The bifilar pancake coil at its resonant frequency

[MileHigh]

Carroll:

Freie Energie bald oder sterben!   

[TinselKoala]

@ MH, TK, Zephir,

Yeah, you guys are right!  Only a fool would rely on stupid scope measurements and I wanna know, how do these guys at Tektronix sleep at night?

pm

I must say, dear Partzman, that I am both surprised and unsurprised by your attitude.

Clearly, "those guys at Tektronix" (the scientists, I mean, not the mere engineers) would be scrambling all over themselves to confirm, by other methods, a measurement that indicated some anomaly like more _energy_ out than in. I believe they even sell advanced power measurement software packages for their high-end scopes, and I'm quite sure they have access to stand-alone broadband power analyzers, and might even resort to calorimetry as MH outlined -- since a Nobel Prize is at stake. However when someone makes valid suggestions to you to try to attain Concurrent Validity (a technical term, look it up) for your claims of OU based on a scopetrace, you resist it and respond with this kind of sarcasm. I'm surprised at that because I know something of your background and I would have expected more of a truly scientific attitude from you.

On the other hand I am not surprised, because it is very common in this field of research (sic) for a person to latch onto some bit of data, however sketchy, that appears to _confirm_ his dearly-held hypotheses, to the exclusion of all criticism, and to avoid performing any kind of experiment that even has the potential for falsifying them. This tendency even has a name and is rather well-studied by experimental and social psychologists: Confirmation Bias.

A real scientist, aware of the danger of Confirmation Bias and the need for Concurrent Validity, would be doing everything in his power to _disprove_ his own hypotheses by performing appropriate control experiments, and in addition would be seeking as much concurrent validity as possible by performing alternate tests and measurements, like calorimetry and using broadband power analyzers and even, heaven and the PTB forbid, attempting self-looping.

Certainly a _real_ COP of 1.6 should be sufficient to overcome inevitable losses in the "non-OU" parts of an electronic or electromechanical circuit to enable self-looping or daisy-chaining with power left over to run an external load of some kind. My own hypothetical threshold for this is a COP of a mere 1.3. But since nobody has seen fit to provide _me_ with a demonstration apparatus that truly produces any excess _energy_ over and above that required to run it, I have no experimental proof that a self looper can be attained at a COP of 1.3.

You are right about one thing, though: Only a fool would rely _solely_ on "stupid scope measurements" for a claim like this.

[nelsonrochaa]

Well, thanks for the sarcastic comment stating that I must possess enough knowledge.

Do you remember saying this?

Did you read the thread about understanding coil discharges that Carroll linked to?

http://overunity.com/16203/inductive-kickback/

Did you see how hard I worked to help other people in that thread?  Did you see how I offered multiple explanations to help people understand?  I must be such a terrible person, eh Nelson?  On a side note, I looked through that thread again and when I read it I recalled good old Luc calling me a "troll" a few months ago.   He deserves a swift kick in the ass for saying that.

And in this thread I have read many really nasty and ugly ad hominem attacks from you against me.  In case you don't know what that means, let me remind you:

Ad hominem (Latin for "to the man" or "to the person"), short for argumentum ad hominem, is a logical fallacy in which an argument is rebutted by attacking the character, motive, or other attribute of the person making the argument, or persons associated with the argument, rather than attacking the substance of the argument itself.

And I have read lots of straw man arguments from you about me.  In case you don't know what that means, let me remind you:

A straw man is a common form of argument and is an informal fallacy based on giving the impression of refuting an opponent's argument, while refuting an argument that was not advanced by that opponent. One who engages in this fallacy is said to be "attacking a straw man".

The typical straw man argument creates the illusion of having completely refuted or defeated an opponent's proposition through the covert replacement of it with a different proposition (i.e., "stand up a straw man") and the subsequent refutation of that false argument ("knock down a straw man") instead of the opponent's proposition.

