THE RANT ROOM

[stivep]

My Partnered Output Coils, he got Above Unity Results
Chris Sykes

Do you mean  overunity?
Can you explain it to me  without giving your test results or all of your stories?
simple definition .. 
-what is that " Above Unity"?
-can you provide me some  scientifically recognized   literature  on it?

Wesley

[partzman]

Chris,

You are really some piece of work!

I have never, ever received any request for help from you about an experiment regarding POC! Period! You asked for Inductance's for a sim, but nothing else was received! What does that makes you?

Partzman used to work with Smudge, Graham Gunderson and others, for Mark Goldes back in the day, now unfortunately working with Mark Goldes gives Partzman a very bad reputation!

Do you trust a man that worked closely with a man that has earned the name: Amazing Perpetual Swindling Machine

Yes, you did receive a request from me but you conveniently erased that message from your thread!  So, why not agree to a simulation?  Mark Goldes give me a bad reputation, Ha!  I never was a contributor to MPI but you sure like to place some reputable people in the mud like Smudge and Graham.  Chris, you are not worthy to tie their shoes!

Who do you think Mark Goldes was getting his information from?

Oh dear, the truth about your background comes out partzman, and it is doggy as anything I see!

Oh yes, I see you have removed your post about your three coil Reduced Lenz's Machine? That just happens to reproduce all I have shown on My POCoils! How convenient! It seems the perpetual swindling machine is a trait learned and carried on by apprentices!

Best wishes, stay safe and well, and just remember, you and your identities are recorded for all of History and the authorities to access you when the time comes, I have all your personal information recorded, when asked, I will pass on!

Mark Goldes never produced a single product after 40+ years in the game!

You, here, are the Darkness! Darkness we are currently Lighting Up!

What are you saying here?  That Mark Goldes was getting info from me and thru this association I'm as guilty as he?  If this is not the case you had better clarify things or I will take you and Stefan Hartman to legal task on just this statement alone as this is libel! 

I have removed no posts of mine on this forum or OUR regarding the sim you keep posting and continually claiming is a replication of your(?) POC.  I have no 3-coil Lenz machine!  It is a 2-coil standard transformer with a constant current load to create an anti-lenz effect.  Are you deaf or just acting stupid? 

BTW Chris, I hear that this whole idea of partnered output coils is really not your idea at all but was given to you by a third party.  Wish to discuss that as I would like to hear how this all came about?

Perhaps without knowing it, Partzman has replicated My Partnered Output Coils, he got Above Unity Results as I have laid out in other posts, so like it or not, he has verified My Work, admit it or not, the evidence is there, from scope shots upside down, to words verifying what I have told you for more than a long time! He can try to deny it all day long, but the evidence is there! Its proof enough for any serious person!

Ask Partzman: Does your machine work if there is no Bucking in your Coils - There is your answer! One Buck, One Assist or as Partsman wrote aid! Whats the equation I have given you for years: 1 + -1 + 1 = 1, same thing!

Yes Chris, my device works without bucking coils!  The transformer you keep referring to in the sim has two alternative connection possibilities relative to itself.  The primary and secondary can be connected in a bucking or aiding mode.  In the bucking mode, the transformer supplies the means for the constant current inductor to gain energy.  In the aiding mode, the constant current inductor supplies the means for the aiding primary and secondary to gain energy.  There is no gain mechanism as you describe with your 1+-1+1=1!  It just ain't there buddy and I wish you could see that!!!

Now, there are many variation and methods of applying constant current to achieve a gain in clever circuits.  None of these utilize your(?) POC, sorry!

Pm 

[EMJunkie]

Look, if you took this the wrong way Partzman, I am sorry, my intent was not to smear you Graham or Smudge, I mearly pointed out that you had worked for Goldes.

Fighting is not going to get us ahead! I had hoped to work with you, but seems we don't see eye to eye. That's what I tried to point out in my last post: Here

Why cant people just get on, work together? Be happy to succeed, when they can, instead of shooting everyone else down all the time, that's what this thread is about, shooting others down, pulling the wings off flies!!! Destructive behaviour begets destructive behaviour, will we humans ever learn?

The truth is, 9 of 10 posts here on this thread alone could be libel or slander, its rampant, and we as a species should know better! Cant we just all grow up?

Best wishes, stay safe and well in these dire times,
   Chris Sykes

[gyulasun]

...
I have replicated his POC on my bench based on his info with proper measurements and load and the COP was ~.7.  I mentioned this to him asked for help, and had no response.  I also volunteered to simulate the POC if he would supply the info needed to model the transformer correctly.  He declined.
...

Hi Partzman, 

Thank you for handling and clarifying this situation. 

