The Adams motor/generator was the topic of some interest when Robert Adams
released his "Adams motor/generator manual" a few years ago through Nexus
magazine. I was an associate of Adams for around 18 months and I visited
and worked with Adams during that period. As it turned out I discovered
that Adams was making a systematic error in his input power calculations -
when this error was corrected his units exibited less than unity operation.
Adams refused to accept my results even though the imperical evedence was,
IMHO, overwhelming. I presented Adams with 4 different methods of
accurately calculating input power to his motor - all supported each other
and all showed less than unity gain. My guess is that Adams' 20 years of
research was a difficult habit to break, as the only way of achieving over
unity operation of his motor was to use HIS method of input power
calculation. The lesson here is never let what one wants interfere with
what one sees. Adams, the last I heard, is still pushing the validity of
his unit - good luck to him.
Harold Aspden was, and perhaps still is, an associate of Adams. I had the
opportunity to speak with Aspden about the shortcomings of Adams methods a
few years ago. Aspdens position, to me at least, is that even if Adams is
in error, the concept is sound. He may be correct but in my mind there are
greener pastures to explore.
Of some interest is the connection with what Adams was trying to achieve
and the claims made by Wesley W. Gary at the end of last century. Much of
what Adams spoke of to me had an intriguing parallel with Gary's concepts.
My experiments with Gary's work showed interesting and encouraging results
and I intend to follow through on this when time allows.
Regards, Bill.
At 11:30 31/07/98 -0700, Jerry Wayne Decker wrote:
>Hi Henry et al!
>
>In case no one has answered yet, this is ROBERT ADAMS of Adams O/U
>motor fame. Bill McMurtry on this list has tested the unit and
>reported it to be erroneous as to o/u claims, though Harold Aspden is
>so confident in the unit that he worked with Adams to file a patent on
>the technology.
>
>NEXUS magazine first released this about 4 years ago and has had
>several articles since.
>
>It is not self-running but the claims indicate it can produce high
>horsepower that only draws minimum current to keep the motor running.
>
>
>---Henry Curtis <hcurtis1@ix.netcom.com> wrote:
>>
>> I don't mean to belabor the point but it would be helpful if there
>was a name or title
>> both would be beautiful. The Adventures unlimited catalouge has
>several hundred
>> offerings.
>>
>> Thanks
>>
>> Henry
>>
>
>_________________________________________________________
>DO YOU YAHOO!?
>Get your free @yahoo.com address at http://mail.yahoo.com
>
>
> -------------------------------------------------------------
> To leave this list, email <listserver@dallastexas.net>
> with the body text: leave keelynet
> WWW based join and leave forms and KeelyNet list archives
> are at http://dallastexas.net/keelynet/
> -------------------------------------------------------------
>
>