Pulsed DC Transformer with Embedded Magnets

[chrisC]

I have read all the comments since my post -- thank you.  Call me a clown if you wish, but perhaps a talented one given my publication and teaching history.... It is true that the top journals may not touch it if certain political interests are opposed -IMO ...  UNLESS the novel effect is being reproduced all over the world, which is the goal in this instance (a goal I share with Lawrence).  At that point, I believe major journals will jump at the chance to publish.

The choice of journal/venue is up to the research scientists, btw, not folks on this forum (I hope you understand).

..

Seriously, if you really are a well renowned professor of physics and you can't detect some delusional writings, then I think I'm entitled to a Nobel prize!
We'll just have to see what kind of physics or electronics you really understand, Mr. Talented Professor. At the end of your 'investigations' maybe your peers will also know who you really are?
cheers

chrisC

[XS-NRG]

I have read all the comments since my post -- thank you.  Call me a clown if you wish, but perhaps a talented one given my publication and teaching history.

Excellent comments, Observer.  My background is that of an experimental physicist, rather than a theorist.  I approach this project seeking experimental verification and to learn what controllable parameters increase the COP -- along with 100% reproducibility (that is a must).

Complete theoretical understanding can come later, even after publication... at least for me.  I have worked with many theorists through the years.  Once an effect is 100% repeatable and can be scaled up, it can generally be understood in months, sometimes years.  High-temp superconductivity is an example of a novel (wonderful) effect that is taking a long time to fully understand -- despite hundreds of publications.

Once an effect is 100% repeatable and can be scaled up, it can generally be published.  It is true that the top journals may not touch it if certain political interests are opposed -IMO ...  UNLESS the novel effect is being reproduced all over the world, which is the goal in this instance (a goal I share with Lawrence).  At that point, I believe major journals will jump at the chance to publish.

The choice of journal/venue is up to the research scientists, btw, not folks on this forum (I hope you understand).

Although our correspondence to date is limited, I have seen nothing from Lawrence that shows " unwillingness of the researcher to proceed along the lines accepted in science which include openness in dissemination of the research, " -- on the contrary.

Let me ask you -- is Lawrence willing to have independent tests of his prototypes?  Is he willing to have the results discussed openly?  Or is he seeking restrictions such as to make him (in an exclusive sense) lots of money?

Quit the show Lawrence.
Your a bad actor so stick with your CLOWN's act. 

[PhysicsProfessor]

No, he is not. If he were, he would have openly presented, as is usual in science, all the details so others can reproduce what he claims. There are excellent researchers in this forum who can do that without the need to be defended by individuals of unknown credentials.

Interesting.  Lawrence is giving all needed details to me to my satisfaction so far... but note that I'm not saying his device "works" since I have not yet tested it!

But on your point, Omnibus, I challenge you to point to

"all the details" of some device so that one can "reproduce what he claims. There are excellent researchers in this forum who can do that..._"

you say.  Who then, and what are the details?

  Ah-- another device or devices to test.    But -- I am new to this forum and would appreciate your help in sorting out what can be reproduced with details given and which researchers have prototypes which actually "work".  Seriously, Omnibus or others -- what are you BEST COP>1  devices that an experienced experimental physicist could test?


I would like to see one or more of them actually work with COP>1 -- and not end up canned by some agency.
  I have done a lot of work with solar energy, invented a solar device which I have made freely available, worldwide.  I gave away hundreds of these -- to Kenya, Bolivia, Mali, Haiti and other countries.

  At risk is humanity if we do NOT come up with an alternative energy source, IMO.

Hence my sincere challenge to your statement, Omnibus, that there are devices with "all the details" given, devices which presumably work.

[Groundloop]

@PhysicsProfessor,

Can you provide a web link to one of your peer-reviewed publications?

Thanks,
Groundloop.

[Omnibus]

The only thing proven conclusively so far is discontinuous production of excess energy (not by Lawrence). While this is enough to conclude tha conservation of energy can be violated, the society will never accept such violation if it doesn't see a self-sustaining device. Everything else, all other efforts to claim more energy out than in, no matter how well founded, are in vain. Such efforts can only satisfy the curiosity of the limited group of people discussing OU in this and other forums. Without a self-sustaining device, clearly demonstrated and made available to thousands, if not not millions, without restrictions and without concealing anything, violation of CoE will neve get across to society, despite the fact that it has already been conclusively proven.