Quanta Magnetics Kits & Experiments

[Farmhand]

The burden of proof of an extraordinary claim is on the original claimant, ie. if
person 1 claims self running then person 2 claims it's fake, then person one
claims the claim of faking is fake the burden of proof is on person one.

Otherwise the third claim of the claim of faking being fake has the burden of
proof being the last claim, it is completely illogical to try to say the second
claim of faking has the burden of proof but the first extraordinary claim and
the third claim of the claim of faking being fake does not

The original claim has the burden of proof, and proof does not come in a you
tube video. It comes when it is proven by valid measurement that more energy
is output than what is input to the device, the voltage of any particular
battery is almost irrelevant.

There is a disturbing familiar tone to this thread.

Truth is that most everyone would have little to no interest if no claims or
hints of self running were made.

If the battery voltage of the charging battery was to rise to 20 volts then
that indicates a heavily sulfated battery and would be normal even if being
charged/desufated by a device with 30 % efficiency.

Truth is that without the hints of self running a lot less kits would get sold.

You either have proof of self running or you don't have proof, evidence is not proof.

Please note, I am not asking for proof. So no one claim I am asking for any proof.
..

[Scorch]

I see no proof of your claim and I believe no such proof exists.

BTW: I, personally, have not made any claim other than the fact the photographic evidence exists. Therefore I suffer no burden to prove anything beyond this verifiable fact.

Thank you for the tacit consent but I have no idea WHICH logical fallacy you refer to or what the context may be.

Here is a reference I like to use for researching logical fallacies-
Truth Seeker: Trivium and Logical Fallacies -- Scorch's Journal -- Fur Affinity [dot] net

Kindest regards;

}:>

LOGICAL FALLACY


the burden of PROOF lay at YOUR FEET.

[Scorch]

Interesting.

What does qualify or, otherwise, is acceptable proof of a self running system in the context of this specific experiment or this forum in general?

Theoretical scenario-
If I do manage to complete building this experiment, and it does run and may even appear to produce a resonant effect, and internal reserve voltage does rise and continues to rise to the point that I must bleed of the access energy to protect the capacitors, what would this forum then consider to be 'absolute proof', beyond any reasonable doubt, this effect is, in fact, occurring in the reality of my laboratory?

In law: First hand testimony, sworn under penalty of perjury, is considered to be hard evidence and 'proof', beyond reasonable doubt, sufficient to convict and execute a living Man. Just as other hard evidence may also serve to this end such as audio-video evidence of an event, artifact, or testimony.

What shall be the law of proof for this forum and these experiments?

In consideration we have already agreed to use a legal system in which first hand testimony is sufficient and perfectly acceptable for even the highest of capital crimes, then isn't this ALSO sufficient for a far smaller claim such as: "The original experiment has now been replicated and the effect observed in the video has now been confirmed"?

If you claim that photographic evidence, including first hand testimony as found in a documentary video, is not acceptable proof then; what is acceptable proof?!?

It may be wise to establish our law of acceptable proof.
So; what shall it be? What is "good enough" for all of you?

Me? I'm easy!
I personally do not need to know HOW a machine works in order to turn it on and use it and experience this knowledge the machine is on and working.

SO, IF I am first hand witness to an observed effect, such as: "Device not connected to external power, light stays on, and voltage continues to rise", then this is actually all the proof I personally need.
At which point I would then consider carrying it (device-experiment) over to a party for LOTS more witnesses to observe the same effect.
Would first hand testimony from such neutral witnesses be an acceptable law of proof for this forum?

And, believe me, I can find a LOT of witnesses at some of these parties or events...
https://s3.amazonaws.com/anthrocon-2...pPhotoHuge.jpg

BUT, if this or a video is not good enough for this forum then, . . what is?

Please respond.

Kindest regards;

}:>

You either have proof of self running or you don't have proof, evidence is not proof.

..

