Tariel Kapanadze self runner - new video

[Grumpy]

Grumpy:

Thanks for clarifying that there are two different versions.

If you assume that the thick wire (i.e. the 6-turn wire for the low voltage output) goes to the bulb load and forms it's own current loop, then we can assume that the PVC HV transformer is acting like a legitimate step-down transformer.

The scenario that I outlined on the Magnacoaster thread still applies.  If the spark-gap starts to conduct when the high-voltage sine wave from the neon sign transformer is still on the upswing, then the mains power is ultimately being coupled through to the light bulb load.

I just watched a new German TV clip, where Kapanadze allegedly kick-starts the setup with a 9-volt battery and then it self-runs:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gErefbcTz-U

It's very easy to fake this stuff and TV journalists are almost never technical.  They are always looking for interesting and different human interest stories and Kapanadze fits the bill.

MileHigh

I never could figure out his wiring from the video (Kapanadze's), but if it really works, I would bet that it works similar to Tesla's Magnifier and I would start there.

[MileHigh]

Grumpy:

Yes I looked up the Tesla Magnifier.  It's basically a regular Tesla coil setup feeding a separate LC resonator.  So if you drive the main Tesla coil at the right frequency for the resonator, the resonator will be able to store (i.e.; resonate) that energy to higher and higher energy levels and the voltages can get into the millions of volts.  To be a sour-puss there is no free energy in sight there!

I tried to find an amazing Tesla concert clip with multiple coils playing an interesting song but failed.

The consolation prize is this:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8zNefMozOz4

Note that ForaTV is really worth checking out.  It is an excellent brain food site.

MileHigh

[Grumpy]

Grumpy:

Yes I looked up the Tesla Magnifier.  It's basically a regular Tesla coil setup feeding a separate LC resonator.  So if you drive the main Tesla coil at the right frequency for the resonator, the resonator will be able to store (i.e.; resonate) that energy to higher and higher energy levels and the voltages can get into the millions of volts.  To be a sour-puss there is no free energy in sight there!

I tried to find an amazing Tesla concert clip with multiple coils playing an interesting song but failed.

The consolation prize is this:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8zNefMozOz4

Note that ForaTV is really worth checking out.  It is an excellent brain food site.

MileHigh

Oh yeah of little faith.

An interesting demonstration that Tesla performed consisted of placing a sheet of aluminum foil on the end of a stick and then holding the stick while placing the foil on the end of it near the magnifier coil. 

The aluminum foil would vaporize with a sound like that of a cannon shot.

Any ideas on how or why this occurred?  I could guess that the foil would get hot or arc or crackle but not vaporize.

Reading up on the magnifier, you will find that the magnifier coil is never placed near anything that it can couple to inductively.

You can  argue that displacement current and polarization current do not exist, but I already know that Roentgen proved that they do exist and no one has disproved his experiments to date.

So, I'd venture a guess that there is one hell of a displacement current outside Tesla's magnifier coil and all currents have an associated magnetic field - even virtual ones.  This current could be caused by the Dirac Sea (or aether if you like that term) moving across the coil, inducing emf in addition to that supplied by the source impulses, magnifiying the total EMF.  Placing another conductor within this field will induce current into it as well.

If you were to try to build a generator based on these principles, you start with a coil that is terminated with a plate at each end.  Then you have to find a way to impact excite this coil and get the displacement current.  Once you get that down, you have to put a collector around or near the coil to induce current from the displacement current.

[giantkiller]

MH,
Do praytell...
I heard of 2 bicycle mechanics making a thingy in their garage that flies! Well there goes the planet. Just because they pedal uphill  leads them to believe they can cruise around aeronautically.
Then there are these 2 other guys making a chart plotter in their garage! Now they call themselves Hewlet Packard.
And then there are the two Steves that created a micro computer, eh?, in their garage too! The one guy wrote the apple boot rom on HP equipment. Sounds like collusion to me.
And I heard 2 guys walked on the moon! Why 2 guys all the time? So they can put up 'Men at work' sign? A guy working alone could be misunderstood as a 'Lone, crazed gunman'.
Looks like it takes more than 1 man to get things done on this planet.

[BEP]

GK,

All you need is a spilt personality.

