Check out the below link and follow from there.
http://cgi.ebay.com/ws/eBayISAPI.dll?ViewItem&item=110625717055
Unless someone has made an exact replication and can prove differently I believe free energy has been liberated by using a single 1.5 AA alkaline battery as means to trip it.
Proceeds go to charity.
Is this self-sustaining?
Check out the below link and follow from there.
http://cgi.ebay.com/ws/eBayISAPI.dll?ViewItem&item=110625717055
Unless someone has made an exact replication and can prove differently I believe free energy has been liberated by using a single 1.5 AA alkaline battery as means to trip it.
Proceeds go to charity.
The burden of proof lies with the inventor, not the overunity community.
I think the "no returns accepted" statement speaks for itself, in my humble opinion.
Oh come ON. What is the first thing you'd do with an OU device? Sell it for 'charity?' No way. You'd hook it up to your mains power and run your house off it. That's what I'd do. Then I'd show you video of it POWERING SOMETHING other than LED's. Then, if I for some bizarre reason felt the need to auction it off for 'charity' I would. Incidentally, all I see is an auction for some sort of device with zero proof of any of the proceeds going to 'charity.'
Quote from: magnetman12003 on December 18, 2010, 11:46:23 PM
Check out the below link and follow from there.
http://cgi.ebay.com/ws/eBayISAPI.dll?ViewItem&item=110625717055
Unless someone has made an exact replication and can prove differently I believe free energy has been liberated by using a single 1.5 AA alkaline battery as means to trip it.
Proceeds go to charity.
1) I agree with happyfunball on every one of his points so I won't rehash (too much) LOL.
2) Show this thing running REAL heavy inductive loads like a filament lamp not pathetic led's. LED lamps are very misleading as we all know that you can run leds with high potential and low amps while still leaving some impressive overflow for the multimeter demonstration. Enough said there.
3) I have seen enough of the circuit on youtube to know that is nothing. Firstly it's not his idea which is just insulting to the real inventor and secondly this isn't running in perpetuity.
4) He provides no real data just some vague comments of it draining a 1.5 volt battery over 3 hours or whatever....and??? ...what about the load data??....yeh...if you put too much info it would show it to be useless THATS WHY!!
Charity my ass. I knew of a guy that labelled his beer fridge a charity so that he felt comfortable telling everyone "all proceeds go to charity" LOL. This fella probably has the same white lie philosophy.
Terrible.
E-Goose
Quote from: ElectricGoose on December 19, 2010, 12:34:12 AM
I knew of a guy that labelled his beer fridge a charity so that he felt comfortable telling everyone "all proceeds go to charity"
That's a good one
From the answers to the questions on the ebay listing:
QuoteA: The starting "OUTPUT" voltage across the 4 lamps measured 68.6 volts and the current .28ma So we are looking at .019208 watts across 4 lighted lamps. A 6 Hour 28 minute run time resulted.
So let's run the numbers. Take the "starting OUTPUT" and just assume it's constant for the whole 6.5 hours. How much ENERGY has been put through the lighted lamps?
I get this: 0.02 Watts for (6.5)(60)(60)seconds, or 468 Joules.
What do you get?
Now, how much ENERGY is in a typical modern AA battery? Let's just use an ordinary one off the shelf which has 2000 mA-H capacity, and let's use the ENDING voltage of the battery used in the device: 1.25 volts.
So I get this:
The battery contains (1.25)(2000) milliWatt-hours of energy, or
(1.25)(2000)(60)(60) milliWatt-seconds of energy, or
9000 Joules.
So the energy content of the AA battery is about 18 or 20 times greater than the energy output of the device, totalled up over the 6.5 hours of runtime.
It is always possible that I have misplaced a decimal point or divided when I should have multiplied or something, so I encourage everyone to repeat my calculations, just in case this device is 500 percent efficient instead of only 5 percent.
Meanwhile, I am going to have another cup of coffee, with a stout shot of brandy in it, because it's cold in here and my Ainslie heater doesn't seem to be working properly.
