Free Energy | searching for free energy and discussing free energy

New theories about free energy systems => Understanding OverUnity => Topic started by: pauldude000 on November 17, 2016, 03:39:04 AM

Title: Why Over-Unity is Possible
Post by: pauldude000 on November 17, 2016, 03:39:04 AM

Over-Unity Vs the Law of Conservation of Energy


The law of conservation of energy states that, inside a closed (isolated) system, the total energy remains constant. IE, Energy can neither be created nor destroyed, but can only be transformed. This is true.


This law is applied towards the concept of over-unity as a negation, in that, if energy can neither be created nor destroyed and that the energy within an isolated system must remain constant, then no more energy can be taken from a system than is put into the system. Sounds logical, correct?


Wrong.


The problem is that the people applying the law are misapplying it. Most are unconsciously limiting the measurement of the system. A few do it consciously. There exists a bias in science toward the notion of perpetual motion, when in reality, perpetual motion systems abound in this universe.


Consider electrons. Electrons zip around their atoms, eon after eon, generating their minuscule magnetic fields without any energy being added to the system, though they are by definition giving off energy due to their motion through space/time in seeming direct confliction with the law of conservation of energy and the process of entropy. 


Cosmologists are constantly faced with the big picture. They are forced to deal with the only truly isolated system in the universe, which is the universe as a whole. All other systems within the main system are but non-isolated subsystems of the whole. Cosmologists are starting to understand that space/time itself contains energy, even without the presence of either light or matter.  They are discovering that space/time actively interacts with matter, imparting energy to said matter, and that this principle is responsible for the increase in speed of the expansion of the universe, instead of slowing down due to entropy as previously thought. It is only on cosmological scales that you find systems that can be truly called 'isolated' in any real sense.


What this means, in reference to the concept of over-unity, is that all forms of energy upon a sub-system must be accounted for to determine unity and to consider the subsystem as being 'isolated' to apply the law and the process accurately. Basically, over-unity does not exist in reality, though over-unity CAN exist in practicality due to our lack of understanding of the energy acting upon the sub-system.


For instance, if I hook up a nine-volt battery to an electronic circuit, to power said circuit, can I say it is the only energy acting upon the circuit? If the circuit is unshielded, then I can list numerous forms of energy sources right now which can act upon every wire, coil, and circuit trace within said circuit from outside sources. Many of these energy sources would not produce electricity, such as gravity. Many others might. Some, like electromagnetic waves produced by house wiring, radio towers, power lines, cellphone towers, etc., all the way to lighting strikes and electromagnetic storms in space would all generate from the immeasurable to quantitative amounts of energy within that supposedly isolated 'system'. This electrical generation would be either additive or subtractive to the input of the nine-volt battery when considering the total available energy within the sub-system. This energy usually is given the name -- interference -- and every electrical engineer designing circuitry must find ways to eliminate it for proper circuit function.


I restate, the main reason for the possibility of over-unity is a misapplication of the term isolated system.


Though this may sound stupid, one good example of an over-unity device is a circuit run by a solar cell. It is a matter of subjective perspective. To an 19th century physicist, it would have been almost magic. To an early 20th century physicist, it would have been perpetual motion. to a 21th century physicist, it is what powers their calculators and energizes their house. The problem is that energy can be converted from one form to another. Heat and light, among other probable energy sources, can be converted directly to electricity. However, before their processes were understood, peltier junction devices, solar cells, etc., would have all been deemed over-unity or perpetual motion due to the misapplication of the very laws and processes in question.


Another area for over-unity is a misjudgment of efficiency. If I state that conversion of electricity to heat through a resistance is the best measurement of efficiency, I would be a laughable idiot. Unity is 100% efficiency, or complete conversion with no losses. Many devices could claim over-unity simply because they are more efficient than the standard of measurement used for comparison.


What over-unity researchers are looking for is actually the newest form of 'solar cell', so to speak; a device that transforms one form of energy to another or greater efficiency than the measuring standard. If either is achieved, then the researcher has temporarily achieved over-unity -- until the process is understood and the measuring standards are reset. After that, they simply 'discovered a new solar cell'. 


Paul Andrulis







Title: Re: Why Over-Unity is Possible
Post by: jbignes5 on November 17, 2016, 04:00:59 AM
 Very good!
 Just what I have been saying for years now.
 I agree 100%. Good job.
Title: Re: Why Over-Unity is Possible
Post by: allcanadian on November 17, 2016, 08:10:53 AM
That was a good post.

The fist problem with overunity is that it implies more than unity which is not be the case. It is in effect a perceptual problem which relates to people with a superficial mind set which they falsely call common sense. On the other hand intelligent more informed people tend to look past simple surface effects and try to understand concepts and processes in a more all encompassing or universal sense.

What many fail to grasp is the concept of "Energy" more so all Energy in a universal sense. For instance if energy is truly conserved then where does all the energy go from the trillions upon trillions of stars not unlike our Sun throughout the universe?. Energy cannot just disappear thus the whole universe must be full of Energy which radiated from every star for billions upon billions of years in every direction saturating every space. As such there is no need to imagine where all energy comes from as we already know because "energy is conserved".

As you implied, we do have a very real conceptual problem with energy and also with ways and means to extract energy in a practical manner. That is we know we are swimming in a sea of energy and energy is conserved however finding practical ways to utilize the various forms of energy is an issue. This relates back to the superficial mind set and it helps to understand that probably 95% of the population still equates energy with the burning of things to create energy which is actually a transformation of energy. As such the Energy crisis is actually an understanding crisis which relates to false perceptions and popular opinions.

The problem with energy isn't all that difficult to understand in a general sense. The whole universe and matter are saturated with energy in various forms relating to the Primary Fields (Electric, Magnetic and Gravic). All tangible matter is 99% fields and 1% matter and all space is saturated with the Primary fields otherwise energy could not translate from one place to another nor could it be conserved. Thus the access point to unlimited energy is not with simple physical interactions but Primary Field interactions relating to matter. That is we manipulate the primary fields in various ways to create an energy sink which allows us to access the greater universal field energy.

I also use the solar cell as an example for all free energy devices and the process is in fact very similar. We could say a free energy device simply uses different parts of the Electro-Magnetic spectrum rather than visible light like a solar cell which is why it works 24/7.  Consider the fact that a solar cell does in fact work all of the time 24/7 in outer space when facing the Sun and you get the picture. Thus the only time a solar cell does not work all the time is on Earth because our planet is rotating. In 99% of the rest of the universe a solar cell does work all the time to some degree because of star light so our perception in this respect is very biased. Earth is not the universe... it is a very small place and an exception to most other places in the universe.

The moment we open our mind and use a more universal mind set free of superficial views free energy is fairly easy to understand if not obvious in my opinion.

AC
Title: Re: Why Over-Unity is Possible
Post by: Zephir on November 17, 2016, 12:43:12 PM
IMO the energy gets preserved across dimensions, so that once our world isn't strictly 3-dimensional, then the energy can leak from/into our space-time. It's an analogy of the surface wave scattering at the water surface - the two-dimensional surface ripples (analogy of light) are complemented there with more subtle longitudinal waves (analogy of scalar waves of vacuum), which spread across third dimension of it. The higher dimensions manifest itself for example with vacuum fluctuations and/or with orbital/angular polarization of light. Therefore the draining the energy from vacuum fluctuations is analogous (https://www.reddit.com/r/Physics_AWT/comments/2n51z8/simplest_theory_of_overunity_devices_possible/?ref=search_posts) to the extraction of energy from underwater sound waves with surface waves at the water surface.

The simplest way how to imagine it is the rectifying of thermal voltage fluctuations of material. Once we use 3D diode for it, then these fluctuations will compensate itself with thermal fluctuations of diode itself, so that we cannot get the energy from it. But if we would use 2D diode (for example in form of carbon nanotubes), then the voltage induced at the diode will become larger than the average voltage spikes within bulk of material, so we can utilize them in an external devices. The key in utilization of negentropy phenomena is therefore usage of low-dimensional materials: the superconductors, topological insulators, graphene and ferromagnetics in monopole arrangement, during which the motion of electrons get spatially constrained.
Title: Re: Why Over-Unity is Possible
Post by: conradelektro on November 17, 2016, 01:27:07 PM
For me the biggest hole in the physics world view of today is the notion that the electron spinning (or whatever it is doing) around the nucleus does not need an energy source. A similar strange concept is that a permanent magnet stuck to a steel ceiling does not need an energy source to hold its own weight (or even more than its own weight).

Once this energy source is discovered new ways to convert it to e.g. electricity or heat will be available.

May be this mysterious energy source is a basic feature of space time.

The sun will not shine forever, but on the human scale it is an endless energy source. In a similar way space time will not provide energy forever (to spin the electrons and to hold permanent magnets) but even on a cosmological scale it might seem to be endless.

To put it in a very naïve way: the big bang created this basic energy source and it is slowly spent by whatever exists. It might take eons till it is completely used up (dissipated) and it will take a new big bang to start all over.

My hope is that we detect this underlying energy of space time and can use it eventually. Like the electron or the permanent magnet we might be able to tap into this underlying energy source.

Greetings, Conrad
Title: Re: Why Over-Unity is Possible
Post by: memoryman on November 17, 2016, 03:35:42 PM
"A similar strange concept is that a permanent magnet stuck to a steel ceiling does not need an energy source to hold its own weight (or even more than its own weight)." it does not need an energy source because no WORK is being done and no ENERGY is used.
Title: Re: Why Over-Unity is Possible
Post by: jbignes5 on November 17, 2016, 04:37:53 PM
For me the biggest hole in the physics world view of today is the notion that the electron spinning (or whatever it is doing) around the nucleus does not need an energy source. A similar strange concept is that a permanent magnet stuck to a steel ceiling does not need an energy source to hold its own weight (or even more than its own weight).

Once this energy source is discovered new ways to convert it to e.g. electricity or heat will be available.

May be this mysterious energy source is a basic feature of space time.

The sun will not shine forever, but on the human scale it is an endless energy source. In a similar way space time will not provide energy forever (to spin the electrons and to hold permanent magnets) but even on a cosmological scale it might seem to be endless.

To put it in a very naïve way: the big bang created this basic energy source and it is slowly spent by whatever exists. It might take eons till it is completely used up (dissipated) and it will take a new big bang to start all over.

My hope is that we detect this underlying energy of space time and can use it eventually. Like the electron or the permanent magnet we might be able to tap into this underlying energy source.

Greetings, Conrad

 Well they are different concepts you are wrestling with.

 Lets take an electron. The energy we assume is there is actually from the body of the matter itself in an electric field. This is the energy of the electron which is actually a ghost charge or reflection of the atom or electrical condition of matter itself. Since matter is in an electric field provided by a plasma field it has a never ending supply of potential energy and simply attracts more plasma to it's center. Plasma's form double layers and those are the electron shells so to speak.
 A magnet is a wholly different aspect. Take a material that is magnetically sensitive and heat it up to it's currie temperature, phase change, and apply a high magnetic field to it and let the material drop below that currie temperature, which locks in that magnetic flow within the matters whole body. Does the magnetic device now do work? Yes it does. Even if it is just stuck to the ceiling it is still working to stay where it is against gravity. It's capability to do that work has been locked into the matter itself. Now heat that stuck magnet up and it will fall away unable to maintain even it's own weight. Care to reason why heat does this? Heat is a form of energy. When you heat something up it expands. What exactly is expanding then? The plasma bound between the matter is the answer or plasmoids to be exact.
 
Lets reason what magnetism is then. Magnetism in all intense and purpose is high density plasma flowing in sheaths. A magnet is nothing more then matter that has been highly electrified drawing in a higher density of plasma from it's surrounding and then allowed to cool with that higher density of plasma bound in between the matter of the magnet. Once this is done it locks in the plasma flows almost permanently. Meaning if you raise the heat or charges into the magnet it spreads the distance between the matter and some of the plasma leaks away or becomes unbound.

 We can simulate a magnet via the electric field and matter being in that electric field can become more magnetic or have an increased plasma density to it via the electric field. Magnetism is the plasma condensed into a flow. Magnetism is a very conservative field. Meaning it can not become non conservative so it must change into a potential field again if matter is not there to hold it. Plasma wants to be uniform across the body of that plasma. Plasma is highly reactive to the electric field which is non conservative in nature. Plasma is not a state of matter it is everywhere that matter is not. That even includes between matters components. Plasma connects all matter because matter displaces the plasma field to a certain degree. This causes matters "energy" we see via a vacuum of plasma. But the plasma want to be even and seeks out the vacuum and flows to the greatest vacuum presented to the plasma field trying to fulfill it's job of maintaining uniformity to that plasma field.

 Now this leads me to the Big Bang you mentioned. Entropy is the mechanic we need to apply here. But we must not forget that there are events happening in the Universe that churn up the system. Between two solid bodies of plasma matter divides the plasma. It has density lower then the two solid bodies of plasma or condensed plasma. These bodies can be light years apart and light years in size. When matter explodes into space it churns up the plasma bodies creating chaos from the stillness of the whole plasma body and increases the division of the plasma. It is in a never ending cycle of this. Order to chaos and back to order again etc. Matter knows about the rest of the matter within that plasma field because of the electric field within that plasma body. It knows instantly when a particle or atom of matter moves within that field because plasma is bound by the electric field and instant communication across that body of plasma is a law. If not then we would have surely flew away from our sun if the speed of light was a factor in gravity. We know it takes 8 minutes for light to travel from the Sun to the Earth. If the speed of light was a determining factor in how we circle the Sun then 8 minutes would be enough time to sling us out into space from our orbit. Yet here we are.

 Ok so I mentioned Gravity. Here it goes..
 Gravity is nothing but the plasma condensed from our Sun around our planet trying to flow to the vacuum of plasma in the center of our planet. Remember matter displaces plasma. Around our planet are double layers of plasma densities. The highest densities are nearer to the ionosphere. This is because of the higher voltage present in that layer, around +365k Volts. Plasma conducts electric potentials right? The lack of plasma conducts less right?
 Now the density of plasma around our planet and it's change in density is what gravity is. You could understand this quite easily by this analogy: Take the same mechanics we see in a body of water and apply it upside down above the water. When a body of matter is tossed high above the surface of the water it is buoyant to the surface just like it happens in water. Lets take helium as an example as well. This would be like throwing a stone in the water. It is less buoyant then water and sinks to the bottom of the water. Helium is less buoyant then the plasma surrounding our planet so it sinks to the bottom of the inverted water scenario.  This is due to the plasma trapped in between the atoms of helium. Like likes like, even in the density of plasma.

 Now these are not the whole truth about these situations. Only what I have worked out with many others in this field. I am trying to devise ways to prove this beyond a shadow of doubt. It will take some time.

 I'm at the point that I can relate a standing wave around matter to the plasma layers around that matter. The electron shells are merely increased conduction paths forming the standing wave patter we see. No need for additional energy in that system as I can tell and the charges we impart to matter do work via those layers around that matter.

 One way to take advantage of the situation as I see it is to increase the plasma density and let it flow to a natural source of displacement of that plasma we target for the vacuum action. Increased plasma allows for better conduction both in matter and free space. Increase it's density and channel it through your device and allow it to flow out. Generation is merely passive at that point hooking to a type of hose analogy. Constrict the flow and the potential raises via the z-pinch rule, just like what happens when you constrict the flow of water in a hose raises the pressure behind the pinch and increases the speed of that water and the force it imparts.
Title: Re: Why Over-Unity is Possible
Post by: MT on November 17, 2016, 04:55:54 PM
"A similar strange concept is that a permanent magnet stuck to a steel ceiling does not need an energy source to hold its own weight (or even more than its own weight)." it does not need an energy source because no WORK is being done and no ENERGY is used.


Hi,
Thats typical answer from physics..


But consider the following example:
To the ceiling is via magnet attached a sack with bullets. Now you add additional bullets till the sack with final weight M falls to the ground.
I hope we can agree that kinetic energy of the sack at the ground will be smaller comparing to the normal fall  from the same height as magnet slows down the fall.
Now, where is this energy difference lost? Gravity performed work. So did magnet preventing fall at the beginning. So who paid for this slowdown?


