Barbosa and Leal Devices - Info and Replication Details

[totoalas]

Hi Totoalas

My My you are giving away all of your gold nuggets Nice

going my main man. I am very impressed with wantomake also.

You guys are really moving this thread over.

The 7 watt bulb running from 12.6 down to 12.5 v in 12 hours

says it all. 70 percent brightness say 60 percent power usage to

be over on calc's is a hansom harvest indeed.

Very shocking.

So lets say 4.2 watts is going into the bulb to get 70 percent

brightness. Joules = watt/seconds this is 4.2 watts every second

this = 4.2 watts X 60 seconds = 252 joules of power in one minute.

Next we could say 4.2 watts 3600 seconds = 15,000 joules per hour.

12 hours X 15,000 joules per hour = 181,000 joules.

So your system is collecting 181,000 joules from somewhere.

Now we can look at the battery.

Lets say the battery is a 100 ah battery.

For this battery numbers look like this. C20 rate = 70 ah divided by 20

And you would probably never get 70ah out of a cheap battery

from WALMART. So 70ah/C20 = 3.5 amps.

3.5 amps for 20 hours will charge the battery and 3.5amps

of delivery to supply current over a 20 hour period.

but we are going for 12 hours.

So around 6 amps at 14 volts = 84 watts per second to charge

your 100ah battery back up again = 84watts X 3600 seconds X 12

= 3,600,000 joules to charge that battery back up.

or we could say that a heavy duty battery like that could give

back 2,000,000 joules in a 12 hour time frame with some heating.

So at least 2,000,000 joule available and your light used 181,000

joules. So it looks like the battery is to big.

What size is your battery?

Thanks for the math calculation lol
Im using a 30 ah car battery charged by 2 10 w solar panel which was disconnected during the test .....

[BroMikey]

Hi Clarence
you can pm me also on your set up as I have all the parts lying idle and we can do parallel results

The Oscillator car ignition coil set up works using power companys earth rod
running an 7 watts led lamp from 12.64 v dc to 12. 50 in 12 hours
the output from the ignition coil shows HV leakage as I accidentally touch one pole........ and as I used a pen power probe it has detected around the battery ignition coils except for the input of oscillator circuit ... if it can be harnessed like in a Slayer circuit wrapping a coil and converting to dc to put back to the battery I think this will work led is 70 % illuminated
My set up used only battery and ignition coils/ osc illator circuit

Another way is to wrap the hv cable in between coils to a crt tv hv coil
iron core and the out put from the primary as step down.....

Hi Totoalas

My My you are giving away all of your gold nuggets Nice

going my main man. I am very impressed with wantomake also.

You guys are really moving this thread over.

The 7 watt bulb running from 12.6 down to 12.5 v in 12 hours

says it all. 70 percent brightness say 60 percent power usage to

be over on calc's is a hansom harvest indeed.

Very shocking.

So lets say 4.2 watts is going into the bulb to get 70 percent

brightness. Joules = watt/seconds this is 4.2 watts every second

this = 4.2 watts X 60 seconds = 252 joules of power in one minute.

Next we could say 4.2 watts 3600 seconds = 15,000 joules per hour.

12 hours X 15,000 joules per hour = 181,000 joules.

So your system is collecting 181,000 joules from somewhere.

Now we can look at the battery.

Lets say the battery is a 100 ah battery.

For this battery numbers look like this. C20 rate = 70 ah divided by 20

And you would probably never get 70ah out of a cheap battery

from WALMART. So 70ah/C20 = 3.5 amps.

3.5 amps for 20 hours will charge the battery and 3.5amps

of delivery to supply current over a 20 hour period.

but we are going for 12 hours.

So around 6 amps at 14 volts = 84 watts per second to charge

your 100ah battery back up again = 84watts X 3600 seconds X 12

= 3,600,000 joules to charge that battery back up.

or we could say that a heavy duty battery like that could give

back 2,000,000 joules in a 12 hour time frame with some heating.

So at least 2,000,000 joule available and your light used 181,000

joules. So it looks like the battery is to big.

What size is your battery?

[BroMikey]

Hello MadMack, BroMikey,

I finished my rebuild and prepped it at the same time for a 120/240 version.
Photos attached

I used the pipe connection to avoid a MOUNTAIN of wire spaghetti both now and in the future components.

still works the same - still needs the added rods but as I discussed I am going a different route instead of adding more rods..

Will keep you posted on how its going.

