Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE

[nul-points]

Your a retrobate !

I guess you missed the part that was " Free "
And I agree... You're a " retrobate  "...

LOL

...i must have had this thread confused with one hosted by friendly people doing interesting investigative work!


"retrobate", eh?

...not even Google knows what that means

[RandyFL]

Lol...
I had to look it up in the urban dictionary...

wait until you show a video on LEDs... there won't be any meat left on your bones...


All the best
R

[seaad]

Hello again
In my last post (Reply #3163 on: February 23) I talked about that my test rig consumed an input current of about 4 mA AC . With the test set according to the image (B) below, I wanted to try out, if output was affected in some way when the AC signal is pulled up above the zero level by an applied DC current. The current is regulated by the potentiometer Rbias.
I can say that nothing special happens with the output. I have tested with transformer laminates, my ferrite rods and other iron materials. I have a signal generator that can produce all kind of waves, from staircase to all types you wish for. Nothing special happens with the output.
It took about 10 mA DC biasing in order to have a pure sinusoidal signal to the P1, P2. Even if I ignore this input power it further takes many many tens of mA to lift the signal above the zero level. If I now adds the supplied DC power to my AC power input my 100% efficiency will shrunk to a few percent. So it takes a huge OU-effect to overcome that.
Arne

[nul-points]

Lol...
I had to look it up in the urban dictionary...

wait until you show a video on LEDs... there won't be any meat left on your bones...

Whoa - what's with all the aggro, Randy?

i'm genuinely interested and impressed with all the good work going on here - and that includes all of Woopy's very practical and informative videos

i'm not sure how we get from me saying " i am interested to see what you guys discover about this technique", and trying to offer helpful observations about intriguing aspects of this project, to me being called names in response

i did have a thread on here which included driving LEDs - but then someone called Atomix93 turned up and trashed it, so there's already not a lot of meat left on it!

  http://overunity.com/16326/thats-not-a-knife-this-is-a-knife-er-ou-flashlight/msg472788/#msg472788

...but don't let that stop you, if that's how you feel  :-)

have a nice day now
np

[bajac]

Hello guys!

It has been a few months since my last post in this forum. However, whenever possible I come to this forum to see what's cooking.

I felt the need to do this post because it seems to me that we are losing the focus in our goal for replicating the Figuera's devices. It is my personal opinion that it is irrelevant to argue who is right or wrong on the theory of operations of the Figuera's devices. Nonsense arguments on theory of operations shall not be the main objective in this forum. No one is right unless its theory has been proven with a working prototype.

That is why we should build as many different devices as possible and share the results. It is very important to publish all details of the device and test results of a non-working unit! I cannot express - strongly enough - the importance of posting the details of a non-working prototype. And that is why I consider the following to be the main purpose of this forum:

1) Built as many different devices as possible  because it will increase the possibility for deciphering the Figuera's mystery. Because we have very limited resources, each one of us might be able to build just a single prototype. It is to our advantage to have available different constructions of the Figuera's device. It really takes a major effort to build a prototype. You should build the device that you believe to be the one. It is your money and your time.

2) Post all results of the test and all construction details of the prototype being tested. The importance of posting the results of nonworking prototypes is that it will help us to look for patterns and clues of what the real device might have been. Do not feel embarrass for posting the results and details of nonworking prototypes. Trust me on this one, you would be making a huge contribution to the cause.

It is OK to share our theories but it is counterproductive to impose it on others. There are people in this forum that are purely 'thinkers' and that are prompt to negatively criticize the 'doers' when posting the results of nonworking prototypes. I do not have a problem with being a 'thinker', I consider myself to be one of them. But we need to post our theories in a constructive manner. Sometimes we fall into the trap of being harsh with the persons that do not agree with whatever we believe. We are just humans, but we need to constantly remind ourselves of what the goal of this forum should be about.

I have a theory that I believe and I am building my prototype around. I have not performed proper tests on my latest prototype because of other important matters. I am expecting to run the tests sometime by the last quarter of this year. I will post all details and test results, good or bad. If the results come out to be negative, I should go back to square one and re-evaluate my theory against the test results.

Finally, I have been very busy building a prototype for one of my patents. To this end, I bought a CNC machine to mill the PCB boards. I am posting a picture of the machine milling a board. I have found it difficult to learn the process of milling printed circuit boards. I had to get used to the following software: building and simulating electronic circuits, exporting to PCB boards and laying out the components, exporting to a CAD/CAM drafting application for preparation, and finally exporting to a GCode to be loaded into the CNC machine (MACH3). It has been an interesting experience, though.

I wish you good luck with your prototypes.

Thanks,
Bajac