STEORN DEMO LIVE & STREAM in Dublin, December 15th, 10 AM

[Omnibus]

@broli,

Here are the data with 100Ohm metal-oxide resistor at 700kHz. As you can see, even in this case there's slight OU but I didn't report it because it may be considered within the error limits.

[LarryC]

The page is right in front of you. You posted it twice. I said it, you don't get it, so I'll repeat it--only the active resistance is responsible for the losses. Inductance is not responsible for the losses. Even if there is inductance and the circuit is not DC or AC resistive only, even in such a case the only parameter responsible for the losses is the active (Ohmic) resistance. That is because over a full cycle the contribution of inductance to the losses is zero. You have to cut that out and to avoid cluttering this thread with your muddled thinking. Taking a course at a local college may help you straighten out some of your confusion.

So you cannot produce any information to back up your incorrect use of your formula's.

Besides, you should quit focusing on the use of inductance in the true Power formula's. Your formula's lack of 'cos angle' is causing the major error. Your scope shot shows that your voltage is 90 degrees out of phase with the current. Cos of 90 is 0, so True power is zero for your 700Hz.

Your lastest plot with the 100 Ohm resistor is correct because voltage and current are in phase and it is an AC resistive only circuit. Steorn's V and I was in phase.

A simple example would be to plug in a small wall transformer but leave the output unpluged(V & I out of Phase or Omnibus OU). Hardly any heat will be produced. Plug in the output(V & I in phase) and the heat will increase dramatically.

Your calorimetric test would easily show your error, but you are allready trying to mislead by saying that poor results would not mean anything.

Omnibus stated:
'Taking a course at a local college may help you straighten out some of your confusion.'

LOL, they teach exactly what is stated on my shown page.


Regards, Larry

[Omnibus]

@LarryC,

There is no phase shift between the momentary current and voltage values. I said momentary. Further, even if there is an inductance contribution in the measured momentary voltage it will be negated when the momentary powers are integrated over a full cycle. This you don't understand and refuse to come to terms with although I repeated it already several times. It follows from the text you're showing me but you don't get it. Again, read the very text you yourself cited and try to understand what the meaning of it is. Why should I give you more reference since you have already shown one? Notice carefully how I'm calculating the power and don't continue with this silliness.

[Omnibus]

@All,

The phase shift seen above in the coil exhibiting OU, whereby voltage trails the current, is indicative of capacitance load. However, the coil has no measurable capacitance above 100pF. I have already shown experimental data which proves that in order for the observed effect to be due to capacitance the coil must have at least 100pF capacitance  (http://www.overunity.com/index.php?topic=8411.msg245828#msg245828). Therefore, the observed current (leading to OU) cannot be due to a current through a capacitive shunt. The contribution of the inductance to the losses (the output) is zero, since power due to capacitance, integrated over a full period is zero, as I explained earlier. The active resistance is frequency independent. Therefore, the observed current-voltage shift causing OU (there are regions where voltage also trails current but no OU is observed there) is real and non-trivial.

[LarryC]

LarryC , I admire your patience but i still think its a waste of time, he wants to stick to his view even if we know that's not the correct one. At the end he will come to the same conclusion , will just take more time.

Thanks, but I don't expect Omnibus to admit he's wrong even after he understands.

In the pass he didn't have any equipment and no testing that I've seen. He usually made a statement like 'It has been proven beyond a shadow of a doubt that this (insert thread device) is OU'. But, no matter how many people asked for proof, he could show no proof and never admit that he was wrong.

Now he has access to University level equipment, large University blackboard, and a University quality test stand as can be seen on page 215, #3220. Did he inherit a University?

His ability to mislead others, has gone up a 100 fold. So it may be worth the trouble to insert a little truth.

Regards, Larry