Pulsed DC Transformer with Embedded Magnets

[The Observer]

Poit,

There is no such thing a Over-Unity.
There are, however, Unrecognized Sources of Energy (USEs).

Best Regards,
                     The Observer

P.S. Why do you think that      2 tuning forks ring louder and longer than 1 ?
        Why an Intensification and Prolongation of Sound?

[ltseung888]

How to improve the Pulsed Pendulum Toy to be an overunity device?

One question from the skeptics is: How would you improve the Pulsed Pendulum Toy so that it could bring-in enough energy to maintain the swinging motion even in the dark?

The theoretical solution is surprisingly simple.

1.   We must operate the Pulsed Pendulum Toy at a high amplitude (swing) range.  In the standard Pulsed Pendulum Toy, this range is the “loud striking noise” range in strong sunlight or lamp light.  In this range, we know that there is sufficient energy to allow for feedback.

2.   We must add a battery similar to the key ring solar flashlight to store this feed-back energy.  The easiest technique is to keep recharging this battery so that it acts as a buffer or storage to smooth out any unexpected fluctuations.

3.   The Pulsed Pendulum Toy is effectively pulsed by the battery.  The battery is recharged both by the strong sunlight or the “loud striking noise range” energy.

4.   In theory, if properly designed, the “loud striking noise range” energy is sufficient to recharge the battery.  However, the use of the larger solar panel will provide additional safeguard to keep the battery fully charged most of the time and prolong the life of the Toy.

5.   Remember the resonance condition.  The swing must be pushed at the right time.  In other words, the pulsing circuit must match the frequency of the pendulum.  The energy extraction or feedback circuit should be on only when a large enough amount of bring-in energy is available. (Listen to the striking noise).

We did not try such an improvement because even in 2005, we knew that a pulsed rotating device would be much more efficient than a pulsed oscillating device.  At the beginning, we thought that we could just work with Newman, Bedini, Liang or Wang and promote their pulsed rotational systems.  That turned out to be much more difficult than we thought.  We then tried to build a demonstration prototype of our own.  In 2008, we found Mr. Tong Po Chi who helped us to build the Tong Wheel.

We displayed the Tong Wheel using meters to show that the Output Energy is larger than Input Energy in Inno Tech Design Expo 2009 at the Hong Kong Convention Center.  That is a much better demonstration of a Bring-in Energy machine (but much more expensive) than the Pulsed Pendulum Toy.

We now have the FLEET prototypes that can conclusively demonstrate Output Energy is greater than Input Energy via the two oscilloscope set up.  The material cost is less than US$3.  I know that a number of teams in Hong Kong and China are improving them.

I am taking my time to improve it in USA.  I still have not found an electronic store that can supply all the components needed in Irvine, California.  There will be team building, instrument buying, contacting academics or research organizations etc. to keep me busy for the next few months. (Spending time at my new favorite place is of higher priority!)

May be this is the path directed by the Almighty.  I should only focus on the theory and disclose the scientific principles and point out the experimental approaches.  Let others build the actual prototypes and shine.

[chrisC]

who wants to make a wager with me?

I bet $1000 that this "lead out" energy is a load of hog wash, and isn't OU.

any takers?

Don't take this thread too seriously .99. This is after all some delusional 'lead-out' comedian show. Oh, there is this other observant dude who claims his tuning fork acts actually bring in energy from somewhere!

cheers
chrisC

[The Observer]

Chris,

Why don't you talk science for once?
Please confirm or deny the following....

How would a person test to see if there was extra energy coming from 2 tuning forks as opposed to 1 ?
              1. Measure the difference in Sound Wave Intensities (Volume).
              2. Measure the difference in the Duration of Sound Waves (Length of Tone).

This is VERY simple physics.
If I can get you think about this, I am sure you will change your mind about my assertion.

---> If you don't agree with the highlighted statement, then tell me how a person would test for extra energy. <---

Best Regards,
                     The Observer

[BEP]

As I offered before: (I will edit the contents of the following quote for the purpose of clarity.)

How would a person measure the total energy from 1 tuning fork?
   1. Measure and record the volume (simplified here. Google measuring sound energy) but measure and record it repeatedly and with high repetitions from the beginning of the fork sound to the fork silence. If you graph your data you will see a descending ramp of sound pressure.

How would a person measure the total energy from one or any number of entrained tuning forks?
   1. Measure and record the volume (simplified here. Google measuring sound energy) but measure and record it repeatedly and with high repetitions from the beginning of the fork sound to the fork silence. If you graph your data you will see an oscillation of amplitude of sound pressure with the highest intensity source moving from fork to fork or group of forks.

Perceived "loudness" varies logarithmically with output power. Do not use your ears and a watch and assume there is more energy. You will be wrong.

If your total time is longer then your average volume is lower. If your average volume is higher then your total time will be shorter. If there are more sources of sound then you will perceive greater loudness.

This is very simple physics.

If I can get your thoughts around this, I am sure you will change your mind and remove 'Bring-In' from your theory title. There is no point in making it less plausible.

Regards,

BEP