PopularFX
Home Help Search Login Register
Welcome,Guest. Please login or register.
OverUnity Research > Electrical / Electronic Theory and Learning Center > Joule Thief Circuits > Lawrence Tseung sent a Prototype to test... any comments?
2024-11-26, 17:27:03
News: If you have a suggestion or need for a new board title, please PM the Admins.
Please remember to keep topics and posts of the FE or casual nature. :)

Pages: 1 ... 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 [22]
Author Topic: Lawrence Tseung sent a Prototype to test... any comments?  (Read 342744 times)
Topic Options img
img  poynt99
Re: Lawrence Tseung sent a Prototype to test... any comments? « Reply #525 on: 2011-03-10, 15:05:34 »

Group: Administrator
Hero Member
*****

Posts: 3217
It's not as complicated as it may seem...
Quote from: teslaalset on 2011-03-10, 13:46:06
Poynt,
Just curious, did you receive the proto and did you have a chance to review already?

See this:

http://www.overunityresearch.com/index.php?topic=723.0


---------------------------
"Some scientists claim that hydrogen, because it is so plentiful, is the basic building block of the universe. I dispute that. I say there is more stupidity than hydrogen, and that is the basic building block of the universe." Frank Zappa
   
img  poynt99
Re: Lawrence Tseung sent a Prototype to test... any comments? « Reply #526 on: 2011-04-11, 14:33:43 »

Group: Administrator
Hero Member
*****

Posts: 3217
It's not as complicated as it may seem...
Lawrence,

From HERE:
Quote
Poynt99 and MileHigh totally dismissed my FLEET waveforms also - claiming that those are wrong and worthless.  They are NOT qualified and WRONG.

Would you care to explain what you mean by this?

.99


---------------------------
"Some scientists claim that hydrogen, because it is so plentiful, is the basic building block of the universe. I dispute that. I say there is more stupidity than hydrogen, and that is the basic building block of the universe." Frank Zappa
   
img  ltseung888
Re: Lawrence Tseung sent a Prototype to test... any comments? « Reply #527 on: 2011-04-11, 21:50:52 »
Group: Guest
Quote from: poynt99 on 2011-04-11, 14:33:43
Lawrence,

From HERE:
Would you care to explain what you mean by this?

.99

Please go to:

http://www.energeticforum.com/renewable-energy/7434-lee-tseung-lead-out-bring-energy-theory-4.html

Check reply 111.  We shall do an open seminar/workshop similar to Rosemary to get the right people involved.  This seminar/workshop will be sponsored by a legitimate group under United Nations.

Some planning will be outlined in that thread.  Their experts examined some of the FLEET waveforms.   One comment on the Output Power waveform was – “It is a classic standing wave demonstrating resonance”.  You and MileHigh dismissed the same waveform as worthless!

Different people can have different opinions.  The experts have formal academic qualifications.  They represent a credible, international organization.

God sends Angels.  But the Devil occasionally turns up.  We need to use our judgments.  Amen.

 
   
img  poynt99
Re: Lawrence Tseung sent a Prototype to test... any comments? « Reply #528 on: 2011-04-12, 01:51:40 »

Group: Administrator
Hero Member
*****

Posts: 3217
It's not as complicated as it may seem...
Lawrence,

If you've being paying any attention at all to the wave forms both the professor and I have been posting in all the JT threads, you would know without a doubt that you can do MUCH better with yours as well.

Unfortunately, some of the wave forms you presented in that picture are not very useful for determining power, but then, what do I know?  C.C

.99


---------------------------
"Some scientists claim that hydrogen, because it is so plentiful, is the basic building block of the universe. I dispute that. I say there is more stupidity than hydrogen, and that is the basic building block of the universe." Frank Zappa
   
img  ltseung888
Re: Lawrence Tseung sent a Prototype to test... any comments? « Reply #529 on: 2011-04-12, 15:49:31 »
Group: Guest
Quote from: poynt99 on 2011-04-12, 01:51:40
Lawrence,

If you've being paying any attention at all to the wave forms both the professor and I have been posting in all the JT threads, you would know without a doubt that you can do MUCH better with yours as well.

Unfortunately, some of the wave forms you presented in that picture are not very useful for determining power, but then, what do I know?  C.C

.99

I know that your and PhysicsProf have been working hard in understanding the measurement technique and the interpretation of various waveforms.  You two have been focusing on the basic Joule Thief circuits.

