Holcomb and other FE technology debate

Home Help Search Login Register

Welcome,Guest. Please login or register.

OverUnity Research > General - Free Energy Related > Miscellaneous Discussions (Moderator: Allcanadian) > Holcomb and other FE technology debate

2023-09-26, 22:44:37
News: Registration with the OUR forum is by admin approval.

Pages: 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 [10] 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22

« previous next »

Author Topic: Holcomb and other FE technology debate (Read 49795 times)

solarlab	Re: Holcomb and other FE technology debate « Reply #225 on: 2022-06-26, 04:16:09 »
Sr. Member Posts: 317	A Self Implemented Review chief kolbacict, in particular, but a general comment to everyone, After quickly reviewing your posts both on the OUR and OU Forums, here is an excercise that may be worth your while, not only for your own self reflection but also in the general forum sense. Try this: [sign in - use down arrow on user Nom - show posts of this user - new page - Show Posts] This yields all Messages - {by user} - top is latest, schroll throught the posts... So, on a scale of 1 to 5 => using your own criteria, rate your "Value Added" score: 1 = nonsense, silly, childish, banter - of no value what so ever 2 = mindless chatter, a few buzz words, but not related to the subject matter 3 = off topic but might, in some way, be related 4 = some value added to the subject; or a valid, properly asked and answerable, question 5 = good/great contribution to the subject Rate all 12 posts using this scale, if your score is less than 48 you have failed to meet even a medium level of contribution to the thread and the subject matter. This proceedure can also be applied to other Forums and threads as well. It's a "self implemented review" in a sense; but may be helpful in "growing and polishing" how others percieve your contributions. This is offered up to you from the prospective as both a mentor and a friend, with respect. The world at large views us in many different ways; and a big one is "what we write" and "how we write it." Another TIP that can sometimes be valuable: Take a notepad and write out what you plan to present; then leave it for a day or two, and re-read it (prospective change even over a brief time; this is especially true when the retoric is heated). If it still has merrit, present it - time aging will only enhance the offering in many cases. Another quick TIP: Use the "R-O-P-E-S" method when addressing technical subjects; that is, "Review," "Overview," "Presentation," "Examination," and "Summary." Note that Chapter 3 (Presentation) is where most of the good technical information is found in most technical books and papers. SL

solarlab	Re: Holcomb and other FE technology debate « Reply #226 on: 2022-06-26, 04:18:34 »
Sr. Member Posts: 317	Quote from: solarlab on 2022-06-26, 04:16:09 A Self Implemented Review chief kolbacict, in particular, but a general comment to everyone, After quickly reviewing your posts both on the OUR and OU Forums, here is an excercise that may be worth your while, not only for your own self reflection but also in the general forum sense. Try this: [sign in - use down arrow on user Nom - show posts of this user - new page - Show Posts] This yields all Messages - {by user} - top is latest, schroll throught the posts... So, on a scale of 1 to 5 => using your own criteria, rate your "Value Added" score: 1 = nonsense, silly, childish, banter - of no value what so ever 2 = mindless chatter, a few buzz words, but not related to the subject matter 3 = off topic but might, in some way, be related 4 = some value added to the subject; or a valid, properly asked and answerable, question 5 = good/great contribution to the subject Rate all 12 posts using this scale, if your score is less than 48 you have failed to meet even a medium level of contribution to the thread and the subject matter. This proceedure can also be applied to other Forums and threads as well as other endevours. It's a "self implemented review" in a sense; but may be helpful in "growing and polishing" how others percieve your contributions. This is offered up to you from the prospective as both a mentor and a friend, with respect. The world at large views us in many different ways; and a big one is "what we write" and "how we write it." Another TIP that can sometimes be valuable: Take a notepad and write out what you plan to present; then leave it for a day or two, and re-read it (prospective change even over a brief time; this is especially true when the retoric is heated). If it still has merrit, present it - time aging will only enhance the offering in many cases. Another quick TIP: Use the "R-O-P-E-S" method when addressing technical subjects; that is, "Review," "Overview," "Presentation," "Examination," and "Summary." Note that Chapter 3 (Presentation) is where most of the good technical information is found in most technical books and papers. SL

chief kolbacict	Re: Holcomb and other FE technology debate « Reply #227 on: 2022-06-26, 10:36:44 »
Full Member Posts: 120	Thanks. And how about simulate such a device in your magnetic field simulator? Unfortunately I havn't that.

chief kolbacict	Re: Holcomb and other FE technology debate « Reply #228 on: 2022-06-26, 10:49:37 »
Full Member Posts: 120	Thanks. And how about simulate such a device in your magnetic field simulator? Unfortunately I havn't that.

