I hereby would like to present the Unity Generator and the Free Energy Party.
https://www.facebook.com/groups/freeenergyparty/
http://www.freeenergyparty.org/

The Unity Generator is an energy multiplier / QMoGen with a PMDC motor driving a 10KW PMAC generator.
Developed by the Unity Corporation and crowdfunded with the help of the Free Energy Party.

I am not the inventor nor the initiator of the FEP [Free Energy Party].
I am one of the admins of the party and a fellow free energy enthusiast.

Now back to the generator! 
11-29-2014
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9t4H3MoX8Ww
We showcased the generator [after a small introduction of the FEP] running for the first time without a LOAD, demonstrating overunity.

1-5-2015
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6W8ymwwdU0s
We showcased the generator running on load showing the following measurements.

Transcript of video
---------------------------------------------------------
IN : from mains to AC > DC PSU
2.6A @ 110V
2.3A @ 110V
Total 4.9 Amps @ 110V = 539W
---------------------------------------------------------
Used power PMDC Motor
1.3A @ 39.6V = 51.48 watts
OUT from Generator to Capacitors
7,4A @ 123.5v AC = 913.9W
7,5A @ 123.4v AC = 925.5W
Total = 1839.40W AC
3500% overunity on raw design!
51.48W DC IN to PMDC Motor > 1839.40W PMAC Generator
= 35 x more energy out than in!
-----------------------------------------------------------
Load on the capacitors
1.Tile-saw dryload 120v @ 4.6A = 550W
2.200w lamp
3.100w lamp
4.100W lamp
5.Saw using 115v @ 4A dryload = 460W
Total load from capacitors = 1310W

1-6-2015
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=CrUEjcWGpxw
We did another running test outside in the light.

We know the importance of running tests by an independent test lab and are at the moment in agreements with one.

I am not fully known about the inner workings of the device but all used components are shared in detail on the Unity Corporation facebook site as this is a crowdfunded funded project.
https://www.facebook.com/UNITYsystems?fref=ts

Theory behind The Unity Generator.
Karl Palsness' Theory

From a interview with Karl Palsness, who is an expert on Tesla technology.
He has also heard of several cases like this, all independent from one another.
"I know exactly what you're talking about. I've done a lot of work in that area. That's amazing. I've heard this from so many people now, that this works.
"From what has been observed, you're playing with the phasing angles between the motor and the generator, and when the phasing angles are out of phase, you're getting into what is called 'power factor'. When you get the power factor right, the current and voltage are out of phase, and when you get them meshed up enough, it actually self-runs and produces excess energy.
"This theory is based on magnetic flux. Permanent magnets or electromagnets such as in a generator or a motor, under certain conditions, give overunity (OU) behavior. But there's more to it than that, from what I've seen myself in overunity devices. It is all about geometry of the system. How and where a permanent magnet gets it's energy, is still a very big mystery to science. Excess energy can appear in electromagnets, as well.
"I've seen this effect on generators. When you have a generator that's turning too big of a load, and you have big enough breakers to handle the current, the currents go way up. Imagine if you have 500 Volts at 1 Amp; you have 500 Watts. Or you can have 500 Amps with one Volt; and you have 500 Watts. So when you get huge amps and low voltages in between the phasing angles, the current and magnetic fields are so collapsing and rising, and the phase angles are 'wrong', I believe that the magnetic field is coupling with, I'd have to say the word: 'The Vacuum'. In other words, it's coupling with an unknown -- whatever makes the permanent magnet work. We truly don't understand the science of that. There are a lot of theories, but no proof yet. Permanent magnets are still one of those unknowns, as to why it does what it does. And that's the same thing with electromagnets. There are a lot of unknowns.
"So when we kept playing with the power factors and phase angles, I believe there is overunity. I've seen it so many times now, with so many different people, that if I had the money, I would go out and buy the parts to do the testing in this area myself.
"Remember that guy [...confidential / U.S....]. He's doing the same thing. He has a small motor turning a big generator, and it's out of phase, and the power factor is out. There's a guy in South Africa that's doing the same thing. He's got a motor connected to a bigger generator, and it's doing the same thing. There's a guy in South America, (the blind guy from welding) (Force Multiplier System). He had a motor turning a generator, via shaky gear connection. That's doing the same thing.
"There are a lot of people claiming this. It's getting to the point that there are so many people claiming it, that are unrelated to one another, that I'd have to say that it holds a lot of potential.
"And I have a theory behind it. I actually wrote a whole chapter on that in my book about the science of how to do it in a much more elegant method than they are doing it now, based on what they are doing right now. The problem is, I don't have the funds to do it. That book is my research journal, and I don't have plans at the current time on publishing it – my notes as you work every day. I've got a lot of time and money into that. If what they are doing indeed works, I believe it can take it to the next level and make it a much better product and bring it to market. At the current time, I don't want to give that idea out, as it is still just an unproven theory of a way that might work. I'd like to bring it to fruition in the future if I can prove it works."

