Free Energy | searching for free energy and discussing free energy
New theories about free energy systems => Theory of overunity and free energy => Topic started by: guest1289 on March 30, 2017, 12:50:27 AM
-
Important Potential ? Update To My Magnet-Motor-3.5
I was thinking/searching for potential reasons why my Magnet-Motor-3.5 might not function( since I don't know if it does or not ), I thought of a possible ? reason( that it could potentially ? go backwards, but that means it would function anyway ?, unless it would all balance ), and made a modification to my design, and have posted the modified-design-diagram below as :
MAGNET-MOTOR - UPDATE.JPG
____
The Simplest Proof That Free-Energy Can Be Attained From Gravity Via Momentum ?
- Use x-amount of energy to push a ball up a hill
- not only will the ball roll down that particular hill, but also, because of the momentum it has gained in rolling down the hill, it will also roll up( how far? ) another identical hill, or up a different hill
- I wonder if the total theoretical energy recoverable/gained?, is more than "x-amount of energy used to push the ball up the hill"
____
Pelton-Wheel Magnet-Motor Idea
Some time ago I posted my idea about a magnet-motor that could be based on the pelton-wheels that are commonly used on hydro-electric-generators
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pelton_wheel
- IMPORTANT
- Instead of the pelton-wheel being made of magnets, it could be made of a strong diamagnetic material like pyrolytic-carbon/pyrolytic-graphite or bismuth
IMPORTANT NOTE - According to a google search, I think this was already designed and constructed using pyrolytic-carbon/pyrolytic-graphite, by someone else, in the last couple of years, so that would mean I did not invent that, no surprise, it's such a simple idea.
However, I don't know if the device I found on the internet uses the 'offset-effect' to overcome sticky-points, but it may, I think it may use multiple-magnets to drive it, I will look at it later.
However, I was hoping to find a picture on the internet of a pelton-wheel with more than 2 rows of 'cups/half-balls', and 'each' row should be slightly 'Offset' from the other rows, in other words, one that would sort of replicate the 'Offset-Effect'( to overcome sticky-points ) I use in my magnet-motors like in my Magnet-Motor-3.5( for example ), although I used it in magnet-motor designs before that one.
But at the moment I can not find a picture of such a pelton-wheel.
Although, you could just put a few wheels on the same shaft but slightly offset, out of synch, with each other.
____
Magnet-Motor Concepts For Use In Gravity-Motors
I have noticed/wondered that maybe, concepts used in many of my magnet-motors could possibly be used for gravity-motors.
But now, the only concept I can think of, used in any of my magnet-motors that could maybe be used as a basis for gravity-motor could my magnet-motor in the diagram below :
magnet-motor concept to gravity-motor.JPG
But then that would( almost sure ) be the same as all those other common gravity-motor designs
-
guest1289
The Simplest Proof That Free-Energy Can Be Attained From Gravity Via Momentum ?
- Use x-amount of energy to push a ball up a hill
- not only will the ball roll down that particular hill, but also, because of the momentum it has gained in rolling down the hill, it will also roll up( how far? ) another identical hill, or up a different hill
- I wonder if the total theoretical energy recoverable/gained?, is more than "x-amount of energy used to push the ball up the hill"
I think there is probably no possible energy gain in the example above.
( Flywheels : - once flywheels are spinning, they only need input-energy to maintain a certain speed, they no longer need the initial input-energy to get them from not-moving - then to a certain speed , at the moment I can't see if there definitely is or is not any possible energy gain there, since it would all depend on the types of dynamos and pulsers( or motors ) that would be used, and I may not even be correct in that last sentence )
____
guest1289
Pelton-Wheel Magnet-Motor Idea
Some time ago I posted my idea about a magnet-motor that could be based on the pelton-wheels that are commonly used on hydro-electric-generators
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pelton_wheel
- IMPORTANT
- Instead of the pelton-wheel being made of magnets, it could be made of a strong diamagnetic material like pyrolytic-carbon/pyrolytic-graphite or bismuth
IMPORTANT NOTE - According to a google search, I think this was already designed and constructed using pyrolytic-carbon/pyrolytic-graphite, by someone else, in the last couple of years, so that would mean I did not invent that, no surprise, it's such a simple idea.
However, I don't know if the device I found on the internet uses the 'offset-effect' to overcome sticky-points, but it may, I think it may use multiple-magnets to drive it, I will look at it later.
When I re-looked at what I found via a google search, it seems that what I found does not utilize Pelton-Wheel shapes ( but it does use pyrolytic-carbon/pyrolytic-graphite )
____
Magnet-Motor Concepts For Use In Gravity-Motors
I later remembered that some basic-principles upon which my Magnet-Motor-3.5 is based( which I had also used in 'at least' one design prior to Magnet-Motor-3.5, 'or in more' ), can also be the basic-principles of :
- A Gravity-Motor . or
- A Spring-Powered Motor
So keeping in mind the basic-principles upon which my Magnet-Motor-3.5 is based, the 'diagram below' shows my design for either :
- A Gravity-Motor . or
- A Spring-Powered Motor
That really makes wonder, if the 'spring-powered-motor' were to actually function successfully, what could actually be the source of it's power down at an atomic/molecular-level, could the source actually be the molecular-bonds between atoms that cause the spring to always return back to it's original shape.
Then that made me wonder/realize, that the source of power that could potentially be derived from magnets, could also 'possibly' be the molecular-bonds between atoms that cause the atoms( electrons? ) in magnets to all align in the same direction, or at least, that is another way of looking at it.
-
Solid-State Version Of My Magnet-Motor-3.5
Just posting it to post some general concepts, I haven't thought of all the details, so I have no idea if such a device could ever run successfully .
A solid-state version of my magnet-motor-3.5, obviously the aim being to permanently keep current flowing in the device, and self-running.
The important component seems to be the switch, since in some versions of this device I hope the switch could detect a stronger-flux-path( stronger magnetic attraction ) in order to keep the device switching from one coil-core and to the next coil-core.
It is that very switching action which would generate the current in the device, so I assume the output would be made of pulses.
I would probably want to avoid using capacitors, due to energy loss( electromotive-force out into the environment ?) when they discharge .
-
The problem is, the magnetic flux cannot be interrupted or switched - only conducted or scattered into a larger volume. But at the end all magnetic lines of force must get close somehow and the force between magnets will get restored in this way. Even the magnetic pipes ("flux path conductors" in your diagrams) will be quite complicated and they consist of alternating layers of ferromagnet and superconductor (which prohibits the spreading of magnetic lines of force into outside).
-
I forgot to post probably my simplest and maybe( or maybe not, I don't know ) most important idea for a Solid-State Version Of My Magnet-Motor-3.5
In the diagrams below, diagrams 4.0, and 4.1, if a single pulse of current is given to the coil, then the magnetic-field emitted by the core or coil, is attracted( or can be designed to be repelled ) away from the coil or core, and towards the triangle-shaped magnet or iron, and because the triangle is an unsymmetrical type of shape , it may tend to 'progressively'( but obviously very fastly ) attract the emitted magnetic-field( from the core or coil ) from the weaker end of triangle and to the stronger end of triangle, in effect, 'creating more movement' of the magnetic-field than would have occurred by using a more symmetrical shape( instead of the triangle ).
More movement of the magnetic-field can often result in more energy generated.
My ideas for solid-state versions of my magnet-motor-3.5 are longshot ideas, I'm only posting them in case they can be developed further.
In diagrams 4.2, and 4.3, the coil, or the core, is put inside a cone which is either a magnet, or is made of iron, for the same effect as above .
-
This is an electromagnetic analogy of magnetic ramp (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=V5RjEbdmAYw) - just instead of magnetic sphere the electromagnetic coil is supposed to climb along gradient of magnetic field. It works, it just doesn't generate any overunity (if we ignore somewhat esoteric SMOT device (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=j-wnSdT_-fI), which wasn't proven yet)
-
I like your example with the ball rolling down the hill. Basicly every football is an overunity device.
But gravity isn't directly substitutable by magnetism. As there is no repelling in gravity.
-
Zephir
The problem is, the magnetic flux cannot be interrupted or switched - only conducted or scattered into a larger volume. But at the end all magnetic lines of force must get close somehow and the force between magnets will get restored in this way. Even the magnetic pipes ("flux path conductors" in your diagrams) will be quite complicated and they consist of alternating layers of ferromagnet and superconductor (which prohibits the spreading of magnetic lines of force into outside).
Yes, those are the types of details I have not worked out
I'm mostly posting overly-general-concepts for a Solid-State version of my "Magnet-Motor-3.5", rather than how specific components like the 'switch' would function
The 'flux-path-conductors' I drew on the diagram are part of a 'component' in the design that tries to 'maximize' the strength of each pulse, I don't know if it would work as designed, anyone could replace them with a simpler design
The component I drew containing the 'coil-with-core' and the 'flux-path-conductor' are either a copy of dieter 's 'pulsed-motor design'( the version of his motor I commented on ), or where I got the idea, I just added a 'switch'( a 'switch' that I'm not sure how it would function )
Note : Dieter 's 'pulsed-motor design' already had the switch, but in that motor it was the rotor
Note : "Magnetic pipes" / "flux path conductors", I wonder if a 'long-cylinder-donut-magnet' can conduct the magnetic-field of another magnet through it's hollow, keeping in mind that 'magnetic-sphere'( monopole generator ) device built at the university in barcelona
I only drew "Magnetic pipes" / "flux path conductors" because of dieter 's 'pulsed-motor design'( the version of his motor I commented on ), I just assume that if anyone were ever to build anything relating to my designs that they would replace any unworkable components/concepts, with workable components/concepts
_____
dieter
I like your example with the ball rolling down the hill. Basicly every football is an overunity device.
