- 5x More Current Out Than In - Validation Of Proof Of Concept -

[GSM]

Hi GSM,

In studying the schematic given in v2.5 (included in the very first post of page 1) and reading the text on (I quote) "The radiant energy receiver proof of concept schematic works by heterodyning with the ambient electrostatic planetary noise. This is accomplished by tuning the L1/C1 oscillating tank to a slightly lower frequency than the OSC. Extremely Low Frequencies are generated. These lower frequency beats are more efficiently converted into useful electrical direct current through the crystal detectors D1 and D2."
I would like to notice the followings:
Across which component(s) can the generated very low frequency beats develop so that the diodes (D1 and D2) would be able to rectify them?
Or putting this otherwise, let's examine the frequency-dependent impedance at the antenna connection point with respect to the ground G1, there is the oscillator output point's impedance and there is the 3.5MHz L1C1 tank circuit impedance and there is the lamp load with the series diodes. Out of these three possibilities, the smallest impedance seems to be the L1C1 tank circuit for the heterodyned low frequency components because a parallel LC circuit behaves as a short circuit, a shunt, at the much lower frequencies than the 3-4MHz band.
So from that schematic I cannot see any possibility for the 21W lamp to bright up as per the original text suggests.

I understand there have been modifications and further version(s) since v2.5 have been issued.

This is an observation from my part, I do not wish to 'declare' anything in advance, for I did not build v2.5 schematic. However you did and I tried to understand 'circuitwise' what is this circuit about at all and how it works.

rgds, Gyula

Hi Gyula,

The beat is effectively a high frequency carrier amplitude modulation tuned by the parallel LC circuit and rectified by the diodes.

The claimed output is for Watts of power, but basic crystal oscillators put out circa 100mW or less, and do not have a low enough internal resistance to overcome the cold filamant resistance of an incandescent lamp.

This is why I tried the TPS61254, because it can put out one amp or more at 4.5V, and though it is clocked with a 3.5MHz sense capability, it looks like the output is not chopped at that frequency.

Cheers ........... Graham.

[soundiceuk]

Hi Paul.

The IC is working okay - as long as it is fitted with a 10uF output capacitor as originally fitted and as intended by Texas Instruments, whereupon of course there is no 3.5MHz output to the V2.5 coil because the 10uF is low ESR damping and in parallel with the coil.

The Texas TPS61254 was only designed last year for use in miniature radios, portable audio etc. where EMI is most undesirable.

So Bruce likely used something like an encapsulated temperature compensated crystal reference clock oscillator module from a computer pcb ? Something like this
http://www.rapidonline.com/Electroni...llator-90-0960
though generally these are not of high power.

So where does this leave constructors wishing to replicate V2.5 and V2.6 ?

Cheers ......... Graham.

Hi Graham, I must admit I dropped the ball there as Bruce didn't say TPS61254 in 2003 I added the TPS61254 assuming that is what he meant.

I do edit spelling, punctuation but sometimes I get a bit too clever.

This file is the draft of the suggested additions to 2nd Edition v0.13

https://www.dropbox.com/s/pyvyg49sbe...28%20BFO.pdf?m

It was posted in a little rougher format to Tantric on the 1st page of the thread.


Apologies for all the unanswered questions on the thread. Today I have spent time adding a members only section for contributors.

This is so they can download the latest version at the time (now v0.13 BETA3) rather than me having to send out links to 100+ email addresses.

This will streamline my time and focus all the feedback into each new version.

We aim to have an A-Z of building construction including pictures and videos for v0.13.

There are many very interesting things happening at the moment in the engineering team.



@ ZAPZAP

A decent lawyer is going to cost some bux! We have to pay £200 for a solicitor to write a letter in the UK!!!!

I'm interested to hear more. There must be a way to do this that will work.


@ ALL

I'm not ignoring questions. I just haven't had time to go through the entire thread again and make a note of all of them.

