EEVblog Electronics Community Forum

Products => Dodgy Technology => Topic started by: EEVblog on February 13, 2018, 09:15:28 am

Title: Bullshit: Texzon Wireless Power
Post by: EEVblog on February 13, 2018, 09:15:28 am
Do we need a whole forum section for dodgy products?

The bullshit tech of the day award goes to Texzon Wireless Power
And I didn't even make it past the home page.

www.texzontechnologies.com (http://www.texzontechnologies.com)
Title: Re: Bullshit: Texzon Wireless Power
Post by: BrianHG on February 13, 2018, 09:22:49 am
 :palm: Sadly enough, they targeted power and aging ugly power lines, wrote some BS & the website layout is flashy enough that they will get investors, which someone there will just be pocketing 95% of the dough, then one day vanish with it....
Title: Re: Bullshit: Texzon Wireless Power
Post by: cat87 on February 13, 2018, 09:45:20 am
So they want to emit  hundreds of kW or MW of power.... riiiiiiiight

Also, information on that Zenneck wave thing is kinda sketchy. Not enough solid stuff to it. As expected, of course. If they really have a patent on the stuff, why don't they give out more details? Well, obviously, because it doesn't work, but still, they could at least have made up  some
Title: Re: Bullshit: Texzon Wireless Power
Post by: daqq on February 13, 2018, 09:59:40 am
Quote
Do we need a whole forum section for dodgy products?
Yes, oh, please yes! I am in desperate need of amusement at the moment.
Title: Re: Bullshit: Texzon Wireless Power
Post by: ogden on February 13, 2018, 10:47:50 am
Also, information on that Zenneck wave thing is kinda sketchy. Not enough solid stuff to it.

Some time ago it was Ring Power Multiplier, now they need more money - to research Zenneck wave :) After some time when money will dry out, there will be another invention/patent and so on.. Smells like venture investment fraud similar to freaking roadways.

Note that Texzon do not even own related patents (contrary to their claims):
https://www.google.com/patents/US7969042 (https://www.google.com/patents/US7969042)
https://www.google.com/patents/US20140252886 (https://www.google.com/patents/US20140252886)

[edit] Yes, we need forum section for dodgy technologies/projects/products - upcoming or already in production.
Title: Re: Bullshit: Texzon Wireless Power
Post by: John Heath on February 13, 2018, 10:52:16 am
They state . in small print . that the technology has not been proven.

Quote

And Zenneck Surface Waves which use the surface of the earth as a waveguide and travel at high levels of efficiency but had yet to be experimentally observed. Our technology uses only surface waves (guided surface waves), and not ground waves (radiated waves).

End quote

This may be consider a legal disclaimer in a court of law therefore action can not be taken for fraud.

Secondly the healthy good looking middle aged woman pictured. There market target is money in lose hands that is unlikely to read the fine print. They hit their market target right on the nose.

If I wanted to raise money for a new product I would want these guys on my team. I give a thumbs up to the marketing team. I give a thumbs down for participating in a scam. Unfortunately fairness as nothing to do with business law , buyer be ware.

Title: Re: Bullshit: Texzon Wireless Power
Post by: cat87 on February 13, 2018, 11:58:01 am
    Well, I just don't get it.... if these guys want money, why go for some unproven, obscure technology?
Why don't they stick with the normal and well-known stuff... like 10.000 $ speaker cables or a 5000 $ wire holder, so that the wires float a few inches off the floor? Also, there's waaaay more cash to be made that way. I mean, people will willingly open their wallets for this kind of "proven" technology.   :-DD
But I digress.....
Title: Re: Bullshit: Texzon Wireless Power
Post by: PA0PBZ on February 13, 2018, 12:05:56 pm
Imagine it would work: How are they going to prevent you, me and everyone else using the energy without paying?
Title: Re: Bullshit: Texzon Wireless Power
Post by: John Heath on February 13, 2018, 12:42:01 pm
Good point. Just hammer a copper stake in the ground to borrow some of their energy. I guess borrow is a little over the top for out right stealing 

Allow me to rephrase. You hammered a copper stake in the ground for a lightening ground to protection for your family and loved ones. There just happened to be some free power from the ground stake so you used it , for experimental reasons only. Who can point a finger of guilt under these circumstances. I rest my case.
Title: Re: Bullshit: Texzon Wireless Power
Post by: W8LV on February 13, 2018, 03:40:49 pm
Quote
Do we need a whole forum section for dodgy products?
Yes, oh, please yes! I am in desperate need of amusement at the moment.
Yes. We need one section for stuff like this!

And ANOTHER just for counterfeit stuff, certain Go Fund kinda sites, perhaps?

Sent from my SM-N920V using Tapatalk

Title: Re: Bullshit: Texzon Wireless Power
Post by: BrianHG on February 14, 2018, 02:48:52 am

Note that Texzon do not even own related patents (contrary to their claims):
https://www.google.com/patents/US20140252886 (https://www.google.com/patents/US20140252886)
WTF?  :palm: Why are the distance measurements in the first few graphs in Kilometers, then the next few Miles?  Then, the vertical field strength changes from mV/m to uV/m, then back to mV/m.

Reminds me of the Duracell 'Quantum' technical .pdf comparing battery output impedance curve to all the regular 'Duracell' battery .pdf.  There is 1 chart which appears to have better performance than the normal Duracells, however it only looks better until you closely look at the vertical impedance scale in the 'Quantum' batteries.  They changed and squeezed the scale on that one graph for their Quantum battery.  And if you look closely, you notice that this 1 single graph looks like it was pencil drawn by hand then scanned into the .pdf unlike every other one which was properly done.  If you reverse the vertical scale changes & account for that minuscule noise error introduced by that hand drawing, those double priced 'Duracell Quantum' batteries are IDENTICAL in performance to every other Duracell battery they make.  (Looking at size AAA through D)...
Title: Re: Bullshit: Texzon Wireless Power
Post by: EEVblog on February 14, 2018, 02:57:03 am
Quote
Do we need a whole forum section for dodgy products?
Yes, oh, please yes! I am in desperate need of amusement at the moment.
Yes. We need one section for stuff like this!

Here it is:
https://www.eevblog.com/forum/dodgy-technology/ (https://www.eevblog.com/forum/dodgy-technology/)
Title: Re: Bullshit: Texzon Wireless Power
Post by: JugglingElectrons on February 14, 2018, 04:23:24 am
What really scares me is that when people aren't familiar with data, equations, testing hypotheses, etc. they tend to latch onto something as vague as some phrasing about harnessing the Zenneck wave. It doesn't help when they are already big on woowoo. Half the time I don't know if it is just wishful emotional thinking instead of logical reasoning or that they don't have the skills to determine correct information from lies. I'm not satisfied until there is at least some data we can run with and do some further investigation on, otherwise we don't need to take any claims seriously.
Title: Re: Bullshit: Texzon Wireless Power
Post by: tarraf on July 23, 2018, 07:05:02 am
Texzon is now named VIZIV technologies and they published http://vizivtechnologies.com/wp-content/uploads/2016/09/TEXZON_Baylor_Corum16.pdf  (http://vizivtechnologies.com/wp-content/uploads/2016/09/TEXZON_Baylor_Corum16.pdf) with experimental data showing attenuation of Zenneck waves with distance. In light of this data I thought it would be interesting to get your educated comments!

Here is the first graph with a 52 Mhz wave https://imgur.com/5weAOQb (https://imgur.com/5weAOQb)
(https://imgur.com/5weAOQb)

And the second one with a 1.82 Mhz wave https://imgur.com/CeNS4ba (https://imgur.com/CeNS4ba)
(https://imgur.com/CeNS4ba)

Another more historical information paper is here http://vizivtechnologies.com/wp-content/uploads/2017/10/TWP-Paper-10-3-2017.pdf (http://vizivtechnologies.com/wp-content/uploads/2017/10/TWP-Paper-10-3-2017.pdf)
Title: Re: Bullshit: Texzon Wireless Power
Post by: jmelson on July 23, 2018, 07:42:51 pm
So, at 52 MHz, the field strength drops to zero at 5 km.  Well, not transmitting any energy very far like that.

And, at 1.82 MHz, they get signal out to 30,000 km!  Hmmm, where the hell did they find a 30,000 MILE long radio test range?  The entire circumference of the earth is is 25,000 mi, but their last data point is OVER 30K!  (Or, maybe I'm confused by the different dots on the chart.)

And, of course, the FCC and other nation's agencies might have something to say about broadcasting energy this way.

Jon

Title: Re: Bullshit: Texzon Wireless Power
Post by: tarraf on July 27, 2018, 12:22:20 pm
Their number typo is confusing. However I think they mean 30.000 km or 30 km, those are trailing zeros...and they show a map picture of the lake below where they did the experiment.
Ali
Title: Re: Bullshit: Texzon Wireless Power
Post by: zenneckwave on October 04, 2018, 05:31:24 pm
I've been working with Texzon for over 5 years on this project - its no joke. The patents for the RPM mentioned earlier are by James Corum, Texzon's (viziv) leading scientist. He confirmed the findings of the Philadelphia experiment and made objects radar-invisible in labs etc. James Corum and his brother Kenneth are the pinnacle of RF scientists.

The tower has been built
https://www.kwtx.com/content/news/Scientists-studying-wireless-electric-transmission-in-Central-Texas-494839331.html (https://www.kwtx.com/content/news/Scientists-studying-wireless-electric-transmission-in-Central-Texas-494839331.html)

They replicated the Seneca Lake experiments, and have performed successful demos for 3-letter government agencies. None of this is BS.

Title: Re: Bullshit: Texzon Wireless Power
Post by: bd139 on October 04, 2018, 05:44:20 pm
My bollocks-o-meter meter just exploded. Thank you  >:(
Title: Re: Bullshit: Texzon Wireless Power
Post by: zenneckwave on October 04, 2018, 05:53:14 pm
First you'd have to build a receiver capable of receiving a guided wave, then give it the precision to tune to 8 or more decimal points to resonate the circuit. Good luck building the receiver to those specifications, and better luck finding the broadcast frequency.
Title: Re: Bullshit: Texzon Wireless Power
Post by: zenneckwave on October 04, 2018, 05:54:03 pm
James F. Corum is Viziv's chief scientist... they guy listed on the RPM patent.
Title: Re: Bullshit: Texzon Wireless Power
Post by: zenneckwave on October 04, 2018, 05:55:48 pm
You wont pull power out of the ground from their transmitter. Wrong physics entirely.
Title: Re: Bullshit: Texzon Wireless Power
Post by: zenneckwave on October 04, 2018, 06:01:58 pm
You're right, they just spent millions on the tower for something they never got working small scale because they wanted to pull a prank and waste theirs, and everyone else's money.

The truth is, they have demonstrated it works, they got even more funding, they built the high-power tower, and they are going to launch the wave in the next few weeks and bring up a load on the other side of the world.
Title: Re: Bullshit: Texzon Wireless Power
Post by: ogden on October 04, 2018, 06:02:55 pm
No offense, but This seems like next DIY cold fusion project fraud to me :)
Title: Re: Bullshit: Texzon Wireless Power
Post by: mikeselectricstuff on October 04, 2018, 06:06:59 pm
I've been working with Texzon for over 5 years on this project - its no joke. The patents for the RPM mentioned earlier are by James Corum, Texzon's (viziv) leading scientist. He confirmed the findings of the Philadelphia experiment and made objects radar-invisible in labs etc. James Corum and his brother Kenneth are the pinnacle of RF scientists.

The tower has been built
https://www.kwtx.com/content/news/Scientists-studying-wireless-electric-transmission-in-Central-Texas-494839331.html (https://www.kwtx.com/content/news/Scientists-studying-wireless-electric-transmission-in-Central-Texas-494839331.html)

They replicated the Seneca Lake experiments, and have performed successful demos for 3-letter government agencies. None of this is BS.
“The Viziv surface wave systems will improve the quality of life for people everywhere by enabling the delivery of affordable electricity throughout the world,” Viziv Technologies states on its website.

Oh FFS :palm: Nothing to see here.
Title: Re: Bullshit: Texzon Wireless Power
Post by: mikeselectricstuff on October 04, 2018, 06:08:07 pm
You're right, they just spent millions on the tower for something they never got working small scale because they wanted to pull a prank and waste theirs, and everyone else's money.

uBeam
Energeous
Fontus
Juicero
Steorn


Plenty of idiots out there pissing away money on unicorns.
Title: Re: Bullshit: Texzon Wireless Power
Post by: PA0PBZ on October 04, 2018, 06:08:22 pm
First you'd have to build a receiver capable of receiving a guided wave, then give it the precision to tune to 8 or more decimal points to resonate the circuit. Good luck building the receiver to those specifications, and better luck finding the broadcast frequency.

It just might be that is why frequency counters where invented? After that it is just a question of tuning for max power... yes, like you do when tuning in to a radios station, no magic involved.
Title: Re: Bullshit: Texzon Wireless Power
Post by: mikeselectricstuff on October 04, 2018, 06:09:56 pm
First you'd have to build a receiver capable of receiving a guided wave, then give it the precision to tune to 8 or more decimal points to resonate the circuit. Good luck building the receiver to those specifications, and better luck finding the broadcast frequency.

It just might be that is why frequency counters where invented? After that it is just a question of tuning for max power... yes, like you do when tuning in to a radios station, no magic involved.
And what happens as soon as you start drawing power from a resonant circuit?
Things only resonate sharply because the energy has nowhere else to go.
Title: Re: Bullshit: Texzon Wireless Power
Post by: PA0PBZ on October 04, 2018, 06:13:02 pm
And what happens as soon as you start drawing power from a resonant circuit?
Things only resonate sharply because the energy has nowhere else to go.


A.K.A high Q, unloaded circuit.
Title: Re: Bullshit: Texzon Wireless Power
Post by: bd139 on October 04, 2018, 06:19:31 pm
You can only draw power from a resonant circuit if you can get it there.

Power density equation (and its derivation!) tends to kill this dead. This to charge a smartphone on the other side of the house think 628kw transmitter :)
Title: Re: Bullshit: Texzon Wireless Power
Post by: zenneckwave on October 04, 2018, 06:24:25 pm
You made my point, its not really magic, its a known principle of electromagnetism, to use the earth as the guide surface, just like the EMF traveling along a conductor.

To steal the power, you have to have the ability to craft a circuit that has the tuning tolerances to 0.00000001 Hz. Your car radio goes out 1 decimal place...

You got a freq counter that can tune in increments of .00000001? Not being facetious at all, I'm genuinely asking
Title: Re: Bullshit: Texzon Wireless Power
Post by: PA0PBZ on October 04, 2018, 06:26:22 pm
Power density equation (and its derivation!) tends to kill this dead. This to charge a smartphone on the other side of the house think 628kw transmitter :)

Oh come on, you know Zenneck waves are immune to that!
Title: Re: Bullshit: Texzon Wireless Power
Post by: bd139 on October 04, 2018, 06:33:39 pm
You got a freq counter that can tune in increments of .00000001? Not being facetious at all, I'm genuinely asking

No. Have you?

Even the most stable oscillators cannot maintain that frequency stability. Also things like Doppler shift. Imagine a car driving away from the source. That will cause the frequency to decrease. Also general relativity causes problems there - look at GPS and time dilation.

Power density equation (and its derivation!) tends to kill this dead. This to charge a smartphone on the other side of the house think 628kw transmitter :)

Oh come on, you know Zenneck waves are immune to that!

Only on Tuesdays  :-DD
Title: Re: Bullshit: Texzon Wireless Power
Post by: PA0PBZ on October 04, 2018, 06:36:06 pm
You got a freq counter that can tune in increments of .00000001? Not being facetious at all, I'm genuinely asking

No. Have you?


Me neither, my counter doesn't tune :P
Title: Re: Bullshit: Texzon Wireless Power
Post by: zenneckwave on October 04, 2018, 06:40:42 pm
Hertzian (norton ground waves) waves have different properties than guided waves. For example, one of the main differences is that the lower you go in Hz, the more efficient they become.

There are more types of EMF than just HZ/RF.

Most of the gnashing of teeth here is simply due to the lack of understanding guided waves. Most everything said here holds true for Hertzian waves. But hardly any of it applies to guided waves! Jonathan Zenneck - look him up
Title: Re: Bullshit: Texzon Wireless Power
Post by: zenneckwave on October 04, 2018, 06:42:18 pm
All hertzian issues... there is no signal loss like that of inverse square with guided waves.
Title: Re: Bullshit: Texzon Wireless Power
Post by: bd139 on October 04, 2018, 06:56:41 pm
All hertzian issues... there is no signal loss like that of inverse square with guided waves.

Put your money where your mouth is and show me a paper explaining it with derivations. I’ve done most of the Feynman books.

I know who Jonathan Zenneck is.
Title: Re: Bullshit: Texzon Wireless Power
Post by: zenneckwave on October 04, 2018, 06:59:38 pm
This whole thread isnt going to age well for you guys... the groupthink is on display big time.

The article I linked I just came to read the 'opposition' from the article I linked showing the completion of the tower, since the article mentioned this forum explicitly. Smae ol stuff I've been hearing for 5 years. Most of it incorrectly tries to link hertzian wave propagation to this technology, as was done here.

I know the system works, because:

I know who the investors are
I know who the inventor is
Title: Re: Bullshit: Texzon Wireless Power
Post by: ogden on October 04, 2018, 07:01:59 pm
I know the system works, because:

I know who the investors are
I know who the inventor is

I did not see system working but I did see names. LOL.
Title: Re: Bullshit: Texzon Wireless Power
Post by: zenneckwave on October 04, 2018, 07:03:19 pm
What is available for public consumption on the math and science has already been posted here. The company does not have to show you how it works. When its launched in a few weeks, we can regroup and chat more. I have nothing further to add; I just wanted to show this group the tower since you were mentioned in the article, and read what was being said about the 'bullshit'
Title: Re: Bullshit: Texzon Wireless Power
Post by: PA0PBZ on October 04, 2018, 07:05:53 pm
When its launched in a few weeks, we can regroup and chat more.

Cool, I'm looking forward to it and I expect you to be back in this thread to let us know the moment is there?
Title: Re: Bullshit: Texzon Wireless Power
Post by: zenneckwave on October 04, 2018, 07:07:03 pm
I know the system works, because:

I know who the investors are
I know who the inventor is

I did not see system working but I did see names. LOL.

I didnt see the big bang, but believed it happened. I havent seen an atom, but know they exist because I've split them.

I know they've conducted tests they havent talked about. I know the results of those successful tests.

They have all he funding they need, and then some. Not because they talk about it, because they've demo'd it. 

Title: Re: Bullshit: Texzon Wireless Power
Post by: zenneckwave on October 04, 2018, 07:07:59 pm
When its launched in a few weeks, we can regroup and chat more.

Cool, I'm looking forward to it and I expect you to be back in this thread to let us know the moment is there?

Yes, Ive bookmarked and will be back after the launch.
Title: Re: Bullshit: Texzon Wireless Power
Post by: bd139 on October 04, 2018, 07:09:50 pm
This whole thread isnt going to age well for you guys... the groupthink is on display big time.

The article I linked I just came to read the 'opposition' from the article I linked showing the completion of the tower, since the article mentioned this forum explicitly. Smae ol stuff I've been hearing for 5 years. Most of it incorrectly tries to link hertzian wave propagation to this technology, as was done here.

I know the system works, because:

I know who the investors are
I know who the inventor is

It’s not group think.

1.  No evidence has been shown of it working.
2.  The physics don’t make sense based on current understanding and propose no new understanding or mathematical models which are independently verifiable.
3.  There are a hundred other people making the same claims with no delivery going back 50-100 years now.
4.  You show no understanding.
5.  Names mean nothing. Look up Nobel Syndrome.
6.  Investors mean nothing (I have worked with many VCs over the years)
7.  The pivotal idea is concentrating on one unrealistic factor.

As an atheist, this has more credibility than you or the project: https://arkencounter.com

If it looks like it works it’ll be a mechanical Turk.
Title: Re: Bullshit: Texzon Wireless Power
Post by: CJay on October 04, 2018, 07:11:47 pm
When its launched in a few weeks

And your appearance here has *nothing* to do with google's first hit for Texzon wireless power being the title of this thread.

That bloody unicorn in my back garden is chatting the hind legs off my pet Kraken...

 :popcorn:

 :-DD :-DD
Title: Re: Bullshit: Texzon Wireless Power
Post by: alsetalokin4017 on October 04, 2018, 07:12:50 pm
I like the Corum brothers. Anyone interested in modern Tesla coil theory and practice should read their work. If anyone can do real power transmission via guided waves they would be the ones.

I've done some small experiments in wireless power transfer systems myself. One problem is what I call "inadvertent reception" where things become energized that you don't necessarily want to be. If receiver tuning needs to be as sharp as all that, maybe inadvertent reception is less of a problem.

I'm confused about the frequency counter question. I have an old Philips PM6676 ocxo counter that has 9 significant digits of resolution maximum, depending on frequency and gate time. I'm pretty sure modern counters can do much better than that.

(oops, only 9 sig digs after all...)
Title: Re: Bullshit: Texzon Wireless Power
Post by: Bud on October 04, 2018, 07:23:32 pm
This whole thread isnt going to age well for you guys... the groupthink is on display big time.
.....
I know who the investors are
I know who the inventor is

Yes yes, just like it was with uBeam. We are still well and alive.
Title: Re: Bullshit: Texzon Wireless Power
Post by: bd139 on October 04, 2018, 07:24:45 pm
I like the Corum brothers. Anyone interested in modern Tesla coil theory and practice should read their work. If anyone can do real power transmission via guided waves they would be the ones.

I've done some small experiments in wireless power transfer systems myself. One problem is what I call "inadvertent reception" where things become energized that you don't necessarily want to be. If receiver tuning needs to be as sharp as all that, maybe inadvertent reception is less of a problem.

I'm confused about the frequency counter question. I have an old Philips PM6676 ocxo counter that has 9 significant digits of resolution maximum, depending on frequency and gate time. I'm pretty sure modern counters can do much better than that.

(oops, only 9 sig digs after all...)

Thats not actually that bad. I live up the road from NPL so I can nip in there and borrow one  :-DD

The problem is how do you build a resonator with that level of accuracy that is thermally stable and that’s ignoring the other claims. If something has to have that precision and high Q then even moving it relative to the source will detune it.
Title: Re: Bullshit: Texzon Wireless Power
Post by: alsetalokin4017 on October 04, 2018, 07:29:05 pm
It has to have some kind of autoresonator locking system, like a PLL. The systems I play with have the transmitter varying frequency to stay in resonance with the receiver as conditions change, but it should be able to do it the other way around too, no?
Title: Re: Bullshit: Texzon Wireless Power
Post by: alsetalokin4017 on October 04, 2018, 07:40:50 pm
Just for fun:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LiV99zi8cj4 (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LiV99zi8cj4)
Title: Re: Bullshit: Texzon Wireless Power
Post by: bd139 on October 04, 2018, 07:59:41 pm
That's not particularly difficult to achieve without breaking any laws.

What you have there is (doing a finger in the air) ~5 femto-farad capacitor between the coils. To get any coupling between the two you have to have a seriously large dV/dt which is why you require a tesla coil. The denominator of the capacitor is distance so the further the distance, the higher the dv/dt is required.

Unfortunately the initial distance is precisely one metric fuck all so that denominator on the capacitance formula, neatly derived from Gauss' law adds up pretty quickly. Which is why Tesla fell flat on his arse. To get any kind of coupling, you need to stick MW in to get W out. Plus also sheep and things will probably catch fire in the near field.

If you fuck with physics it will lead to disappointment, if it doesn't fuck you back first.
Title: Re: Bullshit: Texzon Wireless Power
Post by: alsetalokin4017 on October 04, 2018, 08:14:25 pm
Heh... inadvertent reception, you know what I mean! Or the sheep do, anyway...

Any hope of success depends on receiver and transmitter remaining in the near field. I don't know what that means for low frequency surface waves, but using a different system (EM rather than capacitive) I've noticed that one may get much more efficient power transfer in the near field without 1/r2 falloff.
Title: Re: Bullshit: Texzon Wireless Power
Post by: bd139 on October 04, 2018, 08:26:05 pm
I think they are just going to have to make the near field huge which has more problems.