[wayne.ct]

Evidence and Proof

Let's say person A makes a post on this forum. The post is evidence that someone, somewhere is sufficiently skilled to operate a computer and keyboard to join a forum and has at least some personal interest in the general topics discussed on the forum. What is proved by such evidence is a much shakier proposition. The possibility exists that the post was written by an automatic data processing machine programmed by a super genius that has absolutely no interest in "supposed" over unity, free energy or anything else that us common mortals enjoy thinking about or speculating about.

So, what constitutes proof? I consider most claims to be mere claims on which I make a personal judgment as to authority, credibility and authenticity. Maybe I could add to that list. For example, the self-charging video purports to show a device that is self charging. The videographer or narrator is very clever and uses words that suggest a conclusion. The conclusion is not stated in a positive manner but is designed to get the listener to draw a conclusion. Is there additional evidence that can be gathered from the video? Are there aspects of the display that hide things that might be relevant? I like asking questions, but I usually remain silent because the questions help ME judge the evidence. I don't presume to make those decisions for other people without their asking my opinion. At least not most of the time.

So, I have an opinion of the video and the video certainly does not warrant an unqualified vote of confidence. I don't believe the video PROVES anything. It is a mere claim and the claim is not even explicit.

Now, Scorch, you ask what proof such a person as I might want? I think I would want to duplicate the experiment and reason it out for myself what the results mean. You can't do that for me. I am glad you are doing what you are doing. And, if I can learn something that helps me with my project or projects, that is good enough for me. I might suggest you measure and report this or that, but how or whether you do that is entirely up to you.

Nothing is proved by arguing or debating or merely throwing verbal volley balls back and forth. What you are doing is good enough for me.

[SilverToGold]

Scorch, keep on with your work. Post what you will.

Those who are open will be and those who aren't - there is no proof that will convict them.

To each, he chooses his own path.

Keep up the good post and don't get distracted trying to "prove" anything to any nay-sayer. You will know those who have honest questions because they just ask and don't try to "prove" you wrong. To those, your answers will be worth your time.

Time is a most precious possession, don't waste it.

[Scorch]

Thank you for the input

Thank you for all the input regarding our law of proof.

And please forgive my humble attempt to explore these issues with lots of details and writings.
This is merely the way I am after nearly two decades of dealing with many different internet personalities as well as my own law studies.
This goes way back to a time even before Rick Friedrich booted me from the SSG yahoo group, many years ago, for merely trying to suggest there is more to the story with regards to the Hamel spinner...
At which point his reactive actions against me encouraged me to produce my very FIRST youtube video in order to merely peer review the claim(s)-
Peer Review of the Bedini / Hamel spinner - YouTube

I am always trying to teach what I think I know and, sometimes, simpler is is just better.

Put simply: My answer to the question "Is it self charging?", is merely: I do not know.

I am aware there are only a few undeniable facts-
1. The video exists.
2. The video APPEARS to be evidence of a self charging system.
3. The producer of the video has never lied to me, has always provided excellent customer services, and I am not aware of any verifiable claims of 'fraud' against the company.
4. The system does use three technologies I am personally familiar with.

This is pretty much it and so, without personal hands on experience with that particular device, my INFORMED answer to the question is: I don't know.
But, because I am familar with some of these things, the scales in my reality are slightly tipped towards "yes", I believe the video is genuine.

But, of course, this is merely an UNIFORMED answer based merely on my BELIEF. Therefore is merely an uniformed OPINION.

So when somebody actually does claim the answer is "yes" or "no" then the next logical question is: "How do you know this answer?" How did you come to this conclusion in order to take such a firm position?

These questions MUST be asked because, more often than not, the answer is merely a personal opinion from somebody who did NOT actually see or test the device. . . Or their answer is merely based on OTHER factors such as a reliance on a physical 'law' that hasn't been revised in 150+ years and does face something like 12 known *challenges...

So we must ask these discovery questions to get down to the factual TRUTH of his/her firm position and answer of "no" or "yes".
Thank you Socrates.
Socratic method - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

*Must see video regarding the second law of thermodynamics-
www.youtube.com/watch?v=bBp_SPJAOJc

And, yes, I do intend to keep working on this experiment and attempt to replicate the observed effect in the G1 load test video.
Hope to complete more this weekend.

