Without integrating sampling
oscilloscopes, which make “direct in-phase power” sampling
measurements many times per second and sum these into a real power
measurement, the procedure being set up is at best just a
demonstration of something. If the phase angle is pretty big, then
apparent power can be quite large as “measured” by hand meters, but
real power can be something else completely. And that
is particularly simple to miss if only little hand meters are used.
Phase voltage amplification,
e.g., can wind up looking like – or being interpreted as – a “power
measurement”.

So the best you can have out of
this one appears to be a “demonstration”
of something. And the evaluator
will have to be quite sharp to know exactly what
he has been demonstrated.

On the other hand, just in case
there is a real effect that
the inventor is himself not knowledgeable of, please be aware of the
following true method for overunity COP:

Suppose the external circuit to
which the voltage source is connected, has a self-initiated
action whereby its electrons are momentarily “pinned” and –
momentarily – its current dq/dt = 0. In that
case, voltage amplification
is quite free, and one can easily increase the applied voltage by
orders of magnitude. The change in voltage flows onto (or can flow
onto) the circuit
at nearly light speed. If
this “potentialization of
the circuit” is accomplished during the dq/dt = 0 pinning period, then
asymmetrical regauging of the circuit has been performed and the
circuit has taken on orders of magnitude more real potentialization
energy (real potential energy caused by potentialization
of the pinned charges q). The little equation
for the freely stored extra potentialization
energy W is given by W = Vq. So long as dq/dt = 0, no current flows
and no power is involved as is no work. Potentialization
alone is or can be absolutely work-free. Simple flow of excess
potential energy onto a “static”
circuit involves no power or work
at all, and no entropy is
produced thermodynamically.

Then if the external source of
voltage is SWITCHED AWAY while the pinned circuit is still pinned, and
a resistor and diode in series are used to re-complete the gap in that
now-separated but
potentialized circuit (with the diode oriented properly for normal
dissipation current flow),
the source will not have been depleted whatsoever.
But real “free potential energy” has been transferred to the external
circuit, now completely separated
from the external source.

If, then, the pinning time expires
and the current is again free to move, that
freely potentialized (asymmetrically regauged) circuit now will freely
discharge that excess free
potential energy to power its losses and its loads. Specifically, half
the excess freely collected potential energy will be dissipated
against the back emf to destroy the source dipolarity of this circuit,
and the other half of the freely collected potential energy will be
dissipated in the other
losses and loads of that
circuit. So one will get – quite freely except for a tiny bit of
switching energy – appreciable real EM work in the load. The work
obtained in the load can be orders of magnitude times the amount of
little switching and control work the operator
had to do to control the process. ALL EM ENERGY OCCURS IN FIELDS AND
POTENTIALS, AND THESE ARE A PRIORI ONGOING FREE FLOWS OF EM ENERGY (a
la Whittaker 1903 and 1904) FROM THEIR ASSOCIATED SOURCE CHARGES AND
DIPOLARITIES.

That
is, all EM energy occurs in free and continuous real energy flows from
the associated source
charges. EM energy is always free, once the source charges are
assembled. It also lasts forever, if we do not allow the source
charges to be scattered or
the dipolarity destroyed.

By adroit use of momentary
pinning, one statically
potentializes the temporarily pinned external circuit and its charges
q and then dissipates
dynamically after the source of potential energy flow for potentialization
has been safely disconnected. So in this case one also DOES NOT
deplete the external source of voltage; from one’s finite voltage
source. From any finite voltage source, any finite amount of potential
energy can flow into external circuits and be stored on the
repotentialized charges q, so long as that
potentializing and collection process is not allowed to drive spent
current back through the back emf of the dipolar voltage source and
destroy its dipolarity. If none of the current in the external circuit
is ever allowed to have to flow back through the back emf of that
external source, then the source can be used to FREELY furnish real
usable EM potential energy serially and indefinitely – over and over
-- except for a tiny bit of switching energy.

Such a circuit is also easily
close looped, by using one part of the load as a little storage for
energy that is SEPARATELY
returned to power the switching operation.

Note that
the circuit and operation
we are describing does indeed violate
the arbitrary Lorentz symmetry that
Lorentz arbitrarily imposed on the Heaviside-Maxwell equations
circa 1892, just to get simpler equations
that usually could yield a
closed algebraic solution, and one would avoid the irksome task of
numerical methods.

This circuit now operates
as an ASYMMETRICAL system, one of that
vast class of asymmetrical Maxwellian systems just __
arbitrarily__ discarded
by Lorentz (and still __
arbitrarily__ discarded by EEs by their inane and
arbitrary continued symmetrizing of the equations).

EE’s are taught to build and use
only SYMMETRICAL circuits, which a priori self-restrict themselves to
COP<1.0. But by alternating
between an asymmetrical circuit for potentialization
(statically), and a freely
potentialized but now symmetrical circuit for powering the load
(dynamically), COP>1.0 operation
is enabled, while the laws of physics and nonequilibrium
thermodynamics are obeyed.

Let’s hope the inventors have
inadvertently stumbled onto something like that,
and just do not really understand it.

Best wishes,

Tom