Quote from: TinselKoala on December 19, 2010, 09:38:24 AM
From the answers to the questions on the ebay listing:
So let's run the numbers. Take the "starting OUTPUT" and just assume it's constant for the whole 6.5 hours. How much ENERGY has been put through the lighted lamps?
I get this: 0.02 Watts for (6.5)(60)(60)seconds, or 468 Joules.
What do you get?
Now, how much ENERGY is in a typical modern AA battery? Let's just use an ordinary one off the shelf which has 2000 mA-H capacity, and let's use the ENDING voltage of the battery used in the device: 1.25 volts.
So I get this:
The battery contains (1.25)(2000) milliWatt-hours of energy, or
(1.25)(2000)(60)(60) milliWatt-seconds of energy, or
9000 Joules.
So the energy content of the AA battery is about 18 or 20 times greater than the energy output of the device, totalled up over the 6.5 hours of runtime.
It is always possible that I have misplaced a decimal point or divided when I should have multiplied or something, so I encourage everyone to repeat my calculations, just in case this device is 500 percent efficient instead of only 5 percent.
Meanwhile, I am going to have another cup of coffee, with a stout shot of brandy in it, because it's cold in here and my Ainslie heater doesn't seem to be working properly.
i got a good laugh... :D
i cant imagine anyone foolish enough to try and sell them on ebay ... i got a warning ... it wasent friendly ...
hummmm.
so i abide by the warning ..
i dont sell my work .. i present it public .. it represents ownership...
origonality ..is hard to find.. but so are good inventors that can spell well ;D
osiris
The fellow's two YT videos are "comments disabled".
So it's likely that he fully understands what he's doing, and since he's stating his power figures ... well, if somebody wants to pay 500 dollars for a kludged-up pulse motor when you can do the same thing with no moving parts (see Steorn !!) I suppose that's up to them.
Let the buyer beware !!
Quote from: TinselKoala on December 19, 2010, 09:38:24 AM
From the answers to the questions on the ebay listing:
So let's run the numbers. Take the "starting OUTPUT" and just assume it's constant for the whole 6.5 hours. How much ENERGY has been put through the lighted lamps?
I get this: 0.02 Watts for (6.5)(60)(60)seconds, or 468 Joules.
What do you get?
Now, how much ENERGY is in a typical modern AA battery? Let's just use an ordinary one off the shelf which has 2000 mA-H capacity, and let's use the ENDING voltage of the battery used in the device: 1.25 volts.
So I get this:
The battery contains (1.25)(2000) milliWatt-hours of energy, or
(1.25)(2000)(60)(60) milliWatt-seconds of energy, or
9000 Joules.
So the energy content of the AA battery is about 18 or 20 times greater than the energy output of the device, totalled up over the 6.5 hours of runtime.
It is always possible that I have misplaced a decimal point or divided when I should have multiplied or something, so I encourage everyone to repeat my calculations, just in case this device is 500 percent efficient instead of only 5 percent.
Meanwhile, I am going to have another cup of coffee, with a stout shot of brandy in it, because it's cold in here and my Ainslie heater doesn't seem to be working properly.
Problem is we don't need to know what the energy content of the battery is, as is obviously your impression. What we need to know what the actual amount of energy has been consumed during these 6.5 hours. Do you know it?
He says the battery started at 1.5 volts and the device stopped running at 1.25 volts, 6.5 hours later.
If the battery contained a measly 2000 mA-H to begin with, that means it will supply 2 amps for an hour -- or about 300 mA continuously for 6.5 hours -- BEFORE the voltage drops appreciably, and modern batteries, especially alkalines, have a pretty flat initial discharge curve and a steep dropoff at the end.
So which numbers don't you agree with, the 9000 Joules input (the battery's entire charge) input to the system, or the numbers FROM THE BUILDERS own measurements, of the 468 Joules output of the system?
Quote from: TinselKoala on December 19, 2010, 11:42:09 AM
He says the battery started at 1.5 volts and the device stopped running at 1.25 volts, 6.5 hours later.
If the battery contained a measly 2000 mA-H to begin with, that means it will supply 2 amps for an hour -- or about 300 mA continuously for 6.5 hours -- BEFORE the voltage drops appreciably, and modern batteries, especially alkalines, have a pretty flat initial discharge curve and a steep dropoff at the end.