We have that covered here. Only problem is, our benches wouldn't fit in the garage anymore.... we had to move them to the basement 

[MileHigh]

Grumpy:

The aluminum foil would vaporize with a sound like that of a cannon shot.

Any ideas on how or why this occurred?

I can take a guess but I'm not sure my explanation is correct.  Close to the magnifier coil capacitive sphere the voltage gradient in the air would be very very high.  Supposing it was 10,000 volts per centimeter, enough to make the air ionize if there was a good reason to do so.  The piece of foil is a conductor, which means it wants to be an equipotential, and be at the same voltage all over its surface.  This is incompatible with the super high voltage gradient in the air.  The air will ionize instantly and conduct current into or out the foil.  If you look at a point on the foil/air boundary, the air might be at 400,000 volts and the foil might be at 380,000 volts.  So the air molecules instantly ionize on contact with the metal foil, and very high current flows through the foil.  It's such an energetic environment that the metal heats up an vaporizes in a flash because of the heat generation due to the very high current.

You can  argue that displacement current and polarization current do not exist

I never said that.  What I said was that if you look at a current loop in a circuit, the displacement current in a capacitor dielectric will be identical to the real current flow on the leads of the capacitor.  Since they are identical, you don't really have to think about the displacement current.  You made reference once to "accounting for all currents" or something like that, seemingly implying that displacement currents and real currents might be separate effects when they are not.

So, I'd venture a guess that there is one hell of a displacement current outside Tesla's magnifier coil

There is going to be a certain amount of displacement current outside of the magnifier coil.  That's because in that high-frequency high-voltage environment the stray capacitance effects between the sphere and the walls and the other objects in the room will be greatly magnified.  So you can simplify that and say that the Tesla magnifier capacitive sphere is in parallel with a single imaginary capacitor and let's call it the "stray room" capacitance.

Here is the important point:  The real current that flows into the capacitive sphere from the resonating coil will be identical to the displacement current that goes into the capacitive sphere plus the displacement current that goes into the stray room capacitance.  The source of that current is your power supply.  The identical effects would happen at low voltage and low frequency also.  Except in that case the stray capacitive effects will be much lower and be imperceptible.

You seem to be implying that with the Tesla amplifier setup you may be somehow "kicking up some extra dust" and just maybe there is some "extra" displacement current due to the Dirac sea or the aether.  I understand where you are coming from, there is the hope that something extra could take place.  Hence some people want to play with high voltages and spark gaps.

If any of this exists may be speculation on your part or perhaps you read it somewhere.  I am not convinced at all.  There are places where high voltage is researched, one of them is "Institut de recherche d'Hydro-Québec."  They have a 10-story laboratory with a mega Tesla coils and stuff like that.  They might not be looking for those alleged effects, but if they found any anomalies they would probably research them.

The only picture that I could find of the lab is midway down this web page:

http://www.protectolite.com/industries/electrical.asp

MileHigh

[MileHigh]

Giantkiller:

I heard of 2 bicycle mechanics making a thingy in their garage that flies! Well there goes the planet. Just because they pedal uphill  leads them to believe they can cruise around aeronautically.]I heard of 2 bicycle mechanics making a thingy in their garage that flies! Well there goes the planet. Just because they pedal uphill  leads them to believe they can cruise around aeronautically.

I know, this argument goes like this:  "Unimaginative scientists would have scoffed at the notion of powered flight in at the start of the 20th century.  Look at how closed-minded and wrong they where.  You have to keep an open mind."

That's a tired argument that is completely wrong.  Certainly the vast majority of the lay population would have thought that a flying machine was impossible, and certainly some scientists would have said the same thing.

However, in the latter part of the 19th century, there were some scientists that were doing serious research into flight.  People made gliders big enough to carry a person and they made thousands of test flights and recorded their data.  The Wright brothers were fully aware of this and in touch with these researchers.  Many scientists were aware that all that you needed was a power source with a good enough power to weight ratio to attach to a glider to create a mechanical flying machine.  The Wright brothers knew this too and they followed a serious regimen of research and development and developed their own wind tunnel and did research in countless other areas to develop the first flying machine. They realized that the new gasoline engine technology gave them the power to weight ratio that their calculations demanded.  It was a triumph of scientific research and engineering development and testing.  Many enlightened scientists were expecting this to happen.

So the moral of the story is that the "flat earth/flying machine/nobody would ever need a computer" business can be turned on its head.  It's the science guys that knew the earth was round and you could have airplanes and personal computers.

