Reference to the device
www.rexresearch.com/mra/1mra.htm
www.rexresearch.com/hodomra/1hodomra.htm
Have there ever been any replications By any engineers here?
There is also a similar Acoustic Patent listed here
http://www.panaceauniversity.org
And here
http://www.rexresearch.com/mra/5568005.htm
I hope the Patent office has a nice Christmas, as things might not be
so merry there next year. AHEM. I'll be adding these results and
example of this case to this page.
http://panacea-bocaf.org/patentoffice.htm
(refresh page)
Norm's testimony of this can be found on his page.
http://panacea-bocaf.org/mraevgray.htm
(refresh page)
Thanks to Joel and Norm we finally got the circuit working.
It is one hope that the none profit org can get some
remuneration for Norm and Joel. They have been through enough.
Now, back to the shop and circuits, here are all the values, and here
is a SHORT video, ill be adding it in the suppression video with full
example and script. I think your gonna like the numbers.
Here they are:
http://img246.imageshack.us/my.php?image=mracalculationsdo1.jpg
Guys, if we can get it working, YOU CAN. I am interested in
reconciliation of Norms case, and helping this circuit get known (none
profit). I am sure you guys are going to have fun with this and will
help Norm and Joel if you replicate it. If so please send it to us/Ash.
Now request for tests etc, send them to me (Ash), Norm was so kind he
sent us 2, Andrew (panacea engineer) had an idea that we can get more
out put by stepping down the voltage of the secondary to to increase
the current out put into the LEDS. Should be able to light them all,
just a theory comments welcome.
I think you guys are going to have fun with the input and out put
numbers. Try adding a 1.5 watt amplifier and have fun and play safe.
=). The fun i am gonna have is with the patent office hohohohoho.
A little festive.
Thanks to Norm and Joel.
Here is the Video (Andrew and i are talking)
http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=-8883763398014318356&hl=en
You tube coming, for those subscribed to the channel it will be there soon
This will be moved up from a research paper to a COURSE now on the
Updates of the doc coming, its on the open source engineers university
site. If you have not been there lately, i just want to emphasize this.
"The following manuals have been compiled by the open source energy
community. Open source engineering is all about research and
development, sharing ideas and achievements, using each other's
experiences as our own stepping stones and to move forward as a group.
Each of us provides encouragement and appreciation for open sharing
and participates in a collective non profit effort to bring neglected
and suppressed technologies into public hands. We work on no Budget."
- http://www.panaceauniversity.org/
Also your name email and country on this page will help get more
momentum into reform of the patent office.
http://panacea-bocaf.org/patentoffice.htm
More tests coming guys...RV/TV and MRA too.
Energy in equals energy out :P
Ash
i think the COP is 6. We could light up more LED's for
the same power. Was just a short and sweet proof of principle.
Thing to do now is to create a power source that doesn't need to
energize the Signal Gen. It takes more power to energize the signal
gen , 240V at 50hertz going in then it gets stepped down to +/- 24volt
DC to then putts out .04 of a watt to create the signal.
We get then .252 watts out (could light up more LEDS on .04).
Most people want to see it looped before they credit Norm and Joel
with over unity, i couldn't really care for that, Norm and Joel are
awesome, AND its an efficient sound to power device that has many
applications .
We might mess around with an IMHOTEP power supply in, or inverter to
run the signal gen and loop it back that way.
MRA=Resonance
RV = Resonance
TV= Resonance
One can be extract so can the other. HOW is a good question, maybe the
MRA will help us simplify.
Ash
You're pretty smart fellow. Do you know how to use an oscilloscope?
If so, please repeat the exact same experiment using the scope to monitor the input and output waveforms. You may be surprised.
But I won't be.
(You may be interested in
http://www.earthtech.org/experiments/mra/mra.txt (http://www.earthtech.org/experiments/mra/mra.txt)
and
http://www.earthtech.org/publications/AIAA-2006-4909-871.pdf (http://www.earthtech.org/publications/AIAA-2006-4909-871.pdf))
I am not interested in those. I am interested in DC in and DC out. There is a bridge, the out put is DC. Once i get the input into DC then ill be using a resistor.
please read and perform the experiment your self. i am not here to talk to skeptics thanks.
Ps - I got this from Norm the inventor
Ash
------------------------------
Great work Ash, We used step down ratios to create more current in the
sec. as you have suggested. Keep the Phi ratio in mind
when winding the magnet. The final MRA documented for the patent office
was 256:1 COP. I had a complete 12V battery
powered MRA so that I could compare DC input tp DC output. This
included 12V battery, 12V sig gen, 12V power amp,
MRA, rectifier bridge and DC resistive load. I got very close to
achieving a loop situation. The only draw back was the idle
current draw of the driving amp. I was trying to build a MOSFET power
amp, low wattage that had very little idle current draw.
I guess this is a class D amp? Thanks a million for your
efforts. Congratulations on your success. Norm
----------------------------------------------------------------------
@ashtweth_nihilisti:
So you say you are building or have built a MRA that works,
as in hat it produces over unity?
But it is not looped yet, if I understand...? Or was that the
version by the other guys that wasn't looped yet?
Anyway, it is interesting to hear that, since Hal Puthoff
(if I recall correctly) replicated the MRA experiment
and was able to achieve exactly the claimed 500%
efficiency as was calculated by the inventor(s)...
