If such a thread already exists, let me know.

Occasionally I'll see products advertised that are obvious frauds, obvious to anyone that knows the science or engineering involved. Of course that's not everyone and many people are vulnerable to the "too good to be true" scams.

I thought it might be useful to start identifying and listing such things for the benefit of anyone searching for the truth.

Outrageous claims might also be debunked here but my thought is that we should focus on products actually offered for sale.

 

Here's the one that set me off:

Long-Lost Ancient Invention Wipes Out Power Bills and Generates Energy On Demand
https://theenergyrevolution.net/index-ers-auto-lead-39-promise.html

Lots of conspiracy theories, allusion to Tesla's bifilar coil patent, and much more. Some mention of getting a gain by improving the power factor of your home.

It really comes down to them selling you some published materials so that you can build your own magic machine.

Absolute bunk even if there are a couple of facts mixed in. Exploiting the uneducated and poor.

 

Here's another from the past.

Beware any 18650 cell with a claimed capacity over 3300mAh. It's likely a fraud. The best battery technologies out there - employed by Panasonic, Samsung and even Tesla - do not exceed that technology frontier. And yet you'll find today batteries advertised on Amazon and elsewhere claiming 9,900mAh. I have some of these because they came with an LED flashlight I bought and they tested at roughly 10% of that claim.

Just like these:
https://www.amazon.com/CPZZ-Rechargeable-Headlight-Headlamp-doorbells/dp/B0GKP6B7H9/

Ridiculous

 

The list of outright scams and frauds that are advertised, particularly online in things like YouTube videos, is too long to even comprehend.

Almost any commercial that has the disclaimer, "These statements have not been evaluated by the FDA" are serious candidates (though there are legitimate products that make that statement for legal reasons).

From a moderation viewpoint, however, let's keep in mind that the forum rules state that things like over-unity and other things that violate the laws of physics are forbidden topics. The reason is that it invites endless bickering and heated exchanges. This prohibition applies this thread, as well, and for the same reasons.

 

There is a reason that the phrase Caveat Emptor was coined thousands of years ago. Fraudulent claims are as old as the early humans started commercial deals in ancient civilizations.
For me, anything that mentions an unknown Nikola Tesla discovery, is a big, bright red flag.

 

There is a similar thread over here:
https://forum.allaboutcircuits.com/threads/more-chinese-deleted.206722/

 

batteries advertised on Amazon and elsewhere claiming 9,900mAh

I bought some 18650's from AliExpress that were advertised as 88800mAh. I bought some, and others, that had capacities too large to be believable and they tested at about 2Ah.

I have purchased about half a dozen different Li-ion batteries from AliExpress that were fakes in this thread.

Worse than the fake capacities is the fact that they're likely also poorly made and subject to catching fire after a number of discharge/charge cycles. @MrChips recently reposted a YouTube video by Lumafield about the problem. The original post was on around 1/20 and a link to the PDF file referenced in the video was given (the address/link in the video didn't work for me). I'd post it, but it's too large; about 20MB.

 

From a moderation viewpoint, however, let's keep in mind that the forum rules state that things like over-unity and other things that violate the laws of physics are forbidden topics.

I fully endorse the rule that no such project or "invention" should be seriously entertained here.

But what about exposing products as I've just done? Both the ones I posted are simply impossible and I don't think anyone will defend them. Debunking a product's claims because they violate the laws of physics is different than questioning those laws.

To push a bit further, what if some other product gets identified here as likely fraud but someone with additional details comes along to explain/defend it? I think that could make for a very interesting discussion worthy of AAC. But it could certainly be construed as forbidden.

 

I fully endorse the rule that no such project or "invention" should be seriously entertained here.

But what about exposing products as I've just done? Both the ones I posted are simply impossible and I don't think anyone will defend them. Debunking a product's claims because they violate the laws of physics is different than questioning those laws.

To push a bit further, what if some other product gets identified here as likely fraud but someone with additional details comes along to explain/defend it? I think that could make for a very interesting discussion worthy of AAC. But it could certainly be construed as forbidden.

Let me repeat myself. The main reason that discussion of them is banned is because of the long history of such discussions going down rabbit holes and leading to acrimonious exchanges. This is precisely because there is no shortage of people that will defend those claims, using all of the time-worn tactics we have seen over and over. The owners don't want that here and they set the policies.