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

Tesla Paper

Free Energy Book

Get paid

Donations

Please Donate for the Forum.
Many thanks.
Regards, Stefan.(Admin)

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 Members: 83955
  • *Latest: serials

  • *Total Posts: 525618
  • *Total Topics: 15645
  • *Online Today: 44
  • *Most Online: 103
(December 19, 2006, 11:27:19 PM)
  • *Users: 2
  • *Guests: 11
  • *Total: 13

Author Topic: Arguments against Muller design  (Read 60280 times)

Offline kmarinas86

  • Full Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 156
    • YouTube - kmarinas86's Channel
Re: Arguments against Muller design
« Reply #45 on: July 18, 2011, 01:43:03 AM »
The following set of statements are various ways of expressing the second law of thermodynamics:

* With each energy conversion from one form to another, some of the energy becomes unavailable for further use.
* Heat cannot flow from a cold object to a hot object on its own.
* It is impossible to convert heat energy into work with 100 percent efficiency.
* You cannot break even.
* It is impossible to build a machine that produces as much energy as it uses. (This type of machine is called a perpetual motion machine of the second kind.)
* The entropy of the universe tends to a maximum.

The following set of statements mention facts which the second law of thermodynamics overlooks:
* Thermal energy is less than, not equal to, the amount of energy available for work.
* Thermal energy that is derived from matter consists of energy existing mostly in the infrared and visible frequency ranges. These are all but just a tiny fraction of the electromagnetic energy that actually exists.
* Energy tends to travel from hot to cold, but another, and more advanced, way to put that is that energy tends to travel from high to low frequencies. This is due to scattering of photon energy.
* The highest frequency energy is sourced from (and sinks to) where the mass-energy density is the highest. This occurs mainly in nuclei.
* The increase in entropy in the universe is due to optical scattering/divergence/concavity.
* Any entropy-reversing process will involve some sort of optical alignment/convergence/convexity.

Free Energy | searching for free energy and discussing free energy

Re: Arguments against Muller design
« Reply #45 on: July 18, 2011, 01:43:03 AM »

Offline Pirate88179

  • elite_member
  • Hero Member
  • ******
  • Posts: 8366
Re: Arguments against Muller design
« Reply #46 on: July 18, 2011, 05:49:43 AM »
After reading the forum where the "proof" for fake is posted I consider it even more fuzzy than the so called "fake" videos.

Besides - Offtopic:
I don't get why some harsh words fell in the overunityresearch.com forum about the way overunity.com is moderated. I personally think that Stefan makes a very good moderator job in here by means of being very patient and open for ideas. I also appreciate a lot, that Stefan does not play "god" in here, even though it's his forum. In most other forums you have 1-2 moderators adding their comments and warnings to any 'pups in the gravel' just for the sake of feeling superior to others.

Not so in here (except you behave really really bad for a long time) - in this board you get: Freedom.

When I first registered in here, I expected many things to be moderated more strictly or some outdated disproven topics to be removed already. But it was this tolerance and openness (aside from the fact that many competent and skilled people are in here too) which kept me in here. As a consequence I've learned lot's of things, and others will too. This relaxed way of moderation may attract disproven or dumb devices as well but they will diminish over time anyways.

I agree with you about the moderation here.  I have been a Moderator on many topic areas now for about 3 years and, I can tell you that most of my duties involve re-sizing photos as to not mess up the page width.  I have seen posts that blast Stefan and this forum and yet, they go un moderated.  This is a credit to Stefan and how he runs this place.

Now, we do not put up with spam bots and obvious flame wars.  But, really, the moderation here is, I think, the best it can be.

Bill

Offline hoptoad

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 1009
Re: Arguments against Muller design
« Reply #47 on: July 18, 2011, 06:12:34 AM »
I agree with you about the moderation here.  I have been a Moderator on many topic areas now for about 3 years and, I can tell you that most of my duties involve re-sizing photos as to not mess up the page width.  I have seen posts that blast Stefan and this forum and yet, they go un moderated.  This is a credit to Stefan and how he runs this place.

Now, we do not put up with spam bots and obvious flame wars.  But, really, the moderation here is, I think, the best it can be.

