HI MACEDONIA CD I MADE SOME LIKE TPU IS FORKING MORE THEN INPUT

[tosky]

MAC did not show the time and voltage during spark.,  no one knows if there has any OU. Because energy involves Time *Volt* Current. Still waiting for further information.

[poynt99]

First of all he never said the adapter was producing 7.5 volts dc output. It is a dc adapter but you can easily open these adapters and take out the bridge rectifier and what do you get, a 7.5 v AC, so there is your 50 hz AC which is in a way two 50 hz half pulses. With each half pulse he is making 2 full pulses, or with each full cycle he is making 4 cycles to work then at 200 hz.

So each cycle is split into 4 cycles or 4 coils which are receiving the 7.5 volts in parallel.

But if each cycle was sent into a Tesla style ozone patent then you would only require two sets to make four movements (or four cycles). Why, because you will get two movements, one at short and one off short. So two sets producing high voltage short circuits with the coil outputs then sent together onto his output cylinder which is probably lots of layers of parallel lines that will re-compress the high voltage output into less voltage but more amperage.

This may be wrong but it is a start in explaining his method that he has tried to explain here many times.

Huh? more gobeldygook and quite a stretch.

he already said that his previous experiment of changing 50 Hz to 200 Hz had nothing to do with this new demonstration/device, so its not about 200 Hz or any frequency multiplication.

no explanation for this latest device has been given at all.

Tosky, Chef, Mannix, Tinselkoala, Gobaga, and Antimon have all said the right things here. take note and sober up to what is being said here. this is logical and common sense stuff. the kind of stuff that is sorely lacking here. it is not being negative, it is being scientific. learn the difference.

[sparks]

    Energy must be seperated from time.  We are looking for energy scources aren't we?  When a magnet is moved across a wire we get VOLTAGE or charge seperation at the ends of the wire.  Does this voltage come from the mass of the wire or does it get sucked out of the magnet? It appears because we changed the magnetic field about the conductor period.  The conductor mass does the work to make this voltage appear at the end of the wire.  All we did is put the permanent magnet flux in the same inertial frame of the conductor and then take it away.  The mass does the work and adjusts to the new magnetic field parmeters.  The voltage appears at the end of the wire no matter if there is current in the conductor or not.  Now if this voltage upsets the dielectric field say near a capacitor plate it will result in a current inside the capacitor.  This current does not result in a magnetic field that opposes the field around the permanent magnet because it is in a different inertial frame than the permanent magnet flux.  This is not going to happen if the voltage at the termination of the wires never influences a capacitor,  like when an alternator is connected directly to a resistive load.  This power will be dropped across the transmission lines and resistive loads.  But if this magnetic pulse feeds it's power into a reactive system things start to go way up in efficient use of waving a magnet around.
      Why don't power companies do this?  Because who the fuck would need them?
Edison was a moron working for slave drivers.  He couldn't come up with an original idea to save his soul.  Fuck him and his watt waster. 

[zapnic]

Hi all,
Do you know who is MAC. He is the guy use the '?' Logo so call riddle man in BAT MAN movie. Why he covered his circuit in the video? Because he want to carry out a big riddle. All his post are riddles not English problem, but inference problem.

so just ask he him who he is?

he has post is email long time ago
"thi is my email   <<<<<<<<<<  cede74sk@yahoo.com>>>>>>>>>>>>>>"or that youtube video he has hotmail but enyway

bye

[wattsup]

@poynt99

The only "gobbledeegook" is coming from you. No positive input. No ideas, only shit.

If you can come up with anything half as plausible as above fine, otherwise quit trying to teach your elementary crap, which is a run of the mill that we all know already but you keep on repeating here and there to become the grand pooba of OU validity. What crap. As if @MAC and others did not know how to prove OU and we need you to spell it out.