For resonance, I now understand that multiple LCR circuits are required.  Thus the FLEET is much better in achieving resonance and bringing-in electron motion energy.  My waveforms are very useful to the experts.  Standing waves are associated with resonance.

Do not feel too bad.  I did not appreciate that fact – which had been staring in my face since July 2010.  You and Physics Prof did not see the waveforms until 2011.  Now you two can work on multiple LCR resonance circuits with confidence.  Look for the standing waveform.

I still have not received my FLEET prototype back yet.  If it is with you, you may un-solder the “bad joint” and do the two oscilloscope experiment – varying (tuning) the effective resistance and capacitance with “playing” on the bad joint.  With patience, you are likely to find the resonance position again – look for standing wave form.  DO NOT use mean power!!!
 ;)
   
img  ltseung888
Re: Lawrence Tseung sent a Prototype to test... any comments? « Reply #530 on: 2011-04-13, 12:55:31 »
Group: Guest
Absolute confirmation of resonance? O0

The Output Power Curve is compared with four classic standing waves.

What is the correct measurement of Output Power?

What is the correct measurement of Output Energy in 1 cycle?

God's Revelation cannot be wrong.

@PhysicsProf and Poynt99,

The COP >> 1.  This is much easier to work with than playing with the basic Joule Thief.  Go for Multi-LCR resonance circuits.
« Last Edit: 2011-04-13, 13:22:09 by ltseung888 »
   
img  PhysicsProf
Re: Lawrence Tseung sent a Prototype to test... any comments? « Reply #531 on: 2011-04-13, 15:10:52 »
Group: Professor
Hero Member
*****

Posts: 3017
Lawrence:   I have looked at your data -- can you please explain, for the input Voltage-RMS, one finds Vin (RMS) = 0.320 volts.  This seems strange -- whenever I measure the Vin (RMS) I get very close to the voltage of the BATTERY (or Power Supply). 

I am asking what you input power source was for this test, and why it is that Vin (RMS) is only 0.32 volts.
   
img  ltseung888
Re: Lawrence Tseung sent a Prototype to test... any comments? « Reply #532 on: 2011-04-14, 02:48:37 »
Group: Guest
Quote from: PhysicsProf on 2011-04-13, 15:10:52
Lawrence:   I have looked at your data -- can you please explain, for the input Voltage-RMS, one finds Vin (RMS) = 0.320 volts.  This seems strange -- whenever I measure the Vin (RMS) I get very close to the voltage of the BATTERY (or Power Supply). 

I am asking what you input power source was for this test, and why it is that Vin (RMS) is only 0.32 volts.

That particular set of data was using battery.  The Vpp is the expected 1.52 from the battery.  But note the waveform.  There is a significant portion with almost zero voltage.  This is a property at or near resonance. It was not a mistake.

You have not seen it because you have not played with resonance circuit much yet.  I never managed to get the basic Joule Thief to demonstrate COP > 1.  I have got FLEET to achieve COP > 1 many times.  Multiple LCR circuits are the key.

It may a good time for you to start playing with resonance circuits.  The Output Power Curve is definitely a standing wave.  That is a sign of resonance.

Lawrence
   
img  MileHigh
Re: Lawrence Tseung sent a Prototype to test... any comments? « Reply #533 on: 2011-04-14, 03:33:42 »
Group: Guest
Lawrence:

You must recognize the vast difference between your waveforms and the waveforms you get when the Joule Thief is operating the way it is supposed to operate and the measurements are made properly.

If you worked at a bench with an electronics technician you could explore resonance in depth.  You could make the measurements and draw the proper conclusions.  We see resonance all the time in out daily lives and it doesn't demonstrate over unity.  On the bench you could play with some resonant electrical or mechanical circuits and come to the same conclusion.  Radios have used resonant circuits since the 1920s and if there was something anomalous going on it would have been discovered a long time ago.

There is beauty in the process of learning and understanding the truth.

