World's first real Free Energy Flashlight - no shaking - no batteries! No Solar

[MileHigh]

I must be blind, but I saw no proof in that video that charging a battery in any interesting levels in average environment is possible. Did you? As I wrote, at the charging power of 525μW, you'd need two years (in the very best case) to recharge the 3 AA cells.

There was no proof at all.

[skywatcher]

No, I permit myself to disagree. The evidence that it does not work, is not the evidence of the intent, of the fraud. It's just the evidence of the failure that may be accidental or can have construction or manufacturing reasons. If we find physical evidence in contradiction with the claims of ADGEX about the construction or functioning of the flashlight, there is a better chance to have the suspected scam stopped. If we cannot show any such evidence, the chances are slim.

They never claimed that there is some special circuitry inside the flashlight. They only claim *that* it will recharge itself, but not *how*.
On their website they say: "You will never need to purchase any batteries for ELFE. You simply turn him off and the Adgex Accumulator will recharge ELFEs energy levels to full."
So what is the 'Adgex Accumulator' ?  We can find 3 accumulators inside.

I think the evidence that it does not recharge is sufficient, especially if this is the case for all customers, so they can not say these are single cases or 'dead zones'.
We don't know of any ELFE which recharged itself to full brightness, but we know of many which failed to recharge.
You will never need to purchase any batteries for ELFE.  You simply turn him off and the Adgex Accumulator will recharge ELFEs energy levels to full.   - See more at: http://trade.adgex.com.au/elfe#sthash.8xk5ZUqx.dpufYou will never need to purchase any batteries for ELFE.  You simply turn him off and the Adgex Accumulator will recharge ELFEs energy levels to full.   - See more at: http://trade.adgex.com.au/elfe#sthash.8xk5ZUqx.dpuf

[Pirate88179]

You know, they could actually market these flashlights as "Dead Zone Locating Devices".

So, when a customer's light does not recharge they can claim that the device works as claimed.
Of course, no one may want to pay $100 for a dead zone locating device...

Bill

[txt]

Skywatcher, you are mistaken again. In their presentation video they clearly claimed the flashlight body is a "resonator" feeding the energy through the "converter" (the LED holder), to the "special batteries". I believe that in earlier presentations they even claimed the flashlight has no batteries at all, but I would have to go back and watch all the crap again, which I have no appetite for, right now.

They can explain the fact that it does not work in many possible ways - from dead zones, over incorrect usage, malfunctioning, to a manufacturing problem. The nonfunctional flashlight may be good enough for getting a refund, but it is not good enough to have them persecuted for a scam, and especially it is absolutely insufficient for stopping them to sell shares for tens of millions of dollars, and to have the Australian chamber of commerce terminating their licence. Having any hard evidence directly opposing the recorded claims of ADGEX may be sufficient for triggering an investigation by the Australian authorities.

[skywatcher]

Skywatcher, you are mistaken again. In their presentation video they claimed the flashlight body is a "resonator" feeding the energy through the "converter" (the LED holder), to the "special batteries".

My ELFE contains all the parts they showed in their video.  So what does this prove ?

I believe that in earlier presentations they even claimed the flashlight has no batteries at all, but I would have to go back and watch all the crap again, which I have no appetite for, right now.

The quote from my posting above ('Adgex Accumulator') was on their website from the beginning.

They can explain the fact that it does not work in many possible ways - from dead zones, over incorrect usage, malfunctioning, to a manufacturing problem. The nonfunctional flashlight may be good enough for getting a refund, but it is not good enough to have them persecuted for a scam, and especially it is absolutely insufficient for stopping them to sell shares for tens of millions of dollars, and to have the Australian chamber of commerce terminating their licence. Having any hard evidence directly opposing the recorded claims of ADGEX may be sufficient for triggering an investigation by the Australian authorities.

Let's say you buy a car, and the manufacturer specifies some data for maximum speed, acceleration, fuel consumption etc.  You receive the car and it doesn't work at all. You look inside, and you see that it has no motor at all. I this case, this would be evidence for a fraud, because everyone knows that a car has to contain a motor. Why do we know this ? Because a car is known technology. But in case of 'exotic' technology like a self-recharging flashlight (which is not possible with known technology) we don't know what it has to contain because we don't know how it should work. We can not completely rule out that it might be possible to make an accumulator which looks like any other accumulator, but has the ability to self-recharge. So they could say that they supplied these self-recharging accumulators to the manufacturer but he accidently used some others for building the flashlights.

IMO regarding new and 'exotic' technologies you can only make judgements based on experimental evidence (like we did) but not based on knowledge based on known technology.

Or like Arthur C. Clarke said: "Any sufficiently advanced technology is indistinguishable from magic."