PopularFX
Home Help Search Login Register
Welcome,Guest. Please login or register.
2024-11-27, 02:32:35
News: A feature is available which provides a place all members can chat, either publicly or privately.
There is also a "Shout" feature on each page. Only available to members.

Pages: 1 ... 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 [31] 32 33 34 35 36 37
Author Topic: Romerouk's Muller Replication  (Read 510851 times)
Group: Professor
Hero Member
*****

Posts: 3017
Quote
@PhysicsProf

Just in case you missed this one.  It's real.

http://www.cbsnews.com/video/watch/?id=4967330n

cheers
chrisC

  Thanks, ChrisC -- Yes, I saw it -- months ago.  LOL.

Notable to me, Fleischmann on camera stated that he should never have called what he was seeing "fusion" in the first place.  (OK, I can agree with that.)
But he did not say what it should be called....  


     Recall that I and colleagues at BYU and U of Arizona published claims of a much smaller effect, but clearly d-d- fusion from the energetic neutrons and protons observed.  (See our publication in Nature, April 1989).  Our claimes were put on solid footing when the “BYU-level” cold-fusion effect was made 100% reproducible by experiments in Japan and Europe, along with the use of state-of-the-art equipment (which we also used). Replication is the heart of science. The best metal for catalyzing cold fusion found so far is a lithium-palladium alloy. A brief summary can be found here: http://journalof911studies.com/volume/200704/JonesWTC911SciMethod.pdf


  People have asked me about the claims of heat-production via proton-Nickel “cold fusion” by Rossi and Focardi in Italy. Below is an abbreviated version of my response, which is also a challenge to the “inventors” to do serious experiments and to publish those results. First the claim (by Focardi): “Here’s what’s going on: there, in the container, we have nickel and hydrogen, then we heat up the system. Then, let’s say, the hydrogen nuclei, which are protons, move inside the system and these protons are able to come into contact with the nickel, with the atom, penetrate into the atom and even into its nucleus. So, when the proton penetrates into the nickel nucleus, nickel is turned into copper...” – Focardi, http://22passi.blogspot.com/2011/04/sergio-focardi-father-of-ni-h-cold.html

                 Adding a proton to a Nickel nucleus as claimed by Rossi and Focardi will produce Copper isotopes, predominately Cu-59 and Cu-61, since the predominate isotopes of nickel are Ni-58 (68%) and Ni-60 (26.2%). Both Cu-59 and Cu-61 are highly radioactive and easily detectable. And detecting their presence via decay products would conclusively demonstrate the occurrence of the proton-capture reaction on Nickel. I challenge Rossi et al. to make quantitative measurements to demonstrate the proton-Nickel reaction they claim. I would use a gamma-ray detector; detailed gamma spectra from the decay of Cu-59 and Cu-61 are given in this reference: http://atom.kaeri.re.kr/ton/

                Cu-59 http://atom.kaeri.re.kr/cgi-bin/decay?Cu-59%20EC Half life: 81.5 s – short enough to be VERY easy to observe and demonstrate, to determine whether actually produced or not.

                 Cu-61 http://atom.kaeri.re.kr/cgi-bin/decay?Cu-61%20EC Half life: 3.33 hrs, also short enough to be VERY easy to observe and demonstrate, to determine whether actually produced or not

Thus, while Romero and others have pointed to this claim as "confirmed," to me the Rossi claims are NOT confirmed until they show direct evidence for the process they are claiming, as outlined above.

« Last Edit: 2011-07-16, 22:21:01 by PhysicsProf »
   

Group: Administrator
Hero Member
*****

Posts: 3961


Buy me some coffee
A snip from the Adams motor manual.


Quote
THE INVENTOR WISHES TO POINT OUT THAT THERE IS ONE VITAL
FACTOR WHICH IS THE RESULT','OF THIS INVENTION, THAT BEING THE
ABILITY OF THE MACHINE TO TO BE CONSTRUCTED IN SUCH A WAY
THAT, WITH "FINE TUNING", THE MACHINE IS CAPABLE OF
COMPLETELY OVERCOMING THE EFFECT OF "BACK EMF" AND, IN SO DOING,
REACHES A STATE OF RESONANCE, IN TUNE WITH THE UNIVERSE, SO
TO SPEAK, MAKING IT CAPABLE OF GREATER THINGS.