MileHigh
   
img  GibbsHelmholtz
Re: Lawrence Tseung sent a Prototype to test... any comments? « Reply #534 on: 2011-04-14, 03:45:29 »
Group: Guest
If we can measure the natual frequency of the LCR circuit and compare it with the frequency it operates under.  Could be in the sub-harmonic.
   
img  ltseung888
Re: Lawrence Tseung sent a Prototype to test... any comments? « Reply #535 on: 2011-04-14, 04:01:09 »
Group: Guest
Quote from: MileHigh on 2011-04-14, 03:33:42
Lawrence:

You must recognize the vast difference between your waveforms and the waveforms you get when the Joule Thief is operating the way it is supposed to operate and the measurements are made properly.

If you worked at a bench with an electronics technician you could explore resonance in depth.  You could make the measurements and draw the proper conclusions.  We see resonance all the time in out daily lives and it doesn't demonstrate over unity.  On the bench you could play with some resonant electrical or mechanical circuits and come to the same conclusion.  Radios have used resonant circuits since the 1920s and if there was something anomalous going on it would have been discovered a long time ago.

There is beauty in the process of learning and understanding the truth.

MileHigh

Dear MileHigh,

The truth is now very clear:

1.   Kinetic Energy of Air Molecules can be brought-in via tuning forks in resonance.  This can be proven via standard Newtonian Mechanics.  Remember our debate?

2.   Multiple LCR resonance can be compared with multiple tuning forks.  A single LCR circuit by itself will not get into sympathetic vibration and thus cannot bring-in electron motion energy.  The basic Joule Thief is NOT a multi-LCR circuit.

3.   Please re-examine the waveform again.  You and Poynt99 thought that it was worthless at one time.  Now the Experts from United Nations confirmed that the Output Power Curve is a standard, classic standing wave.  That is a sure sign of resonance.

4.   The tuning fork has been around well before the Radio.  How many could deduce that the extra energy came from air molecules???  Steven Mark probably found that two simple LCR circuits in resonance with the Toroid could bring-in electron motion energy over 10 year ago.  How many people believed him even after they have seen the video?

5.   Poynt99 may still have my FLEET.  Ask him to unsolder the “bad joint” and play (tune) with it.  He has two oscilloscopes to observe the waveform.  Tell him NOT to use mean value for Power.  That was the most misleading information pumped out in this forum.  

The worthless waveforms are reproduced once again for your benefit.  Please find its worth this time.

There is beauty in the process of learning and understanding the truth.
   
img  MileHigh
Re: Lawrence Tseung sent a Prototype to test... any comments? « Reply #536 on: 2011-04-14, 04:54:35 »
Group: Guest
I give up in this debate Lawrence.  I have simply run out of gas.
   
img  PhysicsProf
Re: Lawrence Tseung sent a Prototype to test... any comments? « Reply #537 on: 2011-04-14, 14:03:43 »
Group: Professor
Hero Member
*****

Posts: 3017


Lawrence:
Quote
"
That particular set of data was using battery.  The Vpp is the expected 1.52 from the battery.  But note the waveform.  There is a significant portion with almost zero voltage. "

I don't see how that can be, unless there was some kind of dead short across the battery OR a probe not connected properly.  I find that the measured battery voltage is close to 1.5V, with fluctuations around that value when a JT-type circuit is running and I routinely achieve resonance conditions.  I would like to try other tests when I return from travel.

Quote from: ltseung888 on 2011-04-14, 04:01:09
5... Tell him NOT to use mean value for Power.  That was the most misleading information pumped out in this forum.  



Now here, I have been using mean Power based on your debate with .99 (and my own studies as well) in which it was concluded that mean Power would be the proper approach -- but if not, why not?  and what approach would you use instead?
 I don't think that taking Vrms * Irms will give the correct value for power, for the reasons discussed at length during that debate.

It is so important to take correct measurements! and to agree on how this should be done.  Finally, we may have to do some other measurements-- such as using a capacitor to provide the input power and test the voltage on the cap after a period of time of running, to determine the input power.
   
img  poynt99
Re: Lawrence Tseung sent a Prototype to test... any comments? « Reply #538 on: 2011-04-14, 14:50:42 »

Group: Administrator
Hero Member
*****

Posts: 3217
It's not as complicated as it may seem...
Thank you Professor.

We await Lawrence's response.

.99


---------------------------
"Some scientists claim that hydrogen, because it is so plentiful, is the basic building block of the universe. I dispute that. I say there is more stupidity than hydrogen, and that is the basic building block of the universe." Frank Zappa
   
img  eatenbyagrue
Re: Lawrence Tseung sent a Prototype to test... any comments? « Reply #539 on: 2011-04-14, 16:34:09 »
Group: Guest
Quote from: poynt99 on 2011-04-14, 14:50:42
Thank you Professor.

