ReGenX Coils and ReGenXtra switching

[BroMikey]

Try again.
And Newton's first law of motion in no way reverses the fact that you LIED.

Professor rockin chair crab is grasping at straws as per usual. Git'em Dave. Newton is out dated, that was hundreds of years ago. He was part of the inter-circle, take it or else money. These people like BYE have no discernment whatsoever.

Video partying tonight.

[Turion]

Newton's first law of motion - sometimes referred to as the law of inertia. An object at rest stays at rest and an object in motion stays in motion with the same speed and in the same direction unless acted upon by an unbalanced force.
Newton's first law of motion has NOTHING to do with the statement that a heavier rotor takes additional amps to turn. Try again.
And Newton's first law of motion in no way reverses the fact that you LIED.

[bistander]

... You said there was NO SUCH THING as "speed up under load" and DEMANDED that we prove it. ...

I never said such. In fact I've posted several videos showing this and the analysis of why it occurs. Others have done fine jobs at showing the phenomenon. What I've said repeatedly is that it makes no positive difference to generator performance at load. All it accomplishes is establishing a resonance at no-load which increases power drawn from the prime mover such that when the coil is loaded, resonance is lost reducing power taken from the prime mover in excess of the increased load so the net effect on the system is reduced power often causing increased RPM.

Generator speed up under load

Hi all,

I happened across this video which I think is an excellent demonstration and explanation of generator speed up under load.

https://youtu.be/vAXQBpuLu68

Regards,

bi

[bistander]

You said I TOLD you that I know more about the physics of motion than Isaac Newton. I never TOLD you that did I? I never ever said those words. I never said what you claim I said. That's why you AVOIDED it when I called you on it. You are INTERPRETING what I say according to YOUR rules once again. In other words, you LIED when you said I TOLD you I know more about the physics of motion than Isaac Newton. LIAR. You're a bald faced liar trying to cover up your lies with misdirection like you usually do. Liar, liar, pants on fire. That's your game, putting words in people's mouths, twisting what people say. Picking out bits and pieces you can jump on and correct or impugn. Because that's all you know how to do. Never a contribution. Never an original thought. Always negative crap. We know what you are bi. It's clear to everyone here. You aren't searching for the truth. You're trying to ram your version of alternate facts down everyone's throats. Well it won't WORK with me. I know what is real. I know what is possible. I have seen it on my bench, and on the benches of OTHERS involved in this work. Once you KNOW the truth, no flyweight propagandist like YOU is going to get us to back off. You said there was NO SUCH THING as "speed up under load" and DEMANDED that we prove it. I wouldn't show videos, but others wanted to show you up, so they DID. So now you've admitted it's possible but, according to YOU of no importance or significance. You are such a JOKE.

And by the way, I stand by the statement you quoted above. A heavier rotor is a bigger load on the motor and increases the amp draw of the motor. Period. In what way does that violate ANY of Newtons Laws of motion? It doesn't. Just you trying misdirection AGAIN.

...
And by the way, I stand by the statement you quoted above. A heavier rotor is a bigger load on the motor and increases the amp draw of the motor. Period. In what way does that violate ANY of Newtons Laws of motion? ...

Here we go again. This is a blatant contradiction of Newton's First Law of Motion.

bi

[Turion]

You said I TOLD you that I know more about the physics of motion than Isaac Newton. I never TOLD you that did I? I never ever said those words. I never said what you claim I said. That's why you AVOIDED it when I called you on it. You are INTERPRETING what I say according to YOUR rules once again. In other words, you LIED when you said I TOLD you I know more about the physics of motion than Isaac Newton. LIAR. You're a bald faced liar trying to cover up your lies with misdirection like you usually do. Liar, liar, pants on fire. That's your game, putting words in people's mouths, twisting what people say. Picking out bits and pieces you can jump on and correct or impugn. Because that's all you know how to do. Never a contribution. Never an original thought. Always negative crap. We know what you are bi. It's clear to everyone here. You aren't searching for the truth. You're trying to ram your version of alternate facts down everyone's throats. Well it won't WORK with me. I know what is real. I know what is possible. I have seen it on my bench, and on the benches of OTHERS involved in this work. Once you KNOW the truth, no flyweight propagandist like YOU is going to get us to back off. You said there was NO SUCH THING as "speed up under load" and DEMANDED that we prove it. I wouldn't show videos, but others wanted to show you up, so they DID. So now you've admitted it's possible but, according to YOU of no importance or significance. You are such a JOKE.

And by the way, I stand by the statement you quoted above. A heavier rotor is a bigger load on the motor and increases the amp draw of the motor. Period. In what way does that violate ANY of Newtons Laws of motion? It doesn't. Just you trying misdirection AGAIN.

[bistander]

What I don't remember is saying I know more about the physics of motion than Issac Newton. I say that I never made that statement. You say I did. When and where? Show us. Or are you lying?

... For the LAST time, increased weight of the rotor is an increase in resistance to turning or increased LOAD on the motor. ...

