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: 525623
  • *Total Topics: 15646
  • *Online Today: 44
  • *Most Online: 103
(December 19, 2006, 11:27:19 PM)
  • *Users: 3
  • *Guests: 12
  • *Total: 15

Author Topic: What's wrong with this  (Read 41270 times)

Offline MarkE

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 6830
Re: What's wrong with this
« Reply #75 on: December 30, 2014, 12:47:10 AM »
If you no longer wish to attempt argument that the device described in the outfloater.pdf file of you OP is viable, then I will take it that you have conceded that it is not viable.

Free Energy | searching for free energy and discussing free energy

Re: What's wrong with this
« Reply #75 on: December 30, 2014, 12:47:10 AM »

Offline Floor

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 1588
Re: What's wrong with this
« Reply #76 on: December 30, 2014, 01:07:03 AM »
This is just getting stranger and stranger.  If you have some point I have no idea what it is.

Are you asking me what my point is, or implying that there is no point.
For the sake of the comminication, please be more concise, less crytic.

Offline Floor

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 1588
Re: What's wrong with this
« Reply #77 on: December 30, 2014, 02:08:44 AM »
@MarkE

Are you asking me what my point is, or implying that there is no point.
For the sake of the comminication, please be more concise, less crytic.

Should I restate this question in some other way ?


Free Energy | searching for free energy and discussing free energy

Re: What's wrong with this
« Reply #77 on: December 30, 2014, 02:08:44 AM »
Sponsored links:




Offline ramset

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 7297
Re: What's wrong with this
« Reply #78 on: December 30, 2014, 02:31:08 AM »


























                                                                                                                                                            .

Offline Floor

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 1588
Re: What's wrong with this
« Reply #79 on: December 30, 2014, 03:05:30 AM »
@MarkE

If you no longer wish to attempt argument that the device described in the outfloater.pdf file of you OP is viable, then I will take it that you have conceded that it is not viable.

You're not trying to put words into my mouth again are you ? 

Yes the device is viable, for it's intended purposes. and in the context of the subject of the discussion.

What your imply with your use of the word viable, is not the subject of the argument.

You have been informed at least two times as to the subject of this topic.

The fact that you have previously, responded to that information. is evidence that you know what the
subject is.

Please do not now, contend the subject is other than you know it to be, or that you have not understood.
Eespecially with me, the topics originator.

There is a problem here, with your honesty.

I think therfore it is you who should concede on this basis.
and withdraw form the topic.

Free Energy | searching for free energy and discussing free energy

Re: What's wrong with this
« Reply #79 on: December 30, 2014, 03:05:30 AM »
Sponsored links:




Offline MarkE

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 6830
Re: What's wrong with this
« Reply #80 on: December 30, 2014, 03:29:16 AM »
@MarkE

You're not trying to put words into my mouth again are you ? 
Since in nearly two weeks you have failed to provide the state diagram that you promised, or provide any other counter to facts that I have presented that shoot the scheme outlined in the pdf attached to the OP, I think it is reasonable to infer that you have conceded.  I asked you to confirm whether or not that is the case.
Quote

Yes the device is viable, for it's intended purposes. and in the context of the subject of the discussion.
The device is inoperable as a source of energy.  External energy must be added so that in Slide 2, the float 2 can be pressed into the tank.  There is a direct correlation of denser water taking up volume at the top of the fluid tank 2 for the volume of the lower density float 2 being pressed into the bottom of tank 2.  That's real work that has to be done to get the float 2 in and float 1 out, magic valves or not.  The total energy consumed  in that process is always greater than the energy that can be reclaimed from the float once it is forced out in a subsequent operation.  Slide 3 fails to note that the GPE gained by float 2 rising is more than lost by the water that falls to take up the space at the bottom of tank 2 previously occupied by float 2.
Quote
What your imply with your use of the word viable, is not the subject of the argument.
The device presented in the OP does not work as the pdf attached to the OP claims.
Quote

You have been informed at least two times as to the subject of this topic.

The fact that you have previously, responded to that information. is evidence that you know what the
subject is.
I've read and responded to the OP.
Quote

Please do not now, contend the subject is other than you know it to be, or that you have not understood.
Eespecially with me, the topics originator.
I trust that since you wrote it, you know the contents of the OP as well.
Quote

There is a problem here, with your honesty.

I think therfore it is you who should concede on this basis.
and withdraw form the topic.
Your assertion does not address the claims of your OP.  It does not address the factual disproof I have offered against the claim of the OP.