Marcel
Title: Re: Why Over-Unity is Possible
Post by: conradelektro on November 17, 2016, 05:23:17 PM

"A similar strange concept is that a permanent magnet stuck to a steel ceiling does not need an energy source to hold its own weight (or even more than its own weight)." it does not need an energy source because no WORK is being done and no ENERGY is used.

Thank you for mentioning the standard explanation. I was aware of it but it sounds like the teleological argument https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Teleological_argument (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Teleological_argument) . It is a clever logical word play and I have no good counter argument besides that it sounds tricky.

@ jbignes5: I am overhelmed, too much for me, I can not follow your arguments, they might be right.

I like the Em Drive Engine http://en.yibada.com/articles/157695/20160906/aiaa-will-publish-peer-reviewed-study-controversial-em-drive-engine.htm (http://en.yibada.com/articles/157695/20160906/aiaa-will-publish-peer-reviewed-study-controversial-em-drive-engine.htm) which points to some underlying reality (underneath the quantum reality might be more).

Greetings, Conrad
Title: Re: Why Over-Unity is Possible
Post by: memoryman on November 17, 2016, 05:46:31 PM
"It is a clever logical word play and I have no good counter argument besides that it sounds tricky." why do you think it's a 'word play'? "It sounds tricky"; as an argument that is equivalent to saying 'it does not feel right'; neither is a scientific argument.
Title: Re: Why Over-Unity is Possible
Post by: conradelektro on November 17, 2016, 06:38:38 PM

"It is a clever logical word play and I have no good counter argument besides that it sounds tricky." why do you think it's a 'word play'? "It sounds tricky"; as an argument that is equivalent to saying 'it does not feel right'; neither is a scientific argument.

Why it is a tricky argument: current theory demands that no work is done otherwise it would break down. And of course the assumption is made that no work is done. This is kind of circular.

But if you are happy with the "no work is done" explanation, so be it.

What is a scientific argument: on the fundamental level most arguments are axiomatic https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Axiom (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Axiom) , meaning they are assumed and can not be proven. So, it comes down to belief. There might be many arguments leading to an axoim (to a belief), but in the end there is no proof just assumption.

So, within the assumptions (the axioms established by the establishment) of current physics theory "no work is allowed to be done".

The "no work is done" explanation sounds to me more like a requirement than a proven fact. And you might call that feeling unscientific.

Axioms are the end of every scientific argument, believe the axiom or do not believe it. Both is scientific.

I do not want to convince any one. I am reporting a feeling or an impression which is always dificult to convey or to be understood by others. I have the feeling that the axioms leading to the "no work is done" assumption are not sound.

Fore someone believing in an axiom it might be unscientific to question this axiom. But this is for sure unscientific, because it would exclude discussion of axioms.

Greetings, Conrad
Title: Re: Why Over-Unity is Possible
Post by: conradelektro on November 17, 2016, 07:10:26 PM


Hi,
Thats typical answer from physics..

But consider the following example:
To the ceiling is via magnet attached a sack with bullets. Now you add additional bullets till the sack with final weight M falls to the ground.
I hope we can agree that kinetic energy of the sack at the ground will be smaller comparing to the normal fall  from the same height as magnet slows down the fall.
Now, where is this energy difference lost? Gravity performed work. So did magnet preventing fall at the beginning. So who paid for this slowdown?

Marcel

This example is exactly what makes me feel uneasy with the "no work is done " requirement (according to me it is not a proved fact but a requirement of current theory).

Similar problems exist with the requirement that "the electron does not need energy to spin around the nucleus" (according to me it is not a proved fact but also a requirement of current theory).

But who am I? I do not want to convince any body, I know much too little and every person versed in the slang of current physics theory could talk me down in an instant.

Hopefully science will progress and more about the underlying reality (beyond particle physics) will be understood. The particle zoo is just too crazy to be the last word. I think I understand quantum weirdness, but there should be more underneath which will explain it.

Greetings, Conrad
Title: Re: Why Over-Unity is Possible
Post by: pauldude000 on November 17, 2016, 09:00:11 PM
"It is a clever logical word play and I have no good counter argument besides that it sounds tricky." why do you think it's a 'word play'? "It sounds tricky"; as an argument that is equivalent to saying 'it does not feel right'; neither is a scientific argument.


It is actually not word play. Gravity imposes a 9.18 meter per sec/ per sec downwards acceleration on the hypothetical magnet. For the magnet to stay motionless on the ceiling, it is applying an equal to or greater acceleration upwards. There is a definitive measurable acceleration and therefore is doing work; the fact that subjectively it seems motionless to the observer is irrelevant.


Hold a neodymium magnet 1/2" from a steel plate on the ceiling and you will see the work being done, when the magnet leaps to the plate. Motion in the form of acceleration is required for work. Visible motion(subjective) relative to the observer is not a requirement of work.
Title: Re: Why Over-Unity is Possible
Post by: pauldude000 on November 17, 2016, 10:01:38 PM
I will demonstrate my point with the magnet.
W=Fd (Work equals Force times distance)
F=W/d (Force equals Work divided by the distance)


If this ended here, that would be that, so to speak. However, there is more than one way to skin a cat, again so to speak. Yes, I like colloquialisms.


F=ma (Net Force equals mass times acceleration)


So, we are stuck with distance, and since the magnet appears to be stationary, how does that work?


d=vt (distance equals velocity times time)


Therefore, a 5g magnet hanging on the ceiling, overcoming a 9.18 ms/s downwards acceleration to remain at equilibrium yields:


F=45.9 Newtons
d= 9.18 meters is the distance the magnet has to move every second to overcome gravity.
W= 5 Joules per second required to remain in equilibrium.


If the 5g magnet were an electromagnet, those 5 Joules would be in electricity. Whether talking natural or artificial magnet fields makes no difference, as the work is still 5 Joules per second.




Title: Re: Why Over-Unity is Possible
Post by: Zephir on November 17, 2016, 10:07:58 PM
For me the biggest hole in the physics world view of today is the notion that the electron spinning (or whatever it is doing) around the nucleus does not need an energy source. A similar strange concept is that a permanent magnet stuck to a steel ceiling does not need an energy source to hold its own weight (or even more than its own weight). Once this energy source is discovered new ways to convert it to e.g. electricity or heat will be available.
In dense aether theory the life inside the vacuum corresponds the life inside the oven on the surface of molten iron. Because our environment is actually very hot, it keeps the currents inside the superconductors and magnets in neverending motion in similar way, like the Brownian motion at the water surface keeps tiny particles in motion.

But this analogy still doesn't provides the way, how to draw the energy from this motion. Even if the vacuum is very hot, we need to have colder places in it for to utilize its power. Even the life inside the hot oven doesn't provide the way, how to utilize this heat until no colder surface is accessible.
Title: Re: Why Over-Unity is Possible
Post by: shylo on November 17, 2016, 11:23:17 PM
I will demonstrate my point with the magnet.
W=Fd (Work equals Force times distance)
F=W/d (Force equals Work divided by the distance)


If this ended here, that would be that, so to speak. However, there is more than one way to skin a cat, again so to speak. Yes, I like colloquialisms.


F=ma (Net Force equals mass times acceleration)


So, we are stuck with distance, and since the magnet appears to be stationary, how does that work?


d=vt (distance equals velocity times time)


Therefore, a 5g magnet hanging on the ceiling, overcoming a 9.18 ms/s downwards acceleration to remain at equilibrium yields:


F=45.9 Newtons
d= 9.18 meters is the distance the magnet has to move every second to overcome gravity.
W= 5 Joules per second required to remain in equilibrium.


If the 5g magnet were an electromagnet, those 5 Joules would be in electricity. Whether talking natural or artificial magnet fields makes no difference, as the work is still 5 Joules per second.
I agree.
Now add multiple fluxuating fields, it changes everything.
artv
Title: Re: Why Over-Unity is Possible
Post by: norman6538 on November 18, 2016, 01:50:56 AM
Overunity does exist.

1. the Finsrud rolling ball.

2. my pendulum that is dropped from 2 o'clock and goes down and up to almost
noon and then is not stuck there.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4FzK2XKQ-74
This pendulum starts at 2 oclock and drops past 10 oclock and on
up to noon and then falls down to 6 without getting stuck at any of the magnet 
sticky spots along the way. It is a careful tuning of magnet, gravity and inertia 
forces that make it work. The question is where does the energy come from to make 
it pass 9 oclock? Pendulums normally do not pass their dropping point.
There are no batteries or anything hidden - just magnets and a pendulum carefully 
arranged and adjusted to get that extra 2 hrs of motion. It would be similar to 
the Finsrud device in very simple terms but does not run itself.
I wanted this to be very simple so there can be no arguments.
The magnet under the paper pointer is vertical and a neo while the radial magnets
 are lying down flat all in the same polarity.
I place them on metal to make it easy to make fine adjustments.
The very sad thing is that not one person has even tried to replicate it.


3. and my slider  here
http://www.overunity.com/14876/permanent-magnet-ou-machine-working-today/msg414883/#msg414883
   
But who cares ??
 
Norman

Title: Re: Why Over-Unity is Possible
Post by: memoryman on November 18, 2016, 03:35:15 AM
pauldude000:
1: "W= 5 Joules per second" is wrong use of units.
2: "d= 9.18 meters is the distance the magnet has to move every second to overcome gravity." the magnet DOES NOT MOVE. That is the point.
Without rigor in the use of units, the result is wrong.
Title: Re: Why Over-Unity is Possible
Post by: pauldude000 on November 18, 2016, 08:07:08 AM
pauldude000:
1: "W= 5 Joules per second" is wrong use of units.
2: "d= 9.18 meters is the distance the magnet has to move every second to overcome gravity." the magnet DOES NOT MOVE. That is the point.
Without rigor in the use of units, the result is wrong.


1. Work is measured in Joules. I demonstrated work over a period of one second, so it is indeed 5 Joules per second. Look it up if you don't believe me. I can provide a link (or several) if you need.


2. I cannot help if you are falling prey to an optical illusion. Discounting velocities because they are inconvenient to your philosophy doesn't help your case.


Here is an experiment that will demonstrate your error in logic.


Experiment: Take said 5g magnet and touch it to a steel plate mounted to the ceiling. At the same time, take a 5g brass weight and place it next to the magnet and let go.


The brass weight is the same mass and gravity is exerting the same downward acceleration upon it as it does the magnet. You will find that the brass weight immediately accelerates downward to the floor at 9.18 Ms/s. That is the normal acceleration of a mass in that instance. You can repeat it with another type of nonmagnetic matter weighing 5g if you wish. The fact that the magnet APPEARS motionless is an optical illusion. It is accelerating upwards at equal or greater speed than gravity is accelerating it downwards, as the brass weight demonstrated. What this means is that the relative motion of the magnet is equal to or greater than 9.18 Ms/s. The magnetism is moving the mass of the magnet not the other way around -- you just can't see it, though you can indeed measure the motion by the apparent lack of motion which SHOULD be there.


Another way to look at it. Take a 500g electromagnet of sufficient strength to hold it against the same steel plate on the ceiling as the previous logical experiment. Hook up the current and measure the amount of energy used to hold it in place. Next -- turn off the switch. If no work is being done, then the net work is zero Joules and no energy is required. If no work is being done, then even with the switch off the electromagnet will miraculously stay on the ceiling. Something tells me that isn't going to be the result, just call it a hunch.

Title: Re: Why Over-Unity is Possible
Post by: forest on November 18, 2016, 08:42:09 AM
I proposed long time ago a quite simple (for the scientists) experiment. Look here https://www.ted.com/talks/boaz_almog_levitates_a_superconductor?language=pl

I proposed to construct the most powerful magnet in the form of sheet around the tiny superconductor with isolation between them so it will looks like a round sheet piece of metal. The magnet must be very powerfull and ll must withstand low temperatures.

NOW , you may realize what I'm about. if that complex structure is able to levitate ALONE when put in very low temperature then we have a massive amount of data to modify our current theories.
Title: Re: Why Over-Unity is Possible
Post by: lancaIV on November 18, 2016, 09:03:22 AM
http://translationportal.epo.org/emtp/translate/?ACTION=description-retrieval&COUNTRY=DE&ENGINE=google&FORMAT=docdb&KIND=A1&LOCALE=en_EP&NUMBER=19706659&OPS=ops.epo.org/3.2&SRCLANG=de&TRGLANG=en (http://translationportal.epo.org/emtp/translate/?ACTION=description-retrieval&COUNTRY=DE&ENGINE=google&FORMAT=docdb&KIND=A1&LOCALE=en_EP&NUMBER=19706659&OPS=ops.epo.org/3.2&SRCLANG=de&TRGLANG=en)

  I = 13,8 mA und U = 3 V                                Zugkräfte= traction forces about f.e. 1.000 N
   
                                                                        Hubkraft =  lifting    force ?


For the above concept instead /or with battery  a thermocouple/thermopile arrangement to get the high magnetic field force :
http://translationportal.epo.org/emtp/translate/?ACTION=description-retrieval&COUNTRY=DE&ENGINE=google&FORMAT=docdb&KIND=A1&LOCALE=en_EP&NUMBER=102004020962&OPS=ops.epo.org/3.2&SRCLANG=de&TRGLANG=en (http://translationportal.epo.org/emtp/translate/?ACTION=description-retrieval&COUNTRY=DE&ENGINE=google&FORMAT=docdb&KIND=A1&LOCALE=en_EP&NUMBER=102004020962&OPS=ops.epo.org/3.2&SRCLANG=de&TRGLANG=en)
Title: Re: Why Over-Unity is Possible
Post by: bitbo on November 18, 2016, 01:26:20 PM
I hope we can agree that kinetic energy of the sack at the ground will be smaller comparing to the normal fall  from the same height as magnet slows down the fall.
Yes, everyone here should agree !



[/size]Now, where is this energy difference lost?
Gravity performed work.
So did magnet preventing fall at the beginning.
So who paid for this "slowdown"? Marcel
You gained a "speedup" when attaching the bullets ti the magnet!
(the magnet "liftet" the bullets the last centimeter - your hand did not need to lift the bullets the last centimeter)


Just my 2 cents [/size]
Title: Re: Why Over-Unity is Possible
Post by: memoryman on November 18, 2016, 02:16:33 PM
As i said, get your units straight.
"It is accelerating upwards at equal or greater speed than gravity is accelerating it downwards, as the brass weight demonstrated. What this means is that the relative motion of the magnet is equal to or greater than 9.18 Ms/s." you meant : 9.18 m/s^2.
The magnet is attracted to the plate by an force > than g; the plate exerts a downward force so that the magnet remains motionless. The magnet does not move wrt the plate.
Title: Re: Why Over-Unity is Possible
Post by: MT on November 19, 2016, 10:02:41 AM
You gained a "speedup" when attaching the bullets ti the magnet!
(the magnet "liftet" the bullets the last centimeter - your hand did not need to lift the bullets the last centimeter)


Yes, just this is another typical physics answer. A magnetic object in a magnetic field is somehow "precharged" to energy needed to get it out of there. Similarly in gravitation field an object at height h is somehow "precharged" to potential energy equals mgh. Using those concepts energy is conserved, there is no gain, total sum is zero.
But still gravity or magnetism can and does perform work. Where it gets it energy from? I can lift bullets to the bucket at ceiling but i need calories for this work. Then last centimeter is lifted by magnet. Eventually bucket will detach and fall down by gravity doing work. Did gravity or magnet got weaker by working? apparently not. Did they got energy for foing this from the teoretical physical concepts so it all fits the conservation law? This is hard to believe.
So what is the source that provides for gravity force that can perform infinite amounts of work?