But gravity isn't directly substitutable by magnetism. As there is no repelling in gravity.
In my diagram, in a previous post above in this thread, I posted the diagram :
'GRAVITY, OR SPRING, POWERED MOTOR.JPG'
I then realized that in that diagram, it would actually be the 'gravity/mass-powered-version' that would be much more likely to function, rather than the 'spring-powered-version', because when the spring expands its force gets weaker, unlike gravity which would never vary in strength in that device
You could say gravity has N and S poles , when an object is going against gravity, or when it's falling
if you read the beginning of this post, you'll see that I mention that I either copied or adapted( I added a 'switch') the version of your pulsed-motor that I had commented on, I doubt that either you or I care, since all these designs go nowhere
Note : Your pulsed-motor already had the switch, but in your motor it was the rotor
_____
I have just remembered the main reason why I think that a 'solid-state-version' of my 'magnet-motor-3.5' could have some small chance of functioning
In the 2 diagrams below, at the bottom of each diagram there is a time measurement ruler, if you look above the ruler you will see multiple rows of coils
- Each row of coils is slightly offset from the other rows, which means that different rows?/coils? would pulse at different points in time from the other rows?/coils?
- That is the primary justification for having so many coils and / or seperate rows-of-coils, it is just like the 'numerous' stators and 'multiple' rotor 'components in my 'magnet-motor-3.5'
The offset / un-synchronized pulsing between the different rows?/coils?, would mean that 'at any one point in time', when a coil(coils ) is pulsed, it provides the energy to activate a pulse for another coil(coils ) that is presently not being pulsed, that is the exact method by which the sticky-points in this 'solid-state-version' of my 'magnet-motor-3.5' are overcome
Of the 2 diagrams / versions below, maybe only the diagram/version containing the triangle shapes would provide the necessary electromagnetic-propulsion that would keep this device going/self-running
-
dieter had said on another thread that if you put a '1-tesla'-neodymium-magnet onto a piece of iron( of identical size ?/ shape ? ) , that you will then have 2-tesla ?
( it may have been the thread about 'simple experiments' to prove overunity via magnets )
Is that accurate / correct / precise ?
If it is correct, then look at the 2 diagrams below, is there any possibility for energy amplification if you maybe change the core shapes to squares instead of rectangles, or whatever other modifications could be made
-
This post is just to post some things, rather than needing any information
The Bifilar Pancake Coil
- Maybe if it was made as a long cylinder, instead of as a pancake, it could maybe generate more energy, and block the ends of with pyrolytic-carbon/pyrolytic-graphite or bismuth, or with magnets, to ensure as much as possible is reflected back into coil
- And if it was made as a donut with some sort of diode component/effect, then the energy would be continuously re-cycled
_______
Gravity-Shielding
Gravity-Shielding ideas usually involve things like spinning superconductors, and/or electrical-flow
But what about those forces between protons and neutrons that keep them together
At close distance, those forces between protons and neutrons are enough to keep them together, but maybe if you add up that total force in a mass, then that may explain the effect of gravity at long distances, I wonder if it was theoretically possible to remove all the electrons( and? electromotive-force? ) from a material, maybe it could be a gravity-shield.
_______
The Loss Of Energy When Capacitors Discharge
When capacitors discharge, apparently they lose 50% of their energy into the environment, I assume as electromotive-force and heat
What about encasing capacitors in pyrolytic-carbon/pyrolytic-graphite or bismuth, or inside magnets, to reflect the lost energy back into the device.
Although maybe it would cause them to melt.
_______
A Completely Shielded Electrical Circuit
Using pyrolytic-carbon/pyrolytic-graphite or bismuth, or magnets, to completly encase an electrical-circuit, to reflect as much as possible lost energy back into the circuit
-
We know that adding permanent-magnets to an electric-motor increases the speed/torque, and I read that the 'percentage' of the increase in the speed/torque decreases with the more magnets you add, and I also read that according to a member on this site, that that problem( that the 'percentage' of the increase in the speed/torque decreases with the more magnets you add ) does not apply to solenoids/electromagnets.
So, for a DC-motor/Faraday-type-motor, I wonder if the 'diagram-below' , would be a method to add permanent-magnets to a DC-motor/Faraday-type-motor without the problem of [ "the 'percentage' of the increase in the speed/torque decreases with the more magnets you add" )
In the 'diagram-below' , the grey-cylinders are cylinder-magnets( could be made of individual disk-magnets ) and the light-blue-cylinder is a DC electrical-conductor( solid or hollow ).
So theoretically( according to my unproven idea ) you could keep making the grey-cylinders and the light-blue-cylinder longer and longer, and each time you do, you gain more speed/torque.
______
Spring-Powered-Version Of My Magnet-Motor-3.5
My diagram on a previous post in this thread :
GRAVITY, OR SPRING, POWERED MOTOR.JPG
contains both a Gravity-powered-version, and a Spring-powered-version, of my Magnet-Motor-3.5
I then came to a conclusion that the Spring-powered-version 'may' have even less chance of functioning than I thought, because the force from a spring decreases as it expands.
So, my solution would be to add another 'Identical-Spring' to each spring-powered-moving-component, However, the 2nd-'Identical-Spring' would pull down the spring-powered-moving-component while the 1st-spring in the spring-powered-moving-component is pushing the spring-powered-moving-component down, this way, there will be no loss of spring-force as the spring expands.
______
Gravity
My possible explanation for what gravity is, is that floating particles of Aether are 'on-average' like grid-points throughout the universe.
So, on something like a proton, when one these Aether-Grid-Points touches a proton, it briefly? sticks to it through a surface-tension-effect( like water-surface-effect, or casimir-effect, or magnets ) and then these Aether-Grid-Points form lines between the proton and any other relevant particles, but to form those lines, other particles of Aether float in to fill the gaps between the Aether-Grid-Points, to form solid lines, with all the particles of this gravity-line made of Aether held together by the surface-tension-effect( like water-surface-effect, or casimir-effect, or magnets )
However, then those lines of gravity would be so dense that they would out-weigh any other matter
So, my explanation is that those lines of gravity form and collapse continually, so fast that they don't form matter
______
Pelton Wheel Magnus-Effect / Pelton Wheel Flettner Aircraft
Simply my idea is to either add Pelton-Wheel like scoops to these rotating cylinders, or just add raised bumps, for whatever advantage
I wonder if they actually misunderstand how this effect works, I'm looking at the first diagram on the wikipedia-page for the Magnus-Effect, and I wonder if what actually happens is that as the bottom-cylinder-surface rotates( at the exact horizontal instance of it's rotation ) 'towards' the air, it therefore creates more friction than the top-cylinder-surface( which rotates 'away from' the air), the result being lift.
_____
I had not taken sufficient notice before that the Bessler-Wheel/wheels have pendulum-type-devices( and other things ) linked to his devices/wheels, and not hidden from view
The last incident of a fake-device hand-driven by a shaft through a wall may very well have occurred, but it does not mean all his machines were fake, the designs would have been very hard to fine-tune to get them working, so he may failed on his last design.
The pendulums( and whatever else ) linked to his wheels could have been to break the symmetry of gravity?, by linking the propulsion/momentum from the pendulumsl( and whatever else ) sitting outside the wheel, to the propulsion/momentum emitted by the devices hidden inside the wheels, in other words, the momentum/proplulsion from two very different types of devices/structures with different properties, when connected / interlinked, break the the symmetry of gravity?
The pendulumsl( and whatever else ) sitting outside the wheels, and linked to his wheels, could have been a method to overcome the sticky-points of the device/devices hidden inside the wheels.
It is possible that the device/devices hidden inside the wheels were either just the well-known older designs by previous-inventors, things like balls or swinging-levers, or, that they were just devices designed to create noise to make people think that the secret was hidden inside the wheels, when in fact the secret to his devices was in full open view all along.
-
I forgot to add in that post above I made just now, that maybe a reason why scientists can't get their maths to add up regarding mass-anomalies of the universe or is it gravity-anomalies of the universe is because of an unequal distribution(density?) of Aether in different parts of the universe, in reference to my theory I posted in the post above
on the outermost areas of the universe it could be logical that there would be less aether , although there would be all sorts of other factors also causing unequal distribution(density?) of Aether in different areas
_____
Also, it would seem that All-Permanent-Magnet-'Full'-Levitation does in fact seem to be connected directly/or,-not-completely-directly to a method of overunity, otherwise you would see it posted
-
Can electric-currents flow in a wire or any conductor in both directions at the same time.