We await Lawrence's response.

.99

Oh come on, you know the response.   Divine revelations cannot be wrong!
   
img  ltseung888
Re: Lawrence Tseung sent a Prototype to test... any comments? « Reply #540 on: 2011-04-14, 17:29:35 »
Group: Guest
Quote from: PhysicsProf on 2011-04-14, 14:03:43

Lawrence:
I don't see how that can be, unless there was some kind of dead short across the battery OR a probe not connected properly.  I find that the measured battery voltage is close to 1.5V, with fluctuations around that value when a JT-type circuit is running and I routinely achieve resonance conditions.  I would like to try other tests when I return from travel.

Now here, I have been using mean Power based on your debate with .99 (and my own studies as well) in which it was concluded that mean Power would be the proper approach -- but if not, why not?  and what approach would you use instead?
 I don't think that taking Vrms * Irms will give the correct value for power, for the reasons discussed at length during that debate.

It is so important to take correct measurements! and to agree on how this should be done.  Finally, we may have to do some other measurements-- such as using a capacitor to provide the input power and test the voltage on the cap after a period of time of running, to determine the input power.

Dear PhysicsProf,

It cannot be a dead short across the battery.  We had the same waveforms with three different two oscilloscope setups.  We had dozens if not hundreds of working FLEET prototypes.  We had the demonstrations at multiple locations including Hong Kong University.  The waveforms cannot be wrong.

Please take my advice – forget improving Joule Thief by a few percent here and there.  Your time will be much better spent hunting for resonance with FLEET, Joule Ringer and other Multi-LCR resonance circuits.  I repeat – Joule Thief is NOT a multi-LCR circuit.  It cannot go into sympathetic vibration by itself.  It needs at least one or more LCR circuits

When you come back from your travel, focus on finding standing waves in your one oscilloscope.  Start working on  the FLEET, Joule Ringer or other multi-LCR resonance circuits.

Please forget about the useless and misleading debate information.  It will be left as historic record on how stupid I was.  I stared at the waveforms for months and did not realize the Output Power Waveform was a standing wave! 

Please focus on the classic explanation of a standing wave.  A classic standing wave is associated with resonance.  It can be produced by two identical waves travelling in opposite directions.  Or it can be produced by a reflected wave.  When we examine a standing wave, the amplitude is from the zero axis to the Node (maximum amplitude) position.  The Instantaneous Output Power Curve is definitely a Standing Wave. 

Taking the mean of any classic, ideal standing wave will give zero value.  That is definitely WRONG in any analysis of standing waves.  No scientists will ever say that the huge amplitude observed at resonance is zero.

That debate with Harvey as the moderator was the most stupid thing I did.  It was like taking an uncut diamond to a jewel shop to get an evaluation from the saleperson.  The salesperson is unlikely to be a top expert.  The conclusion was that – the diamond was junk.  Poynt99, MileHigh and Harvey are not as qualified as the United Nation Experts (Chinese Nationals with academic qualifications).  Once the Experts confirmed that the Output Power Curve is a standing wave, it opened my eyes.

The actual energy must be the positive or the negative area of the standing wave.  Using the Mean Power x Time will give you zero energy.  How could I be so stupid to send my diamond to some unqualified persons?  The Rosemary experience helped me.  From now, I shall only trust the academically qualified experts with actual working test equipments.  The postings on the Internet are for documentation purposes.  I no longer need comments and reviews from untrained, unqualified, self-proclaimed experts.

I trust in Divine Revelations.  They are so clear now.  They will be clarified by the Experts from United Nations with China leading the pack of at least 54 Countries.  I do not need to send prototypes to anyone any more.  The standing wave is evidence enough.  The next step is for every participant in the seminars/workshops to have one or more working FLEET prototypes – properly tested, photographed, videotaped and verified. They can bring that back to their own countries and improve them to produce products.  Amen.
   
img  humbugger
Re: Lawrence Tseung sent a Prototype to test... any comments? « Reply #541 on: 2011-04-14, 17:37:52 »
Group: Guest
You and Rosemary have the same bunch of academic experts it seems.  Invisible and nameless and never heard from by anyone except through the two of you by third-party reference.  The epitome of unquestionable credibility.

