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.
 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

Custom Search

### Author Topic: What's wrong with this  (Read 55865 times)

#### Qwert

• Hero Member
• Posts: 924
##### Re: What's wrong with this
« Reply #105 on: December 31, 2014, 05:27:59 AM »
Volts, current are elements of energy. The massenergy relation:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mass%E2%80%93energy_equivalence

Relation between mass and weight:

http://www.engineeringtoolbox.com/mass-weight-d_589.html

Wouldn't be better to search internet before/instead of using this site for fundamental knowledge? Or, even better, go back to school; also for English improvement.

#### MarkE

• Hero Member
• Posts: 6830
##### Re: What's wrong with this
« Reply #106 on: December 31, 2014, 05:34:51 AM »
So do you agree that a stationary objects mass here on earth is its weight?
Next-and this is important, so answer carfully. Dose electrical power have mass-eg, volts, current
No.  Weight is an expression of the apparent force associated with the acceleration between multiple masses.  A mass's resistance to acceleration: its inertia, is independent of its proximity to other mass.

No, no one has successfully unified: the electric force, the two nuclear forces, and gravitation.  For now we only know how to treat them as separate phenomena.
« Last Edit: December 31, 2014, 08:08:18 AM by MarkE »

#### Floor

• Guest
##### Re: What's wrong with this
« Reply #107 on: December 31, 2014, 10:17:34 AM »

Wouldn't be better to search internet before/instead of using this site for fundamental knowledge? Or, even better, go back to school; also for English improvement.

Thanks for the inquiry

Your question is one of the first to be asked, that's relevant to the topic, and I think it's
very relevant.

The topic is for discussion of precisely this kind of question.

As to whether it is better to “search the internet before/instead of using this site for fundamental knowledge”.

I think that the internet and the O.U.site,  are both valuable in this respect. I use both for this purpose.

Some of the subjects of discussion on this site are “fundamental knowledge” to me, while others are too “advanced”.  This depends on the area of discussion.

“Or even better, go back to school”

I for one have a passion for learning, but I do not enjoy a class room like environment, and this for me, is reason enough to not go back to school.

Please excuse me for going on so long with this reply.  It's just that the ideas you have brought in to the discussion are so important to the topic.

“also for English improvement”

If English is your native language, I do not know.  It seems to me that the English you speak, is a little different than the American English I speak. However, you have communicated your points, very well. Thank you for doing so.

I would like to ask you a several specific questions,  perhaps when you have time it.

floor

#### tinman

• Hero Member
• Posts: 5242
##### Re: What's wrong with this
« Reply #108 on: December 31, 2014, 12:58:39 PM »
No.  Weight is an expression of the apparent force associated with the acceleration between multiple masses.  A mass's resistance to acceleration: its inertia, is independent of its proximity to other mass.

No, no one has successfully unified: the electric force, the two nuclear forces, and gravitation.  For now we only know how to treat them as separate phenomena.
Quote: In physics, mass is a property of a physical body which determines resistance to being accelerated by a force and the strength of its mutual gravitational attraction with other bodies. The SI unit of mass is the kilogram (kg).

Mass is not the same thing as weight, even though we commonly calculate an object's mass by measuring its weight. A man standing on the Moon would weigh less than he would on Earth because of the lower gravity, but he would have the same mass (he would have to recalibrate his bathroom scale for lunar gravity).

As we are not standing on the moon Mark,and i clearly stated that we only need to be calculating things that are relative to us here on earth,then the SI unit for mass is the KG. I fail to see why you continually must make things so hard and difficult. You have the habbit of turning the simplest of questions into an extreemly difficult task.

So im going to leave you with this question.
lets froget about mass,lets use a measurement term that wont go into some full debate on what something is.
Do you believe it possable to decrease the weight of a vessle where nothing leaves or enters that vessle-->yes Mark,the vessle is air/gas/water tight-->and yes Mark,we are working here on earth and will be testing the device hear on EARTH-->not mar's,not jupiter,and not the moon.
Is it possable to have the same device(vessle)-(once again,air,gas and water tight-nothing enters,and nothing leaves)that dose NOT change shape or physical size,be made to change from being non buoyant to buoyant-->(sink then float,just so as you dont get confused),by changing the state of the fluid inside that vessle.?.

These are very simple questions Mark,and depending on your answer,will depend on wether or not i continue with this experiment.

Edits; I should add that i have already done these experiment's,and now it is up to you to decide as to wether or not you can become some one that i (and many others) can work with,or you wish to continually have a high tech dribble contest with other high tech dribbler's,just so as you can see who has the biggest set of technical gonad's.

