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: Partnered Output Coils - Free Energy  (Read 3322478 times)

#### Spilled Fluids

• Full Member
• Posts: 138
##### Re: Partnered Output Coils - Free Energy
« Reply #4830 on: July 19, 2015, 12:31:58 PM »
And yet if a lifted golf ball is dropped onto steel or concrete,the ball will come to a stop at one point,and then be accelerated in the opposite direction back up to a slightly lower point to that of the first drop height.Not only was energy used to raise the ball,but that same amount of energy was stored at the same time.The energy lost/dissipated was through vibration,sound and air resistance.

The energy to bounce the ball was stored as the center of the ball was compressed. All the original energy from the drop was spent when the ball hit it's lowest point. The new energy from the compression release is what accelerates the ball back up. Some of that energy is lost initially due to heat while the rest is lost due to the items you mention.
So this is really no different than the dropped rock which will also undergo compression and will rebound ever so slightly.

There is no energy gained or created in any of these examples.

In other words there is no complete cycle since neither the rock nor the golf ball can lift themselves back up to their original height.
Gravity is a conservative force and therefore adds no new energy to the process.

#### MarkE

• Hero Member
• Posts: 6830
##### Re: Partnered Output Coils - Free Energy
« Reply #4831 on: July 19, 2015, 12:37:09 PM »
This is why when working around sensitive electronics, one should always be grounded.
I worked on medical monitors at Tektronix and ECG monitors had to be certified double grounded so that any transient static could not find it's way through the patient; it only takes a couple of milliamps of current to put a heart into defib.
Other test equipment from Tektronix is so sensitive to ESD that poorly grounded workers walking by can kill a \$10,000. module.

Years and years ago a German biomedical company made EKG probes that actually pierce the skin so as to get a cleaner, and higher amplitude reading compared to the Ag/AgCl gel probes used in the USA.  Electrocution concerns were highly elevated with their equipment.

#### tinman

• Hero Member
• Posts: 5363
##### Re: Partnered Output Coils - Free Energy
« Reply #4832 on: July 19, 2015, 12:38:56 PM »
Anyway,for your entertainment SF,we will make the first test very simple.
So carry out the test(in stead of laughing),and explain to us-if not the PM's magnetic field that did more work against the spring,then what was it that did more work against the spring.
If the coil of the electromagnet remains the same,and the applied power to that coil remains the same,then the magnetic field produced by the coil also remains the same.

One complete cycle-power to coil off,spring in resting position.
Power on-electromagnet accelerates toward (test 1) ferromagnetic block,(test 2)PM,work done is recorded by way of LB's on scales.
Power is disconnected from coil,spring returns to starting position.<-- one full cycle.

You may use any material you like for test 1 in place of the ferrite block-->even the material the PM is made from.
But at the end of the test,you must come back and explain as to what it was(if not the PM)that done the extra work against the spring in test 2.

#### Spilled Fluids

• Full Member
• Posts: 138
##### Re: Partnered Output Coils - Free Energy
« Reply #4833 on: July 19, 2015, 12:41:42 PM »
Other test equipment from Tektronix is so sensitive to ESD that poorly grounded workers walking by can kill a \$10,000. module.

Years and years ago a German biomedical company made EKG probes that actually pierce the skin so as to get a cleaner, and higher amplitude reading compared to the Ag/AgCl gel probes used in the USA.  Electrocution concerns were highly elevated with their equipment.

Most places I work at these days have discharge stations outside the labs and all work benches have grounded/grounding pads on them. Workers are required to wear the appropriate grounding straps on their wrists and at the fuel cell companies even grounding heal pads are worn in areas where an ROE could take place.

#### tinman

• Hero Member
• Posts: 5363
##### Re: Partnered Output Coils - Free Energy
« Reply #4834 on: July 19, 2015, 12:44:03 PM »
The energy to bounce the ball was stored as the center of the ball was compressed. All the original energy from the drop was spent when the ball hit it's lowest point. The new energy from the compression release is what accelerates the ball back up. Some of that energy is lost initially due to heat while the rest is lost due to the items you mention.
So this is really no different than the dropped rock which will also undergo compression and will rebound ever so slightly.

There is no energy gained or created in any of these examples.

In other words there is no complete cycle since neither the rock nor the golf ball can lift themselves back up to their original height.
Gravity is a conservative force and therefore adds no new energy to the process.
You missed the point altogether,but anyway-carry on.

