Author Topic: Self-Runner NS Coil Pulse Motor Live Video Stream. It's been going for months! (Read 187881 times)

happyfunball · « **Reply #510 on:** October 05, 2010, 04:46:07 PM »

deleted

Rosemary Ainslie · « **Reply #511 on:** October 06, 2010, 04:10:13 AM »

Quote from: dllabarre on October 04, 2010, 11:05:34 PM

Rosemary Ainslie wrote:

"Don - I get it that the response is much stronger with tap water and, as Laser has pointed out - with other mixes. But if there's even 'some' response - enough to keep even a slow rotor turning - then we've got some argument against the coil being a battery. "

My tap water is filtered a lot.
Next time I'll try "dirtier" water taken before my filters.

DonL

Hello Don. If the water is 'dirtier' would it not also hold more to argue it as a standard galvanic effect using the 'salt bridge'? In any event - it's an interesting experiment to replicate - whichever way you cut it. How are the tests going?

Regards,
Rosemary

IotaYodi · « **Reply #512 on:** October 06, 2010, 05:01:52 AM »

Quote

And regardless of the 'length' it seems that I can simply NOT measure any resistance at all.

Ferrites are a mixture of ceramic and metals and are only slightly conductive. You simply dont have enough voltage or current in the meter to close the circuit. Even if you did close the circuit your standard meter still may read 0 as the values may be to low for the circuitry to pick up. A permanent magnet of iron or steel will show resistance.

Quote

Could this perhaps be some kind of evidence that current itself simply comprises magnetic fields?

Well current is moving charges by standard physics. There are both pos and neg charges. If current is magnetic fields its still interacting with the diamagnetic property's of metals etc: I think theres more than just magnetic fields to charge but it just may be..
Conductivity in water is affected by the presence of inorganic dissolved solids such as chloride, nitrate, sulfate, and phosphate anions (ions that carry a negative charge) or sodium, magnesium, calcium, iron, and aluminum cations {ions that carry a positive charge}. The warmer the water the better the conductivity also.
Question: If we immerse an Ns coil in water should it be negative or positive water? Within a standard electrolyte battery there is a bidirectional flow of pos and neg charges. Outside on the conductor the flow is neg to pos. I would assume the water should be positively charged because of the natural attraction of unlike charges. That should mean less Resistance to the flow. Any comments on this?

Rosemary Ainslie · « **Reply #513 on:** October 06, 2010, 05:27:47 AM »

Quote from: IotaYodi on October 06, 2010, 05:01:52 AM

Ferrites are a mixture of ceramic and metals and are only slightly conductive. You simply dont have enough voltage or current in the meter to close the circuit. Even if you did close the circuit your standard meter still may read 0 as the values may be to low for the circuitry to pick up. A permanent magnet of iron or steel will show resistance.

Hello Iota. I dispute this, with respect. Each magnet is cylindrical - plus/minu a 1/4 inch diameter and slightly more than that in length. I read zero resistance in one or in a string of them - regardless of the length. I measure resistance in all other metals that I tested. If the ferrite material in the magnet is blocking the reading then the resistance would be measured to be higher rather than otherwise. If the magnet itself were 'blocking' current flow - then one would simply need to introduce a magnet to switch a circuit off and on. This is clearly not the case. And both options were tested being the small individual magnets and many of them in a string. I'm going to try and get this photographed to show it.

Quote from: IotaYodi on October 06, 2010, 05:01:52 AM

Well current is moving charges by standard physics.

Standard physics requires moving electrons.

Quote from: IotaYodi on October 06, 2010, 05:01:52 AM

There are both pos and neg charges.

Golly. Wiki allows for the flow of electrons. I have read some complicated ideas that the positive current flow is the result of the flow of protons - for goodness sake. If it were that easy to detach protons from the nucleus of an atom we'd be able to achieve miracles of fusion and fission which thus far, still require enormous efforts and usually result in a massive ex or implosion. And if electrons are the charge carriers then it's never been experimentally verified.

Quote from: IotaYodilink=topic=9687.msg259869#msg259869 date=1286334112

Question: If we immerse an Ns coil in water should it be negative or positive water? Within a standard electrolyte battery there is a bidirectional flow of pos and neg charges. Outside on the conductor the flow is neg to pos. I would assume the water should be positively charged because of the natural attraction of unlike charges. That should mean less Resistance to the flow. Any comments on this?

Can't comment because I don't know. We need comment from a chemist perhaps.