Title: Re: Why Over-Unity is Possible
Post by: pauldude000 on November 20, 2016, 04:03:25 AM
As i said, get your units straight.
"It is accelerating upwards at equal or greater speed than gravity is accelerating it downwards, as the brass weight demonstrated. What this means is that the relative motion of the magnet is equal to or greater than 9.18 Ms/s." you meant : 9.18 m/s^2.
The magnet is attracted to the plate by an force > than g; the plate exerts a downward force so that the magnet remains motionless. The magnet does not move wrt the plate.


Actually, where my error comes in is saying 9.18 instead of 9.81 (9.806 to be more correct) Meters per second, per second. (Often referred to as s^2). Your reference and quote of my words in response to your claim of my units being incorrect was specifically concerning using Joules for work. Since Joules are the standard measurement of work, you were wrong. I did make an error, but you didn't even catch it.


Now, you are basically using the classic teachers work explanation model of the hypothetical waiter's tray. Once lifted to a position it requires no work to keep it in that position. However, anyone but a high-school level physics grad knows that such an example carries a caveat, in that it is true only if no other force is acting upon the tray. In our case, and in a real world case even considering the waiter's tray, this force is gravity. That type of purely mechanistic scenario ONLY deals with inertia and only works if the waiter can remove his support from the tray and it remains motionless (say on some spaceship sufficiently far from a significant source of gravity) which demonstrates no work is necessary to maintain the position of said tray.


This type of 'work' is often referred to stupidly as 'negative work', in that it is a matter of philosophy that someone had to invent such a silly notion, all because of an inherently badly worded and misleading moronic base definition. However, there is logically only work.

By the way, who cares if the magnet moves in relation to the plate? A drunk driver is not moving relative to the car that he used to smash through a brick wall, but that proves exactly the same thing as your example -- nothing. The plate is not the issue. Gravity and the magnetic force acting upon the mass of the magnet are the issue. The only purpose for the plate  in the scenario is that it will give the magnetic field something to pull against. The scenario could be easily modified by stating that the field of the magnet is capable of lifting only the 5g mass of the magnet, and your notation becomes irrelevant anyway, since the weight of the magnet itself cancels out any supposed pressure applied by the plate.
Title: Re: Why Over-Unity is Possible
Post by: memoryman on November 20, 2016, 02:42:09 PM
I did catch your errors, but concentrated on specific ones. Joule is unfortunately used both as a unit of work and energy; hence confusion. Your arguments and analogies are faulty. That's why nobody actually produces OU. They just talk about it. That's also why I usually respond with minimal words; I have better things to do than convincing flat earthers.
Title: Re: Why Over-Unity is Possible
Post by: pauldude000 on November 21, 2016, 09:01:18 AM
I did catch your errors, but concentrated on specific ones. Joule is unfortunately used both as a unit of work and energy; hence confusion. Your arguments and analogies are faulty. That's why nobody actually produces OU. They just talk about it. That's also why I usually respond with minimal words; I have better things to do than convincing flat earthers.


Such snarkiness! (E for effort I guess.)


Yes, Joules are used for both energy and work. I wonder why.


It couldn't be that energy is the ability to do work, therefore when work is done the amount is expressed in the amount of energy used. :-) (The two definitions are tied together, that's why.)


No confusion here son. Just claiming my arguments and analogies are faulty without demonstrating why is a cop-out.
 



Title: Re: Why Over-Unity is Possible
Post by: allcanadian on November 22, 2016, 06:05:07 PM
@Paul
Quote
Experiment: Take said 5g magnet and touch it to a steel plate mounted to the ceiling. At the same time, take a 5g brass weight and place it next to the magnet and let go.

Experiment: Take said 5g magnet and touch it to a steel plate mounted to the ceiling. At the same time, take a 5g brass weight with double sided tape attached and stick it next to the magnet and let go.

As we can see there is little difference between a magnetic field and a piece of double sided tape and both would seem to defy the force of gravity. Understand gravity is not an acceleration but a force which may cause an acceleration. As well the work (a force acting through a distance) performed when the magnet stuck to the plate is equal to the work required to remove it... sum zero.

On the issue of free energy and magnets all that is required is to change the work performed in removing a magnet from the mutual field of attraction it has induced in another object. It does not matter how we do this only that we do and if the total change in work is greater than the work required to invoke the change to remove the magnet then we have produced a gain in the system. Can it be done?, some patents have suggested it can be done however for us this remains to be seen.

AC
Title: Re: Why Over-Unity is Possible
Post by: memoryman on November 22, 2016, 06:58:35 PM
Well said, Paul.Energy is conservative, but WORK is not...
Now start to think about how this can be used.
Title: Re: Why Over-Unity is Possible
Post by: pauldude000 on November 22, 2016, 10:22:51 PM
@Paul
Experiment: Take said 5g magnet and touch it to a steel plate mounted to the ceiling. At the same time, take a 5g brass weight with double sided tape attached and stick it next to the magnet and let go.

As we can see there is little difference between a magnetic field and a piece of double sided tape and both would seem to defy the force of gravity. Understand gravity is not an acceleration but a force which may cause an acceleration. As well the work (a force acting through a distance) performed when the magnet stuck to the plate is equal to the work required to remove it... sum zero.


The sticky tape analogy is extremely loose, basically another illusion. Similarity in behavior does not yield equivalence unless all of the factors are equally equivalent. What we have with a magnet vs the tape is that the tape mechanically bonds the mass to another mass, making the two into one as far as gravity is concerned. With the magnet, it is falling, but being pulled in the opposite direction at an equal or greater rate by a different force.


I agree that if we were approaching this matter on the quantum level, it would get a lot fuzzier in clarity. This is especially true since every interaction between the packets we collectively call matter are merely field interactions of various types, but we are working with the macroscopic scale and are therefore approaching this with a mechanistic viewpoint. However, we cannot blind ourselves by using it exclusively.


The problem I have with the definition of work is that it actually allows violation of the conservation principle due to an old, outmoded notion of the concept we call work. Any system which does not move an object, but necessarily expends energy is a violation of the conservation principle. Due to the work definition, since no mass was moved spatially, no work is done. However, energy is the capability of doing work. Energy as a term can be looked at as potential or kinetic. Stored energy (no work) is potential, expended energy is kinetic. No work being done requires conservation of the energy in the system. Therefore we end up with a paradox due to definition. The magnet scenario has to expend energy to overcome a force, therefore energy is being used. If no work is being performed, then no questions have been answered, only new ones raised.


With our current understandings, the definition of work should be the expenditure of energy within a system. This would inherently open up the concept to account for new understandings of field and force interactions, while still maintaining all of the laws.
Title: Re: Why Over-Unity is Possible
Post by: pauldude000 on November 22, 2016, 11:35:03 PM
Well said, Paul.Energy is conservative, but WORK is not...
Now start to think about how this can be used.


That in itself is a good question. Technically, no energy should be able to be drawn out of any situation in equilibrium. In the magnet example, energy is coming from somewhere (probably directly from space/time) to both create and maintain the field (potential), and do any work. 


I have seen many ideas on a magnet motor, but most strike me as improbable in their function. To extract energy from any system, either energy must be inserted artificially to overcome negative forces and/or system losses, the energy can be directly converted to a useful form, or it has to have an inherent or artificial energy imbalance within the system that can be exploited.


If these energy principles were either easy or obvious, we would have had solar cells and generators in the 1500's, LOL.


Most of the principles we accept as common today were discovered fairly recently in history, yet they were evident all throughout human history. We need to re-examine our base knowledge looking for anomalous discrepancies that don't quite fit the model to find the simple stuff that is still hiding in front of our faces.


With magnetic fields, I think we are looking at usable power at far too low of potential to be utilized. An example would be a direct conversion that might yield say P=I/V of 1Watt =  .0001V X 10000A -- in such a situation, what could you realistically do with it unless you could artificially raise the potential energy slope to a realistic level to work with our systems???


This is the question I have been asking myself for a long time as I have seen hints of just such things in many of the electrical systems I have played with over the years.


Every possible system I have examined that seems to have available energy gives off that energy at potentials either far too low or far to high for any practical purpose using today's technology. Basically, it is like discovering fission in the 1500's. That is where amateur experimenters and forums like this might just work. Most of the people building and replicating do not have a clue what can't work, so they try it anyway. Sooner or later accidents are bound to happen.


However, when they do expect complete BS explanations for WHY they work. (Listen to Hutchinson as a 'for example'.) Everyone is pressured to give explanation for something they themselves truly do not understand, so it is no surprise why fairytales often make more sense than the given explanations.
Title: Re: Why Over-Unity is Possible
Post by: allcanadian on November 23, 2016, 12:42:38 AM
@Paul
Quote
The sticky tape analogy is extremely loose, basically another illusion. Similarity in behavior does not yield equivalence unless all of the factors are equally equivalent. What we have with a magnet vs the tape is that the tape mechanically bonds the mass to another mass, making the two into one as far as gravity is concerned. With the magnet, it is falling, but being pulled in the opposite direction at an equal or greater rate by a different force.

In a sense it is all an illusion because if we were in outer space we could see one magnet rise to the ceiling as another magnet falls to the ceiling on the opposite side of the Earth. In effect we have forces causing accelerations with little insight to what or why the force is.

Quote
The problem I have with the definition of work is that it actually allows violation of the conservation principle due to an old, outmoded notion of the concept we call work. Any system which does not move an object, but necessarily expends energy is a violation of the conservation principle. Due to the work definition, since no mass was moved spatially, no work is done. However, energy is the capability of doing work. Energy as a term can be looked at as potential or kinetic. Stored energy (no work) is potential, expended energy is kinetic. No work being done requires conservation of the energy in the system. Therefore we end up with a paradox due to definition. The magnet scenario has to expend energy to overcome a force, therefore energy is being used. If no work is being performed, then no questions have been answered, only new ones raised.

I would agree it is a quagmire of contradictions and the newest contradictions relate to nano-technology or engineered materials. One scientist built a wall in which water drops are always forced to travel upwards against the force of gravity. Another built a material which is invisible to certain spectrums of electromagnetic waves. In time they will produce Maxwell's Demon where meta-materials cherry pick high energy particles or EM waves from ambient conditions to generate power. At which point we may understand it is not the energy of a system or the supposed work performed per say but the selectivity or characteristics of the process. If we allow only high energy particles to pass a boundary and exclude low energy ones then the particles themselves have performed work due to their nature not the process.

We can produce this kind of selectivity on the macro scale it's just a matter of understanding what is actually happening and why then making the choice as to how we want to control the process. Knowledge and control is power...literally.

AC
Title: Re: Why Over-Unity is Possible
Post by: forest on November 23, 2016, 07:12:57 AM
It is very very simple. take a coil, power with dc, measure field.Take a ferromagnetic core insert into and measure field. You have found OU.
Title: Re: Why Over-Unity is Possible
Post by: Zephir on November 23, 2016, 07:24:55 AM
"Everything Should Be Made as Simple as Possible, But Not Simpler". Albert Einstein in a letter to  Jost Winteler (1901)

It's generally accepted (1 (http://jnaudin.free.fr/2SGen/images/inductive_conversion.pdf), 2 (http://www.intalek.com/Papers/NTP.pdf), 3 (https://www.ncsu.edu/crsc/reports/ftp/pdf/crsc-tr02-26.pdf)) that the overunity results during demagnetization of ferromagnetic materials with hysteresis curve under negative slope conditions (magnetic viscosity leading to oversaturation (https://www.reddit.com/r/Physics_AWT/comments/2n51z8/simplest_theory_of_overunity_devices_possible/?ref=search_posts)). So you cannot observe the overunity in steady state DC conditions.
Title: Re: Why Over-Unity is Possible
Post by: forest on November 23, 2016, 09:01:40 PM
"Everything Should Be Made as Simple as Possible, But Not Simpler". Albert Einstein in a letter to  Jost Winteler (1901)

It's generally accepted (1 (http://jnaudin.free.fr/2SGen/images/inductive_conversion.pdf), 2 (http://www.intalek.com/Papers/NTP.pdf), 3 (https://www.ncsu.edu/crsc/reports/ftp/pdf/crsc-tr02-26.pdf)) that the overunity results during demagnetization of ferromagnetic materials with hysteresis curve under negative slope conditions (magnetic viscosity leading to oversaturation (https://www.reddit.com/r/Physics_AWT/comments/2n51z8/simplest_theory_of_overunity_devices_possible/?ref=search_posts)). So you cannot observe the overunity in steady state DC conditions.

You are wrong. The same energy used but results are different. Analyze again.
Title: Re: Why Over-Unity is Possible
Post by: Zephir on November 23, 2016, 09:14:41 PM
/* take a coil, power with dc, measure field. Take a ferromagnetic core insert into and measure field. You have found OU. */

Nope, the field will be stronger, but it will not release additional energy, repeatedly the less. For example, when you connect two magnets, the field will be also stronger and even some energy will be released - but still with no overunity. For restoring of the original state the same amount energy must be exerted.
Title: Re: Why Over-Unity is Possible
Post by: forest on November 23, 2016, 10:12:13 PM
/* take a coil, power with dc, measure field. Take a ferromagnetic core insert into and measure field. You have found OU. */

Nope, the field will be stronger, but it will not release additional energy, repeatedly the less. For example, when you connect two magnets, the field will be also stronger and even some energy will be released - but still with no overunity. For restoring of the original state the same amount energy must be exerted.


Ha ha ha ...you are troll paid by those bastards who pollute Earth. The stronger field the stronger current produced by induction.
Title: Re: Why Over-Unity is Possible
Post by: forest on November 23, 2016, 10:15:27 PM
Do you know why it took so long to understand simple scientific fact ????    McFarland Cook, Figuera,Buforn,Hubbard,Hendershot, Perrigo,Amman,Tesla,Cohler,Steven Mark - who do you believe ?
Title: Re: Why Over-Unity is Possible
Post by: memoryman on November 23, 2016, 10:38:29 PM
"Ha ha ha ...you are troll paid by those bastards who pollute Earth. The stronger field the stronger current produced by induction."
yes, but the elctrical energy generated does not come from the field but from the mechanism that moves the field wrt the conductor.
For actual examples as to get free work, see Dr. Daniel Sheehan's work on youtube: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bBp_SPJAOJc
Title: Re: Why Over-Unity is Possible
Post by: forest on November 23, 2016, 10:52:03 PM
"Ha ha ha ...you are troll paid by those bastards who pollute Earth. The stronger field the stronger current produced by induction."
yes, but the elctrical energy generated does not come from the field but from the mechanism that moves the field wrt the conductor.
For actual examples as to get free work, see Dr. Daniel Sheehan's work on youtube: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bBp_SPJAOJc (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bBp_SPJAOJc)

 ::) "Remember to always think twice"  Energy comes from field! only the apparatus is wrong. I posted those who should have been listened. They had proper arrangement. People do not poop up for centuries with the same and the same without reason.... That is why it was overlooked - magnetic field is the source of energy, but the way we are tapping it is useless
Title: Re: Why Over-Unity is Possible
Post by: forest on November 23, 2016, 10:53:04 PM
Magnetic field is the dipole is the broken symmetry !
Title: Re: Why Over-Unity is Possible
Post by: memoryman on November 24, 2016, 12:34:38 AM
Magnetic field is NOT the source of generated energy. Magnetism is the equivalent of a catalyst in chemistry.
Title: Re: Why Over-Unity is Possible
Post by: forest on November 24, 2016, 08:11:17 AM
Magnetic field is NOT the source of generated energy. Magnetism is the equivalent of a catalyst in chemistry.

Think twice how is the current generated by induction and you will be struck by this simple fact.
Title: Re: Why Over-Unity is Possible
Post by: forest on November 24, 2016, 08:13:07 AM
You talk like a child who was said how the car is moving... you know...car is doing brum bruuum bruuummm and it's moving
Title: Re: Why Over-Unity is Possible
Post by: Turbo on November 24, 2016, 08:40:58 AM
Magnetic field is NOT the source of generated energy. Magnetism is the equivalent of a catalyst in chemistry.

This is correct and it is one of the best posts i have seen this year.
Title: Re: Why Over-Unity is Possible
Post by: Turbo on November 24, 2016, 08:41:59 AM
Think twice how is the current generated by induction and you will be struck by this simple fact.

