Chas Campbell free power motor

[Liberty]

Iear Stephan,
I am shocked and horrified at Humbuggers removal. There has been no evidence what so ever that the claims that Chas has made have been repeatable or supported by any evidence presented to date.
Humbugger may have lacked diplomicy, however he was experssing the views of the silent majority. I spend my professional life travelling the world, testing OU and other claims and I feel Humbugger brought logical arguments and sensible suggestions of how to test the claims of this device. All I have seen from you and a couple of others, is how to bend the data to suit the result you want to see,,,rather than analysing the data objectively.
This has done your credability a lot of damage.
I openly support and encourage people like Chas to continue their work...however one must always be honest firstly with themselves, and others. Without data being repeatable of independently confirmed..it is of no value.
I am involved in two projects now..one is a self running magnetic motor and the other is emissions and fuel economy technology. Before going public these projects and the people involved are testing, checking data and above all making sure their information is correct, repeatable and validated independently. I grow tired of seeing the endless promotion of claims in forums like this...only to be dissapointed because more emphasis was placed on the sensationalism rather than the facts. Look at the endless list of projects here...none have collected your prize and none have had any value in solving the worlds energy crisis.
However the site is useful for encouraging people to share info, inspire others and introduce people of similar interests.
The freedom of speach, logic must always be defended. Your type of censorship shows bias and scares the hell out of me.
I was censored by you over 12 months ago just for asking questions (in a polite way) in another topic. Please re-enstae Humbugger.
I await paitiently for the latest results and video....I will hoopefully fill up the void created by humbuggers absence and give an objective, unbiased view of what is presented, using scientific principles and logic.
Kind Regards
Mark

Hi Mark and Stephan,

I too am sorry to see a banning and would prefer to see it used very rarely and only for very serious, repeated infractions.  Perhaps just only deleting the post would have been more appropriate in this case, since @hum brought very detailed, educational and insightful hard facts (as do others) to light on many diffferent devices.  He used a bold method at times, but presented a good factual argument usually and presented interesting posts with valid technical analysis.  I do support freedom of speech, but also understand posting a picture of someone else may not be the best thing to do if one's intention is to stay on topic with the purpose of posting a technical analysis.  I support the delete of the message that was found offensive, but would avoid an outright ban of @hum, taking into consideration the insightful, hard fact style of posts to keep things honest and believable out there. 

I would suggest a common sense self imposed limit or restraint to how many posts a person is making per day, so as to allow others to share their input as well to achieve the 'balance' that Stephan spoke of.  (For both Skeptic or Optimistic poster).

@Mark,

I think that true overunity devices must have an area of demonstratable gain somewhere in the system, that doesn't have to be paid back or can be extracted, to have a chance at becoming a device that can take advantage of such gain and harvest it for use.
I agree that all of the evidence should be known about a device, before a correct conclusion can be made, presenting all the facts clearly.

Sounds like your current projects are keeping you pretty busy for now.  Travel safely; nice first analysis.  You may have your hands full, trying to fill in for @hum...

@Stephan,

I enjoy the overunity forum, reading and keeping up to date with what is happening.  A very nice forum.  Thanks!





     

[RoadRunner]

A magnet placed under a magnetic pendulum bob will take energy out of the bob whether in attracting or repelling mode. It will not slow down the rate of oscillation as the frequency is determined by the length of the pendulum, nothing else. It will however shorten the length of swing.

Welllllllll I'll be jiggered, stuffed with peppers and baked at gas-mark 4 !!!

There's another example of how 'thought experiments' can lead one astray.
I could absolutely support the idea that a magnet placed under a ferrous bob would increase the speed of the swing (decrease the period) - No claims of extra energy - Just that it would decrease the period.
... So... I went and did the real-world experiment.
I hung a steel bolt from a piece of thread, suspended in my doorway and watched it swing.
Then I taped a neo to the floor and watched the swing.
The ONLY effect on the swing was that the magnet sucked energy out of the oscillation.
It brought the swing to a stop much faster than without the magnet but it did not alter the period in any way that I could detect.

Hans appears to be absolutely correct according to the results of my experimentation.
It seems that a magnet underneath a ferrous bob does not increase the overall speed of the swing, maybe until the very last few oscillations where the bob never leaves the immediate vicinity of the magnet.. and I mean the very last few... It's no longer a pendulum, it's a piece of ferrous metal straining on a piece of thread to get at the magnet which is pulling at it.

Why don't we have unlimited free energy ? It's got nothing to do with the supposed 'Authoritarian Suppression', it's because those who are chasing the FE dream haven't got the sense to rid themselves of voodoo and bad-science by doing some simple experiments. They'd rather fudge the data to make it look like they've found something interesting.
Bessler wheels and SMOT ramps have been around for a long time and scientists were laughing at them 100s of years ago... And now some goon in Aus is credited with inventing an 'over-unity toy' and countless other goons are claiming that the SMOT works... if only they could get around that nasty friction issue... hmmmmmmm....
I recently read one discussion where the guy playing with a SMOT was 'calculating' the 'output' of the SMOT to the millijoule and claiming OU but absolutely refused to acknowledge the energy he was using to 'seed' the SMOT by placing the ball in the field (I'm sure there are countless discussions of this nature littered all over the internet and other media).

SMOTs and Bessler Wheels work..