Best,
Respects,

Clarence

WOW CLARENCE

That looks so nice. You are a serious inventor/replicator Sir. Very few

could ever rival your patient character to the point trolls come

running. Just let them keep it up and I'll start another thread

and the losers can stay here

Anyway for now we will see if these boys can straighten up.

Your new build is a step up, really good to have you here with

us Clarence. Never have I seem such professional work to

get free energy for a cost effective route.

You are the man we are counting on you Clarence.

You will get a few more rods down the road or maybe

your going to find more another way.

We can discuss it over the phone or whatever.

I can think of a few tweaks myself but what I

have to offer is not much. It's you Clarence

you got the whole show.

[clarence]

Are the ground rods still being used?
That's a big change to what you showed before.
Still needs the added rods , but going a different route,
What does that mean?
Something don't sound right.
Clarence, Why are you changing things, did your battery go dead?
If it works, show us.
I'll mortgage the house, but I need to know it works.
artv

NOPE! no changes! still works exactly like it did before teardown!

the different route is MY personal information and will NEVER be revealed on this forum or any other. that would be a MEGA DUMB ASS thing for me to do considering all past forum involvement I have had. been there-done that-
never again.

look at the clamp meter! does that look like a dead battery reading to you? REALLY!?

everybody wants the pie - BUT FIRST they want just a little tiny slice to see if they like it!

BEST,

Clarence

[MadMack]

[totoalas]

Hi Clarence
you can pm me also on your set up as I have all the parts lying idle and we can do parallel results

The Oscillator car ignition coil set up works using power companys earth rod
running an 7 watts led lamp from 12.64 v dc to 12. 50 in 12 hours
the output from the ignition coil shows HV leakage as I accidentally touch one pole........ and as I used a pen power probe it has detected around the battery ignition coils except for the input of oscillator circuit ... if it can be harnessed like in a Slayer circuit wrapping a coil and converting to dc to put back to the battery I think this will work led is 70 % illuminated
My set up used only battery and ignition coils/ osc illator circuit

Another way is to wrap the hv cable in between coils to a crt tv hv coil
iron core and the out put from the primary as step down.....

[shylo]

Are the ground rods still being used?
That's a big change to what you showed before.
Still needs the added rods , but going a different route,
What does that mean?
Something don't sound right.
Clarence, Why are you changing things, did your battery go dead?
If it works, show us.
I'll mortgage the house, but I need to know it works.
artv

[clarence]

Rebuild completed - prepped for 120/240 version

Hello MadMack, BroMikey,

I finished my rebuild and prepped it at the same time for a 120/240 version.
Photos attached

I used the pipe connection to avoid a MOUNTAIN of wire spaghetti both now and in the future components.

still works the same - still needs the added rods but as I discussed I am going a different route instead of adding more rods..

Will keep you posted on how its going.

Best,
Respects,

Clarence

[citfta]

MadMack I apologize for the way I worded my post. I am sorry that I offended you with the way I responded. I do still maintain that my advice against disconnecting the safety ground is based on a real safety issue. You were lucky that you did not have any problems when doing that. I have seen electronic devices damaged because the safety ground was damaged to the point of not protecting the house wiring.

Again I apologize for wording my post the way I did.

Respectfully,
Carroll

[kenssurplus]

In or out of sync

MadMack, Thanks for offering a conciliatory note. That has given me the peace of mind enough to continue with this thread. There is one part of your last post I would like to address.

Anyway, I got some successful results that indicate to me that it might be next to impossible to avoid mains to earth current no matter how far I was able to go from my mains earth rod. But I can't 'prove it'. How could I? All around my property every house and business is injecting electrons into the earth, how could it even be possible to avoid it in a populated area when using ground rods in the device? You can't, not even with a battery/inverter or isolation transformer system. It's subterranean clouds of discarded electrons, already metered and paid for. Thinking you can stick a ground rod into it and not be exposed to it is like dipping a paddle into a lake and expecting it to stay dry.

If I understand correctly, Mains power wherever it is found is always in sync. In other words, the frequency stays latched to the power company's generator even if the phase is delayed or advanced. In order to prove that you are not using power from the mains, the battery and inverter setup is suggested because the inverter has its own clock and sets it own frequency independent of whatever the mains is doing.

So, if you are truly isolated from the mains power, then your frequencies will be different. If not, then you are synced to the mains power generator, using mains power.

If the whole argument is that somewhere we have ourselves a ground loop with the mains power, then doing the experiment with the battery and inverter effectively eliminates this potential for error.