And then Puthoff showed how that is a calculation error
and how proper calculation shows the true efficiency
at 85% or so...
I can't find the original source where I read this,
but there is a brief summary of the same on
http://www.rexresearch.com/mra/1mra.htm#evalu
in case you wish to check it.
I'm not saying it is impossible that you got an MRA
to work and produce OU, and I'm not saying Puthoff
necessarily proved that the MRA principle can't work.
What I am saying is that Puthoffs analysis seems to be
in order and seems to disprove the MRA claims,
and so it is very interesting that you claim to have been
able to get real OU from an MRA where Puthoff failed. :)
Then again you do say that your aim is DC in and DC out,
and if I am not mistaken that was not exactly what Puthoff
did... So there might be some funky effect that he missed. ;)
Can you please describe your setup in detail some more,
or give some more links to usefull resources?
Thanks, and good luck with your experiments and development :)
Koen wrote:
"I can't find the original source where I read this,
but there is a brief summary of the same on
http://www.rexresearch.com/mra/1mra.htm#evalu
in case you wish to check it."
You might just want to check out the links I posted, in the fourth post in this thread.
I am not interested in skeptics who build nothing to prove it to them self's. And of those who are not thorough in their methods. Just cause Hal did this and i did that, i dont care for that either. And If you read the posts i made you see your question is not needed - i stated
".04 of a watt to create the signal. We get then .252 watts out (could light up more LEDS on .04)." I already stated the aim is to make a source of DC, before even thinking about it. There usually is allot of babel in these threads, just a heads up that its not going to go on in here. Some one might even make me the Mod in this thread, then all these type of posts will be removed. Read what i stated, there is none of these type of questions needed on my part till i post results. Plus , i better know you if you reproduce this device, as if i don't you could be any one, and i don't trust "anyone". AND i may not take your testimony over mine. Just giving a heads up to my friends here who know who they are.
You may find replication data on the panacea university site.
I do not care for looping, until I find out every thing from the energy being transformed, ie, some state it will kill the dipole (Beardon), some say its a counter gyro movement (Joseph Newman) .I am more interested in a DC measurement in and out at this stage. As i already mentioned, read the posts, dont repeat a question that's not needed, i want this thread to be informative, you have to do that here some times. Plus this is a great application as is. We will be building it to maybe charge batteries from a square wave mosfet circuit.
Ash
Guys, here is another post from Norm Wootan.
The "weird effects" included such things as building a very powerful
standing wave, probably columnar that would suddenly collapse is you
unloaded the MRA while under power at resonance. Many times Joel had
all the light bulbs blow out the filaments although they were turned
off at the time. The filaments would break away at one post in the bulb
and spin violently around in the bulb scraping away the phosphor coating.
These MRA's were being driven with audio paging amps at 70V output. The
line input was being monitored all the time and it was found that
the line input current to the amp would fall below idle current draw
when the MRA was fine tuned to peak power output (resonance) See following.
>
> Tuning procedures used on the MRA
>
> Attached are three oscilloscope photographs, circuit diagram (series
> resonant MRA circuit) and a resonant curve for a series resonant
> circuit which depicts the region of operation that we seek to find.
> This document will describe the tuning procedures used to bring the
> resonating circuit into that lossless ultra high "Q" region slightly
> on the right side of the resonant peak. Keep in mind that we are
> tuning a series resonant circuit which produces a slight reactive
> component (current lagging) when tuned to the immediate right side of
> the resonant curve. This tuned position provides us an almost
> infinite impedance in the input side of our circuit.
> To reach this finely tuned, ideal resonant condition it is first
> necessary to find that resonant condition shown in oscilloscope photo
> #1. This photo depicts a net capacitive condition with the current
> clearly leading the voltage traces. The next step is to tune through
> the resonant peak to find a condition of net reactive which shows a
> current lagging scope trace as shown in photo #2. Now we tune ever so
> slightly down in frequency to approach that infinite "Q" sweet spot
> which lies just to the right of the resonant peak providing an almost
> infinite impedance in our primary which also brings the current and
> voltage into a very favorable power factor which yields the maximum
> gain possible as depicted in photo #3.
>
> Norm
The MRA will not work if the magnet is cold. Ambient temp of about 70
degrees F. and a warm up run for an hour below resonant conditions
proved to be most effective. I believe that the
MRA has to have time to build an "aetheric field" around itself in the
form of a standing wave. The very low powered MRA such as the one Ash
is running will work as soon as you start it up.
The high powered MRA. (audio amp driven) have to be brought up to fine
tuned resonance over a period of time to condition everything. The
destructive spike that took out the light bulbs
manifest in the neutral side of the house wiring circuit. Really weird
to see the effect. The MRA output follows the position of the sun and
moon so there is some sork of gravity effect which
Greg Hodowanec describes in his work with earth gravity fields. See REX
Research files on Greg's experiments with the MRA.
The following "grain of wheat" test of the MRA input was the most
difficult evidence for Hal Puthoff to explain.
In Joel's own words.
Norm,
Now that they have it running, tell them to put one tiny grain-of-wheat
bulb in the input, and some larger bulbs on the output load. That is
what we showed to Tom Bearden, and he made that famous comment, "There's
no doubt in my military mind that this is an overunity device".