So which numbers don't you agree with, the 9000 Joules input (the battery's entire charge) input to the system, or the numbers FROM THE BUILDERS own measurements, of the 468 Joules output of the system?
I already said what I don't agree with. Read carefully what I write. And ... leave the builder alone. Again, do you know how much energy was consumed? Where are the results of your measurements of the input and the output energy?
The builder's own measurements aren't good enough for you?
The only thing in my numbers that did NOT come from the builder's measurements and statements is the energy content of the battery.
Perhaps he used a nearly-depleted battery of inferior quality that was just about to tumble over its discharge cliff and drop voltage, and only contained 400 Joules to begin with.
So you are absolutely right, Omni. I have no idea, I am assuming that he would use an off the shelf, new battery...like he says he did.
i will say ... its real i have many units that operate identical ..
he is honest .. and he is correct in asking 500 bucks ..
dont like his price .. pay his labour .. or build your own ..
osiris
ill garentee he has spent far more in labour than 500 could buy you in man hours on it ..
Quote from: TinselKoala on December 19, 2010, 12:12:03 PM
The builder's own measurements aren't good enough for you?
The only thing in my numbers that did NOT come from the builder's measurements and statements is the energy content of the battery.
Perhaps he used a nearly-depleted battery of inferior quality that was just about to tumble over its discharge cliff and drop voltage, and only contained 400 Joules to begin with.
So you are absolutely right, Omni. I have no idea, I am assuming that he would use an off the shelf, new battery...like he says he did.
So, since you have no idea, as you obviously don't, stay calm. No one needs your useless input and advice to customers.
@Omni: I think I am the calm one around here. Not as calm as you, obviously, but calm nevertheless.
@osiris: I laugh.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hYQM8WbCq2Y
Quote from: TinselKoala on December 19, 2010, 02:27:27 PM
@Omni: I think I am the calm one around here. Not as calm as you, obviously, but calm nevertheless.
@osiris: I laugh.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hYQM8WbCq2Y
So, what's the point? That vid isn't even funny let alone evidence against what's being discussed in this thread. Where's your data regarding the device at hand? You don't have such? Then, like I said, relax.
Omnibot, you haven't changed a bit.
Same old, same old... "OU has already been proven beyond a reason of a doubt...." + Bla,blabla..., forever.
Anything new?
That's getting funnier by the minute. Am I seeing it right, the guy increased the inital bid to $5,000 with increments of $5,000? He probably got encouraged by my little exchange with @TinselKoala. What a mistake.
Is Ebay listing fee a percentage of the start price?
Does he really think anyone in there right mind is going to pay $5000 for this??
Quote from: Lakes on December 20, 2010, 05:27:16 AM
Is Ebay listing fee a percentage of the start price?
Does he really think anyone in there right mind is going to pay $5000 for this??
He'll soon find out for himself. I can see now @TinselKoala, cheering ... "I told you so". No, wait till you see the guy up the price even further. That's hilarious.
Oh, and by the way, where's the answer to the question regarding the input current and voltage:
QuoteQ: Would you allow precise measuring of input current and voltage and output current and voltage of your device? I would be interested in making these measurements with the equipment that I have. Please let me know if this would... Continue reading
A: The starting "OUTPUT" voltage across the 4 lamps measured 68.6 volts and the current .28ma So we are looking at .019208 watts across 4 lighted lamps. A 6 Hour 28 minute run time resulted.
Dec 18, 2010
The fun goes on:
QuoteI am not answering any more questions except to say that the 4 LED lamps illustrated are each 120 VOLT RATED, 1 WATT LAMPS. If you are that interested start the bid and as hi bidder you can visit me at your own expense. See this in action "BEFORE" you pay. Examine or take it apart "AFTER" paypal.. Its yours then to do as you wish. No returns for any reason then. There is a few details about this I have not published or shown in any of my prior videos that makes this work. The circuit is safe inside my head. Any deviation from what you see will not work as this does. Need industrial engineers to look into this for further development. Proceeds go to charity. Yes - I changed the bid price much higher. Charity always needs more contributions. Merry Christmas and a happy new year.