As far as I am aware, high voltages or high currents or abrupt disruptive changes in voltage or current, or various coil or capacitor or transformer configurations or unusual ways of arranging magnetic or electric fields do not produce excess energy.  It would be great if they did and I welcome the effort.

The challenge for the researchers is to bridge the gap between what they think might be happening and what they actually observe in the real world and how that correlates with our current understanding.  For example if you build something on the belief that Tom Bearden's theories are true then the measurements, if properly done, should show positive results.  At the same time you are aware that many people state that Bearden is a fraud that purchased a worthless PhD from an "online university."

MileHigh

[Grumpy]

What everyone calls "displacement current" in a capacitor is "polarization current" as nothing is displaced, but the polarization of the molecules changes.

Tesla would stick his head in the same coils as exploded the foil and he was not ionized.

Total current is the sum of all currents.

[MileHigh]

Grumpy:

From Wikipedia:

An example illustrating the need for the displacement current arises in connection with capacitors with no medium between the plates (in free space).

Okay, so displacement current applies to the case where there is no dielectric material.

What about when we have a dielectric material between the plates of the capacitor?  I found this link, very technical:

http://web.mit.edu/6.013_book/www/chapter6/6.2.html

Hence, we can think of a rate of charge transport in a material medium as consisting of a current density of unpaired charges Ju and a polarization current density Jp, each obeying its own conservation law. This is also implied by Ampère's law, as now generalized to include the effects of polarization.

My interpretation is that the polarization current is taking place in the capacitor dielectric medium and it is the same as the real current that goes through the wires connected to the capacitor plates.

This might be better:

http://espace.library.uq.edu.au/eserv/UQ:9891/saha-raj-deis-20.pdf

POLARIZATION AND DEPOLARIZATION CURRENTS
One way,in the time domain,to investigate the polarization process for a dielectric material is to measure polarization and depolarization currents.

If you have a high permittivity dielectric material, you get a higher capacitance.  The molecules in the dielectric can be stressed and deformed by the electric field and in effect act like little energy storing springs.  Higher capacitance implies higher energy storage and higher levels of AC current can flow through the capacitor.  The changing stress on the dielectric material between the capacitor plates because of the changing electric field is called the polarization current.  In other words I am agreeing with you and being long-winded about it.

Total current is the sum of all currents.

In the real world the real current carrying elements like wires and the displacement current and polarization current carrying elements like capacitors are in series, so the real current equals the displacement current or the polarization current.

Again, I think that you are looking for something special when it is not there.  To use the displacement current and the polarization current terms is simply splitting hairs.

If you disagree with me, then please give me an example where you have separate real and displacement or polarization currents in a circuit.

Tesla would stick his head in the same coils as exploded the foil and he was not ionized.

Without any real details I can't really comment.  He could also have been doing a Barnum and Bailey routine there.  Did you watch that little clip I linked to with the two guys playing with the Tesla coils?  They mentioned how one of the famous pictures of him sitting among all of the lightning bolts coming off all of the Tesla coil was faked.  They did an exposure for a few seconds and imaged a bunch of lightning bolts, then shut off the Tesla coil and then Tesla sat in the chair for a regular flash exposure.  So it was a faked double-exposure.

MileHigh

[BEP]

Just my 2 cents....

Polarization/Depolarization current are the stored then released energy of conventional current applied to a capacitor. I believe this is analogous to applied EMF and counter-EMF for an inductor.

Displacement current would indicate that charge flow 'is' momentum, not linear travel of an electron. This would include the transfer of momentum, something like a traveling mass striking another mass and transferring all momentum to the stricken mass.

I believe this is analogous to back-EMF of an inductor.

If Displacement current is the momentum then it is not part of currently measured amperage.

Of course, this would imply that such a current could not flow, as the result of charging/discharging a vacuum capacitor because a vacuum capacitor has no dielectric.

I know. BEMF and CEMF are the same thing. After all, it is taught this way. Right?  
If you believe they are the same thing, forget about trying to understand things like displacement current or current momentum. CEMF is always the reverse polarity of the applied EMF. BEMF is always the same polarity of and perpendicular to the applied force.

My two cents.. You know how the economy is 

Thanks for the interlude from drudgery.

