Language: 
To browser these website, it's necessary to store cookies on your computer.
The cookies contain no personal information, they are required for program control.
  the storage of cookies while browsing this website, on Login and Register.

GDPR and DSGVO law

Storing Cookies (See : http://ec.europa.eu/ipg/basics/legal/cookies/index_en.htm ) 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:
https://overunity.com/5553/privacy-policy/
If you do not agree with storing cookies, please LEAVE this website now. From the 25th of May 2018, every existing user has to accept the GDPR agreement at first login. If a user is unwilling to accept the GDPR, he should email us and request to erase his account. 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.

User Menu

A-Ads

Powerbox

Smartbox

3D Solar

3D Solar Panels

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

Products

WaterMotor kit

Statistics


  • *Total Posts: 513952
  • *Total Topics: 15298
  • *Online Today: 44
  • *Most Online: 103
(December 19, 2006, 11:27:19 PM)
  • *Users: 4
  • *Guests: 14
  • *Total: 18

Author Topic: The paradox of overunity  (Read 72846 times)

Offline Ar-el-es

  • Newbie
  • *
  • Posts: 16
Re: The paradox of overunity
« Reply #45 on: December 29, 2010, 08:22:14 AM »
Omnibus, putting all of the facts and theories aside there is an issue here that only digs you a hole everytime you try to prove a point. By continuing to refuse to back up your claims without any sort of evidence or reference material you only make it impossible for anyone to take you seriously. When I first came to this forum I thought you were a level-headed individual but now I feel you only preach because it gives you something to do. It's a form of entertainment for yourself similar to whatever IST gets out of his nonsense. I highly doubt that there is any kind or formal discussion, debate, of conference that you would actually show up at. Your excuse is just another tactic to delay the inevitable. I would rather not make an enemy out of you but unless I see you say something constructive what is your reason for wasting your time here?

Now back to the real issue here!

Overunity by it's clearest definition so far, (decided on by the people here I guess), is impossible. Slapping a bunch of resistors, diodes, capacitors, batteries, transistors, electromagents, wires, and whatever else anyone decides to use isn't going to make a device that can produce more power than it uses without tapping into a known or unknown power medium. Whatever law of physics it exploits will still make the device just the same by definition as another device that exploits another known law of physics such as gravity. Sure, there may other strange things that we can find out about physics but that doesn't mean we shouldn't try to utilize what we have available. Until I start seeing these devices in use we should not focus on trying to create or contemplate other devices whose sole purpose seem to make you want to say "Hummph".

Even our own definitions on free energy and antigravity is confusing. With free energy there may always be a cost in it's construction and upkeep but as long as you aren't using something you you have to replace on a constant basis like fossil fuels it could be considered as free energy. Solar energy and wind turbine could also be considered as free energy if the devices were much cheaper to produce and much more efficient. With antigravity you could classify the common airplace wing as an antigravity device because it does work against gravity. It seems as if ourselves or the media has placed in our minds that a free energy device creates energy like an overunity device, (and doesn't cost a penny to maintain I guess), and that antigravity is something that generates the exact opposite of gravity, (whether that be anti-graviton or anti-mass particles).

My point here is that by using the definitions that some of the people here use; free energy and/or overunity is impossible. Hell, from what I can tell you can easily replace the word free energy with overunity but you would all probably complain because there is still upkeep associated even with an overunity device. So either way free energy is impossibe IF you go by that definition.

I'd still rather call a gravity wheel or TPU a free energy device because of it's source. The same goes for how I would still call a lifter or even an extremely poweful electromagnet an antigravity device if it still causes you to fly through the air.

The fact of the matter and part of the reason I brought anything up in this topic is because of this:

"If your device is more a mechanical or chemical ( e.g. rotational, electrolyis or cold fusion-type, etc. ) device,
you must build also into it the converter to get electrical DC power out of it, so it is producing at least a contineous
1 Watt of free electrical DC power without using any fuel other than water or air. Your device must not be
powered by an outside source, such as wind, solar or received radio energy and must work 24 hours / 7 days a week / 365 days per year long.
The output power must stay constant and must not fall down after some time.
It must only have a „fuel“ or „maintainance cost“ per year of less than
0.001 US$ = 0.1 UScent PER GENERATED KILOWATTHOUR
including "fuel-", repair-" and maintainance costs.