You should ask yourself this question and it's not a simple fact.

You want to talk about facts, Mister Forrest?
Here's a fact which i will give you for free.
Title: Re: Why Over-Unity is Possible
Post by: that_prophet on June 19, 2017, 04:10:40 PM
over-unity is easily done with pulleys, mechanically multiplying rotations + since AC electricity is made by using rotations,
you are actually multiplying you AC electricity,,,, it is truly that simple
-
.       This is so dirt simple that you will kick yourself, after you discover just how super simple this technology truly is. How is AC electricity made, by using rotations of a coil through a magnetic field, and we can use a set of varying sized pulleys to multiply your total # of rotations. So, we can effectively multiply our amount of AC electricity by using simple pulley mechanics.
-
.      This GEM = (Geometrical Electricity Multiplication) technology is super simple, http://free-energy.yolasite.com/ and is based on basic pulley mechanics. In it, you pay a small amount of DC electricity to rotate a large 100 cm circumference pulley one single time, (one mere spark). Then you run the 100 cm of moving belt, (off the 100 cm of circumference) past a mini-pulley of only one centimeter circumference, giving you 100 rotations, which you covert into 100 cycles of AC electricity, by simply adding an AC generator to it. You are merely using the 100 cm of belt that you get off the single rotation of a 100 cm circumference + by running this length of belt by a 1 cm circumference pulley, with an AC generator attached.
-
.     Now, you have just multiplied your single burst of DC current into 100 cycles of AC electricity. Please don’t listen to the mythical torque problem, because there is no torque problem. This AC generator is running practically torque free, because all that it has to generate is the single burst of DC current that your DC drive motor takes to make one rotation. And please remember, that you get 100 cycles of AC electricity to generate this single “spark” of DC current to power your drive motor, so this is generating practically zero current, divided by 100.
-
.     If you run wires from your AC generator output, + put them into the input of a full wave bridge rectifier,(4 diodes) + then run wires from the DC output of your full wave bridge rectifier, into the input of your DC drive motor, you should have a working mechanism. This perpetual free energy generator mechanism is complete, + you should be able to start it running by merely rotating the large pulley by hand, a quarter turn.
-
.     Please don’t listen to the torque problem, as it is non-existent. This AC generator is pretty much free floating, as for all of its 100 rotations, it only has to generate one small spark of DC current. That is one small spark of current, that is divided by 100, so you only have to generate 1/100th of a spark of current per rotation, or 1/100th of practically nothing. 
-
.     You must have your AC generator + your DC drive motor of the same voltage.
-
.     This is so simple + cheap to build guys + gals, please build one to prove it works,,,
I live in a nursing home, so I cannot even have the simple tools to build this with. This is so dirt simple + easy to build, that satan is laughing his as? Off, at how gullible we simple humans are. But he will get his just deserts, when Jesus returns in His Glory, before the second door close on 2025.94 = 2019.04(door for rapture) + 6.9(7 Hebrew years = 2520 days) http://doorschristmustpassthrough.yolasite.com/
-
.     So we have less than 19 months to live, before all born again followers of Christ, only those who are looking for His Return, will vanish off this earth in the Rapture = “blessed hope” http://my2020vision.yolasite.com/ http://beliefstoliveby.yolasite.com/

Title: Re: Why Over-Unity is Possible
Post by: forest on June 19, 2017, 09:04:29 PM
Mister Turboo
If you find a single case of electric induction generator working without magnetic field you can apply for the Nobel Prize
meanwhile do not spam this thread with useless pictures
Title: Re: Why Over-Unity is Possible
Post by: endlessoceans on June 20, 2017, 02:52:25 AM
It is very very simple. take a coil, power with dc, measure field.Take a ferromagnetic core insert into and measure field. You have found OU.

WRONG!!  Again

See its with daft statements like these that you Tito/Forest/Whatever show how uninformed you are.

The above having been said, the error in your experiment was the ACCURATE measurement of the wattage used in each repulsion test of different magnets of different strengths.  Measure total wattage from your battery.  Yes, the voltage may have been 9VDC in each case, but the current was much higher due to the higher inductive force with iron core.

If youre going to troll around here and drop extraordinary statements then this requires extraordinary proof.  Make a little coil with a supercap and diode and then put your iron core or magnet in whatever arrangement you like, pot it in resin so we cant see it, then show a lit LED and the climbing measurement of the voltage in the supercap.  EASY you say....abundant energy you claim.  Solder it up in 10 mins no problem.

Either that or shutup

 

Title: Re: Why Over-Unity is Possible
Post by: forest on June 20, 2017, 03:34:31 PM
what is "inductive force with iron core" ? coil has no inductive reactance for DC or pulse DC
the same coil with or without iron core has different strength of magnetic field and that's the main reason for different induced EMF
Title: Re: Why Over-Unity is Possible
Post by: that_prophet on August 26, 2017, 04:59:34 PM
TIME IS SHORT = the Pre-Trib Rapture + the infamous 7 year Peace Treaty with Israel MUST START before this 1ST DOOR closes on 2019.04 = Jan 14th http://my2020vision.yolasite.com/ - “know that it is near, even at the doors”,(Mat 24:33) http://doorschristmustpassthrough.yolasite.com/.
-
Free Energy + perpetual motion can be easily produced using pulleys, costing only the minuscule bit of power that it takes to rotate a DC motor with a large 100 cm circumference pulley one single time. You can gain or multiply massive amounts of AC electricity using mini-pulleys with AC generators. You are capable of doing this by running this long length of belt, (off the circumference of large pulley) past a few 1 cm circumference mini-pulleys, with AC generators attached. This GEM-(Geometrical Electricity Multiplier) device is gaining you 100 cycles of AC electricity, for every mini-pulley that you choose to attach to this sane belt. So, if you added 10 mini-pulleys, you could get a return of 1000=10X100 cycles of AC electricity, and all costing you only one mere spark of DC current. How could you not be multiplying AC electricity, when you are using simple pulley mechanics to trade one spark of DC current, for 100-1000 cycles of AC electricity-(duel sparks).
-
This super simple free energy technology: http://free-energy.yolasite.com/ works on the ability of combinations of pulleys being able to easily + freely multiply your total # of rotations. You can do this because of the fact that you don’t have to expend 100 times more electricity to rotate a large 100 cm circumference pulley, than it takes to rotate a 1 cm circumference mini-pulley. Yet if you run the 100 cm of moving belt, that comes off the one rotation of a large 100 cm pulley, past any # of mini-pulleys of 1 cm, then you could gain a return of 100 rotations for every mini-pulley that you choose to attach to the same belt. (As for torque, it only comes from generating power, and power is voltage multiplied by current) + We only need to produce one single spark of DC current to make this a self-powering mechanism. So one spark of DC current, (which is practically nothing) multiplied by even massive voltage, would still equal practically zero power, which takes practically zero torque to rotate.
-
This multiplication of rotations could be extremely helpful, if you only added AC generators to these mini-pulleys, you could be multiplying the total cycles of AC electricity. This AC generator takes no torque to rotate, because although it would be winding up massive voltage, it does not need to be winding up practically any current-(1 mere spark) which is practically zero. Torque is only caused when you are generating power, and you are generating practically zero power, as power is equal to voltage times current. So, no matter how massive of voltage you are generating, it is multiplied by practically zero current, as we only need one spark of current, or practically zero. This works because zero times anything is still equal to zero, and practically zero works the same way.
-
What is AC electricity, + how is it made = it is made out of the easy rotations of coils of wire through a magnetic field of two oppositely positioned magnets right. Using pulley technology, we can easily + freely convert one rotation of a large 100 cm circumference pulley, into 100 rotations of as many 1 cm circumference mini-pulleys that we choose to attach to the same belt that comes off of your large pulley. So, if you added 10 mini-pulleys to this same belt, and added AC generators to each mini-pulley, you could gain you 1000 = 100X10 cycles of AC electricity.
-
All these cycles of AC electricity are from the single burst of DC electricity, which is the small amount of current that a DC motor takes to rotate one single time =(one mere spark). These cycles of AC electricity would cost practically zero torque to rotate, as torque is only caused when you are generating power, and you are not generating practically any power in this system. This is because although you may be winding up massive voltage,(electrical pressure) to keep this GEM mechanism running, you only need to generate one single spark of DC current, and P=IV, or power equals current multiplied by voltage.
-
So your total power output would be practically zero current multiplied by any amount of voltage, which would still be equal to practically zero power, taking practically zero torque. So, you could be easily + freely generating massive amounts of rotations of these mini-pulleys, which are generating you massive voltage, or the ability/potential to gain plenty of current, which will allow you to produce plenty of power. This is because the greater the voltage/pressure, the greater the ease that there is to generate more current. PLEASE,,, let me show you how ridiculous this mythical torque problem really is. Do you think that the 100 cycles of AC electricity would have a hard time producing the single spark of DC current, which is all that you need to crank over your DC motor once, with your 100 cm circumference pulley attached?
-
Mankind was given the best Gift from God, (other than Jesus) http://free-energy.yolasite.com/ right here in Atlantic Canada + just before the infamous 7 years Peace Treaty. This seven years of time, which the 2nd half of is the Great Tribulation, is when this GEM tech will be needed most. This will be the worst time for earth, where not only is there constant war, but most all of the evil fallen angels, and the Nephilum , will be sent to the earth. Nephilum are the offspring of fallen angels + human women, as angels are all male, because God only wanted there to be a set # of angels. This is not only the ones that are still alive, but also the spirits of all that have died. This could be massive amounts of evil spirits, considering that this includes the ones from before the flood. (How can we be billions of years old, when the moon will leave orbit within 10,000 years) + all orbiting bodies will have messed up orbits, because of this yearly amount of space debris adding mass.
-
This is free energy technology, which we all will need and love, as it has practically no cost to run, and there is no need for any fuel to be purchased. Nor would there be any exhaust to cause environmental or noise pollution. So,,, why haven’t we figured this simple little bit of technology out long ago? Evil spirits are, and have been hiding this simple technology from mankind. These AC generators are extremely easy to rotate, because the only resistance torque,(other than the viscosity of the lubricant in the bearings) would come from a great need for current, which would practically never happen, especially when you are dealing with such small amounts of power as the example that I describe here.
-
I confirmed that this free energy technology, discovered in the early 2000’s, was from God + not from evil forces, by finding it in a UFO motor description in Ezekiel 1:16. Thankfully, there are many ways that we can freely multiply the total # of rotations, like a set of varied sized pulleys, can be easily used to multiply the total # of rotations. Then, by simply adding an AC generator to your mini-pulley, you can convert your rotations into cycles of AC electricity.
-
This is one super simple GEM of an idea, and it is made from pre-school technology, so why was this not out long ago. Can you believe the power that evil spirits have, to be able to dumb down a whole population of humans + for so long. I still have problems getting people to believe that there is no torque problem. Think that this may actually be a good enough reason for you to find out if GOD IS REAL = http://beliefstoliveby.yolasite.com/ + if HE IS RETURNING SOON = http://my2020vision.yolasite.com/
-
Do you want to hear how truly super simple this technology is, Where you only pay to crank over the DC motor one time, with a 100 cm circumference pulley, Then you use the 100 cm of moving belt off this large pulley circumference, + run it past one or more mini-pulleys of only one centimeter circumferences, All that you have to do is add an AC generator to these mini-pulleys, giving you a free return of 100’s of cycles of AC electricity. That’s one small pulse of DC current as an input, returning you 100 cycles of AC electricity output, How can you not multiply your AC electricity, with this rotation multiplication technology
-
IT IS TRULLY THAT SIMPLE
-
Come on Canadians,,,
Come on Nova Scotia,,,
-
This is where this GEM-(Geometrical Electricity Multiplier) technology of free energy for the End Times was 1st started, (early 2000’s when He first shared this with me). Let's get out there and start taking advantage of it, by not only building GEM units to power all of our electric tools, toys + gadgets, but we could be starting companies that have electric appliances, utensils, devices, tools, toys, + gadgets with these GEM perpetual power supplies built into them, (let’s start letting electricity generate itself) + on our labels we could even proudly say "FIGHTING TERRORISM + FIGHTING POLLUTION"
Title: Re: Why Over-Unity is Possible
Post by: that_prophet on August 26, 2017, 05:00:27 PM
PROOF OF CREATION + A YOUNG EARTH = (space dust) has mass + billions of years of dust would add up eventually + mess up the orbits of all planets + moons. We could measure the amount of dust on the moon, and divide the total by the amount of dust that is deposited every year, coming up with an age for the moon, and thereby finding out the age of our earth. Most of us have seen pictures of the moon landing, and realize that there is only a few centimeters, meaning that by the deposit of space dust, the moon has only been orbiting us for a few thousand years. Less than 10,000 year
-
COME ON,,, ALL OF YOU BACK YARD MECHANICS,,, Get some AC + DC motors together of the same voltage, and start building these GEM free energy power supplies,, + not only for 1.5, 3, 6, 9 + 12 volt batteries, but household 120 volt, + 12 volt, to powering these new electric cars. Let's throw the oil companies out of work, producing toxic smoke + maybe even make money with them, by throwing any excess power from these perpetually running energy generators that we have the time, + small amount of money to purchase parts to build. Think of it as not only keeping money in your pocket, but you are keeping money from the countries that either fund terrorist, or which are unknowingly funding them. This is not to mention the experimenting that we could be doing with the anti-gravity + speeds approaching light speed. Now I know that there are many out there like me, which would enjoy knowing how one type of this motor was powering a UFO in the Bible, in Ezekiel 1:16. http://aliensandghosts.yolasite.com/
-
Most people have heard that the "day + hour knoweth no man"-(Mat 24:36), but why does nobody mention the soon arriving doors that we are not only allowed to know, but in the original Greek, it is worded like a command = “know that it is near, even at the doors”,,, + that 1st Door will close on 2019.04 + the last Door will close on 2025.94. So we are guaranteed that Jesus will set His foot on the Mount of Olives before the year 2026.
-
Did you ever wonder how you could know that it’s near, if we can’t know the day. Near to what then, maybe it’s near to the door/deadline = "know that it is near, even at the doors" Mat 24:33. Doors are plural, because of the two appearances of Jesus, the first is in the clouds,(Rapture) http://rapturequestion.yolasite.com/ before the 7 year peace treaty is signed + then His second arrival is as His Foot touches earth, on the Mount of Olives. DOOR = (this is not the date of His Arrival, which we are warned that nobody can know, but this is the date that Christ must return before) A day that the Tribulation Saints will not only know, but they will probably being counting down the days until. = (He Returns when the 7 year peace treaty ends)
-
EVil-sOLUTION = isn’t it amazing what Truth can be revealed, when the “il-s” of life are included. http://decimationofthisevolutionfairytale.yolasite.com/
-
I can give you a free to run, perpetual power supply = http://free-energy.yolasite.com/ This GEM mechanism can do this because of how AC electricity is created by rotations. as in the more rotations the greater amount of AC electricity, and pulleys can be used to multiply rotations. So, you are using pulley mechanics to multiply your total amount of AC electricity, by trading one rotation of a large 100 cm circumference pulley, into 100 rotations of as many 1 cm circumference pulleys as you choose to add to the same belt. If you add AC generators to these mini-pulleys then you could be multiplying AC electricity. If you added 4 of these mini-pulleys with AC generators attached, you would gain 400 cycles of AC electricity, and all for the single burst of DC current, the minute amount of current that a DC motor takes to rotate one single time.
-
These mini-pulleys would be easy to rotate, as the only resistance that they would generate, would be caused by any power that they were generating. These mini-pulleys would only be winding up massive voltages, because the only current needed to rotate your large 100 cm pulley on a DC motor, is one simple spark, or short burst, the amount to rotate your large pulley only one single time. Torque is only caused when you are generating power, and power is generated by current multiplied by voltage. Since we only need one single spark of current, (practically zero) the total amount of power being generated would still be practically zero, costing practically zero torque.
-
This was given to mankind before the first door closes = http://my2020vision.yolasite.com/
Especially for the soon coming Tribulation Saints http://doorschristmustpassthrough.yolasite.com/ 
-
Sorry if it offends you, that I add a little bit of Biblical stuff in my explanations, but when I came up with this super simple idea, it was just after asking God for a way to help the Tribulation Saints. Just think about how super simple this AC electricity multiplier truly is, and how the voices in your head tell you that it cannot work. When how much more simple can it be, then to only pay for the one rotation of a large 100 cm pulley, when you can get a return of 100 cycle of AC electricity, for every 1 cm mini-pulley that you attach to the same belt, (with AC generators attached). Yes that’s an input of one single spark of DC current, returning you 100 cycles of AC electricity for every mini-pulley that you attach to the same belt. If you only added 4 mini-pulleys, you would get a return of 40 cycles of AC electricity. Please remember, that there is a most powerful spiritual warfare going on over this GEM technology.
-
There is a most powerful spiritual warfare going on over this GEM technology. Can you believe the problems that I have had, getting this super simple way of using pulleys to multiply the total amount of AC cycles of electricity? I think that it’s totally ridiculous, when you truly take a close look at it. Pulleys can be used to multiply the # of rotations, and AC electricity is made of rotations of a coil through a magnetic field. It should be dirt simple, as you are using pulleys to multiply your total # of rotations, and AC electricity is made of rotations, so you are effectively multiplying AC electricity. .


