New Renaissance Prizes offered to encourage Energy experimenters

[shawnnweed]

Alright, I finished all the LED's. All that is left is wiring them in. I should have an answer within 12 hours.

,Shawn

Well I promised to come back and pass or fail give the results. Just to get it out of the way it was a fail. However, I had mixed results and do not understand the results. I needed 368 volts and was able to make 410 with the amorphous silicon panels I built but when I closed the circuit, the voltage dropped down to 310. The LED's lit up but were so dim that my only response was to shrug; as if to say, "so what." I tried to measure the current but was unable to even get a reading?<<<< That part really baffled me. Also a few strange anomolies; when I touch the side of the high voltage panels the voltage fluxuatates; I've seen this happen with various tesla coil configurations and joule theif configurations but really didn't expect that from solar cells. However, I wasn't completely shocked. And speaking of shock another anomoly; I held the live 400 volt wire in my right hand and touched the LED wire with my left hand and lit the LED's up. I was under the impression that this should have shocked the "BeJesus" out of me and had me cursing like a sailor but that obviously didn't happen. I am at this point open for suggestions, "besides quit" and am willing to listen to any constructive feedback or suggestions.

[quantumuppercut]

Well I promised to come back and pass or fail give the results. Just to get it out of the way it was a fail. However, I had mixed results and do not understand the results. I needed 368 volts and was able to make 410 with the amorphous silicon panels I built but when I closed the circuit, the voltage dropped down to 310. The LED's lit up but were so dim that my only response was to shrug; as if to say, "so what." I tried to measure the current but was unable to even get a reading?<<<< That part really baffled me. Also a few strange anomolies; when I touch the side of the high voltage panels the voltage fluxuatates; I've seen this happen with various tesla coil configurations and joule theif configurations but really didn't expect that from solar cells. However, I wasn't completely shocked. And speaking of shock another anomoly; I held the live 400 volt wire in my right hand and touched the LED wire with my left hand and lit the LED's up. I was under the impression that this should have shocked the "BeJesus" out of me and had me cursing like a sailor but that obviously didn't happen. I am at this point open for suggestions, "besides quit" and am willing to listen to any constructive feedback or suggestions.

I'm not completely follow what your set up is. Are you trying to to use LEDs to power solar panels that power the LEDs?

[shawnnweed]

precisely

I'm not completely follow what your set up is. Are you trying to to use LEDs to power solar panels that power the LEDs?

My set up contains 12 monocrystaline panels. When you shine 7,800 lumen of LED light they produce 320 Ma. When I shine 6,000 lumen CFL's at them they produce 250 Ma. If you do the math you will see that each light source produces 42 millimaperes per each 1,000 lumen. So knowing what they produce, 42ma per 1,000 lumen, then would it not make sense that if you could find a light source that produces 1,000 lumen for less than 42 Ma then you could create pseudo perpetual energy. I found LED's that make 1,000 lumen for 22Ma. In total 8,000 lumen, with these LED's would require a power source of 176 Ma at 368 volts or 64.75 watts. The 8,000 lumen will be converted into 368 volts and 320 milliamperes or 117.75 watts, by the solar cells; as noted per experiments. What seems like extra energy in the circuit will be used to power another set of LED's that shine at the Amorphous silicon panels, which are designed to create the High Voltage. In total it mathematically balances itself out. The amorphous silicon panels are run in series with the monocrystaline to create the total voltage and amperage required to power the LED's and the LED's (both sets) are run in series as well to run the different sets of panels. So yes you said it precisely. So before you berate me on the laws of thermodynamics please understand that I already know that this is impossible when trying to change the output(the output can only be increased by increaing efficiency) but as you noticed I changed the input instead; and techincally i didn't really change the input I only altered it from 33 volts and 3,000 milliamperes or 100 watts to create 7,800 lumen -to- 368 volts and 176 milliamperes to create the same 7,800 lumen. Only now you go from putting in 3,000 ma and getting out 320ma -to- putting in 176ma and getting out 320ma. Notice the input was always 100 watts to create 7,800 lumen which in each case was converted into 320ma. The ouput of the cells never changed because the input never changed; it was only altered. Since it is against the laws of thermodynamics to raise the ouput above the input I simply dropped the input below the ouput through the principle of inversion. So anyway any thoughts on getting this up and running are appreciated.