#### Spilled Fluids

• Full Member
• Posts: 138
##### Re: Partnered Output Coils - Free Energy
« Reply #4835 on: July 19, 2015, 12:47:54 PM »
You missed the point altogether,but anyway-carry on.

I don't think so. The ball did not have the energy stored for the return bounce; that came from the compression at the bottom of the cycle. It was freshly generated at that time, not stored from the original lifting.

#### tinman

• Hero Member
• Posts: 5363
##### Re: Partnered Output Coils - Free Energy
« Reply #4836 on: July 19, 2015, 12:59:14 PM »
I don't think so. The ball did not have the energy stored for the return bounce; that came from the compression at the bottom of the cycle. It was freshly generated at that time, not stored from the original lifting.

So energy was freshly generated out of nothing/
Bullshit.Once the ball was raised from the ground to it's resting position the energy used to raise that ball is now stored as potential energy.Any raised mass has stored/potential energy.Once the ball starts to drop,that potential energy then becomes kinetic energy.
No energy is !freshly generated!,it is converted.

#### Spilled Fluids

• Full Member
• Posts: 138
##### Re: Partnered Output Coils - Free Energy
« Reply #4837 on: July 19, 2015, 12:59:52 PM »
Anyway,for your entertainment SF,we will make the first test very simple.
So carry out the test(in stead of laughing),and explain to us-if not the PM's magnetic field that did more work against the spring,then what was it that did more work against the spring.
If the coil of the electromagnet remains the same,and the applied power to that coil remains the same,then the magnetic field produced by the coil also remains the same.

One complete cycle-power to coil off,spring in resting position.
Power on-electromagnet accelerates toward (test 1) ferromagnetic block,(test 2)PM,work done is recorded by way of LB's on scales.
Power is disconnected from coil,spring returns to starting position.<-- one full cycle.

You may use any material you like for test 1 in place of the ferrite block-->even the material the PM is made from.
But at the end of the test,you must come back and explain as to what it was(if not the PM)that done the extra work against the spring in test 2.

I thought we were going to have a real permanent magnet experiment here! Any work done with this device is purely by the electromagnet and the energy supplied to it.

So this experiment simply tells me that a PM does not do any work.

Don't you have any experiments with just the PM doing the work?

#### Spilled Fluids

• Full Member
• Posts: 138
##### Re: Partnered Output Coils - Free Energy
« Reply #4838 on: July 19, 2015, 01:05:49 PM »
So energy was freshly generated out of nothing/
Bullshit.Once the ball was raised from the ground to it's resting position the energy used to raise that ball is now stored as potential energy.Any raised mass has stored/potential energy.Once the ball starts to drop,that potential energy then becomes kinetic energy.
No energy is !freshly generated!,it is converted.

No, energy is not generated out of nothing. The energy for the return bounce is generated by the compression of the ball not by the energy used to lift it.
The stored energy from the lift is only enough to return it to where it came from.

Again, gravity is a conservative force and does not create energy. That means the lifting of the ball did not store anymore energy than it took to lift it in the first place.

If your theory were correct then a rock or a marshmellow would both bounce back to almost the same height as they were dropped from.

#### tinman

• Hero Member
• Posts: 5363
##### Re: Partnered Output Coils - Free Energy
« Reply #4839 on: July 19, 2015, 01:14:46 PM »
I thought we were going to have a real permanent magnet experiment here! Any work done with this device is purely by the electromagnet and the energy supplied to it.

So this experiment simply tells me that a PM does not do any work.

Don't you have any experiments with just the PM doing the work?

Carry out the experiment,and prove to me that the PM did not add any work being done against the spring.
You have simply done what all other guru's do,and failed to provide evidence to the contrary.
If you gain say a 30% increase of force(per scale readings)with the PM in position,then that PM is what gave rise to the 30% increase of force against the spring. The spring now has a 30% increase in stored potential energy while the electromagnet is energized.When the electromagnet is disconnected,the electromagnet will be accelerated by the stored energy within that spring.
You know-mass/acceleration/distance.The mass(coil,formers and pendulum arm)remain the same in test 1 and 2,but the mass in test 2 is accelerated faster,and travels a longer distance when the coil is switched off-->even though the power input remains the same in both test<--providing you switch the coil on for the same amount of time in each test.

#### tinman

• Hero Member
• Posts: 5363
##### Re: Partnered Output Coils - Free Energy
« Reply #4840 on: July 19, 2015, 01:20:54 PM »

Again, gravity is a conservative force and does not create energy. That means the lifting of the ball did not store anymore energy than it took to lift it in the first place.

