Man Solves Tesla’s Secret To Amplifying Power By Nearly 5000%

a reply to: DenyObfuscation

And there's your sign

a reply to: EvillerBob

The the output is more exponential than the input. And That is what i was referring to with the quote. That you can produce more energy with little energy. If that is not the case, then humans have a shallow understanding of electricity and need to get out their measuring equipment and re-calibrate them.

Regards,

SK

a reply to: ChaoticOrder

I always enjoy reading the rubbish that is written about Tesla.

From your link:-

. It does remind one that Tesla was working at the very start of the electronic age

Who told you that?

Tesla was born in 1856 and was a late comer in the field of electronics and electricity. Much had already been achieved before he was born.

en.wikipedia.org...

originally posted by: SirKonstantin
a reply to: EvillerBob

The the output is more exponential than the input. And That is what i was referring to with the quote. That you can produce more energy with little energy. If that is not the case, then humans have a shallow understanding of electricity and need to get out their measuring equipment and re-calibrate them.

Regards,

SK

Except the EM Drive, if it even works, appears to convert large amounts of energy into small amounts of thrust. Pretty much the exact opposite of a system where "the output is more exponential than the input".

It's a horribly inefficient system, but one that can benefits from our ability to generate large amounts of power from small packages (ie nuclear reactors on submarines). A horribly inefficient system than can run for 25+ years without refuelling is still better than an efficient system that works for a week before running out of fuel. That's one of the big reasons why EM Drives could be a game-changer if they work.

Nothing comes from nothing. Power cannot be "amplified" without inputting more power to do so.

If it could, we would be on the cusp of perpetual motion / "zero-point" energy and our current understanding of the physical universe would have to be re-assessed.

a reply to: buddha

Listen to the last motor at end of video. when he holds the wheel at 200 rpm. it slows a LOT so he stops holding. and says it has the same Power!!! Fake!

Haven't watched the vid yet, but I seem to remember either Dollar or Bearden saying that with the present system, a motor is kind of fighting itself, because of back-EMF I think, and that with a different system you could improve the efficiency of all the motors in use, which would mean the power grid could be more efficient and not need as much upgrading in the future. As you mention though, if the motor is not putting out as much power, for which you would need to do some tests, then what use is it? I'll shut up now 'till I've watched the vid.

originally posted by: TheInhumanCentipede
Nothing comes from nothing. Power cannot be "amplified" without inputting more power to do so.

If it could, we would be on the cusp of perpetual motion / "zero-point" energy and our current understanding of the physical universe would have to be re-assessed.

doesnt everything come from nothing?

originally posted by: hellobruce

originally posted by: ChaoticOrder
Much like the reason we don't use DC in the power grid, we use oscillating AC current to power homes because the losses are much smaller over long distances.

Please explain how the losses for DC are more than AC....

As simple as I can explain it'
We use ac for power transmission because ac voltage can be increased at the point of origin with the use of transformer, travel a long distance through the lines, with low line loss to resistance . Then reduced at the sub station, and further reduced at your home with transformers to a safe, useable voltage.
Transformers work by using coils of wire wrapped around an iron core. The incoming coils, are called the primary, and the out put coils are called the secondary. The changes in voltage are directly proportional to the number turns in each coil. The iron core acts to stabilize the magnetic field.
When we pass a current through the primary it creates a magnetic field. As the field collapses it induces current flow in the secondary coils. In the US the frequency is 60 time a second.
You can't us DC in a power transformer because DC has no frequency and thus no collapse of the magnetic field. There for DC is impractical for long transmission.

I first learned about this phenomena while building a crystal radio set.
You just need to tap the resonant frequency of the human audience.
They made a lot of calculations at the beginning of the 20th century.

originally posted by: Nickn3
We use ac for power transmission

Not always....

en.wikipedia.org...

Depending on voltage level and construction details, HVDC transmission losses are quoted as about 3.5% per 1,000 km, which are 30 – 40% less than with AC lines, at the same voltage levels.[22]

a reply to: [post=20018352]suicideeddie....it's not trash necessarily.....there a reason A C power is easier to send over the wires.....something helps it stay potent!! like magnetic action on the wire

originally posted by: hellobruce

originally posted by: Nickn3
We use ac for power transmission

Not always....

en.wikipedia.org...

Depending on voltage level and construction details, HVDC transmission losses are quoted as about 3.5% per 1,000 km, which are 30 – 40% less than with AC lines, at the same voltage levels.[22]

DC power does travel through a line more efficiently and is even far better for underwater transmissions. The reason it lost the battle was partly do to Tesla. He saw a power grid with a few locations providing power to everyone. While Edison on the other hand everyone would have had local DC power stations. The reason AC is better for transmissions is its easier to step down the voltage than DC. Meaning transformers could be smaller. And didn't require a row of batteries at the time. Meaning it was cheaper.

As for this video here all they are doing is playing with gaps using it as a transformer. Get the timing right and you can show false gains. For example want to save energy on a light bulb take it down to about 19 mhz most people won't see the difference between that and 60 hrz. It will be more efficient and save energy but don't try to run an electric motor off it it would use more energy then 60 hrz. A computer just wouldn't run frequency would be to low. The reason 60 hrz is used is its a good compromise for everything. Europe it's 50hrz if I remember correctly


Playing with frequencies or harmonics is fine for one machine but a power grid needs to handle all electric components. In this video it's not magic it's not even new tech even though the guy in the video seems to think so. As the old saying goes he's robbing Peter to pay paul. For example in a stun gun I can make a 9volt battery provide 150000 volts. But in doing so my amps drop. Meaning I still have the same original amount of power. Now if I'm stupid and only concern myself with voltage it looks like a massive increase of free energy. Pay close attention to him powering up the device to get it spinning to speed he uses volts then shuts them off he's cheating.

originally posted by: GaryN
a reply to: buddha

Listen to the last motor at end of video. when he holds the wheel at 200 rpm. it slows a LOT so he stops holding. and says it has the same Power!!! Fake!