Cheers!

[Grumpy]

conduction current results from charges in motion in a conductor, such as electrons and positrons
Example: battery connected to a light bulb

polarization current is a broad term that includes displacement current and results from changes in polarization of a dielectric
Example: AC capacitively coupled to a circuit (i.e. cap is in series not parallel)

displacement current results from the actual change in position of a dielectric that is polarized
Examples: The rotating field in a TPU, homopolar generators based on rotating dielectrics, and experments performed by Rowland, Roentgen, Wilson, and Eichenwald with rotating dielectrics.

convection current results from charges in motion in space (i.e. not bound by a conductor)

At any given time in a circuit, one or all may be present and the total current in the circuit is the sum of all forms of current.

Induction allows one current to induce another current or the same type or a different type.  For example, depolarization of a capacitor induces conduction current into the circuit it is connected to. 

Moving a magnet inside a coil induces conduction current in the coil.  Is this an example of displacement current or polarization current?  Since the magnet is physically moving, I vote for displacement current.  If the field is changing then I vote for polarization current.  The magnetic field influences space (aether, Dirac Sea, Zero Point Field, etc.). 

This opens up the argument of wether or not a magnet moves the aether along with it or just polarizes another region as it moves.

[Grumpy]

It may help to look at some interesting articles regarding "displacement current" and Maxwell's original intention, which included an aetheric medium.

[MileHigh]

Grumpy:

We are going to have to agree to disagree here.

With reference to moving a magnet inside a coil, you are probably aware that Ampere's law says that the magnetic field going through a cross-sectional area gives you a result where the units are current.  It's interesting because you induce current in a loop of wire if you move a magnet past it, and the loop itself is the cross-sectional area that the magnetic field is passing through.  I am actually very rusty on all of this stuff but the main point is that it all falls together perfectly.  Yes, there might be some little nit-picky cases where you can cite unusual effects or whatever, but in the overall scheme of things it all works.  You don't need aether or a Dirac sea or some kind of polarization to explain this kind of stuff.

Anyway, I'll stick to my guns and in my opinion displacement and polarization currents can always be traced back to the real conduction currents that they are part and parcel of.

I will bring it round full circle and suggest that if any TPU-type projects are ever undertaken, and assuming that they are relatively simple circuits, the person or persons doing the project should try to make a timing diagram that shows how every voltage and every current responds to the external excitation signal with respect to time.  So may wild terms are thrown around when people talk about this stuff.  When you nail down the timing diagram and look at it, it should become apparent that the way the TPU-type device is responding fully respects what the "classical" analysis predicts.  So all of the talk about special bloch wall configurations, or coils bouncing energy back and forth or sharp gradients making the aether snap back or whatever might all start to sound hollow.

I realize that this is all my opinion and it can be taken or ignored, I am not going to be a builder.  Again, in my personal opinion, it's not enough to build something and then just look for over unity.  You don't get over unity?  Then try changing the number of turns of the main coil?  That doesn't work, then try a higher excitation voltage, etc, etc.  That's simply not the right way to go.  You want to understand how the thing works before you start changing parameters.

It may help to look at some interesting articles regarding "displacement current" and Maxwell's original intention, which included an aetheric medium.

Perhaps one day, but not right now because I have other things on my plate.  I simply don't believe in any aetheric medium.  I believe in the impedance of free space!  (Oops, I see that you uploaded some .pdfs.  That makes it too easy.  I will look later.)

Okay, I am stepping off the soap box and throwing in the towel!

MileHigh

[Grumpy]

A long time ago, I started reviwing what we are taught about electricity and this led back to the original thoughts and experiments.  In short, it is a big mess filled with misinterpretations, deletions, assumptions, and mathematical tricks to make everything look good on paper.  I think this is a bunch of BS.  Rather than correct so-called laws, we change everything else to keep them valid.  Reality is thrown to the wind as long as everyone can sleep at night.

The bottom line though, is that there is a Hell of a lot we don't know or understand.

The aether was actually proven to exist and explored in a lesser-known experiment than the failed M-M experiment.  I'll see if I can find it.

