Claim Buster Topic

[Web000x]

Yes I have, why is that ? Did you calculate the real efficiency of that ?

It is more efficient to power the load at the lower frequency than it is to
power it at the higher frequency to show the reduction in input.

At the lower frequency it uses 58 watts to power about a 3 watt load
(I think the load is a bit less than 3 watt).
And at higher frequency it uses about 74 watts to power the same load.

So it uses 16 watts more power to show a decrease when the load is applied.

Obviously he has reduced the efficiency of lighting the light. Neat trick.
But what possible use could it be to use more power just so the meter can be
seen to reduce. Would it be ok if he used 500 Kw of power to light a 50 Kw
load bank just to see a reduction of 50 Kw, thereby wasting many Kw ?

Also at the lower frequency I think the motor is not working at it's most
efficient speed as well, I think is is made to run at a slower speed it doesn't
like to run at.

Let me know you're calculations. Remember the real efficiency is all the power
used after the wall socket, that means the frequency drive controller and the
drive motor of the generator, If it was just the drive motor plugged into the
wall it wouldn't work like that.

Can you explain to me how it is an improvement in efficiency to use more
power to power the same load? Because in my reality that is a reduction in
efficiency.

Cheers

If the Lenz action/reactions are additive, keep adding generator coils. The power output goes up at any rate physically possible but is constrained to lack of space for more coil mounting.

Since the action/reaction are assisting the motor, there is absolutely no reason why you could not continue to add rotors to the same shaft and add more coils. Eventually, by adding enough coils/rotors, you would be able to overcome the initial input energy since the accelerated lenz effect is assisting in the direction of rotation.

Dave

[Farmhand]

If the Lenz action/reactions are additive, keep adding generator coils. The power output goes up at any rate physically possible but is constrained to lack of space for more coil mounting.

Since the action/reaction are assisting the motor, there is absolutely no reason why you could not continue to add rotors to the same shaft and add more coils. Eventually, by adding enough coils/rotors, you would be able to overcome the initial input energy since the accelerated lenz effect is assisting in the direction of rotation.

Dave

This is you're opinion and unproven. Please prove it.

Until it is proved it is speculation. There is no prove the rotor is assisting the
motor. Where is the proof ? In my opinion the motor speeds up mainly
because of the reduced drag on the rotor. I have demonstrated how this is possible.

Here
Reduced input current under added load effects 33 - YouTube

And here
Reduced input under load effects.wmv - YouTube

Also to run the drive motor he would need to produce sine wave AC, would he not.
Is the generator output sine wave AC of the required voltage ?

Cheers

[Web000x]

This is you're opinion and unproven. Please prove it.

Until it is proved it is speculation. There is no prove the rotor is assisting the
motor. Where is the proof ? In my opinion the motor speeds up mainly
because of the reduced drag on the rotor. I have demonstrated how this is possible.

Here
Reduced input current under added load effects 33 - YouTube

And here
Reduced input under load effects.wmv - YouTube

Also to run the drive motor he would need to produce sine wave AC, would he not.
Is the generator output sine wave AC of the required voltage ?

Cheers

I'm unclear on your videos. Was that an attempt to replicate Thane Heins's demonstrations?

Most of the tests that I have seen Thane demonstrate show an unloaded (zero Lenz) rotor as the base line.

Next, he throws his knife switch that engage the generator coils. The loaded rotor speeds up.

How can it be reduced drag if there was no (Lenz) drag to begin with??

As for the AC sine wave, that is a small obstacle. Bridge Rectifier --> DC motors exist. Pulse motors exist...

Dave

[Farmhand]

I'm unclear on your videos. Was that an attempt to replicate Thane Heins's demonstrations?

Most of the tests that I have seen Thane demonstrate show an unloaded (zero Lenz) rotor as the base line.

Next, he throws his knife switch that engage the generator coils. The loaded rotor speeds up.

How can it be reduced drag if there was no (Lenz) drag to begin with??

As for the AC sine wave, that is a small obstacle. Bridge Rectifier --> DC motors exist. Pulse motors exist...

Dave

No it wasn't a replication of anything, just a demonstration of how easy it is
to reduce power by applying a load. Why would i want to replicate Thanes
stuff I have better things to do with my time.

In the video I make AC with a circuit and transformer which I make available
for the other transformer to use, you can see what happens when I do.
It's not hard to understand. No big deal.

I answered you're question. How about answering mine ?

What is the total efficiency of thanes setup in the video ?

How much power is he using to run the drive motor?
And what is the output power ?

I didn't say it was reduced Lens drag did I ? I just said drag.

Like I said all speculation.

Cheers

[Web000x]

Why would i want to replicate Thanes
stuff I have better things to do with my time.

I guess we are both speculating...

[Farmhand]

I guess we are both speculating...

What am I speculating about ?

Why won't you answer the questions of efficiency ?

[Farmhand]

If questions are not answered and dubious and unclear claims are made then speculation is all that can be done.

There is no speculating in my video's I posted here. There are also no claims.

Cheers

[Web000x]

What am I speculating about ?

Why won't you answer the questions of efficiency ?

I have no need to make efficiency calculations for somebody else. I never claimed that his numbers were anything to call home about. I have been looking at his experiments qualitatively. The only thing that I have been stressing is that Thane Heins demonstrations show a very interesting/counter-intuitive effect that needs more consideration than a baseless debunking.

