DaS Energy: Peter Mckinlay Co2 powered energy machines
    Printing batteries on the surface of almost any object

    I was going to leave Rosch’e KPP technology topic alone for a while, especially given the publication of a letter (authenticity not confirmed) indicating not all things are well at GAIA.  Time always eventually reveals the truth. However I felt some of the claims being made by PESN needed challenging.

    I have no intention of attacking the person or persons (Stuart and Sterling). I am just questioning the statements being made in relation to the technology. They honestly believed in what they were shown.

    Article link: http://www.pureenergysystems.com/Validations/Rosch-KPP/

    images (95)The article states :”We are fully satisfied that there were no hidden wires going to the ~18 kW Kinetic Power Plant (KPP) output system, and that it was indeed self-looping with excess energy available for powering a load.”

    There were several questions raised by the readers and relayed onto Sterling and Stuart where reasonable doubt still existed. Tests which were simple to perform we not conducted including a torque test that would have removed a  considerable amount of doubt.  Excuses were made that often boarded on the ridiculous why tests where no performed including  that engineers did not bother as it was so obvious running as claimed.

    Point by Point

    “On June 19, my PES Network, Inc. associate, Stuart Campbell and I traveled to Spich, Germany to personally witness two KPP systems in operation over a four day period of time. The trip was paid for by Rosch Innovations, AG. A blog regarding our trip can be found via http://tinyurl.com/Rosch-15kW-Demo

    This is where part of the problem is. It is not uncommon to pay expenses for professional and companies to come test and validate. In this case Sterling and Stuart did not have the professional experience, instruments or ability to perform independent third party tests

     

    “Classical physics would predict that such a system would never produce excess energy, but there are some proprietary aspects to the technology that are not disclosed.”

    Classical physics  still predicts it will never produce any energy and no data, evidence or independent testing has been made available that would support it would. There have been no peer reviewed papers provided other than an old cut and paste document from the past which had been previously discredited

     

    “Since we know that there are many plugs by which the wheelwork of nature can be harnessed, our task wasn’t to find out how the system works, but to assess whether or not it works; and our conclusion is that it does work.”

    There has never been a paper published or any evidence of any plugs by which the wheelwork of nature can be harnessed.

    1. The questions is who knows ? (Since we know)

    2 What are these plugs?

    3. Where is there any evidence of the whelwork of nature in operation?

    These are just emotive non scientific statements based on fantasy, delusion and and a false ideology
    One of the demonstrator systems was the smaller 180-Watt Plexiglass system on wheels, which they didn’t want to run for too long — maybe 6-8 hours — because it is not engineered for that and was nearing the need for refurbishment (you could see an excess of bubbles emerging, for example), and they wanted to give a few more demonstrations before refurbishing. This is the same as was reported by TUV Inter-Cert to run without the battery dropping in voltage, showing that the batteries were not supplying the power.

    There are some misleading statements in this statement. There were no tests done by TUV as such, just by an associated company. The tests were inadequate in many ways, especially how the batteries were measured.  The batteries were connected at all times. If they were not supplying any energy why not either disconnect them or substitute them with capacitors ?

    There has never been an independent recorded test run in duration that exceeded a reasonable run time that could account for the energy stored in the batteries.

    The other demonstrator system that we witnessed and proved (the primary reason for our trip) was a large tower tube system around 10 meters high that was producing around 15 kilowatts continuously, <7.5kW going to the load, and 7.5 kW going to the compressor. They lifted the air compressor off the ground with a fork lift, so we could see that there were no wires coming to it from the ground. We also ruled out any kind of wire going to the system through the air hose from the tube tower, both during operation, and then by disconnecting the hose immediately after shut-off. They also emptied the tube of its water so they could open the two windows and we could see clearly inside that there was nothing hidden in there, such as a water-proof motor. That left the only possible place for a hidden wire to be in the table holding the generator that was being turned by the chain from the tower assembly. They didn’t unfasten the table and lift the table due to the engineering required to secure the table to withstand the 1500 Newton force on the chain. It takes three days for the glue to dry.

    Having installed many large industrial machines in factories over many years i find in fascinating they would use glue to attach the table.

    1. The most obvious reason is the force is rotational on the shaft and not directly against the table.
    2. The most secure, fast and economical way is to frill a hole and use concrete bolts that expand when tightened. They come by many names. The usual procedure is to secure a plate then attach to the plate.
    3. I think the chain would brake with that force

    Stuart had a high-end FLIR C2 thermal imagery camera that we used to check the infrared heat signature coming all around the table, and we are completely satisfied that the generator was as being depicted — a generator, not a motor, with a pass-through power cable going to the load.

    Stuart had a reasonable quality camera, but it was not a scientific instrument and the wrong instrument to be looking for hidden wires. It is easy to shield these cables against thermal signatures.

    I found the Rosch team members to be like a family, having a good rapport with one another, supporting each other, friendly. But that did not distract from their professionalism. They presented themselves with professional courtesy. We were given essentially free reign of the premises, to come and go through the premises (non-private offices space) as we wished. They were solicitous of our needs, making sure we had whatever beverages and food to be satisfied. They were likewise very cordial outside of the office, taking us on a tour of Cologne, taking us to dinner. Very pleasant experience overall, notwithstanding how busy they obviously were.

    This is exactly the same scenario with The John Rohner team.

    1. “feeling part of the family”
    2. 2. Being wined and dined

    One significant weakness that I will point out is that they are not the best at communicating by email. Responses sometimes take quite a while to get, and sometimes don’t come at all. I would ascribe this to their being inundated with tasks, and their not being able to attend to all tasks, even some important tasks. Persistence and patience pays off.

    Overall, I have high confidence in both the technology and the team, and expect good success, both in this project and others that are in process of emerging.

    Sincerely,
    Sterling D. Allan
    CEO

    I believe Sterling and Stuart believe what they saw and have every right to express their opinion. They also to the best of their abilities explored every possible angle.  I in no way believe they are being deceitful.

    However what they did in testing and validation fall way short of scientific and professional standards. This is where I, and many other engineers would want to do our own due diligence or testing before accepting these claims.

    We have been here 100 times before with companies and individuals making free energy claims. None to date have ever resulted in a commercially successful or useful way of generating energy.  There are some areas of interest worthwhile investigating like LENR, but that may not become a reality in a viable way until:

    1. The processes involved are understood
    2.  The reliability of the event becomes more consistent
    3. The engineering issues are overcome

    So no cigar and if I was looking into purchasing any free energy system I would take the buyer beware path and insist on my own independent testing.

    Finally the question must be asked why this revolutionary method of energy production, or if you like perpetual motion not taken the world by storm. Perhaps that may be a direct reflection of the credibility of the independent testing to date. Perhaps no one is convinced yet.

    It will be interesting to see how Gaia’s progress in building the units pans out in the next few weeks or months or if any of their membership gets a KPP in time to light up their Xmas trees.

     

    DaS Energy: Peter Mckinlay Co2 powered energy machines
    Printing batteries on the surface of almost any object
    Twitter Auto Publish Powered By : XYZScripts.com