solarlab	Re: Holcomb and other FE technology debate « Reply #229 on: 2022-06-26, 15:28:00 »
Sr. Member Posts: 317	Quote from: chief kolbacict on 2022-06-26, 10:49:37 Thanks. And how about simulate such a device in your magnetic field simulator? Unfortunately I havn't that. It makes no sense - a magnetic gear is NOT related in any way to Holcomb. If you think it is, there are lots of options open to you: - contract a local CAE Magnetics design group and work with them directly to develop your idea, - take a course at a local University or Tech College on CAE design, make it you're final project, - get the Student version of any/all CAE programs and work the design in stages, - write up a proposal, present it to people with money that will support you're idea, - find an "end user" that will be willing to fully/partially fund your design and development, - or, just sit here on the thread and hope that somebody does it for you! My time is better spent on stuff that makes sense and will lead to a working device/product... Good-bye, - waisted enough time on this foolishness (if your intent is to "Troll Roll" this thread - have it it). Good Luck

chief kolbacict	Re: Holcomb and other FE technology debate « Reply #230 on: 2022-07-02, 07:36:22 »
Full Member Posts: 120	And the designs of magnetic rotation gearboxes reminded me of John Searl's apparatus ... Nobody thought of this?

solarlab	Re: Holcomb and other FE technology debate « Reply #231 on: 2022-07-02, 18:03:51 »
Sr. Member Posts: 317	Quote from: chief kolbacict on 2022-07-02, 07:36:22 And the designs of magnetic rotation gearboxes reminded me of John Searl's apparatus ... Nobody thought of this? Dr. Holcomb's method and technique have been extensively evaluated and tested. They are valid and do produce excess energy - see the previous 9 pages of this thread. Rotational gearboxes and John Searl's apparatus are of little value, or interest, at this point with respect to Holcomb. "Nobody thought of this?" No, not magnetic gearboxes. A study of Searl's effect was considered but, because the operation of Holcomb's rotating/sliding magnetic fields operational characteristics and results have already been analyzed, clearly understood, and explained in validated technical detail, it appeared very little of the sparse Searl technical information fit any of the Holcomb models. Here are some links [probably missed a few] related to the analysis evolution: Initial thoughts (applications, etc. 2022-04-05): https://www.overunityresearch.com/index.php?topic=4261.msg98375#msg98375 Patent link (initial target patent): https://www.overunityresearch.com/index.php?topic=4261.msg98509#msg98509 Preliminary field roll tests: https://www.overunityresearch.com/index.php?topic=4261.msg98891#msg98891 https://www.overunityresearch.com/index.php?topic=4261.msg98892#msg98892 Magnetic Field Gain simulation tests: https://www.overunityresearch.com/index.php?topic=4261.msg98900#msg98900 https://www.overunityresearch.com/index.php?topic=4261.msg98901#msg98901 https://www.overunityresearch.com/index.php?topic=4261.msg98908#msg98908 Flat Solid-State Rotor WO 2018 134233 Holcomb: https://www.overunityresearch.com/index.php?topic=4261.msg98965#msg98965 Simulation Configuration (various and corrected timing?): https://www.overunityresearch.com/index.php?topic=4261.msg98965#msg98965 https://www.overunityresearch.com/index.php?topic=4261.msg98977#msg98977 Timing: https://www.overunityresearch.com/index.php?topic=4261.msg99028#msg99028 Brassboard and CAE results: https://www.overunityresearch.com/index.php?topic=4261.msg99112#msg99112 https://www.overunityresearch.com/index.php?topic=4261.msg99113#msg99113 https://www.overunityresearch.com/index.php?topic=4261.msg99114#msg99114 Bench Test Driver: https://www.overunityresearch.com/index.php?topic=4261.msg99201#msg99201 Additional analysis and results: https://www.overunityresearch.com/index.php?topic=4261.msg99359#msg99359 https://www.overunityresearch.com/index.php?topic=4261.msg99359#msg99359 https://www.overunityresearch.com/index.php?topic=4261.msg99359#msg99359 Hopefully these will help clear up this confusion and misconception... SL

chief kolbacict	Re: Holcomb and other FE technology debate « Reply #232 on: 2022-07-02, 20:13:10 »
Full Member Posts: 120	And why then does my device produce less power at the output than at the input? ------------------------ Holcomb and other FE technology debate Holcomb.jpg (147.57 kB, 653x490 - viewed 688 times.)