Humbugger

Poynt, if I were you I'd stop gifting this pinhead with free storage space and bandwidth.  He's worse than Rosemary with his insults and abuse of posting privileges.  Let him get his own blog site and fill it with his crap.  I'd ban the sucker and block him from reading here in a New York minute.
   
img  Rosphere
Re: Lawrence Tseung sent a Prototype to test... any comments? « Reply #542 on: 2011-04-14, 18:02:34 »
Group: Guest
Quote from: ltseung888 on 2011-04-14, 17:29:35
...It was like taking an uncut diamond to a jewel shop to get an evaluation from the saleperson.  The salesperson is unlikely to be a top expert.  The conclusion was that – the diamond was junk.  Poynt99, MileHigh and Harvey are not as qualified as the United Nation Experts (Chinese Nationals with academic qualifications).  Once the Experts confirmed that the Output Power Curve is a standing wave, it opened my eyes. ...

Lawrence,

If you have the ear of the top jewel experts, then why are you having debates with salespeople?

Humbugger asks a fair question: who are these top experts?
   
img  eatenbyagrue
Re: Lawrence Tseung sent a Prototype to test... any comments? « Reply #543 on: 2011-04-14, 18:25:05 »
Group: Guest
Quote from: humbugger on 2011-04-14, 17:37:52
You and Rosemary have the same bunch of academic experts it seems.  Invisible and nameless and never heard from by anyone except through the two of you by third-party reference.  The epitome of unquestionable credibility.

Humbugger

Poynt, if I were you I'd stop gifting this pinhead with free storage space and bandwidth.  He's worse than Rosemary with his insults and abuse of posting privileges.  Let him get his own blog site and fill it with his crap.  I'd ban the sucker and block him from reading here in a New York minute.

If you guys had only read some of his older stuff on OU.com, you would give him zero attention.  He kept talking about his friend who built UFOs and flew them around the world.  He would substantiate these claims with badly photoshopped UFO pictures.  I think he predicted a UFO landing on Obama's White House lawn sometime after inauguration.  By the way, his proposed method of propulsion of these UFOs was via the spinny bottle on a string.  He noticed that there is no recoil when you let go of a bottle you have started spinning about yourself on a string, and reasoned that this is a reasonable "bootstrapping" method of propelling oneself through outer space.
   
img  ltseung888
Re: Lawrence Tseung sent a Prototype to test... any comments? « Reply #544 on: 2011-04-14, 19:48:24 »
Group: Guest
Quote from: Rosphere on 2011-04-14, 18:02:34
Lawrence,

If you have the ear of the top jewel experts, then why are you having debates with salespeople?

Humbugger asks a fair question: who are these top experts?

Please goto energetic forum.  The names and posts are in Chinese.  The Organization is the FREE TRADE Zone in Lake Victoria.  The person in charge of High Technology is a Chinese - Mr. Yang.  I did not have the top jewel experts before.  Now I shall ignore the salespeople.  Thank you for the advice.

http://www.energeticforum.com/renewable-energy/7798-seminar-workshop-united-nations.html
   
img  FuzzyTomCat
Re: Lawrence Tseung sent a Prototype to test... any comments? « Reply #545 on: 2011-04-14, 21:35:36 »
Group: Guest
Quote from: ltseung888 on 2011-04-14, 19:48:24
Please goto energetic forum.  The names and posts are in Chinese.  The Organization is the FREE TRADE Zone in Lake Victoria.  The person in charge of High Technology is a Chinese - Mr. Yang.  I did not have the top jewel experts before.  Now I shall ignore the salespeople.  Thank you for the advice.

http://www.energeticforum.com/renewable-energy/7798-seminar-workshop-united-nations.html



@ ltseung888

Instead of going from each alternative energy web site searching for the answers that best suit your needs and waste time doing one by one looking for what you want. I suggest you go to "ALL" of them at one time and save us all some trouble, and think of the following of inexperienced experimentalist you may convince in what your doing. 