Title: Re: Why Over-Unity is Possible
Post by: lltfdaniel1 on October 10, 2017, 07:02:54 PM
WRONG!!  Again

See its with daft statements like these that you Tito/Forest/Whatever show how uninformed you are.

The above having been said, the error in your experiment was the ACCURATE measurement of the wattage used in each repulsion test of different magnets of different strengths.  Measure total wattage from your battery.  Yes, the voltage may have been 9VDC in each case, but the current was much higher due to the higher inductive force with iron core.

If youre going to troll around here and drop extraordinary statements then this requires extraordinary proof.  Make a little coil with a supercap and diode and then put your iron core or magnet in whatever arrangement you like, pot it in resin so we cant see it, then show a lit LED and the climbing measurement of the voltage in the supercap.  EASY you say....abundant energy you claim.  Solder it up in 10 mins no problem.

Either that or shutup


I view everything as energy extraction, so it is possible it is taking energy from the magnet and the magnet will degrade in strength.


Am i correct?


I think it isn't overunity via energy extraction, but it is saving energy thanks to the added energy from the magnet.


Unless you add lots of magnets the more energy you save until you break the cop 1 threshold, it will be like a passenger jet breaking the sound barrier for sure so you have to be careful because this driving force of above cop 1 will not slow down unless your extractors limit it or have a rpm controller.

This cop 1 will be alike a water hammer effect when you break cop 1 gives you a water hammer effect.

But the energy comes from the magnets and will get weaker and weaker.

And some reason the magnets here will not be extracting energy from the environment.

Unless you can get a magnet to do that then there is no point in using magnet energy alone and this magnet energy does not give electrical power.

And in any case energy that breaks cop 1 is unbalanced all by it's self, knowing there is different energys to extract so i cannot comment on what the magnets will extract unless there is a method i don't know the precise name of energy.


Look like i am correct about the water hammer Water hammer[/font][/size] (or, more generally, [/font][/size]fluid hammer[/font][/size]) is a [/font][/size]pressure (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pressure)[/font][/size] surge or wave caused when a [/font][/size]fluid (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fluid)[/font][/size] (usually a liquid but sometimes also a gas) in motion is forced to stop or change direction suddenly (momentum change). A water hammer commonly occurs when a valve closes suddenly at an end of a [/font][/size]pipeline (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pipeline_transport)[/font][/size] system, and a pressure wave propagates in the pipe. It is also called [/font][/size]hydraulic shock[/font][/size].[/font][/size]



Extracting energy then running off with extracted energy with some or more to power a load.

I can't believe but science is catching up with energy extraction methods.

I know this with fissures or water hammers or the uttered type of this phenomenon every time it does that it extracts energy each time it does that like a solar panel so then you extract energy via this method then run of completely with this method with power to spare so it will be self sustaining.

Correct me if i am wrong.

So yea if you want overunity use these water hammer of fissures or whatever the zpe energy equivalent is in electrical energy i think i now know how these overunity machines work like bedini sg and the like, they all run off extracted energy with power to spare whilst sustaining the energy extraction.process all by it's self.

So yea you can do this with your magnet energy creating fissures etc and tuning the electric circuit to take advantage of this process, but will be of the magnetic type.

So if you go from minus cop 1 to over cop 1 you create this water hammer effects of the electric kind and this will tap into external energy.

I think many people here know about that.

When put into laymans terms a machine with cop 1 running off the extracted energy to power the energy extraction process and thanks to that have energy to spare to power a load at the same time working like a solar panel but with electric energy.

Right so in electrical energy it is called the cavity effect.

http://www.panacea-bocaf.org/cavitationheaters.htm

So this dream is actually is possible.

Well here we go > https://www.hydrodynamics.com/ they sell cavity/water hammer powered products giving cop over 1 which is energy extraction from energy from the environment or whatever.

From  https://www.hydrodynamics.com/cavitation-technology/  As a liquid passes through the SPR it is subjected to “controlled cavitation”.  The heart of the device is a specially designed rotor that spins.  The spinning action generates hydrodynamic cavitation in the rotor cavities away from the metal surfaces.  The cavitation is controlled and therefore there is no damage.  As microscopic cavitation bubbles are produced and collapse, shockwaves are given off into the liquid which can heat and/or mix.

Just sent them an email

Your entry has been successfully sent.


Your entered data::
Name:
Daniel Martin
Company:
 
E-mail Address:
lltfdaniel@googlemail.com
Phone:
 
Message:
Where can i buy this device using water hammer for electric power.

Cavity extracts energy from the enviroment right?

How about using that extracted energy to power the extraction process?

Do you have such a device that powers the energy extraction process?

Thanks,

Daniel.

At Rome, Georgia Jim Griggs of Hydrodynamics, Inc demonstrated the assembly and operation of a "hydrosonic water pump" which operated over-unity by producing hot water or steam with energy in excess of the electrical energy input to the pump motor. "Over-unity" was confirmed by satisfied customers, including the Albany Fire Station, where engineers from the "local university" and the "local power company" had been called in to verify the over-100% efficiency.

So yea forest add more magnets to bypass the cop 1 threshold and next is to fine tune the system too fully exploit the cavity effect that you most will have, that is what you need to achieve true over unity via energy extraction from the enviroment,

Simple enough have fun, make sure the circuit does not implode in your face.
Title: Re: Why Over-Unity is Possible
Post by: forest on October 12, 2017, 10:42:49 AM
if magnetic field is the source of electrical energy and the method is induction law then all you need is strong magnetic field and a way to pulse it
Title: Re: Why Over-Unity is Possible
Post by: pauldude000 on February 08, 2018, 10:33:00 AM
Guys, it has been a long while since I started working on OU. Well over a decade now to be precise. I want to point out something. Energy has to come from outside the system you examine to provide OU -- it is that simple.


If you connect a solar cell into a circuit and only examine the voltage provided by a battery within said circuit you will measure OU every time you turn on a light. Once the voltage provided by the solar cell is accounted for in the system, then Over-Unity vanishes.


The same is true of any system: If there is more energy in the system than you can account for, then there is a source of energy providing energy into the system. It will show OU until the source is determined. However, once the source is known the system will be at or below unity again.


The concept of Over-Unity is based upon exploring the unknown, looking for new and previously unknown sources of energy. Physics already accounts for OU in the concept of virtual particles. If you could create a situation where charged virtual particles are released into a system, then these particles will affect and react with stable real particles in the system.


There are quite a few different possibilities for sources of energy that are currently unknown at the moment. Which pair of blinders are you wearing -- I ask this since it is bias, applied logical fallacy, and opinion that prevents a person from seeing and accepting what is often right in front of them.


Title: Re: Why Over-Unity is Possible
Post by: sm0ky2 on February 08, 2018, 01:20:48 PM
With very weak magnets, you can prove that they do work against gravity over time.


Take a magnet that can barely hold itself up on a steel ceiling
And watch it.
Over some time, gravitational acceleration wins and the magnet falls.


If it did no work, why does it stay up for a few seconds?
If gravity did no work, why does it fall?


Now take a model rocket with a large mass for its’ engine.
So that it hangs in the air during the strongest portion of its burn time.
You will see that after a few seconds of ‘hovering’, gravity wins and starts
drawing the rocket to the ground, even though the rocket is still producing force.


Gravity accelerates at 9.8m/s/s, meaning each second in the air adds another 9.8m/s
when these two forces balance, the rocket stays still.
 There is no motion, but rest assured
work is being done by the rocket fuel.
And by gravity
As you see a second or two later, the rocket begins to move downward.


The same thing happens with magnetism when the paramagnetic bond-energy is
lower than a materials constant, derived from the materials specific gravity and the
strength of magnetization, using a Langevin transformation.


this ‘magnetic density’ constant, divided by the magnets volumetric displacement
gives the field strength as a function of distance from the center of magnetism.
This is a timeless force function


Gravity is time-dependent


by combining the two, using the induction properties of the steel, we find the duration
of time the magnet will hang.


When magnetic field strength is greater than this ‘magnetic density’ constant,
gravitational acceleration is countered by induction in the steel.
And in this scenario, the work done by gravity is on the steel ceiling, not the magnet.
Work done by the magnet only happens one time, at the time of induction.
(I.e. approaching the steel with the magnet)


Using an electromagnet on the same ceiling, we find the energy to be a function
of the bond-energy of the crystalline structure, in the form of the induction
constant (which for steel begins at ~ 1150 kg*m^2/s^2A^3)
notice there is a 3rd dimension here (volume, not just area)


by decreasing current through the electromagnet, we can observe the field strength
at which gravity becomes important.
And again, we observe gravity doing work against the magnetic force.
And this is again, a function of time.


This is but one of many tests we can perform to prove that magnetism is a time-less force.
3 dimensions


Gravity exists in 4-d spacetime













Title: Re: Why Over-Unity is Possible
Post by: blueplanet on February 10, 2018, 09:25:25 AM
The term overunity can be very misleading.
Energy harvesting is probably a more acceptable term.
The former implies that the energy can come from nowhere. The latter means that there is a source of energy to harvest.

Title: Re: Why Over-Unity is Possible
Post by: sm0ky2 on February 10, 2018, 12:43:46 PM
The term overunity can be very misleading.
Energy harvesting is probably a more acceptable term.
The former implies that the energy can come from nowhere. The latter means that there is a source of energy to harvest.


The implications come from a misconception of what “energy” is.
And also how we use it.
We have not discovered a “nothing” or a “anywhere” that energy does not exist.
Energy is everywhere that humans have access to.




The arguments against overunity come from one theory.
A theory which cannot be proven, but has been disproven time and time again.


Yet science still insists on calling this theory a set of “laws”.
For clearly economic purposes, and reasons of acedemic prestige.


For thermodynamic theory to hold true, we require a zero-thermal energy state.
Which we don’t have. Nor do we have a truly isolated system.


Currently the theory claims a zero-energy state to exist at 0 Kelvin.
But we have disproven this by lowering the temperature of samples below 0K.
And we still find that there exists atomic motion and quantum fluctuations.


To understand this, we must use the theory itself.
Take an isolated system at thermal equilibrium.
There is no potential for thermal energy flow, therefore no perceived change
in internal energy.
Because the system is isolated, there is no external thermal reference.
Simply put, we have no way of knowing the real temperature.
In a non-isolated system we can use gravity or some other source to
determine a thermal energy quantity, but if the system is truly isolated,
we have no reference.
No potential for thermal energy flow. But does the system contain some
quantity of “energy”?


Of course we assume that if the system has any temperature above 0K
there is some absolute value of thermal energy contained within.
But what is this value? To know that, we must know the absolute temperature.
The Kelvin scale was broken, so the only (temporary) solution is to develop a
new scale, to convert -Kelvins to the new zero.
This could occur an infinite number of times, Kelvin, Marvin, Gavin........
And at the end of our journey, we will find the thermal state of our existence
to be some astronomically high value beyond our ability to conceptualize what
“absolute zero” truly is.


This problem lies at the very foundations of thermodynamic theory.
Without a known zero-state, the theory is open to negative energy values.
Negative energy is the same as energy. The theory doesn’t actually work.


It holds true in most cases, because we exist in a high-entropy environment.
This does not mean that the opposite cannot exist.


In fact, for any of this to exist, at some point, negentropy must have occurred
or still be occurring, “somewhere”. (what caused the ‘big bang’?)


Whether you subscribe to BB theory, or the theory that our universe exists in
a constant state of flux, negentropy is an essential function.


In this field of research we are Orville and Wilbur.
While the rest of the world would be perfectly content stuck on the ground of
their flat-earth, destroying truth and knowledge, so we can do this all over
again in a few thousand years.



Title: Re: Why Over-Unity is Possible
Post by: blueplanet on February 10, 2018, 01:06:06 PM
Even at absolute zero temperature, electric current flow without any source. This appears to be an obvious bleach of the 2nd law.
Title: Re: Why Over-Unity is Possible
Post by: sm0ky2 on February 11, 2018, 04:52:49 AM
Even at absolute zero temperature, electric current flow without any source. This appears to be an obvious bleach of the 2nd law.


That is exactly what Maxwell predicted, even long before we created a superconductor
Resistance is a function of heat.
With no heat, there is no resistance.



Title: Re: Why Over-Unity is Possible
Post by: pauldude000 on February 11, 2018, 09:46:14 AM

That is exactly what Maxwell predicted, even long before we created a superconductor
Resistance is a function of heat.
With no heat, there is no resistance.


That is true, but you are not taking the concept far enough. There are also no I squared R losses in a system that can indeed do work as it does creates a perfectly efficient magnetic field. That electric current in a superconductive coil can theoretically flow in a circle forever if their is no interaction with the field it generates. If an armature is turned in that field, also made of superconductive material, the generation of electricity will be at perfect unity and the work performed will be at COP = 1.


Notice that last statement. No electrical non-superconductive system we have can achieve unity. Ask yourself how unity is measured; what system is used? Subjects can become interesting when examining base concepts.



Title: Re: Why Over-Unity is Possible
Post by: pauldude000 on February 11, 2018, 10:32:27 AM
With very weak magnets, you can prove that they do work against gravity over time.


Take a magnet that can barely hold itself up on a steel ceiling
And watch it.
Over some time, gravitational acceleration wins and the magnet falls.


I agree with you, but the problem stems with a short-sighted and quite stupid scientific definition for work. Too many physicists are still basing their logic on what they can perceive with their eyes. They cannot wrap their heads around the concept that a mass can undergo a positive acceleration yet remain motionless to their frame of reference and still accomplish work. They hold the god's eye view every time they perform an experiment and most cannot understand even that basic concept.


Overcoming negative acceleration to achieve equilibrium is equivalent in comparison to the same mass accelerated to achieve an equal positive acceleration.  Both are moving, just one SEEMS to be stationary.


Why this is so hard to accept is philosophy. You see, that magnet experiment is just a simple example of common everyday perpetual motion; one example among many. Perpetual motion is commonplace and many physicists do NOT want to accept even the concept of perpetual motion let alone the fact that so many common physical systems are examples by very definition, both on the micro and macro scales of perception. Illogical personal bias, pure and simple. Who cares what anyone does or does not want to accept -- personal opinions and personal desires do not change reality.


If gravity were not doing constant work, expending energy on a microsecond by microsecond basis, every planet and star in the known universe would literally explode radially outward into some really interesting gaseous and particulate forms from centrifugal force.