[RAMSET]

Kit form

Paul
The ultralight aircraft industry survives in the "Liar for hire"[lawyer] capitol of the world,solely do to the concept of the "KIT".


Produce the item in a non functioning form void of certain components that the builder has to source elsewhere, with the final assembly being the responsibility of the purchaser , it need have nothing at all to do with the final intent ...a yard ornament ...a paper weight ... there are many, many ways to do this ,
and when done properly its "Rock solid"!!
Provided we are talking about an "open source" venue?

Don't sweat this part Bud !!

Thx
Chet

[GSM]

Quote:
Originally Posted by soundiceuk
Hi Graham, I must admit I dropped the ball there as Bruce didn't say TPS61254 in 2003 I added the TPS61254 assuming that is what he meant.

I do edit spelling, punctuation but sometimes I get a bit too clever.

This file is the draft of the suggested additions to 2nd Edition v0.13

https://www.dropbox.com/s/pyvyg49sbe...28%20BFO.pdf?m

It was posted in a little rougher format to Tantric on the 1st page of the thread.


Apologies for all the unanswered questions on the thread. Today I have spent time adding a members only section for contributors.

This is so they can download the latest version at the time (now v0.13 BETA3) rather than me having to send out links to 100+ email addresses.

This will streamline my time and focus all the feedback into each new version.

We aim to have an A-Z of building construction including pictures and videos for v0.13.

There are many very interesting things happening at the moment in the engineering team.



@ ZAPZAP

A decent lawyer is going to cost some bux! We have to pay £200 for a solicitor to write a letter in the UK!!!!

I'm interested to hear more. There must be a way to do this that will work.


@ ALL

I'm not ignoring questions. I just haven't had time to go through the entire thread again and make a note of all of them.
__________________________________________________ _______________

Paul.

The photo shown in the first post here is not a V2.5, and no amount of apologies or explanations for 'mistakes' or 'misunderstandings' could ever make it so.

Have you youself seen the V2.5 or V2.6 circuits running, because to be blunt about this, someone who publishes *falsehoods* is a Liar; end of.

And those who repeat a Lie perpetrated by someone else without first checking for themselves what they are writing, is an ..... !

As far as I am concerned, if this 'design' truly is part of Burce Perreault's ever changing output, then his reputation is shot right through and full of holes, no matter how flowery his blurb, or how 'professional' his Patents or publications appear to be !

Even communications at the Yahoo Radiant Energy Power Generation Group have dropped off, I recon because the membership see through the latest and still current (though so obviously not realised) gross technical error of advice appearing in the name of member "Bruce A Perreault - President".

This entire situation is as like the Zilano carrot/donkey 'contributions' were in the Don Smith thread, and I think it worth repeat reading my first #21 post here above.

There is another technical aspect I have not addressed, which Guyala above also likely understands, yet the V2.5 circuit developed into the V2.6 circuit, with this now released in -
Direct Electrical Power from the Utilization of Earth IONS
2nd Edition BRUCE A. PERREAULT
"Radiant Energy Research Manual"
for which a $3 donation is sought for ongoing 'research', and even larger sums for Gold and Platinum 'memberships' to keep readers 'updated'.

Paul, you wrote above -
"I feel somewhat oblidged to compensate you for the experience, in the hope to move things forward positively."

But this is supposed to be about everyone's future, the Truth, and thus the reputation of everyone involved with the 'project', including yours !

In the V2.6 section of the above 'manual' are words to the effect that a higher wattage version has been produced with a modified basic radiant energy receiving circuit, but that this could prove can be fatal if a mistake is made. It is also written that details have been withheld because the writer is personally not willing to take on liability issues for this type of responsibility.

High Wattage?
Not even ONE Watt has yet been demonstrated, let alone the near 9V @ 1.5A now claimed in this 2nd edition !

It is clear that you don't have the answers Paul because you are responding like an agent, so what is really going on here ?
Have you seen 'the' working device ?


Cheers .......... Graham.

[soundiceuk]

What you have posted is dissapointing to hear, but at the moment I haven't had time to get to the bottom of it.


