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

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 Posts: 515703
  • *Total Topics: 15375
  • *Online Today: 44
  • *Most Online: 103
(December 19, 2006, 11:27:19 PM)
  • *Users: 3
  • *Guests: 13
  • *Total: 16

Author Topic: I Need Your Opinions  (Read 13271 times)

Offline bodo

  • Newbie
  • *
  • Posts: 3
I Need Your Opinions
« on: August 29, 2006, 07:58:11 PM »
Hi everybody,

I'm currently involved in a little debate on this website.  www.guerrillanews.com
The debate is regarding Sean McCarthy and Richard Walshe's claims to have created a free energy device in Dublin.
I need your help regarding a statement somebody made in regard to the claim:

"If the law of conservation of energy is wrong, it?s incumbent on those making the claim to publish a mathematical proof or experimental evidence for peer review and examination.
There has not been a single claim of free energy that has withstood that requirement"

My actual blog entry can be found here:
http://bodo.gnn.tv/blogs/17997/The_Scientists_Who_Claim_They_Can_Create_Free_Energy

My belief is that it is crucial not to disregard the Dublin claim simply because it is in opposition to conventional scientific establishment dogma.  However, i am no physicist or engineer, and so i need your expertise on this matter. 

His statement that "There has not been a single claim of free energy that has withstood that requirement" is what i have the most contention with, due to my knowledge of how the system of suppression operates.  However, i am not aware of any specific case examples (i have read on it in the past and found examples, but i can't locate that literature), and my searches have run dry.


Any Takers??? 



Free Energy | searching for free energy and discussing free energy

I Need Your Opinions
« on: August 29, 2006, 07:58:11 PM »

Offline Jdo300

  • TPU-Elite
  • Hero Member
  • *******
  • Posts: 682
    • The Magnetic 90 degree rule Theory
Re: I Need Your Opinions
« Reply #1 on: August 29, 2006, 11:01:33 PM »
Hi bodo,

I don?t know anything about the specific device you are talking about but I can say this one thing. You will only rub fur the wrong way if you use the term "Free Energy" to mean that you are creating energy from nothing, or that you are extracting energy from a closed system. The second law of thermodynamics only applies to closed systems. So when I use the term "Free Energy", I don't mean that I am creating or destroying energy, I am simply using my device to tap into an energy source, making my device an open system, not a perpetual motion machine. However, when you go that route, you need to have some explanation of where you are getting your energy from (or at least some sort of theory). Then once you have a theory, you can propose a set of experiments to prove or disprove what you are talking about. But ultimately, the proof is in the pudding.

God Bless,
Jason O

Offline dingbat

  • Full Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 137
Re: I Need Your Opinions
« Reply #2 on: August 29, 2006, 11:10:50 PM »
give them time to show the device.
they say they want 12 people to examine the device.  lets see if they allow this to happen, and what happens when they do.

Free Energy | searching for free energy and discussing free energy

Re: I Need Your Opinions
« Reply #2 on: August 29, 2006, 11:10:50 PM »
Sponsored links:




Offline PaulLowrance

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 2483
    • Global Free Energy
Re: I Need Your Opinions
« Reply #3 on: August 30, 2006, 01:36:55 AM »
Hello Jason and all,

I agree with Jason. The term "Free Energy" is so badly tainted no that personally I don't like to use it. Perhaps a better term is unlimited energy. Of course that's relatively speaking as our own Sun will even burn out one day.

IMHO claiming to create energy from nothing is really a bad idea because you'll pretty much have the science community against you. I know people who will immediately stop reading a post or document upon seeing the words "free energy."

Is sounds like the people bobo is up against are old conventional scientists. Most of the leading edge _intelligent_ scientist_ won't make much fuss over the concept of free energy. Consider what the leading edge M-theorists are working on. A well-known TV science show by BBC called "Parallel Universes" interviewed Alan Guth on M-theory. Quote from Alan Guth:

"I in fact have worked with several other people for some period of time on the question of whether or not it's in principle possible to create a new universe in the laboratory. Whether or not it really works we don't know for sure. It looks like it probably would work. It's actually safe to create a universe in your basement. It would not displace the universe around it even though it would grow tremendously. It would actually create its own space as it grows and in fact in a very short fraction of a second it would splice itself off completely from our Universe and evolve as an isolated closed universe growing to cosmic proportions without displacing any of the territory that we currently lay claim to."

http://www.bbc.co.uk/science/horizon/2001/parallelunitrans.shtml

Obviously they do not have the energy of an entire universe at their disposal. Therefore, when they claim the possibility of creating an entire universe they are claiming to create energy from nothing. That's the way M-theory works. You could think of it like a computer program. Each universe has a set of programmed laws. In this universe they believe the electric and magnetic forces dominate.