Joel
As far as gravity effects, we did measure changes in piezo weight after
running at resonance with a gain back to normal
after turning off the MRA. Same effect as the famous Nieper Ring circuit.
Quote from: ashtweth_nihilisti on December 02, 2008, 06:52:11 PM
I am not interested in skeptics who build nothing to prove it to them self's. And of those who are not thorough in their methods. Just cause Hal did this and i did that, i dont care for that either. And If you read the posts i made you see your question is not needed - i stated
".04 of a watt to create the signal. We get then .252 watts out (could light up more LEDS on .04)." I already stated the aim is to make a source of DC, before even thinking about it. There usually is allot of babel in these threads, just a heads up that its not going to go on in here. Some one might even make me the Mod in this thread, then all these type of posts will be removed. Read what i stated, there is none of these type of questions needed on my part till i post results. Plus , i better know you if you reproduce this device, as if i don't you could be any one, and i don't trust "anyone". AND i may not take your testimony over mine. Just giving a heads up to my friends here who know who they are.
You may find replication data on the panacea university site.
I do not care for looping, until I find out every thing from the energy being transformed, ie, some state it will kill the dipole (Beardon), some say its a counter gyro movement (Joseph Newman) .I am more interested in a DC measurement in and out at this stage. As i already mentioned, read the posts, dont repeat a question that's not needed, i want this thread to be informative, you have to do that here some times. Plus this is a great application as is. We will be building it to maybe charge batteries from a square wave mosfet circuit.
Ash
"Woooohhh, careful with that noose batman!"
"not thorough in their methods" ?
Not taking any measurements at all such as simple Vin Vout, Iin, Iout, ARE basic measurements that DO put you in the realm of scientific/thorough methods. NOT doing so automatically precludes you from it.
So you guys "guessed/estimated" the current and voltage for each LED? Did you know that you can light a typical LED to decent brightness with
as little as 7mA or so? Did you know that the LED voltage drop can be anywhere from 1.5 to 2.5 volts? How can you know what to base your calculations on if you didn't measure either? Why are you guessing?
I like the MRA and the hope it brings to OU (always have), but I'm stupefied that grandiose claims are being made about it based on guesstimates and assumptions.
I really doubt Stefan will allow you to censor this thread, because I'm pretty sure he will have similar questions for you guys.
What's wrong with taking a few simple measurements?
.99
It is about censoring ridiculous posts which have already been answered. like yours. We understand DC in and Dc out for real power and this is where we will be going down the track. already posted. The next one by you,. will mean you will have to find the reports in other forums, i know how this thing goes here, there are too many dis info and stupid posts here that lug the board. yours is one of them. I suggest you go back and read the start, and study the video. I do this to stop time being wasted, we understand power in and out and you guys should go build this and prove it to your selves, not ask me stupid questions, or recite other skeptics.
Stefan may let me mod to report the measurements and developments in this thread, or he may not, either way, i wont be victim to spam and other things here.
and the info will reach every one. Happy testing or. Happy searching for the reports.
Ash
What reports are you referring to Ash...the ones at Rexresearch etc.?
If so, I am not interested in those reports. This thread and my response is about YOUR replication of the MRA, YOUR results, and YOUR measurements etc.
Please name one thing that is ridiculous as stated in my response.
You also haven't answered a single question.
btw, I did study your video, and that is why I posted a response. I (and I'm sure the majority of this thread's readers) would appreciate a civil and rational response to the questions.
.99
poynt99, Ill cut you some slack here, but not again. We showed on the Video what the rating's of the LED's were, in fact we lit up 8 of them after wards. Plus we stated we are moving onto DC, in and out.
DC source and DC out in2 a resistor. But i have had to answer 3 of your posts with a redundant answer. Please study and read properly. I wont be answering arm chair requests (this is an R and D forum) or skeptic incredulous assumptions. In fact you prob better waiting for our reports in the newsletter.
If not, built it and test it, the LED's were enough for us to move on, if not for you. good luck and please don't spam this thread(same as the other user there). If you have any genuine RELATIVE Q's, i am happy to answer them. No need to repeat what you said.
thanks
Ash
Ash,
I've asked a couple of the most RELEVANT question's already, but as of yet there were no direct answers. I have no more, and IMHO, no more are really necessary before moving on to any others.
Anyway, no need to respond to this thanks, your message is loud and clear now, no need to repeat more of the same.
I'll bow out and let some others take a stab at getting some useful information about why you did things the way you did etc,.as I and my predecessors have already.
Stefan, feel free to chime in ;)
Cheerios,
.99
All your Q's were answered in the Video and in the posts. from us showing what the LED's were rated at,(minimum brightness specs) to us lighting up 8, to us now moving onto a DC in and DC out. We showed every thing as it is. Good luck with your other projects. Thank you for not spamming this thread.It will serve as a warning for others to do the experiments themselves.
Ash
Guys i got some interesting info from Joel, it will be in the new MRA document on the uni site shortly.
Now that i have made a point about skeptics, and those not building this.
We found we cold light up 8 LED's normal brightness - They are typically rated for 15-20mA typical
Here are the specs as we ALREADY mentioned in the video.
got http://www.jaycar.com.au/ put on on top left.