So, he won't answer any more questions, right? He, however, didn't answer even the first question. The guy doesn't understand that he should be the one who should pay someone to visit him and confirm what he's claiming. There were 350 of the same ilk in Idaho this year so why should he be the first to be held accountable? Wonder if @markdansie or @mscoffman went there or know anything more about this whole scheme?
I'll be monitoring this closely because such arrogance as shown by that seller should be nipped in the bud (not the way @TinselKoala does it, by showing vids with unrelated evidence and presuming things for a premature laugh). We've already had too much of that crap. Enough is enough.
He might just be trying to make a point as to what he considers the value and potential of this technology to be. From my understanding, this fellow has worked in the technology field through his life... perhaps his endorsement in this matter lends credibility to the community as a whole. Perhaps he is trying to keep his wife from freezing, although I doubt that. The point is... does Tesla care? Does Bedini care? Do any of us who have contributed on the development of the One Magnet No Bearing Bedini style circuit he is showing care? If the answer is no, then, well, why do you care? If he can convince 5 people in the world that he is not selling Rube Goldberg's desk lamp and that there is potential (pardon the pun) in this technology for larger scale positive change, is that a bad thing?
Quote from: twinbeard on December 20, 2010, 09:02:19 PM
He might just be trying to make a point as to what he considers the value and potential of this technology to be. From my understanding, this fellow has worked in the technology field through his life... perhaps his endorsement in this matter lends credibility to the community as a whole. Perhaps he is trying to keep his wife from freezing, although I doubt that. The point is... does Tesla care? Does Bedini care? Do any of us who have contributed on the development of the One Magnet No Bearing Bedini style circuit he is showing care? If the answer is no, then, well, why do you care? If he can convince 5 people in the world that he is not selling Rube Goldberg's desk lamp and that there is potential (pardon the pun) in this technology for larger scale positive change, is that a bad thing?
Most people here know why I should care so I don't need to explain that. As for convincing people, he shows zero real evidence and if he manages to "convince" anybody to buy this thing it would be nothing but a scam on his part. That would be a scam in its purest no matter how you twist words to make it appear it isn't.
Quote from: Omnibus on December 20, 2010, 11:23:18 PM
Most people here know why I should care so I don't need to explain that.
I agree, most people in your house, place of business, place of employment, local public library, internet cafe, or wherever you are typing from probably do know why you care. I am, however, in none of those places. If you want me to know, then you will need to explain it. I would guess by your post count that either a) you are a relatively prolific inventor contributing to a wide range of knowledge bases, or b) you are relatively prolific troll. Only the clarity of time will tell how it really looks from here.
Quote from: Omnibus on December 20, 2010, 11:23:18 PM
As for convincing people, he shows zero real evidence and if he manages to "convince" anybody to buy this thing it would be nothing but a scam on his part. That would be a scam in its purest no matter how you twist words to make it appear it isn't.
I'm not sure he is actually trying to sell it. Does McDonalds provide any real evidence to you that there is beef in your Big Mac? It looks like all he is posting for sale is a machine that will light a bunch of LED's and spin a rotor for 6 hours on a AA battery. As always, caveat emptor. The base circuit is patented but widely documented and available such that it appears that it was intended to be spread far and wide. He has made modifications, incorporating several other ideas placed in the public domain. I can tell you from experience that while that setup is not totally optimized, it will achieve a relatively high frequency for a mechanical oscillator, and as you might recall, Tesla was quite fond of high frequencies. I wonder why...
A point of further clarification on "convince:" Perhaps my choice of words was wrong. Allow me to elaborate: Should he awaken 5 people to the possibility that there does or could exist such a thing as a device which uses an electronic means to create a condition whereby generally unknown quantum or other forces allow energy to be changed from below the quantum threshold or somewhere else into a form which the circuit can collect and deliver into a load, would that be a bad thing?