[quantumuppercut]

My set up contains 12 monocrystaline panels. When you shine 7,800 lumen of LED light they produce 320 Ma. When I shine 6,000 lumen CFL's at them they produce 250 Ma. If you do the math you will see that each light source produces 42 millimaperes per each 1,000 lumen. So knowing what they produce, 42ma per 1,000 lumen, then would it not make sense that if you could find a light source that produces 1,000 lumen for less than 42 Ma then you could create pseudo perpetual energy. I found LED's that make 1,000 lumen for 22Ma. In total 8,000 lumen, with these LED's would require a power source of 176 Ma at 368 volts or 64.75 watts. The 8,000 lumen will be converted into 368 volts and 320 milliamperes or 117.75 watts, by the solar cells; as noted per experiments. What seems like extra energy in the circuit will be used to power another set of LED's that shine at the Amorphous silicon panels, which are designed to create the High Voltage. In total it mathematically balances itself out. The amorphous silicon panels are run in series with the monocrystaline to create the total voltage and amperage required to power the LED's and the LED's (both sets) are run in series as well to run the different sets of panels. So yes you said it precisely. So before you berate me on the laws of thermodynamics please understand that I already know that this is impossible when trying to change the output(the output can only be increased by increaing efficiency) but as you noticed I changed the input instead; and techincally i didn't really change the input I only altered it from 33 volts and 3,000 milliamperes or 100 watts to create 7,800 lumen -to- 368 volts and 176 milliamperes to create the same 7,800 lumen. Only now you go from putting in 3,000 ma and getting out 320ma -to- putting in 176ma and getting out 320ma. Notice the input was always 100 watts to create 7,800 lumen which in each case was converted into 320ma. The ouput of the cells never changed because the input never changed; it was only altered. Since it is against the laws of thermodynamics to raise the ouput above the input I simply dropped the input below the ouput through the principle of inversion. So anyway any thoughts on getting this up and running are appreciated.

I think I have a clearer idea of what you doing. When you said the panels put out 320 ma , I assumed that you measured it dead short. I propose that we split the LEDs in two equal halves (if possible). Use a power source to power one set of LEDs and shine them to the panel. Run the other set at parallel or series or both and see if you can produce the amount of light as the first set. At least we can how efficient your idea is.

[shawnnweed]

excellent idea

I think I have a clearer idea of what you doing. When you said the panels put out 320 ma , I assumed that you measured it dead short. I propose that we split the LEDs in two equal halves (if possible). Use a power source to power one set of LEDs and shine them to the panel. Run the other set at parallel or series or both and see if you can produce the amount of light as the first set. At least we can how efficient your idea is.

I had a similar idea and appreciate the constructive feedback. My idea was to buy a power source that I know could run the set up that I have. Keep tweeking it until the box gives me the desired output then attempt to connect. It was premature for me to expect it to work right of the bat just because the math is sound. Almost nothing works the first time without needing adjustments.
,Shawn

[Armagdn03]

Dr. Jones has been a great source of inspiration to me. And I have recently been blessed with more than I need to survive.

I would like to extend an offer to those who wish to further their education and discovery of alternative sources of energy.

If you are in need of assistance in your experimentation, your learning, let me know. I would be more than grateful to purchase materials and have them sent to you.

All that I ask it that you share openly, be safe, and "pay it forward"
God Bless.

Andrew Manrique
Manriquea@my.uwstout.edu
1-715-308-7781

[mbrownn]

Andrew, the world is a better place with people like you and Steve

Update on my work, I am releasing some of the info I believe is relevant to the original Lockridge device including a circuit.

http://www.energeticforum.com/renewa...tml#post179689

http://www.energeticforum.com/renewa...tml#post179750

http://www.energeticforum.com/renewa...tml#post179812

[totoalas]

I had a similar idea and appreciate the constructive feedback. My idea was to buy a power source that I know could run the set up that I have. Keep tweeking it until the box gives me the desired output then attempt to connect. It was premature for me to expect it to work right of the bat just because the math is sound. Almost nothing works the first time without needing adjustments.
,Shawn

how about using step dpwn transformer to 12 v then joule ringer by xee2 that produce 200 to 400 ma and light up as many 5 w 220 v ac led lamps as you want wgich have steady brightness at least 75 %
or 5 joule ringers that supply 5 led lamps 220v ac

totoalas
ive installed one 5 w mono crystalline directly connected to a 12 v 7ah sla battery that supply one xeee2 joule ringer that supply 2 house 5 led lamps 5w 220 v each @ 200 ma

[Web000x]