CAT. NO. ZD0150
This is very encouraging so we are onto the other tests, one suggested we try using a C MOS chip for an oscillator circuit. They will run at
less then 2ma with no load on the output, as part of a looped MRA.
More test to come.
Hmm... I also don't see why you do feel the need to type
several posts repeating that you're not going to give any
clear info and that all info was already given in the video...
You would have been much easier off simply stating the
measurement data from the video. After all, it's your video,
you know your own data. Once would have been enough.
But now you chose to post several messages repeating that
you're not going to do that. Which cost you more effort.
Also, why do you feel the need to use such an unfriendly tone?
Nobody here attacked you nor was anyone here unfriendly to you.
A more civil tone would be nice.
Anyway, to get back to your experiment, are you absolutely sure
you're getting constant DC out?
I mean, there is such a thing as the Joule Thief and that simple
little circuit can light a white LED to full brightness from a
"dead" 1,5V source battery. LED won't light when you connect
it normally, way too little voltage and current. But when you
connect it via the JT circuit, it lights up to full brightness.
Even though the battery can never power the LED directly.
Are you very certain that your LEDs aren't lighting up
due to a similar trick?
Main point, in case you missed it, is that lighting a bunch of LEDs
from a source that does not put out enough DC to actually
light them up at all, has been achieved by using Joule Thief
and similar circuits, and that does not mean there is any OU in
those circuits. It's just smart switching.
So assuming that LEDs only light up when the DC output has been
amplified by OU means is not automatically correct: the LEDs may
also light up when a non-OU Joule Thief like trick is used.
With high frequency switching, it seems to me that might still be
a possibility here.
And obviously lighting up 8 LEDs with the input energy that should
only suffice to light up one single LED is 7 LEDs gain. :)
So yeah, you're getting more light out. Not necessarily more DC,
but more light, yes, I'll believe that. :)
Don't get me wrong, I'm not saying that it is impossible that you're
actually getting real OU from it, I'm just saying that you don't seem
to have considered the Joule Thief view in your assessment that more
LEDs must mean more DC output.
Hi all ;D i'm new to this thread but i thought i'd interject some data - ive done similar experiments along the reasonance princple in coils etc.
once i had a setup that was basically an output from my pc soundcard (sblive5.1) with bass reduced right down and treble 85%, master and wave about 95% using tone generator software, i put the stereo live together to make mono and grounds together this is also the main ground - i wrapped a basic primary(ring) coil about 2 inch diameter 26 gauge(100 turns) then a secondary, same diameter, gauge but 60 turns instead. the soundcard output went straight into the primary coil and the secondary coil rested exactly flat over the top of it. The secandary coil then went into a 'charge pump/free electric from thin air' circuit. i realised it wasnt a pure clean signal but got some interesting results just from that simple setup, this was using cheap analgue meter using 15khz sine i got about 4 volts at 30 milliamps from soundcard directly (straight over the ground and live) and my output from the 'charge pump' circuit 21 volts dc and 45 ac @ 50 milliamps? . i had about 50 blue leds about so i tested the soundcard directly - in series it lit two only quite brightly though ( that correlates to led op voltage), i did at least 8 in series from my secondary and added more to them in parallel - all not quite full brightness but dam close. using a standard transformer added to this i have seen 350/400 volts ac - i put a 400 volt cap in parallel at the 350/400ac output waited about 5 seconds and it would just make enough juice to flicker a cfl for a few seconds! - just been reading this thread and might go back to the previous work - by the way that 'charge pump/free electric from thin air circuit' is very handy simple thing to have about not just for this.
hope i havent bored anyone too much, keep the work going and getting hands dirty guys - stick to the path, beware the moors, remember the alamo! and free that energy!
p.s. aka - eel ;)
Here is some interesting MRA "data":
http://www.earthtech.org/experiments/mra/mra.txt
QuoteConclusion
Based on the results of our experimentation and analysis we find
that the MRA device provided by McClain and Wooten does not
produce over-unity-efficiency results. The MRA circuit behaves
instead as one would expect of a loaded transformer with a series
capacitor in the primary circuit. When the MRA is detuned from
resonance to frequencies slightly below resonance, the observed
changes may give the impression that the MRA then draws unusually
little power from the source while nonetheless maintaining a
healthy output. This impression is false. True power
measurements show that the MRA continues to draw about twice as
much power from the source as it delivers to the load.
Hi Grumpy and truth finder, thanks for the input, you can find updated info (such as what you posted) in the panacea university MRA document. Just ignore post like those above you for the time being, they will soon be deleted and only replicators or information will be allowed , or this thread will be deleted and ill send you the the location where you can monitor results.
Ash
this one?
http://www.panaceauniversity.org/Magnetic%20Resonant%20Amplifier.pdf
EDIT:
http://www.rexresearch.com/mra/1mra.htm#evalu
Not trying to derail your efforts, but the analysis by Puthoff is technically clear and he is considered very technically competent - perhaps even an expert in the field. Do you think that he missed something?
That is the one. U haven't been reading, the way is to BUILD THIS YOUR SELF, and not listen to any one you don't know is a trusted source.
The next post like this, this thread is shut down.
I dnt care for doubt
I dont care for skeptics
I dont care for the stupid LED posts here
In fact, I am not going to get suckered in this time, i asked to keep this thread clean with technical results and replications, and it has not gone this way.
