A simplified experiment is the most elegant, the most understandable, and the most convincing.
The height that the weighted piston travels upward to a stop determines the output energy of the popper.
Unavoidably, the energy associated with the feedback current must be determined and added to the energy imparted to the piston.
This is what Russ already has, a piston with weight and measuring the height.
But it has to be free to move and not compress air between rodside piston and top off the cylinder. And this calculation is one of the first on the testsheet, the input output tests.
And also, beside a (yet to be found/captured by Russ) feedbackpuls, also the energy of the downward movement of the piston should be measured and added in.
But by measure of thumb, this whole calculation has sort of been done and in Russ case did not point towards overunity yet.
---------------
(read slowly)
So again that's why i ask what is the diff with the special pappmix. I mean, look at the thing that worked.
If Bob still has such mix, as he states in his video..then the proof of that is in a calculation of what he shows us. He pushes a resistance for a distance, it has an exelleration downwards i.e. extra force beside gravity, and he has a motor running some reps from the feedbackcurrent.
We have to answer the question if Bob uses the Pappmixture, and if so; if it is still potent; and if so..we know it has some extra elements in it. Because that's the only thing that can stay the same over a years period and more. (agreed?)
So the question becomes; can we calculate if his popper video shows overunity or is much nearer to it?
Did Bob tell us, how much input he uses? Or must we estimate? The way Bob discribes the test, he boosts about the weight and force of the pop, so we should be able to calculate a decent amount of energy. But if he is not reaching overunity, then his show doesn't proove papp, it only shows making a plasma reaction and using too much electricity for it to be interesting.
If we can see a difference between Russ and Bob, then we know that a Papp special mix has an extra something in it. Its not only ionised, cause that will linger off. There must be a special something, a element or two extra in the mixture, that stays in it for years...!!
This will bring us closer to the secret of the Papp engine, just by using common sense before ellaborate theories. Let those be done on the proof off concept, and thus far the proof doesn't point to overunity, it shows an reaction and collapse with an overuse of electricity. (still worthy of theorising on, but the need for better proof, and the way towards it, also can be done by reasoning on the facts or closeby assumptions) And that road i am calling for here.
Even if we use Hydrogen and let it pop for a day..let it pop until the popp wears out
And then start looking into the remaining gas, it will give us a clue about what is effectively the change in matter, in mixture, between popping a bit and popping hardly anymore.
And that is crusial knowledge. Who knows here what it will cost if we send a sample of used gas towards a company that could make a gaschromatify?
The thing that gets depleated is a big clue on what the poppreaction needs..! Knowing that, we can think about what type of treatment Papp gave the mixture to make it special. And i take a bet that he added molecules, because the mixture can stay special over years.
So i call for prolonged gas tests and 1 or two sample sendings.
Hard science first sticks to what we know?