You are speculating because you have never built Thane's setup and you are telling people that there is no excess energy coming into this system. Until you build this unit, your claim busting holds no merit. (Same holds true for myself)

Dave

[Farmhand]

I have no need to make efficiency calculations for somebody else. I never claimed that his numbers were anything to call home about. I have been looking at his experiments qualitatively. The only thing that I have been stressing is that Thane Heins demonstrations show a very interesting/counter-intuitive effect that needs more consideration than a baseless debunking.

You are speculating because you have never built Thane's setup and you are telling people that there is no excess energy coming into this system. Until you build this unit, your claim busting holds no merit. (Same holds true for myself)

Dave

Ok that's you're opinion and you're entitled to it.

Cheers

P.S. I don't call what I have done as baseless or debunking the merit of experimenting in that way. But it is you're right to have you're opinion.

[nueview]

i have been seeing alot of unusual things lately and i am beginning to wonder if the question of were does the extra power come from is as inportant as how does one accomplish it.
i have come to also realize that there is another form of power we generate but do not use and do not measure with our instruments although it is present as point of fact and it does not work as present electronics predicts.

Martin

[ewizard]

i have been seeing alot of unusual things lately and i am beginning to wonder if the question of were does the extra power come from is as inportant as how does one accomplish it.
i have come to also realize that there is another form of power we generate but do not use and do not measure with our instruments although it is present as point of fact and it does not work as present electronics predicts.

Martin

I'm not sure this is the thread for discussing that but if Farmhand is okay with it I'd like to get at least a basic idea of what you are talking about if you can share.

[Farmhand]

I don't mind really, I've said my piece. I kind of agree, i'm not too bothered
with where any extra energy comes from, but to make a claim and prove it it
should be explained, if it can't fair enough, still if output exceeds input to me
that's free energy, but the system that is being measured needs to be
defined.

To me measuring anything but the useful output compared to total system
input is pointless. Just measuring one part of a system at 140 % "apparent
efficiency" or working efficiency is pointless if the whole system is only 25 %
efficient, as in paid for input compared to useful output.

Also I can't see how extra energy can be claimed until the total output
exceeds the input provided by us, meaning noise heat and everything
intended as output, for the whole system from stored energy to load power.
But still the losses are not useful output so it a different thing.

For instance in a setup which is using 200 watts to just run, then the total
output (including losses) would need to be more than that, to convince me.

Fell free to discuss it.

Cheers

P.S. My point was and is that OU cannot be claimed by measuring one part of
a system as over 100% efficient when that whole system is clearly under
unity and not only under unity but inefficient.

Because if that is OU then I can do it too, but it is not, and I for one won't
buy into it.

I think it is misleading to do that and leads people to think there is real over unity,
which wastes time money and eventually upsets a lot of people. Because
I think people want real over unity like 200 watts input 300 watts output.
Not 200 watts input 40 watts output and the claim that one small part is
Over unity and producing free energy.


,,

[ewizard]

I can see where you are coming from Farmhand and I agree. I honestly haven't looked at Thane's stuff enough lately to determine what it does but I had the impression he is being careful to NOT claim OU even if he may have it because that throws up so many red flags to companies and other people that might have interest. Either way I think he has something of interest whether OU or not. I'll try to get time to look into it more but I just have seen in the past how articulate and knowledgeable he is (or so he appears to me at least ) and how extensive his tests have been.

[nueview]

OK i will try to explain some of the things i am thinking in a small way because it needs a starter point i ran into several things that got me questioning the whole electron idea and i started to see that fields change everything we know about the electrical phenomena.
the more i looked the more i found and the more that started to support the view i was beginning to have about the whole system. nuclear physics actually supports most of what i am thinking so i am not overturning anything just looking at it differently.
i could go into a magnet and reduce it to complex field actions and it works beautifully without ever having an electron and just as easily be upset from working as well.
but it is the fact that even a magnet is a driven field action from within and without but we can not account for all the energy put in for the output. this leads me to think we are missing part of the story.
if in any circuit i look for static electric actions they are easy to come up with and they can do the opposite of the magnetic action.
have you ever seen a large Tesla coil running and generating sparks and do so for about 20 or so seconds and then go quiet for 20 or so seconds and then begin sparking again. why should or does this happen?
how and what does a battery loose charge and still run a circuit for 38 days being dead.
with out an electroscope you cannot see the voltage rise and fall so the energy is not measured by your meters or scopes but is present. does it effect the performance of a circuit if the overall charge on the circuit is displaced or does it cause a third action or force to be present from what i have found it appears this is the case.
my point being that electron action does not account for the many other things that occur when we see systems like this and energy is present and moving producing an action without energy in and out of the system accounted for.
Martin

actually it can all be accounted for if we stop thinking everything electrical is done by an electron.

[Slider2732]

While Thane is time respected and is most certainly pushing research ahead and at the right people, I do share some reservations that Farmhand may be directing towards.
In the videos, we see an unloaded generator, then it is loaded and now amazingly speeds up.
Well, yeah, but the coils are always present in the machine...is that what you mean Farmhand ?
The drag of the windings and whatever core is within each coil has to be considered, in a machine that always has them present. Powering those coils, such that they reduce that drag is where i'm having troubles with this too.
I may be off by 400 miles in thinking, but that's been the stumbler for me.

If the power coils are in fact way out of the magnetic influences and any induction fields until being introduced, then that would change my thinking entirely.
Disclaimer - i'm nowhere near as adept as many fellow posters on a number of such issues.