Bill
Indeed. I agree. Hat's off to Stefan  :)

Free Energy | searching for free energy and discussing free energy

Re: Arguments against Muller design
« Reply #47 on: July 18, 2011, 06:12:34 AM »
Sponsored links:




Offline i_ron

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 1160
Re: Arguments against Muller design
« Reply #48 on: July 18, 2011, 04:47:40 PM »
Ladies and Gentlemen


I have now been convinced that these videos by RomeroUK are fakes, and I want to thank wattsup for persisting and having patience with me as I worked through the evidence.    I just did not want to accept they were fake and wanted to give Romerouk the benefit of doubt, but facts are facts.  This has really been a test of gullibility, and I have failed.  But that's OK, I'll be more critical next time, I hope!



How they were faked.

1)  Video 1 was faked quite easily by supplying the output rail directly from the input.  I should of acted on my instincts earlier when I noticed that his output voltage was the same value as his input voltage. 

2)  Video 2 was faked by taking these same wires supplying the output rail (wire-X), down through the table cap to a hidden battery, just like wattsup has shown.

3)  Video 3 is not proving anything, it's just a spinning rotor.

snip

Sincerely,

EM


Good post EM, doesn't seem to be many other options.

Having built this (and many more over the years) and seeing first hand the night and day difference between romero's and mine this work by wattsup and others is the most logical explanation yet, that I have seen.

People want to believe... look how many still supported mylow, even after the string was shown. There were many a heated battle calling down the "non-believers". Same thing again.

"You will only get it after months of tuning" has been used over and over by Bedini and Hector, et al, to distance themselves from the angry mob.

Ron's rule, "When exact information necessary for a replication is deliberately withheld... then the chances of it being a scam go up exponentially"

Ron


Offline 4Tesla

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 946
Re: Arguments against Muller design
« Reply #49 on: July 18, 2011, 09:26:04 PM »
Yep.. if it was a real ou device, others would have been able to replicate and get ou from it.. this fine tuning stuff is bs.. there isn't anything special about the RomeroUK build that it would be impossible to replicate.  I don't like it when people lie about having a self-runner!!  RomeroUK = Mylow II

Free Energy | searching for free energy and discussing free energy

Re: Arguments against Muller design
« Reply #49 on: July 18, 2011, 09:26:04 PM »
Sponsored links:




Offline gauschor

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 529
Re: Arguments against Muller design
« Reply #50 on: July 18, 2011, 10:19:22 PM »
How can you say that the fine tuning stuff is bs? People simply underestimated how important this part is. (I did not underestimate it and that's why I wrote a short rant 2 months ago, why I wouldn't even try to replicate). This assumption goes hand in hand with Romero suggesting not trying to replicate at this stage, because he knew it was a roulette.
Anyways, IIRC somebody else showed in a youtube video that minimally changing the position of the magnet on the back of the cores results in a brighter or darker lamp. Now you could assume that you tune each coil-magnet in a way the lamp looks brightest, but you don't know if this is the correct way to tune. If you go pure maths then there are almost endless combinations possible to tune with 18 magnets (don't forget combinations which have some magnets removed...). I therefore think that Romero had a huge portion of luck to get a decent result and which explains why Romero said he didn't fully understand the effect. The only way to get something out of it is to isolate the effect, which is difficult which this arrangement though. I think in some post Romero actually confirmed that he will try to achieve this. Maybe a setup with less coils would help too, don't know.

Offline plengo

  • without_ads
  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 961
Re: Arguments against Muller design
« Reply #51 on: July 19, 2011, 02:08:01 AM »
Ladies and Gentlemen


I have now been convinced that these videos by RomeroUK are fakes, and I want to thank wattsup for persisting and having patience with me as I worked through the evidence.    I just did not want to accept they were fake and wanted to give Romerouk the benefit of doubt, but facts are facts.  This has really been a test of gullibility, and I have failed.  But that's OK, I'll be more critical next time, I hope!



How they were faked.

1)  Video 1 was faked quite easily by supplying the output rail directly from the input.  I should of acted on my instincts earlier when I noticed that his output voltage was the same value as his input voltage. 

2)  Video 2 was faked by taking these same wires supplying the output rail (wire-X), down through the table cap to a hidden battery, just like wattsup has shown.

3)  Video 3 is not proving anything, it's just a spinning rotor.