( can 2 DC-currents flow in a wire( or any conductor) in both directions at the same time )
NOTE : For the following, I know that coaxial-cable is made of 2 separate conductors, the central-wire, and the metallic-shield( which also has current running through )
Some time ago, I had found a webpage claiming that in antennas/coaxial-cable, I can't remember if it was antennas or coaxial-cable, that it is known that DC-electric-current flows through them in both directions at the same time.
I can see some logic that that may be possible in antennas, since current is not forced through them in 2 directions at the same time, rather, that the antenna receives only as much as it can from the air, and if there is any type of current that is fed from the tv/radio to the antenna, then that is the only current that is forced through it , therefore, the antenna could naturally balances how much current it allows to pass in both directions at the same time.
But then there's the problem inductance,
[ I think, that when a DC-current flows through a wire,
- that it is the inductance-effect which causes the wire to emit an electromagnetic-field,
- that it is the same inductance-effect that allows a current-carrying-wire to induce an electric-current in a 'separate' previously non-current-carrying wire,
that "causes a wire( which is not being induced ) to emit an electromagnetic-field when a DC-current flows it ]
- So that if 2 DC-currents were to flow in a wire( or any conductor) in both directions at the same time, then it would also be their 'electromagnetic-fields' that would be colliding ' inside, and outside of the wire or antenna , which would make it even more difficult to occur.
My theory I have just typed above, about :
"that when a DC-current flows through a wire,
- that it is the inductance-effect which causes the wire to emit an electromagnetic-field"
could possibly be tested using a single strand/wire of graphene( instead of the normal graphene mesh ), since a single strand/wire of graphene would only be 1-atom-thick( have a cross-section of 1-atom )
, although at this stage it is getting too complicated/advanced for me to think about, or at least for now anyway
EDIT : Any suitable electrically-conductive material could be used instead of graphene, as long as it's only 1-atom-thick( have a cross-section of 1-atom )
______
In my post : "Reply #10 on: April 12, 2017, 08:52:53 PM" I forgot to add the diagram for :
We know that adding permanent-magnets to an electric-motor increases the speed/torque, and I read that the 'percentage' of the increase in the speed/torque decreases with the more magnets you add, and I also read that according to a member on this site, that that problem( that the 'percentage' of the increase in the speed/torque decreases with the more magnets you add ) does not apply to solenoids/electromagnets.
So, for a DC-motor/Faraday-type-motor, I wonder if the 'diagram-below' , would be a method to add permanent-magnets to a DC-motor/Faraday-type-motor without the problem of [ "the 'percentage' of the increase in the speed/torque decreases with the more magnets you add" )
In the 'diagram-below' , the grey-cylinders are cylinder-magnets( could be made of individual disk-magnets ) and the light-blue-cylinder is a DC electrical-conductor( solid or hollow ).
So theoretically( according to my unproven idea ) you could keep making the grey-cylinders and the light-blue-cylinder longer and longer, and each time you do, you gain more speed/torque.
So the diagram for that post is below .
______
-
Thinking of different ways to achieve propulsion( rotation, or any propulsion ) via electromagnetic-fields( generated from electricity ) acting against permanent-magnets,
Or, via electromagnetic-fields( generated from electricity ) acting against any other forces, like for example, against electric-fields from electrets
Or, via permanent-magnets acting against electric-fields from electrets
In the diagram below, the central-grey spheres are permanent-disk-magnets, and they are surrounded by a loop-of-DC-current, or by a half-loop-of-DC-current in the second version
I don't know if the diagram produces any rotation, but the reason I have drawn it is to try and visualize the electric-field emitted by the loop-of-DC-current( or by a half-loop in the second version ), to try and see if it should cause any rotation.
I have read on this site, and on other places on the internet that electric-fields and the magnetic-fields from permanent-magnets do in fact interact, in terms of achieving a propulsion effect, it's definitely something I have found almost no information about
Another possibility for that diagram could be to replace the central-grey spheres which are permanent-disk-magnets, with electrets
-
I avoid including advanced electronics or integrated-circuits in the designs I post on this site, since there are often simpler ways of achieving the same effects, and/or I have little knowledge of electronics/IC's
In previous posts on this thread I posted my design/designs for a solid-state version of my magnet-motor-3.5, and in those designs I could have used a sequential-switching-component, to switch from one coil and to the next coil and to the next coil etc
Maybe a 'jacob's ladder' spark-gap type device could be the sequential-switching-component, and if a device like that could be miniaturized then maybe it could be a future electronics-component like capacitors/diodes/resistors
-
Spring-Powered-Version Of My Magnet-Motor-3.5
In the diagram below of my Spring-powered-version of my Magnet-motor-3.5, it shows the exact spacing between the Spring-Powered-Components that would ensure that there is never more than one Spring-Powered-Component going up-hill on 1 down-up section of the track, in order to minimize the up-hill section as being a sticky-point in the motor, however, I'm not sure if that would actually make a difference in terms of the over-all forces occurring in the motor.
AND ALSO : In the diagram below, I have connected 2 identical motors with a connecting-rod, this further replicates some advantageous forces occurring in my magnet-motor-3.5.
This connecting-rod could? make it possible for one motor to help the other motor get over a sticky-spot especially when the first motor has no spring-powered-component going up-hill on the relevant down-up section of the track , this, and maybe the spacing-concept in the previous paragraph, are very important concepts translated from my magnet-motor-3.5 .
IMPORTANT NOTE : In a previous post I mentioned that it may be necessary to add a 2nd-'Identical-Spring' to each spring-powered-component to eliminate the problem of the force from springs decreasing as they expand :
I then came to a conclusion that the Spring-powered-version 'may' have even less chance of functioning than I thought, because the force from a spring decreases as it expands.
So, my solution would be to add another 'Identical-Spring' to each spring-powered-moving-component, However, the 2nd-'Identical-Spring' would pull down the spring-powered-moving-component while the 1st-spring in the spring-powered-moving-component is pushing the spring-powered-moving-component down, this way, there will be no loss of spring-force as the spring expands.
-
Perpetual-Motion Of Gases Powered Generator
In gases( and liquids ) the 'atoms / molecules' never stop moving.
My idea( as far as I know) is that some type of gas would be held( maybe under pressure ) in a container lined with a 'special-material'( something similar to photo-voltaic materials )
When a gas-atom collides with the 'special-material' , a photon( or part of the electron ) goes into the 'special-material' and causes electrical-current to flow in the 'special-material'.
Note : Obviously the 'special-material'( something similar to photo-voltaic materials ) should not have any protective layer of glass or plastic
I choose gas rather than liquid since I assume that gas-atoms collide with things at a much higher velocity than liquid-atoms.
When an atom-of-gas bumps into something, it is always the electron-shell of the atom-of-gas that bumps into something, so as far as I know( or guess ) this is 'one' reason why electrons are continuosly loosing and gaining photons( each time electrons loose or gain photons they go into a higher or lower orbits )
-
In my theory the overunity can be generated from thermal fluctuations by lowering their dimensionality at some point. If we put a charged capacitor inside the hot gas, then the molecules of gas will hit the capacitor and they will induce voltage spikes into it. This noise can be measured as a common thermoelectric noise within electronic circuits and it indeed decreases with temperature.
The problem is, this noise cannot be rectified and utilized in any way, once the rectifying diode remains as hot, as the gas, the energy of which we are just trying to utilize. Once we will cool this diode, then yes, the noise of diode will be lower than the thermoelectric noise and we would get some voltage on it. The problem is, such an energy production will be just another form of thermoelectric pile, because the diode will gradually heat itself just with the electric noise, which it rectifies. So we must cool it for to keep the production of energy running and this cooling would also require an energy.
In this respect it's interesting, that the we can drain a quite substantial energy flux by cooling surface with cosmic space. Recently such a surface has been constructed (http://physicsworld.com/cws/article/news/2014/nov/27/device-cools-itself-in-the-blazing-hot-sun) by layering of nanosurfaces and it keeps cool itself between 4 and 5 degrees below the surrounding air temperature - which is already temperature difference worth of utilization with classical thermoelectric Peltier cell.
For example, Ann Makosinski (http://www.cbc.ca/news/technology/body-heat-powered-flashlight-takes-teen-to-google-science-fair-1.1317745) did use (https://www.googlesciencefair.com/en/projects/ahJzfnNjaWVuY2VmYWlyLTIwMTJyRAsSC1Byb2plY3RTaXRlIjNhaEp6Zm5OamFXVnVZMlZtWVdseUxUSXdNVEp5RUFzU0IxQnliMnBsWTNRWXA2ZVVBZ3cM) power converter integrated circuit, LTC3108 (http://cds.linear.com/docs/en/datasheet/3108fc.pdf) for it. The circuit contained FET’s that would oscillate at voltages as low as 20mV. When used with a recommended transformer, the IC would provide well over 2.5 volts AC. Ann got for 50 mV DC from the Peltiers about 6 mA at 5 Volts AC which was sufficient to light the LED. The result was a bright light at just 5 degree Celcius of Peltier differential.