Graham, here is truth.

What have I got to gain from leading you or anyone down the garden path?

It's a sick thought really

The suggestion that I am a liar or dishonest is your opinion.

Opinions are like belly buttons. We all have one.

My offer was empathetic and my idea behind it was to get you motivated again and correct / improve whatever was needed.

I genuinely want you and everyone else to break free from energy slavery because it is about everyone's future.

You are right about me not having the answers. I don't have the answers.

The team does have the answers and I haven't asked them all the questions, so hands up it's all my fault!

The engineering team are not monitoring this thread, just me.

Seeing as I don't get paid for this and I do it on an as and when basis, my opinion of my own performance is I am doing an ok job.

I have seen a working validation circuit but not the proof of concept. I will be drawing the validation schematic today and labelling the diagram in the hope I will complete it by tomorrow.

I have also seen high wattage designs working and so have the engineering team. They are working on them in their spare time. We are all volunteers.

We are much further ahead with this project than most would believe.

What is going on here is a group of talented electronics wizards (not me) and me trying to do something positive for the arena to bring us forward, instead of going round in "Don Smith" circles.

I noticed yesterday that even Dynatron has added an antenna to his schematic.


Graham I am able to put myself in your shoes and see your point of view.

You don't know me, Bruce or any of the engineering team.

Whatever you think of us, our motivation is genuine.

I thought it might be worthwhile to note:

We don't need to share any information.
We don't need anyone elses input.
We don't need anyone elses money.

All of this can be taken care of via the investor route and we end up with systems for ourselves, the investor gets brought out and the technology gets shelved. We make some money and carry on living the lie in the matrix.

Two options.

The selfish / greed route.

or the way we are attempting.

We can rock and roll with each other or walk away from each other.


All I know is my life would be extremely easy if I walk away from the whole scene. The relationship problems that have been caused in my family are unbelievable.

Despite all this I'm still here fighting for all of us.

[GSM]

The suggestion that I am a liar or dishonest is your opinion.

Hi Paul.

I am relating to what is published as V2.5/ V2.6
and presently appear in -
Direct Electrical Power from the Utilization of Earth IONS.

Maybe they ought not be shown in their present mod state, lest others are seduced into failure too ?

Those circuits are not as post#1 photograph above.

Cheers ......... Graham.

[RAMSET]

Options??

Paul
Quote

Two options.

The selfish / greed route.

or the way we are attempting.

We can rock and roll with each other or walk away from each other.

end quote

Altruism and Capitalism are strange bedfellows.......


Thx
Chet

[soundiceuk]

Hi Paul.

I am relating to what is published as V2.5/ V2.6
and presently appear in -
Direct Electrical Power from the Utilization of Earth IONS.

Maybe they ought not be shown in their present mod state, lest others are seduced into failure too ?

Those circuits are not as post#1 photograph above.

Cheers ......... Graham.

I need to discuss this with the team and find out why the chip was used for v2.5.

My electronics skills are limited because I'm only an autoelectrician. The circuit details often go over my head but because I have full trust in the team, I trust what I am publishing.

v2.6 has OSC. We have just found a new source for oscillators and are discussing the additions for 2nd Edition v0.13 BETA 4.

At this moment in time I feel the the best thing to do is publish the validation schematic and add it plus a message at the bottom of the 1st post of this thread.

I'm going to put everything else on hold and make this priority.

[soundiceuk]

Paul
Quote

Two options.

The selfish / greed route.

or the way we are attempting.

We can rock and roll with each other or walk away from each other.

end quote

Altruism and Capitalism are strange bedfellows.......


Thx
Chet

Another word I had to look up! Cheers Chet

I didn't realize that when I got into the energy arena I would learn more English too!

The selfish greed route isn't an option I would be involved with. Businessmen are ruthless. I truly believe that anything involving a profit will end in tears in the energy arena.