Quote
THE FEEDBACK, PRODU0ED BY THE OUTPUT GENERATING COIL,
PRODUCES A POLARITY REVERSAL NORNALLY RESULTING IN LARGE. EDDY
CURRENT LOSSES IN CONVENTIOMAL MACHINES, BUT, IN THE ADAMS
MACHINE, IT IS HARNESSED TO DEVELOP FURTHER ADDITIONAL
TORQUE TO THE MAGNETIC ROTOR. THE LARGER THE OUTPUT
GENERATING COILS THE GREATER THE TORQUE DELIVERED T6.THE ROTOR.

Quote
THERE IS NO POWER FACTOR LOSS BECAUSE THE ADAMS MACHINE RUNS
IN A CONDITION OF RESONANCE. THEREFORE, THE POWER FACTOR
LOSS'IS ZERO.
   
Group: Professor
Hero Member
*****

Posts: 3017
  Is anyone making/selling a prototype of the Adams motor?
   
Group: Guest
Here is the easy to replicate waveform -

Penno
   
Group: Guest
Sorry, I should have been more specific.

I only get that waveform if I bias one side of the coil pair. (I guess this is particular to my setup only)
   
Group: Guest

You would think but apparently not.  In the beginning I thought he could easily hide among all the wires, but I gave him the benefit of doubt.  After all, a video like his with so many wires hanging around should make one feel very nervous, but the claim of OU was so powerful most of us were taken in by it and mesmerized.  

....
@ RomeroUK,  

don't be afraid of legal action, Mr. Sterling is not the sharpest guy.  Everything we do on these forums is at our own risk.   I'm continuing my build and I want to see you continue to post here.   A good fake once in a while is a good thing to keep us on our toes.   >:-)

EM

@EM
Despite the fact there are more than one wire pair needed does not mean Romero faked it. The different wires may serve a different function. Romero has enough electronics expertise not to try a fake that can be traced via video. Don't you think so? I give him the benefit of the doubt - he's a lot smarter than most on this forum and above all I believe his integrity. My own belief is that his design worked but the number of (tuning) variables are against it. But do keep on building, as I myself will when I have time to spare.

cheers
chrisC

   

Group: Tinkerer
Hero Member
*****

Posts: 3948
tExB=qr
Sorry, I should have been more specific.

I only get that waveform if I bias one side of the coil pair. (I guess this is particular to my setup only)

Lay the generator on it's side.
   
Group: Guest
It is on it's side ?

   
Hero Member
*****

Posts: 805
It's so obvious now how Romero FAKED the first video.  
It's even simpler to prove than the second one!


EM
« Last Edit: 2011-07-17, 09:34:38 by EMdevices »
   
Group: Guest
Ok guys,  I was exploring video 2 again and I found a frame where we can see the wires on the back of the controler board in question.  

It now seems obvious to me the two black wires going down under the device are in fact one loop of wire, that is just hanging over the side, and not two separate wires going down under as I previously thought.   Can you see that?

(snip)

PS.  The second image from video 2 shows there is no hole in the table.



@EM, [ edit: you've since deleted or reworded your post, so I modified this a bit ]

Helpful angles in video #2 can be found at 1m6s, and 8m41s

The wires are (unfortunately) not a loop.

You cannot see where they enter the table in your image 2 because the threaded support rod blocks the view of them. The rod's purpose in my belief, is to hold down the cap's edge, that is likely why it is there at the rim and not hidden under the unit, as has been proposed would be done by the 'smarter illusionist' [theory].  1m31s

I have also reposted some of the original (infamous) shots posted by "@none." from OU. Hope that is ok per the forum. I also have a PDF of that entire page 215, snagged before Plengo removed the meat in it.

@generally

Even when I have been openly insulted as to my intelligence here by a particular party or two, I have tried to speak to the known facts at the time, so hope that I am not considered to be one causing a ruckus, though if no one wants to hear about wire X's anymore (moderators, I mean) I'll certainly give it a rest. These pics are just counterpoint,  and hopefully illuminating. I am only wanting to know the truth. I go look again, whenever a new point is raised, yet always, I am left with these two wires looking homeless.

@Peter, read up on that Adams file, I might make one of those too.