3.It can be powered by radioactive decay, but the used materials must not be harmfull and must be easy
to get in every city and must not be special parts which are difficult to get or hard to produce and must
not be highly dangerously radioactive or unlawfull to posess.
It also must not use any very expensive or forbidden and/or banned
radioactive materials, which are hard to get for the average guy
and are dangerous to handle and pose a threat for the environment.

Also if it used water as the "fuel", it should not use more than 1 Liter
of normal tap water per day.

It also must not put out any dangerous pollution stuff and
must not be harmful to the environment."

Taken from:

http://www.overunity.com/index.php?topic=5707.0

So until we can vote and decide on the proper meaning to these terms we will only waste a lot more time than we already have!!!

Free Energy | searching for free energy and discussing free energy

Re: The paradox of overunity
« Reply #45 on: December 29, 2010, 08:22:14 AM »

Offline Omnibus

  • elite_member
  • Hero Member
  • ******
  • Posts: 5330
Re: The paradox of overunity
« Reply #46 on: December 29, 2010, 08:46:20 AM »
Tell me why should I bother to explain the issues of OU to you? What will this contribute to the advancement of the field? You should know that I don't give a damn what someone with no clear credentials and leverage for impact to improve the sorry state of OU research thinks as to whether or not I'm level headed. Try to understand, someone comes out of the woodwork and demands explanation of something who knows how much he's capable of understanding. Even in the best instance, supposing he does understand, that's a partisan approach and is really mean when you think clearly about it. We're fighting here against tremendous odds and the least anyone involved in OU research needs is to be distracted by random individuals. Hope you understand there's nothing personal in what I'm saying. I am speaking as a matter of principle.

Offline Omnibus

  • elite_member
  • Hero Member
  • ******
  • Posts: 5330
Re: The paradox of overunity
« Reply #47 on: December 29, 2010, 09:22:55 AM »
Now, on the issue here. I don't know know how to impress on you strong enough to rely also on standard scientific texts rather than just read what some people write here and thus form your opinion about OU. First thing that you should understand clearly is that science, thermodynamics in particular, does not take into account the energy spend to produce the engineitself  and its upkeep when carrying out the energy balance. So leave that part alone. Whether or not a machine is expensive to produce or it needs maintenance is not a matter of consideration when deciding that it is an OU machine.

Another point which I'd like to stress is that we can speak of overunity only when the work of the machine is not at the expense of an existing energy reservoir. Any machine depleting such pre-existing energy reservoir, no matter how large that reservoir is, is not an OU machine. Wind turbines are not OU machines, tidal generators, solar panels, batteries fueld by radioactive elements and so on are not either. One should not confuse the practicality of a machine, its improved efficiency or the fact that its energy production comes out to be free, for what an OU machine is.

That said, it should also be clear tht there are machines which are true OU machines, that is, producing energy which has not earlier been a part of a pre-existing energy reservoir. So far, such machines can only produce discrete amounts of excess energy (free energy, that is; energy produced without depleting a pre-existing energy reservoir). These machines can have practical application but the society at large wants to see machines which produce excess energy continuously. Such machines, for instance, would be gravity machines. Gravity machines, when working such will be made, will be true OU machines (unlike solar, wind etc. machines, as I explained). So this is the main focus of our fight -- to ensure engineering conditions for such machines, which are possible to exist in principle, to find their concrete engineering expression of a working device.

I have explained the above more than once in various forms. Now, what part of it do you not understand?

Free Energy | searching for free energy and discussing free energy

Re: The paradox of overunity
« Reply #47 on: December 29, 2010, 09:22:55 AM »
Sponsored links:




Offline Doctor No

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 262
    • NSPAP
Re: The paradox of overunity
« Reply #48 on: December 29, 2010, 11:07:11 AM »
I^m always astounded, how peoples in XXI century dumb are. Gravity and time was already good researched after I World War. It even don^t needs a complicated research and maths. Even most dumb anthaghonists of free energy have already say that forces exists and gravity is also nothing other as force. So what is really free energy? Free energy simply saying, are gravitons freed from they normal working positions. The only things to have free energy are: 1. knowledge that is possible to free gravitons 2. How to do it 3. What power they really posses. And thats all.   Or simpler: it is normal process which takes place without our knowledge- automatically. It propels us through the space and time.  This force which push us forward and is really born in our body intern and each other body too (try to withstand this force in accident f.e.:-().                                This is antigravity. A second force which brakes us in time and space is gravity. Isn^t true how simple it is?                                            In pre War Germany free gravitons were called tachyons or "Reine Kraft" -pure force.                                           Although all about gravity was than after I War invented and intended for civilian purposes to lift of country from misery to produce cheap electricity and heat, to cure peoples (Volk) cheap and speedy (schnell) and for new, no fuel burning transportation it had all changed after resolving first practical problems.  When after first experiments was known how powerfull tachyons are, all was hidden till time national socialism came to power.  It was purposed to give answer (Antwort geben) Frankreich, England, and the rest.                  This is already history.               Today only 3 parties have this power (alphabetically): Poland, Russia, US.                          Please imagine how will next war look soon, when a bomb of Hiroshima volume can 500 MT yield to give?:-)  Dr Adolf Nowak                                 National Socialists Polish Workers Party                                     www.nsppp.bloog.pl
« Last Edit: December 29, 2010, 11:36:25 AM by Doctor No »

Offline WilbyInebriated

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 3143
Re: The paradox of overunity
« Reply #49 on: December 29, 2010, 08:20:34 PM »
Now, on the issue here. I don't know know how to impress on you strong enough to rely also on standard scientific texts rather than just read what some people write here and thus form your opinion about OU. First thing that you should understand clearly is that science, thermodynamics in particular, does not take into account the energy spend to produce the engineitself  and its upkeep when carrying out the energy balance. So leave that part alone. Whether or not a machine is expensive to produce or it needs maintenance is not a matter of consideration when deciding that it is an OU machine.

Another point which I'd like to stress is that we can speak of overunity only when the work of the machine is not at the expense of an existing energy reservoir. Any machine depleting such pre-existing energy reservoir, no matter how large that reservoir is, is not an OU machine. Wind turbines are not OU machines, tidal generators, solar panels, batteries fueld by radioactive elements and so on are not either. One should not confuse the practicality of a machine, its improved efficiency or the fact that its energy production comes out to be free, for what an OU machine is.

That said, it should also be clear tht there are machines which are true OU machines, that is, producing energy which has not earlier been a part of a pre-existing energy reservoir. So far, such machines can only produce discrete amounts of excess energy (free energy, that is; energy produced without depleting a pre-existing energy reservoir). These machines can have practical application but the society at large wants to see machines which produce excess energy continuously. Such machines, for instance, would be gravity machines. Gravity machines, when working such will be made, will be true OU machines (unlike solar, wind etc. machines, as I explained). So this is the main focus of our fight -- to ensure engineering conditions for such machines, which are possible to exist in principle, to find their concrete engineering expression of a working device.

I have explained the above more than once in various forms. Now, what part of it do you not understand?
regarding these "machines which are true OU machines, that is, producing energy which has not earlier been a part of a pre-existing energy reservoir"... where is your proof or even a shred of evidence that said machines do not "deplete a pre-existing energy reservoir"? you have shown no evidence nor proof, only assumptions and conjecture...

and now you are claiming gravity is infinite?? LMFAO this gets better every time you post omni...

Free Energy | searching for free energy and discussing free energy

Re: The paradox of overunity
« Reply #49 on: December 29, 2010, 08:20:34 PM »
Sponsored links:




Offline Omnibus

  • elite_member
  • Hero Member
  • ******
  • Posts: 5330
Re: The paradox of overunity
« Reply #50 on: December 29, 2010, 09:16:23 PM »
regarding these "machines which are true OU machines, that is, producing energy which has not earlier been a part of a pre-existing energy reservoir"... where is your proof or even a shred of evidence that said machines do not "deplete a pre-existing energy reservoir"? you have shown no evidence nor proof, only assumptions and conjecture...

and now you are claiming gravity is infinite?? LMFAO this gets better every time you post omni...

I have shown conclusive proof to that effect.