The expenditure and/or conversion of energy over time actually defines work in this fine universe, not the simplistic third-grade, tinker-toy, mechanistic notion of force X distance which is just one basic type of an example of energy expenditure over time.
Title: Re: Why Over-Unity is Possible
Post by: forest on February 11, 2018, 02:10:23 PM
There is more to that. A piece of wood lying on tabletop is working against gravity but it's not recognized as work done.
Title: Re: Why Over-Unity is Possible
Post by: sm0ky2 on February 11, 2018, 04:00:17 PM
There is more to that. A piece of wood lying on tabletop is working against gravity but it's not recognized as work done.


Yes, if we follow that logic, the table rests on the earth which is the gravitational source.
So the piece of wood is not “accelerating”.


a magnet repelled in the air is resting on the magnetic field, which sits on the magnet,
which rests on the table on the earth.


the thing about relativity is it requires two perspectives.
and it doesn’t matter which we choose, but both must be present.
an object in motion has no energy.
But relative to another object, it does.
(or the other object does, or we can divide it among them)


The point is, our definition of work is relativistic, not an absolute energy value.


If two objects are moving at the same velocity and vector
they are relatively stationary to each other, and there can be no work done
between them.
However, relative to another object, now work can be done.


The wood on the table does no “work” against the earth
But the table has the same velocity as the earth.
As does the wood.


So when the earth is moving towards a relatively stationary object
the wood can perform work when it hits that object.


how much “kinetic energy” the wood actually has is irrelevant to our
energy analysis, because the work done is relativistic, only to the object
being hit by the wood.


If the wood hits an object that is moving in the same direction as the earth
but as a lower velocity, less work will be done than when it hit the stationary
object.


But the wood still has the same absolute value of kinetic energy
(we just have no way of knowing what that value is)


The velocity of the earth cannot be determined, except in relativistic terms.


energy, as it applies to work is not an absolute value, or even a deterministic
quantity.
But a relative one.

Title: Re: Why Over-Unity is Possible
Post by: pauldude000 on February 13, 2018, 06:05:10 AM
There is more to that. A piece of wood lying on tabletop is working against gravity but it's not recognized as work done.


That is absolutely true Forest. However, in no sense of the word is that piece of wood acting under any acceleration other than that of gravity. Gravity is doing work in the wood scenario, otherwise the wood would fly off into space, along with the table it is lying on. It is not resisting gravity at all. Gravity is resisting radial forces applied by centrifugal force caused by the rotating mass of the earth on which both the table and wood are loosely sitting upon its surface. Two forces are acting upon the wood. They are both doing work. The wood is not applying either force upon its environment so is doing no work at all.


The work issue is based upon far too shallow of thought, ignoring common forces. A lot could be excused from science at the time periods many of these things were first pondered, since they had far less information to work with than we do now. It is past time for an overhaul, at least of the base definitions, to bring us out of the 1600's.


So many things break down into circular logic, circular cause and consequence, fallacy of composition and fallacy of division it is not funny, and inherent basal relationships are still treated as if they were somehow mysterious magik.
Title: Re: Why Over-Unity is Possible
Post by: pauldude000 on February 13, 2018, 06:45:28 AM
I am going to give an example of what is going on, logically, using a word story. I will turn the story into a mathematical proposition to show how it works, mathematically speaking.

A mathematician wakes up one day and gets a headache. He takes an aspirin and the headache goes away, for a time, then it reoccurs later. He takes another aspirin and the headache leaves again. A light-bulb grandly flashes above his head in a cartoon bubble as he gets a new idea.

He puts the situation into a mathematical formula to define the relationship:

First, he assigns variables to the two main factors:

H = the headache
A = the aspirin

Since he started out with the headache, then took an aspirin and the headache left:

H=1

and

H + A = 0

Therefore! (drum-roll)

H = -A

He looked at the result on his chalkboard and mathematically everything made perfect sense. It was also provable, since taking a second aspirin made the equation zero again.

The conclusion? A headache is caused by a lack of aspirin.

At this point the shark has been jumped. The headache is not caused by a lack of aspirin, though the math implies this.

The simple thing is that math can yield a true statement yet be interpreted incorrectly. By itself, no equation proves anything. Math does not prove anything. Math has to be interpreted by a thinking being to have any relevance whatsoever. The thinking being has to approach the mathematics using logic to even have a chance of interpreting it correctly.

Here is a serious clue, even constants in an equation represent something very real in this universe. Nothing stands alone in an equation, since an equation describes the relationship of the (real stuff) quantities involved.

When you find yourself describing something in a self referencing manner for it's definition, you do not understand exactly what the quantity is. You MAY WELL know quite a bit about how it works, but you do not yet know exactly what it is. The one in the first statement (H=1) reflected the cause of the headache, yet was unaccounted for in the logic.


The headache example above demonstrates how an illogical mathematical assumption can be made due to the lack of relevant information, namely the actual cause of the headache, which was NOT a lack of aspirin, rofl.
 
On a serious note, when people try to prove a base definition, what is the response? The moronic statement "show me the math." I will put it forth "show me the logic." Without proper logic the math is worthless.
Title: Re: Why Over-Unity is Possible
Post by: Belfior on February 13, 2018, 12:06:42 PM
I was reading some interesting studies and noticed that many of the equations are the same and just the units change. Like for potential energy and electrostatic potential & gravity.

Is there proof that mass attracts other mass or could it all be electrical attraction? My logic tells me that if we can't find what causes gravity we might be looking at the wrong place. How moderns scientists deal with this problem is that the invent new imaginary things so the math would hold up again. What comes after Dark Matter and Dark Energy? What do we add next so that the theory holds?

Title: Re: Why Over-Unity is Possible
Post by: D.R.Jackson on February 13, 2018, 05:03:08 PM
I was reading some interesting studies and noticed that many of the equations are the same and just the units change. Like for potential energy and electrostatic potential & gravity.

Is there proof that mass attracts other mass or could it all be electrical attraction? My logic tells me that if we can't find what causes gravity we might be looking at the wrong place. How moderns scientists deal with this problem is that the invent new imaginary things so the math would hold up again. What comes after Dark Matter and Dark Energy? What do we add next so that the theory holds?

Belfior in Einstein's Special and General Relativity in his mental lab experiments he paints a picture of gravity being the result of the expansion of not just space and time but matter too, where everything is expanding at the same rate even mass ( and so you can not see or measure it because the measuring stick is expanding too even the measuring stick called the speed of light), and hence gravity is merely the large circumference of the earth expanding outwards into new space and new moments of time, where our little expanding mass is merely being pinned against the earth's surface by our inertia.  The earth being very large expands and over takes more space each second than our mass does and so we can not escape its surface acceleration.  Now some scientist do not believe this to be the case so to explain this they instead are looking for dark energy and matter to fill in the space left out by not allowing for this observation.

You have to envision space expanding too and hence the previous space collapses before each new moment of space the same way as previous moments in time collapses before new moments of time, and they all collapse away towards the center of our mass from our perspective.  In effect the center of all mass in the universe is where the previous space collapses into.

Since this does not describe gravity as a field force of attraction we can conjecture then that since we do not have an opposing field force of gravity we can call antigravity found anywhere in nature naturally, then gravity is not a field force at all.  If it were a classical field force then we would have a counter force.  We do however have curved space around planets and stars which is the area at which we encounter the surface acceleration of lets say the earth starting to accelerate into our space if we get too close to the earth.  You can test this with this, the rate of fall of all objects is the same regardless of their weight, if you drop a wood ball and a lead ball from a tower both at the same time the fall at the same rate side by side and hit the ground at the same time, but the mass of the lead ball has greater inertia and so it leaves a big dent in the earth whereas the wood ball does not.  When both are released from the tower they are being suspended in space, and their mass is expanding into space and time, and they tend to want to occupy the space they are in due to their inertia, yet the massive mass of the earth who's large mass and circumference over takes way more space as it expands, expands up to over take that of the space of the two balls, hence in space time it is the surface of the earth moving more than that of the balls.  Hence the term some use "surface acceleration."  This also explains why the perceived rate of fall is squared every second since the mass of the earth and that of the balls is expanding exponentially into new space and time every second.  And well many scientist do not believe this and everyday nearly this year they have an announcement that they have proof for the discovery of dark matter only to have it dismissed in the news the next day.  I have seen this allot this past year, and so good luck on that hunt for illusive dark matter, its beginning to become a laughing stock.
Title: Re: Why Over-Unity is Possible
Post by: Belfior on February 13, 2018, 11:40:51 PM
I have seen this allot this past year, and so good luck on that hunt for illusive dark matter, its beginning to become a laughing stock.

My point exactly. Do we have any proof, that "gravity" can't be something else like magnetic or electric potentials?
Title: Re: Why Over-Unity is Possible
Post by: sm0ky2 on February 14, 2018, 03:21:55 AM
My point exactly. Do we have any proof, that "gravity" can't be something else like magnetic or electric potentials?


We can prove that it is always perpendicular to both the electric and magnetic moment
of a hydrogen atom.


Beyond that the gravitational field becomes incoherently complex
and for all intensive purposes, as elusive as the electrons themselves.


one can’t help but wonder if gravity is somehow different in an electromagnetic coil
or in a permanent magnet

Title: Re: Why Over-Unity is Possible
Post by: pauldude000 on February 14, 2018, 06:06:34 AM

We can prove that it is always perpendicular to both the electric and magnetic moment
of a hydrogen atom.


Beyond that the gravitational field becomes incoherently complex
and for all intensive purposes, as elusive as the electrons themselves.


one can’t help but wonder if gravity is somehow different in an electromagnetic coil
or in a permanent magnet


That is dangerous territory there, Smoky
Title: Re: Why Over-Unity is Possible
Post by: pauldude000 on February 14, 2018, 06:15:59 AM
I was reading some interesting studies and noticed that many of the equations are the same and just the units change. Like for potential energy and electrostatic potential & gravity.

Is there proof that mass attracts other mass or could it all be electrical attraction? My logic tells me that if we can't find what causes gravity we might be looking at the wrong place. How moderns scientists deal with this problem is that the invent new imaginary things so the math would hold up again. What comes after Dark Matter and Dark Energy? What do we add next so that the theory holds?


I am not going to put forth my ludicrous hypothesis, but let me answer your question with a question that begs the question, lol.


If many of the equations are exactly the same, but just with different units, why could that be? Give it some real thought.


Look at the tensor for electricity then factor in Newton into your thinking. For every action there is an equal and opposite reaction.


Examine the concept with two questions:


1. Are they the same?
2. If not, then WHY not? (Due to the apparent equivalence)


Relative equivalence does not necessarily guarantee mathematical equality, contrary to Einstein.
Title: Re: Why Over-Unity is Possible
Post by: Belfior on February 14, 2018, 10:51:36 AM
I can put forth mine.

It seems to me that everything is waves. Light, sound, electricity and even water. Or the interaction is waves. Nature would not have another way of doing stuff. Like everything else grows in the Golden Ratio. That also comes from the same wave idea. Why does everything grow and develop in 1.618 ratio? Study that for a day and you will find out it comes back to a circle and eventually waves.

I think matter is just standing waves or waves of peculiar frequency. This would explain why different theories (gravity,potential energy, electricity) seem to have the same equations, because they are the same deep down.They seem to be different, but then somehow the equations come up the same. We are just being taken for a ride, so it is all hidden in the open. The only place they can be hidden. They just need to debunk, ridicule and push off buildings all original thought.

So a particular apple is just a sum of all the small waves that make up that apple. If we could "record" that wave/sound and then play it back with enough energy we would have just cloned an apple.

I do like the genesis stories where there was just the "word" in the beginning. So the Creator uttered a sound the created everything. Waves again.

Btw you don'tn need hydrogen for anti-grav. Helium works as well and is not flammable
Title: Re: Why Over-Unity is Possible
Post by: Low-Q on March 13, 2019, 06:58:18 PM

Electrons spins because the material receive energy. Take that material in a -273,15°C freezer, and the electron-spin stops. At that temperature, there is no energy what so ever that can be applied to the material. However, the scenario is impossible, because the material will heat up the freezer - no matter how long it stays there, and the freezer is forced to keep low temperature, the temperature will never reach that low.


Vidar

Over-Unity Vs the Law of Conservation of Energy


The law of conservation of energy states that, inside a closed (isolated) system, the total energy remains constant. IE, Energy can neither be created nor destroyed, but can only be transformed. This is true.


This law is applied towards the concept of over-unity as a negation, in that, if energy can neither be created nor destroyed and that the energy within an isolated system must remain constant, then no more energy can be taken from a system than is put into the system. Sounds logical, correct?


Wrong.


The problem is that the people applying the law are misapplying it. Most are unconsciously limiting the measurement of the system. A few do it consciously. There exists a bias in science toward the notion of perpetual motion, when in reality, perpetual motion systems abound in this universe.


Consider electrons. Electrons zip around their atoms, eon after eon, generating their minuscule magnetic fields without any energy being added to the system, though they are by definition giving off energy due to their motion through space/time in seeming direct confliction with the law of conservation of energy and the process of entropy. 


Cosmologists are constantly faced with the big picture. They are forced to deal with the only truly isolated system in the universe, which is the universe as a whole. All other systems within the main system are but non-isolated subsystems of the whole. Cosmologists are starting to understand that space/time itself contains energy, even without the presence of either light or matter.  They are discovering that space/time actively interacts with matter, imparting energy to said matter, and that this principle is responsible for the increase in speed of the expansion of the universe, instead of slowing down due to entropy as previously thought. It is only on cosmological scales that you find systems that can be truly called 'isolated' in any real sense.


What this means, in reference to the concept of over-unity, is that all forms of energy upon a sub-system must be accounted for to determine unity and to consider the subsystem as being 'isolated' to apply the law and the process accurately. Basically, over-unity does not exist in reality, though over-unity CAN exist in practicality due to our lack of understanding of the energy acting upon the sub-system.


For instance, if I hook up a nine-volt battery to an electronic circuit, to power said circuit, can I say it is the only energy acting upon the circuit? If the circuit is unshielded, then I can list numerous forms of energy sources right now which can act upon every wire, coil, and circuit trace within said circuit from outside sources. Many of these energy sources would not produce electricity, such as gravity. Many others might. Some, like electromagnetic waves produced by house wiring, radio towers, power lines, cellphone towers, etc., all the way to lighting strikes and electromagnetic storms in space would all generate from the immeasurable to quantitative amounts of energy within that supposedly isolated 'system'. This electrical generation would be either additive or subtractive to the input of the nine-volt battery when considering the total available energy within the sub-system. This energy usually is given the name -- interference -- and every electrical engineer designing circuitry must find ways to eliminate it for proper circuit function.


I restate, the main reason for the possibility of over-unity is a misapplication of the term isolated system.


Though this may sound stupid, one good example of an over-unity device is a circuit run by a solar cell. It is a matter of subjective perspective. To an 19th century physicist, it would have been almost magic. To an early 20th century physicist, it would have been perpetual motion. to a 21th century physicist, it is what powers their calculators and energizes their house. The problem is that energy can be converted from one form to another. Heat and light, among other probable energy sources, can be converted directly to electricity. However, before their processes were understood, peltier junction devices, solar cells, etc., would have all been deemed over-unity or perpetual motion due to the misapplication of the very laws and processes in question.


Another area for over-unity is a misjudgment of efficiency. If I state that conversion of electricity to heat through a resistance is the best measurement of efficiency, I would be a laughable idiot. Unity is 100% efficiency, or complete conversion with no losses. Many devices could claim over-unity simply because they are more efficient than the standard of measurement used for comparison.


What over-unity researchers are looking for is actually the newest form of 'solar cell', so to speak; a device that transforms one form of energy to another or greater efficiency than the measuring standard. If either is achieved, then the researcher has temporarily achieved over-unity -- until the process is understood and the measuring standards are reset. After that, they simply 'discovered a new solar cell'. 


