I think people are totally missing the main point.

Captainpecan consider this please:

A single cap discharged directly into a coil vs. the same capacitor discharged into another identical capacitor through the same coil is not comparing apples to apples.

These are two totally different tests and can not be used to compare the work done in each when using the pulse motor as your measurement tool.

You either need to change the test procedure or the measurement tool so that you can compare apples to apples. You need a measurement tool that measures the dissipated energy for the entire time the capacitor is connected across the coil. So if the coil is connected for 3 seconds, you need to be measuring the the work being done for 3 seconds.

Counting the number of rotations of that rotor is not indicating how much current is being wasted in the coil after the initial impulse. What is needed is a way to measure the energy dissipated for the full duration of time that the capacitor is connected to its load. At present time you do not have one.

I urge you to stop and seriously consider what I have said. These are facts, not opinion or speculation.

Allow me to illustrate something that may add clarity to the above. If you were to incorporate a voltage sensor that monitored the capacitor voltage in the first case where it is being discharged directly across the coil, and you set the monitor to drive a switch that cut out the capacitor from the circuit, leaving considerable voltage in the capacitor, you would see that it takes substantially less energy to propel that rotor the same number of revolutions you already measured. This means you could use the capacitor again. Do you see?

Poynt99

What's with you guys and the pulse motor??
Haven't you watched the videos?
Captainpecan showed that it also works without the pulse motor.
The pulse motor is not what this is about at all.
It is only about the difference between the charge in cap1 in the beginning
and the charge in cap1+cap2 at the end.

And yes, please do explain why we may not compare those?
After all, we're just taling about charge on a capacitor, aren't we?
Since when is it not correct to conclude that there is voltage gain,
when the voltage in the end is higher than the voltage in the beginning?
Why would 9+9 not be 18?
After all, we're not talking about current here, we're only talking about charge...
If you measure the voltage on a cpacitor, why the heck would you square that?
Surely if you simply want to measure voltage, you just put your meter on it and
measure the static voltage?
Or do you guys do it differently??

Koen1 you don't understand. Let me explain. We can't have free energy. Oh btw I don't know what this thread is even about.

Yes there are three things wrong in cap'pecan's video.

#1 - One must use the electronics equations for capacitors in series when capacitors
are being used in series. So; 18Vdc at 4500uf in series with 18Vdc at 4500uf equals
36Vdc at 2250uf.  18Vdc at 4500uf in parallel with 18Vdc at 4500uf is 18Vdc at 9000uf.
It doesn't matter whether the connections are FET's or fingers. It's obvious that the
some of the charge energy on the "lower" cap is going to have to be used to support
the discharge of the "upper" cap. So I don't think you can dispute that some
sort of capacitive de-rate-tion is going to have to occur with capacitors in series.

#2 - You have got to consider resonance and 'Q' when you connect inductors and capacitors
in series especially big L's and C's. depending on Q you could definitely get some inconsistency
based in the timing of connections.

One needs to understand how #1 and #2 interacts with the mechanical resonance of the rotor
before one can say too much about rotor pulse power.

#3 - A motor with no load is not necessarily doing work simply because it's rotor is turning.

---

I have this problem about partial completion of this. One of the problems is that defective
methods of analysis always lead to defective answers.

That is why you need to close an instrumentation loop to prove whether this is overunity
or not. To show others how to do it right...So they can avoid these kinds of problems in the future.
You also *can* also prove me or my apparent direction wrong, but you really should close the loop
rather then have so many people come to wrong conclusion due to faulty analysis.

What you are doing as well as many known names in this so called industry is running
faulty analysis up the flagpole and see who salutes (or believes in the same faulty analytical
methods too.) It proves nothing and gets everyone stirred up and miseducates most. You
should not present stuff until one has this done.

Numbers mean nothing and insturmentation displays are only indicators, not proof.

All you need to do; is make instrumentation loop closure the basis of your decision as to whether
something is overunity or not! It's not that expensive and it's same loop for any system. You can
use it to *prove* overunity on you-tube, which is really what is needed.

:S:MarkSCoffman

@poynt99

QuoteYou either need to change the test procedure or the measurement tool so that you can compare apples to apples. You need a measurement tool that measures the dissipated energy for the entire time the capacitor is connected across the coil. So if the coil is connected for 3 seconds, you need to be measuring the the work being done for 3 seconds.

Im not sure I would agree, you are assuming energy is dissipated----- where?
The fact remains that Force=mass x acceleration--- this force is supplied by the coil to accelerate the rotor, Work=force x distance---the rotor has moved a distance against friction relative to the applied force. Whatever happens with the capacitors or coils for that matter is completely irrelevant to these facts.
I think all these tests and measurements you propose are kind of pointless because the results are all that matters in this case, the rotor has been accelerated by a force(where,when and how are irrelevant) because the distance travelled by the rotor constitutes work against friction and is proportional to the applied force. The energy in the capacitors before this happens and after constitutes an energy transfer, it does not constitute work. You cannot compare electrical energy and power to work, because if and when energy is recycled that same energy can do more work. The amount of work a given amount of energy can perform is not based on the transfer of energy it is based on the losses incurred during the transfer, reduce the losses and efficiency rises. There are two things that matter-----
1)Initial energy in one cap
2)how much work this energy can perform irregarless of the context
All these measurements and calculations proposed mean absolutely nothing in light of these two conditions.
Regards
AC