EDIT:
http://www.orgonelab.org/miller.htm

and attached pdf

[Allcanadian]

@Grumpy

A long time ago, I started reviwing what we are taught about electricity and this led back to the original thoughts and experiments.  In short, it is a big mess filled with misinterpretations, deletions, assumptions, and mathematical tricks to make everything look good on paper.  I think this is a bunch of BS.  Rather than correct so-called laws, we change everything else to keep them valid.  Reality is thrown to the wind as long as everyone can sleep at night.
The bottom line though, is that there is a Hell of a lot we don't know or understand.

I would agree, It would seem many supposed experts would like us to believe in a watered down laymans understanding of things littered with contradictions and outright errors. I think this nonsense they teach the general population has just about run it's course as it can no longer support its own sheer mass of BS,lol.
Those are some good links
Regards
AC

[MileHigh]

Grumpy and AC:

It's easy to just say stuff like that.  Like they say talk is cheap.  You say it's a big mess, or it's littered with contradictions but do you have any specifics?

Have you taken all the math and calculus courses so that you can then move on to electromagnetics and electronics courses?  Have you taken courses in electrical network theory and communications, semiconductor physics, control systems, mathematical modeling, numerical analysis?

Have you done the classic derivation in physics to determine the escape velocity from a mass?  Have you done the derivations to see what the fields look like for point charges and current loops and infinite lengths of wire?  Have you done the derivation to calculate the force between two lengths of current-carrying wire?  Have you gone through Maxwell's equations step by step in integral and differential form and then looked at the simplified derivations from them?  Have you applied the equations to solve real-world problems?  Have you done the integral and differential calculations to determine the circuit behaviour and formulas for the energy stored in a capacitor and an inductor?  Have you looked at a circuit and punched in the transforms for all all of the components to work out the equations that map the circuit on the S-plane to show the circuit's poles and zeros?  Have you done the transformations that go back and forth between the time domain and the frequency domain?  Have you ever worked with complex numbers to model electrical circuits?  Have you studied transmission lines and analyzed microwave waveguides with Smith charts?  Have you studied semiconductor physics?  Have you worked out the solution for how an electron behaves when it is in an infinite potential well?

If you have all of that under your belts then perhaps what you say has some merit.  If you don't at least in my book then you guys are reading the "alternative" press and taking it too literally.  It would not surprise me if you can cite a few interesting examples that back up your arguments.  But what about the "beef" the stuff that I mention in the paragraphs above?  I don't want to prejudge you but if you only have some vague familiarity with the stuff mentioned above, and when you look up stuff online and you always avoid the maths, then what does that say?

The entire world runs on the "real thing" and it doesn't run on misinterpretations, deletions, assumptions, contradictions and outright errors.  It's the "real thing" that counts.  I'll give you some examples of how things can get topsy-turvy.  Last year somebody did a replication of the Ainslie circuit.  This person has been investigating free energy for more than 10 years and is an undisputed leader in the field.  I was closely involved in the whole thing at the time and followed his replication day by day.  I quickly realized that he had no clue how to use an oscilloscope and he had no real understanding of how an inductor works, after 10 years.  The second example is about your typical Bedini enthusiast.  They don't understand how an inductor works, and what's worse, the leaders in that realm also don't understand how an inductor works.  John Bedini has never stated how the drive coil functions in a Bedini motor.

So as far as I am concerned, that's f*cked up.  It can sometimes be all topsy-turvy.  The misinterpretations, deletions, assumptions, contradictions and outright errors are typified by the Ainslie replicator and the Bedini crowd examples cited above.

It's like people that say that "Diet Coke will cause cancer."  Can the average person render judgment on the 10 years (?) worth of FDA testing on aspartame to make sure it was safe just because they say so?  I am not here to argue the merits of that so don't take the bait.  If you guys have a real solid technical background so that you can say what you're saying from a position of knowledge that's one thing.  But if you don't have the background, then what gives?  If you don't have the knowledge base and the experience to really and truly make these kinds of judgment calls, then why do it?

It's a form of trash talk.  In World War II the Americans said, "The Japanese can't see well enough to fly planes."  In 1972 Canadian hockey fans were so sure that the Canadian team in the 1972 hockey series with Soviet Union was going to cream the Russian team without even having to try.  It was a rude awakening.

MileHigh

[wattsup]

OK, just as an exercise, can anyone give me the most accepted description of what a standard magnet is. Explain the polarities, how the fields are, etc. If you can do this, then I will chime in later, but I need at least one person to put down the standard description first. So what is the most accepted view of a magnet. Maybe include a diagram.