Regards
Rosemary
http://www.scribd.com/doc/38315399/MORE-INCONVENIENT-TRUTHS

IotaYodi · « **Reply #514 on:** October 06, 2010, 06:12:16 PM »

Quote

If the ferrite material in the magnet is blocking the reading then the resistance would be measured to be higher rather than otherwise

It would be higher. I think your forgetting the conductivity of the ceramic ferrites as well as their materiel though. The electrons are not free to move as in metals. No movement means no flow to complete the circuit. There may be a charge there but that takes a different kind of meter to measure the amount of charge.
http://www.substech.com/dokuwiki/doku.php?id=ionic_and_covalent_bonding

Quote

physics requires moving electrons.

As far as my understanding goes it takes the opposite charge or polarity to move them.

Groundloop · « **Reply #515 on:** October 06, 2010, 11:58:56 PM »

@lasersaber,

I can't see any motor movement on:

http://www.lasersaber.com/public/WebCam/ActiveX1.html

Has the motor stopped or has the video streaming stopped?

Groundloop.

lasersaber · « **Reply #516 on:** October 07, 2010, 07:35:57 AM »

Quote

I just wanted to let you all know that I had to take down the live video cam as I had to use the computer it was hooked up to for other things. I will be buying a new wireless webcam in the near future. I should have a much better quality video stream.

The motor is still running. It's been going for over 100 days now.

I posted this a few pages back. Things sure can get lost in a thread fast. I should post this message on the live video webpage.

Rosemary Ainslie · « **Reply #517 on:** October 08, 2010, 12:37:01 AM »

Quote from: lasersaber on October 07, 2010, 07:35:57 AM

I posted this a few pages back. Things sure can get lost in a thread fast. I should post this message on the live video webpage.

Great stuff Laser. I actually didn't realise you had a live number showing this. So thanks for the link Groundloop.

Regards
Rosemary

Rosemary Ainslie · « **Reply #518 on:** October 08, 2010, 01:43:42 PM »

Guys this subject is being 'trashed' on another forum. I thought I'd just post over some of the arguments against this and my reply.

Quote from: MileHigh on October 08, 2010, 02:15:26 AM

Rosemary:

Like I previously posted, enormous amounts of electrical energy are needed to produce metals like aluminum and magnesium. So aluminum and magnesium are potential components of a battery, just like the components in a lead-acid battery. In other words they contain potential chemical energy that can be transformed into electrical energy. Pirate Bill keeps on thinking that this is all "free" perhaps because he is unaware that massive amounts of electricity were used to make the components of his "earth batteries." The energy comes from the aluminum or magnesium smelter. It takes so much electricity to produce aluminum that they sometimes build hydroelectric power plants that are dedicated to providing power for aluminum smelters.

If you were to take this argument to its logical conclusion - then - in terms of this a natural diamond would have less energy than an artificial diamond. There is no more or less potential energy in a lump of pure copper than there is in a mixed aggregate of the same weight. Nor is more potential energy added to the mix as a result of applied heat or galvanisation or anything else. Mainstream claim that the energy from mass is from the atomic mass. It's just that in a refined state - it's likely to be more useable as required. Bear in mind that the galvanic interaction does not compromise the mass of either the copper or the iron. Theoretically, they'll be there - into infinity. So. Also theoretically - if there's an induction process going on in Laser's rig - which clearly there is, then that too could be there for infinity.

Quote from: MileHigh on October 08, 2010, 02:15:26 AM

In my experiment, when you take away the water, the chemical reaction stops dead, and then the battery can't output any power. It's akin to draining the electrolyte out of a lead-acid battery.

But this argument also has to be seen in context. Laser claims that the rotor can turn with distilled water. If so, then there is no 'salt bridge' required for the 'galvanic effect' - which is battery related. It probably just works better with the addition of salt. Correspondingly, and confusingly, Bill claims that his rig works best if the sand is dry. In which case one could perhaps argue a 'salt bridge'. But in both instances one only needs to encase the entire coil in some kind of sealed condition - like a sealed battery - and either the slightly moist sand - or the slightly moist atmosphere around the coil - would make both the sand and/or the atmosphere - a third element in that rig. Unlike a sealed battery it would never go flat. That's got to be clean green - and virtually, dare I say it, 'perpetual'.

