Is Lindsay?s ?SM? a fraud?

[tosky]

@Otto
How do you know the runaway condition is abnormal? Besides it is powerful High volt, what else you have got? From your description, it drawn large amount of current. So high power input for high power high voltage output is a normal thing. What I think if you could keep the runaway condition even one second when power supply has been cut off. Then I will agree something there. To fully light a 100W bulb only need about 110V. Assume the ferrite core is not saturated, only a few turns of wire is enough to step up the voltage, some circuits could also add to the source input to be higher volt. Mixing frequency could be more easy to step up voltage because of the phase peak wave addition.
If there is a DC bias exist, the voltage will at the positive side even with any waveform.
If you drive a coil without a capacitor connect in serial also lead to a positive side position in the scope at a positive phase. But you have to give some time to let the coil demagnetize. Please tell what make you so sure runaway condition is special case.

[tosky]

@paul
The word overunity is valid to be used in this universe. When we go up to quantum multi-universe view. It will be hyper than saying open or close system. Even could say as sharing  the energy from other universes or return back to them. But this hyper view is not valid in reality. Because we could only exist in this world.

If time travel is true and usually happens less than one second due to the time vector fluctuation. All things including our memory back to the previous second state. How do you know time travel has happened.

These examples tell we should reference to this system, this world, this moment, this extra energy.

[pauldude000]

@all

Please do not misunderstand. I am seeing ineteresting points being made all around. However, I also see misunderstandings  of things and each other all around as well.

@otto

Tesla introduced the AC system, because it was more efficient than the DC system. DC has bad problems with I2R losses. The longer the wire, the more horrendous the voltage/amperage drop. DC is usable only on a small local transmission scale.

AC, due to its pos/neg cycling is a push-pull system by nature, and allows for much greater transmission line distance, with much less voltage/amperage drop.

AC is also MUCH better for many practical uses, such as electric motors, etc, due to efficiency and ease of voltage modification.

However, Tesla himself didn't like having to have wires to transmit electricity to houses. He intended to do so WITHOUT wires. Standard AC was a step in a means to and end for him.

@wattsup

You made some good points.

Points 2, 3, and 4 have some real merit to them. However, with either AC or DC, what comes from the supply IS the system power. With DC, is is straight V x A for power. For AC, it is approx .707 peak x A for RMS (Approximate rule of thumb, use full equation for exact measurement.).

However, whether this energy is used by the drivers, or the TPU, or whatever, doesn't matter. This is the power that the output power is compared against to determine COP.

@poynt99

Unless someone directly attacks you, there is no logical reason for attacking them by anyones standards. The bashing was truly unjustified.

You made one very relevant point though. "Lighting a bulb", of itself, is nothing special. However, the means of it's lighting can be. If a 100W bulb is lit to full brightness abnormally (too low voltage, too low amperage/ whatever) it can be indicative of abnormal effects. I do agree with you however in that it is not really proof of any real kind, and too easily explained in most cases.

You have also got to understand that otto has made it clear that he is taking this in steps.

1. Produce the power (where he is at now).
2. Introduce feedback into the system to attempt to achieve COP.

His approach is quite logical.

I have a question for you. What is your TPU(s) producing?  Many builders here post pics of their projects, and also post data and results. Look at wattsup in this thread, or Loner.

The way to truly "know", is by building. I think Giantkiller posts quite well on that. If you have, I would love to hear your results and theories. Grumpy's as well for that matter. If you have posted this on another thread, let me know and I will look. All information is good stuff to me.

@Grumpy

I tend to hear much wisdom from you, with the occasional BS. (Ya know I like ya, most of the time, occasionally. Just kidding around. )

Paul Andrulis

[pauldude000]

@toski

First, this is not an attack, but a logical challenge.

Prove it.

All of the "extra dimensions" fall under hypothesis, and not even true theory, as they cannot be demonstrated, therefore have no falsifiability.

However, in every empirically demonstrable system, no such thing as a closed system can truly be demonstrated to exist. Energy in some form is present to any system externally from said system. The "closed system" is an antique figment of limited scope in reasoning and knowledge, which is still perpetuated without logical reason due to the evidence.

I still state that overunity is an equal figment, derived from the same source.

Small energies have long been known and accepted to control large energies. Absolutely nothing new. Overunity as a concept claims that small energies somehow CREATE the new unaccounted for energy. This is impossible, as energy is neither created nor destroyed. What I stated is that the small energies are directing the flow of larger energies already present. This is not overunity, and not a surprise or somehow "against current understanding" either. It is common.

The current scientific definitions for both "perpetual motion", and "overunity", both depend upon a closed system to be true, when the concept of a closed system is false itself.

Show me even ONE truly closed system in this entire universe. ONE!

I will show you how it is NOT a closed system.

I like, and respect, the fact that you are truly thinking about this though.

Paul Andrulis

Paul Andrulis

[tosky]

@paul
Bearden books state clearly about the open and close system. I have such knowledge.
I understand and agree your point of view. what I (and they)  say overunity is a description for the function of the device.
Nothing wrong with this word. why not use this word. It is logical description. Unless you assume others don't know the concept of the open or close systems.
What we want is to find out a method to build a device that consume a little energy for input but given out more energy than input which can self running like SM's TPU. The extra energy is not generated, it is attracted from the environment. Because otto's TPU consumes much energy from the power supply. It is unlikely to be one of those devices. So I asked him details about the runaway condition. I said I respect his hard work and want to help if I could.