Look at VLF propagation. Efficiency characteristics are the same. The problem with the lower frequencies is to couple the antenna into free space you have to either have a massive amount of power going into a small antenna and accept a loss (this is the normal mode of operation), or have a massive antenna which is directional. A typical dipole for VLF say 30KHz would be 4.7km long. You can electrically shorten this but you blow efficiency out of the window. Also not all surface waves travel along the ground. Some of them shoot off and get gobbled up by the ionosphere.

These ideas never scale up which is the problem. All apparent breakthroughs are small things that aren't going to scale up.

Incidentally the military spent decades and more money than anyone else on this crap over the years and came up with zip.
Title: Re: Bullshit: Texzon Wireless Power
Post by: CJay on October 04, 2018, 08:30:57 pm
Well the FCC licences they have are in the name of Texzon and are for 80KHz-120KHz, 1.71MHz to 1.9MHz and 50MHz to 54MHz (that's not going to please a lot of Hams).

All specified as 'expected to be non radiating' with powers of 6KW or more and stated ERP of 100mW, bandwidths of 10Hz and 100Hz and frequency accuracies are nowhere near as tight as Zenneckwave suggested though they are stated for the transmitters, not the receivers of course.

I strongly suspect the replies here are because of the first google hit on a search for their name being "Bullshit: Texzon Wireless Power", maybe there's a funding round due...
Title: Re: Bullshit: Texzon Wireless Power
Post by: bd139 on October 04, 2018, 08:36:19 pm
Interesting find. Those are thoroughly explored bits of spectrum.

Is that 6KW in and 100mW out?
Title: Re: Bullshit: Texzon Wireless Power
Post by: CJay on October 04, 2018, 08:40:07 pm
It seems to be but they're claiming they expect it to be non radiating.

Have a read for yourself,

https://apps.fcc.gov/oetcf/els/reports/GenericSearch.cfm

and enter Texzon in the Applicant Name field
Title: Re: Bullshit: Texzon Wireless Power
Post by: bd139 on October 04, 2018, 08:49:01 pm
Ooh meaty. Thank you.

Followed the rabbit hole.

Here is the entire experiment detail: https://apps.fcc.gov/els/GetAtt.html?id=202374&x=.

COTS AM TX running 160m 1000W EIRP. Input power is 50KW which suggests a VERY poor radiator (as I asserted earlier)
Title: Re: Bullshit: Texzon Wireless Power
Post by: zenneckwave on October 04, 2018, 09:58:30 pm
My appearance here is a bystander like you. I have been following texzon for quite some time now, and complained loudly when they changed their name from texzon to now worse, Viziv.

I am thrilled about the work, and like I said before, this is just another test in a long line of tests already concluded. This one will lite up a lightbulb on the other side of the planet.

cheers fellas! Its a great time for humanity and I dont blame your skepticism whatsoever
Title: Re: Bullshit: Texzon Wireless Power
Post by: zenneckwave on October 04, 2018, 10:00:43 pm
the guided wave is non-radiative.
Title: Re: Bullshit: Texzon Wireless Power
Post by: mikeselectricstuff on October 04, 2018, 10:02:12 pm
My appearance here is a bystander like you. I have been following texzon for quite some time now, and complained loudly when they changed their name from texzon to now worse, Viziv.

I am thrilled about the work, and like I said before, this is just another test in a long line of tests already concluded. This one will lite up a lightbulb on the other side of the planet.

cheers fellas! Its a great time for humanity and I dont blame your skepticism whatsoever
And how exactly does lighting a bulb the other side of the planet help anyone?
Long-distance transmission of power is a pretty solved problem and like networking, a wire will usually be cheaper and more efficient.

Title: Re: Bullshit: Texzon Wireless Power
Post by: zenneckwave on October 04, 2018, 10:04:20 pm
Ooh meaty. Thank you.

Followed the rabbit hole.

Here is the entire experiment detail: https://apps.fcc.gov/els/GetAtt.html?id=202374&x=.

COTS AM TX running 160m 1000W EIRP. Input power is 50KW which suggests a VERY poor radiator (as I asserted earlier)

Heres the actual text, so you can see its <5 kW in...Missed that - 50kW is correct my bad!

BUT and guided waves are non-radiating. (nearly lossless)


"Texzon anticipates that the demonstrations will be non-radiating. To
conduct the demonstrations, the RF power necessary to maintain the
voltage to produce local fields required to launch a high velocity
propagating surface wave will be utilized. The testing will not exceed 50
kW of RF input power to the surface wave launching probe at 1710 kHz
.
The intent is to produce a surface wave without producing any Norton
ground wave radiation. Texzon believes that the EIRP will be limited to
1000 watts. Texzon will conduct other testing in the spectrum range from
1710 kHz to 1900 kHz but the input power will be less than 5 kW for
those tests with EIRP limited to 100 watts or less for that testing."
Title: Re: Bullshit: Texzon Wireless Power
Post by: zenneckwave on October 04, 2018, 10:08:09 pm
Because now, your car can run on electricity and never need to be plugged in. Power plants can be built at the energy source. Solar can be transmitted 24x7. A true global power market, where you can actually buy electrons generated from the sun.

Disaster recovery. Electricity where theres no infrastructure. eliminating open fires for cooking. eliminating kerosene lamps. This is what wireless power is. its bringing all of humans into the 20th century.
Title: Re: Bullshit: Texzon Wireless Power
Post by: zenneckwave on October 04, 2018, 10:10:23 pm
It seems to be but they're claiming they expect it to be non radiating.

Have a read for yourself,

https://apps.fcc.gov/oetcf/els/reports/GenericSearch.cfm

and enter Texzon in the Applicant Name field

Here's some work by the inventor:

https://patents.justia.com/inventor/james-f-corum

Go tell him he's wrong I dare you. Us simplteons just have to watch and see if he pulls it off.
Title: Re: Bullshit: Texzon Wireless Power
Post by: bd139 on October 04, 2018, 10:21:24 pm
Well he’s filed a lot of patents for sure. I will attempt to read them over the next few days.

Let’s throw a hand grenade in the pond anyway. One of the patents is about theft of wireless power and disabling the receiver. So revolutionise energy distribution, then control energy distribution, then prevent energy distribution. I couldn’t see any plans for an evil moon base in there but I reckon that’s next.

The lamp will not light. Then more funding will be required.
Title: Re: Bullshit: Texzon Wireless Power
Post by: Bud on October 04, 2018, 10:24:09 pm
The bullshit tech of the day award goes to Texzon Wireless Power
And I didn't even make it past the home page.

www.texzontechnologies.com (http://www.texzontechnologies.com)

Of course there are  pictures of children on the home page. Think Of The Children part of the mission statement is accomplished and success is granted.
Title: Re: Bullshit: Texzon Wireless Power
Post by: zenneckwave on October 04, 2018, 10:25:35 pm
It's lit up every time so far.... maybe he will fail this time? I don't think so personally. Im not alone in that thought
Title: Re: Bullshit: Texzon Wireless Power
Post by: Bud on October 04, 2018, 10:27:40 pm
The lamp will not light. Then more funding will be required.

Well those former executives from Coca Cola need a place to work somewhere.
Title: Re: Bullshit: Texzon Wireless Power
Post by: zenneckwave on October 04, 2018, 10:30:45 pm
Well the FCC licences they have are in the name of Texzon and are for 80KHz-120KHz, 1.71MHz to 1.9MHz and 50MHz to 54MHz (that's not going to please a lot of Hams).

All specified as 'expected to be non radiating' with powers of 6KW or more and stated ERP of 100mW, bandwidths of 10Hz and 100Hz and frequency accuracies are nowhere near as tight as Zenneckwave suggested though they are stated for the transmitters, not the receivers of course.

I strongly suspect the replies here are because of the first google hit on a search for their name being "Bullshit: Texzon Wireless Power", maybe there's a funding round due...

I linked a News article that was about the construction of the tower being completed. The article mentioned this forum specifically as calling texzon vaporware etc. I'm not an employee, just an observer who found out about these guys 5 years ago and have been watching closely since. So I kinda kicked the nest so to speak.

They have papers you can download, released to the sci community at Baylor. To my knowledge no one has refuted their science, and Baylor has partnered up with them to start studying the commercialization.

https://www.baylor.edu/mediacommunications/news.php?action=story&story=202581 (https://www.baylor.edu/mediacommunications/news.php?action=story&story=202581)


Title: Re: Bullshit: Texzon Wireless Power
Post by: mikeselectricstuff on October 04, 2018, 10:35:48 pm
I'm not an employee, just an observer who found out about these guys 5 years ago and have been watching closely since. So I kinda kicked the nest so to speak.

So they've been at it for 5 years, and yet to show any verified evidence of anything groundbreaking.
Now they're building a big tesla coil.
OK it may look pretty and send an insignificiant proportion of its input power over a distance but file under "nothing to see here" until proven otherwise.
 
 


Title: Re: Bullshit: Texzon Wireless Power
Post by: bd139 on October 04, 2018, 10:36:52 pm
Indeed.

Also why the scientific community hasn’t touched this is these ventures are poisonous by association.
Title: Re: Bullshit: Texzon Wireless Power
Post by: ogden on October 04, 2018, 10:52:15 pm
Patent does not prove that tech actually works.

https://patentimages.storage.googleapis.com/pages/US5023850-1.png (https://patentimages.storage.googleapis.com/pages/US5023850-1.png)
Title: Re: Bullshit: Texzon Wireless Power
Post by: Brumby on October 05, 2018, 02:43:56 am
Patent does not prove that tech actually works.

Nor could it.

Evidence to prove some invention actually works as claimed would need to be vetted - and since any such invention is "new" then there would be a significant likelihood that there would be no independent entity that would be equipped or skilled enough to validate the claims.  It would be a costing nightmare as well.

The patent office can only examine the principles involved and claims made against existing patents - which is what they (are supposed to) do right now.
Title: Re: Bullshit: Texzon Wireless Power
Post by: Brumby on October 05, 2018, 04:25:22 am
Some points raised by others:
And what happens as soon as you start drawing power from a resonant circuit?
Things only resonate sharply because the energy has nowhere else to go.
Change the load of a resonant circuit and things go to hell in a handbasket.  I'm having trouble dealing with the resilience of such a system in real world load scenarios.


I know the system works, because:

I know who the investors are
I know who the inventor is

I did not see system working but I did see names. LOL.
No first hand information?!!  Do you also blindly believe used car salespeople and software salespeople?  Because until there are results that have been verified by an independent third party, then you are smiling and nodding to someone who says "Trust me!".


You made my point, its not really magic, its a known principle of electromagnetism, to use the earth as the guide surface, just like the EMF traveling along a conductor.

To steal the power, you have to have the ability to craft a circuit that has the tuning tolerances to 0.00000001 Hz. Your car radio goes out 1 decimal place...
First you'd have to build a receiver capable of receiving a guided wave, then give it the precision to tune to 8 or more decimal points to resonate the circuit. Good luck building the receiver to those specifications ...
It seems somewhat obvious to me that the same constraints would apply in delivering power to an authorised recipient.

... and better luck finding the broadcast frequency.
What?  Is a spectrum analyser no good?


I've done some small experiments in wireless power transfer systems myself. One problem is what I call "inadvertent reception" where things become energized that you don't necessarily want to be. If receiver tuning needs to be as sharp as all that, maybe inadvertent reception is less of a problem.
This is a real Pandora's Box, IMHO.

There have been claims that mobile phone transmissions can create sparks in any suitably arranged conductive bodies that are close enough.  While the power levels are low and the critical dimensions are highly improbable and, that as a result, it is highly unlikely to be encountered, it is theoretically possible.  Bump up the power a few orders of magnitude and the range extends far and wide - so who knows what might just happen to "tune in".

Another aspect of this is:  What effect will dumping such large amounts of power into the environment cause?  Will the forests absorb some - and to what effect?  What about the fleshy bags of salty water and tissue walking around?  The ionosphere?  The magnetosphere?  Please don't say human efforts cannot compare with nature's might.  Wood fires weren't a big problem for millenia, but when the Industrial Revolution came to town, carbon emissions started on a perilous trend.

Call me an alarmist if you must - but these are just questions.  Questions which I believe deserve considered and researched answers.
Title: Re: Bullshit: Texzon Wireless Power
Post by: Cyberdragon on October 05, 2018, 05:52:15 am
Shit, came in here and now I need a new bullshit meter, cringeometer, and a few new braincells. :bullshit: :-BROKE

Going on about "ground waves" and saying its not rf and does not obey inverse square. Yes, whatever the hell you're rambling about does obey it, it's EMF, therefore it is photons, and therefore obeys the laws of physics. But you go on about

the guided wave is non-radiative.

Oh dear, the whole "Earth is a waveguide" stuff started by Tesla that every nut vomits. The phenomenon is real https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Earth–ionosphere_waveguide
however, good luck trying to get reasonable amounts of energy through it. Not only does it bounce down only at certain points (orginally discovered by Tesla), but
Quote
Radio propagation within the ionosphere depends on frequency, angle of incidence, time of day, season, Earth's magnetic field, and solar activity.
::)
Not to meantion the whole "load on a resonator" stuff people have been discussing. Oh and the fact that pumping that amount of energy into the air would be like HAARP tenfold. :scared: IE it would probably start actually making weather and whatnot.
Title: Re: Bullshit: Texzon Wireless Power
Post by: CJay on October 05, 2018, 05:53:26 am
My appearance here is a bystander like you. I have been following texzon for quite some time now, and complained loudly when they changed their name from texzon to now worse, Viziv.

I am thrilled about the work, and like I said before, this is just another test in a long line of tests already concluded. This one will lite up a lightbulb on the other side of the planet.

cheers fellas! Its a great time for humanity and I dont blame your skepticism whatsoever

Off the scale  :bullshit:
Title: Re: Bullshit: Texzon Wireless Power
Post by: Cyberdragon on October 05, 2018, 06:07:09 am
Oh and random objects getting enerized by RF is a sign you are definately not creating a "non-radiating" wave, that's definately a sign of pumping loads of RF randomly in the air. No amount of precision tuning will help, as that's not how RF works. Not only is it impossible to create that precise of a signal at those power levels, it starts getting to the level where tuning doesn't matter and the shear amount of photons flying around causes issues (like foil in a microwave).

I bet the bulb at around the globe stunt will just be a magic trick with an internal battery powered prank bulb. >:D
Title: Re: Bullshit: Texzon Wireless Power
Post by: EEVblog on October 05, 2018, 06:07:59 am
I know they've conducted tests they havent talked about. I know the results of those successful tests.
They have all he funding they need, and then some. Not because they talk about it, because they've demo'd it.

I've worked on multiple 10's of millions of dollar military experimental projects that had many "successful tests", yet were ultimately cancelled because, well, "successful" does not always end up as "practical".
We were able to get more funding after each "successful test" for quite some time.
My favourite phrase from that time was that the project was "workmanship over engineering"

uBeam, Energous et.al have all had "successful tests" too.
Title: Re: Bullshit: Texzon Wireless Power
Post by: EEVblog on October 05, 2018, 06:17:48 am
http://vizivtechnologies.com/technology/ (http://vizivtechnologies.com/technology/)

(https://www.eevblog.com/forum/dodgy-technology/bullshit-texzon-wireless-power/?action=dlattach;attach=539240;image)
Title: Re: Bullshit: Texzon Wireless Power
Post by: CJay on October 05, 2018, 08:33:25 am
Oh and random objects getting enerized by RF is a sign you are definately not creating a "non-radiating" wave, that's definately a sign of pumping loads of RF randomly in the air. No amount of precision tuning will help, as that's not how RF works. Not only is it impossible to create that precise of a signal at those power levels, it starts getting to the level where tuning doesn't matter and the shear amount of photons flying around causes issues (like foil in a microwave).

I bet the bulb at around the globe stunt will just be a magic trick with an internal battery powered prank bulb. >:D

ooh, you cynic, of course it will work but because of the proprietary technology in use they couldn't possibly reveal the contents of the box unless you sign a massively restrictive NDA and perhaps not even then and there definitely won't be any test gear other than their own carefully curated equipment allowed anywhere near the 'receiver' or transmitter

(though at powers 60dBm and above it won't take a lot of effort to work out if they're 'transmitting' from a car parked in the vicinity unless they've got some really heavy duty RF shielding).
Title: Re: Bullshit: Texzon Wireless Power
Post by: Brumby on October 05, 2018, 08:52:50 am
I just love the idea of living in a waveguide with megawatts of power flowing through it.  I will save a small fortune in heating over the winter - but summer will be a bitch.
Title: Re: Bullshit: Texzon Wireless Power
Post by: bd139 on October 05, 2018, 10:10:19 am
Indeed.

Doh someone stepped in front of the waveguide again...

(https://i.imgur.com/tLJIrtg.jpg)
Title: Re: Bullshit: Texzon Wireless Power
Post by: zucca on October 05, 2018, 11:10:54 am
This is so much fun to read, imagine those who put money in it... I think if you are stupid rich you lose the value of money. The more you have the less you care.  :horse:

(https://i.ytimg.com/vi/yPe0R0WOrP0/hqdefault.jpg)
Title: Re: Bullshit: Texzon Wireless Power
Post by: CJay on October 05, 2018, 11:12:35 am
This is so much fun to read, imagine those who put money in it... I think if you are stupid rich you lose the value of money. The more you have the less you care.  :horse:

Yep, like i said, a search for Texzon Wireless power throws this page up as first hit, they must be fuming that their name is linked with Bullshit.
Title: Re: Bullshit: Texzon Wireless Power
Post by: Buriedcode on October 05, 2018, 05:31:57 pm
I didnt see the big bang, but believed it happened....
 
Many beleive it happened, alas we can only accumulate evidence for it, not "proof".


I havent seen an atom, but know they exist because I've split them.

You've split an atom?  I'm not sure many can make that claim, although I guess it depends on whether you were a pilot doing the tests or one of the physicists?

I know they've conducted tests they havent talked about. I know the results of those successful tests.

We see this time and again.  Not jsut on this forum, and not just about technology, often with "wellness" or health fads too.  You cannot expect to say "I've seen it with my own eyes!" and have people blindly (see what I did there?) believe you.  Especially on a forum geared towards engineering which is full of.. engineers who spend their lives dealing with real-world things.


They have all he funding they need, and then some. Not because they talk about it, because they've demo'd it.

I'm unsure why you've posted on this forum.  I'm not suggesting you don't just that I really don't see why.  Given the poor grammar and almost ranty posts I really can't see you being any kind of PR person for the company - if you are, I apologise, but they really should review their hiring process.  If not a PR person then, one of the engineers? 
Naaa, you've repeated the same vague sciencey-sound-stuff that many "tesla lovers" parrot.  Sure, there are plenty of engineers who believe wacky things - but often they are engineers in other fields (and thus have Dunning-Kruger working for them).
If you're not an employee, then perhaps an investor? but then why would investors waste their time trying to convince random people in a forum of their investments? its not like anyone here is going to actually invest.  If not an investor then...

Someone who likes to follow fringe science?  Fair enough.  I'll admit I do that, it often amazes me the hoops people will jump through to avoid admitting they're wrong.  It must work... but if it can work.. why don't we have it? well. someone must be suppressing the technology! but why?  etc..etc..  No-one is immune to false beliefs (generally, the more immune you think you are - the more prone you are! cognitive bias at its finest), and they can be hard to find.

Sorry if this appears a but harsh, I am genuinely curious what your relationship with this company is, and why you decided to post here.  You must have known the sort of responses you would get - especially if you believe we're all closed minded and "group mind" (I assume you mean hive mind? which is odd as many here are older and quite stubborn - not willing to follow others).

I was going to question the whole "8 digit frequency counter" thing but others have covered that.. including that even if the system worked - it would be laughably impracticable if it required that kind of precision. Which you would know if you had just thought about it for a minute.

Edited: so many typos..
Title: Re: Bullshit: Texzon Wireless Power
Post by: Cyberdragon on October 05, 2018, 08:58:15 pm
Quote
I was going to question the whole "8 digit frequency counter" thing but others have covered that.. including that even if the system worked - it would be laughably impracticable if it required that kind of precision. Which you would know if you had just thought about it for a minute.

You can get up to 10 digit frequency meters though.
https://www.amazon.com/Frequency-Counter-0-001Hz-Digits-mVrms/dp/B011ONWV4E (https://www.amazon.com/Frequency-Counter-0-001Hz-Digits-mVrms/dp/B011ONWV4E)
But that kind of precision is found in low power stuff.
Title: Re: Bullshit: Texzon Wireless Power
Post by: CJay on October 05, 2018, 09:13:59 pm
10 is old hat, I have a couple.

12 is the new rock and roll.

https://www.keysight.com/en/pd-1893411-pn-53220A/350-mhz-universal-frequency-counter-timer-12-digits-s-100-ps?cc=US&lc=eng (https://www.keysight.com/en/pd-1893411-pn-53220A/350-mhz-universal-frequency-counter-timer-12-digits-s-100-ps?cc=US&lc=eng)

Title: Re: Bullshit: Texzon Wireless Power
Post by: Cyberdragon on October 05, 2018, 09:19:24 pm
But that only goes up to 350MHz. ::)
Title: Re: Bullshit: Texzon Wireless Power
Post by: bd139 on October 05, 2018, 09:23:26 pm
Doesn't need to go high up, just have extreme resolution. Which is hard.

Say 1710KHz at the quoted 0.0000001Hz resolution. That's 1710000.00000001 which is 15 digits. Plus you need another digit anyway so 16 digit.

Now NPL's primary caesium fountain standard is 2.8x10^-13 per second up to 2.5x10^16 per two weeks.

Now the MTBF of the standard is 33 days and uptime is 83% and I haven't even mentioned jitter and all that so you are, to use a technical term, bloody fucked.

IMHO they will write it off on that basis when it doesn't work.
Title: Re: Bullshit: Texzon Wireless Power
Post by: Cyberdragon on October 05, 2018, 09:59:33 pm
Doesn't need to go high up, just have extreme resolution. Which is hard.

Say 1710KHz at the quoted 0.0000001Hz resolution. That's 1710000.00000001 which is 15 digits. Plus you need another digit anyway so 16 digit.

Now NPL's primary caesium fountain standard is 2.8x10^-13 per second up to 2.5x10^16 per two weeks.

Now the MTBF of the standard is 33 days and uptime is 83% and I haven't even mentioned jitter and all that so you are, to use a technical term, bloody fucked.

IMHO they will write it off on that basis when it doesn't work.

There are 14 digit meters though (up to 40GHz too! :-+), so not far off.
https://www.newark.com/tektronix/mca3040/microwave-counter-w-integrated/dp/84R5912 (https://www.newark.com/tektronix/mca3040/microwave-counter-w-integrated/dp/84R5912)
Not sure if 16 digit meters exist, but we're close if not. However, I doubt that resolution would matter at the power levels needed for "wireless power". ::)
Title: Re: Bullshit: Texzon Wireless Power
Post by: bd139 on October 05, 2018, 11:25:43 pm
Problem is sub-Hz frequencies. 40 GHz is easy in comparison.
Title: Re: Bullshit: Texzon Wireless Power
Post by: EEVblog on October 06, 2018, 12:38:49 am
Problem is sub-Hz frequencies. 40 GHz is easy in comparison.

No, it's easy, it's called reciprocal counting mode, and most good frequency counters have it. It's trivial to measure very low frequencies with great precision.
The resolution is based on your reference clock, so a standard 10MHz reference gives 0.0000001Hz resolution.
Title: Re: Bullshit: Texzon Wireless Power
Post by: Brumby on October 06, 2018, 02:45:27 am
In other words, it doesn't matter which part of the beast you smell - it all stinks.
Title: Re: Bullshit: Texzon Wireless Power
Post by: Cyberdragon on October 06, 2018, 03:06:57 am
In other words, it doesn't matter which part of the beast you smell - it all stinks.

And if you wash it, what's under the crap is equally ugly. ;D
Title: Re: Bullshit: Texzon Wireless Power
Post by: TERRA Operative on October 06, 2018, 06:49:41 am
Imagine it would work: How are they going to prevent you, me and everyone else using the energy without paying?

This is exactly what killed Tesla's Wardenclyffe tower wireless power project....
Title: Re: Bullshit: Texzon Wireless Power
Post by: CJay on October 06, 2018, 07:18:34 am
But that only goes up to 350MHz. ::)

That's fine, they're only licensed to use up to 54MHz
Title: Re: Bullshit: Texzon Wireless Power
Post by: bd139 on October 06, 2018, 10:37:04 am
Problem is sub-Hz frequencies. 40 GHz is easy in comparison.