It was my understanding that the original question was whether Clarence's inverter was supplying the total power to the load through the ground rod setup (a ground loop) or whether the load was receiving most of its power from the ground with the inverter just supplying a tickle.
This has never really been explored much, to satisfy my curiosity.

Wantomake spoke of some positive indications from his efforts with car ignition coils. Whatever the connection scheme, I would think we would want to devise and implement a test of some kind to determine if indeed there is more comming out of the ground than what we are putting in. Otherwise, just hook the load straight to the inverter without all the extra coils, and ground rods and arguments.

[MadMack]

Level, let's call it quits. I'm not angry at you or citfta anymore. OK? Anyone can read for themselves how this all developed.

http://www.energeticforum.com/276349-post529.html

http://www.energeticforum.com/276354-post532.html

http://www.energeticforum.com/276357-post534.html

http://www.energeticforum.com/276359-post535.html

http://www.energeticforum.com/276361-post536.html

http://www.energeticforum.com/276363-post537.html

http://www.energeticforum.com/276365-post538.html

Up until this point we were having a rational discussion with each of us presenting different ideas.

Then things started going downhill when citfta chimed in with a snide remark.

http://www.energeticforum.com/276366-post539.html

And from there on we argued.

So...

You maintain that a battery/inverter system is the only thing to use.

Citfta suggests the use of an isolation transformer.

Myself, I have an open mind on the subject and the subject has been from the start, Clarence's setup, and all of my ideas presented pertain to the original subject. Others have contributed other variations.

Since the time of my first post my theories have evolved due partly to our early discussion, and some tests I have done with mains power. I originally decided to use the mains because I did not yet have the expensive battery charger and inverter Clarence used. By the way I did it exactly how I outlined and everything in my house survived unscathed every time. Must have been a miracle, huh

Anyway, I got some successful results that indicate to me that it might be next to impossible to avoid mains to earth current no matter how far I was able to go from my mains earth rod. But I can't 'prove it'. How could I? All around my property every house and business is injecting electrons into the earth, how could it even be possible to avoid it in a populated area when using ground rods in the device? You can't, not even with a battery/inverter or isolation transformer system. It's subterranean clouds of discarded electrons, already metered and paid for. Thinking you can stick a ground rod into it and not be exposed to it is like dipping a paddle into a lake and expecting it to stay dry.

On a hunch I translated 'captor de electron' and saw 'electron scavenger'. Now isn't that interesting? I think so.

Anyone care to rethink some things?

Mack

[level]

Hello MadMack. You said you were not intending on just arguing, but that is exactly what you are doing. Through all this you haven't provided one single valid reason why a person would want to use the mains instead of a battery and inverter, when you can simply use a battery and inverter and avoid a lot of ambiguity. Is it because you know that Clarence's setup does not work when using a battery and inverter, but 'works' when using the mains? As I have pointed out a few times, if it 'works' when plugged into the mains but not when using a battery and inverter, then obviously the extra power is coming from the mains iteself when plugged into the mains, whether it shows up properly on power meters or not. Also, people should be aware that Clarence's setup shown in his schematic is different than what Barbosa and Leal showed in their own patent application drawings, as Barbosa and Leal did not show earth ground connected to the neutral wire at the input of the device.

MadMack, if a person wants to just believe without doing proper testing under proper conditions that is their choice. Too often however what happens is some of these people who just want to believe are not satisfied with just believing, they want to silence anything that may show that their beliefs are not founded in actual fact and real results that can be demonstrated. They then start making personal attacks against people who present opposing facts and reasoning, or post up all sorts of silliness to try to bury any opposing point of view. This just disrupts the thread and is not helpful at all for people who are trying to determine how something is really working. All views are welcome in this thread, but a person should be able to back up what they are saying with facts and reasoning.

MadMack, please explain why you are so adamant that people should use the mains when it has already been explained in much detail in this thread that doing so do only gives ambiguous results at best?

I posted previously about some tests I did earlier in this thread with a single toroid Barbosa and Leal device, based as closely on Barbosa and Leal's patent docs as I could determine, but could not find any benefit at all to wrapping the earth ground wire around the high current secondary loop wire, although in those tests I did I did not have a really extensive earth ground setup, although my earth ground was not so bad. Still I would think that if there really was some valid effect to wrapping an earth ground wire around a high current wire that I would have seen at least some small effect when doing so, but I saw no measureable effect at all.

