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

2023-09-27, 00:19:25
News: Check out the Benches; a place for people to moderate their own thread and document their builds and data.
If you would like your own Bench, please PM an Admin.
Most Benches are visible only to members.

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 49827 times)

F6FLT	Re: Holcomb and other FE technology debate « Reply #350 on: 2022-09-23, 10:44:39 »
Group: Experimentalist Hero Member Posts: 1909	Quote from: solarlab on 2022-09-22, 15:37:55 It's one of the simplest excess energy devices you will ever find - that is if you take a few minutes to study it. No mystery what so ever! Third party measurements - try Florida Power and Light - FPL. Displacement - so many coils - etc. and other such foolishness - you obviously have no idea about which you attempt to speak. So, give it a pass, and just move on. Nobody here will even spend 1 second to argue with you! For those with a genuine interest - see below: You obviously know not only everything about the coils, the Lenz's law and so on but also the level of understanding that others would have, I am very impressed by your omniscience. Unfortunately I "see below" only generalities and simulations. The simulations are based on conventional laws of physics, so no OU can appear except bug or non-physical parameterization. It's such a pity that you claim without a shadow of a doubt before showing us any real prototype with your measurement protocol, your measurements that show unmistakable OU, and its duplicable design. I'll let you in on a secret: humanity is interested in a real, not virtual, source of free energy. And so am I. Don't count your chickens before they hatch. --------------------------- "Open your mind, but not like a trash bin"

F6FLT	Re: Holcomb and other FE technology debate « Reply #351 on: 2022-09-23, 11:40:03 »
Group: Experimentalist Hero Member Posts: 1909	Quote from: solarlab on 2022-09-22, 16:45:48 Dr. Holcomb explains the "magnetic effect" - BH Curve of electrical steel provides the "gain" mechanism - in this video: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Nm1VJ65LcXM ... This video states a banal fact: the external field magnetizes the electric steel, aligns the magnetic domains, and the internal field is multiplied by 4 to 5. The unsubstantiated claim is that a weak magnetizing field would be the cause of the strong field, which has never been observed since the 19th century, only that B=µH, making the device gain a COP of 400 to 500%. This is of course an equivalent and equally useless explanation as the one stated in the patent, that "energy comes from spin". Not only does the alignment of the domains require energy of density 1/2µB², but if another coupled coil is loaded, then the field created by the variable current in the load will oppose the variable field that gives rise to it, depending on the variation of its intensity (independently of its absolute level). This is the well known Lenz's law. So the question remains. Where does the energy come from that would result in a variation* of magnetization greater than that created by the primary current? Holcomb obviously has no idea. --------------------------- "Open your mind, but not like a trash bin"

F6FLT	Re: Holcomb and other FE technology debate « Reply #352 on: 2022-09-23, 12:03:31 »
Group: Experimentalist Hero Member Posts: 1909	A variation in magnetization greater than that created by the current in a primary coil will create a current of the same direction which will therefore be added to the primary current, resulting in a runaway effect. The OU should therefore be dramatically seen directly at the initial power supply (with a single coil and no need to couple to anything else). I have not seen this to be the case. An explanation? --------------------------- "Open your mind, but not like a trash bin"

Grumpy	Re: Holcomb and other FE technology debate « Reply #353 on: 2022-09-23, 15:56:03 »
Group: Tinkerer Hero Member Posts: 3932 tExB=qr	So far, Holcomb's devices are the most complicated that I have ever seen. He doesn't explain the mechanism of gain in the video or any of his promotional literature. Post of dozens of links and pages of information that does not explain something in simple terms does not help either. Holcomb has found a way to affect/avoid/bypass Lenz's Law: please explain this method in 100 words or less with a diagram if needed. (I have his 160+ page patent, but it take time to go through it...)

F6FLT	Re: Holcomb and other FE technology debate « Reply #354 on: 2022-09-23, 17:34:25 »
Group: Experimentalist Hero Member Posts: 1909	Quote from: Grumpy on 2022-09-23, 15:56:03 ... Holcomb has found a way to affect/avoid/bypass Lenz's Law: We don't know yet Quote please explain this method in 100 words or less with a diagram if needed. (I have his 160+ page patent, but it take time to go through it...) That's what I'm asking too. Even Holcomb doesn't seem able to explain, and the most amazing thing is that those who see it as FE without a shadow of a doubt, are unable to do so too! --------------------------- "Open your mind, but not like a trash bin"

solarlab	Re: Holcomb and other FE technology debate « Reply #355 on: 2022-09-23, 17:53:36 »
Sr. Member Posts: 317	You fellows will have to read all the information, study the underlying physics, do the required analysis and build your own prototypes to varify or de-varify the processes. There is no other viable way. No one (not me anyway) has the time nor incentive do any of that for you! Mindless, uneducated, comments and opinions do not add to your screams for help. Plus, if someone else does it for you, what have you achieved - nothing, right! If that is too much effort, then forget about Holcomb and just move on...