But such a way of energy generation isn't still free energy in classical sense, overunity the less. We are just draining an energy from accelerated cooling of Earth with cosmic space, i.e. we are still utilizing solar and geothermal energy - just in indirect and diluted way not worth the effort.
In my opinion the situation with utilization of thermoelectric noise will change, if we wouldn't collect voltage fluctuations with 3D resistor, but with some thin narrow 2D plate (graphene layer) or even 1D nanowire (carbon nanotube). The trick here is, once we constrain electrons in their motion in one dimension, then the energy of their vibrations increases in remaining dimensions. The thermoelectric noise at the end of such nanowire will be therefore larger, than at previous 3D case and we can rectify it even with diode at the same temperature. Recently so-called time crystals (https://www.reddit.com/r/Physics_AWT/comments/5rmgsm/scientists_create_a_new_kind_of_matter_time/) (a miniature perpetuum mobiles in essence) were observed, which are working on the same principle (constraining motion of charged particles with Penning or magnetic trap).
Because the PN junction of diodes is actually quite narrow, even common LED diode (https://phys.org/news/2012-03-efficiency.html) can exhibit a tiny overunity, once it gets polarized in the proper direction. Of course, such an effect is quite weak at the case of single diode - but we can multiply it with usage of graphite nanolayers or nanotubes suspended within charged electret - which is IMO the principle, on which the Steorn Orbo Cube technology (https://www.reddit.com/r/Physics_AWT/comments/4u4ljs/graphite_based_thermoelectric_generators/) was working.
-
Below is a diagram of some designs I made which are intended to cause either gas( or liquid ) or aether, to propel itself in just one direction, just through the perpetual-motion characteristic of gas( or liquid ) molecules/atoms.
I have some slight reason to think that the point near the triangles marked 'interaction-point', is the point of 'maximum-pressure-?' where gas/liquid/aether would tend to be ejected from the triangles, although of course material would equally be drawn in again after ejection
I also included a half-dome design
I assume aether would have no reason to have the perpetual-motion characteristic of gas( or liquid ) molecules/atoms, but I included it in this description anyway.
( and I assume there's alternate theories that aether is always darting around all over the place )
For an aether-version, the walls of the containment-shape of the device would either be magnets or electromagnets or electrets
My/these designs also have some sort of similarity with the way the surprising electromagnetic-space-drive tested by the space-agency functions, keeping in mind the shape used by the electromagnetic-space-drive , although the similarity becomes ambiguous/confusing
UPDATE : I have now attached another diagram to this post, in which I have optimized the design
Also note, the gas( or liquid ) or aether is intended to flow inside a closed loop for power generation or for whatever else
-
Is it correct. that if you have a radio-receiver that has been tuned to be in resonance with a specific-radio-transmitter that the radio-receiver will bend the radio-waves trajectories in order to draw them into the receiver,
In other words, that the radio-receiver will behave like a magnet attracting iron-filings that have been thrown in the air
that would disprove science much more than magnet-motors
Is it on youtube etc
If this is correct, and keeping in mind that different components inside devices like computers transmit at different frequencies and I assume at different 'resonances', then that could shut down individual components of computers and other devices
And keep in mind that living things also emit radiation, do they have a resonance
What about a hot cup of water, could you theoretically have a radiation-receiver that would be in resonance with that hot cup of water, and could it freeze it
( could it refreeze the earths north / south pole, or freeze volcanic lava, and if a tornado has resonance could it turn of a tornado or other weather modification etc , clouds/thunderclouds, deep earth electrical currents etc)
In tests to determine the resonance of different objects, the object is either sitting or held by something, would that not affect it's resonance, would it be better to magnetically or diamagnetically or electrostatically levitate it instead , although even that could affect it's resonance
-
A new magnet motor by LARSKRO.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=s18h5X2sDZU&feature=iv&src_vid=71vtcl-G4dw&annotation_id=channel%3A58793cbf-0000-2
-
Seychelles
is he a member here ?
I see a bit different spelling?
he says this
Thanks. The rotor is made up of 8 x 12pcs. 0.3mm transformator iron sheet, as you see.
The magnets must be adjusted in strength, so transformer sheet iron does not become saturated, otherwise it will not run.
No, batteries or no electric motor at all.
can you invite him here for a respectful discussion?
he does seem to contradict himself in his introduction?
Thx
Chet
-
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=s18h5X2sDZU&feature=iv&src_vid=71vtcl-G4dw&annotation_id=channel%3A58793cbf-0000-2
That magnet-motor was apparently, either built from plans purchased from gravityflight, or, maybe the person who made the video is the person who supplied the plans to gravityflight
From what I saw on the video. I wonder if maybe it is simply 'broken-symmetry-of-sticky-points' and a propelling-force, just like many of my magnet-motor designs
- Not sure if I'm correct, I notice that swirls have been cut into the wooden? disc, to make flexible/springy arms, I wonder if they are really necessary
Obviously( or I assume ) this idea of 'broken-symmetry-of-sticky-points' and a propelling-force, goes back many years, although at this exact moment I can only think of one magnet-motor( famous, and was patented ) which used the concept, I wonder if there were more and how far back the concept dates
An impressive video if it's genuine, it would be great if someone could start a thread especially for this magnet-motor, since not everyone will check this thread , however, keep in mind, :
That magnet-motor was apparently, either built from plans purchased from gravityflight, or, maybe the person who made the video is the person who supplied the plans to gravityflight
________
guest1289
Is it correct. that if you have a radio-receiver that has been tuned to be in resonance with a specific-radio-transmitter that the radio-receiver will bend the radio-waves trajectories in order to draw them into the receiver,
Obviously I was wondering if people have devices that get free-energy from radio-station-broadcasting-towers etc, things that get more energy and work further away than fluorescent-tubes
( And I assume this is different to what people who had high-power-electrical-grid-towers on their land used to do, they would bury electrical-cable around the tower to get free-energy from the tower via inductance )
I did not find any proven or replicated experiments to confirm this works( referring to the concept/concepts on http://amasci.com/tesla/tesceive.html )
If there's any reputable youtube videos , please post links
( It seems that this is, or may be how 'Tesla's Power Receiver' worked, and also, reading Dollard's work is maybe too difficult for me )
The link below is the most solid material, or written in the most understandable terminology, I have found to date on this concept :
http://amasci.com/tesla/tesceive.html
However, keep in mind, that there seems to be 2 different concepts in this topic :
( 1 ) - You emit a radio-signal( same amplitude and frequency, but offset phase, as the target radio-signal), to funnel the radio-signal from the target-transmitter into your device to gain the energy
( 2 ) - Your equipment funnels in the radio-signal from the target-transmitter by a method other than 'emitting a radio-signal' , so your device can gain the energy, I assume this would be the most difficult method
Regarding method '( 2 )' , I think the following text in that webpage describes a method to achieve it :
http://amasci.com/tesla/tesceive.html
This is not "radio," where wavelength is the same size as the components. This is "circuitry", where wavelength is huge, and circuits are small, and the antenna operation more resembles "AC wiring" rather than "EM radiation."
If that quoted-text above does not describe a method to achieve method '( 2 )', I know that it is in that webpage because I had found it there a week or two ago, however, now I can't specifically remember where in that page it describes it.
- I thought it was in the 'updates' on that page, now I can't remember or be sure where on that page it was
Tesla had stated somewhere that the source of the energy from his overunity? invention( was it one of his inventions related to this ) was not 'electromagnetic' , that makes me wonder if the source of the energy from his overunity? invention was 'gravity', that his Solid-State-? invention converted gravity to electricity,
- Is it possible he visually confirmed this by observing an anti-gravity-effect
And, if a radio-receiver-device was to be funneling energy from a radio-transmitter-device as described on http://amasci.com/tesla/tesceive.html , would there be a physical pulling force between them, for-example, if the receiver-device and transmitter were on free-floating boats, would they move toward each other, either like an artificial version of gravity, or, as a possible alternate explanation of how gravity works, if so, then could this be an idea for producing anti-gravity
-
The only thing like that I know from Tesla is his "Magnifying Transmitter" Patent. Professor Turtur tried to replicate it, but stated the gain is in the 1000th of the actual sender energy, and, Turtur has problems with his reputation. But then again, being a professor researching in the OU field does ruin ones reputation quickly anyway.
-
Seychelles
is he a member here ?
I see a bit different spelling?
he says this
Thanks. The rotor is made up of 8 x 12pcs. 0.3mm transformator iron sheet, as you see.
The magnets must be adjusted in strength, so transformer sheet iron does not become saturated, otherwise it will not run.
No, batteries or no electric motor at all.
can you invite him here for a respectful discussion?
he does seem to contradict himself in his introduction?
Thx
Chet
Hi Chet,
Larskro wrote this in the videos description box (first thing below video) you need to click show more to see it all.
self running devices are a fake, they CAN´T run. This magnetmotor is a replication of a Gravimag magnetmotor. I want to start a discussion . I am so tired of all the videos that declares - self-running engines, magnetmotors, free energy devices, overunity power, vacuum energy, selfpowering, gravity motors, perpetual motion free energy, etc. - Do not be fooled by these videos. Nothing will work without input of energy. There can never get more energy out than coming in. This is a fact. This is a law of nature. Everlasting machines can never run. Do not waste your time with replications of such things. Sorry for your energy dreams. Free energy comes from the SUN and wind.It is my opinion. Have a good day. Larskro
and in the below comments a youtube user aviatrix2 posted a good explanation of how it works.
