Talk:Directory:Lutec

From PESWiki

I'd like to commend PESWiki for doing some research and giving an objective analysis on Lutec rather than just taking Lutec's word for their product. Well done!

I listened to radio clip from a different website which had a scientist give positive comments on Lutec. This scientist spoke about how the oil interests were trying to squash this company, however, Lutec appears to have way more than ample time and space to show an acceptable proof of concept for their machine and I haven't heard any reports of goons or thugs from the oil companies coming in and destroying their work. Their lack of success appears to be completely the result of their own work. If the machine they're touting does produce 15 times the input, it would cost around an additional ten dollars at an electronics store to get some wire and a rectifier to feed the output back to the input in order to make the machine self sustaining. In their defense, I can see how any misconception or math error could be exploited to indicate over-unity so it's possible they believe in their work and they might not just be looking for money or possible notariety.

I had sent one of the Lutec inventors, John Christie, a very constructive e-mail a while back pointing out a few misconceptions on their website and offered my help as I have a background in electrical engineering. John sent me back a scathing reply which was completely uncalled for. Granted, they may be fed up with skeptics but a civil answer would have been nice. In my opinion, somewhere along the line they should actually follow up on information if they're genuinely trying to create a product. If the machine doesn't work and 50 skeptics tell them exactly why it doesn't work, the next logical step would probably be to consider some of the information given. Proof of concept isn't generally a hard thing to do and they've even built a machine that doesn't quite work. I believe with that machine they have more than sufficient 'lack of proof of concept'. Also, anyone with a good general knowledge of physics who looks at their website will also see a 'proof of lack of concept.' The one point they list regarding permanent magnets vs. electromagnets, is flawed and the two equations they list 'for the technically minded' are worthless equations. The equation, "Area = width * length" would have been just as useful.

I feel bad for all the people who invested in Lutec, including John and Lou if they believe in their work. I don't completely discount perpetual motion but even I would say time and money invested in John and Lou is wasted.

reasons to be skeptical of Lutec

I (Eric Krieg) have offered my $10,000 prize for proof of real free energy to the Lutec founders for years now. They act like they are too busy to show real proof - but really have done nothing new for many years now. Australian people have investigated Lutec and found them to be very evasive of proper testing and very under unity. See: http://www.phact.org/e/z/lutec.pdf

  To the best of my knowledge, there have been many people over many decades who claim to have these over unity devices and string along investors for years.  Basically, they pretty much say, "we don't have time to do a really good conclusive demonstration because we are setting up for mass production.  But soon you will be able to buy these in stores and then do your own test.  Early investors are told of super big and secret big investors about to come in.  Excuses are made about getting patents or over coming some kind of conspiracy.  Lutec may be the biggest at this game in their country - but this is a very old and prevalent scam.

Eric Krieg my $10,000 prize offer for any real proof of free energy is found at www.phact.org/e/freetest.html