END of THREAD. For the genuine research, you can contact me for the further testing results.
Ashtweth (4th December)
PS, i dont use my PM here you may use my email or find the test results on other forums where the information will be better).
Ash
Lastly, for the genuine researcher, i suggested reading the MRA document your self and building this your self, (before posting) and that our test were enough for us to move onto the DC in and out measurements.
Here is new information which has come to light on the Hal situation given to me by Norm, even tho there is enough posted in the panacea uni doc for those with no knowledge to not have to make these skeptic posts. So i suggest to please read first.
Here is a sample,
"I don't think this document made it through because I forgot that EVGray Group does not allow attachments. So here goes. Norm
This MRA and experiment was very difficult for Hal Puthoff to explain. He claimed that we were "slipping potential" past the tiny
grain of wheat bulb while driving the MRA. DUH!!! The whole premise of the MRA is that it is a "potential" driven device, requiring
practically no current when in "ultra high Q" resonance region of the "Universal Resonance Curve". This was the most dramatic
demo that I made with the MRA. Tom Bearden was over whelmed when he saw it. Oh! by the way, Joel and I personnaly visited
Tom Bearden at his home in Huntsville, AL and gave him a working MRA long befroe he built the MEG Device. Have fun. Norm"
http://img338.imageshack.us/my.php?image=img044lc8.jpg
http://img233.imageshack.us/my.php?image=img045xi6.jpg
Due to not being able to prevent these type of posts, the results will be posted in other threads Still, i hope you understand why, its too much to keep up with.
Ash
Quote from: ashtweth_nihilisti on December 03, 2008, 07:14:53 PM
That is the one. U haven't been reading, the way is to BUILD THIS YOUR SELF, and not listen to any one you don't know is a trusted source.
The next post like this, this thread is shut down.
I dnt care for doubt
I dont care for skeptics
I dont care for the stupid LED posts here
In fact, I am not going to get suckered in this time, i asked to keep this thread clean with technical results and replications, and it has not gone this way.
END of THREAD. For the genuine research, you can contact me for the further testing results.
Ashtweth (4th December)
PS, i dont use my PM here you may use my email or find the test results on other forums where the information will be better).
Ash
The MRA has been around a long time now, Ash. That old horse has been beaten to dust and used for fertilizer.
Hal is a respected researcher and analyst, you are a fool to just ignore his results. He explains the errors in measurement and reasoning - you would do yourself a great justice by studying his results so you do not fall into the same trap.
Can you refute Hal's analysis?
If you ever hope to construct a working device, you have to take the good with the bad. Most of the crap out there is just that - crap - worthless BS that will never work.
Grumpy, read the post above me. And this is the end of this thread.
I wont be answering this thread any more. Other know where to find me and the results.
Ash
Quote from: ashtweth_nihilisti on December 03, 2008, 08:50:56 PM
Grumpy, read the post above me. And this is the end of this thread.
I wont be answering this thread any more. Other know where to find me and the results.
Ash
Good luck in your endeavors. If you have OU that is not in a usable form - what good is it? Determine why it works at all, and build from that point. Don't spend a lifetime trying to make the unusable into the usable.
Thread is closed and the bar is open... ;D
If i was you, would spend a little less time being an ARM chair person, and stop preventing real results form being produced. Lugging the board. Heed your own advice mate.
This site is over run with crap like this.
Quote from: ashtweth_nihilisti on December 03, 2008, 11:25:34 PM
If i was you, would spend a little less time being an ARM chair person, and stop preventing real results form being produced. Lugging the board. Heed your own advice mate.
This site is over run with crap like this.
I spend enough time at the bench and at the library to see the MRA for what it is - a waste of time.
You can do better with two parallel wound solenoid coils, pulse both at resonance with a phase shift on one but not the other. You can also do better with a closed magnetic polarization current circuit, but only one person has pulled that off and he ain't talkin'. You can even do better with a HV tranny, spark gap (quenched) and a coil with very high self-induction.
Like I said - understand "why it works at all" and start with that knowledge - don't follow the same path with the same end.
@Grumpy
LOL...."If you have OU that is not in a usable form - what good is it?" are you kidding ??? If there was at least one proven by replication OU device that recharged itself let alone SPARE ENERGY I would welcome it ;D no matter how far fetched it sounds!
Regards,
Paul
Quote from: Goat on December 03, 2008, 11:43:31 PM
@Grumpy
LOL...."If you have OU that is not in a usable form - what good is it?" are you kidding ??? If there was at least one proven by replication OU device that recharged itself let alone SPARE ENERGY I would welcome it ;D no matter how far fetched it sounds!
Regards,
Paul
What I mean is that spurious oscillations are not easy to use for our purposes. The devices we wish to power require ordered inputs - DC or AC at a particular frequency.
Ash is working on this, so let's leave him to it.
@Grumpy
Ok I got you're drift, I'll leave it to Ash to prove it....
