Like us on Facebook and Follow us on Twitter



Lasted edited by Andrew Munsey, updated on June 15, 2016 at 1:32 am.

  • This page has been imported from the old peswiki website. This message will be removed once updated.

Discussion page for Directory:Lutec

Image:Lutec LEA 2006 95x95.jpg

Claims generator that will produce up to 1000 watts of DC electricity twenty four hours a day, every day, which will be stored in a battery bank and then inverted to AC power and connected directly into the home or business.


Australian duplicate of Edwin Gray's motor

Timothy Waters wrote on Nov. 22, 2008

"John Christie has unknowingly duplicated Edwin Gray's motor. Using the same pulsed DC motor and AC generator concept to create over-unity. The "How it works" section on his website shows this. The motor looks almost identical and seems to work in an identical fashion."

Thanks for Objective View

I'd like to commend PESWiki for doing some research and giving an objective analysis on Lutec rather than just taking Lutec's word for their product. Well done!

I listened to radio clip from a different website which had a scientist give positive comments on Lutec. This scientist spoke about how the oil interests were trying to squash this company, however, Lutec appears to have way more than ample time and space to show an acceptable proof of concept for their machine and I haven't heard any reports of goons or thugs from the oil companies coming in and destroying their work. Their lack of success appears to be completely the result of their own work. If the machine they're touting does produce 15 times the input, it would cost around an additional ten dollars at an electronics store to get some wire and a rectifier to feed the output back to the input in order to make the machine self sustaining. In their defense, I can see how any misconception or math error could be exploited to indicate over-unity so it's possible they believe in their work and they might not just be looking for money or possible notariety.

I had sent one of the Lutec inventors, John Christie, a very constructive e-mail a while back pointing out a few misconceptions on their website and offered my help as I have a background in electrical engineering. John sent me back a scathing reply which was completely uncalled for. Granted, they may be fed up with skeptics but a civil answer would have been nice. In my opinion, somewhere along the line they should actually follow up on information if they're genuinely trying to create a product. If the machine doesn't work and 50 skeptics tell them exactly why it doesn't work, the next logical step would probably be to consider some of the information given. Proof of concept isn't generally a hard thing to do and they've even built a machine that doesn't quite work. I believe with that machine they have more than sufficient 'lack of proof of concept'. Also, anyone with a good general knowledge of physics who looks at their website will also see a 'proof of lack of concept.' The one point they list regarding permanent magnets vs. electromagnets, is flawed and the two equations they list 'for the technically minded' are worthless equations. The equation, "Area = width length" would have been just as useful.

I feel bad for all the people who invested in Lutec, including John and Lou if they believe in their work. I don't completely discount perpetual motion but even I would say time and money invested in John and Lou is wasted.

Reasons to be Skeptical of Lutec

I (Eric Krieg) have offered my $10,000 prize for proof of real free energy to the Lutec founders for years now. They act like they are too busy to show real proof - but really have done nothing new for many years now. Australian people have investigated Lutec and found them to be very evasive of proper testing and very under unity. See:

To the best of my knowledge, there have been many people over many decades who claim to have these over unity devices and string along investors for years. Basically, they pretty much say, "we don't have time to do a really good conclusive demonstration because we are setting up for mass production. But soon you will be able to buy these in stores and then do your own test. Early investors are told of super big and secret big investors about to come in. Excuses are made about getting patents or over coming some kind of conspiracy. Lutec may be the biggest at this game in their country - but this is a very old and prevalent scam.

Eric Krieg

my $10,000 prize offer for any real proof of free energy is found at

Rebuttal from Lu Brits

On June 30, 2008, Lu Brits of Lutec wrote:

(slightly edited)

Please forgive my English as it is not my native language.

I would like to set the record straight about the nonsense of the following people such as Ian Bryce from the Australian Skeptics, who had a lot to say about something he is pretending to have knowledge of.

Ian Bryce, who is the self proclaimed "Chief Scientist" of the skeptics and an electrical engineer and also the self proclaimed "only rocket scientist" in Australia and as of lately also a self proclaimed, airospace engineer.

The real story- vs - the Ian Bryce's bullshit stories.

To begin with, Lutec Australia needed about $100,000 dollars to proceed with its international patenting applications, within a time frame of 18 months. It was therefor that Lutec Australia had approached the Australian skeptics, who where offering a $100,000 dollar prize reward to any one who wanted to take up the challenge and to prove, in this case, our OU claim.

They had accepted our challenge, but from then on the skeptics had been playing hide and seek games. Whenever we had a date and place fixed to do the testing, they had always some excuse to not show up. This went on for about 14 months untill we came to know that their patron, Mr. Dick Smith, had withdrawn his finacial support. In other words, they did not even have the money, and the rest of their flock was obviously not going to risk their own money.

After we had dropped the skeptics time-wasters, who in my opinion would not have been able to even organize a "piss up party" in a brewery fortunally for us, a local businessman had agreed to pay the $100,000 dollars. Enabling us to go forward.

The Ian Bryce story N02,

Lutec Australia had its office/workshop on premisses located at the Cairns Warf buildings, and I had been advised that we would have to vacate the

premisses, as it had been decided to demolish it. Once again the same businessman came to our rescue and provided us with a workshop in his factory.

As it happenend, that Friday morning, I had started shifting out of the building, as the businessman had directed me, to put our devices into his office untill next Monday. That same day, unanounced, Ian Bryce showed up in Cairns. He had contacted John who had just arrived back form his holidays, not knowing what had taken place. John had agreed to meet and to show Ian Bryce our device. On contacting the office where I had shifted our devices to. The secretary told John that Trevor, the director of the joint, had left to Sydney for business, and would be back on Monday.

Ian Bryce spat the dummy. He then had been offered to stay until Monday, but did not want to.

All the rest of the story is Bullshit.

PS : Trevor Place is prepared to swear on OATH in a court, that the events as stated above, are correct and true.


The other nonsense about taken monies from mum and dads.

All the monies recieved by the company are from shares.

One of our major shareholders is a law firm.

Lutec initial shares started at $33,000 dollars for an "A" class share and presently, "B" class shares for $ 100,000 dollars. I would add, hardly the sort of money that Mums and Dads having laying around the house.

Further, investors who do buy shares are not spending that sort of money either, without having a suitable qualified person, such as an elec.

engineer etc, to verify and to validate it.

As for Walt Rosenthall and Park Cole, perhaps it is better to go and ask them as to why they had sent email to congratulate us with our work.

Also we are not under any investigation by ASIC as some have claimed.