Also. Regarding your applied math to this general effect - I think you're out by a tad. If you take a battery say with a rating of 12 x ampere hours - then what the manufacturer is saying that it will deliver 12 amps for 1 hour or 1 amp for 12 hours - or whatever combination required between these numbers. So. 12 amps x 12volts = 144 watts. Then x 60 seconds, x 60 minutes x 1 hour = 518,400.00 joules. We can't yet quite rate Laser's rig - but - just to follow general protocol and your example of applying numbers here. Let's say that the rotor is turning with a ridiculously conservative dissipation of 0.2 watts. 0.2 x 60 seconds x 60 minutes x 24 hours x 115 days = approximately 1,987,200.00 joules. Technically it's alreadly out performed your standard lead acid battery. AND it's NOT going flat. AND that was an absurdly small wattage figure at kick off.

The truth of the matter is that the concept of a battery supply source also carries the concept of a depletable source of energy. That much has yet to be proven in either Bill's rig or in Lasersabers. Frankly I think they're both carving out some interesting history for us all.

Regards
Rosemary
edit. Sorry the math was out. I've amended.

IotaYodi · « **Reply #519 on:** October 08, 2010, 05:34:12 PM »

Quote

Laser claims that the rotor can turn with distilled water.

Was that before he soaked it in salt water? There would still be salt in the coil if he did that first. Also is the distilled water picking up ions from the copper and iron?
Within most solid materials a current arises from the flow of electrons, which is called electronic conduction. In all conductors, semiconductors, and many insulated materials only electronic conduction exists, and the electrical conductivity is strongly dependent on the number of electrons available to participate to the conduction process. Most metals are extremely good conductors of electricity, because of the large number of free electrons that can be excited in an empty and available energy state.

In water and ionic materials or fluids a net motion of charged ions can occur. This phenomenon produces an electric current and is called ionic conduction. Electrical conductivity is defined as the ratio between the current density and the electric field intensity.

Someone correct me if im wrong here. If the magnetic rotor produces enough v/a on the copper,and the reed switches keep the rotor spinning,then wet or dry it should continue to cycle back and forth as a self sustaining electromagnet.

Quote

The truth of the matter is that the concept of a battery supply source also carries the concept of a depletable source of energy

Except for the Earth. As long as the Sun shines and the Earth revolves the power will be there.

Quote

Bill claims that his rig works best if the sand is dry

.
His setup is a standard earth battery and not a coil. Knowing where Bill lives there is still moisture below ground. If its too wet there is a voltage drop. I think this applys to both the Ns coil and standard earth battery.

Rosemary Ainslie · « **Reply #520 on:** October 08, 2010, 08:12:00 PM »

Quote from: IotaYodi on October 08, 2010, 05:34:12 PM

Was that before he soaked it in salt water? There would still be salt in the coil if he did that first. Also is the distilled water picking up ions from the copper and iron?

It intrigues me that - regardless of what an experimentalist claims - the readers of that experiment impose their own 'take' on the claim. Is that even scientific? My take is that when someone writes something then that's what they mean. What Laser told us was words to the effect 'It works fine with distilled water.' There are NO qualifications. You're making assumptions Iota. And as regards the 'ions'. If there are 'ions' around - here and there - then one must surely accept that such are readily available either in the water - or in the metals - EVERYWHERE. If these are being used? So what? I still argue they're part of that 3rd element. The ONLY condition that would then still confirm that this is a 'battery' would be if the metals 'rust' into an unusable powder. I'm reasonably sure that the only metal that can rust in laser's rig is the iron. But the confusions then come from the observed fact that Bill's rigs do NOT rust. 2 years and climbing and - NO SIGHT OF RUST? How then can you attempt to argue an electrolytic process?

MileHigh also mentions that the deep sea oil rigs are protected by electrical currents imposed on the metal - that somehow prevent corrosion from sea water. I would propose that - since we know there's a flow of current - then perhaps this is the reason that Bill's coils stay pristine - over time - and regardless of the weather. And perhaps, by the same token - this is the reason that Laser's rig shows no further sign of rust. And again. Evidence of continuing rust would be the only actual proof that there's a 'cost' to this supply of energy.

Quote from: IotaYodi on October 08, 2010, 05:34:12 PM

Within most solid materials a current arises from the flow of electrons,...

This has NEVER been proved. No-one has ever seen 'spare' electrons in any circuitry. All atoms' electrons in and outside a battery are always fully accounted for.

Quote from: IotaYodi on October 08, 2010, 05:34:12 PM

...which is called electronic conduction.

Never heard the term. I've only heard of induction or conduction - depending on the material and the application - and electricity and electrical current flow. With respect I'm not sure what electronic conduction means - if anything.