Regards,
Paul
Hi Goat and Grump, that's more like the attitude of an R and D forum, please don't wait for my results in DC to confirm, please try your own results and share. This is what i want, for too long the dis info has crippled the MRA, and i know not all are bad here. We do need moderation tho. Please try some experiment mean time :). If the thread stays like this ill come back with the DC and help with yours. Mean time BUILD and share. :)
thanks guys
Ash
Quote from: ashtweth_nihilisti on December 04, 2008, 12:47:36 AM
Hi Goat and Grump, that's more like the attitude of an R and D forum, please don't wait for my results in DC to confirm, please try your own results and share. This is what i want, for too long the dis info has crippled the MRA, and i know not all are bad here. We do need moderation tho. Please try some experiment mean time :). If the thread stays like this ill come back with the DC and help with yours. Mean time BUILD and share. :)
thanks guys
Ash
@ Ash, good news see:
RESONANCE EFFECTS FOR EVERYONE TO SHARE
http://www.overunity.com/index.php?topic=6225.0
Hi wings, thanks for this addition, aha Luc..yes Luc rawks :D :)
You have a strange way about you Ash...
First you say you don't want to listen to criticism,
and that you choose to totally ignore my post about
the LEDs (probably too logical eh? It just makes too
much sense to even consider it, is that the idea? Lol),
but then you do thank Grumpy for his "R and D",
while what Grumpy did was point out how useless
your RMA was.
But apparently you chose not to read what he posted and chose
to fantasise that he said something in support of your RMA experiments.
Very odd. So a post by G saying your RMA is crap is considered "R and D",
and a post by me saying your RMA is interesting but can you make sure
it's not just a Joule Thief variation is ignored for being too critical??!!
That does not make sense sir!
If that is the type of logic you use all the time, then you might want to
revisit logic class 101.
Oh, besides, you've said several times now that you're going to stop posting here
because the people here are just too critical and rational for you.
Yet you keep posting. ;)
Yes i do after the thread changes, and No, not critical, or rational, just non building, skeptic and arm chair. Go light up 8 LED's same rating as ours on .04 watts catalog no is posted. You should of done that FIRST.
it doesn't matter, Your post about the LED's don't matter. I wont explain why to you again. You go build the MRA and prove your theft THEORY to your self.
Better still go light up 8 LED's same rating as ours same parts rating, on .o4 watts you go do it. no one cares about your skepticism. Your an arm chair skeptic go build some thing or you or any one else who does the same will get the blame for spamming this thread and results not being posted here.I have stated Build and share. If you cannot conform to this, then you do not belong in this thread or this thread is useless here for genuine researches.
If you have doubts about the device, then move on, don't contribute to the dis info that's kept the MRA from surfacing for years, i warned about this early, so i think the engineers here will understand where i am coming from. i wont warn you/others again. Since i have no ability to mod here, and no time for these posts. i will be left no choice.
Quote from: ashtweth_nihilisti on December 04, 2008, 06:41:35 AM
Yes i do after the thread changes,
Please stop implying that you're going to change your attitue after the thread magically changes into your private blog. (as if that's going to happen)
This is a discussion forum, you rocked up with some claims, and discussing them is what is happening.
Quoteand No, not critical, or rational, just non building, skeptic and arm chair.
Bla bla. Simply not willing to discuss it is what you mean.
QuoteGo light up 8 LED's same rating as ours on .04 watts catalog no is posted. You should of done that FIRST.
Probably mean should
have? So I should have lit up 8 LEDs (you said
9 and I said one plus and additional 8, but I guess that's being too critical and arm-chair again eh?)
to prove the Joule Thief circuit works (already proven, I really don't need to repeat it with 9 LEDs), but you do not have to contemplate the possibility
of the Joule Thief "effect" playing a role in your setup? Right. So you refuse to accept the JT works even though hundreds of people around the world
have already proven it to work, but I may not question your RMA which people generally consider disproven by Puthoff already? That's odd..
Quoteit doesn't matter, Your post about the LED's don't matter.
Oh right. Because you don't even want to consider the possibility?
QuoteI wont explain why to you again.
"again"? You haven't explained it even once.
All you "explain" is that you
choose to ignore Puthoffs analysis, that you
choose to not want to even listen to
my LED story, that you
choose to declare all posts except those that in your opinion do not support your view worthless.
That is no explanation, that is just showing your arbitrary criteria for selecting what you want to hear.
QuoteYou go build the MRA and prove your theft THEORY to your self.
What? "Theft theory"? What the heck is that?
And why exactly would I need to build an MRA to see if I can light up 9 LEDs from one weak battery using a Joule Thief type setup?
No, if I'd want to prove that, I'd be better off building a JT circuit and lighting the 9 LEDs with it, and measuring what input that needs.
If then the input needed is comparable to the input you're feeding your MRA (or less), then that would seem to indicate your MRA
setup is in fact a form of Joule Thief.
On the other hand, someone who already has an MRA could easily compare the relative energy input and apparent LED output
with the values available from JT tests. If your MRA clearly lights more LEDs than a JT ever could using the same input,
then you'd have shown that your MRA is most likely not just a Joule Thief.
As long as you're going to tell me to build the MRA and test it, I'm going to tell you to build a JT and test it and compare your
results.
QuoteBetter still go light up 8 LED's same rating as ours same parts rating, on .o4 watts you go do it.
Better still, go light up 8 LEDs using a JT and see if that doesn't happen to pull .04 watt. ;)
Quoteno one cares about your skepticism.
Oh, and tons of people are just begging for your extremely sunny attitude, I'm sure.
