Bybee Quantum Purifier Measurements and Double Blind Test

Status
Not open for further replies.
as it transcends known physics.

Well the claim has been made and John said I was right. Correct me if I'm wrong but separating noise and signal in the way claimed is the same as decreasing entropy in a purely dissipative system so the claims violate first principles. I know Jack doesn't need the money, but the Nobel prize is an honor.

We've been over the secret nonsense years ago, there was a second hard to find Bybee site with dealers for all the products in several countries that at times harbor enemies of the US.
 
[book=]%[/book]
Dan, where did you get this quote? Did you write it, or did somebody else do it? I WILL SAY that it does a very good job at explaining Bybee purifiers, as far as I know and have been told about them. I am always stifled in trying to explain them well, myself. Some of what I know, or what I have heard, I'm never sure if I am 'going over the line' so to speak, and perhaps getting myself or Jack into trouble.
From my perspective, I think that this device used to be much more secret, even though it was probably first developed 40-50 years ago or so. Now it is in that 'grey' area, and SOME devices that Jack sells, can't be sold to just any country. On the other hand, some devices can. I heard Jack warn a customer about this, over lunch, just last week. Some of the devices are on some sort of government list.
I tried to point out something important about the RESISTOR shown in the larger Bybee device, but nobody completely got it. Let's just say, you can't easily buy that specific resistor, and if you could it would be VERY expensive.
Of course, there is confusion with the OTHER Bybee device that does something similar, but uses a COMPLETELY DIFFERENT resistor, and in this case, apparently the resistor is the main active agent. This is the type that SY tried, and has carbon attached to it in some serious way, but I might be saying too much.
In any case, there are a number of audiophiles, like me, who find them interesting, and worth experimenting with, AS LONG as you have the highest quality audio reproduction equipment, already. I have found them to work with computer monitor amp-speakers, but they are far too expensive to put them on a cheap system, unless you just have them around for some reason, like I do.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=RiFhTGZlxGo&feature=youtube_gdata_player
 
Administrator
Joined 2004
Paid Member
Brain and ears connected, yes. Somewhere I've seen charts of where frequencies tend to pull in height, because of the shape of the ear pinna. 6-7K tends to sound high, IIRC. The virtual reality folks are very interested in those clues.
 
Only Cooper pairs will be energized within a superconductor, and these pass AC signals noiselessly, while rejecting the noise that has accumulated previously from random electron motion.
I love the way this statement moves seamlessly from truth to nonsense. Maybe I will have to sign up for one of those creative writing courses - then I will learn how to write sentences like that.
 
I Maybe I will have to sign up for one of those creative writing courses - then I will learn how to write sentences like that.

It's not that difficult; I gave some examples of how I do it and some other members kindly demonstrated how easy it is to be fooled by a serious line of nonsense as long as it's well-marbled with actual, google-able scientific phrases. I can't quite claim the facility of someone like Sokal, but he should be an inspiration to us all.
 
Administrator
Joined 2004
Paid Member
Somebody else posted these before but probably not in this thread.
Thanks! I remember that chart from a recent post, but could not find any English version of it. No idea what it means. Will have to translate by hand.
EDIT: Ah, ha. Google translate is helping. The chart shows the percentage of certainly of where frequency seems to come from.
Looks like I need to get a copy of "Spatial Hearing" by Jens Blauert

Jan, you can read the original, yes?
 
I love the way this statement moves seamlessly from truth to nonsense. Maybe I will have to sign up for one of those creative writing courses - then I will learn how to write sentences like that.

"Noise accumulation", brilliant pataphysical concept as if noise is an additive property of individual carriers. This stuff has so many layers of absurd nonsense it is high art.
 
Last edited:
Dan, where did you get this quote?
Hello John, somehow I stumbled upon it.
I tried to point out something important about the RESISTOR shown in the larger Bybee device, but nobody completely got it. Let's just say, you can't easily buy that specific resistor, and if you could it would be VERY expensive.
Can you let on what is trick about these resistors, and why expensive ?.

Dan.
 
For example, Beryllium oxide is necessary and expensive in order to get the power rating, AND the working element is non-standard. I suspect that it has a relatively lousy tempco.

Not so expensive at all. That's why it's a common substrate for commodity resistors.

Could it possibly be that the reason that the target is moving ("Oh, you have last year's, he's changed it since then!") is that the resistors are surplus buys? The "cost" is because of set-up fees for small production runs if you wanted the manufacturer to make more of that specific kind, but that's not what the fraud squad is actually paying. Feature, not a bug.
 
The resistors used today are not from surplus buys. 15 years ago, some resistors that were first used in PARALLEL with the quantum device, were mil grade wirewound resistors that could be found in some surplus stores. However, specifically non-inductive wound resistors were found to be better, and what Jack uses today, even better, but they are special order.
The part that you evaluated, SY, is completely different, and you or I can't normally buy it either. Prove me wrong, if you can, and I will offer you an apology.
 
Brian, there are 2 (two) separate devices called the Bybee purifier. ONE has a resistor located inside a ceramic case, that has a rare earth coating that is somewhat conductive. The other, the one the SY tested uses a COMPLETELY DIFFERENT resistor type that apparently uses an ALTERNATE METHOD of purifying. This is the source of your questioning.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.