He's just spinning the shaft with one finger from below. Watch him squeeze it tighter when it starts.
A good guess since the shaft is so long
Kind regards
Luc
-
Hi Chet,
Larskro wrote this in the videos description box (first thing below video) you need to click show more to see it all.
self running devices are a fake, they CAN´T run. This magnetmotor is a replication of a Gravimag magnetmotor. I want to start a discussion . I am so tired of all the videos that declares - self-running engines, magnetmotors, free energy devices, overunity power, vacuum energy, selfpowering, gravity motors, perpetual motion free energy, etc. - Do not be fooled by these videos. Nothing will work without input of energy. There can never get more energy out than coming in. This is a fact. This is a law of nature. Everlasting machines can never run. Do not waste your time with replications of such things. Sorry for your energy dreams. Free energy comes from the SUN and wind.It is my opinion. Have a good day. Larskro
and in the below comments a youtube user aviatrix2 posted a good explanation of how it works.
He's just spinning the shaft with one finger from below. Watch him squeeze it tighter when it starts.
A good guess since the shaft is so long
Kind regards
Luc
Back when Mh was encouraging others to build fake motors 'for learning purposes' larskro had a simple motor with 2 coils wound on hex bolts mounted in a base with a magnet rotor an led and reed sw. I was a little intrigued and began questioning him on it. And Mh sure enough joins in. Thats what when i thought maybe Lars was one of his recruits. lol
So larskro finally gave in and said there was a battery inside one of the coils by laying a AAA batt next to the motor. The battery was too big to fit what was shown. I asked him to show the battery that was actually inside the coils and he would not show it. Then he drew a circuit that couldnt work as a pulse motor. Then he redrew the circuit again and it had issues. ??? :o Then Mh went on to describe the circuit saying that the led was only getting its power from the battery not the coil collapse current as his own drawn circuit wouldnt allow that. Then I freaked. What the heck is really going on here? The guy that built it cant describe the hidden pulse motor circuit, twice, nor provide an accurate battery size designation yet kept specifying it was a fake. And then Mh is simply stating that the led is being lit by a 1.5v battery of which cannot happen on its own. So it all had me sucked in due to the mass of terrible info given all to the point of me thinking, maybe its a real self runner. Otherwise why all the dodging and misinfo splattered all about. Mh and I both got put on Mod for the arguments of that time.
I dont care for the attitude of guys like larskro. There is enough fakes out there that nobody needs to do it for years to further beat it into peoples heads. And MH at the time was actually recruiting others to do just that!! Why why why? ??? I know many people that dont have any technical knowledge, yet they have ideas on free energy. The simplest kinds that we all know dont work so far but they have a general idea. And if there is FE out there, Id rather not have peoples minds deliberately molded to the 'it cant happen' mindset when really we just dont know for sure yet.
Mags
-
So the
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=s18h5X2sDZU&feature=iv&src_vid=71vtcl-G4dw&annotation_id=channel%3A58793cbf-0000-2
magnet-motor was not genuine .
And the last post indicates that 'no' magnet-motor has ever worked, which would include my designs.
Even if someone now posts to say that some magnet-motor's have worked, they will have no way of proving it satisfactorily, so it's probably a waste of time saying either way
And what about All-Permanent-Magnet-Full-Levitation, you've got two of the most reputable members on this site stating they achieved it at home, one even built it as a successfully-functioning-bearing , and yet no one posts any pictures, could it be for the same reason why no one posts proof of functioning magnet-motors
_______
dieter
The only thing like that I know from Tesla is his "Magnifying Transmitter" Patent. Professor Turtur tried to replicate it, but stated the gain is in the 1000th of the actual sender energy, and, Turtur has problems with his reputation. But then again, being a professor researching in the OU field does ruin ones reputation quickly anyway.
Sudden stupid thought( I have not yet googled or read anything about Tesla's "Magnifying Transmitter" ) , what if the Tesla "Magnifying Transmitter" used the earths-atmosphere or Aether as a 'Secondary-Coil-With-Core' and the effect is intended to propogate/increase with distance( for-example, propogates/increases from air-molecule to air-molecule, or from aether-particle to aether-particle ), although I'm guessing that for whatever reasons it 'may-?' not 'all' have worked as well as intended
- It could have been a variation of my idea
- So it would have been at a very specific and high-frequency( maybe an unusually very high frequency )
- Keep in mind, that it turns out that most-?/many-? things do not have just 'one' RESONANT frequency, they have many-? or is it numerous-?, or maybe within a frequency-range or ranges it might be hard to find frequencies that are not their resonant-frequencies
Have you ever thought of moving to some sort of warmer climate, I know cold weather is great for letting your creativity/inventiveness run at top-speed because you've got natural-cooling from the environment, but life is usually so difficulty there you're potential usually goes to waste and amounts to nothing, in other words you achieve nothing( not just in overunity ), unless your circumstances/affluence are already higher than average( in which case they are often high achievers )
( I tried moving north last year, but was quickly informed( I can't find a better term at the moment ) that that was not an option for me, ironically, if I would have moved to a country north( from where I live now ) at any time prior to November-2008, I would have had 'no' 'significant' problem in living there .
A second reason why I tried moving north last year was to see if I could move into more productive/different circumstances, since reasons why I am so unproductive( low-achiever ) are not what they seem, or a bit too hard to explain or be understood, even though they are so simple )
-
On the subject of antigravity, or propulsion
Posting my post :
http://overunity.com/17270/a-free-or-cheapest-method-to-trade-in-stock-forex-or-penny-stock/msg506260/#msg506260
from the other forum, onto here :
Capacitor Propulsion in a high-vacuum :
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=CGN65lse5yE
And, in a lower vacuum :
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hw1N5wNzJk8
They say it is very difficult/costly to replicate the same vacuum as space, on earth, so why do they not just test this Capacitor-Propulsion and others up in space, maybe because it might work
The tests above may indicate indicate it is not( or not the same as ) ion drift or ion wind being generated in air
It may work because of one of the examples in the Faraday-Paradox( there is a wikipedia page for the Faraday-Paradox ).
If you spin a Disc-Shaped-Magnet( near 'nothing' else ), an electrical-current will be generated onto the magnet, and can be collected from the magnet.
It works because the magnetic-field of the Disc-Shaped-Magnet does not spin with the magnet, in other words the magnetic-field stays stationary and causes friction( induction ) with the Disc-shaped-Magnet which generates an electrical-current onto the magnet.
So the magnetic-field is ? made up of Aether or stationary-? particles sitting in a grid/lattice pattern in space.
Therefore it is possible Capacitor-Propulsion could be pushing against Aether or stationary-? particles sitting in a grid/lattice pattern in space.
The webpages below do not mention any tests carried out in space
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Electrogravitics
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Biefeld%E2%80%93Brown_effect
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Thomas_Townsend_Brown
The following quoted text is from my post :
http://overunity.com/17203/magnetic-and-gravity-motor-update-and-notes/msg506161/#msg506161
Tesla had stated somewhere that the source of the energy from his overunity? invention( was it one of his inventions related to this ) was not 'electromagnetic' , that makes me wonder if the source of the energy from his overunity? invention was 'gravity', that his Solid-State-? invention converted gravity to electricity,
- Is it possible he visually confirmed this by observing an anti-gravity-effect
And, if a radio-receiver-device was to be funneling energy from a radio-transmitter-device as described on http://amasci.com/tesla/tesceive.html , would there be a physical pulling force between them, for-example, if the receiver-device and transmitter were on free-floating boats, would they move toward each other, either like an artificial version of gravity, or, as a possible alternate explanation of how gravity works, if so, then could this be an idea for producing anti-gravity
That could be another method of anti-gravity, emitting a field that is in resonance with gravity but somehow out of phase with it, or should it be completely synchronised/in-phase with gravity
The following quoted text is from the same post :
http://overunity.com/17203/magnetic-and-gravity-motor-update-and-notes/msg506161/#msg506161
However, keep in mind, that there seems to be 2 different concepts in this topic :
( 1 ) - You emit a radio-signal( same amplitude and frequency, but offset phase, as the target radio-signal), to funnel the radio-signal from the target-transmitter into your device to gain the energy
( 2 ) - Your equipment funnels in the radio-signal from the target-transmitter by a method other than 'emitting a radio-signal' , so your device can gain the energy, I assume this would be the most difficult method
So number ( 2 ) method may-? be a method of anti-gravity without needing to emit a field, and may be be different to gravity-shielding, I think it is mentioned on :
http://amasci.com/tesla/tesceive.html
That webpage above is where I became aware of number ( 2 ) method, and it makes no reference to gravity, except for a link your can find by searching for the text "gravitation"
So I just made some assumptions/theories from that page
-
Still on the subject of anti-gravity, or propulsion .