Quote from: IotaYodi on October 08, 2010, 05:34:12 PM

In all conductors, semiconductors, and many insulated materials only electronic conduction exists, and the electrical conductivity is strongly dependent on the number of electrons available to participate to the conduction process. Most metals are extremely good conductors of electricity, because of the large number of free electrons that can be excited in an empty and available energy state.

Again, and with the utmost respect - this is nonsense. There are NO OBSERVED PROVEN 'FREE ELECTRONS' ANYWHERE AT ALL - least of all in the energy levels of atoms - which I think is what you're trying to refer to here.

Quote from: IotaYodi on October 08, 2010, 05:34:12 PM

Someone correct me if im wrong here. If the magnetic rotor produces enough v/a on the copper,and the reed switches keep the rotor spinning,then wet or dry it should continue to cycle back and forth as a self sustaining electromagnet.

Really Iota. Nothing unusual here? I would have thought that the concpet of a self sustaining electromagnet would be really HOT news. LOL.

Quote from: IotaYodi on October 08, 2010, 05:34:12 PM

Except for the Earth. As long as the Sun shines and the Earth revolves the power will be there.

I'm not sure that the earth can be considered to be a battery? But if it is - then by the same token - the only measurable flux field is a magnetic field and I'm not sure if it's sunshine that powers that 'spin'?

Quote from: IotaYodi on October 08, 2010, 05:34:12 PM

His setup is a standard earth battery and not a coil.

That - Iota - is your opinion only, based as it is on the assumption that there's anything at all that is standard about any of these two rigs. As I've said - unless and until all the iron in all those coils finally OXIDISE into an unsuable powder - then it remains unproven to be battery.

Quote from: IotaYodi on October 08, 2010, 05:34:12 PM

Knowing where Bill lives there is still moisture below ground. If its too wet there is a voltage drop. I think this applys to both the Ns coil and standard earth battery.

Interestingly - Bill's rig show NO RUST AT ALL. What do you make of that? With or without water - with or without ions? What exactly is depleting? Where is there any evidence of a 'cost' if the materials last and last? Where does the actual ENERGY come from that is lighting his LED's?

Rosemary
http://www.scribd.com/doc/38315399/MORE-INCONVENIENT-TRUTHS

Magneticitist · « **Reply #521 on:** October 08, 2010, 11:23:02 PM »

First of all, i hardly see how Mr. Thomson observing cathode rays deflect and split is enough evidence to fully adhere to the "electron" or "corpuscles" idea. I feel like simply observing the distinction of subatomics is enough.
Why is it that to this very day, Leedskalnin STILL has the most logical theory regarding these "sub atomics", being that they are simply N and S "particles" if you want to call them that. And they are very observably equal in strength and motion. To say that they are of equal charge but differing greatly in mass and motion seems to be a serious experimental oversight.
Ed had already pointed out in the early Crookes tube experiments the supply batteries being used were of different capacity, and the way they were attached provided more warmth and conductivity on the negative terminals. The end result was concluding the lazy massive proton remained stationary within the nucleus while the small nimble electron ran around it, and could be knocked away if running freely, to run toward another stationary proton.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SO3dXCsyBC4&feature=player_embedded

In reality it would be more logical to claim the + and - or N and S charges are running towards and through each other.

The next most logical theory which I have read concerns the atomic structure or the supposed particles within. According to a Matt Emery, the individual particles which are the + and - charges are in the shape of a helix, being that the shape allows for stretching and condensing (voltage and current), and being able to "screw" into any mass and pass through it. Also, the clockwise and counterclockwise directions they travel would allow the helical shape to pass through itself perfectly like strands of DNA. The current atomic model seems to me like a huge leap of theoretical faith.

I understand the irony of an individual such as myself stating apparent flaws or miscalculations in modern science, which have supposedly been tested time and time again by the best and brightest using the most expensive and advanced tools.. But I'm not the only one, and have the advantage of looking at it from a unbiased perspective, while most of these "best and brightest" have achieved this acclaim through an Elite categorization, which most of the time just means they had excelled greatly in the department of being able to kiss ass and swear by their teachings. The scientist believes he "knows" something when he labels it a fact, but as others have said, this fact was most likely concluded using the "facts" and equations of previous pioneers who may have been WRONG because their followers never questioned these facts and accepted them as empirical.