Thank you all again and kindest regards;

}:>

[TheoriaApophasis]

Never stop working (as you yourself said).



The world is 99% full of demonic Aholes who say (to you or me etc.) :

CANT
DOESNT
NEVER
IMPOSSIBLE
etc etc


They talk and never DO, ...... obviously you 'DO'. , which is good.

[Scorch]

Yes, indeed, those who claim "it's impossible, doesn't work, will never work and I can't do it" only serve as really great motivation for me to keep DOING it.

And it does get as silly and moronic as: "What you are doing is physically impossible therefore you should stop DOING that!"
The Simplified School Girl device is a prime example in which I've heard that the 'science' teachers at her school finally relented and granted her first prize in the science fair on the CONDITION she agree to NOT break their laws of physics anymore...

As you may be aware; a couple famous quotes do apply-

"People who say it cannot be done should not interrupt those who are doing it."
"Progress is impossible without change, and those who cannot change their minds cannot change anything".
George Bernard Shaw

Welcome to MY reality where the world is no longer flat and heavier than air, powered, flying machines are no longer "scientifically and physically impossible"...

Kindest regards;

}:>

Never stop working (as you yourself said).



The world is 99% full of demonic Aholes who say (to you or me etc.) :

CANT
DOESNT
NEVER
IMPOSSIBLE
etc etc


They talk and never DO, ...... obviously you 'DO'. , which is good.

[Scorch]

The burden of proof of an extraordinary claim is on the original claimant, ie. if
person 1 claims self running then person 2 claims it's fake, then person one
claims the claim of faking is fake the burden of proof is on person one.
..

Did person one make a claim of "my device IS self charging" therefore he suffers the burden of proof?

Or did he merely ask the question: Does the observed effect (I am demonstrating for you) qualify as 'self charging'?

If the battery voltage of the charging battery was to rise to 20 volts then
that indicates a heavily sulfated battery and would be normal even if being
charged/desufated by a device with 30 % efficiency.

..

Does the system in the video use any battery(s) or does it merely use capacitors?

I see no evidence or record the device was connected to any battery or the producer made a specific claim of 'self charging' and I believe no such evidence or record exists.

I assume there is substantially more evidence which may NOT be found in the short video.
Therefore my intelligent, logical, answer to the question certainly is: "I do not know".

I firmly stand on my answer and I so no evidence to the contrary.
But I would certainly LOVE to see conclusive evidence to the contrary.
So... Please provide it!

If one claims to know the answer is "no" then, by all means, please put your money where your mouth is and provide the proof of your claim.
Because common sense, common law, logic dictates that without proof of your claim then, what you THINK you 'know' is nothing more than mere personal belief or opinion without ANY supporting evidence, facts, or law to support your position and claimed answer of "no"...

True knowledge is only gained by way of personal, hands on, experience. There is no denying this...
Everything else is merely hearsay, opinion, or a personal belief in what somebody else wrote (including regularly 'revised' text books) or said such as "that's physically impossible".

And here are a couple of my favorite movies about whether, or not, we can actually believe our eyes or somebody else's camera-
What the Bleep Do We Know!? | Feature Film
EYEBORGS
Also see: Traffic Ticket - Malcolm in the Middle Wiki

Kindest regards;

}:>

[Matthew Jones]

If you spend a little time around these sights you'll soon see the same names over and over. They tend to portray themselves as Healthy well balanced and informed skeptics. Yet they have a hard time even remembering the specifics of the argument they want to make and in long run they would rather argue or be skeptical of your spelling or semantics than actually worry about the real issue at hand. They also rarely take value in any little aspect of a project.

Brush them off like crumbs on your shirt.

I am interested in the Toroid gen you have. Any specs you could give on that I would be greatful. IE material for the core and Induction or resistance on the windings.

I have been looking at them for some time, I think since the QEG stuff came out.

Thanks
Matt

[Scorch]

Yes, indeed, seek the negative one shall ALWAYS find it.
Apparently the job of "skeptic" is really EASY and they are a dime a dozen and probably worth less...