Another very simple reality check test that anyone can do if they are really interested in trying to get to the bottom of the Barbosa and Leal devices, is to run their Barbosa and Leal setup with the earth ground wire wrapped around the high current secondary wire, and measure or observe the power available to power loads by trying different amounts of load. Then remove the earth ground wire wrapping that wraps around the high current secondary so it is no longer wrapped around the secondary wire and see if the amount of power available to power loads drops at all. If the powered availabe to drive loads does not drop when removing the earth ground wire wrap, then very obviously it is not doing anything at all.

If someone can show that they can deliver more power to a load than they are drawing off a battery with a Barbosa and Leal device, then they may well be onto something. If someone can show that they have an obvious increase in power available to drive loads with the earth ground wire wrapped around the secondary wire than is available when that earth ground wire is not wrapped around the secondary wire, then they may well be onto something.

[MadMack]

Citfa,

You essentially said my advice was dangerous because an earth ground was needed. The earth ground is provided, need I remind you for TEST purposes. You were unaware of that and therefore ignorant of a fact and speaking from a false perspective, implying that I meant to remove ALL earth grounding from the circuits. And I have stated that if you want to use an isolation transformer or battery/inverter then by all means do so, and never have I argued or stated that inverter power is not good enough. Stop putting words into my mouth.

.

[MadMack]

Hello level. Nonsense eh? And you really do understand Clarence's schematic perfectly fine? You already knew that the earth ground is reestablished through Clarence's circuit when you agreed with citfa that my advice was dangerous? You understand everything about why Clarence's device showed a reduction of watts from the mains? You understand everything there is to know about the device?

Maybe you do. Is that why you have belittled Clarence's work and keep insinuating that it is only fooling the power meter? You posted a picture of your 'free energy device' as an example too, didn't you. You hooked it up to your 'mains hot wire to ground' to use your own words, and lit a 100 watt light bulb.

Tell us, were you fooling your power meter then? Were you not using power that ran through your meter, power that is paid for?

Have you ever used a current clamp on that mains hot wire to earth and read the current that is being fed to earth when different appliances are running and not running? I think you are aware of how much can be there. Your own words again 'Don't underestimate what kind of power a mains ground loop can provide..'

If you were able to reuse that current over and over after it has been metered (paid for) would not the reuse of current essentially be free?

Do you know that 'captor de electron' can be translated as 'electron scavenger'?

Are you still so sure of yourself about that $2000 extension cord?

Mack

[level]

Level, you may have looked at the schematics very carefully but it is obvious you do not understand what you have looked at. If you did you would not have agreed with that ignorant tirade of citfa's about my supposedly dangerous advice. Neither one of you realized the earth ground was reestablished through Clarence's circuit, so you both have proven to everyone that you really don't understand what you are talking about.

You should rethink what you are insisting on as the only acceptable device configuration because you are not seeing the flaw in your thinking, again. May I suggest that if you truly wish to understand that you build even a small replica yourself and do some testing of your own? Then maybe you can restore some of your credibility.

Mack

Hello MadMack. Now you are just talking nonsense. I understand Clarence's schematic perfectly fine. The fact is that if you connect Clarence's configuration to the mains, what you end up with is a $2000 extension cord, although not quite as efficient as an actual 10$ extension cord. I have pointed out that Barbosa and Leal showed the use of a battery and inverter in their own patent application drawings, so there really is no reason at all for not using a battery and inverter, and avoiding all the problems associated with using the mains. I just can't say it any clearer than that. Everyone is free to make up their own minds.

I personally would avoid using an isolation transformer unless you are going to take steps to show that the isolation transformer you are using is fully isolating the output on the secondary from the mains. You would need to show that you do not measure any significant voltage between either secondary wire and earth ground. Regarding relying on a transformer for isolation, I have observed in my own experiments that at higher frequencies even in the lower kHz range that a transformer with separate primary and secondary does not necessarily give you full isolation, possibly due to the capacitance between the primary and secondary windings. When using a battery and inverter there is no doubt at all that you are fully isolated from the mains, so that is definitely the way to go in my oipinion.

People can do whatever they want. If you want to plug Clarence's setup into the mains to give you a $2000 extension cord that may possibly fool your power meter to some extent, that is your business. If on the other hand someone is really interested in trying to understand if a Barbosa and Leal device can really provide free energy, then in my opinion it only makes sense to use a battery and inverter. If Barbosa and Leal's devices can really provide free energy, then since no one has been able to replicate and demonstrate this yet that I know of, it would appear that no one has figured out the secret to the arrangement. The other explanation is that Barbosa and Leal's devices really just do not work. Time may tell...

Happy experimenting everyone...