Jose Antonio
I respectfully disagree with you. You are tailoring your argument around a hypothetical, designed to satisfy the premise of your argument. This is referred to as hypothetical syllogisms. On the contrary, my argument was based on the exact words written by the inventers of these devices, people who actually have a device and the ability to test their hypothesis in a real world environment. Not looking to be a pain or rude, you are certainly a bright individual based on the subject matter of many of your posts. Best of luck.
Your assumption "I tailored my argument around a hypothetical" is in itself a hypothetical isn't it?.
I have also researched FE inventors, spoken with many FE inventors claiming to have working devices and tested working FE devices first hand on my bench. At no point did I observe anything resembling a runaway condition so long as basic electronic safe guards were in place.
Here is some insight into how the process works which is also based on what most credible FE inventors have claimed. I like Clemente Figuera's description in plain words. He describes how the output is "independent" of the input but proportional to it. Think about that, we can input 1 unit of energy and get 2 out because the output is independent from the input. However the output is proportional to the input so if we reduce the input to 0.5 we can expect an output of around 1. The output can be double the input but as the input is reduced so is the output. I observed this first hand in my own testing of these devices.
In fact, I observed the same phenomena when I tested a working FE device first hand. Yes the output was greater than the input but as the input was reduced so was the output. Keep in mind I am not a newbie but an Engineer with decades of experience. I will not test anything unless I know it is safe like any other professional. It's only the cowboys screwing around with things they don't understand who run into trouble.
Since this thread is about Kapanadze we could use his work as an example. He didn't start with solid state devices, like almost every other FE inventor he started with rotating PM generators. In my opinion they looked like a variation of the Adams motor generator. So initially Kapanadze used a small motor to spin a PM rotor past some generator coils and the coils powered a load plus the motor driving the rotor, ergo a typical motor-generator setup.
Then like almost every other FE inventors in history it probably occurred to him that if the output is truly independent of the input then a moving PM is a mute point. If a moving magnetic field can produce a gain then the next logical step would be to determine if a changing magnetic field ie. solenoid coil/transformer could produce a similar effect. In fact it worked and it does not matter if the magnetic field is moving through a space or expanding/contracting within said space. As Micheal Faraday claimed with respect to induction, it does not matter how the magnetic field changes only that it does. On the subject of Faraday, did you know he was really interested in the Sanskrit Texts and antigravity like Nikola Tesla?. I read most of Faraday's archived papers and he was an exceptional person. Of course I have never met or heard of anyone actually bothering to read the majority of his work and I think you would be surprised who he actually was and what he accomplished.
Here's a clue about these FE inventors which many people miss...
-Nikola Tesla- electrical engineer, mechanical engineer, inventor
-Dr. T.H.Moray- PhD in Electrical Engineering, inventor
-Clemente Figuera- Engineer, university professor, inventor
So when we start looking at the short list of the tens of thousands of FE inventors which can be found here,
http://www.rexresearch.com/invnindx.htm, we find these people were not newbies, amateurs or crackpots. Most had decades of experience, impeccable credentials and were the best and brightest.
AC
Comprehend and Copy Nature... Viktor Schauberger
“The first principle is that you must not fool yourself and you are the easiest person to fool.”― Richard P. Feynman