From what I can gather, he claims the extra energy is "synthesized", but synthesized from what ? I don't see how a setup can be observed to be synthesizing energy without the observer knowing what the energy is being synthesized from. Synthesizing the way I understand it is simply making something artificially by creating one thing/s from other things.
Just a transformation by combining of things to get energy ? I'm confused as to what exactly is claimed.
It's a vague claim to say the least, I just wish people would be more specific, and attempt to explain things in layman's terms, rather than be vague and not "really" make any specific claim at all.
I'm unimpressed by the substance of the claim more than anything. As are others going by the lack of responses.
Cheers
P.S. I think with any claim of extra energy where losses are calculated there should be included an evaluation of the percentage of input energy to the input energy which become "losses". The losses are already calculated all that is needed is the figure for input energy. Then any discrepancies can be seen as output gains or not.
If the losses can be calculated then surely he can calculate if there is energy taken from the supply or returned/added energy to the supply, the output, as well as the losses. All information is then given.
1. Energy taken from the supply and not returned. 2. Losses 3. Output energy.
If 1 and 2 equal 3 then no extra energy is seen, if 3 exceeds 1 and 2 then there is another source of input energy or part of the device is transformed into energy as fuel, if 1 and 2 exceed 3 then there are losses not accounted for.
..
« Last Edit: 2012-09-21, 02:22:10 by Farmhand »
|