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

Plug Heater

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: 508983
  • *Total Topics: 15176
  • *Online Today: 44
  • *Most Online: 103
(December 19, 2006, 11:27:19 PM)
  • *Users: 2
  • *Guests: 4
  • *Total: 6

Author Topic: Nov. 10th, 2013 Successful Over-Unity Experiment  (Read 9999 times)

Offline NathanCoppedge

  • Jr. Member
  • **
  • Posts: 97
    • Philosopher, Artist, Inventor, Poet
Nov. 10th, 2013 Successful Over-Unity Experiment
« on: July 30, 2014, 03:58:44 AM »
I have a device in which, through a supporting divided track, a ball weight is lifted by counterweight and then triggers the counterweight to move upwards, WITH ITS OWN WEIGHT ALONE.

Here is the video, which is real, which I have posted on an academic website:

http://www.academicroom.com/video/evidence-against-classical-model

It is my belief that this is final proof of over-unity.

Although the device is not perpetual in its current form, since the marble can be made (I believe) to not lose altitude --- since it gains altitude while being moved by the lever --- I believe that eight of these devices may be positioned in a horizontal octagon to produce a continuous cycle, as shown at the following link:

http://www.nathancoppedge.com/Perpetual_Motion_RepeatingLeverage_Diagrams.html

It would be great to get more enthusiasm behind these simple-seeming devices, which have been designed with so superior a principle. Or, in this case, 6 perfect principles, which I will list here:

(1) It begins from rest and uses no electricity or stored energy, except a counterweight, (2) It moves upwards and then downwards on its own, (3) It uses a principle of weight versus leverage, with the weight at a lesser leverage distance, (4) It makes use of a supporting track, which creates in imbalance between the mobile weight and the counterweight, (5) The lever is unbalanced at every point of motion, and (6) All parts may return to their initial altitudes after motion.

My other recent notable experiment is the Master Angle, tested on July 3rd, 2014, proven, I believe, to allow an object to roll upwards! Check out this video before you disbelieve! Its arranged using a horizontally-angled board which is positioned partly underneath the marble as it rolls sideways... Perhaps a new discovery? I don't know how to tell if it's new, I just know how to tell if it works, within a shade of certainty...

Here is the Master Angle video, for curious observers:

http://www.academicroom.com/video/master-angle-elementary-discovery

It can also be searched on YouTube under "Master Angle."

Free Energy | searching for free energy and discussing free energy


Offline TinselKoala

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 13824
Re: Nov. 10th, 2013 Successful Over-Unity Experiment
« Reply #1 on: July 30, 2014, 05:19:22 AM »
Would you please define "overunity"  and tell us exactly how your apparatus and your demonstrations support your claim?

All of your videos that I've watched show you storing energy in the system with your hands, so I'm not sure how you can state that they don't involve stored energy or are overunity. Is there a video of your system that returns to the starting state exactly, without you using your hands to help out?

Offline tinman

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 5152
Re: Nov. 10th, 2013 Successful Over-Unity Experiment
« Reply #2 on: July 30, 2014, 05:25:41 AM »
I think he forgot to add the energy it took to lift the counter weight up at the other end of the  device, when he placed the ball on the levers track, and pushed it down. But a bit hard to see the video on my phone, so will have another look when I get home from work tonight.

Free Energy | searching for free energy and discussing free energy

Re: Nov. 10th, 2013 Successful Over-Unity Experiment
« Reply #2 on: July 30, 2014, 05:25:41 AM »
Sponsored links:




Offline gauschor

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 529
Re: Nov. 10th, 2013 Successful Over-Unity Experiment
« Reply #3 on: July 30, 2014, 08:41:47 PM »
Looks interesting but I don't grasp what's this track and ball counterweight. I'm hoping for a better video and explanation.

Offline NathanCoppedge

  • Jr. Member
  • **
  • Posts: 97
    • Philosopher, Artist, Inventor, Poet
Re: Nov. 10th, 2013 Successful Over-Unity Experiment
« Reply #4 on: July 31, 2014, 12:14:49 PM »
Would you please define "overunity"  and tell us exactly how your apparatus and your demonstrations support your claim?

All of your videos that I've watched show you storing energy in the system with your hands, so I'm not sure how you can state that they don't involve stored energy or are overunity. Is there a video of your system that returns to the starting state exactly, without you using your hands to help out?

