"I don't dispute any of your observations. I am not ignoring any of that information. The issue, though, is to figure out what it means - what it proves or suggests. Here's the problem: speed is not the same thing as power. There are a thousand ways you can set up an electromagnetic system like this with very high EM drag pulling down the speed, and then perturb the fields so that the drag is reduced and the motor speeds up. This does NOT demonstrate that there is any power gain, or even suggest that there is. What's needed is to devise an experiment that clearly demonstrates a power gain. That's what's missing." PB

SO THE INCREASING POWER GAIN ACROSS THE 1 K LOAD AS THE SYSTEM SPEED INCREASES HAS NO EFFECT IN YOUR BRAIN THEN?

ALSO THE DECREASE IN PRIME MOVER INPUT FROM 619 W TO 520 W HAS NO EFFECT ALSO?
THIS REPRESENTS ALMOST A 100 W POWER GAIN.

THERE IS AN INCREASING OUTPUT POWER ACROSS THE LOAD WITH A CORRESPONDING DECREASING INPUT MOTOR REQUIREMENT WHICH FOR SOME REASON YOU FAIL TO SEE?

INDEED THERE IS SOMETHING MISSING MY MAN, BUT IT HAS NOTHING TO DO WITH THE EXPERIMENT.

Thane

Hi Thane,

It sounds like your NASA trip is still on, is that correct?

I hope so! 

Aaron

Quote from: polarbreeze on March 21, 2008, 10:04:45 AM

Quote from: OilBarren on March 21, 2008, 08:56:40 AM
I completely agree, Thane. That's why I think it's so important to draw our conclusions from objective measurements and results - because they are free of "external influences on our perception" and "internal tendencies".  PB

PB - I AM STARTING TO GET THE IMPRESSION THAT YOU ARE SIMPLY A SNAKE IN THE GRASS HERE TO DRAIN "ENERGY" AND ENTHUSIASM FROM THIS THREAD - THE INFORMATION YOU CHOOSE TO IGNORE IS SIMPLY BEYOND COMPREHENSION.

Thane

I don't dispute any of your observations. I am not ignoring any of that information. The issue, though, is to figure out what it means - what it proves or suggests. Here's the problem: speed is not the same thing as power. There are a thousand ways you can set up an electromagnetic system like this with very high EM drag pulling down the speed, and then perturb the fields so that the drag is reduced and the motor speeds up. This does NOT demonstrate that there is any power gain, or even suggest that there is. What's needed is to devise an experiment that clearly demonstrates a power gain. That's what's missing.

@PB
In your reply to me, about my testing of Thane's Bi-Toroid generator you said 'Your open vs loaded secondary doesn't do it because it's not an independent external mechanical load' I was using a resistor as a load. Well a load can be a resistor, a light, a electic motor, etc, or a load of crap(PB). But since you didn't understand basic electronic testing, I didn't think it would be worth the effort to explain it to you.

I also have an issue with you making so many half truth statements to make it seem like you know what you are talking about. Two just from above follow.

Here's the problem: speed is not the same thing as power. Because the motor is accelerating you have to say  'An acceleration in speed is not the same thing as power' to be the whole truth. But then only an idiot would say that. Also, it does require power to maintain a given speed unless you're in space and there are no other forces at work.

There are a thousand ways you can set up an electromagnetic system like this with very high EM drag pulling down the speed, and then perturb the fields so that the drag is reduced and the motor speeds up. You would need to add 'speeds up while reducing input power and exceeding the maximum motor rpm'. A thousand ways? Here again unless you're in space it doesn't happen. Since you so easily know a thousand, can you enlighten us with just 1% of the cases?

Also, would you please quit bringing up the obivious on phase difference in the transformer type generators. In the beginning of this blog Thane brought up that we needed a good watt meter for testing his devices. I'll save you the trouble of researching wattmeter, it gives you the actual watts used correcting for phase difference. Also, those that cannot afford a good wattmeter, can just put a heavy load on the secondaries and the phase difference will be nearly zero.


@All,
The weirdest thing about PB is he never gets upset when informed of his ignorance or lack of common sense. Anyone who actually believes that they are contributing something useful to this forum would have went ballistic by now. Apparently it is not his true intention to contribute only to aggravate.   

Quote from: OilBarren on March 21, 2008, 11:12:19 AM
"...What's needed is to devise an experiment that clearly demonstrates a power gain. That's what's missing."[/b] PB

...ALSO THE DECREASE IN PRIME MOVER INPUT FROM 619 W TO 520 W HAS NO EFFECT ALSO?
THIS REPRESENTS ALMOST A 100 W POWER GAIN.

That is NOT a power gain, Thane. Your experimental setup was initially converting its ENTIRE input power (619W) to HEAT. When you changed the configuration, it was then converting only 520W to heat. So what happened was that you're now producing nearly 100W less heat. This is NOT any kind of a power gain. In both cases, you were converting 100% of the power into heat. In the first case, 619W of electrical input made 619W of heat; in the second case, 520W of electrical input made 520W of heat.

Quote from: LarryC on March 21, 2008, 01:06:39 PM

@PB
In your reply to me, about my testing of Thane's Bi-Toroid generator you said 'Your open vs loaded secondary doesn't do it because it's not an independent external mechanical load' I was using a resistor as a load.

That's exactly my point, Larry. The whole setup is actually a convoluted way of turning electrical power input into heat. Using a resistor as a load is just another way of making heat. I was very specific - there was no MECHANICAL load in that setup (a resistor is NOT a mechanical load). There was zero mechanical power output in any of the scenarios. In all cases, the setup was simply converting 100% of the electrical power input into heat.

The purpose of an electric motor is to convert electrical power input into mechanical power output. If there is no mechanical power output, the efficiency of that machine is 0%. If you disagree with me, please post any results from any of the tests that show a non-zero mechanical power output, regardless of what the electrical power input is.