Thane Heins Perepiteia.

[jacksatan]

... According to PB's slip theory, the reason that there is greater efficiency as the device is loaded up is because of a more accurate match of the phase change...

JS: "more accurate match of the phase change", no, that's not it - in fact I'm not sure what that phrase means. Here is a clarification which may or may not change your experiment proposal. I was offering an explanation for the observed ACCELERATION, which is NOT a predictor (either way) of efficiency. Efficiency is about power, not about speed/acceleration - it's important not to confuse the two.

"It sped up" is NOT equivalent to "It got more efficient".

PB

PS - I agree with you about the "not enough data points" - much better to properly analyse what exists already, rather than building ever more complexity, which just adds to the fog.

"more accurate match of the phase change" was a poorly worded phrase... Essentially what I was getting at was that (and please correct me if I am wrong) your hypothesis would claim that if the tests as referenced in the PDF from March 11 were to be replicated using additional coils added one at a time, the overall efficiency of the device (as measured by watts in/watts out) will increase to a point, at which it will plateau and then gradually decrease with each additional coil, and the likely plotted graph of efficiency on the y axis and number of coils on the x axis would resemble a bell curve. This would be in direct contradiction to Thane and Aether's hypothesis which would predict a continuous increase in efficiency for each additional coil - possibly (although not necessarily - Aether) leveling off as efficiency approaches 100%, approximating a sine curve. The test I propose shouldn't take more than a couple of minutes to complete, would offer useful and measurable data irrespective of the results, and can be completed with tools that are currently readily available.

BTW - not sure why you threw that acceleration vs. power thing in?

[JustMe]

Poor JackS. You really have to drop by more often.  The March 11 pdf focused on the transformer tests.  The thread is back to talking about the motor/gen device.

[jacksatan]

So, let's make a summary.

Theories:

Magnetic field theory (AKA back-emf)
Aether Theory
Energy transfer theory (from IST)
PB's slip theory (may be ignored without any consideration if any non science types are wondering)

Experiments:

There is an alternative method of testing which should eliminate some of these theories easily... According to PB's slip theory, the reason that there is greater efficiency as the device is loaded up is because of a more accurate match of the phase change. If that is the case, the efficiency will continue to increase as there are more and more coils attached to the secondary until the point of optimal match, at which point the efficiency will contiguously fall. This would be contrasted starkly to many of the other theories which seem to claim that efficiency will continue to rise as the number of coils increases ad infinitum. So the experiment to prove/disprove this is simply to complete that which you have started... take the simple tests from 3/9-3/11, and instead of changing the testing parameters follow a single course of loading up the secondaries 1 coil at a time... it should not take very long before you will either reach an optimal load (or at least be able to graph the projected growth) or reach a point of greater output than input... but in order to create a projection we need more than three data points for each experiment!!!

PB's slip theory makes no sense so it need not be considered or experimented for.
An analogy on his theory would be that you have an old fashioned human powered mill, strong guys holding spoke like logs of wood force the axle to rotate.
If you made the resistance too strong eventually they could no longer keep it turning, PB is proposing that in effect having a guy hammer or push down the axle will somehow help, it can not.
And it can't increase induction of an entirely different magnetic field either.

It's pure bunk and i do not know what to think of someone who creates such a theory.

Aether - despite your belief that PB is spooky, PB has acknowledged that there are aspects to this design for which he does not understand with certainty... He has put forward a hypothesis, and offered ways to prove/disprove it. As with most thing in the scientific realm, it will be extraordinarily difficult to assess with any degree of accuracy the underlying mechanics of the device - we therefore devise experiments to assess the effects, and then hypothesise the mechanics that causes them. Whether or not there is some unknown mysterious force at work here (the hand of God?), those that have been contributing to this forum regularly (and that includes Thane, Luc, Aether, PB, and all the other people in interesting hats out there) do not yet understand the effects fully enough to predict its effects on an untested experiment - there simply is no model which currently explains what the effects will be (if you doubt this statement, ask Thane what the input and output will be on the experiments that he has completed himself using 4 coils instead of 2). But to identify PB's claim as it relates to your analogy, PB believes that the axle is off its bearing, and by pushing down on it with the hammer you are putting it back in its place... similar to pulling down on a doorknob to open a door that is jammed closed - even though you are increasing the friction on the hinges, it still makes it easier to open the door since you decreased the friction on the top of the door jam...
Is this possible? From my standpoint, maybe... Is it probable? You seem to think not... Is there any reason not to perform a test to verify conclusively one way or the other? I think the answer to that does not need a rhetorical response.

[polarbreeze]

It's pure bunk and i do not know what to think of someone who creates such a theory.

So I guess you're somewhat ambivalent about my theory then?

What's yours?

PB

[jacksatan]

Poor JackS. You really have to drop by more often.  The March 11 pdf focused on the transformer tests.  The thread is back to talking about the motor/gen device.

That much I gathered (see I'm not as lost as I used to be)... but PB's hypothesis can be tested using just the transfomer (I think)