Second, why argue whether the Stubblefield is in "fact" a battery or not? All batteries die eventually, as all things eventually change.. People have built aerials and other large conductors that capture passing waves and have been able to charge capacitors and run small motors with them.
I have seen the video of CosmicGnarler light an av plug standing under HV power lines, and im fairly sure the reception would increase if he used a stubblefield-like inductor.. I also notice daily my little darlington quadruplet circuit switch on and off at the slightest of bodily movements from across the room, and tends to act differently depending on whatever may be going on in the nearby vicinity.

I know for a fact that even regular tap water, containing many supposed positive charges and not as many "electrons" can fully charge a car battery when used as the electrolyte. The chemical reaction still takes place and produces what is needed for a charge. The plates in the battery will eventually die this way, as they would eventually over time no matter what. As someone pointed out as long as the Sun exists we have energy, and the Sun is a battery that will eventually die also..

If we are talking about whether or not its a "battery" or not, we still have to acknowledge that its energy, in some shape or form, that has been passed along from another shape and form. Whether it is chemical, or atmospheric, its still going to be BOTH at the same time.

(IMO lol)

IotaYodi · « **Reply #522 on:** October 09, 2010, 12:23:32 AM »

Quote

Quote from: IotaYodi on Today at 01:34:12 PM
Was that before he soaked it in salt water? There would still be salt in the coil if he did that first. Also is the distilled water picking up ions from the copper and iron?
It intrigues me that - regardless of what an experimentalist claims - the readers of that experiment impose their own 'take' on the claim. Is that even scientific? My take is that when someone writes something then that's what they mean. What Laser told us was words to the effect 'It works fine with distilled water.' There are NO qualifications. You're making assumptions Iota. And as regards the 'ions'. If there are 'ions' around - here and there - then one must surely accept that such are readily available either in the water - or in the metals - EVERYWHERE. If these are being used? So what? I still argue they're part of that 3rd element. The ONLY condition that would then still confirm that this is a 'battery' would be if the metals 'rust' into an unusable powder. I'm reasonably sure that the only metal that can rust in laser's rig is the iron. But the confusions then come from the observed fact that Bill's rigs do NOT rust. 2 years and climbing and - NO SIGHT OF RUST? How then can you attempt to argue an electrolytic process?

The only assumption ive made is if the salt water was used first and thats a valid concern if the coil wasn't broken down and cleaned. I believe even with pure water that ions would be picked up from the copper or iron. Unless someone disproves it. Current flow inhibits rust and has already been proven by science. Im not arguing electrolytic process. There may be some but seems to be checked by current flow as far as materiel depletion. The question of the distilled water picking up ions still stand.

Quote

Quote from: IotaYodi on Today at 01:34:12 PM
With respect I'm not sure what electronic conduction means - if anything.

Standard term to differentiate ionic flow from electron flow. 2 separate flows that can produce electricity according to physics. The Ionic flow may be cold electricity.

Quote

Again, and with the utmost respect - this is nonsense. There are NO OBSERVED PROVEN 'FREE ELECTRONS' ANYWHERE AT ALL - least of all in the energy levels of atoms - which I think is what you're trying to refer to here

Free to move not free electrons. Copper has 29 electrons. If one is forced out of its shell and into the next atom forcing that one into the next and so on making a flow of electrons. This is how Im perceiving it. If the electrons dont leave their shells then an explanation is in order for me to understand.

Quote

Quote from: IotaYodi on Today at 01:34:12 PM
His setup is a standard earth battery and not a coil.
That - Iota - is your opinion only,

No. Unless bill has changed his set up he did not have a coil. He had a simple Anode and cathode and did not use iron wire.

Quote

Quote from: IotaYodi on Today at 01:34:12 PM
Knowing where Bill lives there is still moisture below ground. If its too wet there is a voltage drop. I think this applys to both the Ns coil and standard earth battery.
Interestingly - Bill's rig show NO RUST AT ALL. What do you make of that? With or without water - with or without ions? What exactly is depleting? Where is there any evidence of a 'cost' if the materials last and last? Where does the actual ENERGY come from that is lighting his LED's?

If he hasnt changed his setup the materiel's he used doesnt rust other than a little oxidation on the copper wire. He has a large anode and cathode and that helps. In my opinion the actual energy comes from the constant telluric currents being produced in the earth. What exactly is depleting is a good question.

Rosemary Ainslie · « **Reply #523 on:** October 09, 2010, 05:20:07 AM »

Hello Magneticitist.

