Are Tommey Reed´s pulse motor circuits overunity ?

[Tommey Reed]

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5o7ARCGeLps

This is it.....

Yes Cat, anyone can use my videos.
Its free..............
Tom.

[petersone]

Well done Tommey
If everybody had there heart in the right place,like you, we are bound to get there!!!
peter

[poynt99]

It's amazing how this scenario plays out time and time again, especially when several members here have been present for many of the past similar scenarios involving claimed overunity from "BEMF".

Was nothing learned from these past lessons? Be assured that this circuit is no different, and so will be the results if and when they are ever measured or tested properly.

@all: Do some research on this site and see for yourself the number of times this has been attempted and the final outcome of each. Learn from the past, teach those that folly, and move forward.

Regards,
.99

[petersone]

Hi .99
I agree with you,I was just commenting on Tommey's approach.
I don't think BEMF alone will get us anywhere,but with something else, maybe.
peter

[Goat]

It's amazing how this scenario plays out time and time again, especially when several members here have been present for many of the past similar scenarios involving claimed overunity from "BEMF".

Was nothing learned from these past lessons? Be assured that this circuit is no different, and so will be the results if and when they are ever measured or tested properly.

@all: Do some research on this site and see for yourself the number of times this has been attempted and the final outcome of each. Learn from the past, teach those that folly, and move forward.

Regards,
.99

@ poynt99

Although I somewhat agree with what you're saying I don't think it's safe to say that it can never be realized, we just haven't seen it succeed by replication yet.

Take for instance, the WO1999038247 patent for HARNESSING A BACK EMF, as patents go you are usually left with more questions than answers as far as components used. 

Even if the patent is granted such as this one, and even if it states that "The net effect is that the workload exceeds the depletion rate of the source" there is no way to validate this because of all the missing information.  I'm still wondering why the patent offices grant inventors patent rights when it should be replicated and validated by the scientific community first!!!???  I find patents to be more like a pie in the sky idea rather than physical proof (sort of like intellectual property rights) otherwise this world would be full of OU devices don't you think?

I also think that part of the problem is that there isn't any data provided that follows a definite measurement protocol which is probably only available to Labs or Universities that have proper measuring equipment and knowledgeable personnel to carry out these tests.  Another problem is in replications where it's hard to get the exact same test components and materials as well as proper measuring equipment being that most people are probably not equipped with such things. 

Anyways sorry for the rant, I guess I'm lamenting on my own shortcomings and wished there was a better way to find the truth to all these but in the end most of the great inventions do come from people who get a Eureka moment whether skilled in the art or not.

As such I wish Tommey the very best in his endeavors and hope he comes up with something that others may have missed.

Regards,
Paul