I look at it this way-
Positive outlook:
One who always assumes everything is true until proven false.
Negative outlook:
One who always assumes everything is false until proven true.
Of course; if one has this negative outlook then one must spend a lifetime of effort just trying to figure out what is actually true...
(Versus merely accepting everything, remaining neutral, and moving on to bigger and better discoveries and, basically, maintaining a positive lifestyle..)

I have not performed a lot of testing of the Q3 but it does appear that toroidal generators may have some distinct advantages and I can provide the following-

Toroidal ring is 6.5" Dia Toroid Core part No. T650-52
See:
Micrometals, Inc. - Power Cores
Windings are two coils of 16AWG magnet wire at 125 feet each side.
Over-all Resistance is 1.6 ohms.
Over-all Inductance is 68.5 mH.
As measured with a Sinometer model MS8269 measuring both windings (in series) while still soldered to bridge rectifier and nothing else connected to rectifier output.

At this point; I am not sure if I will keep the completed Q3 and may consider selling it sometime in the future in favor of other pursuits.
Such as the G1 and other Bedini experiments I wish to revisit now that I have gained new information regarding those types of systems.
And other larger systems I may be able to build sometime in the future.

Kindest regards;

}:>

If you spend a little time around these sights you'll soon see the same names over and over. They tend to portray themselves as Healthy well balanced and informed skeptics. Yet they have a hard time even remembering the specifics of the argument they want to make and in long run they would rather argue or be skeptical of your spelling or semantics than actually worry about the real issue at hand. They also rarely take value in any little aspect of a project.

Brush them off like crumbs on your shirt.

I am interested in the Toroid gen you have. Any specs you could give on that I would be greatful. IE material for the core and Induction or resistance on the windings.

I have been looking at them for some time, I think since the QEG stuff came out.

Thanks
Matt

[Scorch]

Scorch Builds Stuff - G1 - Mounting Ultra Caps

Hello all.

I completed some more G1 fabrication today.

One thing I discovered is that the mounting holes for the capacitor bracket are not tapped.
http://www.rodscontracts.com/images/...ingThreads.jpg

Not sure if this an over-sight by the machinist or, maybe, the manufacturer expects us to be able to drive the machine thread screws into the mounting holes in the 1" acrylic plate.
But I wouldn't want to try that. It would have be done VERY carefully and a high risk of one or more bolts actually seizing up in this very hard, but easy to melt, plastic.

So I went ahead and spent a few minutes tapping the holes on both ends.
http://www.rodscontracts.com/images/...ingThreads.jpg

The capacitor mounts are another story altogether.
The original instructions calls for all three cap packs to be mounted on and hanging from a single L bracket with three bolts on one end of the device.
First the bracket, the cap pack #1, then another bracket bolts to the other side of this first cap pack then cap pack #2 is merely fastened with mounted tape to this second L bracket then top of cap pack #3 also fastened with mounting tape to top of cap pack #2. (tops of caps, complete with labels and part numbers, to be glued together with permanent mounting tape)

http://www.rodscontracts.com/images/...lCapMounts.jpg

This configuration, while I am sure works fine, just doesn't appeal to my common sense logic of mounting things.

SO I simply fabricated my own custom mounts for the ultra capacitor packs-
http://www.rodscontracts.com/images/...wMaterials.jpg
http://www.rodscontracts.com/images/...ewBrackets.jpg
http://www.rodscontracts.com/images/...illedHoles.jpg

At this point; all the ultra cap packs are now mounted in such a manor that is solid, serviceable, doesn't require tape or destroy part number labels and room left over for more cap packs or other mounting options of other equipment and/or wiring.

http://www.rodscontracts.com/images/...apsMounted.jpg

That is all for now.

Kindest regards;

}:>

[Scorch]

Additional Information

Hello all.

Just some additional information that may be useful.