Offline Floor

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 1588
Re: What's wrong with this
« Reply #81 on: December 30, 2014, 04:12:44 AM »
@ MarkE

From where I'm standing,  your persistence in remaining off topic appears to be an intentional. 

If you will agree to NOT do that, on my topics, or other peoples topics.  I'll let it slide,  and we can continue these talks.

Other wise leave this topic now, and stay off of any of my topics in the future. 

I hope that you will give it some time before you respond.

                      best wishes
                                floor

Free Energy | searching for free energy and discussing free energy

Re: What's wrong with this
« Reply #81 on: December 30, 2014, 04:12:44 AM »
Sponsored links:




Offline Floor

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 1588
Re: What's wrong with this
« Reply #82 on: December 30, 2014, 04:15:03 AM »
OOPS that's

 intentional disruption.

Offline orbut 3000

  • Full Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 247
Re: What's wrong with this
« Reply #83 on: December 30, 2014, 04:55:47 AM »
What is wrong with answering the question "What's wrong with this" by explaining what's wrong with it?

Free Energy | searching for free energy and discussing free energy

Re: What's wrong with this
« Reply #83 on: December 30, 2014, 04:55:47 AM »
3D Solar Panels

Offline MarkE

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 6830
Re: What's wrong with this
« Reply #84 on: December 30, 2014, 05:07:52 AM »
The OP is:

Quote
Quote

    Sr. Member
    ****
    Posts: 254
        View Profile
        Personal Message (Offline)

What's wrong with this
« on: December 14, 2014, 06:05:50 PM »

    Quote

If Ou can be done any where, then it can be done any where ?

Please find the attached file OUfloater 3.pdf

Cheers
       floor
* OUfloater 3.pdf (348.04 kB - downloaded 116 times.)

Offline tinman

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 5231
Re: What's wrong with this
« Reply #85 on: December 30, 2014, 01:55:01 PM »
@tinman

I hear ya, I once did similar experiments. While completely shit faced I once bent over very carefully and jerked furiously upwards hard and fast on my heavy bootstraps. The next thing I know I'm waking up on the floor... why my head must have hit the roof with such force it damn near broke my neck and knocked me out cold. The ratio was 10 shots of Rye whiskey to my 7.5 inch bootstraps if I remember correctly which is kind of questionable but somehow amazing.
There may be something to this 10:7.5 ratio, I may need to try this on the roof of a moving car or bus to confirm my suspicions but I'm still trying to figure out how not to spill my drinks in the process...that would be wrong.


AC
Always knew you were an ass clown AC,sounds like you have already had to much to drink.
One thing is for sure-you wont be getting your hands on this one and running like you did at OUR.


Free Energy | searching for free energy and discussing free energy

Re: What's wrong with this
« Reply #85 on: December 30, 2014, 01:55:01 PM »
3D Solar Panels

Offline tinman

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 5231
Re: What's wrong with this
« Reply #86 on: December 30, 2014, 02:18:21 PM »
Tinman, so far what you have described as far as I can tell is that you intend to collapse a volume, thereby allowing seawater ballast in by releasing thermal energy from the ballast.  Volume decreases under the ideal gas law until a phase change that then results in a step-wise drop in volume.  Contact with the sea water continues to sink energy until some time later when you either choose to reverse the process or thermal equilibrium is established with the sea water heat sink.  Is this correct?

You intend the increased density to cause the submersible to sink 3.2km.  Is this correct?

You intend to reclaim energy that the submersible gives up in its descent using propeller driven generators and batteries.  Is this correct?

You then intend to raise the submersible by ejecting ballast that you have taken on.  Is this correct?

You intend to eject the ballast by adding thermal energy back to your fluid so that it returns to the gas phase and then develops sufficient pressure to reinflate the containers.  Is this correct?

You believe that you can collect energy on the way up using propeller driven generators and batteries.  Is this correct?

Once we get square on the particulars I will explain the various fallacies.
Sorry Mark-the discussion is now closed.There are now undesirable eyes watching,and i aint done with this idiot yet. He is a walk in take all kind of guy. He's done it before,and he'll do it again. He dribble's endless crap about how much he know's,and the best we have seen from him was some crappy electromagnet device my grand daughter could have built.

By the way,just so as i dont leave your questions unanswered-no,there is no intake of ballast water-the vessle is gas/water tight. Propellors driving onboard generator's on the way up and then on the way back dow-yes. The secret is in being able to get back most of the energy used to reintroduce the gas. With todays technology,it is possable to get back 75% of the used energy from the gas to liquid phase.This means that the generators only have to produce 25% of the power used to make the device work-self run. I have serched the internet for 6 month's now,and although you say we have 2000 years of experiance with buoyancy,i dont see any actual attempts at building such a device(other than a few youtube no hopers frauds) that was designed to self run. Maybe you could point to some that say that this is not possable,or a real organisation that has tried?. Mother nature provides many different ways of giving us free energy,and this device would be seen as that-run by mother nature,not an OU device.