Here is what is necessary for perpetual motion in one of my types of devices: (A) Articulation over a point of balance, (B) Natural momentum, (C) Completed cycle. I have not completed all of these stages in any of my designs.

However, my successful over-unity experiment proves that motion can occur without loss of altitude, which has been a sticking point with modern physicists. As to whether force is inputted, no force is inputted except to put the force to raise the marble to the altitude it would maintain during part of the cycle. The video is dramatized by using a wider range of motion than it would adopt in real-life practice. In a real design, the range of motion would be fixed to a very narrow up-and-down movement. The high point of that motion is reached first by raising the marble by hand, and secondly through the natural motion of the apparatus. Notably, the end-point before the drop is HIGHER than the low point where the marble drops to. Also, the marble has the power to life the counterweight as much as necessary after the drop. Therefore, reasoning from the amount of energy the marble can exert, and the position of the counterweight before energy is exerted, it appears to be over-unity, and I believe that it in fact, is.

The effect is a achieved through a combination of six principles: (1) It begins from rest and uses no electricity or stored energy, except a counterweight, (2) It moves upwards and then downwards on its own, (3) It uses a principle of weight versus leverage, with the weight at a lesser leverage distance, (4) It makes use of a supporting track, which creates in imbalance between the mobile weight and the counterweight, (5) The lever is unbalanced at every point of motion, and (6) All parts may return to their initial altitudes after motion.

Free Energy | searching for free energy and discussing free energy

Re: Nov. 10th, 2013 Successful Over-Unity Experiment
« Reply #4 on: July 31, 2014, 12:14:49 PM »
Sponsored links:




Offline NathanCoppedge

  • Jr. Member
  • **
  • Posts: 97
    • Philosopher, Artist, Inventor, Poet
Re: Nov. 10th, 2013 Successful Over-Unity Experiment
« Reply #5 on: July 31, 2014, 12:19:19 PM »
I think he forgot to add the energy it took to lift the counter weight up at the other end of the  device, when he placed the ball on the levers track, and pushed it down. But a bit hard to see the video on my phone, so will have another look when I get home from work tonight.

The marble is capable of lifting the entire counterweight ON IT'S OWN---something I believe was not done before. And the initial motions (e.g. the rising motion after the drop) occurs exclusively through the counterweight. It is my belief that the range of motion can be fixed to allow the marble to trigger each lever in succession when eight of the apparatuses are arranged in a circle. That is my basis for over-unity.

The experiment was designed to make PROGRESS OF ANY KIND.

Offline NathanCoppedge

  • Jr. Member
  • **
  • Posts: 97
    • Philosopher, Artist, Inventor, Poet
Re: Nov. 10th, 2013 Successful Over-Unity Experiment
« Reply #6 on: July 31, 2014, 12:27:25 PM »
Looks interesting but I don't grasp what's this track and ball counterweight. I'm hoping for a better video and explanation.

Sorry, I took the video with my phone, and it was then converted to MPG format using a video converter program.

The track is a series of two slats through which runs the lever. The counterweight, which is not visible for the entire video, is positioned at the opposite end of the point of balance (called a fulcrum or hinge), and is fixed to the lever.

The lever tilts up and down through the track, and in this special configuration in which the marble travels from about 2.2X counterweight leverage to about 3X counterweight leverage, the marbles motion is created by the counterweight, AND the marble can trigger the counterweight to rise afterwards.

It may seem like a small experiment, but I think it is highly significant.

Will this be marked as the time over-unity was proven for posterity? Time will tell.

Free Energy | searching for free energy and discussing free energy

Re: Nov. 10th, 2013 Successful Over-Unity Experiment
« Reply #6 on: July 31, 2014, 12:27:25 PM »
Sponsored links:




Offline TinselKoala

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 13824
Re: Nov. 10th, 2013 Successful Over-Unity Experiment
« Reply #7 on: July 31, 2014, 12:56:04 PM »
So that's a "no" then I guess. You cannot show the device returning to the initial state exactly, without using your hands, and there is energy stored in the positioning of the weight and counterweight initially.

I suggest you firm up your demonstration, shoot it with a better camera, and get yourself a decent bubble level. For this kind of work a "machinist's level" should really be used. I would like to see this setup done better, because I can tell from your explanation that you are in earnest and you have thought about what you are doing. Let's see if we can fully and rigorously quantify the role of Mister Hand, before we start declaring overunity, OK?

