Quote from: romerouk on June 20, 2011, 09:25:17 PM

They can come over, video record for as long they want, can measure anything but without any o-scope,that will be forbiden.

Why no o-scope?

THANK YOU Romerouk for your continued patience and civil answers to those who are only slinging vile here.  You are truly a much bigger man than some here.  All the best to you in your new projects.

BTW when I saw lasersabers post above I was reminded that I think this essential project has so much promise that I'm designing it to be very modular so almost anything can be easily replaced. 

@Romero

Thank you for your response.
Well we are not finished yet if you do not mind.

As per my previous questions.

1) Your answer "yes but not directly". I know that. You put the red output rail with the red wires from the drive circuit positives together, then through your ammeter then to battery positive. The negative from the output rail also goes directly to battery negative. Is that what you mean by "not directly". There is no difference in directly or not directly in this case. So your answer should be a simple Yes.

2) Your answer "No, those wires are going to the bottom coil." Yes we know about the orange and black wires from the top gen coil to the bottom gen coil. But what about the red and the black wires as shown below identified as Black Wire X and Red Wire X. These two wires are clearly going inside the center opening in the table. Please explain since these are the same two wires you used from the same unchanged fwbr locations to connect to the battery in your first video.

3) Since you now know we know about the Red and Black Wire Xs, would you like to change your answer for #3?

I don't think you understand how much information we have from your videos. May I suggest you visit the link I gave you above and scan through it, especially the images. You do not have to register there since all visitors are allowed to see.

Please take your time.

I understand very well about trust, patents, reputations, business, promises, etc. We all do and have these to one extent or another. What we do not do is make up videos and then have others build them who think the video is real. That in our usual book of definitions includes "not nice", "problematic" and many others qualifications depending on the location, dialect and moderator (hic hic).

I am trying to be as diplomatic as possible and appreciate your clarifications.

wattsup

PS: About your bigger unit, I think the plexiglass is too thin so I am sure you will not operate it in that way at full force. The coils look mean and waiting to bite their first piece of drag. Very smart with the two plate per coil design this will enable you to switch your coils around for testing. I would say you still need a second plate or is this a single plate design. Really nice. But you also know we have seen guys build many things that we do not have the answer to why they built it. When you think you have a good idea, you usually build it. It does not mean it will work, and, about that building instinct, we know. My problem is, right now I am asking myself, will you need a bigger hole to pass a fatter Wire X. And there in lies the problem. Trust, but verify.

Quote from: Free.Energy on June 20, 2011, 10:28:31 PM
Why no o-scope?

Because it give too much away in terms of the o/p wave form then you can decipher it has been modulated in some way and capture the frequencies. A volt meter is fine it will simply allow you to validate the o/p of the device without revealing anything of how it works.

SM's TPU used the EXACT same rules when he asked investors to come and take a look.

RUK said "I was interfering with others on the same project and we have a 'understanding'... if you look around you will probably find out soon who comes out with the same build and with a patent on it too."

I think they have a big problem to patent this. There is a ton of information freely available of OU devices already as open sourced. Just because a patent search doesn't spot anything they leave it up to the patent holder to argue the facts in court...at great expense of course the the patent holder going to lose. It only needs the info to be date validated as prior art and its game over!

SO it better be some technical detail that NO ONE has ever lay claim to before and i doubt that very much.  Open source public information IS prior art. As Kone said, back-end magnet biasing is public information for years, so is coil shorting, series cap tweaking, VARS for BEMF cancellation, resonance and tuning to scaler for ZPE and probably anything else they can think of.

Not to pass judgement here In this case i  will presume you SOLD the device to them thus the reason never to speak about it so they can patent it to recover their "investment". Must have been a tidy some of money as i know you turned down the first few offers. I am surprised you are still in the country Romero i would have packed up and left weeks ago.