Relay-Version: version B 2.10 5/3/83; site utzoo.UUCP
Posting-Version: version B 2.10.2 9/5/84; site kitty.UUCP
Path: utzoo!watmath!clyde!cbosgd!ihnp4!mhuxn!mhuxr!ulysses!allegra!mit-eddie!think!harvard!seismo!rochester!rocksanne!sunybcs!kitty!larry
From: larry@kitty.UUCP (Larry Lippman)
Newsgroups: net.physics,net.misc,net.research
Subject: Re: Joseph Newman's Energy Machine
Message-ID: <533@kitty.UUCP>
Date: Sat, 26-Oct-85 13:27:36 EST
Article-I.D.: kitty.533
Posted: Sat Oct 26 13:27:36 1985
Date-Received: Wed, 30-Oct-85 04:29:52 EST
References: <173@tulane.UUCP>
Organization: Recognition Research Corp., Clarence, NY
Lines: 50
Xref: watmath net.physics:3453 net.misc:8792 net.research:305

> ...
>      Today, I had the oppurnity to attend the first public showing of the
> Energy Machine of Joseph Newman.  ...
> ...
>      The machine which I saw operate today used several lantern batteries
> for a power source... connected to the machine's ouput leads were a neon
> sign and about 12 florescent tubes (each 5 feet long).  When Newman threw
> the switch, the lights and sign started to blink on and off... the only
> movement seen in the machine itself was a spark every tenth of a second or
> so.  Obvisouly, 12 florscent tubes cannor be powered by a few lantern 
> batteries, and there was NO trickery to be seen... 
> ...

	I have been aware of Mr. Newman's `energy machine' for quite some time,
and am admittedly skeptical of his claims (speaking as an engineer).  I must
admit, though, that I have not seen the machine nor do I have enough technical
information on it in my possession to give it a proper evaluation.
	HOWEVER, the possibility of fraud cannot be discounted, since some
really spectacular frauds have been perpetrated in the past for alleged energy
saving devices.
	The fact is that several lantern batteries are INDEED CAPABLE of
powering 12 fluorescent tubes.  Consider the following:  Let's use four as the
number of lantern batteries (you said several, so four seems reasonable).
Assuming they were an Everyready P/N 731 6 volt lantern battery, these batteries
have an approximate energy capacity of 10 ampere-hours to a 4.0 volt discharge.
4 batteries X 6 volts X 10 ampere-hours = 240 watt-hours of energy.  A small
neon sign can easily run on 25 watts (5 KV x .005 A).  A Sylvania fluorescent
tube 4 feet long, P/N F40SSP32/CW/RS requires only 32 watts of energy for FULL
rated output.  32 watts X 12 lamps = 384 watts.
	25 watts + 384 watts = 409 watts, which is quite capable of being
supplied by four lantern batteries for say, 1/2 hour.  For the moment I am
ignoring energy conversion loss for any static inverter, since the above
power consumption for the lamps is RMS anyhow.
	HOWEVER, the human eye is not a very accurate radiometer, so the lamps
could well be running at LESS than full intensity, with no one being the wiser.
Obviously this would increase battery life, especially if high-frequency
excitation were being used for the lamps instead of conventional ballasts.
	The use of fluorescent lamps instead of incandescent sets off alarm
bells in my mind, since fudging the energy consumption of incandescent lamps
is not readily possible.
	Please bear in mind that I am NOT accusing Mr. Newman of tryng to
perpetrate a fraud.  I am only suggesting that people have an open mind.
	
===  Larry Lippman @ Recognition Research Corp., Clarence, New York        ===
===  UUCP    {decvax,dual,rocksanne,rocksvax,watmath}!sunybcs!kitty!larry  ===
===  VOICE   716/741-9185		 {rice,shell}!baylor!/             ===
===  FAX     716/741-9635 {AT&T 3510D}	           syr!buf!/               ===
===  TELEX   69-71461 ansbak: ELGECOMCLR {via WUI} ihnp4!/                 ===
===									   ===
===                   "Have you hugged your cat today?"		           ===