Chet K	Re: Holcomb and other FE technology debate « Reply #233 on: 2022-07-02, 21:01:12 »
Group: Ambassador Hero Member Posts: 3904	Solarlab IMO All your work should be in a dedicated and manageable thread At both forums that will give you ability to moderate/manage/organize content! Can I arrange this ? Respectfully Chet K Ps I know there are a few questions on replications utilizing your data Would be easier done in dedicated topic

solarlab	Re: Holcomb and other FE technology debate « Reply #234 on: 2022-07-02, 22:07:52 »
Sr. Member Posts: 317	Quote from: chief kolbacict on 2022-07-02, 20:13:10 And why then does my device produce less power at the output than at the input? You need to Swap the yellow wires and change the input to => output and output to => input. That should work [then your device will have less power at the input than at the output]! Exactly like the Holcomb brassboard - Your welcome... PS - Guess I called that one right - *"(if your intent is to "Troll Roll" this thread - have it it)"* ^{Actually it doesn't matter at this point - the download numbers indicate that most who have an interest in the LinGen have already archived the needed information.}

solarlab	Re: Holcomb and other FE technology debate « Reply #235 on: 2022-07-02, 22:12:06 »
Sr. Member Posts: 317	Quote from: Chet K on 2022-07-02, 21:01:12 Solarlab IMO All your work should be in a dedicated and manageable thread At both forums that will give you ability to moderate/manage/organize content! Can I arrange this ? Respectfully Chet K Ps I know there are a few questions on replications utilizing your data Would be easier done in dedicated topic Chet K, Sounds like a good idea - that would be great if you can do that. Thanks in advance. SL PS - although I do enjoy messing with the Chief! He's kind of funny... (in a silly way).

chief kolbacict	Re: Holcomb and other FE technology debate « Reply #236 on: 2022-07-03, 10:20:50 »
Full Member Posts: 120	Are the stators not from three-phase, but two-phase electric motors with a phase-shifting capacitor, suitable for experiments? They have not three, but two windings in the stator. And a squirrel-cage rotor-squirrel wheel. I just have a lot of them.

JimBoot	Re: Holcomb and other FE technology debate « Reply #237 on: 2022-07-04, 04:53:05 »
Group: Tinkerer Hero Member Posts: 1670	Well I'm sold. On my rotor/stator setup I'm getting a 42c temp difference anomaly when testing a halogen. There is a lot going on. The Lingen does my head in at this stage so have not embarked on that. btw news from holcomb on LinkedIn https://www.linkedin.com/feed/update/urn:li:activity:6949342864636088320?utm_source=linkedin_share&utm_medium=member_desktop_web The video does not give any info just of people talking and doing tests. ------------------------ Holcomb and other FE technology debate Screen Shot 2022-07-04 at 1.46.25 pm.png (297.44 kB, 553x492 - viewed 578 times.)

solarlab	Re: Holcomb and other FE technology debate « Reply #238 on: 2022-07-07, 18:20:08 »
Sr. Member Posts: 317	Magnetism - Electromagnetism In hind-site it appears that the Holcomb CAE presentation was like putting the "Cart in front of the Donkey. "My assumption regarding "one skilled in the art" might have been a bit optomistic! So, a review of several "basics" is presented in the attached pdf - a poor copy of a rather excellent, older, book that unfortunately is not locatable at the moment. Non the less, for those interested in pulling some of it together for a more comprehensive understanding plus common definitions, read on. Some interesting highlights: 7-4, Magnetic Materials; 7-6, Magnetomotive Force; 7-7, Saturation; 7-9, Residual Magnetism; 7-10, Reluctance; 7-12, Induced Voltage; 7-13, Magnetic Quantities and Units [Magnetomotive Force - The Ampere-Turn; Flux - The Weber; Magnetic Field Strength - Ampere-Turn per Meter; Flux Density -The Tesla; Permeability and Relative Permeability]. Fig 7-29 is worth keeping in mind when considering a "pole" design. Includes Self Tests, Summary, Related Formulas and Tables, Chapter Review Questions, Chapter Review Problems, Critical Thinking Questions and Answers to Self-Tests. Chapter 8, Alternating Current and Voltage as well as Chapter 9, Power in AC Circuits is also included. Rather than present snippets or bits-and-pieces of things with little, or no, reference; these Chapters will hopefully set a baseline from which to work as more comprehensive information and discoveries are unvailed. SL ------------------------ Chapters 7-9 Magnetism and Electromagnetism.pdf (3486.35 kB - downloaded 91 times.)

