Engineering FAQ
Short answers to the principal engineering questions about VENDOR.Energy, the technology, validation, access to further materials and verification of investment authority.
What the system is, and where its energy comes from
Three questions that fix the engineering class of the architecture, describe how the operating state is formed after startup, and set out the project’s position on the energy-source question.
What engineering class does VENDOR.Max belong to?
VENDOR.Max is a multi-level resonant power architecture that uses coupled electromagnetic processes and power electronics within classical Maxwell–Lorentz electrodynamics. The novelty is not in the physics of any single stage — it is in the way known processes are integrated into one controllable architecture.
The excitation stage carries a separate attribution: it belongs to the Armstrong-type discharge-resonant oscillator class, a class known since 1912, within the same classical electrodynamics. This attribution applies to the excitation stage only and is not a description of the system as a whole.
The full functional route of the installation is described on the How It Works page.
Where does the energy for VENDOR.Max operation come from?
The startup energy comes from the start battery: it creates the initial state of the storage elements from which the operating regime unfolds. From there, what is amplified is the state, not the energy. In the discharge channel of block 3 the number of available charge carriers grows; in the resonant part of block 5 local carriers take part many times over in the oscillatory process. The internal flow thus formed is converted, extracted and distributed on the main DC bus: one part goes to the customer, another returns to the excitation path to sustain the operating regime, and a further part covers the system’s own needs.
This describes how the operating state is formed and sustained; on its own it does not answer the question of the primary energy source of the steady-state regime.
After startup, the design provides for no continuing standard power input. That is a statement about topology, not a statement that the complete device boundary is energetically closed in advance. Which physical channel closes the complete energy balance under sustained extraction is an open measurement question; energy-source attribution is performed at Frame 0. The full discussion is on the Where Does the Energy Come From page.
Does VENDOR.Energy claim a new energy source or a violation of energy conservation?
VENDOR.Energy claims no new or unconventional energy source and claims no violation of the law of conservation of energy. The architecture is described by known mechanisms within classical Maxwell–Lorentz electrodynamics.
The start battery, storage elements, carrier multiplication, resonance, transformers, the rectifier bridge, feedback and the internal buffer take part in forming, converting and redistributing the operating state. VENDOR.Energy does not declare any of these mechanisms — individually or together — a source of additional energy. The complete energy balance is not derived from internal mechanisms: it is established at Frame 0 by independent measurement. The verification methodology is set out on the Technology Validation page; current public operating data is on the endurance test page.
Startup, operating point, charge, boundaries, plus
How the installation is started and held at its operating point, why the project describes the route in charge terms, why a single input-to-output ratio is not an efficiency, what block 5 is, and where the two local gains of state are.
How is VENDOR.Max started, and what sustains operation afterwards?
VENDOR.Max can be started in two configurations. In the laboratory configuration the installation is started from an external battery of approximately 9 V, which is physically disconnected once the regime is established. In the standard configuration the start source is a small internal battery within the BBMS, inside the enclosure; after startup it does not supply the customer load but changes role and becomes a bidirectional transient buffer within the operating loop.
In both configurations the input port of the excitation path does not disappear after startup; only the way its boundary condition is maintained changes. In the laboratory configuration, once the external source is physically disconnected, that condition is maintained by the internal feedback path; in the standard configuration the start source is inside the device from the outset, and after startup the same battery moves into a buffer role within the operating loop. The internal battery acts as a transition buffer: it is not a steady-state source of customer power. Ratings and the physical implementation of intermediate stages form part of restricted engineering documentation. The full functional route is described on the How It Works page.
What is the operating point of VENDOR.Max, and what does “zero drift” mean?
VENDOR.Max does not work by maximising internal amplitude; it works by continuously holding a stable operating state. The operating point is the state in which average internal stores do not drift while internal flows match current extraction and internal losses: ⟨dEᵢ/dt⟩ ≈ 0. This state is sometimes informally called the “working zero”; the zero refers to the average drift of the stores, not to activity — at zero drift there is intensive internal circulation of energy and a continuous flow to the customer.
With no load, the system holds the minimum necessary regime and covers its own losses. When a load appears, the state of the bus changes, the internal buffer covers the transition, excitation and extraction are restructured, and the system moves to a new operating point; when the load disappears, the regime returns to its minimum. The system does not seek maximum amplitude: control moves it between bounded operating points. More on the How It Works page.
Why does VENDOR.Energy use a charge-based description?
Coulombs do not replace joules: coulombs may circulate many times, joules must be accounted for once. The architecture does not treat charge as a resource created inside the installation: the main electrical route is formed by exciting and organising the motion of charge carriers already present in the conductive elements and electrically active regions of the system. A charge-based description makes it possible to follow that route continuously through the architecture; the local law of charge conservation holds at every node.
Charge motion or internal charge turnover is not in itself an energy balance and does not establish an energy source. Energy accounting requires a separate measurement procedure at a correctly defined complete device boundary. The physics of internal resonant circulation and its relation to active power is covered on the resonant circulation page.