Hey Dr. Jones,

Sorry about the delay in posting results. My machine is starting to show interesting results while just using standard "acme" parts for my magamp. You can see a brief description here: http://www.energeticforum.com/renewa...tml#post183463

Dave

[shawnnweed]

I wished

how about using step dpwn transformer to 12 v then joule ringer by xee2 that produce 200 to 400 ma and light up as many 5 w 220 v ac led lamps as you want wgich have steady brightness at least 75 %
or 5 joule ringers that supply 5 led lamps 220v ac

totoalas
ive installed one 5 w mono crystalline directly connected to a 12 v 7ah sla battery that supply one xeee2 joule ringer that supply 2 house 5 led lamps 5w 220 v each @ 200 ma

I would love to have the opportunity to work with someone like yourself that has worked in the same area that I am attempting. however I am working with DC not ac. If you live in the US and more preferably in California I would love to partner up and run some experiments with you.

[totoalas]

I would love to have the opportunity to work with someone like yourself that has worked in the same area that I am attempting. however I am working with DC not ac. If you live in the US and more preferably in California I would love to partner up and run some experiments with you.

Hi Shawnweed,
thanks for the offer ..... all my work is based on dc lighting up ac led lamps using xee2 joule ringer I think your one step ahead in charging back using led lamps ... Ive made a joule ringer amplifier lighting 20 1 watt 220 v ac led lamps plus a toroid connected 5 pcs 5 watts led lamps all @200 ma input from a 12 v 7ah dc battery Your quest for efficient led lighting may be found on the thread below
totoalas

http://www.energeticforum.com/renewa...ringer-17.html

[Jules Tresor]

You have it Doc !

Hello Dr Steven Jones,
I am a layman with no material to experiment, but in the past I did a bit.
More important IMHO I have spent thousands of hours reading these OU forums and watched hundreds of video, and made hundreds of webpages about these OU devices. That's for my introduction

I know Professors like their "students" to find by themselves instead of giving them the solutions in hands.
I think you are doing the same, see below why.

I would rather give a small finished circuit, and find someone to manufacture it in small quantities, and send the device all over the world to researchers, NGOs, Universities, etc... And sell these basic OU circuit through internet to collect funds to develop bigger ones and to finance a large communication campaign. But that's just my experience that gives me such opinion

So, coming to the OU device, I watched carefully your video from Sterling Allan interview Physicist Steven E. Jones shows 8x overunity circuit and measurements (1 of 2) - YouTube
At one point you mention your test with a Pin of 4 mW and a Pout of 920mW.
That's 230 more out than in ...
By the way I don't understand why Sterling nor anyone else ever mentioned this x230, but instead talked about x8 and x20 ???

But we don't need x230 to prove OU, or ambient energy harnessing ...

With your very simple circuit (a Joule Ringer as LaserSaber calls it), at 4mW Pin, is it possible to light 1 or a few LEDs on the output side ?

If you can light 1 white LED at full brightness, factory rated at 3V 15mA, you would get 45mW output. That's just about x11 Efficiency. Not much compared to some of your results.

If this is possible, could you just put this LED in front of a tiny solar cell, even a low efficient one, let say a 10% efficient one.

Then you could just connect this solar cell back to the battery, and disconnect the battery, having an Pin superior to what you need.
10% of 45mW is 4.5mW, while your circuit uses only 4mW.
Of course if the solar cell is 15% efficient, then you'll get even more Pin

This self lighting/powering circuit would be better proof of OU than any measurement, isn't it ?

Options :
1- If you can't light LEDs with the secondary, you could just replace the variable resistor on the secondary with an incandescent bulb, and collect electricity the same way with the solar cell.

2- May be the battery is important for this circuit, and it couldn't run from the solar cell only ... then you could try to replace this battery with a capacitor.

3- If you can't do without cap or battery, the a voltage reading after many days of working would prove the OU of your circuit.

Did you do that already but want "us" to find it out ?
The money from your beloved father could be used to manufacture samples of this self-powering-light, to send to Universities, NGOs, governments, ...

The cost of your circuit being so small, we could build dozens of them with only 1,000 USD.

By the way I would be glad to contribute financially too, to the production and spreading of your OU circuit.
I could be of help to manufacture and distribute them in poor countries, and to sell them through internet to customers from developed countries.

Working that way we could open the eyes of thousands people in just a few months.

Why looking for big power generators first, while we can start with a small proof of OU concept. We shall do according to our small means.

Sincerely,
Jules