[Grumpy]

No point in arguing.  People believe what they want to believe.  I could cite particulars, but they are not convincing.  You will just explain it away like everything else.

All of the math is nice and helpful "if" it is based on a correct model.  If the model is incorrect it can still work for many instances, just not all of them.

[giantkiller]

I will state that after 4 years here that I know who knows and that gives me the understanding to know who doesn't know in a limited fashion. I can also see the ones that have potential and those that don't. That doesn't make me an expert by any means. But it makes rejecting pablum easier. It has to be a learning process to achieve the greater because the easy way out is 'Problems are free' and it is what everybody else believes so why fight the tide? Not me, same as I see in those that teach.


--gk. Too much beer? No. Too much time in the barrel with the monkeys.

[Allcanadian]

 

[MileHigh]

Grumpy:

I know it can be frustrating to hear me explain stuff away all the time but I can assure you that I don't have all the answers.  That's why I know that I have to stay away from any possible project that might be done around here and only comment on the final version.  Perhaps one day a few of us will follow some third party project that's being done on YouTube or something.  That could be lots of fun and it would be neutral with nobody having a personal stake in the project.  Then we could have a healthy and fun debate.  And you are right that people will believe what they want to believe.

I think back to the whole Mylow drama as at least a model for the collective analysis.  But it would be preferable if it was some "hot" ongoing electronics project or something.  With respect to Mylow, I never believed for a second that he had anything.  The way it played out in the end made for some great drama though.  That guy, I think he was Swedish, made those amazing clips that showed the thread drive after TinselKoala demoed how easy it was to do.  I always thought that he was hiding electromagnets under the table or he was using fine magnet wire to power a hidden electromagnet somewhere!  The point being that the camera would never pick up the fine magnet wire.  In a sense I was 1/2 right because Mylow relied on the camera and video compression resulting in the thread not being visible in his clips.

How come nobody ever mentioned that it would be possible to hide fine magnet wire in full view of the camera during the Mylow drama?  Whenever I look at a YouTube clip for a purported free energy device I have hawk eyes and I am always looking for a possible way to cheat.

When I personally look at all of the goings on on YouTube and on the forums over the past few years, from my perspective the "classical" explanation always wins out in the end.  Of course a lot of projects never make it to fruition, but the ones that do all seem to end up with a conventional explanation.  So why the bashing?

It's worth mentioning that there is so much electrical engineering knowledge that has been built up over the last 130 years that you couldn't possibly learn it all in 20 lifetimes.  Just the amount of information and research that is done and the journals published by the IEEE every year must be overwhelming.  I only know enough to know how much there is out there that I don't know.  But to do a Donald Rumsfeld, you have to be very cautious about making pronouncements about what you don't know that you don't know.

I had some engineering professors that were brilliant.  I am just dull copper compared to them nor do I work as an engineer anymore.  I had a great deal of respect for them and I have a great deal of respect for the engineering profession.

MileHigh

[MileHigh]

@milehighMaybe you could contact Mr.Kapanadze and inform him he has no "beef" as you say despite the fact he has supposedly built a 100KW FE generator.

Regards
AC

I am not really following Mr.Kapanadze's project.  Have there been any confirmed replications?

Here is the clip, "Kapanadze 100 KW free energy unit test in Turkey."

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_CRkDySQCSM

The clip shows nothing to back up the claim.

Just out of curiosity, how would you verify the power output if you were the person making the clip?

I am smelling "fake" for Kapanadze from my limited perspective.

MileHigh

[Allcanadian]

@milehigh

Just out of curiosity, how would you verify the power output if you were the person making the clip?

I am smelling "fake" for Kapanadze from my limited perspective.

There is no amount of proof that will satisfy everyone, people see what they want to see, I might use a large resistance that would glow red hot maybe producing steam but again this means nothing. There is only one verification that matters and that is being physically present and being able to "feel" the power as heat, light,etc... Gauges and meters mean nothing unless they are your own and they are accurate. In this respect nobody can say whether something is a fake or not simply by watching a video as there are no real facts, I could easily edit in a UFO hovering over his device, it means nothing until we are physically there or the device is personally replicated.

