I revised my previous comment to explain the opperational steps involved in one complete cycle of opperation of the bennets doubler.

It's not that my theory is perfect, it's that the criticism made a statement of fact which I can demonstrate to be incorrect by utilising a third and separate device that leverages the same effects I am using and explaining it's operational cycle.

You will note, I made no criticism of you, I am merely objecting by using a real device to demonstrate the action.

I hope defuse argument by providing you with a real, physical example of the phenoma.

I revised my previous comment to explains the opperational steps involved in one complete cycle of opperation of the bennets doubler.

It's not that my theory is perfect, it's that the criticism made a statement of fact which I can demonstrate to be incorrect by utilising a third and separate device that leverages the same effects I am using and explaining it's operational cycle.

You will note, I made no criticism of you, I am merely objecting by using a real device to demonstrate the action.

I hope defuse argument by providing you with a real, physical example of the phenoma.

I revised my previous comment to explains the opperational steps involved in one complete cycle of opperation of the bennets doubler.

It's not that my theory is perfect, it's that the criticism made a statement of fact which I can demonstrate to be incorrect by utilising a third and separate device that leverages the same effects I am using and explaining it's operational cycle.