We would also like to introduce our Indian team, making great progress in India with their OZZOG gravity generator.

Contact details
Home
https://www.facebook.com/perpetualgravitylab?fref=ts

Presentation of OZZOG generator.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Uw5qBslCftg

OzzoG lighting Ganesh Pandal.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ThOYhZVr-wM

TinselKoala,

I do not understand your question as it is clearly told in the video what the connection points are and if you could not understand, there is a transcript of the same.
The device is not self-looping in this iteration.

TinselKoala,

I do not understand your question as it is clearly told in the video what the connection points are and if you could not understand, there is a transcript of the same.
The device is not self-looping in this iteration.

I understand perfectly well. You have presented a poorly shot video showing a jumble of wires all over the place, a big battery and some kind of motor-generator device, and some "measurements" made with a handheld clampon meter.

"This device is not self-looping in this iteration" and will never be self-looping in any other iteration  because it is not actually producing more energy out than it takes in from its power source.

What part of my question do you not understand? The claim is made that it produces 3500 percent OU, that is, 35 times the energy out that it takes in to run it. Where is the proof of this? Certainly  not in the video you have linked. It would be a trivial exercise to self-loop such a device, well within the capability of any of the electrical experimenters on this forum. Yet somehow it is not within the capability of this claimant. There is one obvious conclusion that can be drawn from these _facts_.

You seem not to understand how easy it is to produce false readings, intentionally or by mistake, using the kind of instruments and procedures that are shown in the video. If you could not understand, there are plenty of places where you could educate yourself. And if you truly want independent and proper testing of the device, this can be easily arranged; the only difficulty will be the extent of the cooperation extended by the claimant.  I can arrange for such testing to occur within the week, and I myself will have no part in it other than making the connection between the claimant and the laboratory or testing group.

I am being trolling here : called a liar, a fraud and that our intentions are not real. [in my books that is bad mouthing]
So I am allowed to speak my mind and defend myself.

That other people play tricks on others is not my business or shouldn't be the reason to immediately call someone a fraud until proven otherwise.
I don't personally treat people like that, I hope you don't in real life.

I am just here to bring some news about our progress and update the opensource community on this forum of our presence for who didn't know us or the concept of underground manufacturing before.

I didn't expect the immediate attacks & enormous demands put on any news share.

To politely answer some of the questions
1.There is no battery in the whole setup.
2.The video explains every wire and every component
3.The transcript explains every component and measurement made in the video.
4.I've explained multiple times that independent lab testing is coming, even with that I doubt some people will believe.
5.We use direct coupling, no rubber belt.

If genuinely interested please follow our progress on the available links.
Thank you all for you time and if offended by the discovery share, life goes on.

I am being trolling here : called a liar, a fraud and that our intentions are not real. [in my books that is bad mouthing]

And yet you took the 'insulted' stance in only your 5th post here (your first 3 were to spam your product about among different threads).


For the most part however, you are being either

a) invited to participate in testing (ramset and tk - replies 3 and 1 on the Free Energy Party thread)
or
b) asked legitimate questions such as ;

Stefan (this sites owner)  in the Youtube comments asked
How do you measure the input amps at your power supply ?
...  I would say something is wrong with your input measurements, as your power supply seems to have a very low efficiency in converting the AC to the about 50 Watts DC the drive motor is using... Hmm... Maybe your meters show wrong datas.


TK above is asking why you cannot self loop something with a 3500 percent COP.
And by the way, what is the evidence for 3500 % ?
You did after all put 200% in the thread title, and  then claim 3500% in the body.
This seems inconsistent and perfectly worthy of a question.

Care to answer just that last simple one please.
Was it a typo ?

No need for a huff just yet.

Majestic1,

If you are responsible for the Anonymous Manufacturing Proposal please do continue to support and
pursue that part of this. You will eventually find someone with an operable Qmogen type device. I am
sure of it.