Keep up the good work.
Gyula

[lancaIV]

Gerard Morin transformer without engine

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cBFAe3rArCg


Comments :


Roland Chabanol
Sorry Your system has no over unity , I test it 20 w consummed to produce 11w.  no interest in this way . you made mistake with your input Amperage. please correct it  regards








The "partnered output coils" process efficiency "shall be based" by :

https://patents.google.com/patent/US6362718B1/en


http://jnaudin.free.fr/meg/meg.htm


http://jnaudin.free.fr/meg/megpaper.pdf page 6+ "Results of the Research " ( page 18, nanocrystallin core material !; page 20/36 : Whittaker mechanism ; page 21 point 7  )

page 64 Figure 14  " Energy gain process ..."




and          Regauging a Magnetic Scalar Potential             page 486  http://jnaudin.free.fr/meg/sachsO3.pdf

http://www.cheniere.org/correspondence/022502.htm




So the trick is to get the active environment to give you a "free wind" so you can have something approaching a windmill.  Or as close to that as you can get.
Fortunately, in electrodynamics there are many "free winds" one can make with ease.  The simplest one is to just make a common dipole.  Lee and Yang received a Nobel Prize in 1957 for their work in broken symmetry and the weak interaction.  One of the broken symmetries that was proven was that of opposite charges -- such as are on the ends of a dipole.

The very words "broken symmetry" in power systems implies that something virtual has become observable.  In other words, the charges of the dipole continually absorb virtual photons from the seething vacuum (that is proven and well-known, and one does not have to prove it again).  The spin of the charges then coherently integrates that absorbed virtual energy into real, observable EM energy.  The dipole thus pours out EM energy in all directions at the speed of light.  Let it alone and don't destroy it, and it will pour out that energy indefinitely.  The dipoles in the original matter in the universe have been doing that for some 14 billion years or so.  We used that fact of broken symmetry of opposite charges, together with the known clustering of virtual charges of opposite sign around any "isolated" observable charge, to treat the observable charge as a set of composite dipoles.  Hence this finally explained the long-vexing source charge problem: how does a charge just sit there an pour out energy in all directions at the speed of light, establishing its associated fields and potentials and all that energy in them?  We explained that in 2000, after a couple or three years work on it.

A simple "free energy system" can be built for a dollar.  Just place a charged capacitor (or electret) across a permanent magnet so that the E-field is perpendicular to the H-field of the magnet.  That silly thing will sit there and pour out Poynting energy flow S = E x H, so long as you just let it alone.  Wait one year, and it will have changed the energy density of a volume of space a light year in radius (reaching out beyond the solar system).

In solving the dipole and source charge problems, it was found that the energy input comes from the time domain into 3-space via the negative charge, and exits 3-space back to the time domain via the positive charge.

In electrical engineering, it is recognized that the source charge pours out the energy to create all its associated fields, but until 2000 there has been no explanation as to what furnished the input energy.  In effect, electrical engineering and classical electrodynamicists for more than a century have assumed that every charge in the universe is a perpetual motion machine of the worst kind, creating energy out of nothing.

There is no problem at all in extracting all the energy one wishes from the active vacuum, anywhere in the universe, at any time.  Just make a dipole.

The problem is in (1) catching some of that freely gushing EM energy in a circuit containing a load, and (2) dissipating the caught and collected EM energy in that load to power it, without using half the caught energy to destroy the source dipole(s).

That is the ONLY real energy problem on the planet, and always has been.




https://news.fnal.gov/2016/04/theta-tau-two-generations-later/  Quarks and their lifetime

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fermion

https://de.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fermion#:~:text=4%20Siehe%20auch-,Einteilung,ein%20Fermion%20oder%20ein%20Boson.



https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kaon

Kaons have proved to be a copious source of information on the nature of fundamental interactions since their discovery in cosmic rays in 1947. They were essential in establishing the foundations of the Standard Model of particle physics, such as the quark model of hadrons and the theory of quark mixing (the latter was acknowledged by a Nobel Prize in Physics in 2008). Kaons have played a distinguished role in our understanding of fundamental conservation laws: CP violation, a phenomenon generating the observed matter–antimatter asymmetry of the universe, was discovered in the kaon system in 1964 (which was acknowledged by a Nobel Prize in 1980). Moreover, direct CP violation was discovered in the kaon decays in the early 2000s by the NA48 experiment at CERN and the KTeV experiment at Fermilab.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/CP_violation

https://theconversation.com/the-not-so-noble-past-of-the-nobel-prizes-18939
But there have been quite a few controversies, even if we don't consider the often-politicised peace prize. For instance, half of the 2008 Nobel Prize in Physics was awarded to Makoto Kobayashi and Toshihide Maskawa for their discovery of the origin of the broken symmetry which predicts the existence of at least three families of quarks in nature. Many felt that Nicola Cabibbo also deserved the award, as his work on two quark families laid the foundation for Kobayashi and Maskawa.


ambient energy harvester and converter (dipole windings) up to 7,7 mW power conversion (915 MHz )
https://www.researchgate.net/publication/301905364_Experimental_study_of_energy_harvesting_in_UHF_band






http://www.rexresearch.com/kawai/1kawai.htm                  to compare an electric motor its performance with a light bulb circuit is a provoke !





magnetic motor concepts compared


"basic factor" effect


https://worldwide.espacenet.com/searchResults?submitted=true&locale=en_EP&DB=EPODOC&ST=advanced&TI=&AB=&PN=&AP=&PR=&PD=&PA=ogino+sanshiro&IN=&CPC=&IC=&Submit=Search

[0038] As a result of comparison between the structure according to the present invention and the structure as a comparison example comprising the electromagnet element 17 and the attraction member 57 without the provision of the permanent magnet element 19, it has been found that the electrical energy (W) required for the structure of the present invention is less than one-third through one-fourth of that which is required for the comparison example having no permanent magnet element 19 when the attractive force of each of the working surfaces is the same between the two.