...But only in the realm of thought experimentation. Bring them into the real world and for some strange reason, they fail.

I came here with hope. A believer that those brave and diligent pioneers who devote their time, energy and money to research and experimentation would find the route to free energy.
After spending a few days reading sites like this one... I think I might just as well abandon all hope, go and see my local witch-doctor and ask him to cast bones for me.

On the upside... I have a few surplus kilos of fairy-dust which has the miraculous property of aligning the domains of figmentium in a Bedini SSG thereby increasing the output by more than 500%.
It looks and tastes like salt, but it works great.
If anyone wants some of my OU enhancement powder, you can send me the money via Western Union.


*walks away sobbing gently*

The RoadRunner..

[ashtweth_nihilisti]

Hi Guys sorry again for the delay    we shot 3 videos, the most practical will be our Video presentation i think showing his Gravity wheel at the R and D stage, including Lawrence's, milcoviks and Bob mary's prototype, plus many more issues which i feel is practical to utilize (support for open source engineers etc)given the amount of publicity Chas' has generated.

Guys even if his motor flywheel wont work, and or his Gravity wheel is at an  R and D stage and can/can not work.

The fact is you did well to handle the situation did a public service by investigation, measurement and or support. So i would like to say you guys have done exceptionally well to increase the R and D effort and also keep the potential alive.

In your [panacea] video presentation

We used the publicity about 'Free energy' to show important issues and critical ways to make sure systems are disclosed, and educated, and what is needed to be developed so we can create  a center, for the NEC/you guys and also provide a research and development center so these systems be secure in the PUBLIC EYE.

okay., our presentation will be edited and done at the end of the week.
The other two video should be done tonight and tomorrow.

Priority- Duty cycle tests
Then Chas explanation statement to YOU and all.
Your Panacea production

Tonight i expect the duty cycle tests we did to be up on Google, let me first say thanks to the TWO who brought their watt hour meters and confirmed the tests for all.

Duty cycle test results. [in short good and bad]

You guys will need to make up your minds if there is still something to salvage:

In our amp meters[digital not watt hour meters] pumped into the 240volt grid, Chas's original motor pulled 6 amps The RV [I AM NEVER WRONG ABOUT THE RV SO FAR) pulled 3 amps input [as i said it would]

The video will show a watt hour and our digital amp meters test,  our digital amp meters show myself pulsing out 2 saws, for 4 seconds on (put a stop watch on the video) and one second off as per Stefans request. Figures went negative [10 out 3 in ruffly], but the voltage most likely dropped.

Watch the video, a real load was pulsed and cut wood which drew around 10 amps [4 sec on and one off], RV stayed around 3 amps. How ever, as an engineer pointed out the voltage on the ALT Dropped, so would this 4 seconds of  ten amps still be usable in a useful applicaiton, you guys will have to decide, we have all the details now to reproduce his system.

Watt hour meters test, show  in run time after it took me along time to CHARGE up the fly wheel from the RV, that the run time tests and even pulse tests on the watt hour meters show no OU.

Total watt hour power consumed from the first tests, showed more energy to charge up the flywheel and pulse it out [total power consumed]. Check out the video. Now i am saying this as we did this on our amp meter and connected the watt hour meter, the actual watt hour meter test with out our amp meters showed similar figures of input and out put so please watch the video and make up your own mind.

Chas has put new stuff on his wheel and continues to try and perfect his gravity wheel.
Any request for his wheel (we are still to load all his wheel with all the balls for Stefan)
Just let me know.

Videos will be up tonight guys.

PS it seems Hummbugger went over to the EVGRAY list and tried his non building skeptical attitude, and is about to be banned from there too, this guy should get a job for an OIL company if he hasn't already.

[ltseung888]

... So... I went and did the real-world experiment.
I hung a steel bolt from a piece of thread, suspended in my doorway and watched it swing.
Then I taped a neo to the floor and watched the swing.
The ONLY effect on the swing was that the magnet sucked energy out of the oscillation.
It brought the swing to a stop much faster than without the magnet but it did not alter the period in any way that I could detect.

The RoadRunner..

Dear RoadRunner,

Please read my post carefully.  You are supposed to have a magnet as your pendulum bob.  A disc shaped with a hole in the middle is best.  You can use other non magnetic material to help to hold it in place.  Then use a stop watch to time the number of oscillations in 1 minute.  Repeat that three times to get the average.

The three separate tests are:
(1) Time the number of oscillations with the magnetic bob alone - repeat three times to get the average.

(2) Place another magnet below the magnetic bob, making sure the action between the two magnets is attraction.  (below can be a few centimeters on the floor but make sure the force of attraction is noticeable).  Repeat three times to get the average.

(3) Repeat (2) making sure the action between the two magnets is replusion.

The Ms. Forever Yuen result was
(1) 100 oscillations per minute
(2) 105 oscillations per minute
(3) 95 oscillatiions per minute.

The actual number for your test will depend on the length of the string and the strength of the magnets.  Please do the above Forever Yuen experiment and tell us the result.

Lawrence Tseung
Misread experiments Leads Out stronger Pulses from the Inventors

[sm0ky2]

ltseung888  is both right and wrong here..

first of all this is not a pendulum. its a magnet on a string over an opposing magnet.
but what he is saying about its function is correct.