#### tinman

• Hero Member
• Posts: 5242
##### Re: What's wrong with this
« Reply #109 on: December 31, 2014, 01:12:03 PM »

Yes Tinman, MarkE has explained very clearly and you're still skeptical.
Your videos are brilliant, you explain everything in a scientific way and
people can understand perfectly. Sometimes you may be wrong with
This thing now sounds like Tin Man-Tin Brain! Just get a fish tank and
embarrass me and Mark with your proof.
I'll certainly believe-if you can prove!!!
John.
Minnie and qwert.
I am asking Mark these question's not because i dont know the answers,but i want to show(yes show) you the truth using Mark's exact description as to what is what,and if he thinks it is a can do,or a cant do. We will test text book science against actual experiment's,and we will be using Mark's very own words to proove what is true,and what is faulse. We will put up his assumption that we know all there is to know about buoyancy and physics because we have 2000 years of it under our belt,against that of the experiment's of a truck driver. Should be a slam dunk for the 2000 year's of colective data,wouldnt you say?.

#### tinman

• Hero Member
• Posts: 5242
##### Re: What's wrong with this
« Reply #110 on: December 31, 2014, 01:17:09 PM »
We agree that it takes energy to convert material from liquid phase to gas phase.  We agree that gas can be converted to liquid by removing heat.  We agree that heat can be removed without adding energy when one has a heat sink that is below the phase change temperature for the pressure.

Do we agree that a gas(of a certain type)can give of heat when returning to a liquid?

#### Qwert

• Hero Member
• Posts: 924
##### Re: What's wrong with this
« Reply #111 on: December 31, 2014, 01:36:16 PM »
Thanks for the inquiry

Your question is one of the first to be asked, that's relevant to the topic, and I think it's

This site I found good in case when I cannot find an answer for my question(s) otherwise. And there are really much more reliable sites (on the net and out of the net) comparing this one.

#### Qwert

• Hero Member
• Posts: 924
##### Re: What's wrong with this
« Reply #112 on: December 31, 2014, 01:48:07 PM »
Minnie and qwert.

The way you present your knowledge, I see as you don't know what you are talking about. Despite that I'm not an expert here.

#### tinman

• Hero Member
• Posts: 5242
##### Re: What's wrong with this
« Reply #113 on: December 31, 2014, 02:11:14 PM »
The way you present your knowledge, I see as you don't know what you are talking about. Despite that I'm not an expert here.
What i know is what i see in front of me.
Let me ask you this Qwert. If you seen something happen right before your sober eyes,and then read in a text book,or had others tell you that it's not possable,which would you believe?.

If i said i could show you !what you call! an OU event,would you believe me-->probably not. That is why Mark is going to do all the explaining in his very own word's.

What you need to understand is that every device that uses electrical power is unity when every source of energy coming from that device is taken into account. The law that states that energy can neither be created nor destroyed but only transformed confirms this. Your little 12 volt DC electric motor is a unity device when all energy output's are taken into account-mechanical output,heat output,vibrational output,and the likes. It all equals the energy input when added up. My device is already unity before anything after the transformation takes place. We then use the forces that mother nature provides to gain a total output that is greater than the input. It is not an OU device to me,but more a device that taps an as yet unused energy source. The simple solar pannel dose just this,uses energy that the sun already provides to give a power output that is free energy to us. The sun is also the source of hydroelectric power generation-no sun ,no evaporation-no evaporation=no rain,and no rain means no hydroelectric power station. No sun also means were all cactus anyway,so no need for any sort of power.

#### MarkE

• Hero Member
• Posts: 6830
##### Re: What's wrong with this
« Reply #114 on: December 31, 2014, 03:01:05 PM »
Do we agree that a gas(of a certain type)can give of heat when returning to a liquid?
Of course it gives off the heat of evaporation.  However, its mass:  That stays the same.  (I am ignoring the tiny adjustment for mass/energy equivalence.)

#### tinman

• Hero Member
• Posts: 5242
##### Re: What's wrong with this
« Reply #115 on: December 31, 2014, 03:06:52 PM »
Of course it gives off the heat of evaporation.  However, its mass:  That stays the same.  (I am ignoring the tiny adjustment for mass/energy equivalence.)
Lets use weight(eg,kg's)Mark,forget mass. So did you see my questions above,and do you agree that every thing that uses electrical energy(eg,an electric motor) runs at unity?.I using electrical energy here,as that is the energy required to convert the liquid to gas-maybe a pressure or vacume pump.

#### MarkE

• Hero Member
• Posts: 6830
##### Re: What's wrong with this
« Reply #116 on: December 31, 2014, 03:30:18 PM »
Quote: In physics, mass is a property of a physical body which determines resistance to being accelerated by a force and the strength of its mutual gravitational attraction with other bodies. The SI unit of mass is the kilogram (kg).

Mass is not the same thing as weight, even though we commonly calculate an object's mass by measuring its weight. A man standing on the Moon would weigh less than he would on Earth because of the lower gravity, but he would have the same mass (he would have to recalibrate his bathroom scale for lunar gravity).

