Cookies-law

Cookies help us to bring you our services at overunity.com . If you use this website and our services you declare yourself okay with using cookies .More Infos here:
http://www.overunity.com/5553/privacy-policy/
If you do not agree with storing cookies, please leave this website now. Many thanks for your understanding.
Amazon Warehouse Deals ! Now even more Deep Discounts ! Check out these great prices on slightly used or just opened once only items.I always buy my gadgets via these great Warehouse deals ! Highly recommended ! Many thanks for supporting OverUnity.com this way.

DC2DC converter

Micro JouleThief

FireMatch

FireMatch

CCKnife

CCKnife

CCTool

CCTool

Magpi Magazine

Magpi Magazine Free Rasberry Pi Magazine

Battery Recondition

Battery Recondition

Arduino

Ultracaps

YT Subscribe

Gravity Machines

Tesla-Ebook

Magnet Secrets

Lindemann Video

Navigation

Products

Statistics

  • *Total Members: 82250
  • *Latest: Chflynn

  • *Total Posts: 496460
  • *Total Topics: 14611
  • *Online Today: 44
  • *Most Online: 103
(December 19, 2006, 11:27:19 PM)
  • *Users: 2
  • *Guests: 246
  • *Total: 248

Facebook

Author Topic: Why Over-Unity is Possible  (Read 12751 times)

Offline pauldude000

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 569
    • My electronics/programming website
Re: Why Over-Unity is Possible
« Reply #60 on: February 11, 2018, 09:46:14 AM »

That is exactly what Maxwell predicted, even long before we created a superconductor
Resistance is a function of heat.
With no heat, there is no resistance.


That is true, but you are not taking the concept far enough. There are also no I squared R losses in a system that can indeed do work as it does creates a perfectly efficient magnetic field. That electric current in a superconductive coil can theoretically flow in a circle forever if their is no interaction with the field it generates. If an armature is turned in that field, also made of superconductive material, the generation of electricity will be at perfect unity and the work performed will be at COP = 1.


Notice that last statement. No electrical non-superconductive system we have can achieve unity. Ask yourself how unity is measured; what system is used? Subjects can become interesting when examining base concepts.




Free Energy | searching for free energy and discussing free energy

Re: Why Over-Unity is Possible
« Reply #60 on: February 11, 2018, 09:46:14 AM »

Offline pauldude000

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 569
    • My electronics/programming website
Re: Why Over-Unity is Possible
« Reply #61 on: February 11, 2018, 10:32:27 AM »
With very weak magnets, you can prove that they do work against gravity over time.


Take a magnet that can barely hold itself up on a steel ceiling
And watch it.
Over some time, gravitational acceleration wins and the magnet falls.


I agree with you, but the problem stems with a short-sighted and quite stupid scientific definition for work. Too many physicists are still basing their logic on what they can perceive with their eyes. They cannot wrap their heads around the concept that a mass can undergo a positive acceleration yet remain motionless to their frame of reference and still accomplish work. They hold the god's eye view every time they perform an experiment and most cannot understand even that basic concept.


Overcoming negative acceleration to achieve equilibrium is equivalent in comparison to the same mass accelerated to achieve an equal positive acceleration.  Both are moving, just one SEEMS to be stationary.


Why this is so hard to accept is philosophy. You see, that magnet experiment is just a simple example of common everyday perpetual motion; one example among many. Perpetual motion is commonplace and many physicists do NOT want to accept even the concept of perpetual motion let alone the fact that so many common physical systems are examples by very definition, both on the micro and macro scales of perception. Illogical personal bias, pure and simple. Who cares what anyone does or does not want to accept -- personal opinions and personal desires do not change reality.


If gravity were not doing constant work, expending energy on a microsecond by microsecond basis, every planet and star in the known universe would literally explode radially outward into some really interesting gaseous and particulate forms from centrifugal force.


The expenditure and/or conversion of energy over time actually defines work in this fine universe, not the simplistic third-grade, tinker-toy, mechanistic notion of force X distance which is just one basic type of an example of energy expenditure over time.

Offline forest

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 3633
Re: Why Over-Unity is Possible
« Reply #62 on: February 11, 2018, 02:10:23 PM »
There is more to that. A piece of wood lying on tabletop is working against gravity but it's not recognized as work done.

