Overunity.com Archives is Temporarily on Read Mode Only!



Free Energy will change the World - Free Energy will stop Climate Change - Free Energy will give us hope
and we will not surrender until free energy will be enabled all over the world, to power planes, cars, ships and trains.
Free energy will help the poor to become independent of needing expensive fuels.
So all in all Free energy will bring far more peace to the world than any other invention has already brought to the world.
Those beautiful words were written by Stefan Hartmann/Owner/Admin at overunity.com
Unfortunately now, Stefan Hartmann is very ill and He needs our help
Stefan wanted that I have all these massive data to get it back online
even being as ill as Stefan is, he transferred all databases and folders
that without his help, this Forum Archives would have never been published here
so, please, as the Webmaster and Creator of this Forum, I am asking that you help him
by making a donation on the Paypal Button above
Thanks to ALL for your help!!


PhysicsProf Steven E. Jones circuit shows 8x overunity ?

Started by JouleSeeker, May 19, 2011, 11:21:55 PM

Previous topic - Next topic

0 Members and 9 Guests are viewing this topic.

powercat

Hi Professor
poynt99 is one of the best person I know when it comes to measurements, there is a thread called
Rosemary Ainslie circuit demonstration on Saturday March 12th 2011,where there is a claim
of OU so far no one on this forum has matched those results and only a small minority elsewhere stand by that claim of OU, this circuit has been around for two years on numerous forums ::)

poynt99 has ben trying to tell the inventor about the measurement errors  for quite some time, and only recently appears to be finally getting through, and dare I say it, it could be now looking promising.

I hope you don't end up in a long drawn out measurement argument, the best way to resolve it would be to make a self-runner as has already been suggested.  ;D 
When logic and proportion Have fallen
Go ask Alice When she's ten feet tall

JouleSeeker

Quote from: poynt99 on May 30, 2011, 04:01:01 AM
I urge you to reconsider Professor.

When dealing with DC power sources, heavy averaging of both the battery voltage and current signals is the most reliable way to measure input power. You simply multiply the two DMM values together (taking the CSR value into account), and the result is an accurate net average INPUT power measurement.

.99

Glad to hear from you on this forum as well, .99.    It was indeed your suggestion to use the Tek DPO scope to calculate the MEAN input power that I have been using, as explained above.

And you have also suggested that, as above:  "You simply multiply the two DMM values together..."

I understand your approach to measure the input power Pin by measuring the current across CSRin and multiplying by the battery voltage. However, when I look at the INSTANTANEOUS Pin waveform on the Tek 3032, I see that Pin fluctuates around zero, and the MEAN (not RMS) value of the Pin is close to zero.  (Same result using my ATTEN scope and looking at the power waveform, integrating by hand over one cycle.)  This is a significant result -- and I would be surprised if it is just wrong; but I certainly welcome further testing as measurment errors at this stage are certainly possible.  In any case, this result from the Power waveform on the Tek 3032 oscilloscope, evidently disagrees with the dual-DMM method used by Itsu, discussed above.

Further, when I ran this sj1 circuit using a single AA rechargeable battery overnight,  the battery voltage had not dropped measurably the next morning, over nine hours running.  So I do not think that the circuit was drawing 40 mW as calculated by Itsu in his video, using the dual-DMM-multiply method.

  I would like to see a direct comparison of the two methods for evaluating Pin, on this particular circuit.  You have a Tek DPO available, .99.  If the MEAN power input as determined using the DPO differs from the dual-DMM method, as appears to be the case, then a resolution of the discrepancy would be useful.
(I should note that while the Tek 3032 I've borrowed is available at the university, I have to use it there -- about 70 miles distant from my home.  I do not get there often at this time.)


I take a time window (2useconds typically) in which there are many cycles, to acquire a good value for the Mean power, both for input and output power.   The Tek 3032 math multiply function allows me to get INSTANTANEOUS power by multiplying for me Vin (t) * Iin (t) -- and this power waveform is plotted (red waveforms above).  Then the MEAN is extracted over numerous cycles.

As you know, .99, we discussed the merits of the MEAN-power (V(t)*I(t))  method  at OUResearch at length over the past several months.  Are you now saying that the dual-DMM method is more reliable than the MEAN power method?





JouleSeeker

 This weekend I have placed four 10,000 uF caps in parallel, and have managed to get the system to feed back into these caps.  There is NO battery in the system, only caps.  The voltage across the caps is nearly constant now, dropping very slowly with LED lit and no CSR's --  my problem is that the caps detached from the circuit drop in voltage at a measurably significant rate.  This particular system does not appear to have demonstrable OU, but again the leaky caps are a problem.

As noted earlier, I am trying to find caps that do not leak so fast, or at all.  Any ideas on this would be helpful.
Edit:  Found some caps that leak very little... more later. thx

JouleSeeker

A brief comment on
a possible source of anomalous energy that we know very little about (except for its existence):

"What Is Dark Energy?

More is unknown than is known. We know how much dark energy there is because we know how it affects the Universe's expansion. Other than that, it is a complete mystery. But it is an important mystery. It turns out that roughly 70% of the Universe is dark energy.
Dark matter makes up about 25%. The rest - everything on Earth, everything ever observed with all of our instruments, all normal matter - adds up to less than 5% of the Universe. Come to think of it, maybe it shouldn't be called "normal" matter at all, since it is such a small fraction of the Universe. "...

"Another explanation for dark energy is that it is a new kind of dynamical energy fluid or field, something that fills all of space but something whose effect on the expansion of the Universe is the opposite of that of matter and normal energy. Some theorists have named this "quintessence," after the fifth element of the Greek philosophers. But, if quintessence is the answer, we still don't know what it is like, what it interacts with, or why it exists. So the mystery continues. "

Read more:  http://science.nasa.gov/astrophysics/focus-areas/what-is-dark-energy/

poynt99

Professor,

Under ideal conditions, the scope method is accurate.

What I am suggesting is this; if the scope and DMM methods do not agree, one of them must be wrong. DC power sources have a power factor of 1.0, therefore heavily averaging the current and voltage measurements is not only the best way to measure the INPUT power, but it is the easiest and most accessible.

.99
question everything, double check the facts, THEN decide your path...

Simple Cheap Low Power Oscillators V2.0
http://www.overunity.com/index.php?action=downloads;sa=view;down=248
Towards Realizing the TPU V1.4: http://www.overunity.com/index.php?action=downloads;sa=view;down=217
Capacitor Energy Transfer Experiments V1.0: http://www.overunity.com/index.php?action=downloads;sa=view;down=209