Seems like a big bunch of people knowing all but don't see anyone else doing
it to prove their words. Maybe you all could settle the issue if someone did
a bit of lab work and show how they think it is being done. I have tried and
can not do it from any of two generators. So what is the big secret everyone
seems so sure about on this list? I would like to know as it does seen very
cool and a neat way to do very low power lighting.

DM

-----Original Message-----
From: Horace Heffner [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Monday, October 29, 2007 4:10 PM
To: [email protected]
Subject: Re: [Vo]:Re: "Cold" electricity


What a dodgy mess this is!  8^)  Second try to send this.

On Oct 29, 2007, at 11:44 AM, Jones Beene wrote:

> Stephen,
>
>> How can you possibly think a circuit with a battery in it provides
>> a more clear-cut case of OU than a circuit which lights LEDs with
>> no input power at all?
>
> Once again - let me repeat that no one has ever claimed that there
> is NO power input.

How would you categorize your statement: "there is NO, ZERO, NADA,
signal... merely ground, or DrS's touch"?  (A copy of that message is
appended below.)


> No one has ever claimed that there is apples-to-apples OU.

Once again the questions is handily sidestepped.   The question
implied is *not* is there any source of power from anywhere in the
universe.  The question for which there has not been a direct answer
from Ron is whether there is any power deliberately supplied to the
circuit in video #7.

Following is a brief summary, in latest order first, of various forms
in which the question has been asked or implied.


On Oct 29, 2007, at 8:14 AM, Stephen A. Lawrence wrote:

> It's just that -- "... have already eliminated obvious inputs" --
> which is under discussion.  In fact, Ron has never actually
> asserted that all obvious inputs have been eliminated.
>
> As I said, the circuit being discussed extensively here was the one
> which apparently had just a ground wire attached and no inputs.  It
> is by far the most anomalous item mentioned in the thread --
> everything else discussed in this thread is just arguing over
> whether the input and output balance; OTOH if there's no input at
> all then it's a clear cut case of something for nothing.  Don't you
> find that more interesting than the (possible) ability to pull more
> out of an alkaline cell than the manufacture's specs claim?
>
> But according to the description given on the web page, the no-
> input circuit /does/ have an input:  the signal generator is
> apparently intentionally capacitively coupled to the circuit.



On Oct 29, 2007, at 9:05 AM, Stephen A. Lawrence wrote:
>
>
> Jones Beene wrote:
>> Stephen A. Lawrence wrote:
>>> The circuit under discussion was the one with a single ground
>>> wire attached and no input.  It is based on the circuit shown in
>>> video #7. It is described farther down on that page.
>>>
>>> The one with a battery is yet something else again.
>> The circuit is FAR from "something else again" and in fact was
>> added later for the (apparent) sole purpose of countering
>> skeptics' objection of capacitive coupling.
>>>> It seems to me that the commentators here have been too quick to
>>>> assume that the effect is conservative. Isn't the purpose of
>>>> this forum to seek out anomalies, and this process may involve
>>>> some trust in experimenters with very extensive experience in
>>>> these things to have already eliminated obvious inputs.
>>>
>>> It's just that -- "... have already eliminated obvious inputs" --
>>> which is under discussion.  In fact, Ron has never actually
>>> asserted that all obvious inputs have been eliminated.
>> Or else you haven't been listening.
>
> So if he said it, and you _were_ listening, please post the quote.
>
> If there was no power input to the 1-wire circuit, just what
> "capacitive coupling" do you think the "skeptics" were objecting to?