Offline sm0ky2

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 2824
Re: Why Over-Unity is Possible
« Reply #63 on: February 11, 2018, 04:00:17 PM »
There is more to that. A piece of wood lying on tabletop is working against gravity but it's not recognized as work done.


Yes, if we follow that logic, the table rests on the earth which is the gravitational source.
So the piece of wood is not “accelerating”.


a magnet repelled in the air is resting on the magnetic field, which sits on the magnet,
which rests on the table on the earth.


the thing about relativity is it requires two perspectives.
and it doesn’t matter which we choose, but both must be present.
an object in motion has no energy.
But relative to another object, it does.
(or the other object does, or we can divide it among them)


The point is, our definition of work is relativistic, not an absolute energy value.


If two objects are moving at the same velocity and vector
they are relatively stationary to each other, and there can be no work done
between them.
However, relative to another object, now work can be done.


The wood on the table does no “work” against the earth
But the table has the same velocity as the earth.
As does the wood.


So when the earth is moving towards a relatively stationary object
the wood can perform work when it hits that object.


how much “kinetic energy” the wood actually has is irrelevant to our
energy analysis, because the work done is relativistic, only to the object
being hit by the wood.


If the wood hits an object that is moving in the same direction as the earth
but as a lower velocity, less work will be done than when it hit the stationary
object.


But the wood still has the same absolute value of kinetic energy
(we just have no way of knowing what that value is)


The velocity of the earth cannot be determined, except in relativistic terms.


energy, as it applies to work is not an absolute value, or even a deterministic
quantity.
But a relative one.


Offline pauldude000

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 569
    • My electronics/programming website
Re: Why Over-Unity is Possible
« Reply #64 on: February 13, 2018, 06:05:10 AM »
There is more to that. A piece of wood lying on tabletop is working against gravity but it's not recognized as work done.


That is absolutely true Forest. However, in no sense of the word is that piece of wood acting under any acceleration other than that of gravity. Gravity is doing work in the wood scenario, otherwise the wood would fly off into space, along with the table it is lying on. It is not resisting gravity at all. Gravity is resisting radial forces applied by centrifugal force caused by the rotating mass of the earth on which both the table and wood are loosely sitting upon its surface. Two forces are acting upon the wood. They are both doing work. The wood is not applying either force upon its environment so is doing no work at all.


The work issue is based upon far too shallow of thought, ignoring common forces. A lot could be excused from science at the time periods many of these things were first pondered, since they had far less information to work with than we do now. It is past time for an overhaul, at least of the base definitions, to bring us out of the 1600's.


So many things break down into circular logic, circular cause and consequence, fallacy of composition and fallacy of division it is not funny, and inherent basal relationships are still treated as if they were somehow mysterious magik.

Free Energy | searching for free energy and discussing free energy

Re: Why Over-Unity is Possible
« Reply #64 on: February 13, 2018, 06:05:10 AM »
Sponsored links:




Offline pauldude000

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 569
    • My electronics/programming website
Re: Why Over-Unity is Possible
« Reply #65 on: February 13, 2018, 06:45:28 AM »
I am going to give an example of what is going on, logically, using a word story. I will turn the story into a mathematical proposition to show how it works, mathematically speaking.

A mathematician wakes up one day and gets a headache. He takes an aspirin and the headache goes away, for a time, then it reoccurs later. He takes another aspirin and the headache leaves again. A light-bulb grandly flashes above his head in a cartoon bubble as he gets a new idea.

He puts the situation into a mathematical formula to define the relationship:

First, he assigns variables to the two main factors:

H = the headache
A = the aspirin

Since he started out with the headache, then took an aspirin and the headache left:

H=1

and

H + A = 0

Therefore! (drum-roll)

H = -A

He looked at the result on his chalkboard and mathematically everything made perfect sense. It was also provable, since taking a second aspirin made the equation zero again.

The conclusion? A headache is caused by a lack of aspirin.

At this point the shark has been jumped. The headache is not caused by a lack of aspirin, though the math implies this.

The simple thing is that math can yield a true statement yet be interpreted incorrectly. By itself, no equation proves anything. Math does not prove anything. Math has to be interpreted by a thinking being to have any relevance whatsoever. The thinking being has to approach the mathematics using logic to even have a chance of interpreting it correctly.