Remember,the deeper you dive in the ocean,the colder it get's.Most gases we know require less pressure to return back to liquid the colder they are,and expand with a lot more pressure the warmer they get. ;) Now all you need to do is turn it all ass about.

This project has now been moved to where the undesirable remains blind.

Offline MarkE

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 6830
Re: What's wrong with this
« Reply #87 on: December 30, 2014, 04:51:06 PM »
Sorry Mark-the discussion is now closed.There are now undesirable eyes watching,and i aint done with this idiot yet. He is a walk in take all kind of guy. He's done it before,and he'll do it again. He dribble's endless crap about how much he know's,and the best we have seen from him was some crappy electromagnet device my grand daughter could have built.

By the way,just so as i dont leave your questions unanswered-no,there is no intake of ballast water-the vessle is gas/water tight. Propellors driving onboard generator's on the way up and then on the way back dow-yes. The secret is in being able to get back most of the energy used to reintroduce the gas. With todays technology,it is possable to get back 75% of the used energy from the gas to liquid phase.This means that the generators only have to produce 25% of the power used to make the device work-self run. I have serched the internet for 6 month's now,and although you say we have 2000 years of experiance with buoyancy,i dont see any actual attempts at building such a device(other than a few youtube no hopers frauds) that was designed to self run. Maybe you could point to some that say that this is not possable,or a real organisation that has tried?. Mother nature provides many different ways of giving us free energy,and this device would be seen as that-run by mother nature,not an OU device.

Remember,the deeper you dive in the ocean,the colder it get's.Most gases we know require less pressure to return back to liquid the colder they are,and expand with a lot more pressure the warmer they get. ;) Now all you need to do is turn it all ass about.

This project has now been moved to where the undesirable remains blind.
Tinman the conversation has been interesting.  In order to change the buoyant state of a submersible the density has to change.  So, something gives:  mass and/or the fluid volume that the submersible displaces.  If we change the density but not not total mass of material inside a sealed and constant volume container, that container's buoyancy does not change.  That is why I speculated that maybe you were hoping to develop enough pressure in whatever contains the phase change material to change that container's volume, expelling sea water ballast.

From the: "It can't produce free energy." camp,  what you have cycling a submersible up and down are the UP and DOWN states.  We can pretty much ignore everything in between.  In the up state the system including the surrounding fluid is at its potential energy minimum, even though the submersible is at its potential energy maximum.  When the submersible is at the bottom of the travel, the system energy is at its maximum.  Before your submersible can rise you need to change its density.  You can either eject mass, or increase the submersible's volume, or a bit of both.  To do either you must expend work.  Since rising removes energy from the system, expending additional work at the bottom only aggravates the energy loss going from the down to up state.  On the way from the top to the bottom you have to be able to get all the energy that the system lost just to break even.  Sinking the submersible requires increasing its density.  That lowers the center of gravity of the system at the top without changing mass, so system energy is again lost.  The bottom line:  A submersible only moves up or down by expending energy from the system that includes the submersible.  The submersible moves up or down because the end position represents a lower energy state than the starting position.


Offline minnie

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 1244
Re: What's wrong with this
« Reply #88 on: December 30, 2014, 05:16:58 PM »



  Oh dear Tinman, looks as if you've come a gutser!!

Offline allcanadian

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 1317
Re: What's wrong with this
« Reply #89 on: December 30, 2014, 05:55:21 PM »
@tinman
Quote
Always knew you were an ass clown AC,sounds like you have already had to much to drink.One thing is for sure-you wont be getting your hands on this one and running like you did at OUR.


To be honest I had way to much to drink and I apologize for my interruption. I can only hope you see some humor in the fact the other 99% of the people out there may honestly believe you are trying to pull yourself up by your bootstraps hence the analogy. I know what your trying to do, I have been all over the same problems and failed. I can only hope you may succeed where I have failed and I mean that sincerely.


Personally I know of two instances which show promise in this area, one is out-gassing (google CO2 geiser) which relates directly to Victor Schaubergers work. The other is a thought experiment made by Tesla where water is transformed into H2 and O2 which I proved by calculation but is impractical in my opinion.


I wish you all the best and can only hope you may see the humor in what were trying to do, I will leave you to it then.


AC

 

OneLink