Offline WilbyInebriated

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 3143
Re: The paradox of overunity
« Reply #51 on: December 29, 2010, 09:24:55 PM »
I have shown conclusive proof to that effect.
LOL no you haven't. you have shown nothing that indicates these alleged OU machines do not deplete a pre-existing energy reservoir. furthermore, your statement demonstrates that you do not even know what constitutes a proof... ::)

Free Energy | searching for free energy and discussing free energy

Re: The paradox of overunity
« Reply #51 on: December 29, 2010, 09:24:55 PM »
Sponsored links:




Offline Omnibus

  • elite_member
  • Hero Member
  • ******
  • Posts: 5330
Re: The paradox of overunity
« Reply #52 on: December 29, 2010, 09:29:59 PM »
LOL no you haven't. you have shown nothing that indicates these alleged OU machines do not deplete a pre-existing energy reservoir. furthermore, your statement demonstrates that you do not even know what constitutes a proof... ::)

It's not up to you to judge.

Offline WilbyInebriated

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 3143
Re: The paradox of overunity
« Reply #53 on: December 29, 2010, 09:50:04 PM »
It's not up to you to judge.
irrelevant. you still have shown nothing that indicates these alleged OU machines do not deplete a pre-existing energy reservoir.

Free Energy | searching for free energy and discussing free energy

Re: The paradox of overunity
« Reply #53 on: December 29, 2010, 09:50:04 PM »
3D Solar Panels

Offline Omnibus

  • elite_member
  • Hero Member
  • ******
  • Posts: 5330
Re: The paradox of overunity
« Reply #54 on: December 29, 2010, 09:57:31 PM »
irrelevant. you still have shown nothing that indicates these alleged OU machines do not deplete a pre-existing energy reservoir.

On the contrary, it is exactly relevant to say it is not up to you to judge. So you may relax and try to find something else to do instead.

Offline WilbyInebriated

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 3143
Re: The paradox of overunity
« Reply #55 on: December 29, 2010, 10:02:29 PM »
On the contrary, it is exactly relevant to say it is not up to you to judge. So you may relax and try to find something else to do.
no it's irrelevant because you originally said you had shown "conclusive proof to that effect", to which i replied you haven't and gave a cogent argument to that effect. you then engaged in a logical fallacy, known as a red herring, with your irrelevant and evasive response which was, "It's not up to you to judge". this statement by you does not address the merits and points of my argument that you have not shown "conclusive proof to that effect" whatsoever.

try a cogent argument next time omni... if you know what one is.  ::)

Free Energy | searching for free energy and discussing free energy

Re: The paradox of overunity
« Reply #55 on: December 29, 2010, 10:02:29 PM »
3D Solar Panels

Offline Omnibus

  • elite_member
  • Hero Member
  • ******
  • Posts: 5330
Re: The paradox of overunity
« Reply #56 on: December 29, 2010, 10:08:16 PM »
no it's irrelevant because you originally said you had shown "conclusive proof to that effect", to which i replied you haven't and gave a cogent argument to that effect. you then engaged in a logical fallacy, known as a red herring, with your irrelevant and evasive response which was, "It's not up to you to judge". this statement by you does not address the merits and points of my argument that you have not shown "conclusive proof to that effect" whatsoever.

try a cogent argument next time omni... if you know what one is.  ::)

You don't understand that it's irrelevant what you've said or what you haven't said on this topic. Irrelevant, get it?

Offline WilbyInebriated

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 3143
Re: The paradox of overunity
« Reply #57 on: December 29, 2010, 10:10:15 PM »
You don't understand that it's irrelevant what you've said or what you haven't said on this topic. Irrelevant, get it?
denied. logical fallacy, red herring... again. and you have demonstrated you don't know what a cogent rebuttal is... again. ::)

let me refresh your memory omni. you have shown no evidence nor provided a single proof that indicates these alleged OU machines do not deplete a pre-existing energy reservoir.

Offline Omnibus

  • elite_member
  • Hero Member
  • ******
  • Posts: 5330
Re: The paradox of overunity
« Reply #58 on: December 29, 2010, 10:13:31 PM »
denied. logical fallacy, red herring... again. and you have demonstrated you don't know what a cogent rebuttal is... again. ::)

let me refresh your memory omni. you have shown no evidence nor provided a single proof that indicates these alleged OU machines do not deplete a pre-existing energy reservoir.

The above is crap. How much longer are you going to fill this thread with crap?

Offline WilbyInebriated

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 3143
Re: The paradox of overunity
« Reply #59 on: December 29, 2010, 10:14:25 PM »
The above is crap. How much longer are you going to fill this thread with crap.
the above is another red herring. until you cease with the logical fallacies and provide such evidence or proof.

 

OneLink