F6FLT	Re: Holcomb and other FE technology debate « Reply #356 on: 2022-09-23, 18:30:31 »
Group: Experimentalist Hero Member Posts: 1909	What do those who believe in the Holcomb machine as a technical reality not understand? Don't they understand that they are only asked for the technical reason why they believe in it before they have achieved anything, what they moreover reproach to others? Don't they understand that in order to embark on a realization, especially of the importance of the Holcomb machine, one must at least have an idea about the principle? Don't they understand that they don't have this idea, nor does Holcomb, whose explanation is not one for the reasons mentioned? Don't they understand that talking endlessly about what they don't know, without answering questions, without responding to objections, is contrary to a discussion forum? If there is time to waste, it is not in a technical discussion, but in endless monologues denying the elementary technical issues (see above) that the subject implies. --------------------------- "Open your mind, but not like a trash bin"

Grumpy	Re: Holcomb and other FE technology debate « Reply #357 on: 2022-09-23, 18:42:17 »
Group: Tinkerer Hero Member Posts: 3932 tExB=qr	Quote from: solarlab on 2022-09-23, 17:53:36 You fellows will have to read all the information, study the underlying physics, do the required analysis and build your own prototypes to varify or de-varify the processes. There is no other viable way. No one (not me anyway) has the time nor incentive do any of that for you! Mindless, uneducated, comments and opinions do not add to your screams for help. Plus, if someone else does it for you, what have you achieved - nothing, right! If that is too much effort, then forget about Holcomb and just move on... You could have explained it in fewer words than your response...

Grumpy	Re: Holcomb and other FE technology debate « Reply #358 on: 2022-09-23, 19:18:42 »
Group: Tinkerer Hero Member Posts: 3932 tExB=qr	I found this nice video that explains what may be the same mechanism of operation. It's based on the Clemente Figuera generator patent. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=notgCACOQr4 (Note that video by "woopy" mentioned toward the end is no longer available...) The explanation starts around 7:21 I seems that a 3-coil test could be performed to see if the coil in the middle indeed performs as stated. Cores are electrical steel, not laminated.

solarlab	Re: Holcomb and other FE technology debate « Reply #359 on: 2022-09-23, 19:22:54 »
Sr. Member Posts: 317	Don't fight it fellows - it's all obviously beyond your technical scope and capability. Best thing for you guys to do IMHO is find another technology that more suits your needs. Maybe Figuera, that's been discussed here for years, is well documented and probably varified and demonstrated...

partzman	Re: Holcomb and other FE technology debate « Reply #360 on: 2022-09-23, 19:54:48 »
Group: Experimentalist Hero Member Posts: 1627	IMO as I've stated before, Lenz can be defeated by means of a constant current or voltage load and each can produce excess energy if the induction source is a moving magnetic or electromagnetic field [as in the Holcomb device] and the output is properly organized. Regards, Pm

Grumpy	Re: Holcomb and other FE technology debate « Reply #361 on: 2022-09-23, 20:50:19 »
Group: Tinkerer Hero Member Posts: 3932 tExB=qr	Quote from: partzman on 2022-09-23, 19:54:48 IMO as I've stated before, Lenz can be defeated by means of a constant current or voltage load and each can produce excess energy if the induction source is a moving magnetic or electromagnetic field [as in the Holcomb device] and the output is properly organized. Regards, Pm Perhaps, but it seems no one can explain it.

