Successful TPU-ECD replication !

[otto]

Hello all,

@Mark,

about the collectors:

In my pdf you can see that I tested iron wire, copper wire, aluminium wire AND soldering wire for a collector. As I remember was the soldering wire the best solution for a collector.

If we now could try  multistrand tinned wires....I used also a flat cable, the one they use in PCs. Veeery interesting results.

In my 15" TPU I first used a oridinary lamp wire with 0,75mm2 diameter. And after this I used in the same TPU a 2,5mm2 diameter wire. This wires are almost the same but the 2,5mm2 wire is of course thicker and the results from this thicker wires are muuuuch better or is the result better because of the longer collector of this 15" TPU??

Who knows??? Maybe only my collector wires are f...g me?

There are big differences in this used collector wires.

I also worked with a 1 turn collector in the 6" TPU. Then I wound the same coils on my 15" TPU. Result: the 15" TPU lights a bulb much better.

Now Im using a 5 turn collector and the results are good.

Yesterday I tried to pulse my other TPU with the coils "wound all over the collector" . Result: NOTHING. The current was the same as in my fast coils but I was missing the heat in my controls!!!

This is because of my veeeery bad signals on the output of my oscillators!!!  Yes, TUBES!!!!
This is why Mannix is pocking all the time on tubes!!!!

But, as Im a ......., Im working on and with my "fast" coils. No, guys dont follow me because Im doing it wrong or at least Im NOT following exact the masters words.

This weekend I want to wind a new TPU, version,...... who knows and who cares,ha,ha.

As I have problems with the current in my controls I want to isolate the primary with a teflon band and then I hope that my controls dont short again. This teflon will do a great job because of the temperature....

Otto

[innovation_station]

@paul

i like opensource but things must be proven as you say and i guess steven proved his point and it still winds up being open source i have left this work many times but always to return 

is

[pauldude000]

@innovation
It is a good concept, and I intend to see it through. My motivation is not altogether altruistic either. I want off the energy grid, and now I have found a sound and suitable means to do so.

@humbug

You tried hard, for you, to make me look the imbecile. I have one of two possible conclusions to draw from your statements: either you did not do your research, or your statements wre intentional. I choose to see you in the better light, as not having done your research, but that is just my opinion.

1. Patents are not granted on perpetual motion devices, which information is overabundant everywhere you look. "Free energy" and "overunity" devices fall under said description with the patent office.

2. "Jesse McQueen" did have a prototype in '06 according to a link in the thread you referred to, which lead to a posting of a news article from said year by blacknews.com, and I could nowhere find a spot where he admitted that he didn't have one. Maybe I missed it. I did find several spots where he stated he would eventually "release" his prototype, but that he was trying to get money. His words (JMAC) were taken out of context, from what I read.

3. If your "catalyst" argument is to hold water, then why did you refer me to a link with you stating how it was impossible? I cannot use my own words as authoritative to validate a point I am making, and neither can you. As to the individual, I wonder if it refers to the man who was trying to build a means to fight cancer with RF, and discovered by accident that his medical machine would break down salt water into hydrogen and oxygen? His machine works, and the principle works, which you would know if you did your research.

4. Concerning "silly patents". I have perused many a good book concerning silly patents. However, patent laws have changed radically since the early part of the last century. You probably could still patent a self-tipping hat, for instance, yet today you would have to provide evidence of it's workability..... Amazingly enough, it is not a perpetual motion machine now is it?

You have voiced your opinion, and I have voiced mine. The people here have the ability to discern from our words whom is more credible, if such even needs be done. I personally do not think such is at all necessary, but that is just me. I researched your words giving you the benefit of the doubt, now you do the reciprocal.

I will not engage in a flamewar with you. If you wish to speak nicely to me, I have no problem with the concept, and even encourage it, and will respond in kind.  From the other thread, it appears you like to engage in such, unless I misunderstand. I would rather be wrong on this then right, so prove me wrong.

Paul Andrulis

[Humbugger]

@innovation
It is a good concept, and I intend to see it through. My motivation is not altogether altruistic either. I want off the energy grid, and now I have found a sound and suitable means to do so.

