Thane Heins Perepiteia.

[JustMe]

Le graph:

[polarbreeze]

Are your latest tests using the motor they recommended, or are you still using the one they had issues with?

THE LAST TIME I CHECKED - I RECALL THAT I DON'T WORK FOR KINECTRICS NOR DO I CONCERN MYSELF WITH OTHER PEOPLES ISSUES.
...
Thane

As you submitted your invention to them for testing for a third party opinion, I'd assumed you'd chosen Kinectrics as a trusted authority on the subject. So when they found basic problems with your experimental setup and offered a clear and simple solution so you could do a truly objective test, I'm surprised that you didn't at least try out their recommendation. Why is that?

[polarbreeze]

Le graph:

The graph illustrates the issue that Kinectrics found. The rated rpm of the motor is 3600rpm. All the measurements on the graph are made at very slow speeds (300 - 1000), where the starting capacitor is still in circuit and the current consumption is 2x to 3x what it should be under rated conditions. Their recommendation was to operate the motor at its rated operating conditions, which would then allow an objective assessment of the effect of the back-EMF. The graph is very good - it's just that it needs to be re-done under proper operating conditions.

[OilBarren]

Are your latest tests using the motor they recommended, or are you still using the one they had issues with?

THE LAST TIME I CHECKED - I RECALL THAT I DON'T WORK FOR KINECTRICS NOR DO I CONCERN MYSELF WITH OTHER PEOPLES ISSUES.
...
Thane

As you submitted your invention to them for testing for a third party opinion, I'd assumed you'd chosen Kinectrics as a trusted authority on the subject. So when they found basic problems with your experimental setup and offered a clear and simple solution so you could do a truly objective test, I'm surprised that you didn't at least try out their recommendation. Why is that?

WHO SAID I DIDN'T?

[OilBarren]

Le graph:

Their recommendation was to operate the motor at its rated operating conditions, which would then allow an objective assessment of the effect of the back-EMF. The graph is very good - it's just that it needs to be re-done under proper operating conditions.

MORE IMPORTANT THAN THE "FACTS" OF ANY REPORT ARE THE MEANING WE ATTRIBUTE TO THOSE FACTS.  IT IS CRUCIAL, THEREFORE TO BE AWARE NOT ONLY OF EXTERNAL INFLUENCES ON OUR PERCEPTION - THE INHERENT BIASES IN INFORMATION SOURCES SUCH AS EDUCATION ETC. BUT ALSO OUR INTERNAL TENDENCIES.

OUR BASIC NATURES HAVE ENOURMOUS EFFECT ON HOW WE SEE THINGS.

THAT BEING SAID - WHEN YOU COME TO THE LAB (THIS IS YOUR 4TH INVITATION BTW)
YOU CAN RUN THE SYSTEM UP TO 3500 RPM AND COLLECT THE ALL DATA REQUIRED TO SATISFY YOUR BASIC NATURE, EXTERNAL INFLUENCES, AND PERCEPTINS - ASSUMING YOU HAVE ANYTHING LEFT TO HANG YOU BASIC ASSESSMENT ON.

I DOUBT LUC AND I WILL BE IN THE ROOM WITH YOU HOWEVER.

ALL JOKING ASIDE - THE GRAPH SHOWS A POSITIVE TREND WHICH WE ARE DOING OUR BEST TO EXPLOIT FOR EVERYONE'S BENEFIT.

Thane