Allcanadian	Re: Holcomb and other FE technology debate « Reply #362 on: 2022-09-23, 20:59:02 »
Group: Moderator Hero Member Posts: 2512	F6FLT Quote That's what I'm asking too. Even Holcomb doesn't seem able to explain, and the most amazing thing is that those who see it as FE without a shadow of a doubt, are unable to do so too! Unfortunately, 99% of people don't understand how a computer or smart phone works so it's par for the course in my opinion. Think about that, the greater majority of all people who have been using computers for decades have little understanding how it actually works. In fact I met quite a few microsoft certified technicians, programmers and EE's who didn't know what a logic gate was. That is the extent of the knowledge gap most people face. So I find nothing amazing about the possibility that Holcomb is still learning about the discovery he may have made. In fact, after I tested a working device it took around 3 years of intensive research before I was confident I had a basic understanding of what was actually happening. I believe it was Dr. T.H.Moray(Ph.D. in electrical engineering), who said it took him 30 years before he understood how his device worked. https://merlib.org/node/5610 Thomas Henry Moray Radiant Energy Pump/Electricity Generator This is pretty cool... Quote It is well documented that Moray developed a bipolar semiconductor as early as 1927. His germanium "valve" was working in 1931. In the 1930s Moray developed advanced semiconductors and transistor-like devices. Moray provided a complete disclosure of his semi-conductor research to Dr. Harvey Fletcher of the Bell Laboratories. Dr. Fletcher later became head of the department at Bell Laboratories that developed the transistor. Moray, therefore, could be the true father of modern electronics since his work predated the Bell Laboratory bipolar transistor findings by at least 20 years. Of course, Moray only having 73 years of research may only have been responsible for inventing the first transistor which led to TTL and all modern electronics and computers. As you might imply, nothing to see and how smart could he have been?... probably just another crank, 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 #363 on: 2022-09-23, 22:47:47 »
Sr. Member Posts: 317	For those who might have forgotten their "Middle School Physics." (follow the links on the page if you need more) Britannica - magnetic field strength: https://www.britannica.com/science/magnetic-field-strength ------------------------ Holcomb and other FE technology debate britannica - magnetic field strength 3.PNG (61.16 kB, 1359x790 - viewed 317 times.)

Grumpy	Re: Holcomb and other FE technology debate « Reply #364 on: 2022-09-23, 23:28:13 »
Group: Tinkerer Hero Member Posts: 3932 tExB=qr	Lenz's Law Explained https://www.khanacademy.org/science/physics/magnetic-forces-and-magnetic-fields/magnetic-flux-faradays-law/v/lenzs-law

JimBoot	Re: Holcomb and other FE technology debate « Reply #365 on: 2022-09-24, 00:24:06 »
Group: Tinkerer Hero Member Posts: 1670	Quote from: F6FLT on 2022-09-23, 18:30:31 What do those who believe in the Holcomb machine as a technical reality not understand? Don't they understand that they are only asked for the technical reason why they believe in it before they have achieved anything, what they moreover reproach to others? Don't they understand that in order to embark on a realization, especially of the importance of the Holcomb machine, one must at least have an idea about the principle? Don't they understand that they don't have this idea, nor does Holcomb, whose explanation is not one for the reasons mentioned? Don't they understand that talking endlessly about what they don't know, without answering questions, without responding to objections, is contrary to a discussion forum? If there is time to waste, it is not in a technical discussion, but in endless monologues denying the elementary technical issues (see above) that the subject implies. sounds like you are saying we should do nothing. I don’t pretend to understand pretty much most of what is presented on the boards and in these discussions. If a man says he has something that will help humanity and at the same time threaten a 300 trillion dollar industry, I’m not going to sit around and wait to see it at my local hardware. I’m going to try and replicate asap because I know how business works. I have spent at least two years of all my bench time on two devices from members who here who claimed ou or self running or ou devices. I took them on their word and that was my decision. Holcomb can never get to market like we hope. I’ll be the first to put my had up and say I don’t know what I’m doing but a large part of the scientific community believe in the Big Bang magic. So there is nonsense everywhere, Holcomb looks like he has something way more than any member here has ever shared. Bite off more than you can chew and start chewing is my philosophy and I have nothing but praise and admiration for all those contributing to the journey. Energy independence = freedom.

