How does this snake oil really work?

[Macbeth]

This circuit has an efficiency of about 88.5%. I had to change the oscillator capacitor because the LEDs are different in this simulation. There is no overunity here.

Yeah, but you are forgetting V1. Does LTSpice have an accurate model of a shitkicked year old alkaline Costco issue Kirkland, used in all kinds of crap, expired March 2014, and had accidentally shorted out for a full minute?

[ModemHead]

But perhaps you can prove us wrong. Use reasonablely accurate meters to measure input current, output current, input  voltage and output voltage. (The meters should be TRMS capable as otherwise they will not measure the correct current or voltage due to the switching waveform.)

Even with a TRMS meter, you've got the issue of AC coupling.  And if the meter is capable of AC+DC measurement, there's still a crest factor limitation.  It always amuses me to see a video with a number of cheap DMMs scattered about some Rube Goldberg contraption putting a surface charge on a battery with some spikes from an inductor (radiant energy, you know.)  The numbers are often meaningless and lead to bogus claims. 

[Oneminde]

I probably have one comment and one comment only, and it goes as follow.

"Is an open system overunity ? .. T.Bearden; No, all human creations will wear down, its built into the system. Same goes with energy conversion. 100 units put in can never be 100 units out, some of the energy is lost to heat. But you can have a coefficient higher than 1 or the 100 units. You can have a 100 unit in and 500 unit outs like with a refrigerator or windmill. What people are confused about with more energy out than the operator put in is the COP vs operational efficiency. A windmill might be 75-80 % efficient, so we lose energy, but nature will aid and put in 3-4 or even higher amounts of energy and that is COP higher than one. That is all it is."

I still remember that, 7 years later

So while reading this tread, I noticed that all the debates surround operational efficiency but non (to my understanding) have mentioned or looked at COP. Maybe it does not matter, maybe it does, I don't know. But I felt that the info from T.Bearden was worth posting. Maybe it will contribute or maybe not.

Regards.
Oneminde

[Jebnor]

"Is an open system overunity ? .. T.Bearden; No, all human creations will wear down, its built into the system. Same goes with energy conversion. 100 units put in can never be 100 units out, some of the energy is lost to heat. But you can have a coefficient higher than 1 or the 100 units. You can have a 100 unit in and 500 unit outs like with a refrigerator or windmill. What people are confused about with more energy out than the operator put in is the COP vs operational efficiency. A windmill might be 75-80 % efficient, so we lose energy, but nature will aid and put in 3-4 or even higher amounts of energy and that is COP higher than one. That is all it is."

What is COP?

[Oneminde]

@ Jebnor: COP = Coefficiency of Operation

[Jebnor]

@ Jebnor: COP = Coefficiency of Operation

How does one measure, calculate and make predictions about COP?

[Oneminde]

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Coefficient_of_performance

[Jebnor]

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Coefficient_of_performance

Interesting. Thanks.

[Oneminde]

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Coefficient_of_performance

Interesting. Thanks.

NP. As a side note, I do remember Bearden mentioning the fact that COP calculations (or similar to that) is a bit different for electronics than heat pumps, but that the over all concept of COP vs operational efficiency is similar. I am searching for the documentary and might include a transcript from it. Unless people want to read his books and documents on the topic - quite a large amount of it 

Regards
Oneminde

[EEVblog]

[EEVblog]

It always amuses me to see a video with a number of cheap DMMs scattered about some Rube Goldberg contraption putting a surface charge on a battery with some spikes from an inductor (radiant energy, you know.)  The numbers are often meaningless and lead to bogus claims. 

In this case his own average current measurements and calculations points to where the energy is coming from, and he annotates this in the videos. He admits the battery has enough energy to light the LED's, but his mistake is in assuming how much energy is left in his "shitkicked costco battery" 

[orbiter]

Theory debunked & thread concluded! 

[FrontSideBus]

That guy got well and trully owned...

[pickle9000]

I have popcorn and jelly tots standing by.

You'd better have lots, it's 32min of waffle + some testing.

Jumbo popcorn and jelly tots,  45 mins and 45 seconds! The pen in the forehead gag works every time. Good job total entertainment. You need to get a foam (soft) pen and have Sagan do it as well.

[Wilksey]

What a thoroughly informative video that was, thank you Dave!

If there is one thing to learn from the EEVBlog forum that is that there are a lot of knowledgeable people in here, and if more than one are saying you are wrong with reason, do not argue with them, take the advice and learn.

[Ribster]

So funny that this guy's first move is to attack mike from mikeselectricstuff..
That's one big mistake there.. Laughed my ass off to this .
Thanks for the entertainment

[dannyf]

if more than one are saying you are wrong with reason, do not argue with them, take the advice and learn.

