Thane Heins Perepiteia Replications

[baroutologos]

You are right about critical thinking.
"parachute and mind should be kept open"

The only thing i accepted as true half a year ago without even knowing the EE basics was the accellaration effect, and i must admit this was a great starting point to my OU research and I thank Mr T for that (bringing to my attention in an explicit way)

...............................
Having "played" enough with my setups and saw their behaviours in various accelaration and non mode, i can understand more or less what i see in the videos.
The figures presented in videos are quite reasonable to my understanding, but,  explanations/theories and output extrapolation are subjected to question.

It must be noted - no offence at inventor -  that he believed for a time that accelaration was coming from prime mover being "fluxed-up" by the magnet/coil system via a steel bar, contrary to many voices denying such thing.
Easily his current beliefs could be wrong too.

The perepeteia setup evolution is far from over I_Ron. There is road ahead, but steps have been made. Lets just have ideas, resources and time to get to the desired effect. (OU)

Regards,
Baroutologos

[CRANKYpants]

OU DEMO AT OU

WE GAVE A DEMO TO THE UNIVERSITY YESTERDAY WITH THE TRANSFORMER PERFORMING AT 1100% (SEE PHOTO DATA).

THIS IS THE SAME DEMO WE GAVE TO THE CHAIRMAN OF THE ONTARIO RESEARCH AND INNOVATION COUNCIL A WEEK AGO.

INPUT POWER = 0.045 W
OUTPUT POWER = 0.495 W

EFFICIENCY = 1099%

T

[Kator01]

Mr. T,

you have to include the reactive-power-part because to drive this part needs energy also.

The "total real power" to drive the total "appearant power" must be compared with the real output on the load.

I made a suggestion how to measure this with a diffrerent driver-circuit not using the grid.

So again my question : How are the figures you measure concerning the appearant power-input in the primary ?

Regards

Kator01

[CRANKYpants]

Mr. T,

you have to include the reactive-power-part because to drive this part needs energy also.

So again my question : How are the figures you measure concerning the appearant power-input in the primary ?

Regards

Kator01

I AM INCLUDING THE REACTIVE POWER PART

THE REACTIVE POWER IS: 120.4 V x 0.006 A = 0.72 VAr

THE REAL POWER IS: 120.4 V x 0.006 A x 0.05 = 0.036 W

BECAUSE THE VOLTAGE AND CURRENT ARE OUT OF PHASE BY 87 DEGREES ONLY 3% OF THE REACTIVE CURRENT IS REAL.

NOW I KNOW WE PAY FOR REACTIVE POWER FROM OUR UTILITY COMPANIES BUT THE TRANSFORMER IS MEANT TO BE MATED TO A GENERATOR WHICH PRODUCES REACTIVE POWER UNTIL IT IS CONNECTED TO A LOAD (AS THEY ALL DO) - SO THE GENERATOR WILL PRODUCE REACTIVE POWER ON NO-LOAD  - CONNECTED TO A TRANSFORMER THAT USES REACTIVE POWER TO PRODUCE REAL POWER WHILE ON-LOAD.

NOW EVEN A CONVENTIONAL GENERATOR (IN EV's) WILL BENEFIT FROM THE BI-TOROID BECAUSE IT WILL BE MAGNETICALLY AND ELECTRICALLY ISOLATED FROM THE LOAD - AND "THINK" IT IS STILL ON NO-LOAD WHILE DELIVERING REAL POWER TO THE BATTERIES.

ALSO BEAR IN MIND BOTH PROTOTYPES IN THE LAB RIGHT NOW USE M6 SCRAPS PICKED UP AND PIECED TOGETHER - THE TRANSFORMERS TO BE PRODUCED BY TOROID TECH WILL EMPLOY M1 OR M0 SO 1100% IS NOTHING YET.

T
 

[Fred Flintstone]

Thane, I am not skeptical...I believe in you..

What I do not understand is...Why has this not been commercialized yet?    You have been working on this for years. I found this link from 2007 http://www.sciencebase.com/science-blog/potential-difference-transformation.html?cp=1 . Please, someone explain to me "why" this cannot be incorporated into a commercial application? Why are thousands of companies not using this already?