PhysicsProf Steven E. Jones circuit shows 8x overunity ?

[MarkE]

Core permeability! The frequency that the ferrite can completely charge and discharge determines it's "Permeability Rating". A thousand like lasersaber's Joule Ringer type, or up to ten thousand for Metglass.

Permeability is the slope of the BH curve.  What we are talking about is what happens when:  H is small after having been large, H is really small after having been large, and H goes negative.

[synchro1]

It's no big secret, the remnant magnetism is a magnetic current created by an electric current (not a permanent magnet) so
when the keeper is removed the remnant magnetism collapses just like the magnetism in a coil collapses when the electric current
is stopped. My guess is that the energy that is contained within the magnetic current is released through the coils when the
keeper is removed.

What do you think should happen ? Should the magnetic current just disappear. Or do you think the energy should be released
some other way ?

....

General statements below, not directed at anyone in particular.

I'm going to go ahead and say that the energy required for the keeper to remain locked is so small that a reduction in the energy
within the magnetism would not be noticed in a short period of time. There is no output from a PMH whatsoever
(except the discharge from the coil when the keeper is removed by force) so the only outlet for the energy is through losses in the
connections between the keeper and the main body of the PMH. If one was to make a PMH with a bad connection between the
keeper and the main body of the PMH then the keeper might fall off on it's own in a relatively short time.

Some say the PMH is free energy or perpetual motion and people can call it whatever they want but a PMH has no output until the
keeper is removed by force. Then only part of the original energy can be recovered.

..

Dr. Jones clearly demonstrates that running a reverse current through the coil and snapping it off, collapses the magnetic field returning flyback power along with removing the keeper by force as an additional approach..

[MarkE]

Nothing described or demonstrated so far appears in the least way unusual to me.  What is it that you think is unusual and why?

[synchro1]

The important difference is that it requires many many times the power to decouple the keeper by physical force then it does with a tiny jolt of a few mlli-watts. The flyback may even be greater with the small backwards jolt, because the magnetic field collapse is more sudden.

[MarkE]

The important difference is that it requires many many times the power to decouple the keeper by physical force then it does with a tiny jolt of a few mlli-watts. The flyback may even be greater with the small backwards jolt, because the magnetic field collapse is more sudden.

Do not confuse: force, energy, and power.  Careful measurement invariably show that the energy required is the same independent of the method.  Mechanically high force is required but only over a very tiny distance on the order of 0.001".  Anyone who doubts this can set-up the experiments properly and conduct them.