Here is a serious clue, even constants in an equation represent something very real in this universe. Nothing stands alone in an equation, since an equation describes the relationship of the (real stuff) quantities involved.

When you find yourself describing something in a self referencing manner for it's definition, you do not understand exactly what the quantity is. You MAY WELL know quite a bit about how it works, but you do not yet know exactly what it is. The one in the first statement (H=1) reflected the cause of the headache, yet was unaccounted for in the logic.


The headache example above demonstrates how an illogical mathematical assumption can be made due to the lack of relevant information, namely the actual cause of the headache, which was NOT a lack of aspirin, rofl.
 
On a serious note, when people try to prove a base definition, what is the response? The moronic statement "show me the math." I will put it forth "show me the logic." Without proper logic the math is worthless.

Offline Belfior

  • Full Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 198
Re: Why Over-Unity is Possible
« Reply #66 on: February 13, 2018, 12:06:42 PM »
I was reading some interesting studies and noticed that many of the equations are the same and just the units change. Like for potential energy and electrostatic potential & gravity.

Is there proof that mass attracts other mass or could it all be electrical attraction? My logic tells me that if we can't find what causes gravity we might be looking at the wrong place. How moderns scientists deal with this problem is that the invent new imaginary things so the math would hold up again. What comes after Dark Matter and Dark Energy? What do we add next so that the theory holds?


Free Energy | searching for free energy and discussing free energy

Re: Why Over-Unity is Possible
« Reply #66 on: February 13, 2018, 12:06:42 PM »
Sponsored links:




Offline D.R.Jackson

  • Jr. Member
  • **
  • Posts: 58
    • My recent developments
Re: Why Over-Unity is Possible
« Reply #67 on: February 13, 2018, 05:03:08 PM »
I was reading some interesting studies and noticed that many of the equations are the same and just the units change. Like for potential energy and electrostatic potential & gravity.

Is there proof that mass attracts other mass or could it all be electrical attraction? My logic tells me that if we can't find what causes gravity we might be looking at the wrong place. How moderns scientists deal with this problem is that the invent new imaginary things so the math would hold up again. What comes after Dark Matter and Dark Energy? What do we add next so that the theory holds?

Belfior in Einstein's Special and General Relativity in his mental lab experiments he paints a picture of gravity being the result of the expansion of not just space and time but matter too, where everything is expanding at the same rate even mass ( and so you can not see or measure it because the measuring stick is expanding too even the measuring stick called the speed of light), and hence gravity is merely the large circumference of the earth expanding outwards into new space and new moments of time, where our little expanding mass is merely being pinned against the earth's surface by our inertia.  The earth being very large expands and over takes more space each second than our mass does and so we can not escape its surface acceleration.  Now some scientist do not believe this to be the case so to explain this they instead are looking for dark energy and matter to fill in the space left out by not allowing for this observation.

You have to envision space expanding too and hence the previous space collapses before each new moment of space the same way as previous moments in time collapses before new moments of time, and they all collapse away towards the center of our mass from our perspective.  In effect the center of all mass in the universe is where the previous space collapses into.

Since this does not describe gravity as a field force of attraction we can conjecture then that since we do not have an opposing field force of gravity we can call antigravity found anywhere in nature naturally, then gravity is not a field force at all.  If it were a classical field force then we would have a counter force.  We do however have curved space around planets and stars which is the area at which we encounter the surface acceleration of lets say the earth starting to accelerate into our space if we get too close to the earth.  You can test this with this, the rate of fall of all objects is the same regardless of their weight, if you drop a wood ball and a lead ball from a tower both at the same time the fall at the same rate side by side and hit the ground at the same time, but the mass of the lead ball has greater inertia and so it leaves a big dent in the earth whereas the wood ball does not.  When both are released from the tower they are being suspended in space, and their mass is expanding into space and time, and they tend to want to occupy the space they are in due to their inertia, yet the massive mass of the earth who's large mass and circumference over takes way more space as it expands, expands up to over take that of the space of the two balls, hence in space time it is the surface of the earth moving more than that of the balls.  Hence the term some use "surface acceleration."  This also explains why the perceived rate of fall is squared every second since the mass of the earth and that of the balls is expanding exponentially into new space and time every second.  And well many scientist do not believe this and everyday nearly this year they have an announcement that they have proof for the discovery of dark matter only to have it dismissed in the news the next day.  I have seen this allot this past year, and so good luck on that hunt for illusive dark matter, its beginning to become a laughing stock.

