On Feb 25, 2010, at 11:01 PM, Harry Veeder wrote:
----- Original Message ----
From: Horace Heffner <hheff...@mtaonline.net>
To: vortex-l@eskimo.com
Sent: Thu, February 25, 2010 12:25:58 AM
Subject: Re: [Vo]:Naudin's improved "generator"
On Feb 24, 2010, at 7:11 PM, Harry Veeder wrote:
Are we watching the same video? ;-)
Did you not see my correction??
the part about rms voltage and current?
harry
That's right. It's the same old issue we've seen over and over again,
and discussed here ad nauseam. The I*V is not a measure of power
when there are phase angles, transient demand, varying frequencies,
or square waves involved. It takes a fast integrating power meter to
measure input power. This applies to battery DC input to a device
with these kinds of power demands as well.
Another issue is there is no apparent measurement of power output. As
we have seen before, driving LEDs with transients can cause the
perception of an amount of light that requiring more power than
actually used. It appears the power produced is a small proportion of
the power applied.
Lastly, as we all know, if there is a claim of significant overunity,
then the loop has to be closed for the claim to be credible.
I see no reason to think the device is not a transformer that works
by displacing a high mu material field. This is not a new idea.
There are commercially produced power supply transformers that work
on this principle. They are not overunity.
Best regards,
Horace Heffner
http://www.mtaonline.net/~hheffner/
