EEG_EM_New_Technique_TRANSVERSE_FLUX (TF) (Provisional Patent Applied for)

[Ufopolitics]

@solarlab 

You know what your behavior here so far is tempting me to do?

To BUILD FOR REAL (not in any "Virtual Simulation") YOUR SETUP.

And to show the Results EVERYWHERE, Including on My YouTube Channel with a PUBLIC Video.

Let me know, I am willing to give MY TIME AND MONEY, to prove Your Claims are either FALSE or REAL.

This will end all this discussion.

You want me to?

Let me know HERE, in the OPEN.


Ufopolitics

[solarlab]

@solarlab

You know what your behavior here so far is tempting me to do?

To BUILD FOR REAL (not in any "Virtual Simulation") YOUR SETUP.

And to show the Results EVERYWHERE, Including on My YouTube Channel with a PUBLIC Video.

Let me know, I am willing to give MY TIME AND MONEY, to prove Your Claims are either FALSE or REAL.

This will end all this discussion.

You want me to?

Let me know HERE, in the OPEN.


Ufopolitics

(from a recent PM):

Ufopoitics,

As has been stated all along, many times, this TF method has proven to generate
excess energy in PM Wind Generators (and other devices). The original patent
was provided along with many technical papers where the physical results closely
match the CAE Analysis results - in most cases within a few percent.

Therefore it's very likely a device where the PM's are replaced by Electromagnets
should yield similar results. This configuration (EM's replaced the PM's) was
Analyzed many times with the results showing excess energy generation. These
CAE results were given many times in the thread.

If someone supposedly "skilled-in-the-art" can not comprehend the TF scheme
or read the CAE Analysis there is nothing more I can do to educate them further.

However, when ignorance of the concept and provided results degrades to
Deformation behaviour (as you yourself posted) then the defense must move
to another level - that's where we are at now.

The only way to "prove or disprove" the TF Electromagnetic functionality to
those claiming "it doesn't work" is for them to "Build One Themselves." That's
also how Deformation works - if you can prove the device does not work based
upon a "true replication of the device in question" then the claim of "if doesn't
work" is proven - otherwise the functionality of the presented evidence is valid.

Trying to get something that the original inventor and author is not ready to
provide by Bullying or other Coercive Methods is simply not the way it's done.

I came here to introduce a relatively little known method and hopefully provide
some educational insight - of course you know this, as do most others.

Now, you can do whatever you want as the Board Owner. Except use copyright
material you are not granted permission to use, nor propogate deformation
without the proper backup requirements.

It's not complicated!

SL

[Ufopolitics]

(from a recent PM):

Ufopoitics,

As has been stated all along, many times, this TF method has proven to generate
excess energy in PM Wind Generators (and other devices). The original patent
was provided along with many technical papers where the physical results closely
match the CAE Analysis results - in most cases within a few percent.

Therefore it's very likely a device where the PM's are replaced by Electromagnets
should yield similar results. This configuration (EM's replaced the PM's) was
Analyzed many times with the results showing excess energy generation. These
CAE results were given many times in the thread.

If someone supposedly "skilled-in-the-art" can not comprehend the TF scheme
or read the CAE Analysis there is nothing more I can do to educate them further.

However, when ignorance of the concept and provided results degrades to
Deformation behaviour (as you yourself posted) then the defense must move
to another level - that's where we are at now.

The only way to "prove or disprove" the TF Electromagnetic functionality to
those claiming "it doesn't work" is for them to "Build One Themselves." That's
also how Deformation works - if you can prove the device does not work based
upon a "true replication of the device in question" then the claim of "if doesn't
work" is proven - otherwise the functionality of the presented evidence is valid.

Trying to get something that the original inventor and author is not ready to
provide by Bullying or other Coercive Methods is simply not the way it's done.

I came here to introduce a relatively little known method and hopefully provide
some educational insight - of course you know this, as do most others.

Now, you can do whatever you want as the Board Owner. Except use copyright
material you are not granted permission to use, nor propogate deformation
without the proper backup requirements.

It's not complicated!

SL

Hello Solarlab,

First, can I ask you very simple to answer questions:

Have you given ALL information here, on this Topic, as to Replicate your setup AS IS?

For example, like I have given on my Figuera Development here?

Are you interested in other Members here to Replicate your Setup?

And to make sure you understand me, again, I will tell you that I am NOT interested -at all- to use anything related to your Patent Application, Copyright or even a Trademark.

I am just asking that you answer to any member requests related on how your Build could be replicated.

Because, after all, that is the MAIN REASON WHY, this website was open.

To SHARE, DEVELOP AND BUILD.

What I am asking is not complicated either.

At least, I think so.

Ufopolitics

[solarlab]

(from a recent PM):

Ufopoitics,

As has been stated all along, many times, this TF method has proven to generate
excess energy in PM Wind Generators (and other devices). The original patent
was provided along with many technical papers where the physical results closely
match the CAE Analysis results - in most cases within a few percent.

Therefore it's very likely a device where the PM's are replaced by Electromagnets
should yield similar results. This configuration (EM's replaced the PM's) was
Analyzed many times with the results showing excess energy generation. These
CAE results were given many times in the thread.

If someone supposedly "skilled-in-the-art" can not comprehend the TF scheme
or read the CAE Analysis there is nothing more I can do to educate them further.