I have asked you to back up your technical claims with logical arguments and you have never done it once.  I am operating on the assumption that you are a beginner and you simply were unable to back up your technical claims.  You simply said those things because they are "buzz phrases" that beginning amateur experimenters use all the time.

So, going forward, I welcome any contribution to this thread by you.  But I don't want any more ad hominem attacks on me, nor do I want any straw man arguments being made about me, nor do I want any fake technical claims being made by you that you can't back up with logical arguments.  Does that sound reasonable?

If the subject matter is above your technical level, then try to learn, keep your hands in your pockets, relax, and watch the blinking lights.

MileHigh

"There are only four types of people in the world regarding discovery and invention:
The most common are those who watch and observe, and profit from invention and discovery; are intrigued by its discoveries.
The second most common are those who dissuade others from invention and discovery, and try to prevent them both mentally and
physically from discovery claiming: 'this can lead to nowhere', or 'that course is a dead end, there is nothing there.'
The third most common are greedy and lustful inventors who desire only fame, profit, and acclaim, nothing matters but any angle that
can be exploited to be used to exploit others for their own ends. Discovery is not an ends to these people, only a means to exploit
others.
The fourth, and most rare are those who do not care about the first three types of people; these rare few have a vision or visions and
are hell-bent to uncover the mysteries of the universe, not out of desire for profit or fame or empirical motives, but the only pure,
noble, and righteous intent, that being pure discovery and understanding as its own ends. The expansion of comprehension and wisdom"

[TinselKoala]

Your quote leaves one type out of course. The type you left out includes people who actually do know better and who point out the mistakes and false claims and even fraudulent hoaxes that the other types are too blind or biased or prejudiced or simply ignorant to see for themselves. This type you so conveniently left out can save, and has saved, millions and untold millions of dollars by vetting claims and allowing investors who are not specialists or scientists to save their money, time and creative juices for better projects that may actually have a chance of coming to fruition.

[ramset]

Hmmm
the problem is intuition ,that nagging feeling your missing something really simple...

Milehigh posted an image of natives who saw a plane fly over and they made one out of grass thinking they could then fly too.
maybe they should make a lightning bolt ??

for a very long time we have been bombarded with energy 24/7 365 ...for ever actually [our ever]
it is jumping from the atmosphere in lightening bolts everywhere on the planet....

its so dangerous it could easily kill us....

yeah we're missing something, ...could it be as Wesley mentions ??  a simple electrostatic pump
a pump which summons lightning bolts ??

or maybe it hides in plain site in the Atom's ??

Every single thing around us seems to be powered at the "atomic level" FOR EVER
and we're told "so what"....have you ever seen the picture of what happens if you split one of these atoms which can run for ever ??
YEASH.... !!!

And then there's the sun..it  pounds 1200 watts per meter onto the planet ....
and we're sitting on a MONSTEROUS spinning magnet...
and there is much much more....

IMO anybody who feels we have learned all there is to learn about harvesting energy on this DYNAMO of an arcing sparking planet
we inhabit [which is entirely composed of these Atom things [YIKES]

anybody who feels we know all there is to know about energy harvesting here.

should stick to building Grass Planes  drinking beer and writing silly poems....


yeah we're definitely missing something really really simple here...

in the mean time be careful of the lightning bolts around your grass planes....and be careful with those Atom's too...

But I have to agree with Tinsel on the "not wasting time" or  other peoples Time...open source has one big advantage...
finding out the truth and vetting claims saves people time .[which is what Milehigh and others try to do]

but that requires Open source disclosure....

so as Tinsel says

""saving time and creative juices for better projects that may actually have a chance of coming to fruition.""
---------------------------------




RE Partzman and his claims ,
its not his first summer !
Partzman practices Brutal honesty and we have all seen this many times [if you have payed attention]

he is a man of integrity and a huge asset to this OPEN SOURCE community...as are others here...

quite certain there will be more to come there ...good or bad it will be the truth....

respectfully
Chet K