Lol. Do unto others as you would have done to you. If you want to be taken seriously, take others seriously. If you want to receive
replies of others with dismissal and negativity, then don't act all victimised if people reply to you with less than immediate acceptance
of your claims.
QuoteYour an arm chair skeptic go build some thing
Haha how dare you accuse people you know nothing of?
I do build things and am certainly not just "an arm chair sceptic". But you wouldn't know, you just want to make me look bad.
Unfortunately that doesn't work well, since I have not attacked you nor accused you of anything, and so it is clear to everyone
that you're being quite childish in your replies.
Quoteor you or any one else who does the same will get the blame for spamming this thread and results not being posted here.I have stated Build and share. If you cannot conform to this, then you do not belong in this thread or this thread is useless here for genuine researches.
Nope, again you're off. My posting of serious questions and suggestions of comparison to the Joule Thief is not "spam", as I think the forum admin
will agree with. Also, that you only want people to "build and share" doesn't mean we can't use the forum as it was intended, namely to
discuss things.
And why then do you not "build" a Joule Thief and consider the possibility that it may be very closely relatedto the MRA, like I "shared" with you?
Oh, right, it's supposed to be you doing the sharing and us doing the building, right? Lol.
QuoteIf you have doubts about the device, then move on, don't contribute to the dis info that's kept the MRA from surfacing for years, i warned about this early, so i think the engineers here will understand where i am coming from. i wont warn you/others again. Since i have no ability to mod here, and no time for these posts. i will be left no choice.
You'll have no choice but to
what?
Post your full schematics and test results?
Funny thing, you could also just give lots of clear and convincing information, and simply not reply to any posts, if all you want is to get the info out there.
If you have no time for such posts, then simply don't post them.
If the data is convincing enough there will be people replicating it.
Shouting "I don't care about Puthoff's analysis, I don't care about doing more proper tests" does not really fall into the category of "convincing data",
by the way.
Okay, so, are we going to see more videos that show more detail?
Are you going to do a test where you power a larger DC load off your MRA while it runs off a much too weak battery?
After all, LEDs are one thing, actual DC motors for example are something else.
All BS aside:
What are the properties of the columnar field that builds around the device?Norm said that he believes it is an "aetheric field" - give me some details on this.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
It will not work if the magnet is "cold" and has to warm up for an hour?
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
QuoteThe MRA output follows the position of the sun and moon so there is some sort of gravity effect which Greg Hodowanec describes in his work with earth gravity fields.
As far as gravity effects, we did measure changes in piezo weight after running at resonance with a gain back to normal after turning off the MRA. Same effect as the famous Nieper Ring circuit.
How was this measured?
Thread is over, Grumpy you can contact me or find the results on the other forums.
Ash
Quote from: ashtweth_nihilisti on December 04, 2008, 06:19:48 PM
Thread is over, Grumpy you can contact me or find the results on the other forums.
Ash
Too bad. It is "taboo" to ask twice, so the hell with it. Never get much with that config anyway. Input is limited - could never take a loop back from the output. Relies on ambiant bias fields that don't behave.
Take care and good luck.
Yeah well, if someone rocks up making OU claims
but does not want to follow through and actually show
convincing results, nor does he want to hear anything
other than people telling him how great he is,
and then declares the thread "closed",
you gotta wonder how real his OU was... ;)
I thought the point of the LEDs seeming to light up
continually but possibly just flashing faster than for
example 100 times per second so our human eyes
don't see that they're not really burning continually
was a fairly good point...
There's a huge difference between 100 pulses per second
and constant direct current.
But hey, if he doesn't want to show how Puthoff is wrong
in his opinion and doesn't even want to hear about Puthoffs
analysis, and he doesn't want to discuss things either,
then perhaps it's not so bad that he's decided to leave...
If he really only came here to shout "lookit" and not
really talk about it beyond that, then he's done what he
came here to do.
;)
Hello all. I know this is an old topic, but I was considering to build this device, since I think that its principles may apply to the function of the Thestatika.
After reading all these collected letters from rexresearch however I am not sure anymore, if it is worth the time. I mean, there were about 500 posts interesting posts talking of measurements and OU, and in the end there was 1 single letter by the institute claiming: "all is bullshit, the device is only 49% efficient".
After this last letter, I have found not any further information regarding this device anymore...
So, does anyone of you know how the status is and if it is worth to investigate in this subject - or ist it really 100% proven that this device delivers only 50% energy?
Better email me we are winding a better version ATM
http://yfrog.com/5cmraj
I dont post here any more
Ash
Yes, I've read in the few pages, that you are not posting here anymore (I think because of all the negative comments). The negative comments however were only based on 1 letter which claims to have disproven the device. I am not convinced by this single letter though. It's not that an "Institute" does everything and always correct (after what I have experienced ridiculous things at university).
Still I would appreciate it if we could work on this as open as possible. I think that's what the forum is here for and it's also easier to exchange information in here than using emails. The more people involved actually doing something the better will be the optimizations. I am not afraid of the negative comments coming from all the chair scientists, in contrary, comparing to on what most people talk about in this forum (e.g. 500 pages about a Joule Thief...) at least there would be enough space for this specific topic :)
If it is a special newsgroup/emailgroup that requires registration, it's ok to email only. Last time however, someone private messaged me in order to tell me some "secret hints" (other topic though), which in the end turned as something, I already knew, so I'm a little bit skeptic about working "behind the curtain" and would rather keep it public.