Can VENDOR.Max be evaluated as a linear input-to-output system, with an efficiency computed from individual internal points?
No. VENDOR.Max cannot correctly be evaluated as a linear converter in which an arbitrarily chosen internal voltage or current is set against the customer output to yield an efficiency for the whole installation. Internal lines, resonant nodes, the startup port and the customer output belong to different functional and measurement boundaries.
The energy balance of the device as a whole is written at Frame 0 — the complete device boundary used for product testing and energy-source attribution. Local block balances and the balance at Frame 1 — the engineering control boundary of the operating core, crossed by four electrical ports — are valid tools for analysing the operating regime, but they do not substitute for the complete Frame 0 balance of the device as a whole. At any chosen boundary, a correct calculation accounts for every energy flow crossing it, for the change in stored energy and for the measurement uncertainty. A ratio of values taken at different boundaries is not the efficiency of VENDOR.Max. An end-to-end efficiency cannot be obtained by multiplying the “efficiencies of the patent blocks”: the patent blocks are not sequential energy two-ports of the real installation.
Therefore, neither the approximately 9 V startup condition nor individual internal voltages or currents constitute the device input to be compared with the customer output. How both ledgers — energy and charge — are kept is described on the Energy Model page.
What is block 5, and how is useful power extracted from it?
Block 5 is a controlled system of coupled electromagnetic resonators, not a single ideal transformer. Three coil structures sit inside its functional boundary: the Tesla coil for excitation, the resonator that holds the coupled HF regime, and secondary winding 10, which feeds the secondary extraction node 10–11.
Useful power is extracted through the secondary extraction node 10–11 — secondary winding 10 together with capacitor 11, which form the output electrical boundary of block 5. From there the electrical flow passes through diode bridge 12 to the main DC bus.
Where is the “plus” in VENDOR.Max?
There are two, and both are local gains of state, not of energy: more available carriers, and repeated participation of the same carriers. The first is in the discharge channel of block 3: in the gas-filled gap disclosed in the patent, an electron avalanche increases the number of free carriers and the conductivity of the channel. Carriers are born in electron–ion pairs and total charge does not change; the avalanche creates carriers, not energy — the work is done by the field of the storage element. The second is in the resonant part of block 5: no new carriers appear, but the same carriers take part many times over in an organised oscillation, and the charge circulation, the amplitude and the regime store, built up from pumping, all grow.
Field transfer, extraction, rectification and preparation of the output flow are subsequent functions of the architecture, not further pluses. The energy result of the system is determined separately, by the boundary balances. This answer describes the gas-discharge implementation disclosed in the patent and used in early prototypes; the specific engineering implementation of later revisions may differ from the examples disclosed in the patent materials. More on the Where Is the Plus page.
Development path and patent rights
Where the programme stands and why the patent text is not the engineering specification of the current unit.
How is the VENDOR.Energy project developing?
The project follows a standard engineering development path: laboratory work, operating trials, independent validation, preparation for production transfer. Project stage: TRL 4.
According to company records, cumulative operating time exceeds 1,000 hours and includes a continuous run of 532 hours; segment-level metrics are given on the endurance test page. This is a recorded operating observation: the complete-boundary balance has not yet been measured by an independent laboratory — that is the next stage of the programme, whose methodology is described on the Technology Validation page. Classification and system status are given on the VENDOR System page.
VENDOR.Energy has already moved from possibility to implementation. The next transition is from implemented operation to an independently recorded and metrologically validated result, and then to a certifiable and reproducible industrial product.
Why does the patent description differ from the engineering implementation?
The patent family defines the claimed and protected scope of technical solutions and may cover several variants of implementation. The patent description is not a complete technical specification of the current unit; differences between the breadth of patent coverage and one concrete engineering implementation do not amount to a contradiction.
The blocks of the patent claims — 3, 5, 12 and 13 — denote physical functions, not separate modules: the real installation comprises approximately two dozen circuit boards and more than two thousand components. The patent map explains functions; the engineering map defines energy boundaries; the two maps do not coincide.
The actual object under test is a specific engineering implementation, part of which is non-public engineering know-how. Separately: access to a published patent does not in itself imply a licence, a contract, any authority, or a commercial relationship with the holders of the patent rights.
What is published, what is restricted, and how to obtain more
What the public layer contains, what remains proprietary and why the balance stays verifiable, how further materials are released, and what counts as a technical evaluation of the actual implementation.
Why is a complete energy report not published at this point?
The complete-boundary balance is verified by measuring every flow through the enclosure and the change in internal stores; this does not require disclosure of the engineering implementation. What exists today is a recorded operating observation by the company and an engineering model supported by calculations; an independently measured complete Frame 0 balance does not yet exist. The word “measured” is applied to that balance only after independent complete measurement.