I would turn that around and say don't believe you are wrong just because others say so, no matter how many there are and how good / knowledgeable / authoritative they are.

Truth is not determined by consensus nor quantity.

Basically, don't give a rat's rear-end about "experts" - there are far more cons among "experts" than among the regular folks.

[nuno]

This circuit has an efficiency of about 88.5%. I had to change the oscillator capacitor because the LEDs are different in this simulation. There is no overunity here.

The oscillator design, a relaxation oscillator, apparently appeared for the first time in a Lou Garner book, "Transistor Circuits", in 1960. I have seen this topology in many places, including with an inductor forming a current source to drive LEDs, specifically in cheap garden solar lamps. It is many times used with PNP and NPN swapped. I was introduced to this circuit more than 20 years ago in brazillian electronics magazines (by Newton C.Braga) and I can say it was one of the things that fascinated me into electronics. I have even written an article on it.

Anyways, I found it that people believing this will not take any reasoning; it is always fundamentalism and it is just a waste of time trying to explain things to them. This people just believe in it.

[pickle9000]

if more than one are saying you are wrong with reason, do not argue with them, take the advice and learn.

I would turn that around and say don't believe you are wrong just because others say so, no matter how many there are and how good / knowledgeable / authoritative they are.

Truth is not determined by consensus nor quantity.

Basically, don't give a rat's rear-end about "experts" - there are far more cons among "experts" than among the regular folks.

True, plenty of discoveries throughout history happened despite the so-called experts. I think in this case it’s safe to say this isn’t one of them.

I would say the one thing to take away from this is, if you are going to make claims about something extraordinary and then publish it in a public venue, be sure you have all your ducks in a row.

If a person finds a real effect I'd certainly want to know about it. What I liked about this was the entertainment but the message was clear, test and prove. Dave has his own weird item, the one where he bangs the scope probe and gets a signal. In his channel promo look at the last 10 seconds. He has no problem with anyone (educated or not) just do the work.

[dannyf]

What I find repulsive in this thread is people jumping on this guy, not for they understand better what's going on but because others are jumping on this guy.

For all his wrongs, the Stone guy experimented and attempted to understand what was going on. The fact that he didn't do it right is no reason for others to step on him.

Tell him why he was wrong, explain to him in clear language, and put your counter examples out there to help this guy understand electronics better.

Spitting on someone, especially when he is in a ditch, is disgusting.

[Richard Crowley]

the Stone guy experimented and attempted to understand what was going on.

No he didn't. He created a non-technical, sensational "mystery/magic" video espousing his "free energy" superstitions.
His mistake was bringing those superstitions here to a hard-core no-nonsense audience.

Now if you want to see a lot of light from an AA cell, check this out....

http://youtu.be/Q4Qo68HvxoE
"Running a 240v lightbulb of one AA battery. Very real and very useful. With full how to. 100% real"
Full disclosure: the "240V lightbulb" is actually a CFL, not incandescent.

[Richard Crowley]

Dave has made video # 708 answering this....

EEVblog #708 - Free Energy BULLSHIT!
https://www.eevblog.com/forum/blog/eevblog-708-free-energy-bullshit!

[mrkev]

I don't know if someone wrote this already, I can't really read whole thread, but...

First thing that I noticed was that he used simple average for calculating the output current [(62mA+17mA)/2]*52h and came up with figure around 2Ah. However as you get lower voltage on the batt, you will also get decrease in current. So the graph of discharging current (as everybody who designed anything like that powered from battery) isn't in fact linear, but would be exponential decrease. So whole calculation of that 2Ah is almost twice as big as it should be...

[EEVblog]

if more than one are saying you are wrong with reason, do not argue with them, take the advice and learn.

I would turn that around and say don't believe you are wrong just because others say so, no matter how many there are and how good / knowledgeable / authoritative they are.

I would second that. Just because a whole bunch of people say you are wrong, does not mean you are wrong, or that you should stop arguing. But it's a pretty safe bet you might be wrong, and you should probably go understand what they are saying before you go back in and argue  You might just learn something.

[Yago]

What I find repulsive in this thread is people jumping on this guy, not for they understand better what's going on but because others are jumping on this guy.

For all his wrongs, the Stone guy experimented and attempted to understand what was going on. The fact that he didn't do it right is no reason for others to step on him.

Tell him why he was wrong, explain to him in clear language, and put your counter examples out there to help this guy understand electronics better.

Spitting on someone, especially when he is in a ditch, is disgusting.

I tried Danny, but alas I got ignored and then lumped in as bandwagoner (and unfortunately lost my temper).