However, when ignorance of the concept and provided results degrades to
Deformation behaviour (as you yourself posted) then the defense must move
to another level - that's where we are at now.

The only way to "prove or disprove" the TF Electromagnetic functionality to
those claiming "it doesn't work" is for them to "Build One Themselves." That's
also how Deformation works - if you can prove the device does not work based
upon a "true replication of the device in question" then the claim of "if doesn't
work" is proven - otherwise the functionality of the presented evidence is valid.

Trying to get something that the original inventor and author is not ready to
provide by Bullying or other Coercive Methods is simply not the way it's done.

I came here to introduce a relatively little known method and hopefully provide
some educational insight - of course you know this, as do most others.

Now, you can do whatever you want as the Board Owner. Except use copyright
material you are not granted permission to use, nor propogate deformation
without the proper backup requirements.

It's not complicated!

SL

Hello Solarlab,

First, can I ask you very simple to answer questions:

Have you given ALL information here, on this Topic, as to Replicate your setup AS IS?

For example, like I have given on my Figuera Development here?

Are you interested in other Members here to Replicate your Setup?

And to make sure you understand me, again, I will tell you that I am NOT interested -at all- to use anything related to your Patent Application, Copyright or even a Trademark.

I am just asking that you answer to any member requests related on how your Build could be replicated.

Because, after all, that is the MAIN REASON, this website was open.

To SHARE, DEVELOP AND BUILD.

What I am asking is not complicated either.

At least, I think so.

Ufopolitics

(from a recent PM):

Ufopoitics,

As has been stated all along, many times, this TF method has proven to generate
excess energy in PM Wind Generators (and other devices). The original patent
was provided along with many technical papers where the physical results closely
match the CAE Analysis results - in most cases within a few percent.

Therefore it's very likely a device where the PM's are replaced by Electromagnets
should yield similar results. This configuration (EM's replaced the PM's) was
Analyzed many times with the results showing excess energy generation. These
CAE results were given many times in the thread.

If someone supposedly "skilled-in-the-art" can not comprehend the TF scheme
or read the CAE Analysis there is nothing more I can do to educate them further.

However, when ignorance of the concept and provided results degrades to
Deformation behaviour (as you yourself posted) then the defense must move
to another level - that's where we are at now.

The only way to "prove or disprove" the TF Electromagnetic functionality to
those claiming "it doesn't work" is for them to "Build One Themselves." That's
also how Deformation works - if you can prove the device does not work based
upon a "true replication of the device in question" then the claim of "if doesn't
work" is proven - otherwise the functionality of the presented evidence is valid.

Trying to get something that the original inventor and author is not ready to
provide by Bullying or other Coercive Methods is simply not the way it's done.

I came here to introduce a relatively little known method and hopefully provide
some educational insight - of course you know this, as do most others.

Now, you can do whatever you want as the Board Owner. Except use copyright
material you are not granted permission to use, nor propogate deformation
without the proper backup requirements.

It's not complicated!

SL

Hello Solarlab,

First, can I ask you very simple to answer questions:

Have you given ALL information here, on this Topic, as to Replicate your setup AS IS?

For example, like I have given on my Figuera Development here?

Are you interested in other Members here to Replicate your Setup?

And to make sure you understand me, again, I will tell you that I am NOT interested -at all- to use anything related to your Patent Application, Copyright or even a Trademark.

I am just asking that you answer to any member requests related on how your Build could be replicated.

Because, after all, that is the MAIN REASON, this website was open.

To SHARE, DEVELOP AND BUILD.

What I am asking is not complicated either.

At least, I think so.

Ufopolitics

Ufopolitics,

To your first question, as it relates to the EE_TFG; YES, including dimensions, one configuration and suggested
material specifications (2), possible windings, etc.. (with many many iterations and results included).

Next, if other members understand the concept properly, then the decision to replicate the TFG would be up
up to them.

Further, there should be no additional questions regarding the EE_TFG if all the information presented in the
20 some pages is studied in detail. It's all given as known at the time of publishing! Input waveforms are not
discussed since there are too many variations to catagorize - these are best done in the CAE Analysis.

In closing - I do not have the time nor desire to go down each Rabbit Hole (what color wire, etc.). A bit of
research on the builders part goes a long way! This is a "Work-in-Progress Reaserch Project" - there is No
"Paint-by-Number" book to reference... A lot of the design and engineering relies on 3D Transient CAE.

HINT: Clamp-on Current Meter (TF)!

OK, Bye Bye - we'll see what Friday brings!

SL

[solarlab]

@solarlab

You know what your behavior here so far is tempting me to do?

To BUILD FOR REAL (not in any "Virtual Simulation") YOUR SETUP.

And to show the Results EVERYWHERE, Including on My YouTube Channel with a PUBLIC Video.

Let me know, I am willing to give MY TIME AND MONEY, to prove Your Claims are either FALSE or REAL.

This will end all this discussion.

You want me to?

Let me know HERE, in the OPEN.


Ufopolitics

Ufopolitics,

By all means: "To BUILD FOR REAL (not in any "Virtual Simulation") YOUR SETUP"

Might be prudent to also include your material "B-H Curves" as well, for verification reasons;
and FEA results for comparison (as many of the papers have included). 

Good Luck!

SL