Offline tinman

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 5152
Re: Nov. 10th, 2013 Successful Over-Unity Experiment
« Reply #8 on: July 31, 2014, 02:18:48 PM »
Disregarding the energy it took to lift the ball onto the track to start the process,the ball would have to end up higher at the end of the track,than it was at the start of the track. At very best-even disregarding any friction,the ball would only roll to the very same hight it started at-it would not go higher.

Free Energy | searching for free energy and discussing free energy

Re: Nov. 10th, 2013 Successful Over-Unity Experiment
« Reply #8 on: July 31, 2014, 02:18:48 PM »
3D Solar Panels

Offline conradelektro

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 1670
Re: Nov. 10th, 2013 Successful Over-Unity Experiment
« Reply #9 on: July 31, 2014, 08:43:42 PM »

It is my belief that this is final proof of over-unity.

Although the device is not perpetual in its current form, since the marble can be made (I believe) to not lose altitude --- since it gains altitude while being moved by the lever --- I believe that eight of these devices may be positioned in a horizontal octagon to produce a continuous cycle, as shown at the following link:

http://www.nathancoppedge.com/Perpetual_Motion_RepeatingLeverage_Diagrams.html


According to my unimportant opinion, the only way to interest a sufficient number of people would be to build that "horizontal octagon to produce a continuous cycle". Why not build a decagon (ten devises in a circle) to make the lift high enough.

Only a marble going in circles for a long time (let's say a week) without energy input would cause a stir in the scientific world. Of course, independent verification is a must as well.

But this is of course the impossible thing to do. So, do not talk about it, do not make promises, just build it and we will see.

The video without details and no understandable explanation is more than useless. Who can take that seriously?

"Look I have something, I do not show what it is, but it proves a violation of known principles." Ridiculous, as always!

"I can not show you details, because I want to preserve my rights." Yes, do that, stop speaking about a secret you do not want to disclose, it will be stolen from you if you give too many hints. If you do not give hints, whatever you say is meaningless.

Disclose completely or shut up completely.

Greetings, Conrad

Offline NathanCoppedge

  • Jr. Member
  • **
  • Posts: 97
    • Philosopher, Artist, Inventor, Poet
Re: Nov. 10th, 2013 Successful Over-Unity Experiment
« Reply #10 on: August 02, 2014, 02:30:58 AM »
I suggest you firm up your demonstration, shoot it with a better camera, and get yourself a decent bubble level. For this kind of work a "machinist's level" should really be used. I would like to see this setup done better, because I can tell from your explanation that you are in earnest and you have thought about what you are doing.

I have tested the slope with a level many times, and it is certainly sloped upwards (more so than in my Master Angle project). I am not confused about which direction the bubble should go. I have highly accurate perception of levels with my eyes also, within reason, and I can tell that if the floor is level, then this device slopes upwards. However, the level confirms that it ACTUALLY IS sloped upwards. I have also found that there is some room for variation in the construction of the device. For example, additional weight can be added to the counterweight, and, if the marble travels further down the track, it will STILL activate the lever to move downwards. But it does depend on proportionality as to when the marble starts and stops. However, unlike in some other prospective designs, there is not much room for downwards sloped movement between upward motions, because of the limited amount of altitude gained. Ideally, three to eight of these apparatuses would be linked in a polygonal loop, reducing the amount of travel necessary to reach the next unit (I find that the distance is significantly longer when there are two modular units, versus three, and there is also a significant reduction in movement with eight, in the right case). With ideal/ professional construction / engineering, some of the problems might be eliminated.

Free Energy | searching for free energy and discussing free energy

Re: Nov. 10th, 2013 Successful Over-Unity Experiment
« Reply #10 on: August 02, 2014, 02:30:58 AM »
3D Solar Panels

Offline NathanCoppedge

  • Jr. Member
  • **
  • Posts: 97
    • Philosopher, Artist, Inventor, Poet
Re: Nov. 10th, 2013 Successful Over-Unity Experiment
« Reply #11 on: August 02, 2014, 02:38:32 AM »
Yes, do that, stop speaking about a secret you do not want to disclose, it will be stolen from you if you give too many hints. If you do not give hints, whatever you say is meaningless.

Disclose completely or shut up completely.

Greetings, Conrad

I am being very frank, and I think the video shows accurately exactly how the machine would operate, minus horizontal duplication and a number of very small nearly horizontal, downward-oriented connecting slopes.

I'm sorry if people thought that it gains altitude cumulatively. It is not designed to do that, but rather to ascend and descend in equal or near-equal ratio. This is possible (I think) because there is relatively more downwards motion on the short end of movement. However, this small point may prove unessential.