There are three rotors with three magnets per each coil pair.
The main rotor, between the coils, contains 6 pcs of 1.5" Dia x 0.75" Thick N52 magnets.
The two outside rotors, behind the coils, are 12 pcs of 1.5" Dia x 0.25" Thick N42 magnets.

And here is an image that somebody else copy and pasted together (from what I think was a YT screen capture) depicting the layout of these rotors and coils-
http://www.rodscontracts.com/images/...chitecture.png

This type of configuration, with additional magnets behind the coils, kind of reminds me of the RomeroUK version of the Muller dynamo in which he placed 'bias' magnets on the back of each coil to radically change their inductance and reposition the bloch wall within the coil.

Coil bobbin outside dimensions are 3" diameter by 1" thick and inner diameter is also 1" and gives me the impression of a VHS tape reel which may work for a DIY replication on a budget.
http://www.rodscontracts.com/images/...oilBobbins.JPG

They are wound with pretty substantial, 18AWG, (0.0415") magnet wire wound all the way out to the edges. Do not know how many turns or length of wire this is.
The pulsed motor stator geometry is very interesting for those who may recognize the significance of this comparison of geometry-
http://www.rodscontracts.com/images/...fLifeCubed.JPG

And, with regards to toroidal generators, this might be an interesting article for those interested in such things-
http://www.rodscontracts.com/images/...cation%201.png
http://www.rodscontracts.com/images/...cation%202.png

And here is a screen capture, from youtube, of basic adjustment guidelines for this G1 experiment-
http://www.rodscontracts.com/images/...djustments.png

That is all for now.

Kindest regards;

}:>

[Scorch]

A note about assumptions...

Hello everybody.

Check this out-
I have heard that when you assume something, such as: "it's a fake", this typically results in making an ass out of You and Me (ASSuME).

Case in point; I had ASSuMEd the three SPDT switches on this three phase alternator where for reconfiguring the alternator for either "Star" or "Delta" configuration or anything between...

See:
http://www.rodscontracts.com/images/...StatorRear.jpg

BUT when I actually paid attention to this; my analysis of the circuit immediately revealed this is NOT the case.

Oh well. So much for my assumption about this.

The switches are actually wired to provide for coil shorting and some of you may understand the significance of this.
My understanding and belief of this is: when a coil of a PM alternator is shorted; this basically causes that coil to become magnetically "saturated" which actually reduces the Lenz effect so remaining coils may perform better and alternator requires less torque from the motor.

So, with these three switches, I can choose one or two sets of coils to be shorted or whether I want shorted coils before or after the passing magnet or something in between.

On another note- I discovered another source for LiFePO4 batteries that are actually cheaper and more suitable for these laboratory experiments as compared to the Shorai starting batteries and charger I had bought from Amazon. ( Amazon.com: Shorai LFX14L2-BS12 Extreme Rate Lithium Iron Powersports Battery: Automotive )

I had ASSuMEd these batteries, rated at 14ah., where 'plain' batteries but discovered they probably contain some internal electronics to help keep the cells balanced. . .

Which, of course, may not be desired if the intention is to 'hammer' these batteries with high voltage spikes from an SSG style device. . .

And at $130 each for a couple 14ah batteries and another $67 for the smart charger, this was kind of expensive as compared to the 20ah. battery at $124 each from a US manufacturer-
LiFePO4 Prismatic Battery: 12.8V 20Ah (256Wh, 10C rate) (24.0) - UN38.3 Passed (DGR)

SO; I returned the Shorai batteries for a full refund and got more power for less money in a battery that has individually serviceable "prismatic" cells and no internal electronics so will be a lot better suited for these types of experiments.

That is all for now.

Kindest regards;

}:>

[Scorch]

Capacitor Alternative Mount

Hello all.

Didn't accomplish a whole lot today.

Decided to relocate the capacitor sub-assembly to the top of the device for the following reasons-

-Shorter length of wires without need for wires to wrap under, over, or around device.

-Smaller footprint without capacitors sticking out from back of device.

-I think it just looks cool from all angles instead of hiding capacitors behind device.

http://www.rodscontracts.com/images/...rnateMount.jpg

}:>