[0039] Further, when we suppose a reluctance motor to which the structure of the above-described comparison example is applied, the energy conversion efficiency thereof will be about 30%. However, if a reluctance motor utilizing the structure of the present invention requires an electrical energy of less than 30% as compared to the structure of the comparison example, an output exceeding the electrical input can be estimated and this fact shows that the energy of the permanent magnet element is being converted into a dynamic energy corresponding thereto.


and


https://worldwide.espacenet.com/publicationDetails/biblio?DB=EPODOC&II=1&ND=4&adjacent=true&locale=en_EP&FT=D&date=20191106&CC=EP&NR=3563395A1&KC=A1


A switchable polarity magnetic diode utilizes the flux of a permanent magnet to do work while electricity consumed by the device can be minimized to only to the amount of energy needed to control/direct the flux supplied by the permanent magnet towards the effective poles. The unique method of controlling flux allows both the coil induced flux and the permanent magnet flux to always work together in such a way that total lines of magnetic flux at the working surface of the pole face can be double (200%) compared to either of the permanent magnets or control coil flux singly. This provides for excellent economy of operation in any magnetic application requiring high "permanent-magnet-like" holding/pulling power per amp turn. Such diodes could also be used for applications that use "on-off switching" for creating pulsed magnetic fields of same or alternating polarity, and is especially applicable towards "reversible polarity-switching" applications for creating high density or alternating N/S polarity magnetic fields.








                                                                                                                 
                                                               That is the ONLY real energy problem on the planet, and always has been :


   In solving the dipole and source charge problems, it was found that the energy input comes from the time domain into 3-space via the negative charge, and exits 3-space back to the time domain via the positive charge.


                                        https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/7/72/Nonsymmetric_velocity_time_dilation.gif




                                                               real or relative time ( velocity ) with/-out speed change


https://worldwide.espacenet.com/publicationDetails/description?CC=DE&NR=2617553A1&KC=A1&FT=D&ND=3&date=19771103&DB=EPODOC&locale=en_EP


http://translationportal.epo.org/emtp/translate/?ACTION=description-retrieval&COUNTRY=DE&ENGINE=google&FORMAT=docdb&KIND=A1&LOCALE=en_EP&NUMBER=2617553&OPS=ops.epo.org/3.2&SRCLANG=de&TRGLANG=en




For a simple explanation introducing this rolling bearing mechanism according to the invention, one can e.g. B. install a rotatably mounted bearing ring in a bearing housing and rotatably support the shaft in the ring. If you now turn the rotatable bearing ring, for example, with only 600 rpm and then you turn the shaft rotatably mounted in this ring also with an effective speed of 6nn rpm compared to the rotating bearing ring, you have to multiply the speed 60 by yourself and reaches a relative shaft speed of 360,000 rpm with an effective rolling speed of the rolling elements as at 600 rpm.

divided the shaft speed according to the invention z. B. in three stages, each 1/16 of the previous stage, the speed in 3 results in reverse order.

Potency of 16. In this case, despite the unusual relative speed of 245,760 rpm, the rolling speed of the rolling elements is at an effective speed of 16 'J /' s of the shaft. This corresponds to half the effective angular velocity of all mean radii between the respective inner and outer roller tracks of the rows of rolling elements or the actual rolling speed of the rows of rolling elements is 480 rpm.

For example, if you order the self-control of the speed division by a factor of 2, you have 1/16 of it in the fourth mile of the shaft speed. This results from 16 U of the shaft in the 4th Level only 1 U To divide the functions according to the invention or

potentiate the speeds even without special drive to achieve a given rotation of bearing rings, you can e.g. B. use the inevitably arising functions in the bearing by basically transferring the rolling speed in the known direction of rolling of the rolling elements rotating in the direction of shaft rotation with their cage by one or more steps of their effective movement speed to the next bearing intermediate ring, so that, for. B. the shaft closest to the rotating bearing intermediate ring 1/8 or 1/16 of the shaft speed compulsorily.






In this way according to the invention, at conventionally low rolling speeds of the rolling elements, theoretically almost unlimited relative shaft speeds are possible, as they can no longer be used in practice, so that the existing inertia of large bearing dimensions with large loads does not in itself constitute an obstacle to high speeds.

According to the invention, you can significantly reduce the rolling speed of the rolling elements and thus the coefficient of friction and at the same time multiply the speed and life / 3 hours compared to roller bearings in a known design.


Applicant : Heinrich Kunel ,1976


and 1980 MEG applicated
https://worldwide.espacenet.com/publicationDetails/originalDocument?CC=DE&NR=3024814A1&KC=A1&FT=D&ND=3&date=19820128&DB=EPODOC&locale=en_EP