solarlab	Re: Holcomb and other FE technology debate « Reply #239 on: 2022-07-07, 18:43:21 »
Sr. Member Posts: 317	Magnetic Gain Another concept that may need more clarification is the "Magnetic Gain" and how it is achieved. By operating in the non-linear region of a ferromagnetic material (electrical steel, metglas, etc.) the "H" source input (Magnetic Field Strength in A/m or Amp Turns) is amplified (provides gain); "B" is the result output (Flux Density in Tesla or Gauss). The elevated region of the "dB/dH derivative" plot shows this region where this "gain" is most prevalent (dB/dH - change in "B" vs change in "H"). SL ------------------------ Holcomb and other FE technology debate BH_derivative.GIF (26.02 kB, 908x534 - viewed 539 times.)

chief kolbacict	Re: Holcomb and other FE technology debate « Reply #240 on: 2022-07-08, 19:04:20 »
Full Member Posts: 120	Quote from: solarlab on 2022-07-07, 18:20:08 Magnetism - Electromagnetism In hind-site it appears that the Holcomb CAE presentation was like putting the "Cart in front of the Donkey. "My assumption regarding "one skilled in the art" might have been a bit optomistic! Quote Another concept that may need more clarification is the "Magnetic Gain" and how it is achieved. And the so-called "scalar magnetic field" of Gennady Nikolaev can take place there?

solarlab	Re: Holcomb and other FE technology debate « Reply #241 on: 2022-07-08, 23:07:58 »
Sr. Member Posts: 317	Onward to the Next Phase Having now finally discovered/found/figured out what, so far, appears to be the "Disruptive Technology" that will dramatically change things as we move forward, there's no more to give on my part. So, full time will now be spent on the final design, development, production and, hopefully, documenting this important time in history! THANKS to those few who contributed good, useful, information while providing further inspiration - there are a few more but space is limited - see below. And a very SPEICAL THANK YOU to DR. HOLCOMB for his long hard work and for showing us the way plus sharing it with the world! *Have a great weekend and a much Brighter Future...* Solarlab A few thoughts, highlights and observations - Holcomb - FE Board-forum - A History (from my humble prospective): Most Forum Threads only contain useful information up to about 10 pages; after that the good contributions become few and far between (as observed over the 10 years or so of participation) and simply not worth the time spent cruising. Periodic key-word searches, on occasion. are more than adequate. OUR original thread " A true OU Breakthrough..? Holcomb scientific research" Started 2022-03-14, ran 5 pages - 110 replies, until 2022-04-28 - Contained nothing of any technical or other value. OUR suplemental thread "Holcomb and other FE technology debate" Started 2022-03-21, so far runs 10 pages - 240 replies, until 08Jul22, - Contains very little useful technical information other than Solarlab's CAE proof-of-Concept Analysis. OU Forum - Holcomb Energy Systems:Breakthrough technology to the world Started March 14, 2022 - ongoing; 64 pages to date. Not much of value after the first 10 pages (this is typical for most forum threads. The initial 10 pages, or so, usually contain the most useful information). * OUR Forum contributions/notable posts - none. * OU Forum contributions/notable posts: PIX OU post March 23,2022 (first mention in a forum thread of "Magnetic Gain") * OU page 4 https://overunity.com/19069/holcomb-energy-systemsbreakthrough-technology-to-the-world/msg564888/#msg564888 "Those kind of things you should hear in primary and secondary school at physics lessons. 1. It is well known that ferromagnetic materials greatly amplify magnetic field acting upon them. It is called magnetic relative permeability. Please see attached magnetising curve of soft ferromagnetic material. 2. As you could see on this graph, first part of it, vertical is nonlinear and a weak external magnetic field 0.1-0.2mT creates a strong response inside ferromagnetic material 1000-1500mT. Further to the right magnetization line is going more horizontal- this is called "saturation" area. Increase of external magnetic field causes less amplified response from the ferromagnetic material. This "saturation" region is a place where common transformer works. 3.Relative Permeability of certain magnetic material gives you amplification of applied external magnetic field. For example for an iron core it is 200, for a permalloy it is 8000, for mumetal it is 20000. 4. Magnetic field amplification by ferromagnetic materials , or "gain" is widely utilised everywhere: in electromagnetic solenoids, in Current Transformers, in Flyback and Boost converters ect." Two reference links were provided: http://hyperphysics.phy-astr.gsu.edu/hbase/Solids/ferro.html http://hyperphysics.phy-astr.gsu.edu/hbase/Tables/magprop.html#c2 Ufopolitics OU post March 23, 2022 (first mention of "Rotating Magnetic Field electronically") * OU page 4 https://overunity.com/19069/holcomb-energy-systemsbreakthrough-technology-to-the-world/msg564897/#msg564897 "You keep pounding on existing -up to now- Technologies...and yes, Dr Holcomb keeps repeating something we all know...about Steel Properties related to magnetism amplification...yes, We all know that. IMHO what He has reached is a way to rotate a DC MAGNETIC FIELD, NOT an AC Field which is rotating just by turning it ON... HOWEVER, the way an AC Magnetic Field "rotates" is completely DIFFERENT from a Rotating DC Magnetic Field. And so, actually, an AC Field does NOT actually, physically rotates, but only "Flashes" N-S at a rate of 60 to 50 Hertz...generating the spinning feeling if we insert a metal "Egg" or a Laminated Steel Rotor, it will definitively spin a steel mass. (Tesla Induction AC Motors, 1896-98) There are many inventors who have played with this scenario of "VIRTUALLY SPINNING DC FIELDS"...I have been also conducting experiments related to this way to induce an Electric Output by Rotating DC Fields...for many years back..." Video link given: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Nm1VJ65LcXM (from Holcomb web site - technical explaination - Feb 9,2022) Feb2006 OU post March 24, 2022 (first mention of planar generator for phone) * OU page 6 https://overunity.com/19069/holcomb-energy-systemsbreakthrough-technology-to-the-world/msg564937/#msg564937 From twitter (Holcomb twitter page capture - photo looks to be a larger planar structure) * OU - Feb2006 Mar 25, 2022 (more photos) https://overunity.com/19069/holcomb-energy-systemsbreakthrough-technology-to-the-world/msg564978/#msg564978 ...