M-theory is leading edge science. So personally I wouldn?t waist my time with closed minded conventional scientists. Quantum Physics has even surpassed just about any spiritual philosophies in the weirdness factor. :-)  Look into MWI (Many Worlds Interpretation) of Quantum Physics. Most scientists including Stephen Hawking are followers of MWI ->
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Many_worlds_interpretation

Kind regards,
Paul Lowrance

Offline bodo

  • Newbie
  • *
  • Posts: 3
Re: I Need Your Opinions
« Reply #4 on: August 30, 2006, 04:22:29 AM »
Well, thanks for the replies guys.  I understand now that the term 'free energy' is a contentious one.  But all definitional parameters aside, assuming that by free energy we mean it in the broadest sense of the word, minus the technicality and stigmatic association, are you telling me that "There has not been a single claim of free energy that has withstood that requirement" is a completely accurate statement? 

-bodo

Free Energy | searching for free energy and discussing free energy

Re: I Need Your Opinions
« Reply #4 on: August 30, 2006, 04:22:29 AM »
Sponsored links:




Offline PaulLowrance

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 2483
    • Global Free Energy
Re: I Need Your Opinions
« Reply #5 on: August 30, 2006, 04:43:54 AM »
Hi bobo,

It's been my observation that the science community does not like the title "free energy" because it gives them the impression the inventor claims "perpetual motion" or getting something from nothing.

I think "free energy" should mean just what it describes; i.e., less cost of device and maintenance the energy is free. By that definition a solar cell is a free energy device. I can easily get free energy 24/7 from one foot of copper wire. It's not that much energy, but it's still energy and it's free from thermal noise.

So there are free energy machines, but perhaps nothing yet that has been proven to defy any present laws of physics.

Paul Lowrance

Offline dingbat

  • Full Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 137
Re: I Need Your Opinions
« Reply #6 on: August 30, 2006, 01:26:53 PM »
Quote

are you telling me that "There has not been a single claim of free energy that has withstood that requirement" is a completely accurate statement? 
 

i have been looking at all information i can find.  i regret that i consider the statement accurate at this time.  paul makes very good and valid points about the semantics of 'free energy'.

a heat pump is a very amazing device.  it extracts energy from the air around it in a very efficient way - allowing more heat output than electricity put in.  this can be considered 'free energy' in a sense.  under the right conditions you get several times the amount of heat output compared to electric input.

i wish that people who are zealots for finding 'perpetual motion' would put their energy in finding things that are just a little better.  many devices that incrementally improve existing technology becomes significant very fast in the big picture.

it also bothers me greatly that people who believe in 'free energy' will not allow the possibility that it may not be possible.  conversely, many scientists will not consider the possibility that it may be possible.  in my opinion neither position can be currently proven (hence i agree the people you are arguing with - no device that i know of meets the claims that steorm makes.)  i believe that free energy may be possible, and it may be impossible - there is no other rational position to take until someone demonstrates such a device and allows it to be scrutinized.

many people make statements like 'it has to be possible'.  i assert that it does not have to be possible.  it might be possible, but it also might not be possible.  we can't say for sure it is possible until someone legitimately proves that it is.  we will never be able to claim with certainty that it is impossible because we can never prove that we have exhausted all attempts to find it.

so (in my opinion), to claim with certainty it must be possible is irrational, and to claim with certainty that it must be impossible is irrational.  therefore my official position is that it might be possible, and it might be impossible.  until i see it happen, my position will not change.

Free Energy | searching for free energy and discussing free energy

Re: I Need Your Opinions
« Reply #6 on: August 30, 2006, 01:26:53 PM »
Sponsored links:




Offline PaulLowrance

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 2483
    • Global Free Energy
Re: I Need Your Opinions
« Reply #7 on: August 30, 2006, 05:16:14 PM »
i have been looking at all information i can find.  i regret that i consider the statement accurate at this time.  paul makes very good and valid points about the semantics of 'free energy'.
Hi dingbat,

I'm curious if you or anyone has a better name for this. Lately I've tried to drop the term "free energy" and like to use "unlimited energy."  I guess there's "COP >1" but that just don't sound right, lol.

Perhaps we all need to agree exactly what the term should mean. For me it simply implies that the energy itself does not cost anything less the cost of the actual device and any maintenance of course. We all know a solar cell cost money, and you have to periodically clean it and perhaps even fix or replace it after a decade or two, but the actual energy is free. So in that sense it's "free energy."  What about "heat pump?" It implies there must be air or an object that is hotter than room temperature. So that term just don't work. "Perpetual motion" is out of the question. Personally I don't like the definition "overunity" (no offense Stefan!!) because that's the same definition as perpetual motion. Another possibility is a term that I came up with called "Energy Mover." It implies that a device simply moves energy. It could be any type of energy from vibrating room temperature molecules to quantum foam or ZPE to even space or time. :-)

Paul Lowrance

Offline dingbat

  • Full Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 137
Re: I Need Your Opinions
« Reply #8 on: August 30, 2006, 05:46:06 PM »
im not good with names.  i think sterling allen does a pretty good job of avoiding sounding crazy because he goes down the path of "tapping some unknown source".  he doens't give it a name, but he does a good job of explaining that he is not talking about violating the conservation of energy laws which i think is very important.  if 'free energy' - the perpetual motion kind - is ever achieved, i think it will be because of some unknown source.  it won't be because of a violation of conservation rules - my opinion.

cop>1 is descriptively more acceptable to me than overunity or free energy, but i agree it doesn't sound good and most people don't know what it means.

even overunity is ok with me if it is qualified by cop and not 'efficiency'.