I think the only way to make big bux from an energy device is to make a device and sell it to someone who will shelve it. That is if they don't poison you or kill you or your family first. Look at SM or TK.

I know of two members of this forum that have received serious intimidation after posting youtube videos and I don't mean empty threats through forums or comments pages.

I'm waiting for the knock at my door. Although we don't answer the door to strangers, so they will have to knock it off to get in.

I am sure there is an angle that will work for us. I don't know exactly what it is yet.

I am trying my best to help refine a way forward. What a rollercoaster!

[Parav]

Crystal Oscillators

I need to discuss this with the team and find out why the chip was used for v2.5.

My electronics skills are limited because I'm only an autoelectrician. The circuit details often go over my head but because I have full trust in the team, I trust what I am publishing.

v2.6 has OSC. We have just found a new source for oscillators and are discussing the additions for 2nd Edition v0.13 BETA 4.

At this moment in time I feel the the best thing to do is publish the validation schematic and add it plus a message at the bottom of the 1st post of this thread.

I'm going to put everything else on hold and make this priority.

Hi Paul,
I found this simple crystal oscillator circuit that utilizes the 74F04 Hex Inverter:
Check out
"http://www.geocities.ws/minhtuam_vo/make_your_crystal_oscillator.htm "

If you can't get thru with the above address --just Google --"make your own crystal oscillator using the 74F04 hex inverter IC".

You can probably use a variable cap instead of the fixed caps that they state that you can use there.

I just got mine wired up with the above and hope to get the "2.6" circuit going in a day or two----will let you know.

Paul

[Neo1]

Back to basics

May be interesting to do the following:

Stop update New Forum

Stop updating ccts and 2nd or 3rd addition Earth Ion documentation

Stop seeking answers from Engineering team for forum members questions

Ask engineering team to issue a complete cct diagram with All components listed, for a working version with accompanying photos of the unit working on the bench. After all the cct does not have a large component count and should be simple for the engineering team to put together.

This may just save a little time and prevent everyone from chasing their tails and it may then be appropriate and reasonable for requests to be made of funds and subscriptions to support development and further knowledge sharing once we see some basic replications post here to validate the design.

Just saying!

kris

[realmikel]

My Savior?

[QUOTE=

Despite all this I'm still here fighting for all of us. [/QUOTE]

Your not fighting for me, I am a Buddhist and we don't believe in that nonsense. May I suggest you recognise that if your fighting, something is not right. Resolve what your struggling with and find the path smoother.

[GSM]

May be interesting to do the following:

Stop update New Forum

Stop updating ccts and 2nd or 3rd addition Earth Ion documentation

Stop seeking answers from Engineering team for forum members questions

Ask engineering team to issue a complete cct diagram with All components listed, for a working version with accompanying photos of the unit working on the bench. After all the cct does not have a large component count and should be simple for the engineering team to put together.

This may just save a little time and prevent everyone from chasing their tails and it may then be appropriate and reasonable for requests to be made of funds and subscriptions to support development and further knowledge sharing once we see some basic replications post here to validate the design.

Just saying!

kris

Agreed Neo.

Our good hearted Paul has been placed in an awful position.
In good faith he relays information without knowing whether it is 100% validated or not.
Unfortunately the only way to communicate Truth is via Paul, so he gets it from both sides.

Take the photo in post#1 above.
I could set meters up to do that. A simple transformer coupled oscillator running off 12 Volts at 9mA could easily drive LEDs with 2.5 volts at 32mA as photographed.

What has NOT been shown here are the voltages across the battery and the LEDs.

Paul I too think just the same as you state here, but those you are helping are NOT providing genuine circuits. So do not worry about anyone calling at your door, there has not been anything to worry about here.

Hi Paul,
I found this simple crystal oscillator circuit that utilizes the 74F04 Hex Inverter:
Check out
"http://www.geocities.ws/minhtuam_vo/make_your_crystal_oscillator.htm "

If you can't get thru with the above address --just Google --"make your own crystal oscillator using the 74F04 hex inverter IC".