JimBoot	Re: Holcomb and other FE technology debate « Reply #242 on: 2022-07-09, 00:20:26 »
Group: Tinkerer Hero Member Posts: 1670	Thanks for curating SL. Excellent stuff

Allcanadian	Re: Holcomb and other FE technology debate « Reply #243 on: 2022-07-09, 04:26:06 »
Group: Moderator Hero Member Posts: 2512	Quote HOWEVER, the way an AC Magnetic Field "rotates" is completely DIFFERENT from a Rotating DC Magnetic Field. And so, actually, an AC Field does NOT actually, physically rotates, but only "Flashes" N-S at a rate of 60 to 50 Hertz...generating the spinning feeling if we insert a metal "Egg" or a Laminated Steel Rotor, it will definitively spin a steel mass. (Tesla Induction AC Motors, 1896-98) UFOpolitics is for the most part correct and an AC magnetic field does not rotate. The forward current induces a current in the rotor and when the current reverses it repels the induced magnetic field in the rotor. Look at the rotor of an AC induction motor with it's heavy bars or conductors. These are really no different than a shaded pole winding designed to delay/oppose an induced magnetic field. The shaded pole winding acts exactly like induced eddy currents in Tesla's conductive egg. The AC induction motor/generator is actually quite brilliant and all Tesla did is move the shaded pole from the stator to the rotor. This is why an AC induction motor/generator always needs a given amount of slip to induce the rotor coils. It is this slip which induces the rotor coils, which causes a delayed action of the rotors induced magnetic field which allows the stator field to act on the rotor field. Think of it this way, there is an experiment where a copper or aluminum washer is repelled from a coil called Thomson's ring, https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Ssi2TzUMNJY. Now, mount the rings on a rotor and surround the rotor with some coils turning on and off or alternating at the correct time and wala we have an AC induction motor. This ain't rocket science and there is no rotating magnetic field. It turns on and off or alternates but it does not rotate like a wheel, that's absurd. Regards AC --------------------------- Comprehend and Copy Nature... Viktor Schauberger I take comfort in the fact there are people magnitudes more intelligent than I could ever be developing new technology I will probably never understand. It proves evolution works...