It is my hope that someone else builds it, so that the world has a real working perpetual motion machine.

I'm not very good at building sturdy devices, I just have some of the best simple ideas about perpetual motion in the world.

I encourage others to find equal evidence to what I have found, so that they gain equal excitement, and the process continues.

With the essence of continuity, perhaps there will also be an essence of progress.

Offline NathanCoppedge

  • Jr. Member
  • **
  • Posts: 97
    • Philosopher, Artist, Inventor, Poet
Re: Nov. 10th, 2013 Successful Over-Unity Experiment
« Reply #12 on: August 02, 2014, 02:49:33 AM »
I should also note that this is not the only option for a working perpetual motion machine.

Here are some principles I have discovered that might be useful, separately or together:

1. A nearly horizontal fixed slope that serves as a partial support or divided track for a mobile weight, reducing the resistance implied to a counterweight which operates the mobile weight, (trough leverage), this might be the easiest,

2. A certain ratio which seems to permit 'difference weights' to move see-saw apparatuses (see Motive Mass Machine Iteration 2), this might be the easiest to prove mathematically,

3. Leverage might be used to extend slope when the slope swivels, using large or small levers (Tilt Motor), this design might produce the most energy of my designs,

4. A certain horizontal angle positioned on a slight diagonal, and skewed to one side so that the rectangular base's corners occupy four successive tiers may be used to allow a spherical object to roll very slightly upwards (Master Angle), this could be the most subtle, but ultimately the easiest to precision-manufacture.

More information at http://www.nathancoppedge.com

As my disclaimer has said for a number of years (since 2007 or so), my designs are freely available to developers, inventors seeking patents, engineers, institutions, etc. I rely on acts of goodwill for any compensation I receive.

Many of my images are google-searchable, and are not expressly copyright.

Offline NathanCoppedge

  • Jr. Member
  • **
  • Posts: 97
    • Philosopher, Artist, Inventor, Poet
Re: Nov. 10th, 2013 Successful Over-Unity Experiment
« Reply #13 on: August 02, 2014, 02:51:03 AM »
Disregarding the energy it took to lift the ball onto the track to start the process,the ball would have to end up higher at the end of the track,than it was at the start of the track. At very best-even disregarding any friction,the ball would only roll to the very same hight it started at-it would not go higher.

Actually, you're wrong, and I have proven it.

The counter-argument that the ball cannot lift the counterweight is moot, because in this case, although the counterweight is heavier, it is lifted by the ball weight. This is because the weight of the lever compensates for part of the mass of the counterweight.

Also, the two masses are about equal (a kind of equilibrious effect) yet motion is created, due not only to equilibrium, but also the supporting track, which reduces resistance to the weight of the ball weight.

You might suspect that the ball weight would roll downwards, but in fact, with some angularity of the lever, the natural motion is upwards in the case of an equilibrium (when the weight of the lever is also compensated).

So, I say again, you're wrong, and you need to look no further than my very authentic video for evidence.

I may add, that I'm acting out of pure goodwill, with a little greed mixed in. In other words, ambition.

Offline TinselKoala

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 13824
Re: Nov. 10th, 2013 Successful Over-Unity Experiment
« Reply #14 on: August 02, 2014, 04:24:55 AM »
I have tested the slope with a level many times, and it is certainly sloped upwards (more so than in my Master Angle project). I am not confused about which direction the bubble should go. I have highly accurate perception of levels with my eyes also, within reason, and I can tell that if the floor is level, then this device slopes upwards. However, the level confirms that it ACTUALLY IS sloped upwards. I have also found that there is some room for variation in the construction of the device. For example, additional weight can be added to the counterweight, and, if the marble travels further down the track, it will STILL activate the lever to move downwards. But it does depend on proportionality as to when the marble starts and stops. However, unlike in some other prospective designs, there is not much room for downwards sloped movement between upward motions, because of the limited amount of altitude gained. Ideally, three to eight of these apparatuses would be linked in a polygonal loop, reducing the amount of travel necessary to reach the next unit (I find that the distance is significantly longer when there are two modular units, versus three, and there is also a significant reduction in movement with eight, in the right case). With ideal/ professional construction / engineering, some of the problems might be eliminated.

How does your marble get from its final rest position when all motion has stopped, back to the start position? What agency or force moves it from that final position, to a new start position so that the "cycle" can begin again?

 

OneLink