@humbug

You tried hard, for you, to make me look the imbecile. I have one of two possible conclusions to draw from your statements: either you did not do your research, or your statements wre intentional. I choose to see you in the better light, as not having done your research, but that is just my opinion.

1. Patents are not granted on perpetual motion devices, which information is overabundant everywhere you look. "Free energy" and "overunity" devices fall under said description with the patent office.

2. "Jesse McQueen" did have a prototype in '06 according to a link in the thread you referred to, which lead to a posting of a news article from said year by blacknews.com, and I could nowhere find a spot where he admitted that he didn't have one. Maybe I missed it. I did find several spots where he stated he would eventually "release" his prototype, but that he was trying to get money. His words (JMAC) were taken out of context, from what I read.

3. If your "catalyst" argument is to hold water, then why did you refer me to a link with you stating how it was impossible? I cannot use my own words as authoritative to validate a point I am making, and neither can you. As to the individual, I wonder if it refers to the man who was trying to build a means to fight cancer with RF, and discovered by accident that his medical machine would break down salt water into hydrogen and oxygen? His machine works, and the principle works, which you would know if you did your research.

4. Concerning "silly patents". I have perused many a good book concerning silly patents. However, patent laws have changed radically since the early part of the last century. You probably could still patent a self-tipping hat, for instance, yet today you would have to provide evidence of it's workability..... Amazingly enough, it is not a perpetual motion machine now is it?

You have voiced your opinion, and I have voiced mine. The people here have the ability to discern from our words whom is more credible, if such even needs be done. I personally do not think such is at all necessary, but that is just me. I researched your words giving you the benefit of the doubt, now you do the reciprocal.

I will not engage in a flamewar with you. If you wish to speak nicely to me, I have no problem with the concept, and even encourage it, and will respond in kind.  From the other thread, it appears you like to engage in such, unless I misunderstand. I would rather be wrong on this then right, so prove me wrong.

Paul Andrulis

Sorry if I sounded offensive.  Your post on this seemed to be doing a pretty good job of making someone else out to be a complete idiot, using incorrect and bad logic and wrong facts, so I thought you needed a dose of reality.

1.  Reread your own statement 1. above.  It seems 100% contradictory to your own argument that SM patented the TPU (obviously a free energy device) and flies in the face of numerous other granted patents like the MEG and Jesse McQueen and hundreds of others.

2.  Jesse says his machine worked once upon a time.  He did not submit his machine to the patent office at any time nor did he submit any other proof or evidence that it worked at any time.  He admits he has no working machine now.  You can hunt the post; it's there.  I asked him the question.

3.  Nope, wrong guy.  I gave a link to the discussion page and thread.  The patent is right there.  It has to do with a guy claiming to be able to do away with all catalysts in all chemical reactions by stimulating the reaction with a tiny low-level RF signal "at the NMR frequency" of the normal catalyst.  The patent is entirely granted and entirely bogus for the reasons I and others clearly give on that thread.  It is not bogus because I say so (my logic is not circular, as you accuse).  My statements there simply point to reference material that states extremely well known facts that are fully accepted and which show clearly the totally false basis for the patent claims and description.  Apparently you did not read the patent or the referenced arguments.

4.  You are correct that patent laws have changed radically, but you have it backwards.  It used to be true that all patent applicants had to submit a working device and that a granted patent implied that one had proven that it worked to the patent examiners.  That rule went away a very long time ago. 

No flamewar, no personal insult, no opinions.  These are all easy facts which anyone can research quite readily.  Your argument that a granted patent proves the covered device or process exists in working form is simply and absolutely wrong.  Sorry! 

Secondly, it is not even true that Steven Mark has ever received a patent on his toroidal power unit or any other energy machine device as far as I know.  I asked you for the patent number and if you had read it.  You did not reply.  So even if your assertion about the PTO was true (and it isn't) it would not apply to SM in any way.  Please forgive my saying so, but you make my arguments for me!

Humbugger

[innovation_station]

   a patent = a waste time money engery

ist

and will never be for me opensource all the way in just a perfect manner 

and when i say thease words "in just a perfect manner "  you have no idea just how good it feels