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

[Omnibus]

I was refering to this post , you removed the trafo and used a resistor, so Vrms * Irms = P but look at what you got as result lol

So, what did I get as a result? What I got as a result when I did the measurements with a current probe is what I reported qualitatively earlier. The current probe results are of importance, as I've always insisted. The results with the shunt should be considered only preliminary.

[infringer]

Just for kicks is there a specific range of frequencies like I see in the pic 60.24 or is it just right around the standard 60ish mark???

I just don't wanna say that you are collecting from the grid wireless somehow like was the case and point of many of the arguments at this forum I'd like to know the values out of curiosity .... Is there a range off of this number which is proving useful as well outside of the magic number 60 of course?

[broli]

I agree with omnibus, there's not even a debate when comparing integral values of experimental data to a theoretical perfect sine wave.

[Omnibus]

Now, with the current probe around I guess we'll be getting closer to the truth. No need to mention, that probe really gives a new perspective to the studies.

First, to put @LarryC's objection to rest, see what the current probe gives for 60Hz. That distortion of the current was observed before (shown some pages back) when using the shunt as well. It is obvious from that screenshot that one cannot use the average V and I to calculate P.

Now, back to the issues. There are two problems to be addressed at this point, as far as I can see:

First, the shunt issue. I did  measurements at 400kHz first using the probe to determine the current and then using resistors of various resistances. Only the resistor of about 5Ohm resistance value gave results coinciding with the probe results. Resistances higher than 5Ohm cause the OU effect to go down while resistances less than 5Ohms ostensibly increases the effect (recall the crazy results with the 0.001Ohm shunt). Having in mind that it is the probe that proves the reality of the OU effect one wonders what may be the cause of that discrepancy when using shunts. One thing appears to be clear now--the adamant insistence by almost every professor of electrical engineering I spoke with, let alone others, that measuring current across shunts (by measuring the voltage ac the shunt and dividing it by the resistance of the shunt) is the way to go, turned out not to be the case and it has to be understood why (even at frequencies as low as 1Hz where inductance is out of the question).

Second important question to be answered is is the ~63Ohm resistance of the coil, which is measured at 0Hz, really ~63Ohm at 400kHz. There should be direct evidence that it is if one is to claim OU. This applies to Steorn's results too (moot as they are now, in light of the present findings) and that's the main point the critics should have raised instead of the ridiculous banter they are still filling the net with.

[broli]

That nipple is a very good example of core saturation. I'm sure if cores were ideal and they didn't saturate, you would see no OU. It's funny that something considered to be a loss and avoided is truly the gain. Congrats omnibus, the fight has only begun now but you are well equipped to slay the dragon  . You are the only one I know on this forum with a hall scope current probe, and you have shown that the right equipment makes the difference between day and light in such experiment.