No, he should not. He is giving no evidence that this is an OU device and therefore he should not have implied in any way that it might be one. His is an incompetent attemt at somethig which many people here are serious about and that clumsy dabbling is offending their intelligence.
And that blabbering with quasi-scientific lingo using words such as "quantum", terminology and field you have apparently no clue about, is disgusting. This may pass among hillbillies, as it is evidently aimed at, to imbue some importance into the subject among the feeble minded. There are many in this forum who are opposite to that and you'd better save your efforts to convince them that way.
Quote from: Omnibus on December 21, 2010, 12:23:10 AM
And that blabbering with quasi-scientific lingo using words such as "quantum", terminology and field you have apparently no clue about, is disgusting.
Ahh. I see it took you over 15 minutes to come up with your opinion on why he should not post that for sale, but only a further 14 minutes to degenerate into insulting me! Troll it is for you then!
As to my knowledge of very tiny things, some of which we can observe, and some of which we can't... you have no knowledge of my level of research therein, nor am I going into a battle of wits with someone half-armed. I know what I know, and you do not, and that is the difference between us, on many levels.
Quote from: Omnibus on December 21, 2010, 12:23:10 AM
This may pass among hillbillies, as it is evidently aimed at, to imbue some importance into the subject among the feeble minded. There are many in this forum who are opposite to that and you'd better save your efforts to convince them that way.
In closing, I really do not care what you think, as your opinion has exactly 0 effect upon me. Feel free to swing your dick around some more in an opportunity to try to be the alpha male you never could quite be by acting like an asshole on an internet forum. OOK OOK!! ME SWING THIS TREE LONG TIME!! ME BIGTIME CHIMP TELL OTHER CHIMPS WHAT TO THINK!! OOOOOOK!!
Quote from: twinbeard on December 21, 2010, 12:46:54 AM
OOK OOK!! ME SWING THIS TREE LONG TIME!! ME BIGTIME CHIMP TELL OTHER CHIMPS WHAT TO THINK!! OOOOOOK!!
LMFAO!! you described him to a T!
Quote from: twinbeard on December 21, 2010, 12:46:54 AM
Ahh. I see it took you over 15 minutes to come up with your opinion on why he should not post that for sale, but only a further 14 minutes to degenerate into insulting me! Troll it is for you then!
As to my knowledge of very tiny things, some of which we can observe, and some of which we can't... you have no knowledge of my level of research therein, nor am I going into a battle of wits with someone half-armed. I know what I know, and you do not, and that is the difference between us, on many levels.
In closing, I really do not care what you think, as your opinion has exactly 0 effect upon me. Feel free to swing your dick around some more in an opportunity to try to be the alpha male you never could quite be by acting like an asshole on an internet forum. OOK OOK!! ME SWING THIS TREE LONG TIME!! ME BIGTIME CHIMP TELL OTHER CHIMPS WHAT TO THINK!! OOOOOOK!!
This is another load of crap and you'd do better not to clutter the forum with that kind of stuff. Defending a scammer in this way is insulting to everybody here, not just me.
Quote from: Omnibus on December 21, 2010, 08:09:30 AM
This is another load of crap
While I thank you for pre-qualifying your posts, we are now all well aware that they are indeed, loads of crap.
Quote from: Omnibus on December 21, 2010, 08:09:30 AM
and you'd do better not to clutter the forum with that kind of stuff.
Once again, you are operating under the mistaken presumption that I want your opinion.
Quote from: Omnibus on December 21, 2010, 08:09:30 AM
Defending a scammer in this way is insulting to everybody here, not just me.
Look, its not like this guy is my best friend. We exchanged a few posts as he read the same thread I read, and we built devices along the same lines. In fact, he challenged some of my early results, and well enough so that I have significantly improved my measurement techniques as a result. That required investment on my part... in both my time learning how to lower margin for error in measurement, and my money for the specialized tools required to mitigate the factors which could cause inaccurate readings. So you could say that this guy has really cost me, and why the hell would I defend him for that? Because his questioning of my results led me to a greater understanding of the work undertaken. To me, that is a positive contribution to a forum of this nature, and not the actions of a scammer. Yeah, the guy is crotchety... so what.