solarlab	Re: Holcomb and other FE technology debate « Reply #244 on: 2022-07-09, 05:53:54 »
Sr. Member Posts: 317	Quote from: Allcanadian on 2022-07-09, 04:26:06 UFOpolitics is for the most part correct and an AC magnetic field does not rotate. The forward current induces a current in the rotor and when the current reverses it repels the induced magnetic field in the rotor. Look at the rotor of an AC induction motor with it's heavy bars or conductors. These are really no different than a shaded pole winding designed to delay/oppose an induced magnetic field. The shaded pole winding acts exactly like induced eddy currents in Tesla's conductive egg. The AC induction motor/generator is actually quite brilliant and all Tesla did is move the shaded pole from the stator to the rotor. This is why an AC induction motor/generator always needs a given amount of slip to induce the rotor coils. It is this slip which induces the rotor coils, which causes a delayed action of the rotors induced magnetic field which allows the stator field to act on the rotor field. Think of it this way, there is an experiment where a copper or aluminum washer is repelled from a coil called Thomson's ring, https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Ssi2TzUMNJY. Now, mount the rings on a rotor and surround the rotor with some coils turning on and off or alternating at the correct time and wala we have an AC induction motor. This ain't rocket science and there is no rotating magnetic field. It turns on and off or alternates but it does not rotate like a wheel, that's absurd. Regards AC AC, This argument has been hashed over a hundred or more times now. UFOpolitics first -pass observations and analysis IS correct when reviewed completely and within the context of his presentation. To further argue this "piece of the equation" is moot at best. It has already been well seated within the context of this Holcomb discussion. Holcomb's devices are not Motors, they are Generators and they work on a different principle. The magnetic field does rotate, or slide in the case of a planar generator configuration. Proper timing and orientation of the excitation pulses, or input signals, determines the virtual rotation or sliding characteristics of this magnetic field. It's that simple. This is clearly shown in the many animations, for example in this one: https://www.overunityresearch.com/index.php?topic=4261.msg99366#msg99366 There is no physical rotation of a rotor, or anything else for that matter. The only movement is the magnetic field. Graphs of the Voltage Output, etc., from the Lap Winding Coil are also included. When you turn coils on and off in a motor the rotor (hopefully) rotates. Holcomb's device is a generator with no moving parts. The "rocket science" is in distinguishing the difference between a GENERATOR with no moving parts, and a MOTOR which rotates a shaft, or otherwise creates mechanical movement. SL « Last Edit: 2022-07-09, 16:22:27 by solarlab »

Allcanadian	Re: Holcomb and other FE technology debate « Reply #245 on: 2022-07-09, 16:44:58 »
Group: Moderator Hero Member Posts: 2512	solarlab Quote Onward to the Next Phase Having now finally discovered/found/figured out what, so far, appears to be the "Disruptive Technology" that will dramatically change things as we move forward, there's no more to give on my part. Having now finally discovered/found/figured out what?... indeed. I have not been able to find anything other than a few supposed simulations and nothing towards a valid working theory. As well, you haven't discovered anything, Holcomb did and at best your simply trying to replicate it. I have yet to see a real demonstrable device which means your still at the wishful thinking phase in my opinion. Quote So, full time will now be spent on the final design, development, production and, hopefully, documenting this important time in history! Development and production?. You do understand Holcomb developed and patented this technology don't you?. As a real inventor, if I heard some nitwit talking about producing my invention I would be calling my lawyers. So no, your not going to be producing anything you didn't actually invent which is considered theft of intellectual property. No offense but as a real Engineer who sought out and tested real FE devices this is a joke. You don't even have a prototype let alone a working device, lol. Regards AC --------------------------- Comprehend and Copy Nature... Viktor Schauberger I take comfort in the fact there are people magnitudes more intelligent than I could ever be developing new technology I will probably never understand. It proves evolution works...

solarlab	Re: Holcomb and other FE technology debate « Reply #246 on: 2022-07-09, 20:29:58 »
Sr. Member Posts: 317	Quote from: Allcanadian on 2022-07-09, 16:44:58 solarlab Having now finally discovered/found/figured out what?... indeed. I have not been able to find anything other than a few supposed simulations and nothing towards a valid working theory. As well, you haven't discovered anything, Holcomb did and at best your simply trying to replicate it. I have yet to see a real demonstrable device which means your still at the wishful thinking phase in my opinion. Development and production?. You do understand Holcomb developed and patented this technology don't you?. As a real inventor, if I heard some nitwit talking about producing my invention I would be calling my lawyers. So no, your not going to be producing anything you didn't actually invent which is considered theft of intellectual property. No offense but as a real Engineer who sought out and tested real FE devices this is a joke. You don't even have a prototype let alone a working device, lol. Regards AC AC, FYI, you know absolutely nothing about what is really going on - NOTHING! Yet you want to argue and "hissy fit" about everything that you truely KNOW NOTHING ABOUT! Your contribution to this subject, or any subject for that matter, is ZERO! No offense - but having 2203 posts simply means you have been a CRY BABY 2203 times! You're simply JEALOUS of anyone who knows this technology and can clearly explain it in technical detail. Just because you are not capable of even understanding or appreciating the unique methods and techniques involved with this "Earth Moving Breakthrough" you lash out, and attack everything and everyone who does. That's classified as just down right STUPID! If I piss you off or offend you - GOOD! That's the idea... For everyone else my goal is simply to provide as much educational information as possible in a clear cut, non-disputable, fashion by using modern Engineering Tools and Accredited References. Go look in the mirror for God's Sake! Get over it - and have a nice day... Regards, SL PS1 - AC You are NOT a real Engineer and you have NEVER tested real FE devices, YOU are the JOKE. PS2 - AC Where is YOUR FE design, proof of concept, description of operation or prototype? You don't have one! PS3 - AC No one, not me, not anyone gives a crap what your opinion is! PS4 - AC What you know about patents and patent law and intellectual property I could put on the head of a pin! PS5 - Same old line you all use - "You don't even have a prototype let alone a working device." (You sure). - The standard TROLL line! Been used for years on the threads. Share, so we can argue and attack. - But don't show any modern CAE Analysis or Simulations because we can't challenge that! (Sick...) - CAE involves Engineering facts and can't be challenged - man, you're no fun! - So, let's attack the person, grab a word or phrase from somewhere, and "we got em." (Even more Sick) AC Now you can see Who/What the REAL JOKE IS... and it sure ain't the guy trying to present the factual, technical, stuff. « Last Edit: 2022-07-09, 21:42:23 by solarlab »