Paul Andrulis
Title: Re: Why Over-Unity is Possible
Post by: forest on March 13, 2019, 07:42:47 PM
Some inventors from the past stated that electric generators do no convert mechanical energy into electric current. Such opinion looks crazy to us but after investigation I take it seriously. There is no direct relationship between magnetic field produced and the input power of electric circuit. Ampere turns and mass of the iron core is the only limit.I believe now ,that generators do not convert mechanical energy into electricity, they condense magnetic field lines into electric current, probably taking the excess from external Earth field.It's so intense that even now I still need a proof and sometimes lost my conviction....sadly I don't expect anything to change in near future - probably no scientist would take it seriously without strong proof.
But it's here, it's a very important concept and it may save the world
Title: Re: Why Over-Unity is Possible
Post by: Low-Q on March 13, 2019, 10:18:20 PM
Some inventors from the past stated that electric generators do no convert mechanical energy into electric current. Such opinion looks crazy to us but after investigation I take it seriously. There is no direct relationship between magnetic field produced and the input power of electric circuit. Ampere turns and mass of the iron core is the only limit.I believe now ,that generators do not convert mechanical energy into electricity, they condense magnetic field lines into electric current, probably taking the excess from external Earth field.It's so intense that even now I still need a proof and sometimes lost my conviction....sadly I don't expect anything to change in near future - probably no scientist would take it seriously without strong proof.
But it's here, it's a very important concept and it may save the world
Hmmm, If it works as you suggest, all generators and motors should have saved the world since Tesla invented the AC-generator. Just because possible discoveries is not known untill today doesn't mean that they did not exist before we discovered them.


What I do know, is that the mechanical energy you use to turn a generator match perfectly to what you get out in electric energy. So I cannot say there is any significant difference between the two that will save the world.
However, you are a free man, and free to believe what you want, but please don't say you believe that the earth is flat...(Pun intended)


Vidar
Title: Re: Why Over-Unity is Possible
Post by: Tito L. Oracion on March 16, 2019, 12:02:25 AM
The real reason why free energy is possible because electrons are almost no weight.
Weight is just apply when there is an essence of gravity.


That is why earth is floating and it has no reason were to fall even it want,
Therefore we conclude that there is no such thing as weight just pull.
And therefore the continues pull makes a movement and creates free energy and also there leads to free energy or overunity. Whoooooh
 :D ;D 8)

It is a matter of pull and push why things possible. A really just a matter of concentration. 8) ;)


Free tits ;D
Title: Re: Why Over-Unity is Possible
Post by: Cherryman on March 16, 2019, 01:02:07 AM
The real reason why free energy is possible because electrons are almost no weight.
Weight is just apply when there is an essence of gravity.


That is why earth is floating and it has no reason were to fall even it want,
Therefore we conclude that there is no such thing as weight just pull.
And therefore the continues pull makes a movement and creates free energy and also there leads to free energy or overunity. Whoooooh
 :D ;D 8)

It is a matter of pull and push why things possible. A really just a matter of concentration. 8) ;)


Free tits ;D


Excactly!


It's just a matter of finding the nipples!
Title: Re: Why Over-Unity is Possible
Post by: lancaIV on March 16, 2019, 02:15:39 PM
Why it can be possible,  short  ;D explaination :
https://patents.google.com/patent/DE102012016225A1/en
Title: Re: Why Over-Unity is Possible
Post by: forest on March 16, 2019, 04:24:26 PM
Low-Q

"What I do know, is that the mechanical energy you use to turn a generator match perfectly to what you get out in electric energy" - what physics law describe this ? Can you find exact one explaining why mechanical energy should be converted into electric energy ? It is an assumption.The only applicable is Faraday law but where does  it state that mechanical energy is converted into electrical in 1:1 ratio ?
The mechanical energy of current generators are used to fight the attraction force between two electromagnets of running mass of iron. The more the output the larger field produced the bigger attraction then more mechanical force needed to turn shaft and mass of iron of generator.As simple as this. Measure the field intensity of loaded generator and construct the bigger one with more iron mass but without moving anything except the output coil.


Title: Re: Why Over-Unity is Possible
Post by: F6FLT on March 17, 2019, 10:16:20 AM
Overunity is NOT possible, energy is conserved in our universe. But we don't care about type 1 perpetual motion machines, we're here to get around the problem.

The main point is that the system must be only apparently overunity, freely recovering energy from a place where it is useless (ZPE, heat...) to put it where it is needed.

Remember that the goal is NOT to get overunity but to get free energy. It does not matter which method is used as long as the result is there. Don't be ideological, but pragmatic.

Title: Re: Why Over-Unity is Possible
Post by: seychelles on March 17, 2019, 10:29:02 AM
THE MOTHER AND FATHER OF FREE ENERGY IS EFFICIENCY, AND ONE NEEDS
TO KNOW WHERE THE ENERGY IS COMING FROM.. THE MOST ABANDON ENERGY
SOURCE IS HEAT ENERGY..AND YET NOT ONE HAS CREATED A FREE ENERGY HEAT PUMP
MACHINE.
Title: Re: Why Over-Unity is Possible
Post by: lancaIV on March 17, 2019, 12:26:27 PM
Hello seychelles,
the free electric heat pump exists, it is called  reversible thermoelectric converter !

to differ : efficiency eta= <100%
https://translate.google.com/translate?hl=de&sl=de&tl=en&u=https%3A%2F%2Fde.m.wikipedia.org%2Fwiki%2FCarnot-Wirkungsgrad (https://translate.google.com/translate?hl=de&sl=de&tl=en&u=https%3A%2F%2Fde.m.wikipedia.org%2Fwiki%2FCarnot-Wirkungsgrad)

and the coefficient of ( work cycle)  performance :  C. O. P.  : > 100%
https://translate.google.com/translate?hl=de&sl=de&tl=en&u=https%3A%2F%2Fde.m.wikipedia.org%2Fwiki%2FLeistungszahl (https://translate.google.com/translate?hl=de&sl=de&tl=en&u=https%3A%2F%2Fde.m.wikipedia.org%2Fwiki%2FLeistungszahl)



1982: Ex-GDR Dr.Helmut Reichelt et al.

https://worldwide.espacenet.com/publicationDetails/biblio?DB=EPODOC&II=1&ND=3&adjacent=true&locale=en_EP&FT=D&date=19910228&CC=DD&NR=287597A5&KC=A5# (https://worldwide.espacenet.com/publicationDetails/biblio?DB=EPODOC&II=1&ND=3&adjacent=true&locale=en_EP&FT=D&date=19910228&CC=DD&NR=287597A5&KC=A5#)

( you have to go to " original document" and then translate German to f.e. English )

He is on a good way  ;) to reinvent the above relatively easy method
https://overunity.com/18179/solving-the-energy-leakage-problem-with-my-batteries/msg532602/#new (https://overunity.com/18179/solving-the-energy-leakage-problem-with-my-batteries/msg532602/#new)



1994 : Dr. Joseph C. Yater

   As heat pump, refrigerator, amplifier (generator, loudspeaker,.....)

https://worldwide.espacenet.com/publicationDetails/biblio?DB=EPODOC&II=0&ND=3&adjacent=true&locale=en_EP&FT=D&date=19941018&CC=US&NR=5356484A&KC=A# (https://worldwide.espacenet.com/publicationDetails/biblio?DB=EPODOC&II=0&ND=3&adjacent=true&locale=en_EP&FT=D&date=19941018&CC=US&NR=5356484A&KC=A#)

Similar, but not reversible :

https://worldwide.espacenet.com/publicationDetails/biblio?DB=EPODOC&II=3&ND=3&adjacent=true&locale=en_EP&FT=D&date=20020514&CC=US&NR=6385972B1&KC=B1# (https://worldwide.espacenet.com/publicationDetails/biblio?DB=EPODOC&II=3&ND=3&adjacent=true&locale=en_EP&FT=D&date=20020514&CC=US&NR=6385972B1&KC=B1#)

And : http://www.coolchips.gi/technology/ccalc.shtml and " power chips" research

Carnot-thermal dynamic cycle and Carnot electro dynamic cycle ( reversible resonant circuit)

Free energy and over-/under unity devices :the " unity" is not a physical,not a technical, it is a mathematical unit :
                                                               
                                                                 time/ work related
                it is a passive device ( no technical input) then  each energy output = " free energy"             
                physically not over-unity  : solar cells conversion efficiency < 100%, wind force Betz-limit et cet.

it is an active cycle/circuit input unit=1 then the output and process C. O. P.  is a. < 1= under-unity b.>1= over-unity

Electric heat pump ( conventional product air/air) : average  C.O.P. 2,5 from 1 KWh electrical grid power view
  1 KWh consumer power ( end energy)  output ~ 2,5 KWh electric power plant net power( primary energy) input
https://translate.google.com/translate?hl=de&sl=de&tl=en&u=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.haustec.de%2Fheizung%2Fwaermeerzeugung%2Fwaermepumpen-praxistest-die-effizienz-ist-niedriger-als-erwartet (https://translate.google.com/translate?hl=de&sl=de&tl=en&u=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.haustec.de%2Fheizung%2Fwaermeerzeugung%2Fwaermepumpen-praxistest-die-effizienz-ist-niedriger-als-erwartet)

                                                             C.O.P. 2,5 heat / 2,5 primary energy : circuit factor = 1             

   
                                                             power system losts recuperation
And the final calculation : with better systems you do only produce in our network circuit
"global thermic emission factor 1", a long society way to " global emission factor 0" and later " global emission  near factor -1" which is the target !

                                  We have a "(bad) positive (lagging)efficiency" ~ AIDS POSITIVE ,         

                      but the way is to "(good) negative (leading)efficiency"~ AIDS NEGATIVE

                                         https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Power_factor (https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Power_factor)                                 
                    From "lagging power factor society" to "leading power factor society"
                      1             -           ZERO POSITIVE/NEGATIVE -            -1
Title: Re: Why Over-Unity is Possible
Post by: conradelektro on March 17, 2019, 08:41:41 PM

Overunity is not required and whether energy is conserved or not should not overly concern us when looking for abundant energy around us.

Let’s talk for instance about solar panels. If you take electric energy from a solar panel (while the sun shines on it) you get overunity energy and energy is not conserved if you only take planet earth into account. And for all practical purposes planet earth is all that counts when talking about electricity from a solar panel.

The sun will shine at least a further 100 million years; therefore, the sun is an infinite source of energy looked at from planet earth. It is futile to talk about something 100 million years in the future (when the sun has spent more of its energy than today).

So, solar energy on planet earth is “overunity” and energy is not conserved (as long as you forget that the sun is not overunity and conservative in its energy habits in the very long run). But for now (and in the coming at least 100 million years) it can be considered as an overunty source of energy which hurts energy conservation.

In short, let’s look for sources of energy which last for millions of years (like light from then sun) and we are done.


In fact, we are done, as long as we accept solar panels as a good source of energy. Then we add wind power, tidal power and geothermal energy. And I am sure more can be found.

Yes, I know, one day the sun will be spent and planet earth will be no more. But that should not limit us to use what is there in front of us for at least 100 million years and we start to worry about overunity and energy conservation if humankind is still alive after 100 million years.
Title: Re: Why Over-Unity is Possible
Post by: synchro1 on March 17, 2019, 09:26:39 PM



timan ou pulsing magnet core coil.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vSODFYCqQH8&t=624s
Title: Re: Why Over-Unity is Possible
Post by: lancaIV on March 17, 2019, 10:33:23 PM


timan ou pulsing magnet core coil.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vSODFYCqQH8&t=624s (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vSODFYCqQH8&t=624s)
synchro1,good link ,I thank you  !
And clearly also him, TinMan,  for these https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=vcUfMQv7aAI  video.

wmbr
OCWL
Title: Re: Why Over-Unity is Possible
Post by: forest on March 17, 2019, 10:36:15 PM
Sun is  shining at night also while solar panels of today are useless at night. Let's build solar panel working at night also collecting everlasting energy of universe, not limited to 100 millions years. That's all around us.
Title: Re: Why Over-Unity is Possible
Post by: lancaIV on March 17, 2019, 10:45:13 PM
Sun is  shining at night also while solar panels of today are useless at night. Let's build solar panel working at night also collecting everlasting energy of universe, not limited to 100 millions years. That's all around us.
One-step-by-the-other :
https://overunity.com/16681/24365-solar-cell-output-theory-and-experiments/60/ (https://overunity.com/16681/24365-solar-cell-output-theory-and-experiments/60/)
Not forgotten,  in progress also through falling solar cell prices : actually 20 Cents/Wp( TR-production)

But with right calculation :
When 1sqm 15% solar-panel works 30 years and 900 full hours per year this gives you +/- 5400 KWh output.

Permanent these solar generator using means :
 5400 KWh : 8766 ( hours per year)  : 200W ( 15% from 1333 Solarpeak) ~ 3 years lifetime
Important for the KWh- power generating price calculation,  or R. O. I.

Problem : we have not time duration experience with the latest thin film / foil solar cell technology                  and for short life generator I do not accept long life prices  and A-Grade quality  !

                      Costs reference for the market :
      Alvin Marks 1984 Lumilight 1/2 year lifetime tandem photovoltaic cell-foils for 1 US$/sqm production
                 
      costs and 56,25%( 75%*75%) light conversion efficiency :
                                1333 * 56,25% = 750 Wp/sqm. 

                     ---------------------------------------------------
 
    When 1984 1US$/750Wp and square- meter production costs then 2019 a fair market price is :
                              1 US Dollar-Cent per Wattpeak end consumer selling price  !                                   

                               Or: 7,5 US-Dollars per sqm solar panel

                                      Dr. Alvin wished to sell these sqm 1984 for 15 US$/sqm                       

                                                ( 15x  costs/consumer price lever )

                                    Patent-rights free market ware is ever 70% less expensive  !
       
Not to forget : the translucent liquid solar cell R&D and the "solar dots"- ink

                          spray-or/print able micro-technology     

       

        https://www.greenoptimistic.com/green-ferrite-solar-cell-japan-20110920/ (https://www.greenoptimistic.com/green-ferrite-solar-cell-japan-20110920/)
https://www.tandfonline.com/doi/abs/10.1080/00150193.2017.1349913?scroll=top&needAccess=true&journalCode=gfer20 (https://www.tandfonline.com/doi/abs/10.1080/00150193.2017.1349913?scroll=top&needAccess=true&journalCode=gfer20)

And storage R&D :
https://www.electronicsweekly.com/news/research-news/battery-lasts-200000-cycles-2016-05/
Title: Re: Why Over-Unity is Possible
Post by: AlienGrey on March 18, 2019, 03:30:58 PM
THE MOTHER AND FATHER OF FREE ENERGY IS EFFICIENCY, AND ONE NEEDS
TO KNOW WHERE THE ENERGY IS COMING FROM.. THE MOST ABANDON ENERGY
SOURCE IS HEAT ENERGY..AND YET NOT ONE HAS CREATED A FREE ENERGY HEAT PUMP
MACHINE.
Tell that Dennis Lee guy who ended up in the brig for doing just that !
https://www.youtube.com/watch?time_continue=2&v=02FFlBLax-Q
Title: Re: Why Over-Unity is Possible
Post by: synchro1 on March 18, 2019, 05:39:54 PM
The Over unity Gain Timan measures from pulsing his magnet core coil emanates from the quanta like the electricity generated by a thermocouple of two differing metals when heated. The magnet generates electricity when it reorders it's electrons and it passes to the coil through induction and is not related to any magnet field Faraday generating effect; Direcrtly from the molecular level.
Title: Re: Why Over-Unity is Possible
Post by: Floor on March 22, 2019, 10:08:07 PM
THE MOTHER AND FATHER OF FREE ENERGY IS EFFICIENCY, AND ONE NEEDS
TO KNOW WHERE THE ENERGY IS COMING FROM.. THE MOST ABANDON ENERGY
SOURCE IS HEAT ENERGY..AND YET NOT ONE HAS CREATED A FREE ENERGY HEAT PUMP
MACHINE.

1. Efficiency is a secondary consideration..... at best.

2.Mankind used fire for tens of thousands of years before we had any knowledge of
where it comes from.