You can probably use a variable cap instead of the fixed caps that they state that you can use there.

I just got mine wired up with the above and hope to get the "2.6" circuit going in a day or two----will let you know.

Paul

Hi Paul-2,

Unless any oscillator is capable of say 5 Watts output into 5 ohms (and NO encapsulated crystal reference PCB mounting oscillator has ever been thus capable!) then neither V2.5 nor V2.6 circuits will start running because the very low impedance of an incandescent filament will damp any lesser powered output.

Also the claim here is to tune within a few Hertz of the oscillator output, but I believe the 'Engineering Team' really do NOT have any idea about the technicalities of what they are talking about.

To peak tune within a few Hertz of say 3.5MHz with a single LC circuit is going to require a resonant 'Q' (I'm guessing) exceeding 1,000. Now look at the stated V2.6 lamp filament resistance of 9/1.5 = 6 ohms. How low is the tuned coil winding resistance going to need to be in order to acheive such a high figure of 'Q'.

In my opinion V2.5 and V2.6 are either a deliberate carrot/donkey hoaxes, or the fabrications of Liars .....
and Paul, we don't need to start navel gazing to see that you are piggy in the middle.

Thus I am very sorry that my bluntness impinges directly upon you Paul, but I have been winding RF coils for 50 years, and these aspects do need to be clarified.

Cheers .......... Graham

[GSM]

Supply a con-man with enough rope and he won't be able to keep from tripping himself up .....
and I don't mean you SoundIceUK Paul, to whom I genuinely send Best Wishes !

[Parav]

2.5 /2.6 Osc.

Agreed Neo.

Our good hearted Paul has been placed in an awful position.
In good faith he relays information without knowing whether it is 100% validated or not.
Unfortunately the only way to communicate Truth is via Paul, so he gets it from both sides.

Take the photo in post#1 above.
I could set meters up to do that. A simple transformer coupled oscillator running off 12 Volts at 9mA could easily drive LEDs with 2.5 volts at 32mA as photographed.

What has NOT been shown here are the voltages across the battery and the LEDs.

Paul I too think just the same as you state here, but those you are helping are NOT providing genuine circuits. So do not worry about anyone calling at your door, there has not been anything to worry about here.



Hi Paul-2,

Unless any oscillator is capable of say 5 Watts output into 5 ohms (and NO encapsulated crystal reference PCB mounting oscillator has ever been thus capable!) then neither V2.5 nor V2.6 circuits will start running because the very low impedance of an incandescent filament will damp any lesser powered output.

Also the claim here is to tune within a few Hertz of the oscillator output, but I believe the 'Engineering Team' really do NOT have any idea about the technicalities of what they are talking about.

To peak tune within a few Hertz of say 3.5MHz with a single LC circuit is going to require a resonant 'Q' (I'm guessing) exceeding 1,000. Now look at the stated V2.6 lamp filament resistance of 9/1.5 = 6 ohms. How low is the tuned coil winding resistance going to need to be in order to acheive such a high figure of 'Q'.

In my opinion V2.5 and V2.6 are either a deliberate carrot/donkey hoaxes, or the fabrications of Liars .....
and Paul, we don't need to start navel gazing to see that you are piggy in the middle.

Thus I am very sorry that my bluntness impinges directly upon you Paul, but I have been winding RF coils for 50 years, and these aspects do need to be clarified.

Cheers .......... Graham

Hi Graham,

Thanks for your input on the above. I do appreciate where you're coming from and I do respect all your views.

I, however, do disagree and will just continue tinkering on with this.
I have been a member and follower of Bruce's team since day one and I don't believe for one minute they would lead us down the garden path deliberately and for what?

I am sure and you can count on it, that there will -mistakes , upgrades , screw ups and revisions galore as it evolves. Each change or revision will hopefully be another step--that we're all looking for in the right direction.

Thanks again for all your thoughts and ideas on this- and on other threads as well--You obviously are very knowledgeable guy.

Cheers--Paul-2