Allcanadian	Re: Holcomb and other FE technology debate « Reply #366 on: 2022-09-24, 00:45:07 »
Group: Moderator Hero Member Posts: 2512	Grumpy Quote Lenz's Law Explained https://www.khanacademy.org/science/physics/magnetic-forces-and-magnetic-fields/magnetic-flux-faradays-law/v/lenzs-law To be honest I don't like it for several reasons, first it's not a real person using there words to try to explain a concept as they understand it. As Einstein/Feynam implied, if a real person cannot explain something in simple terms almost everyone can understand they don't understand it well enough. I don't think most people understand how this works. So in order to understand Lenz Law we first have to understand who the actual person was, there history and the line of reasoning which led to the information we know in the right context. We should understand that the physicist Emil Lenz only claimed that a changing magnetic field normally tends to induce a changing current thus a changing magnetic field which tends to oppose the field which induced it... no more no less. Any more or less has no application and these scientists were intelligent enough to understand why they needed to be very specific in there claims as a matter of context and evidence supporting there claim. Here is a good example... who was this guy? .https://prabook.com/web/emil.lenz/2338178 https://www.jtooker.com › files › Lenz.pdf On doing more searches on Lenz actual history it would seem most of what many suppose is nonsense. Doing an investigation on multiple search engines reveals very little of Lenz investigations or foresight. Given the concept he proposed is from the mid 1800's. Apparently the mid 1800's mentality is alive and well... there's really no more to be said and it explains how fu!@#$ up things have become. 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...

Allcanadian	Re: Holcomb and other FE technology debate « Reply #367 on: 2022-09-24, 01:12:12 »
Group: Moderator Hero Member Posts: 2512	Jimboot Quote sounds like you are saying we should do nothing. I don’t pretend to understand pretty much most of what is presented on the boards and in these discussions. If a man says he has something that will help humanity and at the same time threaten a 300 trillion dollar industry, I’m not going to sit around and wait to see it at my local hardware. I’m going to try and replicate asap because I know how business works. I have spent at least two years of all my bench time on two devices from members who here who claimed ou or self running or ou devices. I took them on their word and that was my decision. Holcomb can never get to market like we hope. I’ll be the first to put my had up and say I don’t know what I’m doing but a large part of the scientific community believe in the Big Bang magic. So there is nonsense everywhere, Holcomb looks like he has something way more than any member here has ever shared. Bite off more than you can chew and start chewing is my philosophy and I have nothing but praise and admiration for all those contributing to the journey. Energy independence = freedom. I think you nailed it... At least these FE inventors offer some hope and direction to pursue where the critics, to put it bluntly, offer nothing. They offer nothing but a dead and dying universe where nothing we do matters and we may as well just follow along like good little peons which is bs. My theory is simple, fuck them all and the horse they rode in on, there is always hope and any one of us has the ability to do better. We may not know how, when, where or why but the fact we keep trying opens up opportunities that we can make progress. 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...

F6FLT	Re: Holcomb and other FE technology debate « Reply #368 on: 2022-09-24, 09:53:30 »
Group: Experimentalist Hero Member Posts: 1909	Quote from: solarlab on 2022-09-23, 19:22:54 Don't fight it fellows - it's all obviously beyond your technical scope and capability. ... This kind of talk without any scientific argument on the subject only reveals the Dunning-Kruger effect. And of course there is not a single thought to be given to the evidence that the increase in magnetization of a magnetic core beyond the field that gives rise to it, as claimed by Holcomb, has as a corollary because of the additional flux variation, an induced current in the same direction as the initial one, leading to a runaway effect that would be easy to observe even with a single coil. But nobody has ever observed it. The omniscience of the free energy gurus who pretend to give lessons on how it works, by looking down on you, is in the magical processes they invent as the stories are told to them. Unfortunately, even in this field of fiction, not everyone has the talent of Joanne Rowling, so not only is their science nothing but fictional hocus-pocus, but their fables are only of interest to simpletons. --------------------------- "Open your mind, but not like a trash bin"

F6FLT	Re: Holcomb and other FE technology debate « Reply #369 on: 2022-09-24, 10:16:52 »
Group: Experimentalist Hero Member Posts: 1909	Quote from: JimBoot on 2022-09-24, 00:24:06 ... If a man says he has something that will help humanity and at the same time threaten a 300 trillion dollar industry, I’m not going to sit around and wait to see it at my local hardware. I’m going to try and replicate asap because I know how business works. ... The road to hell is paved with good intentions. Let's say this man is lying to you or deceiving himself, and you're trapped by appearances. You're going to spend a lot of time trying to duplicate a machine that has no chance of working. Wouldn't you find it more useful to analyze a minimum of the announcement that is made, before wasting your time duplicating an improbable machine? And rather than choosing the easy solution like trying to duplicate a machine simply because you are told that a miracle is at work in its functioning, to explore other tracks, less seductive than Holcomb's because they lead to the unknown and not to a supposedly known COP, including your own ideas ? Research on overunity should not be confused with debunking or validating everything that is on the Internet, especially since no validation of free energy has succeeded during the last thirty years. I don't see the point of continuing here the methods that don't work. --------------------------- "Open your mind, but not like a trash bin"