Allcanadian	Re: Holcomb and other FE technology debate « Reply #247 on: 2022-07-09, 22:52:22 »
Group: Moderator Hero Member Posts: 2512	Solarlab Quote FYI, you know absolutely nothing about what is really going on - NOTHING! I can only comment on what I see and to date I have seen nothing which would convince me anyone really understands how this technology works. Sure theories and simulations are wonderful however that's light years from having a working technology on our bench. I think Holcomb may have the technology working but then again I don't know this as a fact and it's simply my opinion. Quote No offense - but having 2203 posts simply means you have been a CRY BABY 2203 times! Cry baby 2203 in all caps... nice. The fact is myself and many other members here have seen countless people come and go over the last decade or so. They were all gung ho and had it all figured out and this time was different but it never was different. I suspect some may have found something and left the forums looking for fame and fortune. However as we know nobody has disclosed a device which has been replicated here otherwise we wouldn't be having this conversation. Quote That's classified as just down right STUPID! If I piss you off or offend you - GOOD! That's the idea... That's cool, no offense is taken. I would simply point out what kind of personality type is more prone to insults rather than debating any facts like responsible adults. I think of it this way... would you trust your bank, a business or doctor who responded to you in this way?. Well no, real professionals never resort to name calling or slander because it's immature and serves no constructive purpose. Do you not understand this reflects more on you than me?. I wouldn't do it but if you want to it's cool... Quote For everyone else my goal is simply to provide as much educational information as possible in a clear cut, non-disputable, fashion by using modern Engineering Tools and Accredited References. Non-disputable? ... I beg to differ and part of my present job is operating and troubleshooting a 40 million dollar LAN automation system developed by Johnson and Siemens Controls. Apparently it was designed by the best and brightest the U.S. has to offer but has turned into a train wreck. It's just one big old bundle of gross incompetence of over paid under skilled technicians who believe they know what there doing. You see I have been programming for 30 years since the mighty VIC 20 and still do today on PLC/IOT/microcomputers. As an Engineer I meet all kind of wing nuts who talk the talk and baffle with bs but can't seem to get anything working as it should in reality. This ain't my first rodeo... Most here have seen all this before but keep in touch and let's see where your at a year from now. Regards AC --------------------------- Comprehend and Copy Nature... Viktor Schauberger I take comfort in the fact there are people magnitudes more intelligent than I could ever be developing new technology I will probably never understand. It proves evolution works...