Haven't watched the vid yet, but I seem to remember either Dollar or Bearden saying that with the present system, a motor is kind of fighting itself, because of back-EMF I think...

Right. Back EMF is why a motor doesn't look like a short circuit. If the motor's spinning without much of a load, it generates a counter voltage that balances out most of the input voltage. Thus it draws little current. As the mechanical load increases, the motor doesn't spin as fast and generates less back EMF, thus the voltage across the windings seems to increase and the motor draws more power.

Therefore back EMF is a useful negative feedback mechanism that reduces power consumption under low loads and tends to keep the motor running at a constant speed.

(With AC motors it's slip angle)

originally posted by: WeAre0ne
Wow, this topic proves ATSers don't even bother to watch the video before speaking, or understand what is actually going on from the creator himself instead of the halfwit writer of the article based on him. It seems like you people have given up hope so much that you will dismiss things based on nothing but your assumption this is another gimmick, and just totally ignore the content. This is not the usual free energy topic...

With that said... After watching the video, and understanding what this guy really is doing, I believe he is on to something and completely legit.

All of you pretty much ignored his main area of concern which is counter-electromotive force which it seems he may have actually found a way to counteract or at least use it to his advantage. His armature design for his generator/alternator is something I never even considered, and he just gave me some good ideas of my own.

Apparently he has found a way to use the back EMF to help assist his motor instead of resist it, making it way more efficient, and not just with electromechanical devices, but with general circuits as well which makes sense when thinking of how the magnetic field of a transformer could affect the overall circuit.

The quality of this guy's builds, and his knowledge, it seems he is incredibly serious about this and not just looking for money (I dont even think he needs money). This is the real deal guys. He is not getting something from nothing, this isn't free energy, he just increased the efficiency of electric circuits and generators/alternators tenfold.

Okay I was with you till one small mistake which sort of makes a mockery of your comment. You berated people for not even watching the video then state that you don't think he even needs money. In the video that you berated people for not watching he clearly states he ran out of money... XD He clearly states he is looking to make a team and get more money to further his research. He actually talks about money a fair few times yet you seem to have missed it? Did you watch the video? :p

I call bs.... I think he is showing the input power and claiming that it is the output power,and vice versa..which makes sense when he mentioned the low power factor as well. Also some of the things he says just don't make any sense. At 33:10 of the video, he mentions that this kind of system needs that light bulb, otherwise the "recaptured power" would feed back to the source and blow up the power supply. Then 5 seconds later he says he will turn off the lamp to feed back power to the power supply.

Another telling sign with the setup in that section of the video...he claims the watt meter on the right side is hooked up to the mains...but why would he have the furthest meter from the main line hooked up to the main line? Then he has the watt meter on the left side supposedly hooked up to the power supply behind the motor. Again, this is the furthest meter from the power supply.

Most likely he has some low efficiency Dc to Dc converter, with some kind of power factor correction circuit hooked up to the lamp. When the lamp is on the efficiency goes up to the high 90's...and all the power he is pulling from the mains is used up. Then, he turns the lamp off, and shows us the "mains" meter reading a low wattage. But that's really the output of his converter. This "returned power" that he keeps talking about is just more proof that it's bs. He is talking about the reactive power which went unused and means that the efficiency is lower.

If I send you a 100 watts and you use 80 watts, that does not mean you were 125% efficient..it means you were 80% efficient. The other 20 watts was just wasted because it did not do any work.Basically you didn't use it. Now, if I send 100 watts and you use 125 watts, then yes somehow you managed to be 125% efficient, but there still would not be 25 watts being "sent back"

Plus I think it's just common sense, if I posted some video like this, I know people would be skeptical. It would not be hard to show the main power coming from the wall - to the watt meter - and then to the input of the converter. Then show the output of the converter clearly hooked up to another watt meter.

It's really simple, you show the wattage going in to the converter - and the wattage coming out of the converter clearly wired, and if you have more wattage coming out than going in - you'll be rich...or dead lol

The rest of the stuff he is saying and showing, some of it make sense, some of it doesn't,but most people don't understand anyway.By adding all this extra stuff he is just trying to confuse people and make it seem legit. Again, show the wattage clearly going in, and the wattage clearly going out, and if you get more wattage going out, you don't need to show or explain anything else and people would still contact you.

originally posted by: liteonit6969
a reply to: suicideeddie

Where's the profit from the scam?

For a scam to work there must be a profit.

I can't see a profit here.

Buy his stuff
HERE

watched 20 mins of the video and so far it looks promising. An ardent bloke researching for 45 years. Will revert after watching the full video

People have been trying to get that "capacitive bounce" thing to work for years without success. If this dude has done it, then good for him. We'll all live in a wonderful future.

If the dude has done it, in all likelihood he'll suddenly and tragically have a heart attack, or commit suicide via two gunshots to the back of the head.

originally posted by: Eilasvaleleyn
If the dude has done it, in all likelihood he'll suddenly and tragically have a heart attack, or commit suicide via two gunshots to the back of the head.

Lol nice one.
The dude seems legit with 300 % eff