[BEP]

That guy, I think he was Swedish, made those amazing clips that showed the thread drive after TinselKoala demoed how easy it was to do.  I always thought that he was hiding electromagnets under the table or he was using fine magnet wire to power a hidden electromagnet somewhere!

MH,

I know your comment wasn't addressed to me but I wanted to say I agree with your comments on the ease of faking videos and the abilities of the video presenters.

At that point of the Mylow saga nearly everyone voiced amazement at the ability of the 'Swede' to uncover the string drive and the debunking abilities of TK. I found both amazing for completely different reasons.

My amazement about the string was of the extremely high level of intellect Mylow must have to make the string appear above the motor support frame in one camera angle and below it from the other camera angle. Yes, people believe the video supporting their opinion. I didn't see any supporting mine except the one with the string impossibility. So, I think Mylow is smarter than all of us combined or that video was also a fake?

As for TK, I will agree there also. Great diagnostic abilities. Obviously a person of high intellect and a quality education. Unfortunately, his childish surprise and glee about the magnet lifting while sliding down the bar and no apparent idea of the reason..... Well, I stopped wasting my time watching his 'expertise'. It became obvious that he was just somebody capable of basting you in the greatest recital of detailed explanation as long as he didn't break a hip while chewing gum and walking at the same time.

Yes, we all have opinions. Some may never change.

   

[MileHigh]

As far as YouTube videos go that purport to demonstrate free energy, in my opinion they are never convincing.  There is always a "hole" in the presentation, and for the most part it's not commented on by the viewers of the clip.  The classic example would be all of the Perendev motor clips where as the jaws are closed down over the rotor, you see the rotor spin up.  However, you never see the other side of the rotor axle, where an electric motor could be speeding the rotor up.  The camera shot doesn't show the whole device when it is clear that it would be very easy to take that shot.  As we know, the Perendev motor guy was busted for fraud and is now in jail in Germany.  So there was an electric motor used to fake those clips.

There is so much wishful thinking and hope among a lot of free energy enthusiasts such that many suspect clips are not critically analyzed for possible ways of faking the clip.  Instead, a thread gets started and then the thread takes on a life of its own.  The people that want to fake clips are fully aware of this, and therefore if they are going to fake a clip they don't have to try too hard.

The 100 kilowatt power output was an extreme example of a high power output.  I am pretty sure that there are other clips out there that claim between 5 and 10 kilowatts output for various free energy devices.  You might see somebody show a volt meter and amp meter reading and the numbers add up to 10 kilowatts.  The problem is that's all they show, which is another sure sign that the clip is suspect.  10 kilowatts is something like five electric oven bake elements running at the same time.  Imagine that you bought five 2-kilowatt bake elements and you built a 5' x 3' metal cage to mount them in.  Then you run your free energy experiment and after about 30 seconds you are looking through the cage at five mean oven elements glowing bright red.  You would feel the heat from that from several feet away, it would almost be scary.  That's what 10 kilowatts is, it's not just a volt and amp reading, it's real power.

Here is a clip that I have always hated: "Free Energy - Selfrunning Bedini Motor Replication"

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=g9ARja0DiT0&feature=mfu_in_order

That clip will never die, it's been hosted by who knows how many YouTube users.  It looks like the setup is on a carpet floor.  So you take a sewing needle and you thread two fine wires up through the carpet to emerge somewhere, perhaps behind the motor, and you are done.  There is a battery off-screen that powers the setup.  It's an old clip from the low-resolution YouTube days also, and so for all you know there is fine magnet wire running right across the top of the carpet, they didn't even have to go to the trouble of hiding the wires under the carpet.

The clip was probably made years ago by somebody that was selling mail-order plans for a do-it-yourself "Bedini Free Energy Machine."

Here is a ridiculous clip from some currently active con artists:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WZqYZcYiEwE

There are three props used in this clip in an attempt to give it credibility, 1) a lab coat, 2) a pyramid, and 3) latex gloves.  I find the latex gloves laughable, but it's no laughing matter for the people that send money to these crooks to get plans for a "free energy machine."

Personally I have never seen a clip on YouTube that looked like a credible and convincing demonstration of free energy.  I have seen many clips by enthusiasts that think they have either demonstrated something highly unusual, or they demonstrated free energy.  In all cases, from my perspective, they are not understanding what they are looking at or they are making incorrect measurements.  I gave up looking at clips like that a long time ago.

MileHigh