Newest test on the 90% Eff. Lighting Circuit


courtesy of Wesley Crosiar

From: WESLY To: Subject: Re: High efficiency lighting system Date: Wed, 23 Apr 1997 00:08:06 -0700 -------------------- TO ALL:
I purchased the high efficiency lighting system detailed in Popular Electronics. I have just finished my testing of the device. On the cold wire, before the electrical converter box we placed a one Ohm resistor. Across this resistor we placed the scope. There was a seventy volt spike at approximately 1/60th of a [cycle]. 1/60th of a [cycle] times [1/10]cycle is approximately 1/600th of a second or approximately 1.66 milli/sec. L=1/10th cycle in width + or - 10% 16,666 mil/sec + or - 10% divide by ten = 1.66MS V=I amp times R Seven volts over 1 ohm = 7amps spike @ 115V AC 60HZ or approximately a 700 watt spike + or - 10% for 1/10th of the cycle, which would be 70 watts + or - 10% at 60HZ. I then compared the light to a standard one hundred watt light with a light meter. The results were that the 100 watt bulb was brighter than the light from the bulb in the high efficiency lighting system that is supposed to equal a 100 watt lightbulb, although it was more than a fifty watt light bulb. By using a light meter I found that this high efficiency lighting system really put out only seventy five watts. At this point I assumed that the High efficiency lighting system must fool the Power companies meter, so I hooked it up to a regular house meter. Here are the results. The high efficiency electrical system that had a lamp that is supposed to put out 100 watts but actually only puts out seventy to seventy five watts, spins the meter exactly the same speed as a normal seventy five watt, one hundred and ten volt bulb does. This test was done with a stop watch and a regular Pacific Gas and Electric power meter. My conclusions: Mr. Rosenthal's device is a fraud. He makes the claim that his device uses seven watts of electrical energy to produce one hundred watts of light. This message can be forwarded to vortex-L or Newmans list or anywhere else anyone wishes to save anyone else from being duped by fraud. WESLEY CROSIAR PO BOX 268 SAN ANDREAS CA. 95642 ----------------------------------------------------- I should have proofread the earlier post, 1/60th of a "second" should have read 1/60th of a [Cycle]. To make it more clear It should have read something like One HZ, which is 1/60th of 60 Hz times 1/10th of a HZ [the duration of the spike] = one 600th of a second or 1.66 Mill/Sec.