On 03/17/2010 02:13 PM, Jed Rothwell wrote: > George Holz wrote: > >> This setup is only interesting if the 12V >> battery is disconnected from the pulse generator. > > I assume you mean they should charge up the capacitor first, and then > attach it to the pulse generator instead of the battery. Right? > > If it stays charged for a long time, that is proof of over-unity > operation.
Or of a good capacitor with low self discharge rate. Say, rather, if the voltage on the cap *increases* with no external supply, that's proof of over-unity operation. That is, in fact, the claim being made here -- the cap's charge is increasing and the battery "obviously" isn't providing the current to do that; so says the guy in the video. So, get rid of the battery -- I mean, *really* get rid of it, disconnect the wires at the battery terminals, and carry it a good distance away from the experiment -- and show the capacitor still charging itself up. Or admit that it's bogus. (But that'll never happen, which is one reason it's not worth the effort to post on a forum which is exclusively dedicated to discussing this "device".) Even with the battery hooked up, it would be so easy for the guy to measure current drain from the battery, and measure current into the caps, multiply by the input and output voltage values, and compare the power in and power out -- but he didn't do that; obviously he doesn't want to find out what's really going on. Stiffler would never do that, either. He kept his signal generator going, and never put a current and voltage probe across it to find out how much energy it was pumping out. Dead giveaway, when the person performing the experiment won't even make the most obvious and simple checks to see if the energy budget really does balance, and just claims it's OU without any supporting measurements: They don't measure it, yet they could measure it, so they obviously don't want to know. It's like performing a cold fusion experiment and claiming to get excess heat, but failing to use a calorimeter. > > - Jed >
