Regarding the QRBB. The patent establishes how and why the device works. It functions as a coulomb charge circuit, but without the normal use of capacitors in series. We have measured the QRBB directly and it does exactly what the patent says it does. The Suretest device was developed to detect wiring junction errors that need correction within large scale commercial wiring systems (ex. open junction errors) -- and not finer gradations like between two similar awg. power cords from different manufacturers, or the difference between a rhodium or silver plated outlet, or stranded versus solid core wiring. We don't use that device beyond our video example for those reasons.
I just reread the QR/BB patent
https://patents.google.com/patent/US10031536B2/en more carefully. As I mentioned earlier, it appears the SureTest device does not appear to be able to properly measure how my Denali v2 (and other products of yours) behaves in reality with respect to instantaneous current delivery, because it relies on a rather simplistic quick short-circuit to calculate peak current delivery (which is also why the device trips CFGI outlets). The SureTest device does show a peak current drop out of the Denali outlet as we have seen, but this is not the whole truth.
So after reading the patent again, it is obvious to me that this QR/BB technology is rather ingenious, and can offer more instantaneous current than we lay persons pretend to measure. Specifically, I am calling attention to this language:
In the power supply, when the rectifiers switch on, their impedance drops to less than 0.1 ohms. This creates a dramatic increase in current draw from the AC power line. However, the inductive reactance of the AC power line resists this instantaneous draw of current that impedes the effective flow of current flow to the power supply.
The inventive apparatus is positioned at the AC input to the power supply. The apparatus is most effective when placed as near to the rectifiers as possible.
As the AC voltage waveform rises in voltage with the rectifiers off, an electric charge is formed within the apparatus. As the AC voltage nears its peak, the rectifiers turn on when they have exceeded the voltage level in the storage capacitor array. When this occurs, the AC line impedance resists the sudden change in current, thereby creating a high source impedance to the power supply. However, the stored electric charge within the apparatus is released and delivers a momentary power boost.
This tells me a couple of things:
1) Irrespective of the invention, it is always beneficial to be able to draw as much instantaneous current as possible from the power line - a rather obvious observation I might say; so chalk that one up against better receptacles, connectors, cords, et al
2) Placing those QR/BB modules on the power cords, as you do with the higher-end cords, would appear to offer additional benefit to those inside the Denali, Everest and others
3) The invention seems to answer for me the rather intriguing question of why my system sounds so much more dynamic when everything is plugged into the Denali v2
The other thing you pointed out is that the invention does not suffer from the typical issues one would be faced if a series capacitor were to be used. There was a thread on audiogon decades ago discussing the benefit of store/release of energy in the power line, and someone famously asked something like "So why not just plug in a big-ass capacitor in series and be done with it"
The patent makes the following claims around this, and I fully believe them:
The apparatus has some of the advantages of a storage capacitor and some of a series inductor without the corresponding disadvantages. Specifically, it can store small amounts of reserve charge in the manner of a series inductor, yet like a storage capacitor it responds to changes in current flow almost instantaneously.
The apparatus stores energy in the form of a coulomb charge, in a manner similar to how a capacitor functions. However, unlike a capacitor the apparatus has virtually no current flow through it. The apparatus is specifically designed to have a very high series resistance, on the order of three to six Giga ohms. Further, the apparatus does not store voltage as a capacitor does.
Also unlike a capacitor, in embodiments the conductive strips used in the inventive apparatus are not placed in close proximity to one another. Further, the electric charge is not stored in an intermediary dielectric material. Rather, the coloumb charge is stored entirely within the conductive strips themselves, in the form of compressed electrons. As used herein, “compressed electrons” means that the there is a relative electric charge present from one end of the conductive strip to the other end such that the electrons behave within groups or domains of electron charge.
What may raise some eyebrows is that last sentence: "
As used herein, “compressed electrons” means that the there is a relative electric charge present from one end of the conductive strip to the other end such that the electrons behave within groups or domains of electron charge."
Finally, the meat of the matter appears to be:
"Unlike an inductor, the inventive apparatus does not resist a change in instantaneous current flow. Rather, it improves instantaneous current flow. In essence, the apparatus may be considered a unique type of basic electronic circuit component in that it operates entirely differently from either a capacitor or an inductor.
The principle of operation requires further study, but there is evidence that the apparatus functions based upon the principles associated with drift current and not necessarily electromagnetic wave propagation.""
Regardless, this is all brilliant, if nothing else but thinking way outside the box!
Note should be made that the inventive circuit operates only in a power system where current is drawn in pulses. It has no advantageous effect in a system where current draw is linear across the entire AC waveform.