I had thought that Tesla had either found a solid-state method way to turn gravity into electricity, and or that he had discovered an anti-gravity( or propulsion ) effect related to this.
I was probably, or possibly wrong.
Tesla famously said somewhere, that wireless waves/transmission were not 'electromagnetic' , rather that it was actually 'sound' in nature.
( I wonder if he actually said, or meant to say, that it was 'like' 'sound' in nature )
Sound-waves are described by science, as mechanical, a wave made of the compression of the medium in which they travel.
And yet I remember reading in more than one source, that some people do actually regard sound-waves as being 'part of the electromagnetic-spectrum', or 'somehow' 'part of the electromagnetic-spectrum'.
- I assume that a sound-wave does actually carry an amount of energy, so maybe that is why some people can fit it into their version of the 'electromagnetic-spectrum'.
And as far as I know, gravity, or gravitational-waves are also somehow described by science, as mechanical, a wave made of the compression of the medium in which they travel.
Obviously I assume it's more complicated than that, or that a definitive answer is not actually known.
__________
Applying the 'broken-symmetry-of-sticky-points' in my Magnet-Motor-3.5, to the designs of :
- The Bessler-Wheel
- A Spinning-Generator
The Bessler-Wheel( using the 'broken-symmetry-of-sticky-points' principle in my Magnet-Motor-3.5 )
- Note : I am assuming the Bessler-Wheel contained no magnets, and for this idea I am 'not' including any magnets.
- I wonder if a possibility of how the Bessler-Wheel functioned was that it had more than one 'row' of 'identical-devices' hidden inside the wheel , all on the same shaft .
The result would be that the sticky-points from one 'row'/'wheel' would actually help another 'row'/'wheel' to get past it's own sticky-points, and if you have enough 'rows'/'wheels' on the same shaft, the whole shaft should spin as freely as if there were 'no' 'rows'/'wheels' on the shaft( only the weight/inertia would be noticed ).
I 'may' see a difference here to my 'Magnet-Motor-3.5' , because in this 'Bessler-Wheel' idea I think I 'may' see that the propulsion-forces would be affected by this set-up where as in my 'Magnet-Motor-3.5' I don't think the propulsion-forces would be affected .
It does have some significant differences to my 'Magnet-Motor-3.5', so I don't know if this guess of the 'Bessler-Wheel' is valid.
A Spinning-Generator( using the 'broken-symmetry-of-sticky-points' principle in my Magnet-Motor-3.5 )
- Generators( and electric-motors ) have cogging-torque, sticky-points that can be noticed when the device is not powered.
- So, my-? idea( I assume commonly known ) is 'simply' to put multiple generator-wheels on the same shaft, but not having the coils from the different generator-wheels aligned with each other, rather, that they are completed UNALIGNED with each other.
The result would be that the sticky-points from one wheel would actually help another wheel to get past it's own sticky-points, and if you have enough generator-wheels on the same shaft, the whole shaft should spin as freely as if there are 'no' generator-wheels on the shaft( only the weight/inertia would be noticed ).
-
guest1289
A Spinning-Generator( using the 'broken-symmetry-of-sticky-points' principle in my Magnet-Motor-3.5 )
- Generators( and electric-motors ) have cogging-torque, sticky-points that can be noticed when the device is not powered.
- So, my-? idea( I assume commonly known ) is 'simply' to put multiple generator-wheels on the same shaft, but not having the coils from the different generator-wheels aligned with each other, rather, that they are completed UNALIGNED with each other.
The result would be that the sticky-points from one wheel would actually help another wheel to get past it's own sticky-points, and if you have enough generator-wheels on the same shaft, the whole shaft should spin as freely as if there are 'no' generator-wheels on the shaft( only the weight/inertia would be noticed ).
Edit : The site went down as I pressed to post this post
( I assume people had already thought of this before I posted it )
I think that some people claim that this theory cannot work, because when each coil( with or without a core ) is pulsed, it instantly becomes an electromagnet, which temporarily 'sticks' to the magnet( or electromagnet ), so that this becomes a secondary set of sticky-points which would cause this theory to fail.
But I think this theory would / may still overcome this secondary set of sticky-points( made of electromagnets ), just the same as the first set of sticky-points.
I do not actually read posts on this site anymore, so I don't know if anyone has already posted the following idea.
I have another version of this idea/theory, and that is that instead of using coils( with or without cores ), it would use Radially-Designed-Electrophorus's all offset from each other but sitting on the same shaft.
This idea would use Permanent-Electrets like those used in microphones.
( obviously electrophorus's still have that very strong sticky point when you are lifting the plate up from the electret, but they do not additionally become electromagnets , so, they only have one set of sticky points.
-
Imploder For Producing 'Strangelets'
I think( not sure ) that mine, and other peoples overunity designs/devices( excluding my purely magnet-motor designs, but including my broken-symmetry-of-sticky-points-electrical-generator ) , would get the free-energy/extra-energy from the environment.
I think it would be in the form of photons?/quarks? floating or moving in the vacuum , in other words photons?/quarks? would be sucked into the iron-cores( cores sitting inside coils ), or maybe sucked directly into the coils , or other components.
( I had read about research where it was claimed that a specific-frequency for an iron-core had produced overunity, and that research( or article about it ) claimed the iron-core was drawing the overunity/extra-energy from it's environment. )
But many people believe that the free-energy/extra-energy would come from ions floating in the environment.
If they are correct, then these devices would either not work in the vacuum of space, or would produce much less free-energy, even though there is still a quantity of ions per square-meter in space. )
My idea is that these devices could be used as the basis for devices to produce 'strangelets'( matter which has the density of protons/neutrons ). Although I assume that past a certain size 'strangelets' would sink straight to the earth's-core, if not causing any other problem.
Maybe one method, would be to 'very-suddenly' disconnect a 'Secondary-Load'( energy-consumer ) connected to the overunity-device, 'Note' that this 'Secondary-Load' would not be a 'load' that spins or powers the overunity-device, it would just be an energy-consumer,
SO THAT then, photons?/quarks? being sucked into a specially designed 'electromagnetic-cone' would be compressed together to produce strangelets .
My following idea is not completely logical :
- My original idea was that if an 'electric-motor' was the 'Secondary-Load'( energy-consumer ) connected to the overunity-device, 'Note' that this 'electric-motor' would not be the 'electric-motor' that spins the overunity-device, it would just be an energy-consumer,
SO THAT then, if you would then use a 3rd-electric-motor( which is not electrically connected to the overunity-device ) to spin( via gear-wheels or something ) the 'Secondary-Load'/'electric-motor'( energy-consumer ) MUCH FASTER than it is actually being powered at, that that would cause a 'VERY-UN-NATURAL-ENERGY-DRAWING-EFFECT' , and result in the production of a strangelet.
However, a problem with this particular version of the 'Imploder-Idea' is that you may not be certain where abouts in the overunity-device the compression of photons?/quarks? may occur( as a result of the 'VERY-UN-NATURAL-ENERGY-DRAWING-EFFECT' ), so that you may not be sure where in the overunity-device to put something like an 'electromagnetic-cone' to compress photons?/quarks? .
Note : Yes, I know or assume, that photons?/quarks? have no electric-charge and that they are probably not affected by magnetic-fields, so the use of an 'electromagnetic-cone' would very possibly be useless.
These types of details are things that I would probably never bother studying, for various reasons etc.
-
The Negative-Resistor
I thought of another possible answer as to how the 'Negative-Resistor' described on http://www.cheniere.org/misc/kron.htm may have worked .
I thought that it may have been a type of cathode-ray-tube, but obviously not used to produce images, instead they may have used crt's just for the beam of electrons.
Normally in wiring/conductors electrons are apart from each other, scattered about, so that their electric-fields( electro-magnetic-fields? ) are diluted? by the wiring/conductor material.
Electric-Current is primarily composed of 'Electromotive-Force'( which is made of electro-magnetic-field?, energy-plasma?, photons?/quarks? ), although the source of the 'Electromotive-Force' is electrons.
So, If you have a beam of electrons in a vacuum, like in a cathode-ray-tube, you have a very un-natural situation, it is like a line composed of the most efficient-batteries in existence, so if you could minimize energy losses enough, in a closed-circuit containing the cathode-ray-tube, it could maybe be an overunity and/or self-running-device,
Especially when you consider that the number of electrons in the beam of the CRT will not be soaked up by the wiring/conductors of the closed-circuit because usually these materials have exactly the number of the electrons that they need and they will resist absorbing more than they naturally require.
------------------------------
PLEASE NOTE :
- Up until a year or so ago I read and understood via Wikipedia's-pages that 'electric-current' is primarily composed of 'Electromotive-Force'( https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Electromotive_force ) flowing through conductors, and that electrons merely drift through the conductor, although I assume that the source of the 'Electromotive-Force' is the electrons.
Now on Wikipedia's-pages I read that the electrons flow in the opposite direction to the electric-current.
Not only has Wikipedia possibly changed what I read about 'electric-current' being primarily composed of 'Electromotive-Force', but it has also become more complicated.