This is it. You're saying that you are right and therefore implying Newton is wrong about mass, motion and related physics. How else could that discussion be interpreted?

bi

[Turion]

What I don't remember is saying I know more about the physics of motion than Issac Newton. I say that I never made that statement. You say I did. When and where? Show us. Or are you lying?

[bistander]

I never said THAT, and you know it. I notice you didn't respond to my post pointing that out. That's what you DO. avoid the truth, and uphold that party line that Free Energy is impossible. Good luck with THAT,

You have called me "greedy." You have called me a liar, a fraud, a con man. You have said I spread B.S. Yet NOW you are pretending to be a little lamb who never er says anything bad about anyone. Poor little you. So picked on. Remember, I have screen shots of all those posts. I keep track of that stuff.

... The rotor he is currently using is heavier than my original rotor so it may require more amps to turn it. ...

You don't remember this or the discussion that followed?

[Turion]

Practically everything that you "know" and post here is erroneous or a falsehood. Just like your statement quoted above. Or a while back when you told me that you knew more about the physics of motion than Issac Newton.

bi

I never said THAT, and you know it. I notice you didn't respond to my post pointing that out. That's what you DO. avoid the truth, and uphold that party line that Free Energy is impossible. Good luck with THAT,

You have called me "greedy." You have called me a liar, a fraud, a con man. You have said I spread B.S. Yet NOW you are pretending to be a little lamb who never er says anything bad about anyone. Poor little you. So picked on. Remember, I have screen shots of all those posts. I keep track of that stuff.

[bistander]

He has been attacking everyone for years. Clown show paid antagonist. Don't let him get to you, that is the plan. Just keep tearing on a piece of flesh sucking out the life force. This is what BYE does. We know that we can't change that. We have tried to help BYE for over 5 years. Thx for chiming in.

I do not attack anyone. I comment on what they post. OK, I admit once in a while Turion gets to me and I call him greedy. But for the most part, I refrain, and try hard to stick to the subject. I attempt to help. Most often, the OP doesn't appreciate it, but I do get PMs from members thanking me.

bi

[BroMikey]

I'll post results over on the bistander thread.

It'd be nice to start talking about science instead of me.

bi

No you won't your thread is dead so you have to come to mine. And no you are not trying to complete any experiments Turion has mentioned. Just more smoke. Show your work or go away.

[BroMikey]

Bi, your density is amazing, do you even think about what is written?

The premise that all those joules are converted is absurd, exactly my point.


I’m done here.

He has been attacking everyone for years. Clown show paid antagonist. Don't let him get to you, that is the plan. Just keep tearing on a piece of flesh sucking out the life force. This is what BYE does. We know that we can't change that. We have tried to help BYE for over 5 years. Thx for chiming in.

[bistander]

I have suggested this experiment before. Charge a battery and let it rest. Now discharge it to a load through a meter measuring how many watts were used. Now connect your battery charger to wall through a kilowatt meter and take a look at how many watts it takes to charge that battery. WHY so many just to charge it... just to replace a little energy. The reason is because you are NOT just charging it. You are pushing a big rock up a hill so you can take advantage of the work it will do on the way down, but not only THAT, the rock is pushing BACK. The energy does not WANT to be all on one side of a battery, but we force it there. THAT TAKES WORK. More work than replacing what modern theory would tell us the battery "lost" when it ran a motor for a while.

But this is NOT the thread for this discussion, so I will say no more about it. I've had my say. I'll let history judge my words. I'm happy with that.

Hmm. Looks familiar. I think I ran that exactly as you say, recently. I've done it hundreds of times, maybe thousands, over my career. If I don't see the recent test data, I'll run it again.

You say "Now discharge it to a load through a meter measuring how many watts were used. Now connect your battery charger to wall through a kilowatt meter and take a look at how many watts it takes to charge that battery." I assume you mean watt hours, or joules. I'll post results over on the bistander thread.

It'd be nice to start talking about science instead of me.

bi

[bistander]

I wrote, "What does come out can be captured and boosted to a higher potential (optional) and reused before returning to the source battery. Turion has shared those circuits here."

Twisted my words, and don't try to claim ignorance about his and other member's battery, motor, boost converter circuits. You know good and well which circuits were being mentioned.

Huh! It was an exact quote from you. Albeit a partial. I did include the icon so anyone can easily click and see your complete post. I twisted no words and have no bad intent. I'm genuinely curious about that to which you refer.

Is it the 1BGS which he posted and I replicated?

bi

[Cadman]

Regarding Turion's method of reusing current and getting extra energy.

To all,

Can anybody help me find the examples?


Thanks,

bi

I wrote, "What does come out can be captured and boosted to a higher potential (optional) and reused before returning to the source battery. Turion has shared those circuits here."

Twisted my words, and don't try to claim ignorance about his and other member's battery, motor, boost converter circuits. You know good and well which circuits were being mentioned.