3.The most abundant energy source is heat energy....  but  matter and dark matter are the most abundant forms of energy.

    floor
Title: Re: Why Over-Unity is Possible
Post by: seychelles on March 25, 2019, 05:42:45 PM
HERE IS MY FREE ENERGY HEAT PUMP INVENTIONS. THERE IS THREE SOURCE INPUT
OF HEAT ENERGY..1 THE AIR CONDITIONER THE HEAT IS COMING FROM AMBIENT AIR.
2 HOT WATER SOLAR PANEL, 3 A BIT OF A ENIGMA, PUT I WILL PUT IT AS A FRICTION
MATTER HEAT SOURCE..   
Title: Re: Why Over-Unity is Possible
Post by: lancaIV on March 26, 2019, 08:59:27 PM
With new methods we can experiment and get better results for the final optimized thermoelectric converter :
https://newatlas.com/shape-memory-alloy-nitinol-heating-cooling/58837/ (https://newatlas.com/shape-memory-alloy-nitinol-heating-cooling/58837/)
And nickel-titanium related :
https://3dprintingindustry.com/news/u-s-army-develop-ultra-strong-3d-printed-steel-parts-to-revolutionize-battlefield-logistics-150367/
Title: Re: Why Over-Unity is Possible
Post by: Tito L. Oracion on March 28, 2019, 09:11:40 AM
OVERUNITY IS POSSIBLE


SIMPLY BECAUSE WHEN THERE IS UNITY IN EVERYTHING, THINGS BECOMES POSSIBLE AND OVER!!! ;) 


AND THAT IS POWER!!! 8)
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wdi5HsjWZnc


SEE.? THATS HOW SIMPLE IT IS, JUST A MATTER OF CAREFULL PLANNING AND DESIGN . :)
GOT IT? :D
Title: Re: Why Over-Unity is Possible
Post by: synchro1 on March 28, 2019, 02:15:26 PM
Itzu reported going OU with his Tinman magnet core coil. No one has gotten back to his nonsense pulse motor thread on Overunity Research for two months.


Tinman is trying to build a pulse motor. I went about 40 times over unity with a piezo transducer chip oscillated by my spring pressure switch permanent magnet backed electromagnet oscillator already.


This output approach for the magnet core coil is much more efficient then a rotor like Tinman is attempting.


https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rIpsn_eZ2rY (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rIpsn_eZ2rY)
Title: Re: Why Over-Unity is Possible
Post by: synchro1 on March 28, 2019, 03:12:18 PM
The heat from the electromagnet coil is feeding the permanent magnets the thermal heating to offset the cooling effect of the magno-restrictive MCE of the pulse.


The electro magnet has a steel case between coil and ceramic magnets.




Title: Re: Why Over-Unity is Possible
Post by: seychelles on March 28, 2019, 07:16:42 PM
JUST LIKE TO REMIND YOU ALL THESE ARE OFF THE SELF ITEMS THAT CAN BE PURCHASE ANYWHERE IN THIS
WORLD.. THE FINAL OT WATER TO STEAM WATER CAVITY HEATER CAN BE REPLACED BY A MORE EFFICIENT
INDUCTION WATER TO STEAM INDUSTRIALIZE SYSTEM..
Title: Re: Why Over-Unity is Possible
Post by: lancaIV on March 29, 2019, 08:27:08 AM
https://www.google.com/search?q=charles+law&ie=utf-8&oe=utf-8&client=firefox-b (https://www.google.com/search?q=charles+law&ie=utf-8&oe=utf-8&client=firefox-b)

https://worldwide.espacenet.com/publicationDetails/biblio?DB=EPODOC&II=15&ND=3&adjacent=true&locale=en_EP&FT=D&date=19881020&CC=WO&NR=8808220A1&KC=A1# (https://worldwide.espacenet.com/publicationDetails/biblio?DB=EPODOC&II=15&ND=3&adjacent=true&locale=en_EP&FT=D&date=19881020&CC=WO&NR=8808220A1&KC=A1#)

"Photon( light) Phonon(wave) " absorber : black (w)hole principle

            vertere/tornar/winden/drehen:            "(w)hole"/Ampere-turn

https://translate.google.com/translate?hl=de&sl=de&tl=en&u=https%3A%2F%2Fde.m.wikipedia.org%2Fwiki%2FDynamoelektrisches_Prinzip (https://translate.google.com/translate?hl=de&sl=de&tl=en&u=https%3A%2F%2Fde.m.wikipedia.org%2Fwiki%2FDynamoelektrisches_Prinzip)


Mental designing :
http://www.arminwitt.de/hoegl.html (http://www.arminwitt.de/hoegl.html)
Steel + silicon https://www.cam.ac.uk/research/news/solar-grade-silicon-at-low-cost (https://www.cam.ac.uk/research/news/solar-grade-silicon-at-low-cost) solar grade 8 US$/Kg
https://translate.google.com/translate?hl=de&sl=de&tl=en&u=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.arminwitt.de%2Fhoegl.html (https://translate.google.com/translate?hl=de&sl=de&tl=en&u=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.arminwitt.de%2Fhoegl.html)
Next step would be similar low cost : https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Black_silicon (https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Black_silicon)

                                20-30% conversion efficiency of incident light :                                               

                                                              parabol foil
https://www.google.com/search?q=parabolic+solar+concentrator&tbm=isch&source=univ&client=firefox-b&sa=X&ved=0ahUKEwjkkNa_oKfhAhUwx4UKHeQ0Dd0QsAQIIA (https://www.google.com/search?q=parabolic+solar+concentrator&tbm=isch&source=univ&client=firefox-b&sa=X&ved=0ahUKEwjkkNa_oKfhAhUwx4UKHeQ0Dd0QsAQIIA)
                   Light concentrating factor ?" Coil cell "un-/ cooled,  in tube evacuated  ?!

                                                              As example :
 http://www.ecochunk.com/6361/2013/02/22/cool-earth-solar-develops-inflatable-solar-concentrators-to-boost-energy-production/ (http://www.ecochunk.com/6361/2013/02/22/cool-earth-solar-develops-inflatable-solar-concentrators-to-boost-energy-production/) ".... up to 1200 times more electricity ..... "
         From natural - periodically - light/ photon-phonon source to permanent 24/365 conversion process :

                                                        "Artificial fusion chamber "
             https://worldwide.espacenet.com/publicationDetails/biblio?DB=EPODOC&II=0&ND=3&adjacent=true&locale=en_EP&FT=D&date=19900201&CC=DE&NR=3817730A1&KC=A1# (https://worldwide.espacenet.com/publicationDetails/biblio?DB=EPODOC&II=0&ND=3&adjacent=true&locale=en_EP&FT=D&date=19900201&CC=DE&NR=3817730A1&KC=A1#)
                                                            And related :
              http://www.lenr-coldfusion.com/2013/03/14/lenr-cfl-light-bulbs/ (http://www.lenr-coldfusion.com/2013/03/14/lenr-cfl-light-bulbs/)
                        There is much research about radiant emission converting material :
https://www.google.com/search?q=carbon+instead+silicon+solar+cell&ie=utf-8&oe=utf-8&client=firefox-b (https://www.google.com/search?q=carbon+instead+silicon+solar+cell&ie=utf-8&oe=utf-8&client=firefox-b)



https://worldwide.espacenet.com/publicationDetails/biblio?DB=EPODOC&II=10&ND=3&adjacent=true&locale=en_EP&FT=D&date=20070201&CC=ES&NR=2265253A1&KC=A1# (https://worldwide.espacenet.com/publicationDetails/biblio?DB=EPODOC&II=10&ND=3&adjacent=true&locale=en_EP&FT=D&date=20070201&CC=ES&NR=2265253A1&KC=A1#)

https://worldwide.espacenet.com/publicationDetails/biblio?DB=EPODOC&II=29&ND=3&adjacent=true&locale=en_EP&FT=D&date=19941208&CC=DE&NR=4318270A1&KC=A1# (https://worldwide.espacenet.com/publicationDetails/biblio?DB=EPODOC&II=29&ND=3&adjacent=true&locale=en_EP&FT=D&date=19941208&CC=DE&NR=4318270A1&KC=A1#)

                                      Compact micro device production
https://worldwide.espacenet.com/publicationDetails/biblio?DB=EPODOC&II=3&ND=3&adjacent=true&locale=en_EP&FT=D&date=20040916&CC=US&NR=2004178874A1&KC=A1# (https://worldwide.espacenet.com/publicationDetails/biblio?DB=EPODOC&II=3&ND=3&adjacent=true&locale=en_EP&FT=D&date=20040916&CC=US&NR=2004178874A1&KC=A1#)
Title: Re: Why Over-Unity is Possible
Post by: lancaIV on March 30, 2019, 01:21:40 PM
                                          The " numbers" curiousity and treat
A.

             https://tesla3.com/wp-content/uploads/2016/11/zpe_hilden_brand_valve.gif (https://tesla3.com/wp-content/uploads/2016/11/zpe_hilden_brand_valve.gif)

                                    double the flux lines four times the force
     
     Question :                 only attractive or also repulsive ( internal/external field force )



B.                                               magnetic force to rotation


             Richard Fradella generator RPM/ output ratio description
                                          ( like all other conventional generators performance)

            rated and nominal 1000 RPM : 1000 W              1,00 W/ round

                                                500 RPM :    125 W.            0,25 W/ round

                                                100 RPM  :        1 W.  =       0,01 W/ round
                                   Measured efficiency in all three cases : around 95%


Several different ratio results to conclude ! By the same - only - " force converting machine"

This is important to understand the over-sized or under-sized use and performance of generators and/ or motors !                                              charge/ load : ideal resonance point

And to remark the great power saving potential if change from fix ( net frequency controlled) speed/ load to variable and controlled speed/load charge and pulse-2-magnetic force-2-pulse recharge circuit ( feedback cycle)
            And to transform this physical rotative process to MEG-calculation as "static dynamo".


 C.                     Force-" F= BIL" balance for counterforce ( BEMF/FEMF) neutralization
                          MMF/EMF ? permanent or periodically/ pulsative

               remark Hildenbrands number about "4 times force units amplification"
               
               8 Watt permant DC for electromagnetic force/ 1 inch permanent neo magnet force aequivalence
               = 8 W permanent DC/ 3 ( surplus) units ~ 2,6 W permanent DC per mmf unit
               working with pulsed DC  pulse: current on/ off cycles + feedback cycle

             Motor disc rotor : 360° cycle , 2 poles with 10° attraction/repulsion space : 10° /360° = 1/36 power on                                             and 35/36 power off
                                     
                                             rated 360 W = pole field Watt consume = periodic energy need = 360 W/36

D.  " free energy home plant" study and error/ success controls for best performance :        in household the " consume Wattpeak centre" : the kitchen       
       The greatest task to resolve :       https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:Inrush_current.gif (https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:Inrush_current.gif)

                                             http://rakarskiy.narod.ru/_si/0/19966480.jpg (http://rakarskiy.narod.ru/_si/0/19966480.jpg)                                             
                                               To controle and regulate :
                 https://www.ametherm.com/inrush-current/inverter-inrush-current-protection (https://www.ametherm.com/inrush-current/inverter-inrush-current-protection)
                 V-Ampere-max. peak and V-Ampere- average peak and duration !
           
             
                 -------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

                                      Out from inverter : up 3 KWh power per day                                      + solar collector heat

                 https://translate.google.com/translate?hl=de&sl=de&tl=en&u=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.oeko-energie.de%2Fprodukte%2Fsolarstrom-photovoltaik%2Finselanlagen%2Findex.php (https://translate.google.com/translate?hl=de&sl=de&tl=en&u=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.oeko-energie.de%2Fprodukte%2Fsolarstrom-photovoltaik%2Finselanlagen%2Findex.php)                                                       

                                                       https://mtbest.net/
 (https://mtbest.net/)           
                                                     
                                                             sommer/ warm season
   
                  3 KWh = 3000 Wh / 24 hours = 125 Watt generator output need /0,5( losts charger,  battery,  cable)
                                                    sufficient by battery-storage :


                                                    250 Watt nonstop  generator
                                                   5000 Watt-hour batteryset
                                                 
                               Better : partial  " on demand" load charge delivery by generator
                                            and lower capacity battery-set ( DoD- malus)                                     

                                                  500 Wp nonstop generator                                             

                                                3000 W-hour batteryset

   Actually there is price related a scientifical competition between battery and hydrogen technology   
             so probably instead batteryset hydrogen-genset

  Or the development from a 1 KW by load demand controled mo-gen rorative/ mo-gen static makes the batterysetand hydrogen-genset obsolete.
Title: Re: Why Over-Unity is Possible
Post by: lancaIV on March 31, 2019, 12:33:38 AM
Rare,  double sided motor shaft,  but existent. !
https://www.google.com/search?q=double+side+motor+shaft&ie=utf-8&oe=utf-8&client=firefox-b (https://www.google.com/search?q=double+side+motor+shaft&ie=utf-8&oe=utf-8&client=firefox-b)
"Relative speed accelerator ":
a generator with rotative rotor and fixed stator to rotative stator : outer and inner rotor : one cw and the other ccw
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
the rotative generator stator combine/ couple  with one motor-shaft side and the rotative generator rotor combine/ couple with the other motor shaft side
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Only with this combination we get a transformer ( con-/inverter)  equivalent rotative circuit cycle. !
Title: Re: Why Over-Unity is Possible
Post by: lancaIV on April 01, 2019, 01:30:24 PM
https://www.google.com/search?q=akio+hara+winpro&ie=utf-8&oe=utf-8&client=firefox-b (https://www.google.com/search?q=akio+hara+winpro&ie=utf-8&oe=utf-8&client=firefox-b)

                                   "Company overwiew" PDF :

                     Characteristic of New Wind-Power Generator ( E= 1/2 m v2)


                                and here their commercial application
https://worldwide.espacenet.com/publicationDetails/description?CC=EP&NR=2383870A4&KC=A4&FT=D&ND=&date=20170412&DB=&locale=# (https://worldwide.espacenet.com/publicationDetails/description?CC=EP&NR=2383870A4&KC=A4&FT=D&ND=&date=20170412&DB=&locale=#)
                               [0050]  description kinetic-mechanical power in/ electric power out ratio?




                                                                                and
                    https://www.voanews.com/a/can-better-electric-motor-save-planet/4235140.html (https://www.voanews.com/a/can-better-electric-motor-save-planet/4235140.html)     

                                      description electric input/ kinetic-mechanical output ratio
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                             Generator-Motor couple
                   eta < 1               efficiency < 100%                  C.O.P. : 2/0,5 = 4

                       4 times better than conventional  Generator-Motor couple = 75% savings per couple                                                   
                                    Generator-Motor-Cascade-Network : on- or off-grid

                      1st couple C.O.P.  :                =       4.                     75,00%      savings related "old society method"

                      2nd couple C.O.P. : 4x4         =     16                     93,75%.     savings   

                      3rd couple C.O.P. : 4x4x4.    =      64.                    98,43%      savings

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Reply 98, B : The Richard "Dick" Fradella Generator ( motor)  behaviour easy compared :
https://worldwide.espacenet.com/publicationDetails/description?CC=US&NR=2012256422A1&KC=A1&FT=D&ND=3&date=20121011&DB=EPODOC&locale=en_EP# (https://worldwide.espacenet.com/publicationDetails/description?CC=US&NR=2012256422A1&KC=A1&FT=D&ND=3&date=20121011&DB=EPODOC&locale=en_EP#)

                                                                                 [0092]

           Basic x Acceleration                                     1000 RPM   1000 W output    = 1,00 W/RPM         

                                                                                     200%.Basic                                  400%Basic
         
                                                   
                                                                                 [0093] base line

         Basic power/ velocity.                                      500 RPM.    125 W output.    = 0,25 W/RPM

                                                                                      100%= Basic                              100%= Basic


                                                                                [0094]


          Basic x Deceleration.                                        100 RPM.       1 W output      =  0,01W/RPM       

                                                                                        20% Basic.                                      4% Basic


 
                                                 https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pareto_principle (https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pareto_principle)                             

                                                     Pareto "power law and distribution"