@Pons and Fleischmann ...it is a shame that scientists of the day then and even now, were not open-minded enough, nor simply gracious enough, to look beyond a flawed terminology or presentation, and still seek the truth objectively.
 
Robert (AG)

« Last Edit: 2011-07-17, 10:08:01 by ArtistGuy »
   
Group: Guest
It's so obvious now how Romero FAKED the first video.  
It's even simpler to prove than the second one!


EM

Greetings. (guess you did an edit while I was composing my other, and changed your viewpoint again perhaps) :)
 
I saw that connection which you point out, last night, while seeking the coil wires and such, and wondered about that too, but figured as most might have that it was an output tap. If you've found a new angle on this, congrats.


Robert (AG)
   

Group: Administrator
Hero Member
*****

Posts: 3961


Buy me some coffee
Hi AG
You are doing some great work with those pictures  O0

I am just trying to stop angry mud slinging matches, as it just disrupts any chance of research either way, i have no problem with wattsup saying it's a fake or anyone else as long as they dont then start attacking anyone who says it's not, this works both ways as well.


Yeah the Adams motor is quiet interesting, and relevant with Romero's motor.
   
Group: Guest
Thanks, Peter.

Civil contention about facts yields its own research opportunities in the pursuit of verification, or refutation, becomes fun then.

Since I did a repost of the older images combined with one new image, just to clarify, the first image (2 Wires.jpg) is one I composed from my own grab, the other 4 wirex-wirex4 are the "@none." images, reposted, they have good gamma correction, were the clearest seen yet.
   
Robert
   

Group: Administrator
Hero Member
*****

Posts: 3961


Buy me some coffee
Ok i need some technical help here.

Adams uses the collapsing field in his drive coils to pull the next magnet into position.

What i cannot understand is that at the point in time the field is collapsing the coil is no longer being driven by the transistor and therefore the coil is open circuit, so does this mean the collapsing magnetic field contains all of the energy that was used to create the field in the coil when it was driven by the transistor, if the coil was short circuited after being driven then most of the energy in the collapsing magnetic field would get dissipated in heat as the field collapes in the coil and core.

so to put this another way how can i calculate the magnetic field strength when the coil has a known voltage and current flowing and then calculate the resulting collapsing magnetic field strength when de-energized.

I guess i could do this experimentally by using a hall sensor that has a bias midway point that detects north and south poles and place it near the pole of the coils core and scope while the coil is energized and then let the coil de-energize.

   

Group: Administrator
Hero Member
*****

Posts: 3961


Buy me some coffee
Having done some reading on the theory i can confirm i am having trouble LOL

So back to plan b

Looks like i need to position a ratiometric hall sensor above the drive coil and scope the output against a periphery hall sensor for alignment, this way i will be able to track the MMF, the UGN3503 is a great little device it biases at half the supply rail for 0G and swings above or below for different polarity magnetic fields.
   
Hero Member
*****

Posts: 805
Quote
What i cannot understand is that at the point in time the field is collapsing the coil is no longer being driven by the transistor and therefore the coil is open circuit, so does this mean the collapsing magnetic field contains all of the energy that was used to create the field in the coil when it was driven by the transistor...


Peter,

In a stand alone coil, pulsed very quickly (less than 4 time constants perhaps) the magnetic field would contain most of the energy that was put in, minus some I^2 R losses.
In a motor like this dynamo,  most of the energy goes into the kinetic energy of the rotor, ( if the timing is appropriate, but some also goes into building up the magnetic field and also some is wasted in I^2 R losses.)

Regarding the Adams motor,  I thought he let the magnets attract to the core, and thus give the rotor an impulse and speed it up, and than at a particular angle that is critical, he energized the coil to repel the departing magnet.  Not only that, but he would capture the kick back after the firing.   This has been my understanding of his motor since the 1990's


@ Penno

Nice waveform!  It appears to approach Romero's towards the right (flat spots are more pronounced) but towards the left not so much.  Congratulations, looks like you're almost there!    O0


@ ArtistGuy

I can now clearly see the table cap covering the center hole of the table, thank you for the photos.  Yes I did waver in my decision for a moment, but than "wire-X" saved me!    ;D  