No, it's easy, it's called reciprocal counting mode, and most good frequency counters have it. It's trivial to measure very low frequencies with great precision.
The resolution is based on your reference clock, so a standard 10MHz reference gives 0.0000001Hz resolution.

This isn’t low frequencies. It’s precise frequencies to 16 digits which isn’t easy.

I should have been more detailed in my point. It’s difficult to measure 10^-8 to 10^7 at the same time.
Title: Re: Bullshit: Texzon Wireless Power
Post by: EEVblog on October 06, 2018, 01:16:41 pm
Problem is sub-Hz frequencies. 40 GHz is easy in comparison.

No, it's easy, it's called reciprocal counting mode, and most good frequency counters have it. It's trivial to measure very low frequencies with great precision.
The resolution is based on your reference clock, so a standard 10MHz reference gives 0.0000001Hz resolution.

This isn’t low frequencies. It’s precise frequencies to 16 digits which isn’t easy.

I should have been more detailed in my point. It’s difficult to measure 10^-8 to 10^7 at the same time.

Ah, I assumed it was some low frequency thing.
Title: Re: Bullshit: Texzon Wireless Power
Post by: Cyberdragon on October 06, 2018, 01:53:32 pm
Imagine it would work: How are they going to prevent you, me and everyone else using the energy without paying?

This is exactly what killed Tesla's Wardenclyffe tower wireless power project....

That and it's incredible innefficiency. It took a whole power plant just to light some discharge lamps. ::)
Title: Re: Bullshit: Texzon Wireless Power
Post by: rrinker on October 10, 2018, 02:33:48 pm
Patent does not prove that tech actually works.

https://patentimages.storage.googleapis.com/pages/US5023850-1.png (https://patentimages.storage.googleapis.com/pages/US5023850-1.png)

This is a must read, if just for the comedy - the text starts on page 4. I think I shall so equip all of my dogs.
Title: Re: Bullshit: Texzon Wireless Power
Post by: bd139 on October 10, 2018, 03:39:06 pm
Oh that's brilliant. Thanks for posting.
Title: Re: Bullshit: Texzon Wireless Power
Post by: Buriedcode on October 10, 2018, 08:10:39 pm
Patent does not prove that tech actually works.

https://patentimages.storage.googleapis.com/pages/US5023850-1.png (https://patentimages.storage.googleapis.com/pages/US5023850-1.png)

Good to see the 555 timer getting some use from a Bulldog.
Title: Re: Bullshit: Texzon Wireless Power
Post by: rrinker on October 11, 2018, 02:11:16 pm
 Also, I'm not sure what about that dog watch patent wouldn't work - model railroaders have been using frequency multipliers even on cheap battery operated electric clocks to produce fast clocks, and even those super cheap clock models mostly can take being operated at least 12x the standard speed.
Title: Re: Bullshit: Texzon Wireless Power
Post by: SaiSharma on October 22, 2018, 06:49:26 am
I've been working with Texzon for over 5 years on this project - its no joke. The patents for the RPM mentioned earlier are by James Corum, Texzon's (viziv) leading scientist. He confirmed the findings of the Philadelphia experiment and made objects radar-invisible in labs etc. James Corum and his brother Kenneth are the pinnacle of RF scientists.

The tower has been built
https://www.kwtx.com/content/news/Scientists-studying-wireless-electric-transmission-in-Central-Texas-494839331.html (https://www.kwtx.com/content/news/Scientists-studying-wireless-electric-transmission-in-Central-Texas-494839331.html)

They replicated the Seneca Lake experiments, and have performed successful demos for 3-letter government agencies. None of this is BS.
First of all, congratulations on exploring this to such depths. Zenneck Wave is not unreal, it exists! I like what Schekunoff had mentioned in this regards. "Different words have different meanings for different people and hence the noise".

As far as I understand, the receivers lying on the ground need to have the proper electrical length to resonate? I mean you cant simply use RLC parameter based resonant circuits at Frequencies below 36 MHz. Its all about receiving parameters given by radiation resistance relation. The physical dimension would have to be atleast 1/2 wavelength long?
As far as am concerned, I understand that the Earth ground is actually a neutral point?
Also, the attenuation of the E_z(Y) in the transverse direction (Y axis) needs to be phase progressive as well as independent of frequency? Z axis is normal to the ground-air interface.
Please do shed some light on this.
Sincerely

 
Title: Re: Bullshit: Texzon Wireless Power
Post by: SaiSharma on October 22, 2018, 06:54:59 am
ZenneckWave,
You are wasting your time here by defending that it is a non-radiative power transfer system.
Ironically, these guys have quoted some wiki articles, but, did not bother to look up something called "Evanescent" Decay.
Being Non-radiative, it can easily bypass partial faraday shields. e.g. it can get through the neoprene gaskets of the shipping containers etc.
Title: Re: Bullshit: Texzon Wireless Power
Post by: SaiSharma on October 22, 2018, 07:22:44 am
I think they are just going to have to make the near field huge which has more problems.

Look at VLF propagation. Efficiency characteristics are the same. The problem with the lower frequencies is to couple the antenna into free space you have to either have a massive amount of power going into a small antenna and accept a loss (this is the normal mode of operation), or have a massive antenna which is directional. A typical dipole for VLF say 30KHz would be 4.7km long. You can electrically shorten this but you blow efficiency out of the window. Also not all surface waves travel along the ground. Some of them shoot off and get gobbled up by the ionosphere.

These ideas never scale up which is the problem. All apparent breakthroughs are small things that aren't going to scale up.

Incidentally the military spent decades and more money than anyone else on this crap over the years and came up with zip.
I have to admit that near-field is unpredictable. The issue here is that an antenna witha resonant length of Lambda/2 will actually couple with the Zenneck Wave. Lumped parameters donot work effectively in this regime. The oldest trick in the book is improving the Radiation Resistance using the multi loop helical coil of a total lambda/2 electrical length. Another standing road block is the fact that the H-field simply travels in loops (parallel to the ground-air interface) in this mode of power transmission. Also known as Transverse Magnetic wave. So, as one moves away from the transmitter, the power gets spread in large contours. Radiation may not happen here, the way we think. However, with higher number of Receivers, you can actually extract more power as it is not a coupled mode power transmission.
Title: Re: Bullshit: Texzon Wireless Power
Post by: SaiSharma on October 22, 2018, 07:33:54 am
So, at 52 MHz, the field strength drops to zero at 5 km.  Well, not transmitting any energy very far like that.

And, at 1.82 MHz, they get signal out to 30,000 km!  Hmmm, where the hell did they find a 30,000 MILE long radio test range?  The entire circumference of the earth is is 25,000 mi, but their last data point is OVER 30K!  (Or, maybe I'm confused by the different dots on the chart.)

And, of course, the FCC and other nation's agencies might have something to say about broadcasting energy this way.

Jon
I think its a "dot", so it might be 30 miles. Also, the X axis in that plot needs to be in Logrithmic scale. If I apply Schelkunoff's integrals to the said scenario, then, the attenuation should be independent of the frequency. This has also been confirmed by Tapan Sarkar et. al. in their 2014 publication titled: "Application of the Schelkunoff Formulation to the Sommerfeld Problem of a Vertical Electric Dipole Radiating Over an Imperfect Ground" , IEEE Trans. Attenna and Propagation Volume: 62 , Issue: 8. But, I think we have to really zoom into 100m zone to see that effect, instead of 30 miles.
Title: Re: Bullshit: Texzon Wireless Power
Post by: Ozone88 on November 12, 2018, 03:15:14 am
New member tonight, Amateur Radio since 1960, EE 1970, Fringe Scientist.  3 questions to start:
1. Can you compare Raymond C. Gelinas / Honeywell patents with Corum / CPG patents & let me know?  Hmmm...
2. How is ViZiV gonna modulate the 50KW Nautel AM transmitter driving their TESLA-coil longitudinal-wave transmitter?
3. Anybody near TX site for signal reports?  I'm building a 3-ground listening array for surface waves 30 kHz > HF.
Cheers, Ozone88
Title: Re: Bullshit: Texzon Wireless Power
Post by: ebastler on November 12, 2018, 12:50:04 pm
Imagine it would work: How are they going to prevent you, me and everyone else using the energy without paying?

Ah, that's easy. Blockchain!!  :-+

(Ducking and running...)
Edit:  ;) ;) ;) :P
Title: Re: Bullshit: Texzon Wireless Power
Post by: CJay on November 12, 2018, 02:17:25 pm
Imagine it would work: How are they going to prevent you, me and everyone else using the energy without paying?

Ah, that's easy. Blockchain!!  :-+

(Ducking and running...)

Pfft.

Synergistic Blockchain surely?

Interesting that there's been no world changing announcement but three new users who are enthusiastic (one might say 'astro-turfing') about the technology.

Title: Re: Bullshit: Texzon Wireless Power
Post by: ebastler on November 12, 2018, 08:11:40 pm
[Interesting that there's been no world changing announcement but three new users who are enthusiastic (one might say 'astro-turfing') about the technology.

Your irony detector may be due for calibration.  ;)
Title: Re: Bullshit: Texzon Wireless Power
Post by: SiliconWizard on November 13, 2018, 01:58:36 am
Tesla must feel pretty sad in his grave.

Title: Re: Bullshit: Texzon Wireless Power
Post by: StillTrying on November 13, 2018, 09:52:13 am
It worked, allegedly.

twitter.com/BrianRoemmele/status/1061478991834505216 (http://twitter.com/BrianRoemmele/status/1061478991834505216)

Even I can detect it. ->  :bullshit:
Title: Re: Bullshit: Texzon Wireless Power
Post by: bd139 on November 13, 2018, 09:59:06 am
Marketing: it worked

Real world: we had a minor breakthrough where one of our narrow predictions was almost correct but we haven't analysed all the data yet and at no point are we publishing it for peer review. can we have some more money? k thx

Similar outcomes start as "man finds extra terrestrial signal from space" and ends in "man had radio interference from local TV transmitter plus was a meth head".
Title: Re: Bullshit: Texzon Wireless Power
Post by: Johnny10 on November 14, 2018, 11:46:49 pm
Its Magic !
Title: Re: Bullshit: Texzon Wireless Power
Post by: bigglesOz on November 16, 2018, 10:09:22 am
what's this then... one for the septic nerds
https://www.collective-evolution.com/2018/11/13/strange-looking-tesla-tower-in-texas-aims-to-transmute-electricity-wirelessly/ (https://www.collective-evolution.com/2018/11/13/strange-looking-tesla-tower-in-texas-aims-to-transmute-electricity-wirelessly/)
Title: Re: Bullshit: Texzon Wireless Power
Post by: StillTrying on November 16, 2018, 11:17:22 am
what's this then... one for the septic nerds
https://www.collective-evolution.com/2018/11/13/strange-looking-tesla-tower-in-texas-aims-to-transmute-electricity-wirelessly/ (https://www.collective-evolution.com/2018/11/13/strange-looking-tesla-tower-in-texas-aims-to-transmute-electricity-wirelessly/)

It's just a Free Energy For All junk article! :horse:
Title: Re: Bullshit: Texzon Wireless Power
Post by: CJay on November 16, 2018, 02:03:16 pm
Y'know, 'all' these new user accounts, shilling for Texzon?
Title: Re: Bullshit: Texzon Wireless Power
Post by: Johnny10 on November 16, 2018, 02:35:50 pm
I wonder just how much money they have collected?
 10's of millions?

The CEO was a Health Administrator and graduate of online for profit school.
Title: Re: Bullshit: Texzon Wireless Power
Post by: Wan Huang Luo on November 16, 2018, 02:37:09 pm
Whole lotta astroturfing going on here. I wish that audiophool companies would come astroturf too in the audiophool threads.
Title: Re: Bullshit: Texzon Wireless Power
Post by: bd139 on November 16, 2018, 02:43:37 pm
Perhaps we need to bait them  :-DD
Title: Re: Bullshit: Texzon Wireless Power
Post by: BrianHG on November 16, 2018, 03:04:35 pm
I didnt see the big bang, but believed it happened....
 
Many beleive it happened, alas we can only accumulate evidence for it, not "proof".


I havent seen an atom, but know they exist because I've split them.

You've split an atom?  I'm not sure many can make that claim, although I guess it depends on whether you were a pilot doing the tests or one of the physicists?

I know they've conducted tests they havent talked about. I know the results of those successful tests.

We see this time and again.  Not jsut on this forum, and not just about technology, often with "wellness" or health fads too.  You cannot expect to say "I've seen it with my own eyes!" and have people blindly (see what I did there?) believe you.  Especially on a forum geared towards engineering which is full of.. engineers who spend their lives dealing with real-world things.


They have all he funding they need, and then some. Not because they talk about it, because they've demo'd it.

I'm unsure why you've posted on this forum.  I'm not suggesting you don't just that I really don't see why.  Given the poor grammar and almost ranty posts I really can't see you being any kind of PR person for the company - if you are, I apologise, but they really should review their hiring process.  If not a PR person then, one of the engineers? 
Naaa, you've repeated the same vague sciencey-sound-stuff that many "tesla lovers" parrot.  Sure, there are plenty of engineers who believe wacky things - but often they are engineers in other fields (and thus have Dunning-Kruger working for them).
If you're not an employee, then perhaps an investor? but then why would investors waste their time trying to convince random people in a forum of their investments? its not like anyone here is going to actually invest.  If not an investor then...

Someone who likes to follow fringe science?  Fair enough.  I'll admit I do that, it often amazes me the hoops people will jump through to avoid admitting they're wrong.  It must work... but if it can work.. why don't we have it? well. someone must be suppressing the technology! but why?  etc..etc..  No-one is immune to false beliefs (generally, the more immune you think you are - the more prone you are! cognitive bias at its finest), and they can be hard to find.

Sorry if this appears a but harsh, I am genuinely curious what your relationship with this company is, and why you decided to post here.  You must have known the sort of responses you would get - especially if you believe we're all closed minded and "group mind" (I assume you mean hive mind? which is odd as many here are older and quite stubborn - not willing to follow others).

I was going to question the whole "8 digit frequency counter" thing but others have covered that.. including that even if the system worked - it would be laughably impracticable if it required that kind of precision. Which you would know if you had just thought about it for a minute.

Edited: so many typos..
Buriedcode, I don't know how to exactly say it, but, you took the words right out of my mouth...  :-+
Title: Re: Bullshit: Texzon Wireless Power
Post by: Johnny10 on November 16, 2018, 03:17:34 pm
What is a "septic nerd"?
Title: Re: Bullshit: Texzon Wireless Power
Post by: CJay on November 16, 2018, 03:36:08 pm
Perhaps we need to bait them  :-DD

Nah, fun thing is, this thread comes up high in the google results for Texzon and viziv, closely linked with the words BULLSHIT and SCAM
Title: Re: Bullshit: Texzon Wireless Power
Post by: EllisCo on November 16, 2018, 04:02:11 pm
I have to say that I am a skeptic myself, and have read all the posts on this thread with great interest. I live in the area of the Texzon/Viziv tower, and stumbled onto this project soon after they bought the tower site in Milford, Texas. I can't speak to the technology, but can provide some input on the "scam" aspects of the company. I don't know if the technology works, or not, but I have to say that the people behind this BELIEVE that it does. They were confident enough to buy a 300 acre site, and build a full-scale transmitter. This is not a kitchen table project. Not long after I saw their initial efforts, I read through what was on their Website, and reviewed the patent applications. I was interested on behalf of an acquaintance who might have been a potential investor. I contacted Texzon twice by email, asking for a meeting on behalf of the investor (one of Forbes top 50 world billionaires). I got no reply. I actually went to the Texzon (now re-named Viziv) HQ in Waxahachie, and got no further than the front door. I sent a follow-up email to their Director Of Development, telling him to let me know if their need for funding changed. I didn't even get a reply to that. I have to say that if they are running a scam, trying to bilk investors, they are doing a very poor job of it. It would have made a lot more sense to buy no land, build a small test tower to fake "results", and take money from anyone who would offer it. That is definitely NOT what they are doing. Call them misguided or delusional, but no con turns away investors on this scale. From their SEC filings regarding investors, they have likely spent a great deal of what they have raised on hard costs and salaries. These guys are either totally bonkers, on drugs, or they are onto something. Despite the posts that detail technical shortcomings, I'm taking a wait and see attitude.   
Title: Re: Bullshit: Texzon Wireless Power
Post by: ebastler on November 16, 2018, 04:19:14 pm
What is a "septic nerd"?

I'm not sure I want to know...  :o
Now how do I get that imagery out of my head again??
Title: Re: Bullshit: Texzon Wireless Power
Post by: Johnny10 on November 16, 2018, 05:12:00 pm
When you invest do you own part of the 300 acre site? Or is it leased back to the company?

Come on man, stick a pole in the ground full of electrical energy and believe that you can get it back out hundreds of miles, no wait, thousands of miles away and it be a useable efficient amount of energy.

You don't have to be an electrical engineer to understand it is bullshit.

Drop a large rock in the ocean and then collect that particular energy potential on the other side of the world ?


Title: Re: Bullshit: Texzon Wireless Power
Post by: StillTrying on November 16, 2018, 05:13:14 pm
they have likely spent a great deal of what they have raised on hard costs and salaries.

 :palm:

Quote
Despite the posts that detail technical shortcomings, I'm taking a wait and see attitude.   

Good idea, ignore any technical stuff and just believe.
Title: Re: Bullshit: Texzon Wireless Power
Post by: BrianHG on November 16, 2018, 05:24:49 pm
Even more sadly, I just realized, they say 1 power station envelopes the world.  Besides, as already mentioned here the fact that others may tap into that power freely with home made hardware, what happens when you need a second power station?  From the way the website describes the technology, there is 1 power station.  How do they expect to power so many people all over the world?
Title: Re: Bullshit: Texzon Wireless Power
Post by: bd139 on November 16, 2018, 05:32:03 pm
Licensing. Look at the patents. It's all covered. You will need an energy license and when you don't pay your energy license they will put you in power prison. In power prison there are large hamster wheels erected around the transmission tower which will be used to power it until you have generated your equivalent KWh in servitude. The whole model revolves around this licensing and servitude process. The guy is a business mastermind.
Title: Re: Bullshit: Texzon Wireless Power
Post by: BrianHG on November 16, 2018, 05:34:25 pm
Also, isn't it stupid to have a power generating plant on one side of earth, receive fuel from the other side of the planet just to send electricity back to that side of the planet?  Isn't it cheaper just to use the fuel on the other side of the planet and generate the power there?

Title: Re: Bullshit: Texzon Wireless Power
Post by: BrianHG on November 16, 2018, 05:36:57 pm
Licensing. Look at the patents. It's all covered. You will need an energy license and when you don't pay your energy license they will put you in power prison. In power prison there are large hamster wheels erected around the transmission tower which will be used to power it until you have generated your equivalent KWh in servitude. The whole model revolves around this licensing and servitude process. The guy is a business mastermind.
I'm sure the Russians and Chinese citizens or even cities, who steal his generated power will bow down to their patents and come to the US to be placed in prison for their crime.
Title: Re: Bullshit: Texzon Wireless Power
Post by: bd139 on November 16, 2018, 05:39:35 pm
Also, isn't it stupid to have a power generating plant on one side of earth, receive fuel from the other side of the planet just to send electricity back to that side of the planet?  Isn't it cheaper just to use the fuel on the other side of the planet and generate the power there?

Even better: how about if we come up with a new technology that allows you to carry the fuel with you? Then you won't have to precariously balance on the roof of your office with your phone to get power, just 4G reception.
Title: Re: Bullshit: Texzon Wireless Power
Post by: BrianHG on November 16, 2018, 05:40:23 pm
I'm also sure that if someone makes a receiver and transmitter to send the power back out of phase will never destroy the master transmitter with so many gigawatts being transmitted.

Someone should go on Texzon site and ask if the power being sent is 'Encrypted' so it cannot be blocked to interfered with just to see what the yoyo's have to say.  I bet we would have just created a new talking point and they'll have a new 'Encryption Power transmitting' patent within a week.
Title: Re: Bullshit: Texzon Wireless Power
Post by: bd139 on November 16, 2018, 05:55:25 pm
Well everything you try and couple into free space needs impedance matching otherwise you generate quite a bit of a standing wave. I'm wondering if just affecting the SWR of such a transmitter would do the job. Enough to throw back 25% of power would need 250,000kw of load absorbing ability at 1GW out in the transmitter. Bear in mind we have no transmitters that an kick that out now other than for a couple of picoseconds. That's a fuck bucket of energy. All it takes is some enterprising sod with a plane full of tinfoil hats to air drop them all into the near field.

Genuinely go and look at the patents for it. They have already thought of that licensing situation hence my facetious outlook on that :)

I find the whole thing utterly interesting as it's completely retarded at so many levels even if by some galactic conicidence it did work on a small scale.
Title: Re: Bullshit: Texzon Wireless Power
Post by: Cyberdragon on November 17, 2018, 05:27:19 am
Don't worry, all of these problems will be solved with the all new Super Xenopsycotronic Blockchain IOT Master Control they call the "Think Tank". The the Think Tank will not only encrypt and protect the energy, it will direct it to exactly where you want it with no deviation.

*intruder finds door labeled Think Tank and sneaks in*
*finds a room full of Hollywood sci-fi machines and a man sitting in a chair wearing an EEG helmet. He is staring intently and pointing at a spot map while making a buzzing noise.*
*intruder startles him and the machinery goes nuts. He turns and points angrily at the intruder, saying nothing but hissing like an angry cat*
*"Are you guys trying to take over the world by making a Tesla death ray with an insane man wired to a chair or is this a prototype?"*
*Inruder is tackled by an army of armed guards and is never seen again*

 ;D (anyone good at comics?)
Title: Re: Bullshit: Texzon Wireless Power
Post by: EllisCo on November 17, 2018, 05:51:45 am
OK.......let's assume that the people behind Viziv are delusional or on drugs. Let's assume that the science is all wet, and that the method of distribution won't work, and that despite their patents for signal receivers, everybody would just get free electric. If all that is true, why are they doing this? They haven't raised enough in total for ONE person to live comfortably in exile in Costa Rica, much less to pay for the land, pay for the tower, and keep a growing staff on salary. My point is, they haven't raised enough money for Viziv to be a worthy scam. Enron and Bernie Madoff scammed hundreds of millions. Viziv is peanuts. Why do it, only to wind up destroying your credibility and professional reputations? I don't get it. That they are not seeking additional investors (or even open to listening to proposals) is puzzling. Not much of a Ponzi scheme, in my book.

As for the "free power" aspect, what keeps everyone from getting free Sirius satellite radio service, or cellular phone service? I don't think free power is what Viziv has in mind. I think they DO plan to bypass the line transmission charges consumers now pay to Oncor here in Texas. If they can buy electricity wholesale for 3-4 cents a KW hour, and sell it (wireless distribution) for 10 cents, they would have a solid enterprise. I believe that they bought their 300 acre site to build future power generating plants next to their tower in Milford. The site is in close proximity to natural gas transmission lines.

At any rate, within a year, we should know who was right about the technology.  If it DOESN'T work, they have wasted a lot of time, effort, and money for nothing. 

 
Title: Re: Bullshit: Texzon Wireless Power
Post by: ebastler on November 17, 2018, 05:53:25 am
*intruder finds door labeled Think Tank and sneaks in*
*finds a room full of Hollywood sci-fi machines and a man sitting in a chair wearing an EEG helmet. He is staring intently and pointing at a spot map while making a buzzing noise.*
*intruder startles him and the machinery goes nuts. He turns and points angrily at the intruder, saying nothing but hissing like an angry cat*
*"Are you guys trying to take over the world by making a Tesla death ray with an insane man wired to a chair or is this a prototype?"*
*Inruder is tackled by an army of armed guards and is never seen again*

Aww, that's an anti-climax...  I was fully expecting the intruder to be vaporized by a beam of wireless power, magically focused on him by the evil man with the thinking cap...   8)
Title: Re: Bullshit: Texzon Wireless Power
Post by: ebastler on November 17, 2018, 06:39:32 am
If all that is true, why are they doing this?

