This is posted in the other forum
Then you have been lying all around with your COP 3 device made with resistors
For references to my post which was just stating what is written in the patent. Not your own opinion which is what you write in your posts. You are just promoting the toroid and you are just distorting what the patent states.
Evidences of that:
- You said that was done with resistors. Now you say that resistors wont work and just the toroid works because if not it is just a transformer.... Are you scamming people?
- You sold your 100 W in / 300 W output device. A very smart move: selling your only ou device forthe price of an iron core.
- No pictures taken, nor videos of your device
- I suppose no witnesses from this planet
- Your notebook got spoiled by a flooding in your area. Now you dont have nor the device neither your notes...
- For one device you released two sets of design parameters, one in OU dot com and other in EF dot com with different cores sizes, turns and driving parameters. How can that be possible?
- Now someone has stolen in your home and they took your camera cable you can not show your progress in part G. BTW when will you get a new cable? Two weeks all your followers waiting for those pictures.
- Now you have put up a funding campaing to give you money . OMG
- In a communication you told me that you PCB was costing around 350 dollars, telling me that you havent that money. I see now that the one you bought was just 33 dollars...
You are confusing people saying that just the toroid invented by your mentor, not by you is the only method which work. This is your opinion. The key is to move the two fields no matter how you do it. How many OU devices have an internal recycling device? None. Even Figuera has none. Just your own proposal has one.
You are distorting what the patent says. That why you get mad each time that I just quote the patent. If the toroid was essential then it must be described in the patent. But it is not even mentioned. If you dont describe an essential part then your patent is invalid. Period. Dont fool people to believe that the toroid is mandatory when it is not.
I am about posting my builder pictures in the other thread and start to ask just technical questions about the alleged recycling concept. Just technical question and wait for the technical answers.
Originally posted by marathonman
View Post
For references to my post which was just stating what is written in the patent. Not your own opinion which is what you write in your posts. You are just promoting the toroid and you are just distorting what the patent states.
Evidences of that:
- You said that was done with resistors. Now you say that resistors wont work and just the toroid works because if not it is just a transformer.... Are you scamming people?
- You sold your 100 W in / 300 W output device. A very smart move: selling your only ou device forthe price of an iron core.
- No pictures taken, nor videos of your device
- I suppose no witnesses from this planet
- Your notebook got spoiled by a flooding in your area. Now you dont have nor the device neither your notes...
- For one device you released two sets of design parameters, one in OU dot com and other in EF dot com with different cores sizes, turns and driving parameters. How can that be possible?
- Now someone has stolen in your home and they took your camera cable you can not show your progress in part G. BTW when will you get a new cable? Two weeks all your followers waiting for those pictures.
- Now you have put up a funding campaing to give you money . OMG
- In a communication you told me that you PCB was costing around 350 dollars, telling me that you havent that money. I see now that the one you bought was just 33 dollars...
You are confusing people saying that just the toroid invented by your mentor, not by you is the only method which work. This is your opinion. The key is to move the two fields no matter how you do it. How many OU devices have an internal recycling device? None. Even Figuera has none. Just your own proposal has one.
You are distorting what the patent says. That why you get mad each time that I just quote the patent. If the toroid was essential then it must be described in the patent. But it is not even mentioned. If you dont describe an essential part then your patent is invalid. Period. Dont fool people to believe that the toroid is mandatory when it is not.
I am about posting my builder pictures in the other thread and start to ask just technical questions about the alleged recycling concept. Just technical question and wait for the technical answers.
Comment