The beauty about any physics theory is that it is either partially or completely right. Else it would hardly survive a moment. And I do not, for a moment, propose that our Greats are wrong in essentials - hardly. They've all led us to where we are today. And the technological revolution abounds - unstoppable and breathtaking. It's all amazing. And our scientists have every cause to be proud of their achievements. But. They are simply WRONG if they conclude that electrons are the cause of current flow. It quite simply does not 'stack' - not logically. I personally think that Leedskalnin knew how to defeat the gravitational pull - and his work pays tribute to some such miracle. And his work is not even referenced in schools. Personally I have difficulty with his monopolar subdivision of that quintessential particle - but at least he unquestionably proposed this as the material structure of 'charge'. And he's not alone. I believe Tesla also pointed to 'dark' energies or to 'force fields' as the source of all energy. Also contra 'popular belief'. And I also think that 'belief' has become the preferred method of anlaysis. It seems the public and our scholars are actively discouraged from looking at 'inconvenient truths' - as phrased by Al Gore - albeit in a different context.

The reaon I go on and on about the definition of Laser's rig - being either a battery or a generator - or both? is because it really, really matters - in the same way that Tesla matters, or Leedskalnin. Can you imagine where we would be today if mainstream had picked up on the significance of the remarkable research conducted by forum members on the Joule Thief? Or can you imagnine where our physics would have moved if those many questions still outstanding in physics were simply acknowledged? And here we have a development where simple applications of what seems to be pure inductive principles - are fuelling what also seems to be perpetual motion! Why is this not being shown in classrooms? Why is it not being filmed and shown as Hot News through our media? Surely? If it's perpetual motion we should be shown this. And if it's not perpetual motion it should be explained. But not with the facile arguments used in these forums. At least then use those arguments that can be more completely understood. A battery - in essence - requires the systematic transfer of energy from one medium to another at the cost of some material depletion in one or other of those two mediums. In this alone it appears that neither the Joule Thief's nor Laser's rendition of the Nathan Stubblefield coil - comply. That definitely confronts conventional understandings - all over the place. And while everyone is happy to point to scientific achievements - the truth is that science has NOT progressed much since the turn of the century - or since quantum mechanics was forged. We really need to move on to new questions and new paradigms. For the crying need to re-introduce some logic into science if not for sake of our planet's poor state of health.

Kindest regards,
Rosemary

Mk1 · « **Reply #524 on:** October 09, 2010, 05:46:31 AM »

Dark energy = unknown energy .

I will say that 5 types known , but what is causing those 5 recognized forces , i will postulate that the root of those are from the conversion from dark energies .

Is electricity an action or a reaction , first off as long as it works who cares , but now we are beyond that , some times a mirror is all that is needed to see a complete picture .

I saw this video http://www.disclose.tv/action/viewvideo/56623/Secret_UFO_Propulsion_System_Boyd_Bushman_Lockheed/

I sure would love talking with him .

Mark

News:

User Menu

Author Topic: Self-Runner NS Coil Pulse Motor Live Video Stream. It's been going for months! (Read 187881 times)

happyfunball

Re: Self-Runner NS Coil Pulse Motor Live Video Stream. It's been going for months!

Rosemary Ainslie

Re: Self-Runner NS Coil Pulse Motor Live Video Stream. It's been going for months!

IotaYodi

Re: Self-Runner NS Coil Pulse Motor Live Video Stream. It's been going for months!

Rosemary Ainslie

Re: Self-Runner NS Coil Pulse Motor Live Video Stream. It's been going for months!

IotaYodi

Re: Self-Runner NS Coil Pulse Motor Live Video Stream. It's been going for months!

Groundloop

Re: Self-Runner NS Coil Pulse Motor Live Video Stream. It's been going for months!

lasersaber

Re: Self-Runner NS Coil Pulse Motor Live Video Stream. It's been going for months!

Rosemary Ainslie

Re: Self-Runner NS Coil Pulse Motor Live Video Stream. It's been going for months!

Rosemary Ainslie

Re: Self-Runner NS Coil Pulse Motor Live Video Stream. It's been going for months!

IotaYodi

Re: Self-Runner NS Coil Pulse Motor Live Video Stream. It's been going for months!

Rosemary Ainslie

Re: Self-Runner NS Coil Pulse Motor Live Video Stream. It's been going for months!

Magneticitist

Re: Self-Runner NS Coil Pulse Motor Live Video Stream. It's been going for months!

IotaYodi

Re: Self-Runner NS Coil Pulse Motor Live Video Stream. It's been going for months!

Rosemary Ainslie

Re: Self-Runner NS Coil Pulse Motor Live Video Stream. It's been going for months!

Mk1

Re: Self-Runner NS Coil Pulse Motor Live Video Stream. It's been going for months!