The most likely explanation I can come up with is that this is a pet/hobby project for a few retired folks:
http://vizivtechnologies.com/about-us/ (http://vizivtechnologies.com/about-us/)

There is at least some intriguing science history behind it:
http://vizivtechnologies.com/wp-content/uploads/2016/09/TEXZON_Baylor_Corum16.pdf (http://vizivtechnologies.com/wp-content/uploads/2016/09/TEXZON_Baylor_Corum16.pdf)

That paper is actually well-written (by two further retirees), and describes an interesting dispute around propagation modes for electromagnetic surface waves, which dispute ranged from 1909 into the 2000s. I won't claim to have followed the math in the paper, but it seems to follow the standard approaches taught during my physics curriculum, too long ago.

Does this mean that there is mode of long-range energy transport which can be technologically exploited? My gut feeling says that the theory is neglecting some major source of losses (absorption or scatter?) on the surface wave propagation, and/or its excitation. The historic experiment done on a lake surface seems rather idealized.
Title: Re: Bullshit: Texzon Wireless Power
Post by: StillTrying on November 17, 2018, 04:32:14 pm

Bonkers. ^-^
Title: Re: Bullshit: Texzon Wireless Power
Post by: Cyberdragon on November 17, 2018, 04:39:14 pm
*intruder finds door labeled Think Tank and sneaks in*
*finds a room full of Hollywood sci-fi machines and a man sitting in a chair wearing an EEG helmet. He is staring intently and pointing at a spot map while making a buzzing noise.*
*intruder startles him and the machinery goes nuts. He turns and points angrily at the intruder, saying nothing but hissing like an angry cat*
*"Are you guys trying to take over the world by making a Tesla death ray with an insane man wired to a chair or is this a prototype?"*
*Inruder is tackled by an army of armed guards and is never seen again*

Aww, that's an anti-climax...  I was fully expecting the intruder to be vaporized by a beam of wireless power, magically focused on him by the evil man with the thinking cap...   8)

That's why others write comics and I don't. XD
Title: Re: Bullshit: Texzon Wireless Power
Post by: EllisCo on November 17, 2018, 05:49:16 pm
A totally reasonable perspective. They may well have overlooked some major signal losses. Seems strange that they wouldn't have done some small scale tests BEFORE they bought 300 acres and built a full-scale tower. Wouldn't it have made more sense to do some experiments in somebody's garage, and have successive tests of progressive lengths? As it is now, they supposedly have 30 receivers set up around the globe to assess signal strength/losses for the current FCC licensed test. It's going to be pretty funny if they come back and say, "Sorry....there are losses we didn't account for. It won't work".

One nagging question that I keep asking is about the people involved in Viziv.....at the top are two retired Air Force generals. I have to wonder why they just happened to wind up at an "energy" company. Is there some "death ray" aspect to this, as a potential weapons system (or missile/AA defense)? Is private investment in the company just a smokescreen for a "black-ops"/off-budget expenditure by the U.S. Department Of Defense? If so, why publish papers, set up a Website, and invite scrutiny? Why partner with Baylor University? There are a lot more questions than answers, about the technology, and Viziv's ultimate objective. Hopefully, they have some grand plan that will all come together. Otherwise, we can expect them all to be carted off to the loony bin. 
Title: Re: Bullshit: Texzon Wireless Power
Post by: Johnny10 on November 17, 2018, 05:54:13 pm
I would like to see them run a 3-phase 25HP motor lifting a 2000 lb. load 10 ft. just 1/2mile from the from their tower.
With comparable cost and efficiency to the local Power Company.
Shouldn't be very complicated from your described views of their abilities.

The General was managing a Health Care Plan.
Title: Re: Bullshit: Texzon Wireless Power
Post by: Cyberdragon on November 17, 2018, 08:05:04 pm
I want to see their oscillator detonate spectacularly from trying to break the laws of physics. >:D :popcorn:
Title: Re: Bullshit: Texzon Wireless Power
Post by: MrMobodies on November 17, 2018, 11:43:18 pm
Quote
Clean, safe and reliable, wireless power will bring valuable resources to parts of the world that don’t have consistent access to necessities like potable water and life saving medical treatment.

So they will use that instead of the solar panel to power the dehumidifier.
Title: Re: Bullshit: Texzon Wireless Power
Post by: bd139 on November 18, 2018, 01:41:48 pm
I would like to see them run a 3-phase 25HP motor lifting a 2000 lb. load 10 ft. just 1/2mile from the from their tower.
With comparable cost and efficiency to the local Power Company.
Shouldn't be a very complicated from your described views of their abilities.

The General was managing a Health Care Plan.

If that happens I will insert the aforementioned 2000lb load into my anus.

As for generals, read “the men who stare at goats”.  :palm:
Title: Re: Bullshit: Texzon Wireless Power
Post by: wbeaty on November 20, 2018, 02:59:19 am
Seems strange that they wouldn't have done some small scale tests BEFORE they bought 300 acres and built a full-scale tower. Wouldn't it have made more sense to do some experiments in somebody's garage

The Corums have been working on this for decades, with garage-experiment papers as early as the mid 80s, but finally performed longer-range testing in 2016 at Seneca Lake (I thought you read their paper?)  Then, they published about their 2017 testing at 1.82MHz using a 1/30th-lambda tower, with progressive tests across distances 1, 2.5, 5, 8, 10, and 20 miles (short wood tower shown in their pdf physics paper, and their results plotted, perhaps you read a different paper?)

2016
https://ieeexplore.ieee.org/document/7577497 (https://ieeexplore.ieee.org/document/7577497)

conference paper, w/photos
http://vizivtechnologies.com/wp-content/uploads/2016/09/TEXZON_Baylor_Corum16.pdf (http://vizivtechnologies.com/wp-content/uploads/2016/09/TEXZON_Baylor_Corum16.pdf) 

and have successive tests of progressive lengths? As it is now, they supposedly have 30 receivers set up around the globe to assess signal strength/losses for the current FCC licensed test. It's going to be pretty funny if they come back and say, "Sorry....there are losses we didn't account for. It won't work".

It worked at Seneca Lake, then worked on land as predicted up to twenty miles, using HF band.  Note that their experimental results give a graph which lays almost perfectly atop the theory graph.   But any really interesting results will come from the future VLF testing, where the propagation-path is many orders less lossy.

For example, for known, conventional-RF behavior down at 100KHz the signal is still significant after passing once around the Earth (attenuated by something like ?5dB?)  And down below 20KHz, the signal after a single pass around the Earth is known to come back at 95%, giving a cavity-Q of ~10.  And, this low loss is even the conventional accepted value ...which Tesla-believers insist is a mistake caused by instrument artifacts.   Supposedly N. Tesla found cavity-Q factors up in the hundreds/thousands.   (Heh, maybe Tesla had accidentally discovered some sort of unusual propagation mode, rather than employing Schumann ionospheric ducting.)

One nagging question that I keep asking is about the people involved in Viziv.....at the top are two retired Air Force generals. I have to wonder why they just happened to wind up at an "energy" company. Is there some "death ray" aspect to this, as a potential weapons system (or missile/AA defense)?

Good question. 

I suspect that Air Force people might approach Corum if they had access to (or at least heard about) the 1940s weapons work spawned by the Nikola Tesla papers.  In one of the old Tesla biographies the author found that one AFB had a complete set of the Tesla docs in their classified library, and that they'd built and tested Tesla's infamous metal-particles "death ray."  (Didn't say whether they got it working!)  If the same papers contained all the info about building these transmitters, then Texzon may be an unofficial "tech transfer" effort, to get some old disused military tech out into public use.   In the case of Dr. Corum, there would be no need to expose classified docs, since Corum had already analyzed Tesla's devices back in the late 1980s, from first principles using Maxwell eqns.   No need for illegal military leaks.

Why partner with Baylor University?

Because Corum is basically the world's foremost Tesla expert in academia.  (I mean in phys/eng, not counting historians with no tech training.)  And Corum is currently at Baylor.

There are a lot more questions than answers, about the technology, and Viziv's ultimate objective. Hopefully, they have some grand plan that will all come together. Otherwise, we can expect them all to be carted off to the loony bin.

Probably their plan is the same as it has been for forty years:  Look at Tesla's broadcast-power claims using actual physics, find that they're real after all, so get a bit of funding and mount some kilometer-scale experiments to vindicate Tesla empirical numbers.  Then if it still works in practice as the physics shows in theory, patent and make moolah.

The real question is, why didn't anyone do this a hundred years ago?   Simple: to do that, physicists would have had to take Tesla seriously, and take a level-headed look into the math behind the devices.  Without sneering first.   Even today, most would rather die.  (Just look at the kinds of responses here.  Any contact with N. Tesla will ruin your reputation as a scientist.)    The very first one to actually do this was James Corum in 1986.  Note that he's an engineering prof, not a physicist.  And then, he couldn't get his papers into any journal.  (They're in conference proceedings, which as everyone knows, don't count!  :) )
Title: Re: Bullshit: Texzon Wireless Power
Post by: StillTrying on November 20, 2018, 12:51:47 pm
Just to play along. :)

When the tower is transmitting its MegaWatts in all directions, can it even detect if there's someone hundreds of miles away trying to light a 20W bulb.
Title: Re: Bullshit: Texzon Wireless Power
Post by: Cyberdragon on November 20, 2018, 05:16:05 pm
Just to play along. :)

When the tower is transmitting its MegaWatts in all directions, can it even detect if there's someone hundreds of miles away trying to light a 20W bulb.

The man in the Think Tank is psychic, he knows all with his ESP. ;D
Title: Re: Bullshit: Texzon Wireless Power
Post by: SiliconWizard on November 20, 2018, 05:45:07 pm
Also, would it be prone to a man-in-the-middle attack?
 :-DD
Title: Re: Bullshit: Texzon Wireless Power
Post by: StillTrying on November 20, 2018, 09:15:17 pm
If they decided to encrypt the Electro Magical Waves with blockchain, that might prevent people using pots and pans to steal the leccy, but perhaps more importantly get them about another 2 years of funding.

Will the Eiffel and Blackpool towers have to be demolished because they're creating a short circuit.
 :horse:
Title: Re: Bullshit: Texzon Wireless Power
Post by: wbeaty on November 21, 2018, 12:09:01 am
Also, would it be prone to a man-in-the-middle attack?
 :-DD

Well, they could just use Nikola Tesla's original plan.

Those whose habit is to actually pick up a book may already know that this "transmitting power for free" was garbage, at least in part. Tesla planned on using his covert broadcasting technique to prevent power-theft.  He talked about it all the time, calling it "Method of Individuation."   Later in his famous 1916 legal deposition he gave details of an odd RF technique which was probably his secret trick:  multiple resonators, similar to what we'd today call molecular IR spectra, or line-splitting resonance of coupled oscillators.  Really cool stuff, from a physics/math perspective.  I wouldn't be surprised if there's some old PhD dissertation about it somewhere.   It's a distant relation to FM, but occurring naturally (not needing an active modulator.)  It involves normal radio but using several tuning knobs.  It's also a distant relation to broadband FHSS or "wifi."

So yes, Tesla was planning on broadcasting "encrypted" power, but the word wasn't invented yet, so he called it "Wave-complex."  During his Wardenclyffe era hs was trying to sell it to the military as uncrackable secure comms.    He also called it "Static Eliminator," and had photos of these weird hollow disk devices full of circuitry.

In one interview Tesla mused about getting a phone order from an Australian factory for a certain energy quantity.  The customer is billed, the receiver-codes are given, and then they couple-in to the nearfield standing wave to run their machinery.  In that 1916 legal deposition Tesla said that a 2-knob receiver was just barely crack-able, but a 4-knob was not, and that he'd experimented with as many as 20-knob receivers, which would be the same as a combination lock with a 20-digit code.

PS I've never encountered any of this stuff online anywhere.  In other words, you's gonna hafta READ A BOOK. (https://tinyurl.com/handythetick)   (The Tick reference)

EDIT:  Oo oo, they've managed to sell it to Bahrain (https://tinyurl.com/texzonupower), while mentioning frequency hopping encryption
Title: Re: Bullshit: Texzon Wireless Power
Post by: bd139 on November 21, 2018, 12:36:57 am
This was before advances in computation and cryptography understanding. And physics. Not only that Tesla liked to oversell as did people fascinated with the guy. He was like a kickstarter now. Have an idea, tell everyone about it, take their money and then not deliver.

As they say, shit or get off the pot. I see lots of pots and lots of people sitting and have done for over 30 years but I haven’t seen one shit.
Title: Re: Bullshit: Texzon Wireless Power
Post by: Cyberdragon on November 21, 2018, 05:33:52 am
This was before advances in computation and cryptography understanding. And physics. Not only that Tesla liked to oversell as did people fascinated with the guy. He was like a kickstarter now. Have an idea, tell everyone about it, take their money and then not deliver.

As they say, shit or get off the pot. I see lots of pots and lots of people sitting and have done for over 30 years but I haven’t seen one shit.

Tesla didn't just want money, in fact he frequently turned down offers to buy his patents and whatnot. He was just a nuts visionary scientest. The man was definately a savant, but that made him think he knew everything so he had these rediculous grand plans. In reality, he had far from our full modern understanding of physics, so they went bust. :-- Like his brush lamp super radio detector...which became the modern plasma globe desk toy (pointless bin).
Title: Re: Bullshit: Texzon Wireless Power
Post by: bd139 on November 21, 2018, 07:45:51 am
Oh he wanted money alright. Granted this was to invest and build ideas however. He was so irresponsible with it that he ended up living the last years of his life in a hotel with an impedance bridge as security after telling the hotel owner it was a death ray.
Title: Re: Bullshit: Texzon Wireless Power
Post by: wbeaty on November 22, 2018, 12:41:28 am
Oh he wanted money alright. Granted this was to invest and build ideas however. He was so irresponsible with it that he ended up living the last years of his life in a hotel with an impedance bridge as security after telling the hotel owner it was a death ray.


Not really irresponsible.  Just blatantly dishonest. And done while other investors watched.

Tesla: I need a $million to develop worldwide radio.

John Jacob Astor: Forget it.  What about those fluorescent bulbs you've been going on about?

Tesla:  No, the FUTURE is going to be radioeverything, also Televisor plates in every home.

JJ Astor: Are you sure you don't want to start a light-bulb company, and eat Edison's lunch?

Tesla: we could even power dirigible-airship engines using radio. We know that blimps go much faster than airplanes, after all.

Astor: Major investors would jump on any fluorescent-tubes factory project.

Tesla:  OK.  I'll start a fluorescent bulbs factory.

JJ Astor contributes millions, in today's dollars

Tesla uses it to build a giant radio laboratory, out where nobody can see.

JJ Astor cuts Tesla off after the first payment.

Then suddenly, Astor won't answer Tesla's letters.  Then, no other rich investors will touch Tesla anymore. 

A great mystery!  Tesla never figured out what happened.   Then, he contracted with JP Morgan to build a radio station to cover a nearby Yacht race.  It was 300ft tall, made of railroad ties, with a huge multi-story brick building to house the power supply.   It could cover yacht races thousands of miles away!  And also power their engines!

JP Morgan stopped answering Tesla's letters too.

---

Now here's some actual footage of Tesla's death ray.  Honest!


https://youtu.be/EdD3MRvBvc4


Title: Re: Bullshit: Texzon Wireless Power
Post by: Buriedcode on November 22, 2018, 01:29:35 am
I have no idea if this thread is mocking Tesla zealots, or siding with them?  Never understood the fascination with the man either, its amazing how many myths there are about him, even the Oatmeal writer perpetuates a lot of them.
Title: Re: Bullshit: Texzon Wireless Power
Post by: bd139 on November 22, 2018, 08:01:42 am
It’s easy to sell hope and hype.

Jesus started it with the old “come to my kickstarter launch and I’ll show you how to turn water into wine”. Dick.
Title: Re: Bullshit: Texzon Wireless Power
Post by: wbeaty on November 22, 2018, 03:04:34 pm
I have no idea if this thread is mocking Tesla zealots, or siding with them?

The mindless zealots are zeloting, and the mindless scoffers are mocking.   But many of us here are ignoring both.

It's like fans of RP Feynman.   Feynman really did do Nobel-worthy physics.    He also really did hit on Pan Am stewardesses, and get beaten up in dive bars in Buffalo.  We applaud!   "Tesla and the Bellboy" appears a quite-accurate description of N. Tesla in his late 1930s pigeon-fancier period.  It was made in the actual Hotel New Yorker!

Never understood the fascination with the man either, its amazing how many myths there are about him, even the Oatmeal writer perpetuates a lot of them.

First encounter Tesla as a kid.  Build a flyback-transformer version and light up some flourescents!  Dearly wish you could afford some 810 tubes and plate transformers on your fifty-cents allowance.  Then later, discover that G. Marconi really did steal Tesla's fundamental breakthrough.   Marconi Inc. never sold his own patented transmitters and receivers, he only sold Tesla Coils, after renaming them as "Spark transmitters."   In radio history, the entire Morse code era was based on Tesla coils, see article in 73 magazine (https://teslauniverse.com/nikola-tesla/articles/tesla-inventor-radio-and-modern-day-ac).  Or as Marconi called them, "Oscillation Transformers. (https://www.google.com/search?q=oscillation+transformer+spark&num=100&source=lnms&tbm=isch&sa=X)"  Tesla berated Marconi for the use of 100KHz broadcast freq, when his broadcast-power only works at well below 20KHz.  Then Marconi moved even higher, but still using electrically-short antennas.  Really, we have Nikola Tesla to thank for amateur radio shortwave, since Marconi was stealing Tesla's ground/VLF philosophy, and the high frequencies were obviously useless garbage.  Give them all to the amateur community, while the pros stay well below 500KHz.   (Heh, too bad the hams couldn't keep outsiders from discovering that the waves shorter than 300 meters were actually useful.)

As for Tesla fanboys, it's not impossible to avoid the myths.  Just track down Tesla's actual writings and interviews, while ignoring all the words put in his mouth by the mindless fans and hoards of skeptics.  Also it helps if you're a skeptic yourself, and recognize a huge fallacy when you see it.  In particular, the well-poisoning and straw-man are coming fast and thick here; being used to pseudo-debunk Tesla.  Heh, where Tesla is concerned, we even have a new type of fallacy: "ad hominem directed at claims!"  Don't try to expose actual flaws, if instead it's much easier to badmouth the claims; smearing them with negative emotional descriptions.  Our goal must be to avoid any clear-headed analysis, if instead we only want to persuade.

:)

Here's an excellent little article which shows the central theme of scientific criticism:  Clinical approach to debate (http://legacy.earlham.edu/~peters/courses/inflogic/clinical.htm)
Title: Re: Bullshit: Texzon Wireless Power
Post by: zucca on November 26, 2018, 04:11:06 pm
Jesus...

bd139 I am a big fan of you that's why I did not report your post. Can you please leave Jesus in peace? It's not that hard. Many thanks in advance.
Title: Re: Bullshit: Texzon Wireless Power
Post by: bd139 on November 26, 2018, 04:59:23 pm
It was a facetious jab at the irrelevance of sales pitches rather than Jesus. No offence intended. My apologies.
Title: Re: Bullshit: Texzon Wireless Power
Post by: ddmeltzer8 on December 11, 2018, 06:45:03 pm
Imagine it would work: How are they going to prevent you, me and everyone else using the energy without paying?
F1 only takes me to the Brave help center!Y bastard!!!Y owe me a continuation.
Title: Re: Bullshit: Texzon Wireless Power
Post by: JoC on January 24, 2019, 09:53:01 am
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wFiW2lqdnlM (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wFiW2lqdnlM)

Gen. Richard Devereaux, Executive Vice President, Viziv Technologies, explaining the technology.
Title: Re: Bullshit: Texzon Wireless Power
Post by: ddmeltzer8 on January 24, 2019, 06:06:23 pm
Hi.Y think its possible?
Title: Re: Bullshit: Texzon Wireless Power
Post by: Cyberdragon on January 25, 2019, 07:45:24 pm
Another promo vid? Really? You poor noob spammer trying to promote a dead dumb idea. Just trying to keep your little scam afloat? :-DD Newsflash - you won't all float down here. Things that violate physics or practicality will be meticulously and scientifically dismantled here (and were in this thread).
Title: Re: Bullshit: Texzon Wireless Power
Post by: bd139 on January 25, 2019, 07:53:07 pm
Indeed. 1 hour of crap. Show it working and show us independent validation it works or to quote our Scottish brethren here in the UK, "get t'eh fuck".



Title: Re: Bullshit: Texzon Wireless Power
Post by: ogden on January 25, 2019, 11:01:07 pm
If it looks like a scam and quacks like a scam, then it probably is a scam. http://alternativeinvestmentcoach.com/investment-scams/ (http://alternativeinvestmentcoach.com/investment-scams/)
Title: Re: Bullshit: Texzon Wireless Power
Post by: SaiSharma on February 02, 2019, 03:39:20 pm
Pl see my response above.
Title: Re: Bullshit: Texzon Wireless Power
Post by: SaiSharma on February 02, 2019, 03:44:04 pm
Hi,
But I was under an impression that ZW's are a real thing?
Are a case of Maxwell's equations with proper boundary conditions?
I do not think the ZW themselves are a problem here. In my research, I found that the earth will disperse the energy in contours and hence the efficiency would be low.
A Metal sheet of limited dimensions, say an aluminium foil (oven foil) would be able to support a ZN power transmission of upto 66%-20% efficiency between a range of 2.7m to 15m.
Title: Re: Bullshit: Texzon Wireless Power
Post by: SaiSharma on February 02, 2019, 03:59:26 pm
I have no idea if this thread is mocking Tesla zealots, or siding with them?

The mindless zealots are zeloting, and the mindless scoffers are mocking.   But many of us here are ignoring both.

It's like fans of RP Feynman.   Feynman really did do Nobel-worthy physics.    He also really did hit on Pan Am stewardesses, and get beaten up in dive bars in Buffalo.  We applaud!   "Tesla and the Bellboy" appears a quite-accurate description of N. Tesla in his late 1930s pigeon-fancier period.  It was made in the actual Hotel New Yorker!

Never understood the fascination with the man either, its amazing how many myths there are about him, even the Oatmeal writer perpetuates a lot of them.
Very well said and actually well articulated my own thoughts.

First encounter Tesla as a kid.  Build a flyback-transformer version and light up some flourescents!  Dearly wish you could afford some 810 tubes and plate transformers on your fifty-cents allowance.  Then later, discover that G. Marconi really did steal Tesla's fundamental breakthrough.   Marconi Inc. never sold his own patented transmitters and receivers, he only sold Tesla Coils, after renaming them as "Spark transmitters."   In radio history, the entire Morse code era was based on Tesla coils, see article in 73 magazine (https://teslauniverse.com/nikola-tesla/articles/tesla-inventor-radio-and-modern-day-ac).  Or as Marconi called them, "Oscillation Transformers. (https://www.google.com/search?q=oscillation+transformer+spark&num=100&source=lnms&tbm=isch&sa=X)"  Tesla berated Marconi for the use of 100KHz broadcast freq, when his broadcast-power only works at well below 20KHz.  Then Marconi moved even higher, but still using electrically-short antennas.  Really, we have Nikola Tesla to thank for amateur radio shortwave, since Marconi was stealing Tesla's ground/VLF philosophy, and the high frequencies were obviously useless garbage.  Give them all to the amateur community, while the pros stay well below 500KHz.   (Heh, too bad the hams couldn't keep outsiders from discovering that the waves shorter than 300 meters were actually useful.)

As for Tesla fanboys, it's not impossible to avoid the myths.  Just track down Tesla's actual writings and interviews, while ignoring all the words put in his mouth by the mindless fans and hoards of skeptics.  Also it helps if you're a skeptic yourself, and recognize a huge fallacy when you see it.  In particular, the well-poisoning and straw-man are coming fast and thick here; being used to pseudo-debunk Tesla.  Heh, where Tesla is concerned, we even have a new type of fallacy: "ad hominem directed at claims!"  Don't try to expose actual flaws, if instead it's much easier to badmouth the claims; smearing them with negative emotional descriptions.  Our goal must be to avoid any clear-headed analysis, if instead we only want to persuade.

:)

Here's an excellent little article which shows the central theme of scientific criticism:  Clinical approach to debate (http://legacy.earlham.edu/~peters/courses/inflogic/clinical.htm)
Title: Re: Bullshit: Texzon Wireless Power
Post by: SaiSharma on February 02, 2019, 04:09:57 pm
Y'know, 'all' these new user accounts, shilling for Texzon?
I have nothing to do with Texzon or Vizviz.
I even emailed guys from Baylor, no response.
Title: Re: Bullshit: Texzon Wireless Power
Post by: ebastler on February 02, 2019, 07:06:43 pm
A Metal sheet of limited dimensions, say an aluminium foil (oven foil) would be able to support a ZN power transmission of upto 66%-20% efficiency between a range of 2.7m to 15m.