We discuss the MRA PUBLICLY at http://groups.yahoo.com/group/EVGRAY/
minus all THE DISTRACTIONS.
Ok, I've written to the group owner. Currently waiting for approval/pending.
Ugh... do not join this yahoo group; some people (including "Ash") are quite unfriendly in there, also not being able to give simple/reasonable answers (although I only needed simple yes/no's) but instead writing paragraphs completely cross purpose, furthermore starting insults. Don't bother however, you will not miss anything when not participating, it's not that they have something to share anyways. It's more like kindergarten: "I have something, but I don't want to show you". Complete waste of time.
Quote from: gauschor on April 30, 2010, 01:10:44 PM
Ugh... do not join this yahoo group; some people (including "Ash") are quite unfriendly in there, also not being able to give simple/reasonable answers (although I only needed simple yes/no's) but instead writing paragraphs completely cross purpose, furthermore starting insults. Don't bother however, you will not miss anything when not participating, it's not that they have something to share anyways. It's more like kindergarten: "I have something, but I don't want to show you". Complete waste of time.
YOU and this forum should not build the MRA, We are not interested on your opinions, , ask me again ill tell you the same
ASHTWETH
Hi,
I am a newbie here. Though this a very old thread and has reported replications that failed to prove OU, yet I had a renewed interest in this thread after watching a video on youtube by John Myatt. Video title is Panacea MRA. I have no idea how old this video is but shows some promising results.
I was wondering if you guys watch it and post your valuable comments.
Best
Sandeep
OK, I watched the video. What do you see that you think indicates "promising results"?
The things that I noticed most were that there is no oscilloscope in use, and there seems to be no appreciation for how properly to measure real power in spiky signals that are likely to have significant phase shifts between current and voltage waveforms.
Certainly lighting up a bunch of LEDs from "apparently" lower voltage (or "power") than you think they might need... is no big deal. Furthermore, using LEDs as loads for output power measurements is tricky, especially if evaluating visual brightness is how you are making your "measurement".
For your amusement:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=G5wbyAwgeO8
(a bunch of LEDs and a LED ring oscillator running _wirelessly_ .... )
Thanks for the prompt reply TK. Has anyone replicated the MRA experiment on a slighly larger scale to light an automotive bulb say 12V 24 Watt. That may give a real idea. And also its important to measure DC in and DC out. Just wondering if it can be done. Although I agree with you, yet wanna give it a try at least once. The original experimenters said its important to keep the input frequency at least 3 harmonics away from the natural resonant frequency of the magnet. And also primary vs. seconday windings must be a multiple of the Phi.
Has anyone tried with the parameters specified by the inventors ? I believe replicators drifted away from the parameters specified and used materials which were easily available. Just a thought.
Best
Sandeep
Google - what a name - I agree, interesting read, tho, mystic stuff like phi relatio makes me sceptic. Some makes sense. Eg. the guy who says, who said current and voltage must come from the same source?
Anyhow, replication infos are spread all over, one would have to read a lot just to check if after that reading all requird infos are accessable. From what I read just here, they are not. If there were a simple and compact guide to reconstruction, I would be interested. Right now it's all to vague for me. They say they faxed the cirquit to the one watt contest dude... what cirquit please? Also, how would I have to tune to resonance and how to know the "natural resonance frequence of the magnet", i even doubt such a thing exists since a pm doesn't alternate or oscillate by it's own, tho I could and would be glad to be wrong in that.
So many promising and or good sounding concepts are presented. As a intuitive and unskilled person I got to concentrate on the stuff that comes with complete, clear and simple instructions.
Hi
Phi is not mystic at all. Check out Jay Harman video on youtube, you will understand the power of Phi in nature. Also check out a video by aniccame, where he measures the longitudinal resonance frequency of his new ferrite rods. Also checkout a video by John Myatt on Magnetic Resonance Amplifier.
It should be easy to make and check the results.
Best
Sandeep
I meant mystical in that the relation of coils is rather defined by their impendance etc. which is not just a matter of the number of windings. Even when the wire is the same, diffrences are in the increase of the radius * pi. Also, In that picture it says 1:1 transformer, pretty confusing.
Hi
I just have one concern though. This info comes from Keely and another info that water explodes at 42712.2 Hz of ultrasonic frequency, to which I have not been able to find a successful replication by anyone. Well its just a matter of trial. However investigators found that Keely had hidden pressure pipes in his lab to show fake demos of Keely Motor through which he milked the investors of some $ 50,00,000 for some 20 years till he died in 1899. Read it in wikipedia. I am yet not sure its the same Keely which has been referred to in MRA.
Best
Sandeep.
Can you give me a link to the vids, I'ge just wasted again 20 minutes in searching them. Also, the mra pdf link on page 2 is dead.
Hi
Here is the http://www.rexresearch.com/mra/1mra.html link
I cant cut paste youtube links as using a tab. However search the channel of "aniccame" and "John Myatt". John Myatt's video caption is Panacea MRA.
Best
To your latest reply, I don't give much about wikipedia, but indeed, keely has this rather esotheric ambience to me for some reason. After some unsuccessful reproductions (eg. beardon) one realizes: golden does not always mean gold.