Quote from: lancaIV on July 22, 2019, 08:34:46 AM
I  have got nothing against Mr.Friedrichs' claims,without to know what his claims really are  !
Instead 75 coils 75 and more bulbs


Reading : https://patents.google.com/patent/WO2004100349A1/en

and  knowing that beside Volt and Ampere the European net-grid works with "stable" 50 Hz frequency.
Seriell resistors effect : frquency and/or duty cycle divider ? bulb filament actio/ reactio behaviour ?

Light elements are "physiological" indicators,without real output  measurements by appropriate instruments

related

"flickering" (1/10,1/100,1/1000 sec cam sequences ) and/or

lux/lumen and/or

heat units/ calori)

we do not know about the real output/input ratio.

Other example :

https://patents.google.com/patent/US5130608A/en
PRR : pulse repetition rate ( and our eyes reaction delay)

Before : 100 W lamp consume             with module : 4 Watt lamp + 8 Watt ( the modul consume)

                                                                                            lumen/Watt ? calori/Watt
A power saving device, not claimed : OU

We have to disclose ( and differ) physical and technical peak and average power consume ( with/-out feed back circuit)

Exactly !! And this must be done in a clear manner, repeatable by anyone "familiar with the art".


Data, data data. Does a claim of overunity or enhanced efficiency involve the brightness and power consumption of some kind of light source? Then at the very least some kind of calibration should be presented. Like this one, which is for a small Grain-Of-Wheat incandescent bulb. The principle is the same for whatever kind of light source load one may care to use. Measurements that are repeatable by anyone, data that is solid and not the result of a single anecdotal trial. Are you using LEDs for your load? Then a graph similar to this one should be obtained for that load, so that one knows what to expect in the straight DC or "normally powered" condition.
Can Rick present such a graph, or similar, for his LED loads? Does anyone think that such comparison data is _not_ required, when testing an OU claim that involves light output?

To those of you new to this; the claim is: At resonance there is a gain and this gain is realised through magnetic resonance. Each receiver coil also creates it's own magnetic field and re-transmits the signal. The procedure occurs because of magnetic resonance. You can also place further coils above and below the current picture.  I believe Rick claims that each mr16 light consumes approximately 1/2 watt although I am not sure if that relates to this picture.  I find the opposing vitriol unbelievable to be quite frank. This was not the case in the past when people simply accepted a claim and tried to verify it in their own way.
Also the rudeness to an inventor is only going to put other inventors off.  That's why some do not do videos.  So we all lose in the end.  Think about it.
Would you post a claim here after seeing the vitriol against an inventor ie Rick? The kit is called the Resonance Induction Coupler Kit.

Quote from: a.king21 on July 22, 2019, 12:01:25 PM
Correct, so you have to take into account the further losses incurred by passing the current through the bridge rectifier.

Oh yes, a handful of milliwatts here and there is going to make all the difference in the world.

In view of Brad's (TinMan, who started the threads on both forums) apology today, and the fact that the debates have really come to an end (the only thing happening now is people embarrassing themselves and heaping insults), I wrote the below response on Overunityresearch.com. I'm sure the principles will be debated, and that is what I am hoping for. After all, that is what science is about. The true principles will be clarified, illustrated, demonstrated and developed over centuries to come. It will never be perfect or finished. Hopefully this will mark a change in the free energy community from the impulsive blind mad rush for some free energy mystery circuit quest to the principled approach in having an informed foundation so that endless varieties of parts can be used to experience practical results.

"All right.
So at this point I'm just going to continue with the new website that will attempt to present the principles of free energy in the context of people proving or disproving such to themselves. The heated exchange on these forums has been useful to bring out the points that need to be focused on. But it does not give the ability to systematically develop and address very much. Principles need to be the focus, not individuals.
I may linger around here to see if you guys progress anywhere in your attempts here, but I think I'll let the new website take it from here.
I appreciate the invitation to come here, and I'll take everything shared into consideration.
I really wish you all the very best.
Rick"

Quote from: a.king21 on July 22, 2019, 12:29:27 PM
To those of you new to this; the claim is: At resonance there is a gain and this gain is realised through magnetic resonance. Each receiver coil also creates it's own magnetic field and re-transmits the signal. The procedure occurs because of magnetic resonance. You can also place further coils above and below the current picture.  I believe Rick claims that each mr16 light consumes approximately 1/2 watt although I am not sure if that relates to this picture.  I find the opposing vitriol unbelievable to be quite frank. This was not the case in the past when people simply accepted a claim and tried to verify it in their own way.
Also the rudeness to an inventor is only going to put other inventors off.  That's why some do not do videos.  So we all lose in the end.  Think about it.
Would you post a claim here after seeing the vitriol against an inventor ie Rick? The kit is called the Resonance Induction Coupler Kit.

Hi a.king. Don smith presented such a general arrangement way back in the 90's.
If there is an 'inventor', it is Don Smith. I am not aware of anyone ever demonstrating OU from such an
arrangement. Unfortunately what Rick is showing in that picture appears to be within an expected normal
performance range for the stated input power, as has already been pointed out a few times now.

Instead of piling up more and more words, perhaps you would care to show some actual proper power
measurements of your own setup so we can have a look? Surely you must have reproduced this and made proper
measurements to claim that you think something unusual is going on...
This is not energetic forum where proper measurements are greatly feared and considered taboo.

If someone can show some proper measurements or a self-looped setup which points towards
possibly something unusual going on, then great. Let's have a look! So far I haven't seen it.