A metal sheet of limited dimensions, say an aluminium foil (oven foil), would also be able to support a DC current transmission of upto 66%-20% efficiency between a range of 2.7m to 15m. What's the point?

And what does it tell us about the validity of the concept to transmit waves across the inhomogeneous, much less conducting, corrugated surface of the Earth, over distances many orders of magnitude larger?
Title: Re: Bullshit: Texzon Wireless Power
Post by: Cyberdragon on February 02, 2019, 07:49:20 pm
It's just the grain of truth behind the BS, that's all.
Title: Re: Bullshit: Texzon Wireless Power
Post by: SaiSharma on February 03, 2019, 03:43:45 am
A Metal sheet of limited dimensions, say an aluminium foil (oven foil) would be able to support a ZN power transmission of upto 66%-20% efficiency between a range of 2.7m to 15m.

A metal sheet of limited dimensions, say an aluminium foil (oven foil), would also be able to support a DC current transmission of upto 66%-20% efficiency between a range of 2.7m to 15m. What's the point?

And what does it tell us about the validity of the concept to transmit waves across the inhomogeneous, much less conducting, corrugated surface of the Earth, over distances many orders of magnitude larger?
Interesting. But the point here is that coupled WPT systems do not support multi receiver power up with the same efficiency as they do for single receiver.
1. The peak splitting happens
2. Misalignment of Tx and Rx takes a massive toll
3. Partial metal shields such as ships, shipping containers, industrial pipelines etc hinder EM based Power transfer due to Faraday shielding or EM shielding effect.
So, to counter the above issues, one simple way is to get rid of "coupled" and "radiation" element in the  transmission, altogether. Therefore, a wave based solution is desirable.

As far as validity is concerned,
1. The ZW equi-phases sink into the lossy dielectric media[1]-[8]. The system I developed shows that property. See the figures attached[in my previous responses], where an ANSYS HFSS simulation of the same shows this property.
2. The ZW specifically exhibits evanescent field decay property [1]-[9].
3. The slow attenuation rate of Ez(Y) component of the field[1]-[8].
If the said company's system exhibits all the above properties, then it is indeed a ZW system, else, it is at the best a Single Wire Power Transfer system.
DC Transmission:

The point here is, you can always use a cable to transmit power, but then, WPT was all about reducing the wire involved. If one looks at Tesla's earliest patent of 1900, he wasn't referring to a "wireless" but a "less-wire" system and hence the concept of single wire transmission came up. e.g. Goubau line.
The entire point of research with proper scientific rigor is to increase the range of transmission, to see an advantage over DC. One key point is to go below 1MHz range to increase the distance. Unfortunately, the half-wave resonator system would become large.  Earth is an  inhomogeneous media, however at lower frequencies is acts as a conductor a fact well noted by Schelkunoff, Barlow and Sarkar et.al[1]-[3].
I donot want to conclude anything specific here, but, am open to do a research on this. There might be a caveat somewhere, which needs to be explored.

Corrugated Surface
They are known to support Surface waves, ZW may be not that much. But, then ZW, Surface waves and Surface Plasmons are all classified in the same category.

PS: I ran out of space at my lab to experiment beyond 15m. Also the largest ship container Hyundai Heavy Industry(HHI)  threw at me was 14.83m, thats the High-Q container we are talking about. The thickest metal they sent me was 80 mm, used for hull at HHI. I built a radio system for voice communication, based on the above concept, which covers multiple decks without the use of a repeater or relay[320 m range, LNG carrier ship and Dolphin semisub oil rig]. This is not possible for a mono-pole motorola system, unless a relay or repeater is used.

References

1. S. Schelkunoff, IRE Trans. on Antenna and Propagation 7, 133-139 (1959)
2. T. K. Sarkar, M. N. Abdallah, M. Salazar-Palma and W.M. Dyab, IEEE Antennas
and Propagation Magazine 59, 77-93(2017).
3. H.M. Barlow, and A.L. Cullen, Proceed. of the IEE - Part III: Radio and Comm.
Engineering 100, 329-341 (1953).
4. Zenneck, J. Uber die Fortpflanzung ebener elektromagnetischer Wellen l¨angs einer ¨
ebenen Leiterfl¨ache und ihre Beziehung zur drahtlosen Telegraphie. Ann. d. Phys. 23,
846-866 (1907).
5.  Sommerfeld, A. N. Uber die Ausbreitung der Wellen in der drahtlosen Telegraphie. ¨
Ann. d. Phys. 28, 665-736(1909).
6.  Jangal,F., Bourey, N., Darces, M., Issac, F. & H´elier, M. Observation of Zenneck-Like
Waves over a Metasurface Designed for Launching HF Radar Surface Wave. Hindawi,
International J. of Antennas and Propagation 2016,1 (2016).
7. Jeon,T.I., Zhang, J., & Grischkowsky, D. THz Zenneck surface wave (THz surface
plasmon) propagation on a metal sheet. Appl. Phys. Lett. 86, 161904 (2005).
8. Goubau,G. Surface Waves and Their Application to Transmission Lines. Journal of
Appl. Physics 21, 1119(1950).

9. S.K. Oruganti, O. Kaiyrakhmet and F. Bien, URSI Asia-Pacific Radio Science Conference, 318(2016).

Title: Re: Bullshit: Texzon Wireless Power
Post by: wbeaty on February 05, 2019, 10:21:38 pm

PS: I ran out of space at my lab to experiment beyond 15m.


Increase your conductor lenght by pi(), by using a circular hoop (supported horizontally, with vertical axis.)   Rigid zinc "flashing" those rolls of flexible metal from the carpenter store, or perhaps extreme heavy-gauge foil from online restaurant suppliers ($90 per roll.)   Bonus: this simulates planetary resonance modes but without the un-physical high-Z sharp edge at the terminus.   

I think for worldwide broadcast power, investors would be more impressed by a "round Earth," rather than a long rod or a sheet on a table.    The VLF version of your single-wire transmission is a long narrow Tesla secondary-coil.  Hence, the 1-D model of VLF Earth would be a Tesla secondary-coil bent into a ring: a torus-coil wound on a plastic form.   Then no need for 13.56 or 27.1 MHz, use 200KHz or similar, with dirt-cheap signal generators and instruments.

Y'know, 'all' these new user accounts, shilling for Texzon?
I have nothing to do with Texzon or Vizviz.

I think you're fighting against irrationally-held positions.  With emotional entanglements driving opinions, "the Tesla stuff" must be wrong no matter what, and therefore you must be a company shill without question.  No other explanation can be tolerated.   In that case, no evidence you present, and no argument you make can even slightly shift the irrational disbelief.   See the bead-on-wire analogy from Encyclopedia of Ignorance, RA Lyttelton 1977. (http://amasci.com/freenrg/bead.html)  "Fallen-bead" minds cannot respond to evidence; they've gone over the nonlinear cliff and can never step back.

Imagine the Wright Brothers in 1905, mixed in with a large community of crackpot flying-machine inventors and scam artists.    If an investor wanted to put money into in flying machine R&D, they'd waste it on flapping leather bat-wings project with wood-buring steam engine.   (The Wright Brothers were smart, and gave up early.  They funded everything themselves.)  Tesla, the Wrights, and also 1930s Caltech rocket engines, which had to be called "jets," because otherwise everyone would sneer at Caltech people wanting to built flash-gordon pulp-SciFi spaceships and fly to Uranus.  Just like JPL, "jet" propulsion labs never worked on jets, it's founders were rocket men, but the in 1930s the word "Rocket" was nearly as taboo as bigfoot or little green mars-men.  "JATO" units could not be called rocket-assisted takeoff, or the military would just laugh, and turn away.  (See? Caltech people were actually smart!)  Same deal here.  Irrational disbelief, but triggered by the word "Tesla," rather than "rocket," or "flying machine."

At least you're not heavily into Aliester Crowley magical spells, like certain Caltech rocket designers were!
Title: Re: Bullshit: Texzon Wireless Power
Post by: bd139 on February 05, 2019, 10:45:30 pm
From the perspective of rationality we don’t hold certain terms as instant discredit. What happens is we acknowledge that even the best of minds does tend to come up with a load of shit sometimes. Many times, hundreds of lives of work have been written off instantly by competing theories and ideas. That’s the march of knowledge. Flogging a dead horse is an obsession of the human race. Each and every development should be treated with the most critical of thinking. Look at what happens to “kirchoff is for the birds”

But fundamentally, extraordinary claims require extraordinary evidence. And there is currently none.

And by evidence we expect to see independently reproducible evidence. One thing that the crackpots tend to miss.

Anyone can write a patent and a paper and build a mechanical Turk and solicit funding for it. My entire native industry, software, is based on selling an idea which may not work. Science needs to be held to a higher standard.
Title: Re: Bullshit: Texzon Wireless Power
Post by: Buriedcode on February 06, 2019, 02:02:54 am
Also, most here are engineers.  We deal with practical ideas and technologies, rather than new or novel theories that have little potential to benefit our lives.  There is a lot of pseudoscience about - more than ever - and much of it has latched on to Tesla ideas.  But there is also serious research into wireless power, no-one here has claimed otherwise.  The reason for the cynicism is pretty obvious - we have yet to see any prototypes or systems with reasonable efficiency and scalability. 

People posting such ideas on this forum either want something, be it funding, collaboration, recognition, or hero-worship, or are just letting folks know current research.  I'm not sure what kind of response is expected.
Title: Re: Bullshit: Texzon Wireless Power
Post by: SaiSharma on February 06, 2019, 03:48:02 am

PS: I ran out of space at my lab to experiment beyond 15m.



I think for worldwide broadcast power, investors would be more impressed by a "round Earth," rather than a long rod or a sheet on a table.    The VLF version of your single-wire transmission is a long narrow Tesla secondary-coil.  Hence, the 1-D model of VLF Earth would be a Tesla secondary-coil bent into a ring: a torus-coil wound on a plastic form.   Then no need for 13.56 or 27.1 MHz, use 200KHz or similar, with dirt-cheap signal generators and instruments.

Y'know, 'all' these new user accounts, shilling for Texzon?
I have nothing to do with Texzon or Vizviz.

I think you're fighting against irrationally-held positions.  With emotional entanglements driving opinions, "the Tesla stuff" must be wrong no matter what, and therefore you must be a company shill without question.  No other explanation can be tolerated.   In that case, no evidence you present, and no argument you make can even slightly shift the irrational disbelief.   See the bead-on-wire analogy from Encyclopedia of Ignorance, RA Lyttelton 1977. (http://amasci.com/freenrg/bead.html)  "Fallen-bead" minds cannot respond to evidence; they've gone over the nonlinear cliff and can never step back.

Thanks for the reply and the interesting suggestion about the experimental setup.
I think the Tesla cult has done a massive disservice to the man's work. A friend and colleague of mine once went to this Long Island conference. He was perplexed by the Tesla cult, they all claimed Tesla was an Alien and was a commander sent by some reptilian race.
I missed the entertainment due to Visa rejection by the US immigration[ I am from India, but, was a student in Korea, that complicated the scene at immigration]. haha!

I think the use of Earth as a medium to transmit power over long distances will continue to be elusive/unrealizable. There will always be that few factors which will hamper any such realization.
However, limited distances would just be fine. Also, one has to understand that reactive power will be a bummer, when one tries to send power over long distances over earth ground.
In my limited experience, voltage oscillation across the receivers(Rx) shall always be a big challenge. Only way out of it is to facilitate an electrical length across the Rx terminals in the order of quarter to half of Lambda.

I emailed the folks associated with the said company [see attachment]. No response, perhaps they dont want to comment [understandable] or perhaps not.


 
Title: Re: Bullshit: Texzon Wireless Power
Post by: CJay on February 06, 2019, 10:08:54 am

Y'know, 'all' these new user accounts, shilling for Texzon?
I have nothing to do with Texzon or Vizviz.

I think you're fighting against irrationally-held positions.  With emotional entanglements driving opinions, "the Tesla stuff" must be wrong no matter what, and therefore you must be a company shill without question. 

Don't talk rubbish, prove it works and I will happily accept it.

Until then, every thread referencing Zenneck Waves, wireless power transmission soliciting funding and attracting the conspiracy nuts will be regarded, rightly in my opinion, as bullshit.

Nothing I've seen here has shown me anything other than the same, tired, old, crackpot pseudo science and a deep desire to fleece investors.
Title: Re: Bullshit: Texzon Wireless Power
Post by: SaiSharma on February 07, 2019, 04:16:53 am



Don't talk rubbish, prove it works and I will happily accept it.

Until then, every thread referencing Zenneck Waves, wireless power transmission soliciting funding and attracting the conspiracy nuts will be regarded, rightly in my opinion, as bullshit.

Nothing I've seen here has shown me anything other than the same, tired, old, crackpot pseudo science and a deep desire to fleece investors.

I am trying to understand, what kind of evidence shall be convincing?
1. Experimental Data?
2. Simulation Model [Industry standards: CST Microwave, ANSYS HFSS]?
3. Analytical Formalism?
Now, coming to ZN waves,
1. Are you saying that the said company is scamming?
2. Are you saying that my earlier posted results on ZN waves at metal-air interfaces in the thread are a crack nut job as well?
 ;)
Title: Re: Bullshit: Texzon Wireless Power
Post by: bd139 on February 07, 2019, 08:06:24 am
I was clear earlier. Independent reproduction of the experiments by a reputable team of engineers and scientists.

There is so much crackpottery in this space that you have to do this minimally to even look at credibility.
Title: Re: Bullshit: Texzon Wireless Power
Post by: SaiSharma on February 07, 2019, 01:16:20 pm
I was clear earlier. Independent reproduction of the experiments by a reputable team of engineers and scientists.

There is so much crackpottery in this space that you have to do this minimally to even look at credibility.

IEEE, Nature etc. qualifies as a good peer reviewed system according to you?

Title: Re: Bullshit: Texzon Wireless Power
Post by: bd139 on February 07, 2019, 02:38:58 pm
Not necessarily. There’s a lot of trash coming out of there. If CERN, NASA or NPL reproduced it and published experimental data I might have some confidence in the idea.

But that’s not going to happen because this is all monetised heavily for absolute control of the idea rather than loose patent licensing and royalties. The types of people running these projects tend to clam up when someone approaches them about this.
Title: Re: Bullshit: Texzon Wireless Power
Post by: wbeaty on February 07, 2019, 05:25:07 pm
Also, most here are engineers.

As am I.   (Heh, Engineers Allowed Only, since physicists won't touch this stuff even with SOMEBODY ELSES ten foot pole!  ;)  Professional scientists are actually smart, and they clearly see that any contact with N. Tesla will drag down their own reputations, rather than elevating the Tesla stuff.    Note well, the Corums who are behind all of this, the Texzon project, are electrical engineers.

novel theories that have little potential to benefit our lives

So you've already made up your mind, don't bother presenting counterevidence?    Also, I usually find that people attacking "Novel theories" don't have any idea of what those theories actually are.   They've refused to inspect the evidence, having made up their minds based well beforehand.

I'm curious: you haven't read any of the Corums' many engineering papers on this topic right?  Or even their latest one?  With their replication of the General Electric 1927 antenna test which disproved Tesla's claims?   (The Corums even performed it at the original 1927 site in upstate NY!)  [oops, edit, that was 1936.  And by Bell Labs, not GE.]

If not, then why bother to participate in the discussion?  (I don't mean just you.)

Again (and again, and again,) for those who do want to discuss, the recent one is https://ieeexplore.ieee.org/document/7577497. (https://ieeexplore.ieee.org/document/7577497.)    For non-engineers, the non-paywall version is http://web.archive.org/web/20161019214341/www.texzontechnologies.com/wp-content/uploads/2016/09/TEXZON_Baylor_Corum16.pdf (http://web.archive.org/web/20161019214341/www.texzontechnologies.com/wp-content/uploads/2016/09/TEXZON_Baylor_Corum16.pdf)

The reason for the cynicism is pretty obvious - we have yet to see any prototypes or systems with reasonable efficiency and scalability. 

I think a major reason for the cynicism comes from listening to critics who insist that there is no evidence, and there aren't any prototypes.   If we listen to them and belieeeeeve, mah children then why bother even looking?  Reading an obviously crackpot paper from people with no tech training would be just too disgusting.   But in reality there are a bunch of phd-level engineering papers from the 80s and 90s, plus a recent 2014 replication of the antenna field-test which supposedly settled the 1926 controversy, and disproved Tesla (by disproving Zenneck.)   [edit oops, that was 1936, by Bell Labs.]  Heh, they disproved the disproof in 2014.  The Corum's disproof is the entire reason for the giant plastic tower in Texas.   Those who refuse to read unusual tech papers would never know this, and wouldn't understand why anybody sane would want to discuss such a disgusting crackpot topic.


People posting such ideas on this forum either want something, be it funding, collaboration, recognition, or hero-worship, or are just letting folks know current research.  I'm not sure what kind of response is expected.

Or, we want to actually discuss the current research posted here (the Corum bros. new field test, the $100M project to build a pilot plant,) preferably without all the ad hominem coming from multiple eevblog members.  We also want to make you one of us, one of ussss.  Begin to take N. Tesla seriously.   So then all your friends turn against you, and you develop teh Crazy Eyes!  Start playing with kilowatt RF amplifiers in your basement!  And also, we want to see inside that darned Milford TX tower (giant VLF antenna made of plastic girders!   You watched their video, right?  The one with the entire slideshow of the interior?)   [edit, I pasted some stills here: http://amasci.com/graphics/st/ (http://amasci.com/graphics/st/) ]

If you have no interest in high-power VLF global-wireless stuff, or tests of exotic bizarre antennas, or the century-old Tesla controversy regarding just that  ...then it's understandable that you wouldn't participate here, or have any need to track down the engineering papers or the field-test data.  That's why it's in Dodgy section, where nobody sane need ever look.

But with the "skeptics," they have no excuse.  Decision prior to inspection, outright refusal to inspect evidence, plus a stream of logical fallacies, ad hominem being the least of them.

"There is a principle which is a bar against all information, which cannot fail to keep a man in everlasting ignorance-- that principle is contempt prior to investigation." - H. Spencer

PS That Texzon tower slideshow on youtube is cool, just ignore the lecture and skip ahead to the good part like this:   https://youtube.com/watch?v=wFiW2lqdnlM&t=654 (https://youtube.com/watch?v=wFiW2lqdnlM&t=654)
Title: Re: Bullshit: Texzon Wireless Power
Post by: bd139 on February 07, 2019, 06:01:17 pm
What about my request for published experimental data and reproduction via a national level agency or laboratory? That’s all I demand.

Extraordinary ideas require extraordinary proof.

Or in layman’s terms: shit or get off the pot.

A side note: one of the ridiculous things about this idea is the fact it doesn’t actually have a viable commercial benefit even if it does work. Every other alternative is better on paper even under ideal conditions. The compromises are pretty poor. Even burning dead dinosaurs is commercially more viable.

Edit: incidentally Tesla did some excellent work but every idea should be treated critically or we end up with homeopathy, religion and Brazilian butt surgery.
Title: Re: Bullshit: Texzon Wireless Power
Post by: ogden on February 07, 2019, 07:06:57 pm
The reason for the cynicism is pretty obvious - we have yet to see any prototypes or systems with reasonable efficiency and scalability. 

I think a major reason for the cynicism is in listening to critics who insist that there is no evidence, and there aren't any prototypes.

Sure! Working prototype is key to success for inventor. Where's small scale prototype like 10W bulb at 10m distance? With efficiency numbers shown? Those field strength measurements in paper you referred to, shows > 30dB loss at 1km distance.  W/o doubt I am cynic here because "wireless energy transfer" network having 99.9% losses is very ineffective to say it politely.
Title: Re: Bullshit: Texzon Wireless Power
Post by: bd139 on February 07, 2019, 07:21:47 pm
At that loss, I'm going to start tying 18650s to pigeons and issuing people with nets.
Title: Re: Bullshit: Texzon Wireless Power
Post by: ebastler on February 07, 2019, 08:08:23 pm
Those field strength measurements in paper you referred to, shows > 30dB loss at 1km distance.  W/o doubt I am cynic here because "wireless energy transfer" network having 99.9% losses is very ineffective to say it politely.

It‘s not only wireless, but also nearly energy-less. Success on all fronts!  ;-)
Title: Re: Bullshit: Texzon Wireless Power
Post by: SaiSharma on February 08, 2019, 12:54:34 pm
Not necessarily. There’s a lot of trash coming out of there. If CERN, NASA or NPL reproduced it and published experimental data I might have some confidence in the idea.

But that’s not going to happen because this is all monetised heavily for absolute control of the idea rather than loose patent licensing and royalties. The types of people running these projects tend to clam up when someone approaches them about this.
I agree that a lot of crap is coming out from them.
I also agree that an extra ordinary theory needs an extraordinary proof.
However, as far as I know, Zenneck wave's physical existence has been under controversy from a long time(almost a century).

 I shared my data with a lab at University at Buffalo NY. They have confirmed my results, infact we found a new way to improve them as well.

Also, I am not alien to controversies, I literally fought 4 years to solve the riddle and suffice the critics. 

I repeat, the said company's technology must confirm the following three important physical phenomena in order to qualify as a Zenneck wave:
1. The equi-phases of the E-field must sink into a lossy dielectric.
2. They must exhibit an evanescent field decay property away from the interface (earth-air).
3. Slow attenuation rate in the transverse direction of the interface.
Else, its at the best a single wire transmission system just like the Goubou line.
Title: Re: Bullshit: Texzon Wireless Power
Post by: ogden on February 08, 2019, 03:50:55 pm
I shared my data with a lab at University at Buffalo NY. They have confirmed my results, infact we found a new way to improve them as well.

Where is peer review (document)?

Quote
I repeat, the said company's technology must confirm the following three important physical phenomena in order to qualify as a Zenneck wave:

If Zenneck wave proven to work as expected - then what? I would love to see how it can beat existing wire-based power grid. Is there any paper demonstrating feasibility of Zenneck wave to power let's say, small town? Oh, wait... in the end it will be wireless power for open field IoT sensors, for applications where huge power loss (>99.9%) is not an issue. We already got wireless IoT power for indoors: uBeam.
Title: Re: Bullshit: Texzon Wireless Power
Post by: SaiSharma on February 10, 2019, 05:18:14 am
I shared my data with a lab at University at Buffalo NY. They have confirmed my results, infact we found a new way to improve them as well.

Where is peer review (document)?

Quote
I repeat, the said company's technology must confirm the following three important physical phenomena in order to qualify as a Zenneck wave:

If Zenneck wave proven to work as expected - then what? I would love to see how it can beat existing wire-based power grid. Is there any paper demonstrating feasibility of Zenneck wave to power let's say, small town? Oh, wait... in the end it will be wireless power for open field IoT sensors, for applications where huge power loss (>99.9%) is not an issue. We already got wireless IoT power for indoors: uBeam.

It shall take a month's time for all the reviews to be complete and then only I can share the outcome. In my earlier post, I shared some results , you can check them out.
 In the meanwhile I am waiting for ArXiv to announce my submission.
I am skeptical that it would ever replace wireline system completely.
It can replace some wirelines aboard the marine vessels, space-payloads, IoT device charging- home and industry.
The issue of long distance power transfer can only be solved using a Laser based Power transfer system or Single-wire transmission(again limited).
Title: Re: Bullshit: Texzon Wireless Power
Post by: ogden on February 10, 2019, 09:12:48 am
It shall take a month's time for all the reviews to be complete and then only I can share the outcome. In my earlier post, I shared some results , you can check them out.

So you admit that you don't have signed peer review. As simple as that.

Quote
In the meanwhile I am waiting for ArXiv to announce my submission.

Come on. Arxiv is just library for scientists. Papers there are not peer-reviewed but just moderated by volunteers.

Quote
I am skeptical that it would ever replace wireline system completely.

Here we go. ZW expert do not agree to "Texzon Viziv Wireless Power" claims: "Power the planet and Bring Light to the World".

Quote
It can replace some wirelines aboard the marine vessels, space-payloads, IoT device charging- home and industry.

