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.

# New Book

### Statistics

• Total Posts: 498489
• Total Topics: 14680
• Online Today: 44
• Most Online: 103
(December 19, 2006, 11:27:19 PM)
• Users: 5
• Guests: 205
• Total: 210

### Author Topic: Overunity is it possible?  (Read 9405 times)

#### lltfdaniel1

• Hero Member
• Posts: 610
##### Re: Overunity is it possible?
« Reply #90 on: October 23, 2017, 01:41:24 PM »
IMO, the ambiguity about overunity comes from the way energy efficiency ratio is defined.
In the case of electric circuits, we usually define it as the ratio of the output power to the input power, measured in the electric circuit.
But we should rather define it as the ratio of the useful output electric power to the absorbed power, the absorbed power having two origins: the input electrical power and the energy transfered from the active vacuum medium to the system (considered as a open system from the thermodynamic point of view i.e. able to exchange matter and energy with the outside environment).

To achieve energy conversions between the vacuum and the system, the vacuum must be described as a dynamical system possibly modeled as an infinite fluid. This fluid has to be compressible to allow waves to propagate with finite speed (as sound in air) and inviscid (non viscous) for not dissipating thermal energy. In this scheme, particles of matter have finite sizes and appear as stationary vortices. In the normal conditions, vacuum energy is uniformly distributed and matter continuously receives energy from the vacuum and radiates the same quantity of energy (so the mean energy balance is null). So, if this equilibrium is broken, energy has to flow to restore equilibrium. If this non-equilibrium state is maintained, a stationary current can be established.  If we consider the vacuum as a compressible fluid, its density can vary. So, if we are able to create a stationary vacuum energy density gradient, a energy current can be created between the system and the vacuum. Scalar wave solution of Maxwell equations allows non electromagnetic energy to propagate.

The main problem to solve is how to convert this energy into a coherent electromagnetic energy to create an electric current.
This involves that vacuum fluctuations (considered as electron-positron virtual pairs) must be stabilized to allow either the separation between electron and positron charges or the creation of superconducting pairs. The Big Bang theory tells us that such a charge separation is possible, because, assuming that matter emerged from vacuum energy fluctuations consisting of matter-antimatter pairs, matter and antimatter should be present in equal quantities and we should not exist. Several hypotheses might explain this unbalance state:  matter and anti-matter were (very) swiftly separated before mutually annihilating (but where is the anti-matter now?) or a part of anti-matter was converted into matter. Electric circuits where free energy is observed are generally composed of coils, capacitors and magnets (permanent or electromagnets) and the source of energy excess is often attributed to the magnets. Recent studies of magnetic materials that showed there exist numerous interesting interactions between electric current, spin current and the crystal lattice magnetic spins to create magnetic structures such as skyrmions might provide a further insight into ways of understanding how matter and energy interact in magnets.

Thanks for that makes sense to me.

#### Free Energy | searching for free energy and discussing free energy

##### Re: Overunity is it possible?
« Reply #90 on: October 23, 2017, 01:41:24 PM »

#### lltfdaniel1

• Hero Member
• Posts: 610
##### Re: Overunity is it possible?
« Reply #91 on: October 24, 2017, 10:33:39 PM »
The person who came up with spitting the atom knew full well creation can in actual fact create or destroy but create and destroy are both incompatible to each other or not varying on how it is perceived which of course defy's cannot create or destroy.

So thanks to the guy who came up with splitting the atom i have now succeeded in accomplishing my idea.

So instead of being slapped with conversion law and being cut off that was my last hope and hooray it breaks all the laws of physics and bypasses the heart of conversion law.

The bit where zpe wakes up to smell the coffee (zpes/vaccum own perpetual process) in conjuction with the power to destory which is what zpe is i have now succeeded in getting zpe to perpetuate.

#### lltfdaniel1

• Hero Member
• Posts: 610
##### Re: Overunity is it possible?
« Reply #92 on: January 03, 2018, 05:27:20 PM »
So yea just to recap.

If you cannot create nor destory then we shouldn't exist simply put if you find the thing responsible for creating us to exist you will have cracked it on the head - i mean it is the holy grail of free energy it has power to create.

If you cannot go faster than the speed of light, what speed is infinity again am correct in saying it is instantaneous in speed no matter the distance.

Anyways happy new year all!

#### sm0ky2

• Hero Member
• Posts: 3038
##### Re: Overunity is it possible?
« Reply #93 on: January 04, 2018, 11:55:38 AM »
I believe it was the same guy who figured out about atomic energy
That stated energy could not be created nor destroyed.
He also gave us the equation that relates energy to mass.
E=mc^2

Atoms are not destroyed in fissality, but rather converted to other forms of energy.
The energy output of this is the same energy that went into the fusion of its creation.

