Hmm, Toshiba. Sure ain't no laptop....
http://www.springfield.il.us/NewGraphics/Generator2.jpg

Robert Swinney wrote:
Don sez:

"However, the underlying premise is either flawed or utter bull****", I vote both.

Bob Swinney .

"Don Foreman" wrote in message
...
On Mon, 17 Mar 2008 11:42:37 -0600, Ignoramus22030
wrote:

On 2008-03-17, Phil Kangas wrote:
Yah, this guy claims to have invented a new form of
generator and claims it is not a perpetual motion
device! I'm a skeptic but here is the link so you
can decide for yourself. I'm going to keep my wallet
in my pocket......phil

http://www.nullgrav.com/index.htm
They say it produces more energy that it consumes.

i

Not exactly.

"A very small motor keeps the generator spinning continually, which
may produce far more energy than it consumes." This statement is
somewhat ambiguous.


"Current generators have inherent opposing forces when put under
electrical load. This limits the amount of power that can be extracted
from magnets. By eliminating the factors that cause these opposing
forces, the NullGrav generator may extract far more energy from the
same magnets."

Horsepuckey! Power is extracted from the mechanical force turning the
genny, not from the magnets.

Also,

"Current generators have inherent opposing foces. When placed under
electrical load, the forces limit efficiency to a maximum of 85
percent."

Horsepuckey! There is no such theoretical limit of efficiency. There
is no way the large turbine-driving generators enclosed in helium are
anywhere near as low as 85% efficient. They'd melt in minutes.

See
http://www.springfield.il.us/Generator.htm

At 85% efficiency, this 200-megawatt generator would be dissipating
35.3 megawatts as heat. That's about 120 million BTU/hr.