Publication of the full energy report is provided for as a separate stage of the programme — at TRL 8 — once the required volume of independent metrology is complete and a public set of supporting data has been prepared. Public operating metrics are given on the endurance test page; the independent verification methodology is set out on the Technology Validation page.
How can further technical materials be obtained?
Public materials are available on this site. Qualified investors, together with scientific and technical partners, may receive further materials under controlled access and NDA.
Routes of enquiry: the investor room for investment review and technical evaluation; the pilot programme for site-level engagement.
Can the operation of VENDOR.Max be understood if all boards and components are published?
Not fully. Even a complete list of boards, components and their connections would describe the hardware implementation, but on its own it would not define the operating regime.
VENDOR.Max is a controlled system of operating states. Reproducing its operation requires not only the hardware topology but also knowledge of how the system is moved between states and held at its operating point: the measurement topology, thresholds, setpoints, timing and regime dependencies, firmware, control laws and the BBMS algorithms. Without this, the same set of components does not determine which state the system should be in, when to change excitation and extraction, or how to return to a stable operating point after a load change.
The proprietary know-how is therefore not a “secret component”, but the method by which the operating regime is established, maintained and reproduced. The physical class of the mechanism and the formulation of the energy balance are open.
A restricted implementation does not make the balance unverifiable. Energy is verified at the complete device boundary — through every flow across the enclosure and the change in internal stores — without disclosing how the operating regime is established and maintained.
Can VENDOR.Max be reliably evaluated using AI, the published patent, or open materials?
No. Conclusions drawn only from the published patent, from individual pages of this site, from fragments of schematics, from photographs or from AI analysis cannot be regarded as a sufficient engineering evaluation of the actual VENDOR.Max implementation.
The current engineering implementation is distributed across approximately two dozen circuit boards and more than two thousand components. Its functions, interaction modes, measurement boundaries and part of its parameters are not publicly disclosed. An evaluation made without an agreed validation protocol and without sufficient access to the relevant engineering documentation is therefore built, unavoidably, on an incomplete model of the object.
A technically valid evaluation can be performed in two ways: direct independent metrological validation under an agreed protocol, or a technical study by a qualified technical or scientific organisation with access to the necessary volume of documentation under a defined scope, contract and NDA.
VENDOR.Energy does not release restricted engineering documentation for unrestricted distribution or for general external assessment. The scope of access is set by the purpose of the engagement, the qualification of the party and the agreed programme of work.
AI analysis without the full engineering context can examine published materials, but it cannot substitute for metrological validation or for a qualified technical study of the actual implementation.
Verifying authority
How the project raises funds, what it does not do, and how any claimed relationship with VENDOR.Energy can be checked.
Does VENDOR.Energy accept investment in cryptocurrency?
No. VENDOR.Energy does not accept investment, payments or funding in cryptocurrency.
All investment transactions involving VENDOR.Energy are conducted solely through standard legal and banking channels, with identification of the parties and appropriate documentation. VENDOR.Energy does not ask anyone to transfer Bitcoin, Ethereum, USDT, USDC, stablecoins, its own or third-party tokens, or any other digital assets to cryptocurrency wallets.
Is VENDOR.Energy currently running a token sale or raising funds through crypto assets?
No. At present VENDOR.Energy is not conducting an ICO, a token sale or crypto fundraising, and is not raising funds through USDT, USDC, stablecoins, utility tokens, security tokens or tokens of any other kind.
Use of the name VENDOR or VENDOR.Energy, of the name of the technology, of a patent number, of patent documentation, of images of the installation or of any other project materials — in the name of a token, a website, a company or an investment offer — does not in itself indicate any relationship with VENDOR.Energy or with the holders of the patent rights. No such relationship should be regarded as authorised unless it is confirmed directly and officially by VENDOR.Energy.
Can a third-party company raise investment by referring to the VENDOR patent?
A reference to the patent, to its publication or to the technology it contains does not confirm that a third party holds a licence, an investment mandate, authority to represent, or any other agreement with the holders of the patent rights.
At present, the holders of the patent rights have not authorised any third-party company to raise investment or other funding on their behalf, including funding through cryptocurrencies and crypto assets. Any claim by a third party that such a contract, licence, investment mandate, authority to represent or other authorisation exists, including any claim that such authority was granted later, must be verified directly with VENDOR.Energy at info@vendor.energy.
How can it be checked whether an investment offer is genuinely connected with VENDOR.Energy?
Do not transfer funds on the basis of the use of the name VENDOR.Energy, a patent number, patent documents, presentations, photographs or technical descriptions alone.
Request confirmation from us directly at info@vendor.energy. We can confirm whether the claimed contractual, licensing, investment or representative relationship with VENDOR.Energy or with the holders of the relevant patent rights exists.
Ready to go deeper?
Technical evaluation
For laboratories, engineers and technical partners. Structured technical review materials are released under controlled access and NDA.
Request evaluation 02Investors and due diligence
For investors and strategic partners. Investment framework of the project; further materials under controlled access and NDA.
Enter the investor room