You just demonstrate why many are cynical skeptics - because of nonsense claims like yours. In space they use silver-plated conductors to get impedance of power wires down but you suggest to use lossy Zenneck Wave? :palm:

Quote
The issue of long distance power transfer can only be solved using a Laser based Power transfer system or Single-wire transmission(again limited).

Laser based power transfer to replace wires? - Again nonsense.
Title: Re: Bullshit: Texzon Wireless Power
Post by: SaiSharma on February 11, 2019, 03:37:33 pm
It shall take a month's time for all the reviews to be complete and then only I can share the outcome. In my earlier post, I shared some results , you can check them out.

So you admit that you don't have signed peer review. As simple as that.

Quote
In the meanwhile I am waiting for ArXiv to announce my submission.

Come on. Arxiv is just library for scientists. Papers there are not peer-reviewed but just moderated by volunteers.

Quote
I am skeptical that it would ever replace wireline system completely.

Here we go. ZW expert do not agree to "Texzon Viziv Wireless Power" claims: "Power the planet and Bring Light to the World".

Quote
It can replace some wirelines aboard the marine vessels, space-payloads, IoT device charging- home and industry.

You just demonstrate why many are cynical skeptics - because of nonsense claims like yours. In space they use silver-plated conductors to get impedance of power wires down but you suggest to use lossy Zenneck Wave? :palm:

Quote
The issue of long distance power transfer can only be solved using a Laser based Power transfer system or Single-wire transmission(again limited).

Laser based power transfer to replace wires? - Again nonsense.
1. While I dont have a peer review yet, it managed to pass through the nature comm editorial process. Which implies, that the guys sitting there saw some worth in it. Infact it was transferred by the Nature editor to Nature comm.
2. Again, there exists an option with Nature comm, to transmit the manuscript under consideration to the community recognized preprint servers. That implies a "through proper channel" process.
3. I always took a strong and clear stance, that in order for it to be a proper ZN wave, they have to conform to 3 necessary conditions.
4. The system I designed has already been in production with Hyundai Heavy Industries (HHI). Again, the space payload thing has been quoted from Dr. George E Ponchak. He commented that during WPTC 2014, where I had presented my work.
So, you can take that issue with him. ZW is not lossy when conductors are around, thats exactly my work is all about. 
5. Laser based WPT is again from Prof.Dr. Zoya Popvic's work at University of Colorado Springs, Boulder. Kindly follow her work, before dismissing it as "all hat no cattle".
Title: Re: Bullshit: Texzon Wireless Power
Post by: ogden on February 11, 2019, 06:57:09 pm
1. While I dont have a peer review yet, it managed to pass through the nature comm editorial process.

Ok. At least Springer Nature denied accusations (https://group.springernature.com/kr/group/media/press-releases/response-to-recent-investigation-into-predatory-journals/15973788) ;) Anyway when you get proper peer review - then we talk.

Quote
3. I always took a strong and clear stance, that in order for it to be a proper ZN wave, they have to conform to 3 necessary conditions.

When theory says that ZW is many orders of magnitude less efficient than wire, it does not actually matter - they manage to match theory or not.

Quote
4. The system I designed has already been in production with Hyundai Heavy Industries (HHI).

What system? Any pointers to information? Efficiency figures?

Quote
Again, the space payload thing has been quoted from Dr. George E Ponchak. He commented that during WPTC 2014, where I had presented my work.

I can't find him in the author index. https://ieeexplore.ieee.org/xpl/mostRecentIssue.jsp?punumber=6828591 (https://ieeexplore.ieee.org/xpl/mostRecentIssue.jsp?punumber=6828591)

Quote
So, you can take that issue with him. ZW is not lossy when conductors are around, thats exactly my work is all about. 

ZW is lossless? How's that? From point A to point B you can generate/transmit/receive ZW power with better efficiency than wires?

Quote
5. Laser based WPT is again from Prof.Dr. Zoya Popvic's work at University of Colorado Springs, Boulder. Kindly follow her work, before dismissing it as "all hat no cattle".

It is obvious that one may transmit some (hilariously small amount of) power using laser and PV cells. To compete with wires - you need nearly- 100% efficient PV cells, laser and fiber. I do not recall reading tech news about such. When laser power transfer will be more efficient than wire, humanity most likely will not need power transfer at all.
Title: Re: Bullshit: Texzon Wireless Power
Post by: SaiSharma on February 12, 2019, 03:03:10 am
1. While I dont have a peer review yet, it managed to pass through the nature comm editorial process.

Ok. At least Springer Nature denied accusations (https://group.springernature.com/kr/group/media/press-releases/response-to-recent-investigation-into-predatory-journals/15973788) ;) Anyway when you get proper peer review - then we talk.

Quote
3. I always took a strong and clear stance, that in order for it to be a proper ZN wave, they have to conform to 3 necessary conditions.

When theory says that ZW is many orders of magnitude less efficient than wire, it does not actually matter - they manage to match theory or not.

Quote
4. The system I designed has already been in production with Hyundai Heavy Industries (HHI).

What system? Any pointers to information? Efficiency figures?

Quote
Again, the space payload thing has been quoted from Dr. George E Ponchak. He commented that during WPTC 2014, where I had presented my work.

I can't find him in the author index. https://ieeexplore.ieee.org/xpl/mostRecentIssue.jsp?punumber=6828591 (https://ieeexplore.ieee.org/xpl/mostRecentIssue.jsp?punumber=6828591)

Quote
So, you can take that issue with him. ZW is not lossy when conductors are around, thats exactly my work is all about. 

ZW is lossless? How's that? From point A to point B you can generate/transmit/receive ZW power with better efficiency than wires?

Quote
5. Laser based WPT is again from Prof.Dr. Zoya Popvic's work at University of Colorado Springs, Boulder. Kindly follow her work, before dismissing it as "all hat no cattle".

It is obvious that one may transmit some (hilariously small amount of) power using laser and PV cells. To compete with wires - you need nearly- 100% efficient PV cells, laser and fiber. I do not recall reading tech news about such. When laser power transfer will be more efficient than wire, humanity most likely will not need power transfer at all.
1. Is it not the thing I said earlier? may be we can share my manuscript via email. I am rather happy to take a Physicist's approach. i.e. to first demonstrate a concept, master it and then Engineer it.
2. Using ZN or Surface waves on earth is way different than using them at metal-dielectric or metal-air interfaces.  For SW they have been using corrugated metal structures.
3. Before we talk about efficiency, we need to understand the system requirements a bit first:
(a) Conventional fire alarm systems on the marine vessels rely on powerline, as well as the health check requires the cable as well. They wanted to do away with cables for the fire alarm system and go for a wireless solution.
(b) For wireless system to realize, the metal walls and doors stand as a hindrance. EM shielding.
While efficiency is important, however, primary target is a cable less power up and health monitoring. HHI wanted low power transmission and health monitoring signals to be sent to the fire alarm.

Now coming to your question:

The one to one efficiency is just ~56% with my current design.  But the multi receiver efficiency is (1 Tx and 2 Rx )66% at 2 m across a 40 mm thick metal door. The water tightening door uses neoprene rubber gasket, thus making the scenario of a leaky shield. I send the ZN wave to transmit power along the metal.
 You might want to ask,
i. Where is the rest of the power getting lost?
ii. The power which is being lost, not harmful to human operators around? Does it comply with ICNIRP ratings?
iii. Any field measurements done using state-of-the-art ICNIRP approved equipment?
I have asked these questions to myself as well.
So here is what I came up with based on HFSS analysis, some intuition and experiment based measurements.
- The system which I designed, sets up a Transverse magnetic (TM-Mode) wave, this implies that the  wave is kind of spread across the metal. So, all the power is propagating, once the metal reaches its end point, the sharp corners are going to cause radiation of the wave.
- In order to prevent that, you can increase the number of receiving units, as it is a wave based power transmission, there is no issue of freq peak splitting. As we no longer rely on coupling as a mode of transmission. Also been observed in the studies by Noda &Shinoda[] and Kurs et al[]. These two studies pertain to weakly coupled WPT systems. So, in principle you can achieve a very high efficiency by increasing the number of Rx. Ofcourse, there would be limitations, needs further investigation. But, right now as a researcher, I need to bring a proof of concept. Therefore, I only restricted myself to two receivers.

- I used the NARDA field analyzer to measure the radiation levels. I wont be able to share that data on the forum, but, I can send you via email.
- The findings were that the system shows ~36% lower E-field values and ~80% lower H-field values than the permissible radiation levels. However, when I increase the power levels beyond 100 watts, the radiation levels reach the permissible levels. But, then am using only two receivers. However, when using 65 watts, single receiver and multiple receiver there is a solid difference is radiation levels.
4. George E. Ponchak was the chair of the conference. He had no keynote sessions there. We spoke at lengths during the break times and post-dinner.
5. I already answered this point in the point 3. ZN is lossy when we have earth, it is therefore I have been skeptical about power the globe claims. In terms of metals, its not lossy(relative). Unfortunately, the current Transceiver I use, loses power due to radiation at the metal corners and eddy current generated in the metal due to the primary coil. I had limited success in reducing losses,by adjusting the spacing and by introducing a ferrite core.
6. Please take that issue with Zoya Popovic. I have zero understanding of how the Laser system might be engineered.

 Am not much of an engineer, I am more interested in the physics. Whatever I have spoken at the moment has more to do with Science rather than Engineering. :-//

Reference:
[1] Noda, A. and Shinoda, H.  Selective Wireless Power Transmission Through High- Flat Waveguide-Ring Resonator on 2-D Waveguide Sheet, IEEE Trans. Micro. Theory and Tech.,59,2011
[2] Kurs, A., Moffatt, R., & Soljaˇci´c, M. Simultaneous mid-range power transfer to multiple devices. App. Phys. Lett., 96, 044102-3(2010).
Title: Re: Bullshit: Texzon Wireless Power
Post by: ogden on February 12, 2019, 08:36:19 am
1. Is it not the thing I said earlier? may be we can share my manuscript via email. I am rather happy to take a Physicist's approach. i.e. to first demonstrate a concept, master it and then Engineer it.

It is not about approach. It is about truth - if you do not have proper peer review, just say so.

Quote
2. Using ZN or Surface waves on earth is way different than using them at metal-dielectric or metal-air interfaces.

As a matter of fact, this discussion is about exactly that - ZN or Surface waves on earth. Your research is very, very specific case of ZN over metal/conductive surfaces.

Quote
The one to one efficiency is just ~56% with my current design.  But the multi receiver efficiency is (1 Tx and 2 Rx )66% at 2 m across a 40 mm thick metal door.

Really? By power transfer efficiency I mean power supplied to transmitter versus power available for downstream load behind receiver. Meaning if transmitter (device) consumes 100W then you shall be able to power 56W load connected to receiver. Is it so in your case? Explain please what you mean by 56% efficiency, state actual power numbers as well.

Quote
6. Please take that issue with Zoya Popovic. I have zero understanding of how the Laser system might be engineered.

Not only engineers but scientists shall have common sense as well. It does not matter how the Laser system might be engineered if it is widely known that Lasers are inherently power-inefficient. I would not even talk about potential failure modes of such power transmission system, in case of high power (> 100W).
Title: Re: Bullshit: Texzon Wireless Power
Post by: ebastler on February 12, 2019, 09:18:20 am
@ogden -- I think you are getting increasingly stubborn and unreasonable in this discussion. You have made your points, SaiSharma has provided detailed and honest answers. Time to let it rest.
Title: Re: Bullshit: Texzon Wireless Power
Post by: ogden on February 12, 2019, 09:37:31 am
@ogden -- I think you are getting increasingly stubborn and unreasonable in this discussion. You have made your points, SaiSharma has provided detailed and honest answers. Time to let it rest.

So you believe that 56% efficiency is detailed and honest answer? SaiSharma are welcome to provide detailed and honest answer to my question where 56% comes from, without your insults.
Title: Re: Bullshit: Texzon Wireless Power
Post by: bd139 on February 12, 2019, 10:13:07 am
I'm with ogden here. This is a number pulled out of thin air (excuse the pun).
Title: Re: Bullshit: Texzon Wireless Power
Post by: ebastler on February 12, 2019, 10:51:30 am
I'm with ogden here. This is a number pulled out of thin air (excuse the pun).

Only focusing on the 56% question now is quite beside the point.

Just read through ogden's last half-dozen posts or so. He is giving SaiSharma the third degree here, interrogation-style with quite aggressive phrasing. That is uncalled for. While I can't comment on the validity (or lack thereof) of SaiSharma's results, I admire his patience and self-restraint in this "discussion".
Title: Re: Bullshit: Texzon Wireless Power
Post by: ogden on February 12, 2019, 11:13:42 am
I'm with ogden here. This is a number pulled out of thin air (excuse the pun).

Only focusing on the 56% question now is quite beside the point.

In case you did not notice - it was only question in my last post. Anyway I heard you, will try to preserve snowflakes. Just don't be unreasonable yourself, do not (further) pollute thread with offtopic. Let's get 56% efficiency explanation.
Title: Re: Bullshit: Texzon Wireless Power
Post by: bd139 on February 12, 2019, 11:33:28 am
Indeed. Efficiency is the mai
I'm with ogden here. This is a number pulled out of thin air (excuse the pun).

Only focusing on the 56% question now is quite beside the point.

Just read through ogden's last half-dozen posts or so. He is giving SaiSharma the third degree here, interrogation-style with quite aggressive phrasing. That is uncalled for. While I can't comment on the validity (or lack thereof) of SaiSharma's results, I admire his patience and self-restraint in this "discussion".

The 56% is a key factor of the viability of the idea so it is not beside the point.

I think that both sides are handling it well. Extraordinary ideas require deep scrutiny. I am regularly subject to similar levels of scrutiny on my consultancy outcomes because they can make or break and idea or business. This is perfectly acceptable.

You wait until you get an investor grilling for non delivery. I got death threats once ;)
Title: Re: Bullshit: Texzon Wireless Power
Post by: SaiSharma on February 12, 2019, 01:00:12 pm
@ogden -- I think you are getting increasingly stubborn and unreasonable in this discussion. You have made your points, SaiSharma has provided detailed and honest answers. Time to let it rest.
Thanks. I have been under constant scanner in my professional life as well. Its normal for me to face aggressive grilling sessions. 
BTW, I love Paulaner Hefe, I drank them a lot when I was doing masters at Darmstadt.
Title: Re: Bullshit: Texzon Wireless Power
Post by: SaiSharma on February 12, 2019, 01:33:17 pm
I'm with ogden here. This is a number pulled out of thin air (excuse the pun).
Guys, I understand that there would be scrutiny and no offense taken. Koreans trained me ;)
There as couple of published peer reviewed papers by me back in 2014 and 2016. IET Electronics letters and URSI, but they were not claiming a ZW wave back then.

Anyway coming to the number 56%.
This number has not been pulled out of thin air.
Way back in 2014-15, this number used to be as low as 12%-16%.
Back in 2014, for an input power of 20 watts on the Tx, I used to get barely 3.2 watts on the load end on the energy meter.
I also got stuck with one typical problem, i.e. the grounding!
If I used a  lambda/8 length wire and a flat GI metal sheet lying on the ground arrangement connected to one end of the terminal of the Rx, the efficiency would jump to 33-34%.
Thats when I realized that the TM wave makes the metal sheet a quasi- equipotential surface.

The RLC lumped elements would not do anything to help the situation. There used to be simply not enough voltage oscillations across the terminals of the Rx. This is because, the damn thing needs an electrical length across its terminals.
HFSS simulation would not show up any resonance peak either, but the VNA would. Then came good old Balanis to rescue.
July 2018:
One fine morning while taking a massive dump in July 2018 (after a very frustrated night of beer drinking), I attached a Tesla Transformer "like" coil arrangement to the existing ground backed impedance resonator on HFSS. The simulation started showing up the peak at the expected freq zone.
In couple of days from that time, I optimized my design and built it.
When I measured the I/P Power (20 watts) and O/P (11.4 watts)using the energy meter, I got the Tx to 1 Rx efficiency of 56%.  Then I used a second Rx and the overall efficiency jumped to 65%-67% range.  I also built a makeshift partial shield box, it worked through the shield as well with a marginal drop of 3-4% in efficiency.
Until that point in time, people (folks at my Startup) called it various names-e.g. capacitive system, radiative system etc.
The HFSS clearly showed the ZW equiphases, Slow attenuation rate of E-field in the transverse direction and evanescent field decay away from the metal-air interface.

When I showed those results, the external expert was extremely impressed and said, "Sai, you dont have to prove anything to any of these skeptics. They clearly have no idea about Physics"

Long story short, I was kicked out of my startup, as the CEO acquired all my 7 patents from my PhD Uni. His management team didnt want to work with me as they thought, they gathered everything needed to do it themselves.

Lets wait for the peer review, if it gets through I will share the entire set of results. If it doesnt get through, I will just hang my boots and leave.
 
Title: Re: Bullshit: Texzon Wireless Power
Post by: ogden on February 12, 2019, 06:33:45 pm
When I measured the I/P Power (20 watts) and O/P (11.4 watts)using the energy meter, I got the Tx to 1 Rx efficiency of 56%.  Then I used a second Rx and the overall efficiency jumped to 65%-67% range.  I also built a makeshift partial shield box, it worked through the shield as well with a marginal drop of 3-4% in efficiency.
Until that point in time, people (folks at my Startup) called it various names-e.g. capacitive system, radiative system etc.

output_power = 0.56*input_power?  That's your answer?

You mentioned arxiv, nature comm, 3rd party university. I was expecting pointer to your research or just excerpts. At least provide pages of your research that describes setup, results and analysis.

Quote
Long story short, I was kicked out of my startup, as the CEO acquired all my 7 patents from my PhD Uni. His management team didnt want to work with me as they thought, they gathered everything needed to do it themselves.

Name of the startup or pointer to it's web page? Web links to patents?

To you and your advocates I can honestly admit - you did not produce *anything* that would confirm your results or even existence of your research as such.
Title: Re: Bullshit: Texzon Wireless Power
Post by: SaiSharma on February 12, 2019, 11:35:22 pm
When I measured the I/P Power (20 watts) and O/P (11.4 watts)using the energy meter, I got the Tx to 1 Rx efficiency of 56%.  Then I used a second Rx and the overall efficiency jumped to 65%-67% range.  I also built a makeshift partial shield box, it worked through the shield as well with a marginal drop of 3-4% in efficiency.
Until that point in time, people (folks at my Startup) called it various names-e.g. capacitive system, radiative system etc.

output_power = 0.56*input_power?  That's your answer?

You mentioned arxiv, nature comm, 3rd party university. I was expecting pointer to your research or just excerpts. At least provide pages of your research that describes setup, results and analysis.

Quote
Long story short, I was kicked out of my startup, as the CEO acquired all my 7 patents from my PhD Uni. His management team didnt want to work with me as they thought, they gathered everything needed to do it themselves.

Name of the startup or pointer to it's web page? Web links to patents?

To you and your advocates I can honestly admit - you did not produce *anything* that would confirm your results or even existence of your research as such.
lol. Now you sound like a pissed off teenager, trying to pick up crap out of thin air and trying to create arguments just to win it. Do you really think that I do not know how to measure power do you? Thats exactly why I replied to you that way.
Also, why the heck should I show you anything related to the name of my company etc? Are you my employer? Investor?
 
As I said, lets wait for the peer review to be done.
Also,  none of you are going to be my investors anytime soon, so it would be great to stick to a certain level of decorum.
If you can argue on facts, then, you are welcome. Else your behaviour is at the best  like my narcissistic ex.
Title: Re: Bullshit: Texzon Wireless Power
Post by: ogden on February 13, 2019, 01:02:47 am
lol. Now you sound like a pissed off teenager, trying to pick up crap out of thin air and trying to create arguments just to win it. Do you really think that I do not know how to measure power do you? Thats exactly why I replied to you that way.

LOL. Trying personal insults? You sound like bullshit artist pushed into the corner. It is very important how exactly and using what hardware you measure input/output power. Seems, you have absolutely nothing to show. You don't even specify frequency BTW.

Quote

As I said, lets wait for the peer review to be done.

Provide link to your research so we can read it. You mentioned more than one journal and publisher, yet cannot produce single pointer to your research paper. It is suspicious to say it politely.

Quote
Also,  none of you are going to be my investors anytime soon

:)

Quote
If you can argue on facts, then, you are welcome. Else your behaviour is at the best  like my narcissistic ex.

When you provide facts - somebody can argue. At the moment you did not provide any facts, just bullshit: that it is possible to wirelessly transmit 11.4 watts over 2m metallic door with 56% efficiency using lambda/8 antennas with Tesla Transformer "like" coil attached to the existing ground backed impedance resonator on HFSS.
Title: Re: Bullshit: Texzon Wireless Power
Post by: SaiSharma on February 13, 2019, 01:47:23 am
lol. Now you sound like a pissed off teenager, trying to pick up crap out of thin air and trying to create arguments just to win it. Do you really think that I do not know how to measure power do you? Thats exactly why I replied to you that way.

LOL. Trying personal insults? You sound like bullshit artist pushed into the corner. It is very important how exactly and using what hardware you measure input/output power. Seems, you have absolutely nothing to show. You don't even specify frequency BTW.

Quote

As I said, lets wait for the peer review to be done.

Provide link to your research so we can read it. You mentioned more than one journal and publisher, yet cannot produce single pointer to your research paper. It is suspicious to say it politely.

Quote
Also,  none of you are going to be my investors anytime soon

:)

Quote
If you can argue on facts, then, you are welcome. Else your behaviour is at the best  like my narcissistic ex.

When you provide facts - somebody can argue. At the moment you did not provide any facts, just bullshit: that it is possible to wirelessly transmit 11.4 watts over 2m metallic door with 56% efficiency using lambda/8 antennas with Tesla Transformer "like" coil attached to the existing ground backed impedance resonator on HFSS.
I wont share any specifics, until review is done. How difficult is that for you to understand?
Its so easy to call someone a bullshit artist.
I have nothing to gain on this forum. I was expecting a sane discussion, not some "fuck_u, nah_fuck_u, nah_nah_fuck_u" game.
I can easily see, you have no clue about Zenneck wave exactly.
 But, you are pretending to be a Skeptic. You cant be a skeptic until you have some inkling.
Title: Re: Bullshit: Texzon Wireless Power
Post by: ogden on February 13, 2019, 02:07:14 am
I can easily see, you have no clue about Zenneck wave exactly.

My understanding of Zenneck wave does not match yours definitely. As you do not provide facts we may have discussion about, our discussion is over unless you actually publish your paper (after peer review).
Title: Re: Bullshit: Texzon Wireless Power
Post by: SaiSharma on February 13, 2019, 05:51:48 am
I can easily see, you have no clue about Zenneck wave exactly.

My understanding of Zenneck wave does not match yours definitely. As you do not provide facts we may have discussion about, our discussion is over unless you actually publish your paper (after peer review).
I realize, you have nothing to offer in this discussion. You have so far behaved like an unruly teenage keyboard warrior, nothing more.
Title: Re: Bullshit: Texzon Wireless Power
Post by: bd139 on February 13, 2019, 08:12:34 am
I’m going to sit and wait patiently. SaiSharma you answered the questions perfectly. Thank you and good luck.
Title: Re: Bullshit: Texzon Wireless Power
Post by: wbeaty on March 07, 2019, 08:26:16 am
What about my request for published experimental data and reproduction via a national level agency or laboratory? That’s all I demand.

Sarcasm?    If you're actually serious  ...then you're going to disbelieve forever, since no lab/agency has any reason to work on the topic.  Not without serious funding (and perhaps not even then!)    In other words, exactly who would pay for such work?

Quote
Extraordinary ideas require extraordinary proof.

Um...  the original quote speaks of extraordinary evidence.  "Proof" is for mathematicians; in physics any idea, sane or weird, just requires good solid supporting evidence, not exotic and special "extraordinary" evidence.

Here's a bit of Trivia:  M. Truzzi, one of the co-founders of CSICOP, was the author of the above quote, but later expressed regrets.   He discovered it to be a recipe for bias.   Why?  "Extraordinary-ness" is totally subjective!   Everyone has a different threshold.  I see a worse problem: to disbelieve anything, just reject all confirming evidence, saying "Nope, evidence still not extraordinary!"    Instead why don't we all just use a level playing field: treat all ideas the same, always with the same high evidential requirements.  Don't try to make bias normal and acceptable. "When a man finds a conclusion agreeable, he accepts it without argument, but when he finds it disagreeable, he will bring against it all the forces of logic and reason." -Thucydides.   Poor Dr. Truzzi.  He could never take back the meme he'd unwittingly released.