solarlab	Re: Holcomb and other FE technology debate « Reply #248 on: 2022-07-10, 00:03:33 »
Sr. Member Posts: 317	Quote from: Allcanadian on 2022-07-09, 22:52:22 Solarlab I can only comment on what I see and to date I have seen nothing which would convince me anyone really understands how this technology works. Sure theories and simulations are wonderful however that's light years from having a working technology on our bench. I think Holcomb may have the technology working but then again I don't know this as a fact and it's simply my opinion. Cry baby 2203 in all caps... nice. The fact is myself and many other members here have seen countless people come and go over the last decade or so. They were all gung ho and had it all figured out and this time was different but it never was different. I suspect some may have found something and left the forums looking for fame and fortune. However as we know nobody has disclosed a device which has been replicated here otherwise we wouldn't be having this conversation. That's cool, no offense is taken. I would simply point out what kind of personality type is more prone to insults rather than debating any facts like responsible adults. I think of it this way... would you trust your bank, a business or doctor who responded to you in this way?. Well no, real professionals never resort to name calling or slander because it's immature and serves no constructive purpose. Do you not understand this reflects more on you than me?. I wouldn't do it but if you want to it's cool... Non-disputable? ... I beg to differ and part of my present job is operating and troubleshooting a 40 million dollar LAN automation system developed by Johnson and Siemens Controls. Apparently it was designed by the best and brightest the U.S. has to offer but has turned into a train wreck. It's just one big old bundle of gross incompetence of over paid under skilled technicians who believe they know what there doing. You see I have been programming for 30 years since the mighty VIC 20 and still do today on PLC/IOT/microcomputers. As an Engineer I meet all kind of wing nuts who talk the talk and baffle with bs but can't seem to get anything working as it should in reality. This ain't my first rodeo... Most here have seen all this before but keep in touch and let's see where your at a year from now. Regards AC AC, Review your posts in this thread and you will quickly realize I learned this "Chicken Sh_t" technique from you! Hey, when in Rome - do as the Romans do... Try this "Self Implemented Review" test (no need to post your score): [I did pretty good - however lately my score is rapidly declining] https://www.overunityresearch.com/index.php?topic=4261.msg99385#msg99385 And, if you would like to review the Holcomb "Theory of Operation" again using a CAE Analysis combined with some underlying information go back through this thread. Some of the highlights are found in this list: https://www.overunityresearch.com/index.php?topic=4261.msg99432#msg99432 As a seasoned PLC Programmer, I mean "Software Engineer," I'm hoping after a few passes, you will gain some insight. On the Lighter Side Not sure what the "40 million dollar LAN automation system developed by Johnson and Siemans Controls" or the "bundle of gross incompetence of over paid under skilled technicians" has to do with the Holcomb device, or, for that matter, "this not being my (your) first rodeo... Anyway, glad I got to you, or so it appears... IMHO, a step in the right direction! Yea, quite unprofessional I agree - but fun non-the-less; -- but, like I said -- "I learned that from you!" A lesson in "Survival on the Great Open Internet Forum" I suppose. Also, try mentoring/working a bit with the "gross incompetents" and see how it may change to the up-side. I know, and have worked with, quite a few Johnson and Siemens Controls Engineers and they are, for the most part, quite good at what they do - maybe I'm just lucky however. Although, just my opinion. Have a good one and take care, {As "Red/Green" would say "We're all in this together"!} SL

Allcanadian	Re: Holcomb and other FE technology debate « Reply #249 on: 2022-07-10, 18:11:21 »
Group: Moderator Hero Member Posts: 2512	SL Quote Try this "Self Implemented Review" test (no need to post your score): [I did pretty good - however lately my score is rapidly declining] https://www.overunityresearch.com/index.php?topic=4261.msg99385#msg99385 Quote So, on a scale of 1 to 5 => using your own criteria, rate your "Value Added" score: 1 = nonsense, silly, childish, banter - of no value what so ever 2 = mindless chatter, a few buzz words, but not related to the subject matter 3 = off topic but might, in some way, be related 4 = some value added to the subject; or a valid, properly asked and answerable, question 5 = good/great contribution to the subject It's debatable and dependent on our perspective in my opinion. I have found around 95% of people would lump free energy technology and these forums into group 1 or 2. So while we could think were in group 4 or 5 any number of other people could see it as group 3 or lower. Which begs the question who is more correct?, we cannot all be correct. Thus it all comes down to our perspective, how we view other people and how well we accept criticism. We could think of it this way, your probably going to disagree with anything I say if it doesn't agree with your thoughts and vice versa. So the actual rating system is more a matter of self-confirmation or populism isn't it?. We generally always think were more correct than everyone and would rate them lower than ourselves if we disagree. So why not just state the obvious, you think CAE Analysis and equations are the way forward and I disagree. I disagree because I have written my own simulators and understand they can clarify what I know but not what I don't know. Ergo, if were not asking the right questions it cannot give us the right answers because it's only a computer. Regards AC --------------------------- Comprehend and Copy Nature... Viktor Schauberger I take comfort in the fact there are people magnitudes more intelligent than I could ever be developing new technology I will probably never understand. It proves evolution works...

Pages: 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 [10] 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22

« previous next »

Home Help Search Login Register

Theme © PopularFX | Based on PFX Ideas! | Scripts from iScript4u

2023-09-26, 22:44:37

SMF 2.0.18 | SMF © 2021, Simple Machines
XHTML
RSS
WAP2