I ASSUME THAT WHAT I ORIGINALLY READ ABOUT 'electric-current' being primarily composed of 'Electromotive-Force', is not now being suppressed , I don't know.
_________________
CRT Curiosities
I had been thinking about crt's, and the more I thought about them, the more unexplained and curious they become, but now I forgot some of my questions etc.
One important question I can't find the answer to, is that I cannot see how a closed-circuit is formed to allow the electrons hitting the 'phosphor-coated-tv-screen' to be directed back into the tv-circuit, are these just wasted electrons that vaporize when they hit the 'phosphor-coated-tv-screen', so that the 'wall-power-socket' is providing a constant supply of 100%-disposable-electrons, that's totally different to how I thought electricity works, and I never realized that electricity can work that way.
- Maybe this is some kind of quirk of Alernating-Current
- I assume it's not some type of knowledge-suppression, and that the truth is that it is actually photons or 'pulses-of-electromotive-force', that are actually hitting the 'phosphor-coated-tv-screen', instead of electrons.
I'm sure there are lot of scientific-tests existing proving it is actually electrons, and not anything else.
- If it was photons or 'pulses-of-electromotive-force', that are actually hitting the 'phosphor-coated-tv-screen', then why would a handheld-magnet be able to warp the image on a crt, since photons are un-affected by purely magnetic-fields.
Also, exactly how can a handheld-magnet warp the image on a crt , electrons only have an electric-field, and that electric-field is affected by the electro-magnetic-fields of the electro-magnets built into the crt, to direct the electron to a specific spot on the tv-screen
Although obviously, the source of the magnetic-field from the handheld-magnet is actually electrons.
Note : Yes, it seems that probably, the problem is that I don't sufficiently understand how a crt for tv's works, despite reading the wikipedia-page, that's not a criticism of the website, because I think the answer is probably on the wikipedia-pages for the devices that pre-dated the crt for tv's.
-
Using The Time-Dilation Effect Of Centrifuge- Like Devices To Achieve Overunity
It 'may' be the Time-Dilation Effect that is responsible for various unexplained phenomenon that people have noticed about gyroscopes etc.
Obviously from the center of a centrifuge-like device to it's outer rim, the greatest time-dilation 'time-difference' occurs between the 'center' and the 'outer-rim', if for example the radius is 5cm, then at each .05mm increment of the radius the effect is very little or non-existent compared to that at the 'outer-rim',
In other words you cannot point at any exact 1-point on the radius as being where this effect occurs, you can only compare the 'center' to the 'outer-rim'( or to any point on the radius ), so it's all relative, almost like it's non existent( or maybe it is non-existent ).
-------------------------------
An Idea
One of my ideas is to have the center of the spinning-wheel be a cathode, and a point on the rim be an anode, and have a spark jump between the two
- The spark could jump in a vacuum
- Or, the electricity could travel between the cathode and the anode simply via a wire or via a superconductor.
I'm thinking that since individual-electrons spin so fast in their orbits, that they already experience time-dilation,
And that because electric-current travels so fast, that it also already experiences time-dilation
SO, I'm thinking that mixing the time-dilation experienced by electrons and electric-current, WITH the time-dilation effect of centrifuge-like devices, that it will possibly amplify some sort of effect of broken-symmetry in the overall situation, possibly by adding( bringing ) electrical-current-material( electrons?, photons?, electro-motive-force? ) from another point in time 'INTO' the 'PRESENT'-Electrical-Output( the closed-circuit means it's also the input ) of the device.
_______________________
The Siberian-Coliu Device
This device is too difficult for me to see how it was claimed to have functioned, even though I read as much as possible, since I have no actual educational background in anything related to this website.
However, what I'm really interested in is that 'composite-disk-magnet' :
- From a side-view( and from above ), how does it appear on magnetic-field-viewing-film
- And, much more interestingly( but directly related to the above ), how does it behave in the 'Faraday-Paradox' tests :
- 'Faraday-Paradox' test - a disk-magnet rotating on it's own axis and unaffected by anything else will generate an electric-current onto itself, because it's own magnetic-field stays stationary, so it acts against the disk-magnet to generate a current
- And the other 2 'Faraday-Paradox' tests may also be useful
The more I think about that 'composite-disk-magnet' the more difficult it is work out what it is or what goes on, theoretically, if any device using it functioned successfully, maybe it is because this 'composite-disk-magnet' is a 'round-about' way of creating a magnetic-field that is constantly flowing around in a circle-? , a bit like putting together two u-shaped-magnets together to form a donut-magnet, but obviously not the same.
-
guest1289
A Spinning-Generator( using the 'broken-symmetry-of-sticky-points' principle in my Magnet-Motor-3.5 )
- Generators( and electric-motors ) have cogging-torque, sticky-points that can be noticed when the device is not powered.
- So, my-? idea( I assume commonly known ) is 'simply' to put multiple generator-wheels on the same shaft, but not having the coils from the different generator-wheels aligned with each other, rather, that they are completed UNALIGNED with each other.
The result would be that the sticky-points from one wheel would actually help another wheel to get past it's own sticky-points, and if you have enough generator-wheels on the same shaft, the whole shaft should spin as freely as if there are 'no' generator-wheels on the shaft( only the weight/inertia would be noticed ).
Obviously ELECTRIC-MOTORS also have cogging-torque, sticky-points that can be noticed when the device is not powered.
So you could use the method above in the quoted-text to eliminate that cogging-torque from electric-motors, by placing multiple electric-motors on the same shaft etc, etc, HOWEVER, I assume that the result would be that because the cogging-points would be neutralized that the electric-motors would lose all grip and not turn at all-?, but I am not actually sure what the result would be.
-------------------------------
Also, in the idea in the quoted-text above :
A Spinning-Generator( using the 'broken-symmetry-of-sticky-points' principle in my Magnet-Motor-3.5 )
Think about how easy it would be to increase the power output of that device merely by geometrical means, in other words simply increase the 'diameter' of the generator-wheels( and use the extra space to add more coils etc ), so the power output is increased.
( And you could use 100%-floating magnetic-bearings, using permanent-magnets or electromagnets( those would need an initial temporary external power-input )
________________________
Also, the "Electric-motors turning Electric-generators" device would/may not actually need to contain any permanent-magnets at all, since you could achieve it all just with wiring / electro-magnets, so initially you would need to feed the device with electricity to achieve the electromagnetic-fields and then the device would then self-run without needing any external input.
I read an article some weeks ago that apparently this had already been achieved 2 or 3 years ago.
________________________
Some weeks ago I read about a theory in classical-physics that explains overunity/free-energy( or at least in the situation that it explained it ), basically the theory said something about particles that move through mediums in spiral-trajectories, cause other particles in the medium to move in spiral-trajectories, so that that effect is all amplified, repeated by each new particle caused to move in a spiral-trajectory, that certainly reminded me of my theory of what may happen in the iron-cores( sitting inside coils ) of electromagnets or induction.
( I forgot to bookmark the website, it may have been somewhere on http://amasci.com , or it may been some other site )
_______________________
To win against any debunker on this site that claims that no proof exists that any device has ever achieved overunity and / or has been self-running,
- You should remind them of how easy it is to defeat the laws of magnetic-levitation, simply by floating an appropriately shaped permanent-magnet in the center/above a donut-magnet ,
To make it easier, my idea is to add a string to the bottom of the floating-magnet and then to simply add an appropriate-weight( that constantly floats, it never touches any other object ) at the end of the string so that the floating-magnet is merely kept in place via gravity, this definitely defeats the laws of magnetic-levitation, and at least one member on this site confirmed that using the donut-magnet works
- Then you should ask the debunker why this method to defeat the laws of magnetic-levitation does not appear on the wikipedia-page for magnetic-levitation, or why any other method that defeats the laws of magnetic-levitation does not appear on the wikipedia-page for magnetic-levitation or anywhere else, obviously it's because of suppression, I assume because the floating-magnet apparently also exhibits perpetual-motion
-
I think I don't receive all of my email, only some
-
Just a clarification, I think I don't receive all of my email, on my external email-address( john.backerwww@gmail.com ), not referring to overunity.com
( there would be no way of finding the cause etc )
-
One of 2 posts I'm making today
I assume I'm typing what everyone realizes
While thinking( not to build ) about using FRICTIONLESS( I assume magnetic friction exists in them ) Magnetic-Gears( wikipedia.org/wiki/Magnetic_gear ), as SPEED-AMPLIFIER-GEARS( like in a transmission etc ) , FOR
- An electric-motor to drive a frictionless-generator(a generator that has no magnetic or electromagnetic friction),
- OR, for an initial wheel( no motor anywhere at all ) to turn a final wheel in SPEED-AMPLIFIER-GEARS, maybe with a flywheel
......to design an overunity device(referring to the above ), I suddenly realized something that may directly explain what I typed about a little known part of "classical-physics" that I mentioned on my post on this thread on -
« Reply #33 on: June 30, 2017, 03:40:26 AM »
As far as I remember, it related to 'particle physics' , vortices, or vortices made of radio-waves, electromagnetic-waves( different spectrum )
I can no longer find what I read about "about a little known part of classical-physics", however, what I realized , may 'explain' all the 'unknown' origins of overunity :
- such as devices relying on electromagnets( etc ) containing iron-cores
- devices relying on speed-amplifier-gears
- centrifugal devices
- self-sustaining tornadoes, vortices
Any point( away from the center ) on a spinning-wheel, it travels through space( rotates ) faster, than the center of the wheel.