Further, I understand his device. I have a more advanced version. He is on the right track. Or rather, one of many right tracks. Sure, its on a prototype board instead of a finished circuit board that he could have designed and had printed for a few dollars. Sure, there are clip leads all over the place instead of proper terminations. Its not the most beautiful build in the world, and I doubt he will actually sell it. Maybe he is even a little confused... they used lead solder in the old days, you know. Its obviously not a "finished product" type of item... but let me ask you this: Do you eat at McDonalds? I don't. I find it odious. Foul. Not even to be considered food. I once took a Greyhound from Florida to California. Every meal stop from Nebraska to the Cali border was McDonalds, with nothing else in sight but gas station fodder. Needless to say, I was rather hungry when I finally got to Cali. Even under such conditions where I was forced to be there, I did not find it necessary to stand outside the McDonalds and tell every passer by what I thought of the establishment. Nobody is forcing you to read this thread. Get it?
It was not only by chance that my first post in this thread was asking whether or not it's self-sustaining. I asked that even before looking at the vids because I don't want to waste one more second to assess bogus claims. I only looked further when others commented on it and especially @TinselKoala. He's a snide guy, many know that and he's had his share of scam but also he knows some things and sometimes you can exchange a quality thought with him here and there. It is clear to those who are in the know in this business of OU that a device can be pronounced as an OU device without providing high quality experimental measurements only if that device is self-sustaining. Even worse, mainstream won't even listen if you try to talk about OU even if there are undeniable experimental data but the device isn't self-sustaining. This here is not mainstream and folks would listen but it better be well supported with evidence. This forum and others too have seen so much crap that adding more to it is unnecessary. What this felow is doing is crap and supporting such crap is making you an accomplice. If you disagree let's see what experimental results you have. Otherwise, don't bother. No one is interested to know what opinion you're interested in or not.
NOTE TO ALL. Unless this guy comes up with some better reparte than this, I am done with him after this. Trollbaiting during the holidays can be fun, but I do have better things to do. I'm sure you will understand, and appreciate this lesson on how to deal with a bully.
Quote from: Omnibus on December 21, 2010, 11:02:13 AM
It was not only by chance that my first post in this thread was asking whether or not it's self-sustaining. I asked that even before looking at the vids because I don't want to waste one more second to assess bogus claims.
Had you watched the vids, it would be obvious to you that he is making no such self runner or loopback claim. As to time wasted... you are accumulating that in abundance it appears. You should cut your losses now and leave an old man who wants too much for a lamp alone.
Quote from: Omnibus on December 21, 2010, 11:02:13 AM
I only looked further when others commented on it and especially @TinselKoala. He's a snide guy, many know that and he's had his share of scam but also he knows some things and sometimes you can exchange a quality thought with him here and there.
I will keep that in mind. A quality thought is a rare thing indeed this day in age.
I keep waiting to hear one from you.
Quote from: Omnibus on December 21, 2010, 11:02:13 AM
It is clear to those who are in the know in this business of OU that a device can be pronounced as an OU device without providing high quality experimental measurements only if that device is self-sustaining.
That is a reasonable metric. It must be noted, however, that not all devices with a COP > 1 are designed to loop back and run themselves. In some cases, this may even be a bad choice in design consideration.
Quote from: Omnibus on December 21, 2010, 11:02:13 AM
Even worse, mainstream won't even listen if you try to talk about OU even if there are undeniable experimental data but the device isn't self-sustaining. This here is not mainstream and folks would listen but it better be well supported with evidence. This forum and others too have seen so much crap that adding more to it is unnecessary. What this felow is doing is crap and supporting such crap is making you an accomplice.
Ok, so if you truly are an appointed forum Nazi, then ban me! If he is making crap, let the marketplace sort it out. I have no stake in his selling or not selling anything, so if you want to take civil action against me, go ahead. My lawyer loves dipping into peoples pockets for filing frivilous suits... I could use 15-20 thousand of your cash. If you are a government employee and want to arrange some criminal charges, I think you will find that you will meet frustration there as well, and will likely be looking for new employment in the near future. Otherwise, opinions are like assholes, buddy.