---

On the other hand the Qmogen you are showing as part of this post is non-operable.
First the PSU power supply unit shown should be nearly 100% Watts efficient Watts in ~= Watts out.
You will notice this shown as being 10% efficient. No good. You need to *measure* these numbers
at the same time.
Second there is no reason to hang large high voltage capacitors on the output of the generator
The generator should already be at a power factor of 1:1 as is. Adding additional capacitance only
serves to make it resonant with the inductance in the generator. This would be done
only to fool instrumentation. A useful OU system will have the energy going to the device be
at exactly 50Hz or 60Hz which is under rpm control. Also to have a useful system means separating
the loop power from the excess power so that the excess power can all be directed toward the user load.
Remember too, that motor nameplate load cannot be used unless the motor is mechanically loaded
just like the generator cannot be considered running at rated mechanical load unless there is a rated
electrical load on it. The saws cannot be considered operating at nameplate load unless they are sawing
something. Which is very difficult to make continuous.

As you may be able to now see, you have to be able to demonstrate the system is self running because
only a self running system would be able to make excess energy. Excess energy is the only kind of energy
a user is going to want. The most likely reason that a system is not self looping is that it *cannot* be looped
therefore is not OU.

You need to avoid the "My (expensive) instrumentation says thus and so is happening, therefore it must be" attitude
in favor of energy = time @ (times) power form of thinking.
You need to avoid the "We can't self loop because the type of energy we produce can't be self looped" attitude because
self looping electrical energy has only one type and that is the only the one users want.

Consider the QEG - only an actually satisfactorily operating device meets the users' Goal. I would never claim
that something was meeting users' goal when it was not really meeting them as I consider doing so fraud.
That doesn't make me a critic, it makes me honest.

:S:MarkSCoffman

If someone claims an electrical energy output of 35 times the electrical energy input, yet cannot show self-looped operation... what is the appropriate conclusion to be drawn?

If someone makes some light bulbs light up, and then uses the _nameplate wattage value_ of the bulbs instead of actual power and brightness measurements, what is the appropriate conclusion to be drawn?

If someone persists in using error-prone consumer-grade DMMs for measurements in support of their claims, instead of using real power analyzers and math-capable oscilloscopes properly operated, what is the appropriate conclusion to be drawn?

If someone responds to honest straightforward criticism and offers of independent no-cost testing, with pottymouth playground insults, what is the appropriate conclusion to be drawn?

If someone is asking for donations based on extreme claims like "3500 percent OU" or even "200 percent OU" but cannot provide _solid, irrefutable proof_ of those claims... what is the appropriate conclusion to be drawn?

I'll tell you Yet Again: Any competent electrical engineer, and most of the electronics hobbyists and researchers on this forum, would only need a _true_ OU ratio of 1.3 to 1, or 130 percent OU, in an electrical device to be able to make it self loop and run itself indefinitely.  Add another ten or twenty percent OU, say to 150 percent, and it will be able to power a substantial load while running itself. Yet here we see a claim of 3500 percent, or another at 200 percent, we see a load bank of lightbulbs using nameplate values rather than measurements of power and brightness, and we see a PayPal button... but no self-looper and no real independent testing of the claims. What is the appropriate conclusion to be drawn?

If someone claims an electrical energy output of 35 times the electrical energy input, yet cannot show self-looped operation... what is the appropriate conclusion to be drawn?

The needed swervel bearings are on back order.

If someone makes some light bulbs light up, and then uses the _nameplate wattage value_ of the bulbs instead of actual power and brightness measurements, what is the appropriate conclusion to be drawn?

They need more light bulbs.

If someone persists in using error-prone consumer-grade DMMs for measurements in support of their claims, instead of using real power analyzers and math-capable oscilloscopes properly operated, what is the appropriate conclusion to be drawn?

Big oil controls the supply of real power analyzers.  Ignore the man behind the phasor.

If someone responds to honest straightforward criticism and offers of independent no-cost testing, with pottymouth playground insults, what is the appropriate conclusion to be drawn?

They must be a brilliant developer of blue algae.

If someone is asking for donations based on extreme claims like "3500 percent OU" or even "200 percent OU" but cannot provide _solid, irrefutable proof_ of those claims... what is the appropriate conclusion to be drawn?

Hope you will donate girl has a competitor.

I'll tell you Yet Again: Any competent electrical engineer, and most of the electronics hobbyists and researchers on this forum, would only need a _true_ OU ratio of 1.3 to 1, or 130 percent OU, in an electrical device to be able to make it self loop and run itself indefinitely.  Add another ten or twenty percent OU, say to 150 percent, and it will be able to power a substantial load while running itself. Yet here we see a claim of 3500 percent, or another at 200 percent, we see a load bank of lightbulbs using nameplate values rather than measurements of power and brightness, and we see a PayPal button... but no self-looper and no real independent testing of the claims. What is the appropriate conclusion to be drawn?

They need to contact Sterling Allan!