So maybe, think about an electron in an atom in an iron-core , with each higher orbit that that electron can travel in , it may travel/orbit faster than at the lower orbits , if you think of it as a spinning-wheel( since usually electrons usually stay in the atom if they have no reason to leave )
Electrons and their fields obviously interact with other things, so with a higher orbit and therefore higher speed, they will interact with things more strongly
This may mirror , what occurs in gear wheels, this merely geometrical, more outward point on the gear wheel, may produce overunity just through geometry.
So instead of just thinking about it in terms of electrons, what about thinking about it in terms of electric or magnetic or gravitational fields.
Could this cause self-sustaining tornadoes, or vortices, or even cause them to become larger.
I also tried to think about this in terms of Emitted Photons( I assume that this will not work with photons, since they don't seem to be the same as a point on a spinning-wheel, away from it's center, but I don't know )
-If you sit in an office chair in space, and while you spin yourself around in the office-chair, you throw a baseball away, emit a photon
- the baseball will not only travel directly away from you, in direction 'x', it will also have the Sidewards-Direction-Of-Travel-'W'( CAN PHOTONS HAVE THIS SIDEWARDS MOTION ?)
- At 20-meters away from you, the baseball/photon, will have a Sidewards-Direction-Of-Travel-'W' of 40-meters a second
- But at 100-meters away from you, would the baseball/photon have a Sidewards-Direction-Of-Travel-'W' of more than 40-meters a second
- So, at a sufficient distance away from you, would the baseball/photon have a Sidewards-Direction-Of-Travel-'W' of more than the speed of light
- Since a photon is no longer connected to the object that emitted it, after it is emitted, I assume that a Sidewards-Direction-Of-Travel-'W' would just remain constant, no amplification, but this is not the same as electric or magnetic or gravitational fields,
-
.
-
THE 2ND OF 2 POSTS I'M MAKING TODAY
( check on this page, my « Reply #36 on: November 01, 2017, 11:55:47 PM » )
Electromagnetic-Eavesdropping of computer-screens, would also affect people contacting owners of those screens, or even people not contacting owners of those screens, through browsing etc
( obviously this is the least aspect of situation, but anyway )
Imagine how it would affect electromagnetic-eavesdroppers themselves, if very very detailed information and photos about them( etc etc............. ) appeared on the computer-screen they eavesdrop
How difficult would this be to do, especially if a totally anonymous 'once-off' email-address was used.
( I have no way at all of getting these details-etc myself, and it would be just about the only way of affecting ......................... )
( I have never received any such email, and have never had any data on t--m, only few details I have noticed indirectly about them t--m on media )
Of course, I wonder if I would actually receive any such email if it was sent, or if it would just be deleted at any point before I would check my email )
( If anyone wants to affect t--m for free, good as possible )
Also, My phone - 605 673 265 ( dialing code is 34 )
If anyone wants to send me 'very very detailed information and photos' about the bnjmn-motor-generator, and secodarily even about the p1-motor-generator( prefer about the bnjmn-motor-generator ) please do so directly to my email address : john.backerwww@gmail.com
john.backerwww@gmail.com
.
-
.
My blog https://johnbacker.blogspot.com.es/
-
But gravity isn't directly substitutable by magnetism. As there is no repelling in gravity.
It is this difference between two conservative fields, that allows energy to be extracted
between them.
I refer to this as the flux-to-mass ratio of a given pair of magnets.
It is related to the gravitational field, but of different magnitude and without the
time constant.
E=mgh and the mass and height lifted by the opposing magnets (maximum)
The greater the flux-to-mass ratio, the more mass is lifted higher.
-
@guess1289
You propose an interesting scenario.
What happens if we send an electric current through a wire
Around the circumference of a centrifuge
In the direction of rotation?
Technically (and I mean by technicality) we would have a
superconductor.
-
@guess1289
You propose an interesting scenario.
What happens if we send an electric current through a wire
Around the circumference of a centrifuge
In the direction of rotation?
Technically (and I mean by technicality) we would have a
superconductor.
I wonder if there's a useful invention there, an easier more convenient way( in various situations ) to achieve 'Quantum Levitation'
If, by using your idea, 'Quantum Levitation'( https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Ws6AAhTw7RA ), could be achieved, would that prove or disprove the 'theory of relativity' regarding constant speed of light
And what about if you implement your idea, by already using superconductor at the start
-
@guess1289
You propose an interesting scenario.
What happens if we send an electric current through a wire
Around the circumference of a centrifuge
In the direction of rotation?
Technically (and I mean by technicality) we would have a
superconductor.
I forgot to add something to my post 15 minutes ago :
http://overunity.com/17203/magnetic-and-gravity-motor-update-and-notes/msg517155/#msg517155
Your idea ( possible invention, may have been, or may not have been, inspired by guest1289 's post :
http://overunity.com/17203/magnetic-and-gravity-motor-update-and-notes/msg507817/#msg507817
( Note - Your idea does not seem possible using guest1289 's described design, only the design you suggested may( or may not ) function successfully, but may depend on the correctness of einstein's theory of a constant speed of light )
For example, as the centrifuge component spins, coils placed on the rim of it's outer circle-perimeter could be acted upon by an external stator-permanent-magnet, in order to power your idea, and via your idea 'Quantum Levitation'( https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Ws6AAhTw7RA ) could be achieved
-
I believe Einstein to be correct, in that c is constant for local space-time.
However, the actual value of c may vary from our location to another part
of the universe.
So, the experiment should confirm Einstein’s predictions.
even though they may not be entirely correct.
-
I wonder if there's a useful invention there, an easier more convenient way( in various situations ) to achieve 'Quantum Levitation'
If, by using your idea, 'Quantum Levitation'( https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Ws6AAhTw7RA (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Ws6AAhTw7RA) ), could be achieved, would that prove or disprove the 'theory of relativity' regarding constant speed of light
And what about if you implement your idea, by already using superconductor at the start
Well...... relativisticly speaking,
The electrical signal should be restricted to c
this May manifest as an increase in magnetic field intensity.
Proportional to the rotational velocity.
-
Maybe a decommissioned MRI machine could be recycled for a cost-effective test
-
Maybe a decommissioned MRI machine could be recycled for a cost-effective test
it seems MRI machine's use liquid-helium( and nitrogen ) for cooling the main electromagnet ( the main source of it's field ), although, I assume they do actually also spin some electromagnets
alternatively, place some coils on the rim of the outer circle-perimeter of a centrifuge( or other spinning component ), then place an external stator-permanent-magnet to generate current in the coils, in order to power your idea, and via your idea 'Quantum Levitation'( https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Ws6AAhTw7RA ) may be achieved
Although, I just realized, that in your idea, if the current and the wire are both rotating, then any predicted effect may be nullified, since they are both rotating
however, what if the 'quantum-levitation' effect is solely because of an increased speed of the current
Also, I'm not sure if this relates to the Faraday-paradox, in particular, the following post :
http://overunity.com/16769/faraday-paradox-revisitedmagnetic-field-rotation-question/msg490265/#msg490265
allcanadian
Re: Faraday paradox revisited,magnetic field rotation question.
« Reply #47 on: August 22, 2016, 09:19:00 AM »
We have three scenario's.
1)only the conductive disk rotates relative to a stationary magnet... a voltage is induced.
2)the conductive disk and magnet rotate together...a voltage is induced.
3)only the magnet rotates... no voltage is induced.
Scenario 2 is unique in that we do not need a conductive disk if the magnet itself is made of conductive material. A magnet rotating on axis will induce an Emf or voltage from center to perimeter or vice versa thus a separate conductive disk is not actually needed.
Although, the following post may contravene the assumptions gained from the paradox :
http://overunity.com/16769/faraday-paradox-revisitedmagnetic-field-rotation-question/msg491719/#msg491719
I have re-read that post, and it seems correct, in regard to the paradox,
-
Yes they must be supercooled to get them into their superconducting state
But Nibtinol wire is very expensive (niobium-titanium alloy)
So recycling it from an old machine would be cheaper.
-
@posting
I’m not sure if simply rotating a magnet in its own field will work
Most magnets ARE electrically conductive.
So why use a separate disk conductor at all?
someone would/should have noticed if it worked without the disk.
we would just draw current off the magnet.
-
Greetings, I have invented over unity, now what should I do? any advice.
-
I have re-checked how quantum-levitation works, it involves more things than just the speed of the current, it involves various other effects, unless anyone wants to disprove their theories
-
Greetings, I have invented over unity, now what should I do? any advice.
Share it with the world, and free us of the energy crisis
-
" Greetings, I have invented over unity, now what
should I do? any advice"
you must now quickly determine which branch of the nsa is going to be your friend: the killeen texas branch or the queens,NY branch