Mehmet?s BackEMF pulser circuit

[wattsup]

@Mem

Don't remove a thing. Just keep pushing. All views here are possible as you may have already realized.

Here is a link to something I posted quit some time ago that can confirm one of your simple tests.
http://www.overunity.com/index.php/topic,1761.msg18885.html#msg18885

Here is another interesting link I posted on Erfinders thread that got me in lots of hot water.  I always wondered why. Geez.
The first post.
http://www.overunity.com/index.php/topic,133.msg31422.html#msg31422
The second post with corrected diagram
http://www.overunity.com/index.php/topic,133.msg31428.html#msg31428

Sometimes the simplest designs are the best.

I think one of the problems for people will be the welding transformer. I think if you just used several tranformers with the primaries in series, this should also work.

Did you measure anything comming out of the secondary as there could be some extra juice there.

[z_p_e]

I understand 100% of what you are saying Mehmet.

There are some things you should understand also.

Disclosing responsibly has always been a problem here. Folks become excited and quite prematurely disclose their "discovery" and claim that it is overunity.

Later of course, after some more experienced folks either point out the flaws, or someone trys to duplicate the results, the claims are proven erroneous.

All due respect to you Mehmet, but you have not done your due diligence, i.e. your homework.

I will concede one thing however, charging lead-acid batteries with bemf charges can elicit the negative resistor response a la Bedini, but there are few out there that claim to have done so. I am not saying it is impossible, just that no one I know has been able to do it.

So, in the case of your charging battery, you may have something, but even if you do, it is nothing new ok? Check into Bedini's work. He has been doing this since the 80's !!!

In regards to driving a resistive load however, sorry that's not overunity. It is simply bemf, which at the very best is 100% of what you put in to the circuit.

Folks with pulse motors have been capturing the bemf in their motor drivers for years, and I have also tried it. So yes, I have worked with bemf, but even if I haven't, there is so much information out there already about people that have worked on the very same thing you are, that it astounds me you have apparently not seen any of it.

I am not saying that you should not have come here and posted your work, nor that you shouldn't have posted your video on youtube, what I am saying is that it should not have been claimed overunity. The main reason why is because you have no proof. You admit yourself that one can not use regular meters to accurately measure what is going in and out of the circuit you posted, and since you have not done accurate measurements, how can you claim with any confidence that it is overunity?

That I'm afraid, is being precisely what you have just accused me of being....a provocateur.

IF, you want to post this sort of thing when YOU KNOW YOU CAN NOT BE 100% CERTAIN, please begin by stating that you have some interesting results and wish for input. That is all you can responsibly do....beyond that is just leading people on because you have no verifiable evidence. It's just plain wrong to do so otherwise.

Below is a post I made some time ago in a thread I started called "Disclosing Responsibly". @ ALL folks, please use this as a guide BEFORE posting any claims of overunity:

Folks, I wanted to start a topic to discuss what seems to be a heated subject at the moment, primarily due to recent claims of overunity.

The claim itself is not the topic per se, but the method, format, or process of how the claim is made and represented...is.

The following is what I suggest as a start, and anyone is welcome to add their bit.

1) Decide and state what exactly you are about to claim:
Options here include:
a)100% certainty you have achieved overunity,
b) not 100% sure and asking for help to determine if it is so, or
c) that you are only observing strange effects and that you would like other users to provide feedback.

2) Regardless of which option fits your case, please provide in your post the following minimum parts:
a) A complete drawing or schematic of your prototype or test setup,
b) A clear description of what the device or circuit is, what you think the circuit is doing, or what you wanted it to do,
c) A list of references to any other devices or documentation you based your device on,
d) A list of proper power measurements (more on this later),
e) A photo of your setup is optional, but may be helpful,

3) For those with limited Free Energy Research experience, and/or electronics experience, please post a request for someone to review your steps 1) and 2) above, BEFORE making your post and disclosure,

4) Refine all the above listed elements with the feedback received from the more experienced forum users,

5) Make your disclosure post.

Cheers,
Darren

[wattsup]

@Mem

Actually z_p_e is right. Even though you feel there is OU, it is best to say that you have something interesting and would like input here. This way you simply bypass or ground all persons that think you are claiming OU. Then let the group confirm this with you.

Now, on the other hand, if you had verifiable good measurment instruments, the whole shebang as we would say, then by all means go for it.

Crying OU happenned to me a few times but I quickly realized the measurment mistake and came back to clarify the issue. I'm not saying this is your case.

@z_p_e

While you're here, could you please, double please, even triple please, take a look at a post I made on Otto's thread located here;
http://www.overunity.com/index.php/topic,2535.msg45336.html#msg45336

I have asked this twice already, once to otto and again to btenzer for some advise but no answer. I am begginning to think people here are avoiding me because of my open stance on SM.