I just summarized what is known today, drew the line of reality, you have to be blind and deaf not to see and not hear this reality.
best regards
Petr
This what I mentioned in posting #355, little has changed since.
"You are the closest thing on this Audio Forum to an LP with a scratch, with one difference, an LP does not insult people".
😉
Hans
"You are the closest thing on this Audio Forum to an LP with a scratch, with one difference, an LP does not insult people".
😉
Hans
Switching issues can be prevented in class A amps and in SE configuration they are simple to build. A closer look might reveal that THD as function of amplitude is exponential, more resembling a musical instrument than the "straight line / hockey stick" standard AB amp. The required (extra) power can be dealt with by more effective power supplies, like those this dissertation is about: http://utpedia.utp.edu.my/id/eprint/15554/
Apparently you didn't read the pdf. Otherwise you would have known that even nothing isn't free, and that the issue has been dealt with experimentally (so is reproducible). It's just that the effect obtained still is small but nevertheless patented, as you could have known when investigating something you are not familiar with.
https://patents.justia.com/patent/9230730
https://patents.justia.com/patent/9230730
Apparently you did not read the pdf. The first sentence is "Bi Toroid transformer is invented for obtaining efficiency beyond 100%." No need to continue reading of such BS
Apparently patents aren't read either. Has this site become a religious forum where commenting on the physics is prohibited?
A thesis is a just a series of claims that need to be carefully considered and evaluated through peer review and then published if valid.
The presence of these claims before review somewhere on internet does not warrant their accuracy.
Patents are just claims too and you just need to pay to get them deposited. The associated proof of concept does not need to be checked nor evaluated.
Patents just protect your claims before someone else comes up with the same. They don't prove anything.
The presence of these claims before review somewhere on internet does not warrant their accuracy.
Patents are just claims too and you just need to pay to get them deposited. The associated proof of concept does not need to be checked nor evaluated.
Patents just protect your claims before someone else comes up with the same. They don't prove anything.
Anyone can get a patent, that doesn't say diddly. If someone convinces you he has an overunity solution, you're taken.
Jan
Jan
Last edited:
For those fluent in German but who failed or omitted physics class, take it up with this contemporary physicist (English translation is erroneous):
https://gehtanders.de/raumenergiekonverter-nach-prof-turtur/
https://gehtanders.de/raumenergiekonverter-nach-prof-turtur/
I am pretty sure that petr_2009 can demonstrate with a series of colorful graphs and figures that overunity does not exist.
The world is full of charlatans claiming such stuff. So far, nothing has materialized.
Of course, those who peddle this invariably point to a global conspiracy by big oil/fill in your fav target, to keep them out of the game.
But there's so many people who refuse to think critically, they always find a following.
The classical one of course is an electric motor driving a generator, where the generated output power is larger than the power input to the motor.
Jan
Of course, those who peddle this invariably point to a global conspiracy by big oil/fill in your fav target, to keep them out of the game.
But there's so many people who refuse to think critically, they always find a following.
The classical one of course is an electric motor driving a generator, where the generated output power is larger than the power input to the motor.
Jan
Anyone in this forum able to debunk the physics in this article?
https://www.ostfalia.de/cms/de/pws/turtur/.content/documents/Teil_02-Serie-deutsch-5Artikel.pdf
https://www.ostfalia.de/cms/de/pws/turtur/.content/documents/Teil_02-Serie-deutsch-5Artikel.pdf
All that stuff is controversial, only the experiments you can undertake yourself aren't. Which is what in my case, "DIY" is all about - not the rigid beliefs, even vented by "experts". History has plenty of such "experts" like those predicting death as result of traveling faster than `30 Km/h.
You are free to waste your money, time and effort as you want. We are also as free not to do so.
Experiments can be falsified so only live performance with immediate verification could be accepted.
Names & qualifications of the experts? Review according to which standards? In case it has been missed,
https://research.uh.edu/the-big-idea/university-research-explained/five-cases-of-research-fraud/
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_experimental_errors_and_frauds_in_physics
etc. etc.