THE RANT ROOM

[bistander]

Apparently that meter samples and stores phase currents. Not exactly real time, but close enough, I guess. I still don't trust Holcomb.
bi

[SolarLab]

Bi,

Go through all the videos on this page:

https://vimeo.com/user81692192

I doubt if Holcomb or HES cares if anyone trusts them or not
at this point - they are long past that stage.

But do check out all the videos if you can spare a few minutes.
Interesting, if nothing else!

SL 

[bistander]

Maybe less dancers and more engineers.
bi

[onepower]

SL

None of you guys ever discuss technical issues - only "Smoke" - why is that,
kind of answers a retorical question does't it!

That is interesting isn't it?.
As an Engineer who was sent to evaluate many of these devices and who has seen a few real working devices first hand I find most of the chatter in these forums a little mind numbing.

It's always he said/she said, oh look at this video which explains nothing, oh look at this second hand circuit diagram from a questionable source or look at this special clamp on meter in a video attached to some random wire which means nothing.

I think this may be the most relevant fact...

https://www.cpomagazine.com/cyber-security/bad-bot-traffic-report-almost-half-of-all-2021-internet-traffic-was-not-human/
Bad Bot Traffic Report: Almost Half of All 2021 Internet Traffic Was Not Human

Thus it would be easy to presume half of all internet traffic including web sites, social media, comment sections and forums like this one are occupied by computer/AI generated responses and paid shills peddling misinformation. Smoke and mirrors indeed.

A few posts back you said something which hit home with me. Something to the effect that everyone is talking about all kinds of random bs which has no real bearing on how a real device could work. They talk about literally everything but how the device could actually  work. Which tells me they don't have a clue what there doing or as explained above it's bot/shill traffic.

Like in the latest video presented about the Hocomb device here https://vimeo.com/750533880
I would never accept this amateur bs and would first verify that the conductor carried a pure sine wave the meter was actually able to measure accurately. If in fact the wave form was uniform measured with a DSO only then would I deem the instrument able to measure the power and only after a calibration test. You see even a $500,000 dollar instrument is basically a paper weight if it has not been properly calibrated and designed to measure the thing you want to measure in the proper context.

I get it, the video looks cool if a person is incompetent, has no idea about what the meter is designed to measure, how it measures it or all it's limitations. However whenever anyone pulls out a DMM or clamp meter I usually do a face palm. It's like, really dude?, I mean really?, and at that point I tell the investors looking to me for guidance this person has no idea what the hell there doing or showing.

Throwing this out there, going to retire early and wouldn't mind getting back into evaluating advanced technology having actually seen it. I don't fuck around and I call it as I see it based on my own instrumentation actually designed to show a loss or gain in energy. All these retards preoccupied with becoming billionaires doesn't really interest me but evaluating what works or not in the name of science does. I'm only interested in moving forward not backwards...

AC

[SolarLab]

AC,

Good points.

Also, it's not uncommon when presenting information, especially complex technical
stuff, that the presenter assumes, maybe wrongfully so, that the audience has a least
a moderate "skili-in-the-art."

If you had to explain every finite piece of the presentation every time you made a post,   
you would never be able to finish even a basic concept. Take the B-H Curve for example.

Or, as you point out, try measuring a GHz pulsed waveform with a clamp-on meter. If you
would have to explain the "why and how's" of the measurement techniques versus instrument
capabilities - you would never get from "a" to "b" in several months or quarters or years.

I have to assume the audience I'm presenting to has a skill level that's up to the task. But,
often times this is impossible.

The solution I've adopted, quite successfully in fact, is to use an accepted professional tool
that is trusted throught the industry and one that the audience has immediate faith in.

That's where my "CAE Analysis" approach was born. There are many other advantages to
using these tools, not only with clients, but also students or even in general discussions.

Analyze the concept, and if need be, construct a simple (or complex) Proof-of-Concept is need
be (e.g. B-H Curve analysis with graphs, etc; wind an air-core coil; measure it with a Tesla-Gauss 
meter; insert a soft magnetic core; measure again. Now, go back and use the CAE Analysis to 
show the same demonstrations. It works extremely well and is quite comprehensive.

Can be vital to the complex design and fabrication process as well further down the road.
Anyway, good luck with retirement - BTW, get a Contract and build-in the CAE tools - clients   
will love it as well - a great deal of credability can be gained just by presenting it in the   
proposal, including the time and effort that can be saved in getting their product to market!   
 
SL