Quote
A side note: one of the ridiculous things about this idea is the fact it doesn’t actually have a viable commercial benefit even if it does work.

How so?

We presume they intend to sell KWh, while preventing power-theft (employing the original method Tesla described, coded frequency-hopping.  Or even perhaps a modern one.)   The stuff about Tesla giving away free power was fictional.  Tesla expected everyone to pay.   Also, we presume that the efficiency must rival that of continental power-grids, otherwise all bets are off.   If efficiency is middling, then the system is only economical where large producers or users might exist, yet it's far too expensive to run power lines.    Tesla's original plan was to harness a huge number of remote mountain waterfalls: wireless hydro not fossil fuels.

The Texzon hype is discussing emergency backup power service: when disaster brings down sections of the conventional grid, or if you're invading a hostile country while destroying their existing power grid, you can still immediately use (perhaps expensive) wireless power service.  No fuel-truck supply-chain to keep the army rolling.

Heh, with mideast oil trillionaires involved, they can pay to run their vacation mansions in the middle of jungles or on mountaintops, yet not be trucking in the fuel to run gasoline power plants.    Perhaps do like Gernsback and HG Wells, have a huge cluster of always-running helicopters, set up tennis courts and gardens up there.  Price be damned, same as with yachts etc.    (The Texzon tower cost ?? $50M, but compare that to the pricier yachts or winter palaces.)
[/quote]
Title: !
Post by: wbeaty on March 07, 2019, 09:40:03 am
Sure! Working prototype is key to success for inventor. Where's small scale prototype like 10W bulb at 10m distance? With efficiency numbers shown?

That's impossible, because if we want to light a bulb locally, we also light the same bulb anywhere on Earth.   The system is not radio, and it only works if planetary resonant modes are being driven.  Without that, we end up with a VLF transmitter with a too-small antenna and microwatt ERP.   Tesla (supposedly) excited planetary resonance at Colorado Springs, a few tens of kilowatts with a giant VLF oscillator.   I'm not aware of any methods for making it any smaller than that.  In the 1980s Robert Golka built a vaguely similar setup, but didn't have full information, and it never worked at all ( yes 10MV, but no 100ft mast w/3ft globe, no ion-beam generator.)   Also, Tesla cheated, by exciting the global "tank circuit" using vertical impulsive lightning bolts up to 150ft tall, from his 100Ft mast.   A Real Man's Spark transmitter, naturally synchronized to the drifting mode frequencies.

Quote
Those field strength measurements in paper you referred to, shows > 30dB loss at 1km distance.  W/o doubt I am cynic here because "wireless energy transfer" network having 99.9% losses is very ineffective to say it politely.

Look at the frequency.   Is it in the required operating region, well below 20KHz?   Is it driving an enormous cosine-shaped Schumann antinode, with vertical e-fields constant over tens of KM, and the first node out over the horizon?    Is it even using a grounded antenna?

Of course not.  That paper is only demonstrating the removal of the last critical objection to Tesla's ideas, the one left over from 1936.

Like so:

See what's going on?   Every one of the above "sane and rational" criticisms turned out to be wrong  ...except the very last one.   The 2014 Corum experiment was an empirical demonstration that the last objection was wrong too.   Tesla's method, now called "Zenneck surface waves," weren't disproved in 1936 like everyone thought.  The Bell 1936 experiment is shown to have been using the wrong antenna structure.   They didn't use Tesla-style wave-launchers, so they detected none of the unusual long-range ground waves on which Tesla had based his system.


Title: Re: Bullshit: Texzon Wireless Power (Re: ! )
Post by: ogden on March 07, 2019, 11:41:08 am
That's impossible, because if we want to light a bulb locally, we also light the same bulb anywhere on Earth.   The system is not radio, and it only works if planetary resonant modes are being driven.  Without that, we end up with a VLF transmitter with a too-small antenna and microwatt ERP.

Yes, please - where is microwatt-scale demonstration? If it spreads all over the earth - how it can compete with existing grid (~6% losses) if only one-eighth of Earth's surface is suitable for humans to live on? At the moment it seems like never ending preparation of Fyre Festival (tm) - kind of what Arca Space does, but they at least produce funny youtube videos :)
Title: Re: Bullshit: Texzon Wireless Power
Post by: bd139 on March 07, 2019, 12:51:36 pm
What about my request for published experimental data and reproduction via a national level agency or laboratory? That’s all I demand.

Sarcasm?    If you're actually serious  ...then you're going to disbelieve forever, since no lab/agency has any reason to work on the topic.  Not without serious funding (and perhaps not even then!)    In other words, exactly who would pay for such work?

100% serious.

For an idea to attract funding, it has to be commercially viable or break a boundary of knowledge. This clearly isn't. The best outcome is a novelty centralised power transmission method, something as a society we're desperately trying to get away from at the moment.

And as you say "who would pay for such work?". No one unless the idea has a demonstrable commercial advantage. Which it doesn't even if the physics are correct.

Quote
Extraordinary ideas require extraordinary proof.

Um...  the original quote speaks of extraordinary evidence.  "Proof" is for mathematicians; in physics any idea, sane or weird, just requires good solid supporting evidence, not exotic and special "extraordinary" evidence.

Here's a bit of Trivia:  M. Truzzi, one of the co-founders of CSICOP, was the author of the above quote, but later expressed regrets.   He discovered it to be a recipe for bias.   Why?  "Extraordinary-ness" is totally subjective!   Everyone has a different threshold.  I see a worse problem: to disbelieve anything, just reject all confirming evidence, saying "Nope, evidence still not extraordinary!"    Instead why don't we all just use a level playing field: treat all ideas the same, always with the same high evidential requirements.  Don't try to make bias normal and acceptable. "When a man finds a conclusion agreeable, he accepts it without argument, but when he finds it disagreeable, he will bring against it all the forces of logic and reason." -Thucydides.   Poor Dr. Truzzi.  He could never take back the meme he'd unwittingly released.

This is not bias. That's a junk straw man you threw together to discredit my idea.

If you want intellectual or financial investment, you need collateral.

An analogy. A man walks into my office and says I've made a horse that you feed hay and it pisses dollar coins. Am I going to invest? No I will do due diligence. I hire a horse expert who followed the same steps documented by the original claimant. My horse did not piss coins. Original man was actually running a mechanical turk to pull funding in. There's a LOT of that out there and this is in the same space as a lot of it.

Reputation, trust, reproducibility, transparency and viability are next to ZERO here which is the problem.

Quote
A side note: one of the ridiculous things about this idea is the fact it doesn’t actually have a viable commercial benefit even if it does work.

How so?

We presume they intend to sell KWh, while preventing power-theft (employing the original method Tesla described, coded frequency-hopping.  Or even perhaps a modern one.)   The stuff about Tesla giving away free power was fictional.  Tesla expected everyone to pay.   Also, we presume that the efficiency must rival that of continental power-grids, otherwise all bets are off.   If efficiency is middling, then the system is only economical where large producers or users might exist, yet it's far too expensive to run power lines.    Tesla's original plan was to harness a huge number of remote mountain waterfalls: wireless hydro not fossil fuels.

The Texzon hype is discussing emergency backup power service: when disaster brings down sections of the conventional grid, or if you're invading a hostile country while destroying their existing power grid, you can still immediately use (perhaps expensive) wireless power service.  No fuel-truck supply-chain to keep the army rolling.

Heh, with mideast oil trillionaires involved, they can pay to run their vacation mansions in the middle of jungles or on mountaintops, yet not be trucking in the fuel to run gasoline power plants.    Perhaps do like Gernsback and HG Wells, have a huge cluster of always-running helicopters, set up tennis courts and gardens up there.  Price be damned, same as with yachts etc.    (The Texzon tower cost ?? $50M, but compare that to the pricier yachts or winter palaces.)

Err you're missing the point by a mile. Centralisation, which this entirely relies on as the power source has to be concentrated on the transmitter logically, brings no benefit at all whatsoever. Look at where the rest of the market is going. It's entirely about moving away from centralised and grid models to fully distributed, high efficiency energy distribution and generation. Any centralisation is a risk.

The rich dudes and the army engineers just build a road and cables to where they want to go or take generators with them. Multiple redundancy. A lot of military strategy is setting up supply chains. Now lets look at your case; if someone uses their hypersonic weapons to take out your two main Texzon towers, which are conveniently centralised and visible from bloody space, where are you then? Shit out of luck. Game over.
Title: Re: Bullshit: Texzon Wireless Power
Post by: MT on March 07, 2019, 04:35:28 pm
You're right, they just spent millions on the tower for something they never got working small scale because they wanted to pull a prank and waste theirs, and everyone else's money.
Theranos got tons of investment to, for the same reasons.
Quote
The truth is, they have demonstrated it works, they got even more funding, they built the high-power tower, and they are going to launch the wave in the next few weeks and bring up a load on the other side of the world.
wave goodbye to all underground animals. :-//
Title: Re: Bullshit: Texzon Wireless Power
Post by: EEVblog on March 07, 2019, 10:41:01 pm
When I measured the I/P Power (20 watts) and O/P (11.4 watts)using the energy meter, I got the Tx to 1 Rx efficiency of 56%.  Then I used a second Rx and the overall efficiency jumped to 65%-67% range.  I also built a makeshift partial shield box, it worked through the shield as well with a marginal drop of 3-4% in efficiency.
Until that point in time, people (folks at my Startup) called it various names-e.g. capacitive system, radiative system etc.

output_power = 0.56*input_power?  That's your answer?

You mentioned arxiv, nature comm, 3rd party university. I was expecting pointer to your research or just excerpts. At least provide pages of your research that describes setup, results and analysis.

Quote
Long story short, I was kicked out of my startup, as the CEO acquired all my 7 patents from my PhD Uni. His management team didnt want to work with me as they thought, they gathered everything needed to do it themselves.

Name of the startup or pointer to it's web page? Web links to patents?

To you and your advocates I can honestly admit - you did not produce *anything* that would confirm your results or even existence of your research as such.
lol. Now you sound like a pissed off teenager, trying to pick up crap out of thin air and trying to create arguments just to win it. Do you really think that I do not know how to measure power do you? Thats exactly why I replied to you that way.
Also, why the heck should I show you anything related to the name of my company etc? Are you my employer? Investor?
 
As I said, lets wait for the peer review to be done.
Also,  none of you are going to be my investors anytime soon, so it would be great to stick to a certain level of decorum.
If you can argue on facts, then, you are welcome. Else your behaviour is at the best  like my narcissistic ex.

Like you calling people narcissistic and a "pissed off teenager" for simply asking for links and evidence?, that level of decorum?  ::)
Title: Re: Bullshit: Texzon Wireless Power
Post by: SaiSharma on March 08, 2019, 06:30:43 am
When I measured the I/P Power (20 watts) and O/P (11.4 watts)using the energy meter, I got the Tx to 1 Rx efficiency of 56%.  Then I used a second Rx and the overall efficiency jumped to 65%-67% range.  I also built a makeshift partial shield box, it worked through the shield as well with a marginal drop of 3-4% in efficiency.
Until that point in time, people (folks at my Startup) called it various names-e.g. capacitive system, radiative system etc.

output_power = 0.56*input_power?  That's your answer?

You mentioned arxiv, nature comm, 3rd party university. I was expecting pointer to your research or just excerpts. At least provide pages of your research that describes setup, results and analysis.

Quote
Long story short, I was kicked out of my startup, as the CEO acquired all my 7 patents from my PhD Uni. His management team didnt want to work with me as they thought, they gathered everything needed to do it themselves.

Name of the startup or pointer to it's web page? Web links to patents?

To you and your advocates I can honestly admit - you did not produce *anything* that would confirm your results or even existence of your research as such.
lol. Now you sound like a pissed off teenager, trying to pick up crap out of thin air and trying to create arguments just to win it. Do you really think that I do not know how to measure power do you? Thats exactly why I replied to you that way.
Also, why the heck should I show you anything related to the name of my company etc? Are you my employer? Investor?
 
As I said, lets wait for the peer review to be done.
Also,  none of you are going to be my investors anytime soon, so it would be great to stick to a certain level of decorum.
If you can argue on facts, then, you are welcome. Else your behaviour is at the best  like my narcissistic ex.

Like you calling people narcissistic and a "pissed off teenager" for simply asking for links and evidence?, that level of decorum?  ::)


I was being reasonable for fairly long enough. When, he called me a bullshit artist and got personal, I  responded. I had indeed posted here some reasonable theory, but party under question didnt bother to read it and started attacking me in the name of skepticism. You cant be a skeptic without knowing the fundamental physics behind the said thing.
 I am still waiting for my peer review to be complete. I have shared the preprint with bd139, lets see what he has to say.
Title: Re: Bullshit: Texzon Wireless Power
Post by: EEVblog on March 08, 2019, 07:56:31 am
When I measured the I/P Power (20 watts) and O/P (11.4 watts)using the energy meter, I got the Tx to 1 Rx efficiency of 56%.  Then I used a second Rx and the overall efficiency jumped to 65%-67% range.  I also built a makeshift partial shield box, it worked through the shield as well with a marginal drop of 3-4% in efficiency.
Until that point in time, people (folks at my Startup) called it various names-e.g. capacitive system, radiative system etc.

output_power = 0.56*input_power?  That's your answer?

You mentioned arxiv, nature comm, 3rd party university. I was expecting pointer to your research or just excerpts. At least provide pages of your research that describes setup, results and analysis.

Quote
Long story short, I was kicked out of my startup, as the CEO acquired all my 7 patents from my PhD Uni. His management team didnt want to work with me as they thought, they gathered everything needed to do it themselves.

Name of the startup or pointer to it's web page? Web links to patents?

To you and your advocates I can honestly admit - you did not produce *anything* that would confirm your results or even existence of your research as such.
lol. Now you sound like a pissed off teenager, trying to pick up crap out of thin air and trying to create arguments just to win it. Do you really think that I do not know how to measure power do you? Thats exactly why I replied to you that way.
Also, why the heck should I show you anything related to the name of my company etc? Are you my employer? Investor?
 
As I said, lets wait for the peer review to be done.
Also,  none of you are going to be my investors anytime soon, so it would be great to stick to a certain level of decorum.
If you can argue on facts, then, you are welcome. Else your behaviour is at the best  like my narcissistic ex.

Like you calling people narcissistic and a "pissed off teenager" for simply asking for links and evidence?, that level of decorum?  ::)

I was being reasonable for fairly long enough. When, he called me a bullshit artist and got personal, I  responded.

There was nothing of the sort in the quoted thread.
I strongly suggest that you don't respond in that way (or at all) to such things.
Title: Re: Bullshit: Texzon Wireless Power
Post by: ogden on March 08, 2019, 08:19:40 am
Like you calling people narcissistic and a "pissed off teenager" for simply asking for links and evidence?, that level of decorum?  ::)

I was being reasonable for fairly long enough. When, he called me a bullshit artist and got personal, I  responded.

There was nothing of the sort in the quoted thread.
I strongly suggest that you don't respond in that way (or at all) to such things.

Right. First came teenager, only then artist:

lol. Now you sound like a pissed off teenager, trying to pick up crap out of thin air and trying to create arguments just to win it.

LOL. Trying personal insults? You sound like bullshit artist pushed into the corner.
Title: Re: Bullshit: Texzon Wireless Power
Post by: Cyberdragon on March 08, 2019, 04:15:48 pm
This just sounds exactly like people trying to reinvent Wardenclyfe and are gonna end up the same way. Wasting money. Just because Tesla didn't know about "zennek waves" doesn't mean it's not exactly the same crap, trying to "resonate Earth" to broadcast power. Even if it works, the effeciency will be shit. You'll have a machine constantly pissing away tons of energy waiting for someone to use it instead of wires that direct the exact amount of power to exactly where it needs to go. Also, you'll need local recievers and regulators/coverters everywhere so how would you get it into people's houses, one on every house, on every machine (making them big)?
Title: Re: Bullshit: Texzon Wireless Power
Post by: ebastler on March 08, 2019, 04:26:28 pm
@Dave, ogden, SaiSharma:
Please, guys -- I thought we were beyond that quarreling in this thread.

Dave, I'm afraid you did this thread a disservice with your post. If you read through the later posts in the thread, you will find that things had settled down between ogden and SaiSharma, and we were back to "Let's discuss the facts once SaiSharma's paper is ready for publication."

Can we please all turn back our clocks and restart at that point? Thanks!
Title: Re: Bullshit: Texzon Wireless Power
Post by: ebastler on March 08, 2019, 08:29:02 pm
Dave, I'm afraid you did this thread a disservice with your post. If you read through the later posts in the thread, you will find that things had settled down between ogden and SaiSharma, and we were back to "Let's discuss the facts once SaiSharma's paper is ready for publication."

So what? Settlement (or whatever it is) between me and SaiSharma does not mean that others can't express their opinions anymore. Are you social justice police here? :)

I'm just annoyed. I staid subscribed to this thread since I am actually interested what level of experimental evidence will eventually emerge. But I don't want to be bothered reading more of this mudslinging.

Dave (and anybody else) is obviously free to post here s they see fit. But it is bad style to just skim the posts, stop midway at something that catches your attention, and immediately fire off a reply without mustering the patience to read the follow-up posts.
Title: Re: Bullshit: Texzon Wireless Power
Post by: EEVblog on March 08, 2019, 09:37:31 pm
Dave, I'm afraid you did this thread a disservice with your post. If you read through the later posts in the thread, you will find that things had settled down between ogden and SaiSharma, and we were back to "Let's discuss the facts once SaiSharma's paper is ready for publication."

So what? Settlement (or whatever it is) between me and SaiSharma does not mean that others can't express their opinions anymore. Are you social justice police here? :)

I'm just annoyed. I staid subscribed to this thread since I am actually interested what level of experimental evidence will eventually emerge. But I don't want to be bothered reading more of this mudslinging.

Dave (and anybody else) is obviously free to post here s they see fit. But it is bad style to just skim the posts, stop midway at something that catches your attention, and immediately fire off a reply without mustering the patience to read the follow-up posts.

The post was reported. I don't normally read this thread.
Title: Re: Bullshit: Texzon Wireless Power
Post by: joeqsmith on March 08, 2019, 10:52:07 pm
Looks like it's running at 1710KHz.   

https://www.google.com/maps/place/32%C2%B009'24.0%22N+96%C2%B056'22.0%22W/@32.1527028,-96.9413238,1530m/data= (https://www.google.com/maps/place/32%C2%B009'24.0%22N+96%C2%B056'22.0%22W/@32.1527028,-96.9413238,1530m/data=)!3m1!1e3!4m5!3m4!1s0x0:0x0!8m2!3d32.1566667!4d-96.9394444

Title: Re: Bullshit: Texzon Wireless Power
Post by: SaiSharma on March 15, 2019, 06:23:23 am

The post was reported. I don't normally read this thread.
First of all, you started this thread, so please read all my earlier posts, where I did post some links and No one bothered to follow them up except for two folks who contacted me on researchgate redirected from this forum.

Now, coming to my reaction to Ogden, that comes as a response to his aggressive antics in the form of posts by him as response to my answers.
I need not be reminded about how to respond, when you simply allow this kind of unscientific way of questioning on this forum. :palm:
You may ban me from this forum, I could give a donkey's hoot. :blah:

Finally, one can not be a skeptic without knowing the basics of the said concept of physics. Something odgen has been trying very hard to be and has ended up exactly like an unruly teenager.
Also, you have been blinded by your bias against the said Physical phenomena.
@ebastler and @bd139, you both have received the links to the preprint article.
You can always contact me through that. Nothing more on this forum, its a closure.
Sincerely
Sai
Title: Re: Bullshit: Texzon Wireless Power
Post by: ogden on March 15, 2019, 08:50:39 pm
please read all my earlier posts, where I did post some links and No one bothered to follow them up except for two folks who contacted me on researchgate redirected from this forum.

Which of your posts contained links? Meaning URL to readable information in form of HTML or pdf document?

Quote
I need not be reminded about how to respond, when you simply allow this kind of unscientific way of questioning on this forum.

"Unscientific way" of asking for information (paper) does not justify insults and name calling. Scientific way of questioning would be just take your words for granted?

Quote
Something odgen has been trying very hard to be and has ended up exactly like an unruly teenager.

Here we go again. You better send me your paper (in PM), not insults.
Title: Re: Bullshit: Texzon Wireless Power
Post by: bson on March 16, 2019, 12:43:52 am
The patent applicant seems to be "CPG Technologies, LLC".  Probably the business of the CTO or founders. 

Patent application search time...

http://appft.uspto.gov/netacgi/nph-Parser?Sect1=PTO2&Sect2=HITOFF&p=1&u=%2Fnetahtml%2FPTO%2Fsearch-bool.html&r=0&f=S&l=50&TERM1=CPG+Technologies&FIELD1=AANM&co1=AND&TERM2=&FIELD2=&d=PG01 (http://appft.uspto.gov/netacgi/nph-Parser?Sect1=PTO2&Sect2=HITOFF&p=1&u=%2Fnetahtml%2FPTO%2Fsearch-bool.html&r=0&f=S&l=50&TERM1=CPG+Technologies&FIELD1=AANM&co1=AND&TERM2=&FIELD2=&d=PG01)

115 applications, most in the last year or so.  Legitimate or not (sounds up there with anti-gravity gyroscopes, hyperloop, self filling water bottles, to me but I don't really know) - they sure do crank out patent applications!
Title: Re: Bullshit: Texzon Wireless Power
Post by: SaiSharma on March 16, 2019, 01:34:41 am
please read all my earlier posts, where I did post some links and No one bothered to follow them up except for two folks who contacted me on researchgate redirected from this forum.

Which of your posts contained links? Meaning URL to readable information in form of HTML or pdf document?

Quote
I need not be reminded about how to respond, when you simply allow this kind of unscientific way of questioning on this forum.



"Unscientific way" of asking for information (paper) does not justify insults and name calling. Scientific way of questioning would be just take your words for granted?

Quote
Something odgen has been trying very hard to be and has ended up exactly like an unruly teenager.

Here we go again. You better send me your paper (in PM), not insults.

Alright. Sorry for being a bit triggered. However, your stance came across very aggressive. Hence, I wont be backing down on whatever I said.
As far as links are concerned, I deleted the post, after I found no one bothered to look up.
Ask me politely, I shall answer your questions to the best of my understanding.
Sent you the preprint link via PM and email ID too.
Title: Re: Bullshit: Texzon Wireless Power
Post by: ogden on March 16, 2019, 10:55:11 am
Alright. Sorry for being a bit triggered. However, your stance came across very aggressive. Hence, I wont be backing down on whatever I said.

It tells a lot, especially knowing that it was you who started profanity and insults. Whatever. Please keep further communication professional no matter how aggravating are questions, assertions or conclusions. If someone do not believe in what you say - better provide additional information to convince nonbelievers rather than just become triggered teenage keyboard warrior yourself.

Thank you, I received PM. Will check your paper. Why don't you share it with everyone here - after all it is public and there's nothing that would fall into nondisclosure category.
Title: Re: Bullshit: Texzon Wireless Power
Post by: ebastler on March 16, 2019, 11:14:47 am
Will check your paper. Why don't you share it with everyone here - after all it is public and there's nothing that would fall into nondisclosure category.
I had been wondering the same thing -- but I can see that Saisharma might not want his forum name linked to his real name in a permanent, public post.

Please keep further communication professional no matter how aggravating are questions, assertions or conclusions.
Please keep your questioning professoinal too. No need for "Spanish inquisition" style interrogations.  ;)
Title: Re: Bullshit: Texzon Wireless Power
Post by: SaiSharma on March 17, 2019, 03:01:38 am
Sent email to your queries.
Thanks.
Title: Re: Bullshit: Texzon Wireless Power
Post by: SaiSharma on March 17, 2019, 03:05:57 am
Quote
I had been wondering the same thing -- but I can see that Saisharma might not want his forum name linked to his real name in a permanent, public post.
Well, its a 4-5 years of work in progress. Over the years some reviewers and folks at conference in the past called me names. Downright rude and down right unprofessional
e.g.
1. Crack,
2. Tesla-cult in the academia,
3. capacitive power transfer being packaged as guided mode power etc.
4. Are you trying to disprove a 2 century old Faraday shielding? I am surprised you have a college education at your disposal.
and on and on.
Title: Re: Bullshit: Texzon Wireless Power
Post by: Cyberdragon on March 17, 2019, 09:18:15 pm
HMM...I WONDER WHY...

