Peter Davey Heater

[greendoor]

Looking once again into video... Obviously that small hemispherical metalic objects laying on Davey tabletop are common because he has got so many. Why I can't find any ? Where can I buy a few such hemispheres ?

Peter is an old man - 92.  You have to remember that during the 1940, 50's 60, 70's - alarm clocks were mechanical and had bells on them.  Bike bells were common too.  This is stuff from previous generations. 

[greendoor]

If there is an useful overunity effect from the Peter Davey heater, we should isolate the acoustic effect from the electric heating effect.  Peter seemed convinced the effect was acoustic - and his experience shows a very important problem that any overunity design that connects to the AC power is going to have:

If you can achieve overunity with any invention that connects to mains AC power you are going to be accused - rightly or wrongly - of stealing power from the grid.  The conservative engineers who don't understand overunity will come to only one conclusion - and the conservative judges will find you guilty - because they don't understand either.

Also note: if your invention works on mains frequency, or harmonic thereof, you are also going to be accused of steal electricity from a distance.  This is an old trick used to silence free energy inventors.

So please - don't be trapped by the spooks involved in this Peter Davey case.  You need to explore the acoustic effect, and distance yourself from the AC power issue.  Or suffer the fate of Peter Davey.

Also - the high current draw of the alleged Peter Davey device means this is so far away from overunity that there is no point wasting resources in replicating it. 

Take the essence of the idea - and make it work.  We know from Tesla (and even those paid-off bungling Mythbuster clowns) that we can excite a steel beam with carefully timed impacts, and get it to vibrate with dangerous self-destructive force.  If we can feed carefully timed impulses into a bells, tube, rod, plate - whatever - to this point of self destruction - don't you think this would heat up water really good??  That's a lot of energy whipping around.

Microwave ovens heat water by oscillating it with high frequency.  Heat is motion.  Sound is motion.  The key is resonance.  Forget the high amp AC power - it's a diversion. 
   

[Sprocket]

One of the most fustrating things about the Davey device is the lack of info - no-one seems to know exactly how much power his working heaters consumed, so saying to focus on acoustics and forget about the AC aspect is premature.  As is worrying about being accused by the power companies of stealing power - something that is consuming say 100W of power to do work that physics says should take 1000W would be classed as OU, but how is the power companies going to know you are drawing less current than you 'should' be! (or  that they would like you to be...)

[Sprocket]

I should mention that with the current configuration (live attached to outside bell) current consumption seems dependent on where the inner bell is located - I can vary mine easily, deep within the outer bell or move it progressively outwards.  When pushed well in, current increases big-time (last test: same water, 70sec boil-time, current goes from 4->8.6A).  There is also more of an 'electrolysis effect' - much more HHO being produced, whereas there seems to be none when connected the other way...

[greendoor]

If this thing draws 4 amps @ 240V (I live in Christchurch New Zealand - it's 50Hz 240V here) then that is 960 Watts.  If it rises to 8.6A - that's 2064 Watts.

There is something seriously wrong if you can't boil a cup of tea very quickly with 2kW!  I believe there is a principle here that requires serious research, but I suspect the recent media release is disinformation designed to mislead researchers.  I was tempted to look up Peter Davey - but decided against it.  His phone number is unlisted.  I could find his house and go see him - but he's 92.  I don;t expect to gain much.  Maybe he is being manipulated in his old age to cover up the truth?  The wierd stuff published by "Dr Jan Pajak" appears to be delusional, sad and fairly creepy.  But he gives good reason to be very suspicious of this recent unearthing of Peter Davey's invention.  So if he's right, I don't want to tangle with the government spooks.  And if "Dr Jan" is the spook (disguised as a whacko) I don't want to tangle with something our government might be trying to smear at the moment.  Either way - something is very dubious about this whole thing, and I doubt we can find the truth without experimenting with the basic acoustic principle.  Or waste your time frying water with high current AC mains power ... it's your choice.

I'm a musician, and I know about tuning and resonance.  I can get a house shaking with a carefully tuned bass or synth note.  How much energy would that take by any other means?  And that's with air-coupling!  Think about that for a moment ... there is great power in resonance if you tune it right.  Get a musician involved if you don't understand this part.

If there is any overunity in this device, it's from the acoustic effect - which is what Peter Blake has said all along.  I just think his big mistake was to try to use AC power - but back in the 1940's there wasn't the electronic solutions we have today.