So when you had enough of tweaking and can't get that dynamo "tuned" just right, than perhaps you might want to consider the truth.   RomeroUK told us quite clearly it was faked and even apologized.    It really was not his fault, he was just playing a joke on the one guy that was on his forum, but than this was brought to Stefan's attention and it got promoted to a wide audience.   After his confession,  Mr Sterling showed up with the legal accusations and questioning, and Romero became scared and afraid of legal action, so he changed his story and invented a suppression story, and just so his conscience won't bother him any longer, he says he will no longer talk about the dynamo.  He also hates to see people getting banned from the forum because they say his device is faked, because he knows it is, and his conscience is bothering him.

So please, let's all assure RomeroUK  that everything is ok, and that we accept him here without any hatred and animosity.  He is a very knowledgeable experimenter and does good work as you can see.  Besides,  everyone is free to experiment at his own risk on these forums, and you can't be liable for others decisions.  After all he did not even claim OU in the videos, just simply made a video.  It is us who interpreted the video as OU. 


Sincerely,

EM

PS, as an example, in Video 1 we see that wire-X that wattsup talked about, and how it comes to the input side.  This was such an obvious fake.  In video 2 this same wire is routed through the table hole, just like he showed.

Very good EMdevices, BUT. I already established that there is not hidden wires going to the table's cap on the second video. So your theory and watssup does not hold water.

I also tried the input wire directly to the output rail and guess what IT DOES changes things dramatically. One must try and see the dynamics of it. Now that I DID try it I know that Romero may indeed know that and was using it with a purpose but not to fake.

IF the hidden wire is really going through that table's cap I want to see videos and close up shots of it that I COULD not see. I actually even created a series of short videos showing that there IS NO wire in that table's cap.

short video one: http://www.overunity.com/index.php?action=downloads;sa=downfile&id=477

short video two: http://www.overunity.com/index.php?action=downloads;sa=view;down=478


Fausto.


Free Energy | searching for free energy and discussing free energy

Re: Arguments against Muller design
« Reply #51 on: July 19, 2011, 02:08:01 AM »
Sponsored links:




Offline plengo

  • without_ads
  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 961
Re: Arguments against Muller design
« Reply #52 on: July 19, 2011, 02:20:16 AM »
Guys, think for a moment please.

it is not about fake or not. We arecalling ourselfs EE or experimentalist or even better lover and pursuers of OU, WE should look at the evidences first. Not conjectures of what I think or what you think.

There is no conclusive proof (as proof as one can accept the same video as OU) that there are hidden wires. IF there is really proof of it we have been doing a horrible job at showing it.

I am one of those guys that debunked Mylow (piece of Sh***** - that even burned my Youtube channel with copyright  violations). I also did believe that guy on the beginning but I was (just like Watssup) looking very closely to the videos trying to find a "proof" of falseness and I did find it. I showed very clearly on my videos his stupid hidden wires. I still have the video on my computer.

Unfortunately in those series of videos from Romero I can't find where is the flaw!!!

I'm not trying to be in his side or anyone's side. I am looking for OU and evidences of it. Either way.

So please, show me the evidence of the fake. I have studied those videos like "heroin addict looking for veins" but I have not found the problem.

Fausto.

ps: debates about this kind of things on the correct place is very healthy. :)

Offline Freezer

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 414
Re: Arguments against Muller design
« Reply #53 on: July 19, 2011, 02:38:03 AM »
Yes Tommy is correct people, please stop all your efforts on overunity because it is impossible and you guys are wasting your time.

Also the backside of the moon does not exist because we can't see it.  I challenge anyone to prove otherwise!  And don't show me photos of the backside, because photos can be faked!

Free Energy | searching for free energy and discussing free energy

Re: Arguments against Muller design
« Reply #53 on: July 19, 2011, 02:38:03 AM »
3D Solar Panels

Offline Artist_Guy

  • Jr. Member
  • **
  • Posts: 54
Re: Arguments against Muller design
« Reply #54 on: July 19, 2011, 04:32:21 AM »
Very good EMdevices, BUT. I already established that there is not hidden wires going to the table's cap on the second video. So your theory and watssup does not hold water.
Fausto.

You proved nothing of the sort. You ignored, willfully,  the fact that the support rod blocks the view of THE VERY WIRES IN QUESTION, then said "Case Closed."

Sorry to rant, but this is what happens when 'moderators' block the healthy exchange of energy, by one-sided policies.

