Confirmation of OU devices and claims

[Grumage]

GOOD GRIEF!!

This is getting beyond even Monty Python.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Iu7vySQbgXI

Stefan

Please remove the moderation so that we can continue in a normal fashion once again.

Regards Grum.

[lancaIV]

https://www.overunityresearch.com/index.php?topic=1455.0
PhysicsProf< Reply 9- 2012-05-09
Lux/Lumen ratio for input/ output measurement

[ramset]

LancalV 
thank you ,I see also Farmhand in your Link ,have not heard much from him since he moved off the farm hope he is well ,some experiments on the table soon that he might want to become involved in [if he still has his big Tesla stuff ?or just for opinions ??

Here some input from Fe metrologist on what Circuits can be inside todays LED's
QUOTE  "The circuit inside those bulbs is a High Brightness High Frequency LED driver chip, the MAX16820.  attached
is the Data Sheet for this chip.  the characteristics of this chip will make anyone trying to associate light output with input power go "nutso". Just read the first page,"
end quote Chet K

[Void]

I have pointed out a number of times in the past here that using LEDs or LED lights in OU experimentation
can be very misleading, especially for the inexperienced and those not very knowledgeable in electronics and physics.
LEDs and LED bulbs typically glow quite brightly while consuming relatively low amounts of power.  This fools
many a noob. 

Use of an incandescent bulb or a non-inductive resistor as a load or loads is always a much wiser way to go.
Also, testing at fairly low power levels leaves more room for measurement errors, so try to avoid doing that
where possible as well. Not that I think my pointing this out yet again will really make much difference.
People with little understanding of electronics and physics will continue to make the same mistakes over and over,
and then they will tell people who do have experience in electronics that they are wrong if they point out
obvious problem areas like this.  This cycle keeps repeating, ad infinitum.

[Mannix]

I think that many of you are not considering that this website is about readership and interest and there certianly is  a lot to read, and a lot of interest..

Rick does write well,  and knows how passionate perple are to do the deed .
There are of course many here trying to save the ignorant from thenselves ,a noble gesture .

This website is a stepping stone about hands on stuff and any body with lots of hands on can see that there are some issues with many statements made .

Its hard to avoid this becomming personal but in this regard Rick is well versed and basically wins debates right or wrong.

A skilled politician and lobbyist who has worked with the "market" for many years .

May I suggest that feeding his expertise here will not convince him of any technical errors as what he may lack in providing proof he more that makes up for in his ability to do well in debates .

This thread contains enough to provide him with material to include in his futute writings that he can use as he wants to within legal boundaries which
he knows well.

Notice how the answer, if you can call it that is always before the question and the question is quoted?

If members who bite ,leave their info is with him forever to use or not ,to change context or not .

That said many will have fun playing with what he offers as the hope of OU may be more fun that the achivement as was the case with Stevem Mark.

Be polite and keep it non personal and I know that is impossible for some whos technical ability is beyond reproach .

Please think kindergarden and the teacher , who knows? Perhaps somebody will stumble onto something regardless of the futility, that some see so clearly.