Why do you say “he has done what no other has done”? He has a video, which could be easily faked, and nothing more. It’s a scam because he wants someone to spend a lot of money on an unproven project. If they somehow make it work (unlikely), he get a share of the sales (not profit, he wants a royalty). He wants to take no risk, only get rewarded. And, after the other folks spend all the money, he wants to retain the IP (intellectual property, say, a patent, if one ever comes) rights, so the folks spending all the money got nada.
As a test.
Using my 18V cordless drill over the weekend doing some sheet rocking I was able to sheetrock continuously for about 2.5 hours before I had to switch batteries.
Then I recharged the battery and decided to do a little test (about the same as what Jill posted). I then ran the drill continuously (NOT DOING ANY WORK)…it ran for a little over 3 hours. No when I was doing the sheetrocking…the drill wasn’t running continuously. It was on and off for each screw. Plus time I had to stop to put up another sheet. So running drill time was probably well less then 1 hour. Just goes to show the difference between running something under load an not under load.
JilaineBell, even if he drained the battery down to 0 volts and 0 amps, that is nothing new. (It is a fact that you can drain a rechargeable battery down to 0 volts and 0 amps. I have done it with Energizer rechargeable AA batteries.) The question is now that he has done this, has the battery been damaged by it? It is a fact that any battery can be completely drained. The question in my mind is, with a rechargeable battery, how do you prevent this from damaging the battery and reducing its capacity?
“A hypothesis is theory based on logic and facts.”
I disagree. A theory is something that has been shown by numerous experiments to be a reaonable expanation. It is not as well proven as a law of science, but has more reason to be accepted than a hypothesis. A hypothesis is just a statement of the problem. It has nothing to do with the outcome of the test, it is only a place to begin.
“You have neither.”
Is that directed at my or the OP? I have no financial interest in this system. Just like you, I’d like to see if it has some worth. That has not been shown to me yet.
“You really should take at least ONE science class.”
Is that for me, or the OP? Mike, why are you a bully? When you post negative, personal remarks it doesn’t reflect well on you IMO. Every time you post in this manner I wonder what you hope to accomplish. I don’t think that any recipient of such badgering takes you seriously. It’s OK to have diverging points of view, but it is not acceptable to attempt to demean anyone.
Quote “Using pldaniels example (he is correct): the Ryobi motor, no load (without a blade) will run, on average, just under 3 hours with PBA technology (with a blade just over 1 hour). The Ryobi motor, no load (without a blade) will run, on average, over 9 hours with the batacitor (with a blade over 4 hours).”
Your drill did not run for 9 hours, you are comparing Apples and Oranges!
Your drill did not run for 9 hours, you are comparing Apples and Oranges!
No I’m not…The drill lasted a LOT longer when NOT under torque…which is the EXACT same thing as this stupid (NON SCIENTIFIC TEST) did. Both tests proved NOTHING…Unless you test the mower under the EXACT SAME CONDITIONS it means NOTHING.
So for the 4TH TIME…What vested interest do you have with this company??? Why are you avoiding the question???
She did mention “We” in an older post…
JT…it is NOT directed at you…but the OP.
You are right about a hypothesis…I should have said a REASONABLE hypothesis. Sorry…but the OP’s hypothesis is NOT reasonable. But out in left field.
And I’ve asked her 4 times now to explain her Vested interest. In one of her statements she mentioned a $6k investment. I want to know what that is.
She also mentioned a $6k investment which I want explained.
She is clearly a shill. (and will probably protest mightily that she is not) We’ve seen this before. “I’m only looking for answers” while ignoring any and all actual answers or questions about her connection to the “inventor.” Note her location in her user profile is a zip code in Florida, coincidentally where the inventor and his lawyer are. Anyone surprised? I thought not.
1 Like
It’s a quote! Possibl, his lawyer.
Who’s lawyer??
The attorney name on YouTube is Kevin Sanders. I guess you haven’t been keeping
up! I guess the most important skill is listening not ego???
Your sentence fragments and run-on sentences are VERY DIFFICULT to read.
1 Like
And Jill, your habit of insulting the same folks you’re (apparently) asking for advice is not such a good idea.
Folks, we’re fighting a losing battle. We’re wearing out fingers out to no end. The OP is not and never was looking for information, analyss, or facts.
I just 5 minutes ago heard some clerks discussing how flammable oxygen is, validated because one of their moms was on oxygen and they were warned of the danger of smoking near the oxygen tank. I mustered all my self control and stayed completely out of the conversation. They believe that oxygen itself is highly flammable. They’re welcome to do so. I would have been viciously attacked had I tried to explain the chemistry of combustion.
We have a somwhat similar situation here, except with the possible addition of a financial motive.
I’m sorry you think that, I understand, that opinions die hard and can cause vicious personal attacks. Oxygen does not cause combustion, the present of oxygen fuel a rapid burn or fire. I know a fire burn much faster and hotter with oxygen, than with simple air. Elderly people who have smoked all there life?s need it on a daily bases, (just like my dead grandfather) on this I can agree! I have tried to listen, to reason, to research, to discuss, but opinions die hard.
Opinions are all we can give when no facts are available. And you may not know it, but your ‘questions’ are the typical ploy of a scammer advertising their wares. What facts has your research discovered?
I like the idea of holding people accountable for their claims. We see fit to do with Jill but not as vociferously as those with corporate labels and hired guns with degrees who make their equally bogus claims for them using more correct English and a more polished presentation. Scams come in all shapes and sizes.
Okay, let’s talk physics, chemistry, electronics, or scientific test protocol rather than opinion.
What is the battery made of? Plate material(s)? Plate area? Plate thinkness? Dielectric material? How much power does the motor consume 9with the blade)? At least that way I can determine the energy density necessary. From there I can research the materials and verify the storage capacity of the cells and that the motor could be driven that long with that capacity.
Can you explain to me the elements necessary for an independent party to duplicate the test and test conditions and verify the outcme in a seperate test? It would be fun to try.