russian websites, that the main target of the scam are the investors, not the small end-customers. ADGEX, like other free energy scammers, gets millions in investment, so they could not care less whether the'll rip off some small customers of $99. If they are not complete nuts, they will not make too big troubles if you ask the refund - they could face consequences that would not be worth of it, while in the meantime investors, seeing they have a "working" technology and sell products, will happily send them their money for their bigger "projects".

In fact, I am quite surprised that the flashlight does not work, because harvesting some 8 μW from the ambient EM field with existing technologies is nothing difficult or expensive. There are plenty of low-consumption sensors and simple devices that did it already many years ago. So in fact they could have made their scam much better - if they made flashlights harvesting a few μW (easily doable), everyone would confirm it works, nobody could scream scam, and the investments would pour in like crazy. The investors would be incapable realizing that a few μW from a device of the size of some 10 cm³ means that their kW range ELFE Accumulator for powering houses would have to be billion times bigger - 10^10 cm³ = 10^4 m³ - that's a cube with the side of over 20 m. That's if we calculate the volume. In reality, for harvesting EM energy, it would have to be flat and a few km large to harvest this amount of ambient energy, because understandingly a cube could harvest the EM energy only from its surface.

Otherwise, I saw an argument earlier in this thread whether it is possible to harvest energy from Schumann resonances (SR) - of course it is. It is done since decades in plenty of meteorologic devices that measure and localize lightning worldwide. If you can measure it, it means it generates some voltage and current in the measuring devices (and hence also energy). However, you need really very large loops of wire (coils), and even with those, you get just a few μA. Hence with a device of the size of the flashlight, even if there were some hidden unshielded coils, you could harvest a few nanowatts, but not more. Not because the technology would not allow it, but simply because the field is so weak, and SR does not offer more in this volume. The ambient EM field in standard wavelengths is much stronger - it allows harvesting up to units of μW per cm³ in densely populated urban environment.

[conradelektro]

Yesterday it was switched on for 4 hours. After the first 2 hours the light slightly darkened , after the complete 4 hours you could only see the middle of the spot. At this morning , when switched on , the light has regained intensity with no doubt.
But I will test it , if this is true on the long run.
Next it will be drained completely and it will be tested , if it will be able to recover to whatever extend.
I have this thing lying on the table and will nail down facts that I observe, and eventually depending on results write some harsh comments, that Mr M. will have to focus on other 'business models' in future.

@TheCell:

I think you read the "extended warranty" at
http://trade.adgex.com.au/Terms-Conditions/Standard-and-Extended-Warranty-Terms-and-Conditions

You have to ask yourself: what constitutes a failure of the flash light? And even if you can proove failure, ADGEX could send you a replacement flash light again and again for one year and then the warranty is over (see Point 6. in the extended warranty).

You have to allow for a reasonable handlig time, so, getting 6 replacements during the warranty year is feasable and you have to pay the shipping costs (at least for returning the faulty ones). And six flash lights probably cost them only 12.-- which leaves them on the winning side.

1) If the flash light does not regenerate after a 12 hour burn within 14 days, ADGEX could claim that you placed it somewhere wrong (no magnetic field, no electromanetic waves). So, I would not go along that route.

2) Three hour burns every day will probably be possible for many days if not months. How is your patience and for how many days do you want to play with that thing?

3) If you are lucky ADGEX gives you back the 99.-- just to be rid of you. If not, any legal action will cost more than 99.--


A possible way of action:

After you have established that the flash light does not shine three hours a day after let's say two months, you should open it up and take a few clear pictures. May be the North Sydney Chamber of Commerce http://www.northsydneychamber.com.au/contact/ is interested in hearing about a scam. They might be willing to contact ADGEX in order to apply some pressure to give you the money back.

You accuse the North Sydney chamber of commerce of not taking proper care when overseeing commerce in Sydney. You should save important parts of the ADGEX web site in order to have evidence in case they go off line.


You can also report a scam:

https://www.scamwatch.gov.au/report-a-scam (I think the type of scam is "other buying and selling scams")


There might be news papers in Sidney interested in "scandal stories".

In Austria there are very small local news papers which accept stories from the public (because they fill space and cost nothing). You could then send ADGEX a copy of that news paper story (even if it is an unimportant newspaper) in order to apply pressur on ADGEX. But be careful what you write because if ADGEX is clecer they sue you for accusing them wrongly. You write "according to my experience" or "I could not verify the claims made by ADGEX" or you ask the retorical question "Can a battery be recharged by the earth magnetic filed or by elctromagnetic smog? I could not see that effect in the flash light."


But I have the impression that the damned flash light will shine three houres a day for many months (disregarding brightness, which is hard to discuss legaly).

As I said, it is a clever scam (if you disregard honesty, which is nowadays in short supply).

Whatever you do, it willl be a lot of fuss with little reward. If you have time and if you are not poor, go ahead and beat them over the head. Some sort of Robin Hood quest. You will have a slightly bigger chance of going to heaven or you at least lower a bit your chances of going to hell. But it is better that you ask your local priest for heavenly advice. May be he wants a flash light? Sell it to him for 80.-- and accept your losses.

Greetings, Conrad