The attached images are from "@none." again, since you CENSORED that poster and others. You do not MODERATE as much as you censor from what I have seen...such is why you should resign, since you -then leave up insulting and mocking attack posts AS LONG AS THEY ARE AGAINST A CRITIC-. Wattsup is subjected to ad hominem childish attacks, and they remain. It's -ridiculously unfair-. And shows 'moderation' and 'freedom' to be illusion here, in that thread at least. You only have freedom to speak your mind when its Pro-BELIEVER or anti-critic, otherwise, forget it.

The 'research only' mask that gets hidden behind as reason for removal of posts, is just a red herring and demonstrably false logic given the whole thread is about the device and talks about it, not just -how to do it-.

Yeah, it's great and 'healthy' to have all this posted down here in the cellar, where nobody reads it. ;)
« Last Edit: July 19, 2011, 04:57:18 AM by Artist_Guy »

Offline 4Tesla

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 946
Re: Arguments against Muller design
« Reply #55 on: July 19, 2011, 07:44:50 AM »
Guys, think for a moment please.

it is not about fake or not. We arecalling ourselfs EE or experimentalist or even better lover and pursuers of OU, WE should look at the evidences first. Not conjectures of what I think or what you think.

There is no conclusive proof (as proof as one can accept the same video as OU) that there are hidden wires. IF there is really proof of it we have been doing a horrible job at showing it.

I am one of those guys that debunked Mylow (piece of Sh***** - that even burned my Youtube channel with copyright  violations). I also did believe that guy on the beginning but I was (just like Watssup) looking very closely to the videos trying to find a "proof" of falseness and I did find it. I showed very clearly on my videos his stupid hidden wires. I still have the video on my computer.

Unfortunately in those series of videos from Romero I can't find where is the flaw!!!

I'm not trying to be in his side or anyone's side. I am looking for OU and evidences of it. Either way.

So please, show me the evidence of the fake. I have studied those videos like "heroin addict looking for veins" but I have not found the problem.

Fausto.

ps: debates about this kind of things on the correct place is very healthy. :)

Please tell why, if it is real, it hasn't been replicated?  There is nothing special about Romero's build that makes it impossible to replicate, yet no one has.  So you can see how it is hard to believe it is real.

Free Energy | searching for free energy and discussing free energy

Re: Arguments against Muller design
« Reply #55 on: July 19, 2011, 07:44:50 AM »
3D Solar Panels

Offline i_ron

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 1160
Re: Arguments against Muller design
« Reply #56 on: July 19, 2011, 04:54:40 PM »
Guys, think for a moment please.

it is not about fake or not. We arecalling ourselfs EE or experimentalist or even better lover and pursuers of OU, WE should look at the evidences first. Not conjectures of what I think or what you think.

There is no conclusive proof (as proof as one can accept the same video as OU) that there are hidden wires. IF there is really proof of it we have been doing a horrible job at showing it.

I am one of those guys that debunked Mylow (piece of Sh***** - that even burned my Youtube channel with copyright  violations). I also did believe that guy on the beginning but I was (just like Watssup) looking very closely to the videos trying to find a "proof" of falseness and I did find it. I showed very clearly on my videos his stupid hidden wires. I still have the video on my computer.

Unfortunately in those series of videos from Romero I can't find where is the flaw!!!

I'm not trying to be in his side or anyone's side. I am looking for OU and evidences of it. Either way.

So please, show me the evidence of the fake. I have studied those videos like "heroin addict looking for veins" but I have not found the problem.

Fausto.

ps: debates about this kind of things on the correct place is very healthy. :)


Fausto,

To your credit you have run a tight list and encouraged many to attempt a replication of romero's device. This is good.

However, you seem to have a blind side when it comes to actual evidence as seen in the videos.

The three videos each have an explanation which you seem to deny.  This evidence doesn't go away with your denial!

A case in point of your focused thinking is your recent scope connections drawing.

When I pointed out the obvious ground interconnections you simply discarded my input and changed your drawing to something different! Yet with no clear explanation to the group that you had done this, implying that my advice was irrelevant, or stupid.

Yet even with the revised drawing you will still have ground loop artifacts in your scope pictures. For a precise view you (generally) can only run one channel at a time, unless the other channel is on an isolated amplifier... or share an identifiable common ground.