I am or have been a member at each and every one of these organizations and "MANY" members here are also .... so spread the word and lets get this over with ASAP  O0

http://www.zpenergy.com/index.php
http://www.thunderbolts.info/forum/phpBB3/index.php
http://www.hereticalbuilders.com/
http://www.overunity.org.uk/cmps_index.php
http://www.thenakedscientists.com/HTML/front/distilling-the-best-science/  ( I'm banned as FuzzyTomCat )

And these I think your a member at already ....

http://www.overunity.com/index.php?PHPSESSID=adaec4909e3d44a898383a4078f9564f;wwwRedirect  ( I'm banned as FuzzyTomCat )
http://www.energeticforum.com/

Fuzzy
 :)
   
img  poynt99
Re: Lawrence Tseung sent a Prototype to test... any comments? « Reply #546 on: 2011-04-14, 22:08:21 »

Group: Administrator
Hero Member
*****

Posts: 3217
It's not as complicated as it may seem...
Seems to me Lawrence that in an indirect way you are saying that those here that have debated with you, and advised you are not qualified to do so?

This despite the fact that they have the appropriate backgrounds to do so? You are rallying to depart from the OUR forum? Why are you here if you are not happy with the technical abilities of those on this site?

I am going to strongly suggest, that if you are interested in staying a member of OUR, that you demonstrate some respect for those advising you here. Recently, you've shown little else but contempt and disrespect for the members here.

.99


---------------------------
"Some scientists claim that hydrogen, because it is so plentiful, is the basic building block of the universe. I dispute that. I say there is more stupidity than hydrogen, and that is the basic building block of the universe." Frank Zappa
   
img  muDped
Re: Lawrence Tseung sent a Prototype to test... any comments? « Reply #547 on: 2011-04-14, 22:50:16 »

Group: Tinkerer
Hero Member
*****

Posts: 3055
Quote from: poynt99 on 2011-04-14, 22:08:21
...

I am going to strongly suggest, that if you are interested in staying a member of OUR, that you demonstrate some respect for those advising you here. Recently, you've shown little else but contempt and disrespect for the members here.

.99


Would it not be good to suggest that all members of OUR
when participating in discussion demonstrate some respect
for those with whom they may disagree?

Certain members seem to have been granted extraordinary
privilege to spew their distasteful commentary with little
moderation.

It would indeed be gratifying to see mature, objective exchanges
of opinion without the drama which brings discredit to the forum.




---------------------------
For there is nothing hidden that will not be disclosed, and nothing concealed that will not be known or brought out into the open.
   
img  poynt99
Re: Lawrence Tseung sent a Prototype to test... any comments? « Reply #548 on: 2011-04-14, 23:45:35 »

Group: Administrator
Hero Member
*****

Posts: 3217
It's not as complicated as it may seem...
Quote from: Dumped on 2011-04-14, 22:50:16

Would it not be good to suggest that all members of OUR
when participating in discussion demonstrate some respect
for those with whom they may disagree?

Certain members seem to have been granted extraordinary
privilege to spew their distasteful commentary with little
moderation.

It would indeed be gratifying to see mature, objective exchanges
of opinion without the drama which brings discredit to the forum.


Absolutely, and in cases where the offending party is clearly in error and unqualified to properly comment to begin with, AND they insist on being right, then they open the floodgates to receive the same criticisms they impart to others. Rosemary and now Lawrence have demonstrated they are two prime examples of this scenario.

Disagreeing on issues is one thing. Insisting you are right in technical matters when you are clearly very wrong, and having it proved to you as such, is quite another.

.99


---------------------------
"Some scientists claim that hydrogen, because it is so plentiful, is the basic building block of the universe. I dispute that. I say there is more stupidity than hydrogen, and that is the basic building block of the universe." Frank Zappa
   
img  GibbsHelmholtz
Re: Lawrence Tseung sent a Prototype to test... any comments? « Reply #549 on: 2011-04-15, 14:41:21 »
Group: Guest
I've never treat electricity anything less than longitudinal wave.  Having said that, I still agree with the prof on the measurement technique.  When one have a perfect standing wave, I consider it at 90 degrees out of phase.  The amplitude of course is non zero.  I think having two parties working in parallel with different perspective especially scientists from United Nations would accelerate the discovery.  Not a bad thing in my opinion.
   
Pages: 1 ... 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 [22]
« previous next »


 

Home Help Search Login Register
Theme © PopularFX | Based on PFX Ideas! | Scripts from iScript4u 2024-11-26, 17:27:03