As an example of being intelligent but senseless.
So far the focus has been on the power supply to the device to get even a meager reaction from two inducers sandwiched with a output coil between.

  Since the device is said to be able to self run once started. The start up is not as important as the continuation of operation after the supply is removed. Hell you could just plug into a mains supply through the output coil for as long as it takes to power up the process at which point running a load would not register from amp meter out of the mains it would come from the device.
Any other device could be reworked to function on the same principles. Which would save a lot of work. How you start it is of little importance. Even if you get a reaction using known induction rules you are only left with a motor or a transformer and you dont need to do that. So wasting large amounts of time and effort toward making motors and transformers from scratch still will not yield anything useful in the end. There will still be the problem of getting it to self run which if it was solved would render the efficiency to not important either.

For as long as I can remember people have said the output will always be less then the input because losses are unavoidable. The losses are man made which serve a purpose to some people. The industry of manufacturing builds into the product a life expectancy with sole intent of limiting the time something will last before needing to be replaced. If it lasts for ever your business will not. Conspiracies to some are simple good business practices to others. How would free energy be a good business practice? In fact it is bad business practice, it would be like making a car that could last forever. What part of society would support such a thing as it's own demise.

Society must change . Labour is required for producing things , today it is known from producing money (which is nothing more then a piece of paper or electronic variable)  Money should be depreciated to the position it can still be usable but do not limit humanity. For example of radical change , if there is 100 electrical engineers in town but only 30 have job in their proffession then hire them all , to produce/ repair things faster and better. They would work just 4 hours a day not 8 and they would have plenty time for hobby/education/experimenting. Except, it require the reality change, when the real limitation is the natural resources limit, not just stupid economics. Consume less, produce better longlasting things, have more free time just productively used.


If Figuera/Blasberg/Buforn were right then maybe every generator on Earth is producing free energy but the construction is limited in such way that mechanical force applied is wasted for limiting the power production by creating not necessary drag.
We only need a proof....

I keep going back to the design of a dynamo and trying to identify the differences between a dynamo (which works) and the Figuera device, which so far does not work.

My thinking is as follows:

One of the obvious things is the field coils in a dynamo develop their full flux and maintain it constantly, and the Figuera device constantly varies the flux from each field coil.

Constantly varying the current to the field coils brings extra losses, compared to a dynamo, because of Lenz and these escalate exponentially as the frequency increases.


The circuit below is an attempt to minimize the field coil losses.

This drawing represents a single field coil with a series bifilar winding on a common core of soft iron, with DC current.

The circuit resistance is always the same and current is never interrupted or varied in coil A. Once powered up, coil A will not be affected by Lenz.

By switching the connection with coil B we can vary the production of flux in the iron core to any of 3 states without ever changing the amount of current through coil A.

Coil B will still be subject to Lenz but since coil B is only half the turns on the field coil, Lenz will also be reduced to half compared to a field coil with a single winding.

Any thoughts or comments?

Cadman, that's an interesting design. I think I've been doing something similar. You essentially have two coils, mutually coupled. I can see how this is similar to the stators in a generator... The only problem is the no flux state. When one coil tries to oppose the flux of the other, it's going to create a forward voltage to maintain the field. That will draw more current from the supply.