@ ANYBODY

Did Muller have a self-running, power producing, dynamo?   I see his videos and it appears to be.     In a way I'm glad that Romero did not replicate it but faked it, because now I have a real chance at the OverUnity  $$ JACKPOT $$      LOL   :D


EM

« Last Edit: 2011-07-17, 17:41:23 by EMdevices »
   
Group: Guest

@ ANYBODY

Did Muller have a self-running, power producing, dynamo?   I see his videos and it appears to be.     In a way I'm glad that Romero did not replicate it but faked it, because now I have a real chance at the OverUnity  $$ JACKPOT $$      LOL   :D


EM




I agree. Hopefully it won't involve the many frustrating hours of tuning that led Romero to fake it!

Hoppy
   
Hero Member
*****

Posts: 805
I made a posting at OverUnity.com  alerting the folks that I am now convinced it is a fake.


http://www.overunity.com/index.php?topic=10781.msg295153#msg295153


EM


PS,  In retrospect, I know how I fell for this:    

Romero shifted the focus from his first video rapidly to his second video, the apparently closed loop self running video, and I was just amazed.   His persistence in this line of fakes is what did it.   If anybody makes a fake video and than sits back and laughs and has a drink at our expense, than sooner or later we'll figure it out.  However, Romero quickly continued to the second fake video that was even more steeped in deceit.   What bothered me in the first video from the beginning was the fact that his output voltage was the same as his input.  I should of acted on that hunch and taken the time to analyze the wires,  but frankly, seeing so many wires dissuaded me from engaging in a video investigation, because I was tired and burned out after looking at the SM videos for years.   But the most important point about why I fell for this is MY STRONG DESIRE FOR FREE ENERGY IN THIS WORLD.   I'm sorry if I'm an optimist.

« Last Edit: 2011-07-17, 18:18:24 by EMdevices »
   

Group: Administrator
Hero Member
*****

Posts: 3217
It's not as complicated as it may seem...
Here is the easy to replicate waveform -

Penno

Hi penno. I don't see the resemblance. One question though, is that across the coil or across a series CSR?

.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
   

Group: Tinkerer
Hero Member
*****

Posts: 3948
tExB=qr
It is on it's side ?

your axis is horizontal, his axis was vertical

   
Group: Guest
Well I'm back and I will congratulate Wattsup on doing the video frame detective work.  I didn't have the energy to do that.   Thank you Peter for reinstating me.

Romerouk did not show waveforms to back up his claim; the voltages before and after the FWBR, and the voltage output from the DC-to-DC converter.  If he had shown these waveforms for all of the different voltage settings on the DC-to-DC converter output his claim would have been credible.  However, he intentionally did not show those waveforms because that would have exposed him.

Here is the critical point in the long clip as far as I am concerned:  He sets the DC-to-DC converter to three volts and rotor slows down a lot.  The output from the FWBR must have been very low voltage and also low in power in this case.  We know from the replications that this is indeed the case.  Some replications have the same rotor magnets and approximately the same pick-up coil configuration.

Now, you have to ask yourself, how could the motor run in self-sustaining mode under these conditions when you can make a guesstimate that after the FWBR the voltage must have been very low, perhaps a few volts.  More importantly, the available power was very low.  Simply put, the DC-to-DC converter would croak under these conditions.  I am almost 100% sure that particular DC-to-DC converter needs at a bare minimum 9 volts on the input, because it was designed for a 12-volt input.

So, if a replicator ever gets to the point where they wire in the DC-to-DC converter, and sets the output to 3 volts, and temporally powers the converter with 12 volts from an external source, and then switches off the external power source and connects the FWBR output to the DC-to-DC converter input, their motor will grind to a halt right away.  There will simply not be enough juice to power the DC-to-DC converter, much less the motor itself.  The only logical explanation, barring the "magic tuning" speculation, is that Romero wired DC power into the FWBR output bus covertly, which is exactly what Wattsup found in the video frames.

The lesson here is that the enthusiasts and believers absolutely must demand from the person posting the alleged free energy clip is that their demo has to be supported by clear and unambiguous measurements that back up the claim.  When you see a clip that allegedly demonstrates free energy, there is a logical thought process that you can follow where you collectively agree that it's an interesting clip but the proponent of the clip has to make measurements A, B, C, D and E before anybody gets excited about anything.