Offline Belfior

  • Full Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 198
Re: Why Over-Unity is Possible
« Reply #68 on: February 13, 2018, 11:40:51 PM »
I have seen this allot this past year, and so good luck on that hunt for illusive dark matter, its beginning to become a laughing stock.

My point exactly. Do we have any proof, that "gravity" can't be something else like magnetic or electric potentials?

Offline sm0ky2

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 2824
Re: Why Over-Unity is Possible
« Reply #69 on: February 14, 2018, 03:21:55 AM »
My point exactly. Do we have any proof, that "gravity" can't be something else like magnetic or electric potentials?


We can prove that it is always perpendicular to both the electric and magnetic moment
of a hydrogen atom.


Beyond that the gravitational field becomes incoherently complex
and for all intensive purposes, as elusive as the electrons themselves.


one can’t help but wonder if gravity is somehow different in an electromagnetic coil
or in a permanent magnet


Free Energy | searching for free energy and discussing free energy

Re: Why Over-Unity is Possible
« Reply #69 on: February 14, 2018, 03:21:55 AM »
Sponsored links:




Offline pauldude000

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 569
    • My electronics/programming website
Re: Why Over-Unity is Possible
« Reply #70 on: February 14, 2018, 06:06:34 AM »

We can prove that it is always perpendicular to both the electric and magnetic moment
of a hydrogen atom.


Beyond that the gravitational field becomes incoherently complex
and for all intensive purposes, as elusive as the electrons themselves.


one can’t help but wonder if gravity is somehow different in an electromagnetic coil
or in a permanent magnet


That is dangerous territory there, Smoky

Offline pauldude000

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 569
    • My electronics/programming website
Re: Why Over-Unity is Possible
« Reply #71 on: February 14, 2018, 06:15:59 AM »
I was reading some interesting studies and noticed that many of the equations are the same and just the units change. Like for potential energy and electrostatic potential & gravity.

Is there proof that mass attracts other mass or could it all be electrical attraction? My logic tells me that if we can't find what causes gravity we might be looking at the wrong place. How moderns scientists deal with this problem is that the invent new imaginary things so the math would hold up again. What comes after Dark Matter and Dark Energy? What do we add next so that the theory holds?


I am not going to put forth my ludicrous hypothesis, but let me answer your question with a question that begs the question, lol.


If many of the equations are exactly the same, but just with different units, why could that be? Give it some real thought.


Look at the tensor for electricity then factor in Newton into your thinking. For every action there is an equal and opposite reaction.


Examine the concept with two questions:


1. Are they the same?
2. If not, then WHY not? (Due to the apparent equivalence)


Relative equivalence does not necessarily guarantee mathematical equality, contrary to Einstein.

Offline Belfior

  • Full Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 198
Re: Why Over-Unity is Possible
« Reply #72 on: February 14, 2018, 10:51:36 AM »
I can put forth mine.

It seems to me that everything is waves. Light, sound, electricity and even water. Or the interaction is waves. Nature would not have another way of doing stuff. Like everything else grows in the Golden Ratio. That also comes from the same wave idea. Why does everything grow and develop in 1.618 ratio? Study that for a day and you will find out it comes back to a circle and eventually waves.

I think matter is just standing waves or waves of peculiar frequency. This would explain why different theories (gravity,potential energy, electricity) seem to have the same equations, because they are the same deep down.They seem to be different, but then somehow the equations come up the same. We are just being taken for a ride, so it is all hidden in the open. The only place they can be hidden. They just need to debunk, ridicule and push off buildings all original thought.

So a particular apple is just a sum of all the small waves that make up that apple. If we could "record" that wave/sound and then play it back with enough energy we would have just cloned an apple.

I do like the genesis stories where there was just the "word" in the beginning. So the Creator uttered a sound the created everything. Waves again.

Btw you don'tn need hydrogen for anti-grav. Helium works as well and is not flammable

 

Share this topic to your favourite Social and Bookmark site

Please SHARE this topic at:


OneLink