Free Energy | searching for free energy and discussing free energy

Re: I Need Your Opinions
« Reply #8 on: August 30, 2006, 05:46:06 PM »
3D Solar Panels

Offline dingbat

  • Full Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 137
Re: I Need Your Opinions
« Reply #9 on: August 30, 2006, 05:47:51 PM »
vfe = virtual free energy!

Offline omnicognic

  • Newbie
  • *
  • Posts: 8
Re: I Need Your Opinions
« Reply #10 on: September 04, 2006, 09:01:22 AM »
Here is the website for this devices creators and their challenge:
http://www.steorn.net/frontpage/default.aspx

Free Energy | searching for free energy and discussing free energy

Re: I Need Your Opinions
« Reply #10 on: September 04, 2006, 09:01:22 AM »
3D Solar Panels

Offline garry s

  • Newbie
  • *
  • Posts: 12
Re: I Need Your Opinions
« Reply #11 on: February 14, 2016, 12:07:58 AM »
Hi everybody,


"If the law of conservation of energy is wrong, it?s incumbent on those making the claim to publish a mathematical proof or experimental evidence for peer review and examination.
There has not been a single claim of free energy that has withstood that requirement"


This is the perpertual argument between the thinkers and the doers.
A doer, builds a device and becasue he doesnt really know what he is doing, he makes a mistake here and there and sometimes advances in science come from this, sometimes huge evolutions in our thinking come from a simple mistake.
The thinker looks at this and asks for some sort of proof of a broken rule or law, to make this possible and to make this comprehendable for him.
The doer, did, he has the proof it works, right there, on his test bench and it works.
The thinker cant comprehend it working and the doer cant explain it, in terms the thinker can understand .... stalemate.
Will the thinker ever go and see it working .... no because if he cant figure out it can be real, then its never going to be worth the cost of the trip.
Does the doer ever need to go to the thinker and show him its real, of course not hes got the proof right there in his hands.
Its not like the thinker is going to be able to finance him onto the market with his device ?
The final nail in this cofin is, even if the thinker goes and has a look and see's it with his own eyes, we have already established, he doesnt know how it could possibly work, so hes going away thinking about how it was faked, not how it actually worked ?
Garry Stanley 

Offline Doug1

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 763
Re: I Need Your Opinions
« Reply #12 on: February 15, 2016, 03:40:03 PM »
My children do not pay the electric bill,they have free electric. They do not contribute in any way except to neglect turning off the lights not in use. That is hardly a contribution.
  Most peoples objective. To independently produce your own electricity for your own consumption. Best case, to do that and reproduce the device for market so others may also be independent. Requirement for success being that it is far less expensive then the present system being used. It would be be just dandy if did not pollute the planet in the process. If you built such a device without spending any money for the materials the knit pickers would take your time spent toward that goal and measure it against the time you could have worked and earned money with that time. Comparing the money you would possibly save against the money you could have possible made. There by making it not free even if you did not take any money out of pocket to complete it.
  Who would have a problem with it and why should be of equal importance.   

Offline Bob Smith

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 710
Re: I Need Your Opinions
« Reply #13 on: February 15, 2016, 04:26:24 PM »
I'm going to re-post a slightly abridged version of something I stated in another thread. I believe it applies here as well:
Overunity cannot be achieved within a closed system, and purportedly closed systems that exhibit overunity are doing things that effectively nullify their status as closed systems.

A permanent magnet is in its simplest form an open system, converging energy in its most raw form from the dielectric at the dielectric plane, or what is commonly referred to as the Bloch Wall, and diverging it outward at its poles. A magnet is an open system device.

But there are systems with certain characteristic oscillations which foster dielectric convergence as well.  If evaluated as closed systems in terms of internal losses, they fail the overunity test without a doubt.  BUT if their interplay with the dielectric realm (as open systems) is taken into account as they are evaluated, they pass the overunity test.  Oh my.

Do we have to re-write the laws of physics to allow for this interplay with the dielectric realm?  I don't think so. It's simply a matter of acknowledging that certain conditions will take us beyond parameters within which closed system dynamics apply.  Within such conditions, closed system criteria simply cannot account for the overunity behavior of setups which interact with the dielectric realm. Again, these systems are always going to be less than 100% efficient when evaluated as closed systems. 

Analysing overunity (>1 COP) systems using only closed system criteria is closed-minded. 
Bob

Offline Gabriele

  • Full Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 248
    • Formerelax
Re: I Need Your Opinions
« Reply #14 on: February 15, 2016, 08:45:33 PM »
Hello. You can only understand things you love. Freedom,is not one of these

 

OneLink