Quote from: Omnibus on December 21, 2010, 11:02:13 AM
If you disagree let's see what experimental results you have. Otherwise, don't bother. No one is interested to know what opinion you're interested in or not.
Well, since you are the big forum tough guy, I will allow you to go first, since you insist on a duel. Perhaps you could show me something that you have built that is not "crap." I will then counter with my own, non-"crap" device. Further, given your tough guy status, what with the ability to speak for how many thousand members of this forum, you should be able to find my experimental results on your own, that is, "if ya'll can google real good."
You have to figure out some things for yourself, such as why someone is interested in something and why dealing with OU is not like making up your mind about McDonald's and announcing it to the world. You're confused about these things as much as about what OU is really about, as seen from your above useless banter. Like I said, try not to waste the forum bandwidth for such useless talk. If you have to say something of substance, just say it, show experimental results, do something productive and don't just put yourself on the firing line for someone who's equally as confused as you. I grant you that, at least you're not filling youtube with silly vids the way that guy is doing. I try to avoid wasting time to watch such vids, like I already said, but I won't spare time to tell impudents who impose their confusion on others.
So, to be sure, you have no device to offer up, no experimental results? And no power to ban me other than by lowering the general signal to noise ratio with your degratory drivel?
Thats what I thought. You are welcome to visit the only thread I have started here, if you would like to learn about what I have built. Oh yes, and here is a youtube video for you, smartass:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7HodWLtUeRo
This is just an update video... you will have to watch several hours worth, including some of my random amusements included, if you want all the pieces to the puzzle, which are distributed throughout those videos. Are you smart enough to solve the puzzle? We shall see...
Quote from: Omnibus on December 21, 2010, 12:32:38 PM
You have to figure out some things for yourself, such as why someone is interested in somethinf and why dealing with OU is not like making upyour mind about McDonald's and announcing it to the world. You're confused about these things as much as about what OU is really about, as seen from your above useless banter. Like I said, try not to waste the forum bandwidth for such useless talk. If you have to say something of substance, just say it, show experimental results, do something productive and don't just put yourself on the firing line for someone who's equally as confused as you. I grant you that, at least you're not filling youtube with silly vids the way that guy is doing. I try to avoid wasting time to watch such vids, like I already said, but I won't spare time to tell impudents who impose their confusion on others.
What has that video got to do with overunity?
QuoteNOTE TO ALL. Unless this guy comes up with some better reparte than this, I am done with him after this. Trollbaiting during the holidays can be fun, but I do have better things to do. I'm sure you will understand, and appreciate this lesson on how to deal with a bully.
That's what you should have done in the first place. There are indeed better things to do than to spam this thread and youtube with posts and videos that have no substance. Your selfrighteounsess cannot make up for that neither can it justify defending a confused proposal auch as the one the thread is about. A critic is not a bully neither is his requirement to see experimental evidence and arguments same as disliking McDonald's sandwiches, that's the lesson for you to learn.
Quote from: Omnibus on December 21, 2010, 09:13:39 PM
That's what you should have done in the first place. There are indeed better things to do than to spam this thread and youtube with posts and videos that have no substance. Your selfrighteounsess cannot make up for that neither can it justify defending a confused proposal auch as the one the thread is about. A critic is not a bully neither is his requirement to see experimental evidence and arguments same as disliking McDonald's sandwiches, that's the lesson for you to learn.
Could someone, please, explain to that OmniBot super-spamming idiot troll, that he is not actually the owner of this forum ?
He must have a record at hitchhiking threads - with pure bs.
WHOA IS ME 8)
closed looped self running G6
utilizing RF RECHARGE
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=PEYoF6mYMhI
osiris
Quote from: osiris on December 22, 2010, 08:19:46 AM
WHOA IS ME 8)
closed looped self running G6
utilizing RF RECHARGE
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=PEYoF6mYMhI
osiris
Could you please explain what your video is supposed to show? The incessant moving of camera doesn't help to see what's really going on there. A schematic will help too. Thanks.
Also, how do you mean RF recharge? Is that from some external RF source? If so, that's not OU.