Connect with us

hendershot generator

Discussion in 'Electronic Design' started by Brianss, Oct 13, 2013.

Scroll to continue with content
  1. Brianss

    Brianss Guest

    HAS Anybody out there built and used the Hendershot generator to power up a
    home? And if so how well dose it work?

    +------------------[ SERVER SIGNATURE ]----
    | posted via
    | Web, RSS and Social Media Interface to
    | and other groups
  2. amdx

    amdx Guest

    It doesn't matter how it works, it's free energy. :-(
  3. Den søndag den 13. oktober 2013 19.00.08 UTC+2 skrev amdx:
    and if you are lucky you get what you pay for ...

  4. John S

    John S Guest

    What the hell is it, BrainAss?
  5. Guest

    It's okay but be sure to install a transfer switch to get back on the grid from time to time, like anytime you want power.
  6. Guest

    The real secret is to plow a small part of the money into the next
    scam, hopefully with a fresh face for a partner. If you can find
    someone with a PhD who will lie, like Slowman, all the better. Only
    then does it become "perpetual".
  7. tm

    tm Guest

    I don't know. Maybe if you got him one of those "matchbook" nobel prizes?
    You know, like oboma has.
  8. Bill Sloman

    Bill Sloman Guest

    If the Ph.D.s aren't any more enthusiastic about lying than I am, this is very bad advice, but since krw regards anybody who doesn't share his asininedelusions as a liar, he probably isn't being intentionally misleading.
    There are people around who've got Ph.D.s on the basis of faked results, and if your entrepreneur could find one of them before they get caught they might do better.

    The most convincing "free energy" story in recent years would be Pons and Fleischmann's "cold fusion"

    and that seems to have been more of an unfortuate over-reaction to some very odd experimental results than any kind of deliberate fraud - Fleischmann at least had a very good reputation when I was working in the same department at Southhampton back in 1972.
  9. Robert Baer

    Robert Baer Guest

    "Fire" is the operative term.
    Un-synched generators tied together tend to create a HOT argument
    between each other.
  10. Robert Baer

    Robert Baer Guest

    Remember the 3 laws of conservation of energy: (1) you cannot win,
    (2) you cannot break even, (3) you lose.
  11. Martin Brown

    Martin Brown Guest

    At least USPTO have *finally* stopped accepting patents for perpetual
    motion machines. The purpose of these scams is to separate the credulous
    fools from as much of their money as possible. It works only too well as
    the latest incarnation called eCat demonstrates so well.
    Not even that. People will believe what they want to believe
    irrespective of powerful scientific evidence to the contrary.

    The closest I have seen to a perpetual motion machine is an
    electrostatic Zamboni pile and an small piece of aluminium foil. They
    were used to power first generation night vision equipment. The foil
    jumps to and fro until metal fatigue gets the better of it. Total output
    power is in the low 100s of nW.

    The Oxford electric bell has been powered by one since 1840.

    I think there is another somewhere using a sulphur ball and friction
    also in hard vacuum not been running quite as long. It made the news a
    decade or so back when an industrial dispute threatened to deprive it of
    the LN2 needed for the hard vacuum cold trap.
  12. Guest

    (3) You cannot get out of the game.
  13. Phil Hobbs

    Phil Hobbs Guest

    The PTO has required a working model to accompany all perpetual motion
    machine patents for many years. What do you mean, "finally"?


    Phil Hobbs

    Dr Philip C D Hobbs
    Principal Consultant
    ElectroOptical Innovations LLC
    Optics, Electro-optics, Photonics, Analog Electronics

    160 North State Road #203
    Briarcliff Manor NY 10510

    hobbs at electrooptical dot net
  14. Guest

    No, it is #3. Yours is a direct consequence of #1 & #2. If you
    cannot win or draw, you must lose. That's the universe of possible
    outcomes of game play.
    It *is* #3.
  15. Guest

    It falls back to the examiner. If he believes that it relies on
    perpetual motion, it's automatically denied until a working model can
    be examined. If the energy is coming from somewhere, it still need
    not be proven to patent. The rules haven't changed for some time but
    the examiners are being trained to see the difference a bit better
    these days.
  16. kevin93

    kevin93 Guest

    Normally #3 is quoted as "you cannot get out of the game"

  17. Robert Baer

    Robert Baer Guest

    * Both true and false.
    True part: if any of the wording appears to eXplicitly imply
    perpetual motion, the app is denied.
    False part: if the wording talks about extracting energy from or by
    using exotic and unproven techniques like Heisenbergian transformation
    of Casmir energies. Or some such more opaque and mumbo-jumbo. I remember
    seeing some in this class. In fact, one seemed to be an extension of a
    cold fusion system.
  18. Robert Baer

    Robert Baer Guest

    No,i did not.
    You fail to realize that some idiot may try to do that!
  19. Robert Baer

    Robert Baer Guest

    One cannot have TWO third laws.
    What you cited was a corollary to the three.
Ask a Question
Want to reply to this thread or ask your own question?
You'll need to choose a username for the site, which only take a couple of moments (here). After that, you can post your question and our members will help you out.
Electronics Point Logo
Continue to site
Quote of the day