Kind regards,

Ron

Offline plengo

  • without_ads
  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 961
Re: Arguments against Muller design
« Reply #57 on: July 19, 2011, 06:17:52 PM »

Fausto,

To your credit you have run a tight list and encouraged many to attempt a replication of romero's device. This is good.

However, you seem to have a blind side when it comes to actual evidence as seen in the videos.

The three videos each have an explanation which you seem to deny.  This evidence doesn't go away with your denial!

A case in point of your focused thinking is your recent scope connections drawing.

When I pointed out the obvious ground interconnections you simply discarded my input and changed your drawing to something different! Yet with no clear explanation to the group that you had done this, implying that my advice was irrelevant, or stupid.

Yet even with the revised drawing you will still have ground loop artifacts in your scope pictures. For a precise view you (generally) can only run one channel at a time, unless the other channel is on an isolated amplifier... or share an identifiable common ground.

Kind regards,

Ron

i_ron, I have not ignored you man. I am still looking into the spikes thingy. I am listening to everyone on this matter. Don't start speculating in what I am doing, please.

I am not blinded by anything. I am looking the thruth.

Fausto.

Offline plengo

  • without_ads
  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 961
Re: Arguments against Muller design
« Reply #58 on: July 19, 2011, 06:22:48 PM »
You proved nothing of the sort. You ignored, willfully,  the fact that the support rod blocks the view of THE VERY WIRES IN QUESTION, then said "Case Closed."

Sorry to rant, but this is what happens when 'moderators' block the healthy exchange of energy, by one-sided policies.

The attached images are from "@none." again, since you CENSORED that poster and others. You do not MODERATE as much as you censor from what I have seen...such is why you should resign, since you -then leave up insulting and mocking attack posts AS LONG AS THEY ARE AGAINST A CRITIC-. Wattsup is subjected to ad hominem childish attacks, and they remain. It's -ridiculously unfair-. And shows 'moderation' and 'freedom' to be illusion here, in that thread at least. You only have freedom to speak your mind when its Pro-BELIEVER or anti-critic, otherwise, forget it.

The 'research only' mask that gets hidden behind as reason for removal of posts, is just a red herring and demonstrably false logic given the whole thread is about the device and talks about it, not just -how to do it-.

Yeah, it's great and 'healthy' to have all this posted down here in the cellar, where nobody reads it. ;)

Artist_Guy,

yes I remember removing some of your posts on the "wrong" thread. I am not removing from here, guess why, because this is the correct thread for this kind of discussion. This is called, categorization, organization NOT discrimination dude.

I see you are loaded with arguments against me. Let me go slow.

Those pictures you are showing are not demonstrating anything for sure. I went to the videos where those pictures are taken and closely studied them. I even created a short video (previous post) showing that they are only 3D tricks of the viewer. The wire you seem to show going to the cap IS NOT GOING TO THE CAP.

In one of the short videos, if you watch repeatedly long enough, you will see that the wire you think is going to the cap is actually going to the foremost coil, not the cap.

I am not using the power as moderator to limit anyone but keep things in place. This is the thread for debunking Romero's motor not the other thread. Why don't you get that?

Do me a favor. Go to the short video that I created, watch them, many, many, many times until you see that that black wire is going to the foremost coil (your fourth picture). The first picture is just a trick of 3D in peoples mind. Studying the video closely one will se NO wire going to the cap. Just pictures is not enough because they are tricking you.

The short videos do a better job showing that.

Fausto.

Offline nueview

  • Full Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 163
Re: Arguments against Muller design
« Reply #59 on: July 19, 2011, 08:21:42 PM »
I would think that this is more or less a mute discussion as to is it a fake or not ,or does it have a wire or not and to what purpose.
with a big enough field at the proper frequency it could be done without wires adding power to the system ,and even be done with a voltage envelope with any vibration.
single wire power or otherwise so without a spectrum analyzer or the like it is a mute argument.
in the end there will be those who go on searching and those who will stop and argue that these type of energy devices cannot be made as the physics they embrace support.
i am in the other camp with Carl Sagan because without some means of energy cycling we will never get off this rock we call earth and we are doing such a great job of taking care of it that we may not be around much longer.
for every failure there is a success and that is how i see this device hoax or not.
Martin

 

OneLink