As we are not standing on the moon Mark,and i clearly stated that we only need to be calculating things that are relative to us here on earth,then the SI unit for mass is the KG. I fail to see why you continually must make things so hard and difficult. You have the habbit of turning the simplest of questions into an extreemly difficult task.
Tinman, I am being picky because misuse of the terms can easily lead to incorrect conclusions in what is an energy problem.  The energy that is required to accelerate a mass between two non-relativistic velocities depends on those velocities and the mass.  The energy that is required to separate a mass from the center of the earth depends on the mass of the earth and the mass of the object, and the object's density with respect to the atmosphere surrounding the object.  If you work only with the latter, your energy balance will in virtually all cases end up wrong.
Quote

So im going to leave you with this question.
lets froget about mass,lets use a measurement term that wont go into some full debate on what something is.
Do you believe it possable to decrease the weight of a vessle where nothing leaves or enters that vessle-->yes Mark,the vessle is air/gas/water tight-->and yes Mark,we are working here on earth and will be testing the device hear on EARTH-->not mar's,not jupiter,and not the moon.
Stipulating that Ge is constant within the space of the problem:  The submerged weight of a vessel depends on:

1) Total mass of the vessel and its contents.
2) Total volume of the vessel.
3) Density of the fluid that the vessel displaces.

At Newtonian velocities, you cannot change the weight of the object without changing at least one of the above three parameters.
Quote

Is it possable to have the same device(vessle)-(once again,air,gas and water tight-nothing enters,and nothing leaves)that dose NOT change shape or physical size,be made to change from being non buoyant to buoyant-->(sink then float,just so as you dont get confused),by changing the state of the fluid inside that vessle.?.
Absolutely not.  See the list above.  You must change one or more of those variables to change either the submerged weight or the buoyancy.
Quote

These are very simple questions Mark,and depending on your answer,will depend on wether or not i continue with this experiment.
Just as 10kg of feathers has the same mass as 10kg of lead shot, 10kg of some material in gas form has the same mass as the same material in liquid or solid states.  If you are thinking hot-air balloon, lower density heated air and higher density cold air exchange  from underneath the bottom opening of the balloon.  When you seal your vessel, no such exchange takes place.  I suggest a very simple experiment for you:

Take a small vessel such as a half liter water bottle and fill it 3/4 or so with crushed ice.  Tightly seal the top.  Thoroughly dry the outside of the bottle.  Hot glue a precision scale to the side of the water bottle.  Get a bucket and fill it half way with room temperature water.  Place the half liter bottle in the bucket.  Snap a picture that captures the where the water surface in the bucket registers on the scale.  Take another picture after the ice has melted.  Guess what?  The scale will read the same value as when the ice was solid.   You can repeat the experiment using a bit of dry ice provided that you seal the cap really well and don't use so much dry ice that the bottle deforms.
Quote

Edits; I should add that i have already done these experiment's,and now it is up to you to decide as to wether or not you can become some one that i (and many others) can work with,or you wish to continually have a high tech dribble contest with other high tech dribbler's,just so as you can see who has the biggest set of technical gonad's.

#### MarkE

• Hero Member
• Posts: 6830
##### Re: What's wrong with this
« Reply #117 on: December 31, 2014, 03:39:48 PM »
Lets use weight(eg,kg's)Mark,forget mass. So did you see my questions above,and do you agree that every thing that uses electrical energy(eg,an electric motor) runs at unity?.I using electrical energy here,as that is the energy required to convert the liquid to gas-maybe a pressure or vacume pump.
Tinman the difference in our positions is that you assert that you can change the buoyancy of a fixed volume vessel by changing the state, but not the mass of some of its contents, and I say that unless you change one or more:

1) Total mass of the vessel plus its contents.
2) Total volume of the vessel.
3) Density of the surrounding fluid.

That you cannot affect the weight or buoyancy of the vessel.

#### tinman

• Hero Member
• Posts: 5242
##### Re: What's wrong with this
« Reply #118 on: December 31, 2014, 03:46:06 PM »
Tinman the difference in our positions is that you assert that you can change the buoyancy of a fixed volume vessel by changing the state, but not the mass of some of its contents, and I say that unless you change one or more:

1) Total mass of the vessel plus its contents.
2) Total volume of the vessel.
3) Density of the surrounding fluid.

That you cannot affect the weight or buoyancy of the vessel.

Thank you Mark.
That is all i wanted to hear(read).

See you here sunday with an intersting video to show you.
Happy new year to you and all.

P.S-i will be changing the state of the mass contained within the vessle. Hope that still counts as a  no can do on your side of the fence?

#### MarkE

• Hero Member
• Posts: 6830
##### Re: What's wrong with this
« Reply #119 on: December 31, 2014, 03:51:08 PM »
Thank you Mark.
That is all i wanted to hear(read).

See you here sunday with an intersting video to show you.
Happy new year to you and all.

P.S-i will be changing the state of the mass contained within the vessle. Hope that still counts as a  no can do on your side of the fence?
If you can change the weight or buoyancy without changing at least one of the above three parameters then it will indeed be very interesting.