#### sm0ky2

• Hero Member
• Posts: 3038
##### Re: Overunity is it possible?
« Reply #94 on: January 04, 2018, 12:15:02 PM »
The Law of Conversion is the fundamental principle of Thermodynamic Theory.
It sets the stage for the theoretical “closed system” (which itself is impossible)

The heat-pump, by definition, is not a closed system. But rather designed to
transfer thermal energy between two systems.
Both of which are also Not closed systems.

If it were possible to enclose all 3 of the systems in the heat-pump,
the theory states that they would reach thermodynamic equalibrium.
And once in this state, no heat would be further transferred.
This cannot be verified, due to the impossibility of closing the systems.

#### Free Energy | searching for free energy and discussing free energy

##### Re: Overunity is it possible?
« Reply #94 on: January 04, 2018, 12:15:02 PM »

#### AlienGrey

• Hero Member
• Posts: 1797
##### Re: Overunity is it possible?
« Reply #95 on: January 05, 2018, 12:22:13 AM »
The Law of Conversion is the fundamental principle of Thermodynamic Theory.
It sets the stage for the theoretical “closed system” (which itself is impossible)

The heat-pump, by definition, is not a closed system. But rather designed to
transfer thermal energy between two systems.
Both of which are also Not closed systems.

If it were possible to enclose all 3 of the systems in the heat-pump,
the theory states that they would reach thermodynamic equilibrium.
And once in this state, no heat would be further transferred.
This cannot be verified, due to the impossibility of closing the systems.
Oh I don't think so, most laws are based on 'political correctness'
and since most of us know some things we don't by any means know it all
and to some in here all these threads are just a political soap box view to many.
no offense intended but if you read more you will find out more,

ps think out side the box

AG

#### sm0ky2

• Hero Member
• Posts: 3038
##### Re: Overunity is it possible?
« Reply #96 on: January 05, 2018, 02:12:58 AM »
reading without experience is how people end up believing those “laws”

it is better to both read AND experiment.

Thermodynamic theory (“law”) is the church of capitalism.
It governs our educational system

It cannot be proven, yet it is accepted as absolute fact.

Until we can get past this mythology as a society,
we here are Wilbur and Orville.

#### Free Energy | searching for free energy and discussing free energy

##### Re: Overunity is it possible?
« Reply #96 on: January 05, 2018, 02:12:58 AM »

#### lltfdaniel1

• Hero Member
• Posts: 610
##### Re: Overunity is it possible?
« Reply #97 on: January 05, 2018, 05:37:06 PM »
reading without experience is how people end up believing those “laws”

it is better to both read AND experiment.

Thermodynamic theory (“law”) is the church of capitalism.
It governs our educational system

It cannot be proven, yet it is accepted as absolute fact.

Until we can get past this mythology as a society,
we here are Wilbur and Orville.

I for one would prefer to think out side of the box as much as possible, and would rather not believe the ''reading without experience is how people end up believing those “laws” so to speak.

If it cannot be proven then, then the fact is self evident all by it self.

I hope we can get past the myth as you put it.

#### pauldude000

• Hero Member
• Posts: 569
##### Re: Overunity is it possible?
« Reply #98 on: February 08, 2018, 10:57:07 AM »
I will put the answer to your question in a nutshell -- Yes.

Unity is a measurement of the energy provided and used within a closed system. Energy input/energy output = 1 (COP = 1 or unity)

If energy is entering the supposedly closed system from outside, then the system is actually an open system and over-unity is then possible, since the energy you provide to the system may just control or transform a much larger amount of energy.

Think of it this way, either the energy you input controls an unaccounted for source of energy, or it creates a situation where a new form of energy becomes usable that beforehand was not.

A really simplistic evaluation: If you saw a wire coming out from under a tarp and you connect a MOSFET to that wire along with another mysterious wire coming from under the tarp and then apply a voltage to open the gate of the MOSFET to allow electricity to flow, the battery under the tarp would be hidden from view, and therefore be unknown to you. You would not be able to account for its energy within your calculations and would show OU when the MOSFET goes bang.

In real examples, unknown sources of energy are comparable to the hypothetical battery in the example. Energy can neither be created nor destroyed, but it sure can be transformed, controlled, and manipulated.

If you managed to, just for giggles, locally stress space-time inducing a barrage of charged virtual particles into your supposedly closed system, would that not yield an "unknown hidden battery"?