On Oct 28, 2007, at 2:12 AM, Michel Jullian wrote:
> So there still is a signal generator coupled to the device, why
> couldn't it be the power source
> then?
>
> Michel



On Oct 27, 2007, at 1:48 PM, Horace Heffner wrote:
> Has anyone noticed that at some point in the progress that Ron
> started using an AC coupling through the bottom of the breadboard
> backing plate?  For example see Fig. 22 of the following:
>
> http://www.drstiffler.com/ce4.asp


On Oct 22, 2007, at 10:54 PM, Horace Heffner wrote:
>
> I would still like to hear Ron's direct response to the question as
> to whether he is supplying any input energy to the device in video #7.
>
> Horace Heffner
> http://www.mtaonline.net/~hheffner/



On Oct 22, 2007, at 1:21 AM, William Beaty wrote:
> On Sat, 20 Oct 2007, Stephen A. Lawrence wrote:
>
>> William Beaty wrote:
>>> I totally missed any announcement that self-acting or "closed-loop"
>>> operation was achieved.
>>
>> WHOA slow down, that's not what was said.
>
> That's exactly what was said.   Or at least strongly implied... and
> then
> if we made the wrong conclusions, he didn't correct us.


On Oct 22, 2007, at 9:07 AM, Jones Beene wrote:
> --- Horace
>
>>> As I stated, and the video demonstrates, the
> signal
> can be disconnected now after startup, but not both
> the ground and the signal.
>
>> Nonsense!
>
> Only with the connotation that this experiment defies
> traditional understanding...then yes, it is "nonsense"
> to the mainstream.



On Oct 21, 2007, at 3:27 PM, Horace Heffner wrote:
>
> On Oct 20, 2007, at 10:42 AM, William Beaty wrote:
>
>> On Sat, 20 Oct 2007, Jones Beene wrote:
>>
>>> I find Bill's T-coil comparison enlightening ;-) but lacking (in the
>>> sense of apples-to-oranges) wrt to the latest experiment -- where
>>> there
>>> is NO, ZERO, NADA, signal... merely ground, or DrS's touch.
>>
>> Ah, that's different!
>>
>> :)
>
> and ... that is probably not true that there is no signal applied.
> If you will notice there is no mention of closing the loop or self
> running in the video.  In fact, it appears what has likely happened
> is the pan potential has been made to float, providing a capacitive
> or conductive linkage to the breadboard ground, the closed path to
> the "ground" supplied by the clip or hand.  The power is supplied
> through the pan.  Since the supplied power is AC, this is no
> different from attaching the clip to the power supply and using the
> capacitive link between the pan and ground as ground, even if the
> pan is not grounded by wire, but rather by capacitive linkage to
> ground.  You can see about an inch of what appears to be a power
> supply lead at the bottom right of the screen.  It goes under the pan.
>
> *Complete* documentation including a full circuit diagram and parts
> info should be supplied.
>
>
> Following is the dialog from the video:
>
> http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tdJm9QCVJHY
>
> Quoted material below is from narrator on the video, assumed to be
> Ron Stiffler.
>
> "Sometimes a good ground really makes all the difference in the
> world. There's my big fat ground lead hooked to that one little
> wire on that coil.  Eight beautiful white LEDs."
>
> (Hand grabs insulated alligator clip and removes it, showing LED go
> out.)
>
> "Let's see if I'm a good ground too."
>
> (Hand comes back into picture without clip, touches lead, the LED
> glows dimly.)
>
> "I'll be dared.  Not too bad, right?"
>
> (Repeats touch, no touch.  Note little black wire at bottom right
> of screen, going under pan, moving side to side a bit.)
>
> "Fire up eight LEDs."
>
> (Repeats touch, no touch.)
>
> "That takes a lot of power doesn't it?"
>
> (Lifts up breadboard with left hand to show no battery.  Note what
> appears to be a small black wire, going under the right half front
> of the aluminum pan, shaking back and forth just prior to and after
> the lifting of the board. )
>
> "I still don't have that pink bunny under here either."
>
> (Rotates breadboard.  Places board back on pan.  Wire at bottom
> right of screen moves side to side some more in the process.  Hooks
> alligator clip back to coil lead.)
>
> "Well, we'll put the ground back on it and be satisfied with it.
> Lookn' better all the time.  Maybe I'll light my house next week."
>
> Horace Heffner
> http://www.mtaonline.net/~hheffner/


Reply via email to