JimBoot	Re: Holcomb and other FE technology debate « Reply #370 on: 2022-09-24, 10:28:41 »
Group: Tinkerer Hero Member Posts: 1670	Quote from: F6FLT on 2022-09-24, 10:16:52 The road to hell is paved with good intentions. Let's say this man is lying to you or deceiving himself, and you're trapped by appearances. You're going to spend a lot of time trying to duplicate a machine that has no chance of working. Wouldn't you find it more useful to analyze a minimum of the announcement that is made, before wasting your time duplicating an improbable machine? And rather than choosing the easy solution like trying to duplicate a machine simply because you are told that a miracle is at work in its functioning, to explore other tracks, less seductive than Holcomb's because they lead to the unknown and not to a supposedly known COP, including your own ideas ? Research on overunity should not be confused with debunking or validating everything that is on the Internet, especially since no validation of free energy has succeeded during the last thirty years. I don't see the point of continuing here the methods that don't work. you assume too much my friend. We do not all learn the same way. One can walk and chew gum at the same time.

F6FLT	Re: Holcomb and other FE technology debate « Reply #371 on: 2022-09-24, 10:58:08 »
Group: Experimentalist Hero Member Posts: 1909	Quote from: JimBoot on 2022-09-24, 10:28:41 you assume too much my friend. We do not all learn the same way. One can walk and chew gum at the same time. I agree. But when it is suggested, as you did above, that chewing gum or walking that way, i.e., trying to replicate anything claimed as FE, is a good way to solve humanity's energy problem while chewing it or walking another way, e.g., by eliminating harebrained trails, seems more effective, I ask why keep the first way, and from your answer I see that you have no justification. --------------------------- "Open your mind, but not like a trash bin"

JimBoot	Re: Holcomb and other FE technology debate « Reply #372 on: 2022-09-24, 12:44:35 »
Group: Tinkerer Hero Member Posts: 1670	Quote from: F6FLT on 2022-09-24, 10:58:08 I agree. But when it is suggested, as you did above, that chewing gum or walking that way, i.e., trying to replicate anything claimed as FE, is a good way to solve humanity's energy problem while chewing it or walking another way, e.g., by eliminating harebrained trails, seems more effective, I ask why keep the first way, and from your answer I see that you have no justification. that’s not what I meant. I wish you well on your journey.

solarlab	Re: Holcomb and other FE technology debate « Reply #373 on: 2022-09-24, 16:31:59 »
Sr. Member Posts: 317	Quote from: F6FLT on 2022-09-24, 09:53:30 This kind of talk without any scientific argument on the subject only reveals the Dunning-Kruger effect. And of course there is not a single thought to be given to the evidence that the increase in magnetization of a magnetic core beyond the field that gives rise to it, as claimed by Holcomb, has as a corollary because of the additional flux variation, an induced current in the same direction as the initial one, leading to a runaway effect that would be easy to observe even with a single coil. But nobody has ever observed it. The omniscience of the free energy gurus who pretend to give lessons on how it works, by looking down on you, is in the magical processes they invent as the stories are told to them. Unfortunately, even in this field of fiction, not everyone has the talent of Joanne Rowling, so not only is their science nothing but fictional hocus-pocus, but their fables are only of interest to simpletons. For a guy who couldn't even pass a Middle School Physics Test you sure seem to persist in the self-illusion that your some sort of expert in this field. Well, at least your persistant - but you should apply it to learning the basics rather than polluting the threads! Or maybe you just enjoy making a complete fool of yourself. Edit - sorry, forgot that your a Troll/Shill; making a complete fool of yourself is in your task/job description... ------------------------ Holcomb and other FE technology debate Mark_Twain_never_argue_with_stupid_people.jpg (17.56 kB, 255x255 - viewed 204 times.)

Chet K	Re: Holcomb and other FE technology debate « Reply #374 on: 2022-09-24, 17:07:35 »
Group: Ambassador Hero Member Posts: 3904	Hmmm This type post looks awful familiar….. Maybe there should be a build topic started ( or not ? Generic repetitive Interruptions are not permitted at build topics !

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

2023-09-27, 00:19:25

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