#### blueplanet

• Sr. Member
• Posts: 364
##### Re: Overunity is it possible?
« Reply #99 on: February 10, 2018, 09:08:52 AM »
Measurement can be wrong. In many electrical or electromagnetic systems, for instance, both input and output power can be distributed at different harmonics. Some of the input power may exist at a higher harmonic frequency in the form of waste heat. But this waste heat lost is usually not measurable using ordinary meters.  You may end up with COP>1 by measurement but your system cannot self-run for longer than 10 minutes.

The best way to test if a system is overunity or not is to check if it can continuously self-run for a week or so.  Another thing you can tell is to check if there exists any endothermic effect in the device. Energy lost in an underunity system is finally converted into waste heat. Being endothermic means that the process is reverse of underunity.

According to my experience, almost NONE of the electromagnetic devices that have been publicized as OU devices CAN self-run without an artificial power source.  It does not matter whether they are labeled as quantum energy or whatever.

Some devices harvest energy from the nature. They may not be called OU but they can at least turn on an LED.

I am under an impression we can find overunity in chemistry, particularly when the temperature approach absolute zero.

#### Free Energy | searching for free energy and discussing free energy

##### Re: Overunity is it possible?
« Reply #99 on: February 10, 2018, 09:08:52 AM »

#### sm0ky2

• Hero Member
• Posts: 3038
##### Re: Overunity is it possible?
« Reply #100 on: February 10, 2018, 01:13:01 PM »

#### pauldude000

• Hero Member
• Posts: 569
##### Re: Overunity is it possible?
« Reply #101 on: February 11, 2018, 09:20:42 AM »
Measurement can be wrong. In many electrical or electromagnetic systems, for instance, both input and output power can be distributed at different harmonics. Some of the input power may exist at a higher harmonic frequency in the form of waste heat. But this waste heat lost is usually not measurable using ordinary meters.  You may end up with COP>1 by measurement but your system cannot self-run for longer than 10 minutes.

The problem with overunity in such a situation as electromagnetism or EMR is that people are doing the standard approach whether they realize it or not. The standard approach cannot work, except for maybe small amounts due to inaccuracy of measurement or of testing systems, or small flaws in standard theory concerning efficiency of the standard as applied. They are trying to create a magnetic field with an electric current and are hoping to extract excess current from the current they supply. They are purposely creating a closed system and throwing the concept under the bus in doing so. To get actual OU in that manner will be an accident, not by design.

One of the problems I have noticed are that all the standards used with electricity do not reduce the electrons to their lowest possible energy state which means that all the testing methods are actually below COP=1. If you try to convert electricity to heat, there is still a usable current on the ground end of the resistance that can be used to perform work. I realize that you can get it close by measuring the voltage/current on both sides of the resistance and subtracting to see how much electricity is leftover, but it just goes to show that the conversion is incomplete and the measurement of the heat has to involve complete capture and measurement of said heat to be accurate. In that system it is hard to calculate heat loss to the environment as well, which further complicates the problem. Capturing all of the available energy to measure it can be close to impossible. All of this throws off the standard against which watt conversion depends upon for accuracy.

Many may not agree with me, but agreement is subjective.

#### sm0ky2

• Hero Member
• Posts: 3038
##### Re: Overunity is it possible?
« Reply #102 on: February 11, 2018, 04:27:03 PM »
Measurements of electricity are Always wrong.
We cannot know how much electrical energy we have.

We only know the potential voltage between our source and reference.

Current we may be able to have an accurate depiction of.
But never voltage.

If our reference is the earth, we can develop a standard of measure
But only relative to the earth ground (or earth positive by another method)
If we choose another point as our reference, the same source can have drastically
different voltage potentials.

For instance, an object insulated from earth may have a potential that is greater than
earth-ground. If this is our reference, the voltage is less from the same voltage source.
From the same perspective the reference itself has a potential to earth-ground.
We can find these objects with a meter to earth and test different objects.

If our reference is a point just outside the earth, our measured energy becomes
something to the tune of gigajoules, from the same source.
because the potential has increased by billions of volts.

Batteries are measured in potential only relative to themselves.
If it is an electrochemical battery, then we have a set energy value.
(in most methods of analysis)
because the reaction creates the potential.

Other voltage sources can be relativistic, only determined by our reference.
And in this form, the true “energy” quantity is unknown.

In electromagnetic induction, we create a potential between two ends of a coil,
and if this is our reference, we have a situation similar to the electrochemical battery.
However if the coil is in series with another reference, the same input force can result
in completely different energy measurements.

Now - does a voltage bias create extra energy?
No
Only a difference in measurement.

Let’s say we place a battery in series with an electret (or permanently charged object)
Our measurement shows more total power (because total potential measurement is greater)
But the available energy from the battery remains the same.

This is why we use earth ground, or ground electronics to the case
common-ground, common reference.
To standardize our measurements.
It has nothing to do with the actual value, only our perspective.