This process of logical deductive reasoning was not done for the Romero clips and I am hoping that this process does take place for the next time a situation like this happens.  If Romero was subject to this process he would have run away right away because the measurements would have exposed him.   If you look at the case of Ismael Avisio, it's basically the same thing.  Ismael has no real measurement data to back up his claim yet people believe.  On top of this when Ismael talks tech, to a discerning ear like mine, it's blatantly obvious he barely knows what he is talking about.  Yet, he drops some buzzwords and those that want to believe will believe.

Anyway, Wattsup found what I predicted was done within the first day of seeing Romero's clips.

I suppose we are on the downward slope with respect to the replication phase.  LaserSaber seems to have bowed out and ZeroFossilFuel has an ambitious build but he already has some serious doubts.  It's probably going to take Plengo a few months more testing before he gives up.  He concentrates on the smaller "victories" like seeing his rotor speed up under load but he knows that eventually he is going to have to deal with power-out vs. power-in because that's what it's all about.

Shame on Romerouk for orchestrating this farce.  If you go back and read his comments from the beginning with a "new attitude" you might see them like I see them - he says whatever he has to say to pretend that everything is real.  I know that there is a subtle difference between someone really telling the truth because of their conviction and somebody not telling the truth at all and pretending the whole way though.  If you read his comments again with a critical ear you should be able to detect the latter modus operandum.  You can tell that often Romero was improvising his answers to detailed technical questions.  There is a parallel here to to what Wattsup said about looking at his video clips again (which I haven't done).  Once you look at his video clips again keeping in mind what Wattsup said about the camera angles that Romero was trying to avoid, it should become painfully obvious that that's what was really happening.

Anyway, that's about my final take on the Romerouk deal.  Sorry for all of the people that believed in this and especially sorry for the people that put time and money into this project.  Better luck next time but do your due diligence beforehand.  Don't take the pure visuals of a clip for granted.  The person making that clip has to make real scope and multimeter measurements to support their claim.  Without that then the pattern risks repeating itself all over again.

MileHigh
   
Group: Guest
Finally, permit me to post a link not for the faint of heart.

I actually "caught up" with Romero on a YouTube clip a while back.

I will admit freely that I beat the living crap out of him in the comments on the clip.  He deserved it and I am no angel at all with respect to my choice of words.

This conversation with Romero actually took place before Wattsup did the video frame analysis.

So for those that might be interested here is the YouTube clip where I have a no-holds-barred conversation with Romero  (You have been forewarned):

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=d5cdhOmwofI

The conversation is not pretty but for some they may find that there is an element of poetic justice associated with my bad behaviour.

MileHigh
   
Hero Member
*****

Posts: 520
Ok then I am back also. he he. Twas a brief respit but the rest was good.

@MH

What is your username on that youtube page? I don't see anyone named @MileHigh.

Also, in the POLL thread I was too late to post something I had prepared but was not finished before I had to leave this afternoon. I will finish it and still post it just to give you my thoughts about you coming back and giving you a little of my background so you know at least something more about me then what you see and read on the forum. This may push you to relax your pen with the big attacks and start acting like you are part of a team. Team @members get to know the guys, know their weaknesses but above all, show some respect for our varying abilities.

wattsup

Added: OK forget my question. You have to be ReasonForemost. Yep, I could tell that writing style from 1 mile away. lol


---------------------------
   

Group: Administrator
Hero Member
*****

Posts: 3961


Buy me some coffee
well said wattsup

I have always looked at everyone interested in what i am also interested in as being friends, and anyway who wants enemies there's enough of those in the big world anyway life's too short to keep creating enemies.
   
Hero Member
*****

Posts: 805
Dr Steven Jones,


I admire you very much for the articles and the research you have done and for risking your career and reputation on the subjects you did.   I read your article in entirety.  An early retirement might not be a bad thing, just enjoy it!


I'm just curious, when you talked with Carmen Muller,  did she mention if her father's motor is self running?  Is she willing to do any demonstrations for people?


EM
   
Pages: 1 ... 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 [31] 32 33 34 35 36 37
« previous next »


 

Home Help Search Login Register
Theme © PopularFX | Based on PFX Ideas! | Scripts from iScript4u 2024-11-27, 02:32:35