I wonder if it's because you have yet to produce real concrete data that shows it's not only functional but...wait for it...PRACTICAL.
Title: Re: Bullshit: Texzon Wireless Power
Post by: ogden on March 17, 2019, 10:49:48 pm
I wonder if it's because you have yet to produce real concrete data that shows it's not only functional but...wait for it...PRACTICAL.

Many who follow this thread perhaps remember that I insistently asked for real experiment info/data that would confirm efficiency figure stated by SaiSharma. Claim was that everything is in the paper which can be obtained (only) on request. I got The Paper. Guess what - did I see scientifically sound proof of SaiSharma's claims? Obviously I can't tell unless paper is made public at least for readers of this thread.
Title: Re: Bullshit: Texzon Wireless Power
Post by: EEVblog on March 17, 2019, 11:22:13 pm
Quote
I had been wondering the same thing -- but I can see that Saisharma might not want his forum name linked to his real name in a permanent, public post.
Well, its a 4-5 years of work in progress. Over the years some reviewers and folks at conference in the past called me names. Downright rude and down right unprofessional
e.g.
1. Crack,
2. Tesla-cult in the academia,
3. capacitive power transfer being packaged as guided mode power etc.
4. Are you trying to disprove a 2 century old Faraday shielding? I am surprised you have a college education at your disposal.
and on and on.

Engineers are incredibly easy to shut up, they deal in facts, just show them concrete data and it's done.

If you don't have concrete data to show your device works and/or is practical, then it's not unexpected for people to call you things when you work in this sort of field. Because there are countless crackpots and tesla-nuts out there, the internet is filled with them, and many startup companies have stolen a lot of peoples money. People have good reasons to be very skeptical.
Title: Re: Bullshit: Texzon Wireless Power
Post by: SaiSharma on March 18, 2019, 12:06:25 am
HMM...I WONDER WHY...

I wonder if it's because you have yet to produce real concrete data that shows it's not only functional but...wait for it...PRACTICAL.
I admit, back then I didnt have a concrete theory and simulation model to rely upon.
Please check ur PM.
Title: Re: Bullshit: Texzon Wireless Power
Post by: SaiSharma on March 18, 2019, 12:08:05 am
Quote
I had been wondering the same thing -- but I can see that Saisharma might not want his forum name linked to his real name in a permanent, public post.
Well, its a 4-5 years of work in progress. Over the years some reviewers and folks at conference in the past called me names. Downright rude and down right unprofessional
e.g.
1. Crack,
2. Tesla-cult in the academia,
3. capacitive power transfer being packaged as guided mode power etc.
4. Are you trying to disprove a 2 century old Faraday shielding? I am surprised you have a college education at your disposal.
and on and on.

Engineers are incredibly easy to shut up, they deal in facts, just show them concrete data and it's done.

If you don't have concrete data to show your device works and/or is practical, then it's not unexpected for people to call you things when you work in this sort of field. Because there are countless crackpots and tesla-nuts out there, the internet is filled with them, and many startup companies have stolen a lot of peoples money. People have good reasons to be very skeptical.
That was years ago, when I was what you call a N00B.
In certain ways am still learning. Thats what researchers are supposed to do, i.e. Keep learning.
Title: Re: Bullshit: Texzon Wireless Power
Post by: SaiSharma on March 18, 2019, 12:09:20 am
I wonder if it's because you have yet to produce real concrete data that shows it's not only functional but...wait for it...PRACTICAL.

Many who follow this thread perhaps remember that I insistently asked for real experiment info/data that would confirm efficiency figure stated by SaiSharma. Claim was that everything is in the paper which can be obtained (only) on request. I got The Paper. Guess what - did I see scientifically sound proof of SaiSharma's claims? Obviously I can't tell unless paper is made public at least for readers of this thread.
Lets do one thing, next time you have a business trip to Korea. Let me know, I will take you to my facility, and we can do all the testing as per your standards?
Hope that would work for you.
Title: Re: Bullshit: Texzon Wireless Power
Post by: EEVblog on March 18, 2019, 12:18:03 am
Many who follow this thread perhaps remember that I insistently asked for real experiment info/data that would confirm efficiency figure stated by SaiSharma. Claim was that everything is in the paper which can be obtained (only) on request. I got The Paper. Guess what - did I see scientifically sound proof of SaiSharma's claims? Obviously I can't tell unless paper is made public at least for readers of this thread.
Lets do one thing, next time you have a business trip to Korea. Let me know, I will take you to my facility, and we can do all the testing as per your standards?
Hope that would work for you.

That's what all the people working on this sort of stuff say. I got offered US$20k and a trip to Canada to "verify" some crackpots invention.
Bottom line is, if you are inviting people to do the testing and verification for you then you are doing it wrong. You make the claims, you get to prove it. No one is going to waste their time doing any verification for you.
It's pretty trivial these days to make Youtube videos demonstrating your claims. If you have a prototype that demonstrates your claims, show it working.
NOTE: I have not been following this thread, so I don't know what's been presented so far, but it sounds like no one here is convinced so far.
Title: Re: Bullshit: Texzon Wireless Power
Post by: EEVblog on March 18, 2019, 12:23:26 am
Question:
Quote
Viziv Technologies has a portfolio of over 60 U.S. and international granted patents. Additional patent applications are in development and more are expected.
100+ Unique U.S. patents filed.
760+ Pending patent filings (U.S. and International).
65+ Patents granted (U.S. and International).

That's hundreds of thousands of dollars minimum in patent drafting costs alone, millions of dollars if done by a proper patent attorney. So where is your funding coming from?
And it's strange that with 65 US patents granted I can't find a single one under Viziv Technologies
Title: Re: Bullshit: Texzon Wireless Power
Post by: ogden on March 18, 2019, 12:24:16 am
Lets do one thing, next time you have a business trip to Korea. Let me know, I will take you to my facility, and we can do all the testing as per your standards?

If my presence in your facility is only way for you to do proper measurements, then you are out of luck. Are you going to show your paper to others or not? At least pictures of setup or some demo video?

It's pretty trivial these days to make Youtube videos demonstrating your claims. If you have a prototype that demonstrates your claims, show it working.

There are some Youtube videos BTW. Only tiny detail - author shall "release" them in public.
Title: Re: Bullshit: Texzon Wireless Power
Post by: ogden on March 18, 2019, 12:55:13 am
And it's strange that with 65 US patents granted I can't find a single one under Viziv Technologies

Smart move actually. Patents will not be auctioned when project fails.
Look what happened to Ring Power Multiplier by Texzon and project web page http://www.powermultiplier.com/ (http://www.powermultiplier.com/)
When money income of Viziv Technologies will dry out, most likely same scientists will start next energy-related venture investment project.
Title: Re: Bullshit: Texzon Wireless Power
Post by: Cyberdragon on March 18, 2019, 01:32:25 am
He showed me a paper demonstrating wave power over METAL SURFACES. Not "OMG it will circle the earth!" power. :palm:
Title: Re: Bullshit: Texzon Wireless Power
Post by: SaiSharma on March 18, 2019, 01:49:38 am
He showed me a paper demonstrating wave power over METAL SURFACES. Not "OMG it will circle the earth!" power. :palm:
I never claimed earth! Its not possible, E-field modes would simply sink into earth because of Lossy nature!
Title: Re: Bullshit: Texzon Wireless Power
Post by: bd139 on March 18, 2019, 09:42:08 am
Question:
Quote
Viziv Technologies has a portfolio of over 60 U.S. and international granted patents. Additional patent applications are in development and more are expected.
100+ Unique U.S. patents filed.
760+ Pending patent filings (U.S. and International).
65+ Patents granted (U.S. and International).

That's hundreds of thousands of dollars minimum in patent drafting costs alone, millions of dollars if done by a proper patent attorney. So where is your funding coming from?
And it's strange that with 65 US patents granted I can't find a single one under Viziv Technologies

Back in the late 00's I worked for a hooky as hell tech startup. Someone just turned up with a suitcase of £50 notes one day and said "here you go". Lots of people will just throw money at ideas and eventually one of them will stick and make them a return. We didn't even pitch to this guy. We bought some MacBooks, nice Aeron chairs and ate at Moro three days a week at lunch times. Good times. We were comfortable and ate like kings.

At least they spent it on patents  :-DD
Title: Re: Bullshit: Texzon Wireless Power
Post by: ogden on March 18, 2019, 02:08:03 pm
Lets do one thing, next time you have a business trip to Korea. Let me know, I will take you to my facility, and we can do all the testing as per your standards?

If my presence in your facility is only way for you to do proper measurements, then you are out of luck. Are you going to show your paper to others or not? At least pictures of setup or some demo video?

Update: I did not get proof of power efficiency in private email conversation. Still nonbeliever. When seeing scope screen I pointed out that SaiSharma does not measure AC RMS voltage and current properly guess what happened?  :-DD
Title: Re: Bullshit: Texzon Wireless Power
Post by: wbeaty on March 23, 2019, 05:28:40 am

Quote
Extraordinary ideas require extraordinary proof.

Um...  the original quote speaks of extraordinary evidence.  "Proof" is for mathematicians; in physics any idea, sane or weird, just requires good solid supporting evidence, not exotic and special "extraordinary" evidence.

Here's a bit of Trivia:  M. Truzzi, one of the co-founders of CSICOP, was the author of the above quote, but later expressed regrets.   He discovered it to be a recipe for bias.   Why?  "Extraordinary-ness" is totally subjective!   Everyone has a different threshold.  I see a worse problem: to disbelieve anything, just reject all confirming evidence, saying "Nope, evidence still not extraordinary!"    Instead why don't we all just use a level playing field: treat all ideas the same, always with the same high evidential requirements.  Don't try to make bias normal and acceptable. "When a man finds a conclusion agreeable, he accepts it without argument, but when he finds it disagreeable, he will bring against it all the forces of logic and reason." -Thucydides.   Poor Dr. Truzzi.  He could never take back the meme he'd unwittingly released.

This is not bias. That's a junk straw man you threw together to discredit my idea.

So,  you can read my mind and tell me what I think?   But your telepathy powers didn't work this time.  I actually was just honestly describing the decades-old history of that quote, as I remember it.   (If you're not personally familiar with such history, therefore I have to be lying?  Making s**t up?  Sheesh!)

For years the 'Extraordinary Evidence' quote was widely attributed to Carl Sagan.  But back in early internet days, folks on the Skeptic groups tracked down a much earlier instance coming from the late Marcello Truzzi (discussed online in late 1990s.  IIRC might have happened on sci.skeptic usenet, or on JREF skeptic forum.)  There was also some material directly from Truzzi himself, him specifically bemoaning the word "extraordinary."  I haven't found his original article unfortunately.  Truzzi expressed regrets in creating the quote, and thus introducing unscientific material into basic reasoning.  (He seems to assume that, if he hadn't coined the phrase, Sagan wouldn't have spread it all over, and today it wouldn't be a Skeptic Trope.  So Truzzi took the blame.)   

Again:  our judgement of a claim's "extraordinary-ness" is necessarily subjective.   The bias needn't be automatic, if the term "extraordinary" is taken to mean "good solid evidence" rather than some sort of "special" evidence.  Yet the situation too easily becomes "I hate this weird idea/claim/etc., and I can easily make it look bad, by labeling it as being 'extraordinary,' which in addition, magically makes it immune to normal evidencial requirements."

The phrase "we need good solid evidence, not 'extraordinary' evidence" was not my own, although I've been trying to spread it online over the last decades.  It was coined because demanding proof is wrong.  "Proof" doesn't apply to science, only Falsification/disproof.  And of course "extraordinary" needs to be stricken entirely, and replaced with something far less subjective.   The 'solid' evidence phrase may have originated in one of the old articles by Truzzi, or more likely came from the online skeptics/believers groups arguing about the flaw built into the Extraordinary Evidence quote.   

Either way, when I see someone try to use Truzzi's misguided quote, I pounce on that s**t.

Again:  the concept "extraordinary" is an embarrassment, and has no place in tightly reasoned argument.    We need good solid evidence for everything in science, including both the obvious scammers with the magical horse pooping out the dollar coins, and also the unquestioned (but occasionally erroneous) material appearing in every reputable technical text.

It's a very RP Feynman philosophy: question everything, never entirely trust textbooks or the pronouncements of experts; instead track down solid evidence behind them.  Attack your own position!  Don't limit your critical attitude to enemies' assertions, or to the weird stuff alone.

Title: Re: Bullshit: Texzon Wireless Power
Post by: wbeaty on March 23, 2019, 05:45:56 am
Err you're missing the point by a mile. Centralisation, which this entirely relies on as the power source has to be concentrated on the transmitter logically, brings no benefit at all whatsoever.

WHAAAT?   What centralization?  Criticizing a system you haven't researched?  Tesla's 1890s plan (and Viziv's apparent continuation) involves a vast array of multiple transmitters covering the planet, each using cavity-resonance to violate inverse-square falloff.   Tesla's original proposal was to have hundreds (perhaps even tens of thousands) of transmitters, little remote dynamos run by hydro systems unreachable by power lines.   Each transmitter blankets the planet with standing waves, employing the physics of driven-cavities, and so reception is roughly independent of distance.  Together they lock to each other, to excite a single standing wave "wireless grid."   But to get past the barrier of human nature, that same old irrational disbelief, instead Tesla built one giant prototype tower.   (That, as well needing to demonstrate worldwide comms and driving headphones worldwide, before amplifiers existed.   And also to broadcast significant power to Paris, for an upcoming worlds fair demonstration.)

In other words, Tesla's (and Viziv's) system won't work  (and it perhaps becomes idiotic,) if:


The whole point of this wireless power scheme was to tap nearly all significant energy sources worldwide, where each small transmitter independently blankets the entire planet (driving a cavity-mode: think microwave-oven chamber.  Not an inverse-square falloff,) and also, having thousands if not tens of thousands of transmitters online.  The global standing-wave becomes like a "water resevoir," an elevated pond, and would be filled using multiple small "water pumps."  The 'giant towers' form of the device is not the intended system.  Giant towers are either an initial prototype test- bed also including extreme high power, or they're a specifically impressive publicity-hype advertising system for producing easily-verified effects such as lighting tiny bulbs 1000KM distant, where any smaller transmitter would incapable, and where even fairly small numbers of KW towers would be far beyond their initial funding.  In the end, there might be a giant tower at Hoover dam etc., but that contribution might be minimal compared to the immense number of smaller ones.

Or put simply: what was Nikola Tesla's dream?  What is Viziv actually pursuing?   It was vehicles, flying and rolling and seagoing, all running without fuel tanks.  Wireless electrical service both in cities and remote homes.  Wireless navigation by standing-wave patterns.  Hugo Gernsback's "togas, food-pills and personal helicopters," or at least giant flying machines with onboard tennis courts and swimming pools.  All driven by one gigantic array of small transmitters running in phase-lock to a Schumann resonance line.  Viziv is building the initial pieces.   But for those who judge this "extraordinary" claim without bothering to first study its origins ...they'll only encounter Tesla's giant rotting tower torn down in Long Island, and Viziv's single huge experimental testbed device in Texas.

The centralization demonstrated by these giant towers is not the goal.
Title: Re: Bullshit: Texzon Wireless Power
Post by: wbeaty on March 23, 2019, 05:59:39 am
Engineers are incredibly easy to shut up, they deal in facts, just show them concrete data and it's done.

...unless it involves teh Dodgy.   Tesla stuff or similar.   Or just a new breakthrough which demonstrates a major flaw in our previous understanding. 

Really, would you ever trust "concrete data" if it encourages magical speaker cables that only cost $200/foot?   If it closely resembles a known scam, then we dare not trust any supporting data.  If 3rd party's testing didn't falsify the claim, then they're obviously promoters of that piece of probable woo.   If they appear to be independent third-parties, well, maybe they're actually socks, and secretly part of a scam.   If enough money was involved, then even people from known reputable test-labs aren't above corruption.   See the problem?

So instead, to make a good judgement, we have to produce the concrete data ourselves.   Perform replications in our own garage.   But what if our evidence supports the weird claim, then will anyone else ever take us seriously?  From outside, it looks like we've inexplicably turned into Believers.   We might be fooling ourselves, or just honestly mistaken.  Or the least probable: the weird discovery turns out to be legit, and the entire community was wrong about it.  Its promoters were right all along, those $200/ft speaker cables are worth the price, and were never Dodgy to begin with.  Heh.

The solution from science: wide replication, taking place over time (sometimes up to a couple of decades!)   For really major breakthroughs, a single paper usually won't convince the community.   If the breakthrough exposes a long-running community-wide error, then even a fair number of replications won't change opinions. (Examples: quasicrystals, jumping genes, ulcer bacteria.)   In that case "Planck's Other Law" has to kick in:  some scientists never accept a really new idea, but rather die of old age, and are replaced by their students who grew up already familiar with it.  Planck shortened this to:  science only progresses funeral by funeral.

Liquid-fueled rockets were once regarded as revolting Flash-Gordon crap, and nobody could get funding for research (unless like Caltech they quietly pretented they were "jets.")    I'm convinced that all the apparent Tesla-garbage is in much the same situation as those scientifically disgusting 1920s spaceships from the afternoon-movie serials, a bunch of ignorant Buck-rodger fantasy, so stupid thinking they can "fly to outer space" with rocket-tubes shooting fire out the back!!!   But then I'm extremely biased, having built a flyback Tesla Coil as a kid in 1973, burning tiny holes in fingertips, and over time became only more corrupted!
Title: Re: Bullshit: Texzon Wireless Power
Post by: EEVblog on March 23, 2019, 06:01:44 am
WHAAAT?   What centralization?  Criticizing a system you haven't researched?  Tesla's 1890s plan (and Viziv's apparent continuation) involves a vast array of multiple transmitters covering the planet, each using cavity-resonance to violate inverse-square falloff.   
Tesla's original proposal was to have hundreds (perhaps even tens of thousands) of transmitters, little remote dynamos run by hydro systems unreachable by power lines.   Each transmitter blankets the planet with standing waves, employing the physics of driven-cavities, and so reception is roughly independent of distance. 

What is the cavity standing wave dielectric loss of the earth?
Title: Re: Bullshit: Texzon Wireless Power
Post by: wbeaty on March 23, 2019, 07:17:35 am

What is the cavity standing wave dielectric loss of the earth?

Down below 20KHz?   Rule of thumb: the system-Q for the Earth's lowest resonance is commonly quoted as 8-10.   So, any ~11Hz pulse will pass around the Earth over 8 times times before decreasing to 66%.  (Imagine passing an AC pulse ten times across an entire a continent-wide power grid, with losses only 33%.)

The Corums (the Tesla-phile engineers behind the Viziv tower) published an engineering analysis in the early 1990s that showed that Tesla's system would still work, even with a Q that low.    Their main point:  when the system is in operation, the Earth's losses, (the low Q,) represents a constant loss independent of throughput, basically a resistor parallel to the power supply.   For a large system, the loss would be ?tens? of megawatts.   But if we keep the operating voltage always the same, then these Earth-losses remain constant, no matter how much wattage is being drawn by the distant receivers.   Just make sure to sell gigawatt-rates of energy to customers, if your grid losses are constant megawatts.   

The losses are analogous to corona-leakage from a power grid the size of a continent.   Even with the conventional 60Hz power grid, if nearly everyone stopped using it, the efficiency would plummet to near zero, with megawatts of net corona-loss relative to such reduced throughput wattage.     (Also remember, the Tesla system isn't made of thin wires.  It's planes.   The analog to "cable resistance" apparently is insignificant, when compared to that parallel leakage in the air between the high voltage and ground.   But I think this fact is taken from theory only, and has never been verified empirically.   Better make sure your receiver acts like a lossless sky-coupling capacitor, not like a giant neon lamp!)

But in the mean time, there was a 1990s Sutton/Spaniol paper from NASA where they built an unusual exotic antenna, and measured Q-values in Shumann-lines with values of many hundreds.  Not ten!   The greater VLF research community has never accepted this.  These results are still maverick/fringe, and like the Corum papers, banished to Tesla conference publications.

Sutton/Spaniol explained the problem: conventional Schumann resonance Q-measurements require long integration times, and unexpectedly, the Earth's sharp resonant lines are not stable in frequency, but wander around over a scale of many seconds.   If your measurement-window is on a scale of minutes (in order to pull the natural signal out of the extreme thunderstorm VLF static,) then a wandering-yet-high-Q resonance will be measured as an artifact: a broader low-Q resonance.   And also, with minutes of integration time it becomes impossible to even detect such wandering behavior.   Sutton/Spaniol's weird neg-resistance neg-inductor antenna-driver was actively altering the space impedance, essentially amplifying the signal as fields, just outside the antenna-coil.  An artificial superconductor loop.   They obtained relatively huge signals, performed FFT on them, and saw extremely narrow Shumann spikes going way up into the KHz.   But it was just two NASA guys with weird results, versus an entire radio-research community, where the two guys say it's been done wrong for decades.   I bet their paper is PDF somewhere, with their graphs of VLF spectra above 100Hz, so-called "Black Hole Antenna."  (Ripe for hobbyist replications!  But probably not if you live in normal em-noisy neighborhoods.)

Note that if Earth's system-Q really was more like 800 rather than 8,  then any VLF pulse actually passes around the planet many hundreds of times before significant attenuation.   (If Sutton/Spaniol aren't fools, then that would mean that Tesla's claim of insignificant losses might have been genuine after all.   Yet that part wasn't even necessary to his success.)

FYI, the Q of a microwave oven chamber is more like 10,000 - 50,000.    If the box was made of parallel front-surf mirrors w/99.99% reflection, you could see way deep into the "infinite tunnel," tens of thousands of distant copies before the "tunnel" looked too dark.   In a box, you'd see miles of 3D space, with a billion copies of any emitter, all shining upon you.  So, a Tesla-style worldwide power-broadcast system may rival the efficiency of a wired grid thousands of miles wide, but its no match for the incredible efficiency of your kitchen's nook-ular dinner-cooker box!    Now we just gotta get rid of that hot magnetron.  Replace it with nice cold mosfet blocks.  (We had one of those in our lab last year: a 300watt plasma lamp, with a pair of 2.5GHz, 150watt "microwave oven" mosfet drivers.)
Title: Re: Bullshit: Texzon Wireless Power
Post by: wbeaty on March 23, 2019, 07:50:08 am
Looks like it's running at 1710KHz.   

https://www.google.com/maps/place/32%C2%B009'24.0%22N+96%C2%B056'22.0%22W/@32.1527028,-96.9413238,1530m/data= (https://www.google.com/maps/place/32%C2%B009'24.0%22N+96%C2%B056'22.0%22W/@32.1527028,-96.9413238,1530m/data=)!3m1!1e3!4m5!3m4!1s0x0:0x0!8m2!3d32.1566667!4d-96.9394444

This was passed along:

The FCC application, search https://apps.fcc.gov/oetcf/els/reports/GenericSearch.cfm (https://apps.fcc.gov/oetcf/els/reports/GenericSearch.cfm)
try entering"viziv."    Transmitter callsign WN9XDJ  1.4KW18 kHz   Expires April 2019

"Purpose Of Operation:
"The purpose of the test will be to confirm effective launching of a Zenneck surface wave and to
"measure its propagation and attenuation characteristics on a global scale.
Title: Re: Bullshit: Texzon Wireless Power
Post by: StillTrying on May 10, 2019, 02:47:16 pm
How well did the testing go.  :) :-BROKE :horse: \$\Omega\$ :bullshit: >:D
Title: Re: Bullshit: Texzon Wireless Power
Post by: bd139 on May 10, 2019, 02:54:13 pm
They're busy starting a new company and redoing the branding probably for the next round of funding :-DD
Title: Re: Bullshit: Texzon Wireless Power
Post by: bd139 on July 09, 2019, 08:03:24 pm
Think they’re definitely dead.

Actually did some reading and they partnered with Baylor university. World renown for absolutely not being heard of that one. Oh right it’s a Christian university with such alumni as Satan’s (Larry Ellison) right hand man Mark Hurd ironically. Even though they’re relatively unknown they now have the equivalent of a vegan vampire tapping their funding cabbage.