Thane Heins Perepiteia.

[JustMe]

No, I understood the use of Pgen. My confusion comes from the fact that you seem to be assigning the cost of the coupled affect to the direct power inputs to the generator without experimental evidence that backs that. For example, when the generator is used to light the LEDs I'm assuming that's measurable "work" (sorry if I'm using the term incorrectly) of some sort. When coupled, it continues to do that job and according to your theory does the additional job of accelerating the motor all without drawing more power (taking more in) or dimming the lights (putting less out).

Sadly, it's very possible I'm missing something.

At any rate, I think it's worth mentioning for anyone just jumping on the thread that the third equation reflects your theory on the behaviour of the device, and not the theory of the inventor.  Thane does not cost the magnetic feedback to a direct input of the device, but to a reversal of Lenz's Law, a de facto second source of power.

[aether22]

JustMe, the only thing you are missing is that talking to him is a waste of time. (though I suspect you know that really)

The fact is that heat is an output, and unless you can explain why connecting the motor and generator magnetically should reduce the various forms of waste heat output within conventional physics (and how a faster rotating generator with higher voltage generation would not lead to more electrical power) then we have something worthy of investigation.

Polarbreeze knows perfectly well everything I have said and that his arguments do not hold water and I even forced him to entirely contradict everything he has said when I forced him to answer 5 questions.

He IS a spook, or a dishonest skeptic or a person with very real mental problems. (the latter two being much the same)

The fact is that waste heat very likely IS being reduced by having the all steel shaft allowing 'something' to flow through the shaft and neither Thane nor I nor anyone else has said that such may not be happening, while we hope the effect is OU we can not rule out that it may be at least in part merely a device that reduces various losses, but does it in a way not conventionally explainable and indeed valuable.

He is an outright liar and manipulator and with the way he works if he isn't being paid then he should be.

[aether22]

No, I understood the use of Pgen. My confusion comes from the fact that you seem to be assigning the cost of the coupled affect to the direct power inputs to the generator without experimental evidence that backs that. For example, when the generator is used to light the LEDs I'm assuming that's measurable "work" (sorry if I'm using the term incorrectly) of some sort. When coupled, it continues to do that job and according to your theory does the additional job of accelerating the motor all without drawing more power (taking more in) or dimming the lights (putting less out).

Sadly, it's very possible I'm missing something.

At any rate, I think it's worth mentioning for anyone just jumping on the thread that the third equation reflects your theory on the behaviour of the device, and not the theory of the inventor.  Thane does not cost the magnetic feedback to a direct input of the device, but to a reversal of Lenz's Law, a de facto second source of power.

I can't speak for Thane, but I'll have a go anyway

I don't think that Thane is saying that he's sure Lenz Law stops working in the generator when it's coupled to the motor (though he may be considering it as a possibility).

I believe what Thane is saying is that the overall effect is that of Lenz Law being reversed (it gives that appearance) and I would guess that he thinks the most indicated cause is that the motor power is being augmented somehow rather than the generator load being reduced. (The odds of both happening though seems very good)

Of course it doesn't really matter, the key is that the utterly innocent act of placing a 3 inch steel piece changes the dynamic hugely and even polarbreeze admitted that something is traveling through the shaft.

Polarbreeze is so full of s#!t, he was somehow 'confused' and thought that the motor driving it was a synchronous motor after it had been mentioned 50,000 times that mostly it has been tested with an induction motor. (and universal)
But in a recent PM he sent me he claims to be an expert on induction motors, obviously I have and will never reply to a PM of his.
And his theory on how this could be happening was so sad only the most ignorant 'can't find the US on a world map' and 'believes the sun orbits the earth' (both apparently a full 1/5th of the US pop.!) could fall for it.

I would say the chance that he is as persistent as he is, dishonest as he is, manipulative as he is, knowledgeable as he is (when it suits him) and incredibly dumb as he is leaves almost no doubt that he's a pro at disinfo and disruption, and I don't just mean 'good at it'.

[LarryC]

No, I understood the use of Pgen. My confusion comes from the fact that you seem to be assigning the cost of the coupled affect to the direct power inputs to the generator without experimental evidence that backs that. For example, when the generator is used to light the LEDs I'm assuming that's measurable "work" (sorry if I'm using the term incorrectly) of some sort. When coupled, it continues to do that job and according to your theory does the additional job of accelerating the motor all without drawing more power (taking more in) or dimming the lights (putting less out).

Sadly, it's very possible I'm missing something.

At any rate, I think it's worth mentioning for anyone just jumping on the thread that the third equation reflects your theory on the behaviour of the device, and not the theory of the inventor.  Thane does not cost the magnetic feedback to a direct input of the device, but to a reversal of Lenz's Law, a de facto second source of power.

I can't speak for Thane, but I'll have a go anyway

I don't think that Thane is saying that he's sure Lenz Law stops working in the generator when it's coupled to the motor (though he may be considering it as a possibility).

I believe what Thane is saying is that the overall effect is that of Lenz Law being reversed (it gives that appearance) and I would guess that he thinks the most indicated cause is that the motor power is being augmented somehow rather than the generator load being reduced. (The odds of both happening though seems very good)

Of course it doesn't really matter, the key is that the utterly innocent act of placing a 3 inch steel piece changes the dynamic hugely and even polarbreeze admitted that something is traveling through the shaft.

Polarbreeze is so full of s#!t, he was somehow 'confused' and thought that the motor driving it was a synchronous motor after it had been mentioned 50,000 times that mostly it has been tested with an induction motor. (and universal)
But in a recent PM he sent me he claims to be an expert on induction motors, obviously I have and will never reply to a PM of his.
And his theory on how this could be happening was so sad only the most ignorant 'can't find the US on a world map' and 'believes the sun orbits the earth' (both apparently a full 1/5th of the US pop.!) could fall for it.

I would say the chance that he is as persistent as he is, dishonest as he is, manipulative as he is, knowledgeable as he is (when it suits him) and incredibly dumb as he is leaves almost no doubt that he's a pro at disinfo and disruption, and I don't just mean 'good at it'.

@All,

I received a personnel email from PB today it follows.

New Personal Message: Cool it Larryââ,¬Â
From: free energy (harti@harti.com)
Sent: Fri 3/21/08 7:05 PM
To:  lardonx2@msn.com

You have just been sent a personal message by polarbreeze on free energy. IMPORTANT: Remember, this is just a notification. Please do not reply to this email. The message they sent you was:

Thanks for your noble attempts to help me "understand known physics". Kind of inflammatory though and I don't think it helps the tone of the thread. What makes you such an authority? Do you have any kind of education, training or practical experience in physics?




Maybe I was wrong about the fact that PB never gets upset, since in a later email to Thane he said

WAY WRONG  - SO VERY WRONG PB - CAR BRAKES AND GAS MOTORS DON'T PRODUCE MAGNETIC FIELDS.

Thane, of course that's true and I didn't mean to imply that the mechanisms are the same. I was using the car-gas-brake example simply as a "thought-experiment" because someone was having trouble understanding the physics of the electromagnetic system. It was just intended as an analogy, as I said.

In any event for once he right about something, that I need to cool it. PB is the first one on a forum to get me agravated. I'm sure it is the same with the rest of you guys as I seen most post from the beginning. I am gone to try to get back to testing and ignore him unless he tries more deception if and when I get something interesting to post. I do feel sorry for any newcomers that get caught in his traps, but others of higher statue will have to warn them.

Regards,
Larry

[OilBarren]

Perhaps we all might do well to reflect on some messages given to us by the "PRINCE OF PEACE"
and wish each other a Happy Easter?

Happy Easter to All...
Thane