ENERGY AMPLIFICATION

[endlessoceans]

V8 karlo asked this - - -




Quote



TITO! , I have question for you if you can help

I don't have the solution you need ...but I know some old guys were using a mass of iron to control the feedback. [size=78%])[/size]

Huh....interesting....Tito replies as his alter ego Forest despite previously lying and saying he only uses the one name.  Pathetic.  You constantly lie and use at least 7 other aliases here.  Did you forget to change back to your Tito name?  You really have mental illness.  Years of stupid 'clues' that go nowhere and yet you have nothing yourself.  The IP addresses don't lie.

[forest]

just don't listen to endlessoceans


he is a troll

[Bob Smith]

I don't have the solution you need ...but I know some old guys were using a mass of iron to control the feedback. When the iron mass saturate it will change the characteristic of device and limit the output to almost zero. Today it will maybe need a better core...For air core there is a problem.
I think that even large electric generators are using this trick indirectly (because we still believe they convert one form of energy into another  [size=78%])[/size]

Interesting. I remember reading a man from New Zealand who was instructed by Stan Meyer. I think he was talking about a similar feedback approach to create a standing wave in a toroid core that could be tapped without affecting the primary.


I agree with you on converting from one form of energy to another.  Many COP>1 devices involve a change of energetic state. For example, from liquid to gas and back to liquid (as in refrigeration unit), from aether to magneto-dielectric, from magnetic flux to useable charge...
Bob

[endlessoceans]

1)   I think he was talking about a similar feedback approach to create a standing wave in a toroid core that could be tapped without affecting the primary.


2)   Many COP>1 devices involve a change of energetic state. For example, from liquid to gas and back to liquid (as in refrigeration unit), from aether to magneto-dielectric, from magnetic flux to useable charge...
Bob

All due respect Bob

Point 2)    Many Cop>1 devices you say?     How many of these Cop>1 devices have you seen or have been verified?    I have seen 99% efficient devices that APPEAR OU.....but they are not.   99% efficiency and recycling will do an incredible amount of work that appears OU.

You use the  refrigeration cycle as example.....here again previously erroneously stated as OU when it is not.  VERY efficient yes.  But do you ever end up with more gas than what you started with after all the compressions and decompressions??  err NO.  And thank goodness for that.   

Very few people are following scientific method on this site.  If you don't you will never find truth or make advancement.

This site just has people making stupid half informed claims and then to add insult to injury they post 'informative links' to websites that have malware and are hacker sites.   Forest loves posting those.   Incredible how many gullible people here just lap it all up without asking a single question

Want the truth?  go to the bench and you will see some amazing things

What is the Scientific Method?

The scientific method is a process for experimentation that is used to explore observations and answer questions. Does this mean all scientists follow exactly this process? No. Some areas of science can be more easily tested than others. For example, scientists studying how stars change as they age or how dinosaurs digested their food cannot fast-forward a star's life by a million years or run medical exams on feeding dinosaurs to test their hypotheses. When direct experimentation is not possible, scientists modify the scientific method. In fact, there are probably as many versions of the scientific method as there are scientists! But even when modified, the goal remains the same: to discover cause and effect relationships by asking questions, carefully gathering and examining the evidence, and seeing if all the available information can be combined in to a logical answer.

Even though we show the scientific method as a series of steps, keep in mind that new information or thinking might cause a scientist to back up and repeat steps at any point during the process. A process like the scientific method that involves such backing up and repeating is called an iterative process.

[Bob Smith]

Notice I used the term "COP>1" rather than "overunity."  Within a closed system, there can be no overunity. However, with open systems, it is a different story. I would argue that change of state can involve outside forces (though not always), which can under certain conditions render a COP>1.  The prevailing scientific method typically considers efficiency within a closed system paradigm.  While its methodology and rigor have their importance and merits, I cannot embrace it in its totality as the only viable means for evaluating COP, based on what I have seen in my own experiments and those of others.  I guess we'll have to respectfully agree to disagree.
Bob[/size]