If your theory were correct then a rock or a marshmellow would both bounce back to almost the same height as they were dropped from.

You are seriously lost-->you need to go re educate your self.

Quote
No, energy is not generated out of nothing. The energy for the return bounce is generated by the compression of the ball not by the energy used to lift it.

Quote
The stored energy from the lift is only enough to return it to where it came from.

So once the ball has returned to the starting position(where it came from),all the energy used to raise it has been returned?.

Please explain to all of us here where then the energy came from to compress the ball in order for it to have a return bounce.

#### Spilled Fluids

• Full Member
• Posts: 138
##### Re: Partnered Output Coils - Free Energy
« Reply #4841 on: July 19, 2015, 01:21:39 PM »
Carry out the experiment,and prove to me that the PM did not add any work being done against the spring.
You have simply done what all other guru's do,and failed to provide evidence to the contrary.
If you gain say a 30% increase of force(per scale readings)with the PM in position,then that PM is what gave rise to the 30% increase of force against the spring. The spring now has a 30% increase in stored potential energy while the electromagnet is energized.When the electromagnet is disconnected,the electromagnet will be accelerated by the stored energy within that spring.
You know-mass/acceleration/distance.The mass(coil,formers and pendulum arm)remain the same in test 1 and 2,but the mass in test 2 is accelerated faster,and travels a longer distance when the coil is switched off-->even though the power input remains the same in both test<--providing you switch the coil on for the same amount of time in each test.

I appreciate that you went to the trouble of drawing this experiment up but it does not show that a PM does work. On the contrary, it shows an electromagnet doing work. Changing the ferrite to a PM or any other type of magnet is a red herring...I'm not fond of food that smells like fingers
If you have a PM experiment that does not use input power via electromagnets or anything else, I will build it and report on whether it does work or not.

#### Spilled Fluids

• Full Member
• Posts: 138
##### Re: Partnered Output Coils - Free Energy
« Reply #4842 on: July 19, 2015, 01:29:27 PM »
You are seriously lost-->you need to go re educate your self.

So once the ball has returned to the starting position(where it came from),all the energy used to raise it has been returned?.

Please explain to all of us here where then the energy came from to compress the ball in order for it to have a return bounce.

Back to hurling insults

The mass of the ball and it's elasticity provide the compression that generates the energy to lift the ball apart way back up.
As I pointed out, if the energy for the return bounce was stored at the top of the lift then a golf ball and a rock would bounce and return to the same heights but they don't so where is the difference? It's in the amount of energy the compression can add. In the case of the rock which is almost non compressible, it doesn't bounce very high at all since there is little to no energy added. Same goes for a marshmallow, an apple, an egg or anything else you want to raise to a height and drop.

#### tinman

• Hero Member
• Posts: 5363
##### Re: Partnered Output Coils - Free Energy
« Reply #4843 on: July 19, 2015, 01:29:52 PM »
I appreciate that you went to the trouble of drawing this experiment up but it does not show that a PM does work. On the contrary, it shows an electromagnet doing work. Changing the ferrite to a PM or any other type of magnet is a red herring...I'm not fond of food that smells like fingers
If you have a PM experiment that does not use input power via electromagnets or anything else, I will build it and report on whether it does work or not.

Just as i thought,you have no answer,and thus you hide behind babble.
I have shown you how a PM increases the work that can be done with a set amount of power.
No other material you can come up with will increase the work being done against that spring with a set amount of power as show in my simple experiment.

Like all other self acclaimed guru's,you fail at providing a simple answer,and the reason is-you have none.The electrical power remains the same,and yet the work done against the spring is increased simply by adding a PM into the system. You deny the outcome,and yet you have no argument against it.

#### Jimboot

• Hero Member
• Posts: 1398
##### Re: Partnered Output Coils - Free Energy
« Reply #4844 on: July 19, 2015, 01:48:01 PM »
Yes these are the problems. It's the same with digital music vs analog music. Analog music is complete as captured but digital music is just the analog music sliced and diced then put back together. There is always something lost in the translation. Same goes for scopes or other digital measuring systems.
I'm sorry I missed your question.
That used to be the case but at the sample rates these days it's near impossible to hear the difference. now I'm confused though. Based on marks comment on newer scopes vs older ones should I go for an analogue one or purchase the rigor I'm looking at? I guess that is a question for TK