http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=aVYiT4zK9Kc
talking about motionless OU devices, see what I found!
A research group should focus on one device to get the depth.

Hi Lawrence. Thane Heins' 'bi-toroid transformer' has been around for several years now.
I experimented with this approach a couple of years ago. Based on my own test results, it does not
appear to work as claimed. I believe it is based on an incorrect understanding of how transformers work,
overlooking certain things, and also due to Mr. Heins incorrectly trying to draw conclusions under inadequate
measurement conditions. From what I recall, Thane Heins bi-toroid transformer was independently
tested and it was determined that under those measurement conditions proper measurements could not be made.

You may find the videos of the following claimed electronic overunity devices more useful, as
at least some of the devices in these videos, if not all, seem to very possibly be actual overunity devices.

Akula's device videos (Kazakhstan):
Some Germans are helping Akula to market his devices, and Chinese investors have already looked
at some of Akula's devices. See the following videos.
Demonstration of devices to Chinese investors:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ipdXqW15Axo
More Akula videos:
http://www.youtube.com/channel/UC2aHNMDJzRW7YDd145_Pa2w/videos

Ruslan's device videos (many devices mostly based closely on Akula's devices) (Latvia):
https://www.youtube.com/channel/UC_zn0cdzv_qfsxQUm4e7R9w

All the best...

  Thank you, Void.

  I would also point to some LENR devices as showing promise, Low Energy Nuclear Reactions, generally reactions with protons and heavier elements such as nickel and lithium.

Hi JouleSeeker. Thanks for the info on LENR. That sounds interesting...
All the best...

http://www.overunity.com/15115/dual-resonant-eccentric-flywheel/msg423986/#new

I need help of a physicist.

Void,
 
Thank you for the good information.
 
I do not mind that some information is many years old.  The Milkovic 2SO must have been around for over 20 years.  Why do thousands of scientists look at it and cannot see that it is already an OU or a lead out energy device.

Simply because IT IS NOT any such thing.

 
I was told by a mechanical engineer that the Milkovic 2SO was one of their projects when he was an undergraduate over 10 years ago.  They, including their lecturer. did not make the link with the unbalanced wheel.
 
How many who looked at the video made that connection?  How many build the equivalent of the Chan Wheel?  How many confirmed that a balanced wheel cannot lift the Weight whereas the unbalanced wheel can easily lift the Weight?   How many noticed that the amplitude of oscillation of the pendulum does not decrease?  How many conclude that the energy must come in from outside?  How many realized that gravitational energy must have been brought in?

How many actually made careful measurements? How many used proper test equipment? How many performed True Experiments? Every one who DID do these things knows that the oscillations do in fact decrease and that there is no more work available for output than was put into the system in the first place.

If gravitational energy can be brought in by the unbalanced wheel Milkovic style, can magnetic or electromagnetic energy be brought in similarly?
 
This vital link points to the possibility that many pulse motors are actually OU.  The efforts of thousands of OU researchers will not be in vain...

If wishes were horses, Lawrence, beggars would ride. No pulse motors are actually OU, and if you would like to dispute that statement, you can just present one, using proper measurement, that you think IS. But of course your "225 HP pulse motor" is Top Secret, isn't it.

What happened to all those "OU" Joule Thief boards you sent out? What response did you get, when everyone found that they weren't OU at all and that your measurements were bad and your conclusions false?

And ... just WHERE do you get your electricity, Lawrence? Why do you not answer this simple question? I  know why... and so do you.

Void,
Thank you for the good information.
I do not mind that some information is many years old.  The Milkovic 2SO must have been around for over 20 years.  Why do thousands of scientists look at it and cannot see that it is already an OU or a lead out energy device.
I was told by a mechanical engineer that the Milkovic 2SO was one of their projects when he was an undergraduate over 10 years ago.  They, including their lecturer. did not make the link with the unbalanced wheel.
How many who looked at the video made that connection?  How many build the equivalent of the Chan Wheel?  How many confirmed that a balanced wheel cannot lift the Weight whereas the unbalanced wheel can easily lift the Weight?   How many noticed that the amplitude of oscillation of the pendulum does not decrease?  How many conclude that the energy must come in from outside?  How many realized that gravitational energy must have been brought in?
If gravitational energy can be brought in by the unbalanced wheel Milkovic style, can magnetic or electromagnetic energy be brought in similarly?
This vital link points to the possibility that many pulse motors are actually OU.  The efforts of thousands of OU researchers will not be in vain...

Hi Lawrence. My comment that the bi-toroid transformer was around for some time was of course not meant
to suggest that something being around for some time means it is not valid, but I was just pointing out
that that device has been looked into quite a bit and does not appear to give over unity. I can't comment on
the Milkovic 2SO device or other similar types of mechanical devices because I know next to nothing about
such things. I will say this however. If any given device really is producing over unity, it shouldn't be too
overly difficult for the most part for a qualified experimenter to set up a demonstration that clearly shows
that the device is generating over unity, which can stand up to close inspection. If any given device does
really produce over unity then it should stand up to inspection by qualified technicians, engineers, and scientists, no?
I realize that many people will not even look at such devices because they have already made up their mind
that over unity is impossible, but in the case of those who are qualified and who are willing to test such a device, 
if the device really is clearly producing over unity then it should stand up to such an inspection without too much difficulty. 
Something to consider anyway.

The devices by Akula and Ruslan are set up to be self running, so this completely eliminates potential measurement error.
(For lower power electronic devices, the devices can be placed in a faraday cage to eliminate pickup of external EM fields.)
The only other possibility for those devices not producing over unity is (obviously) some sort of trickery.
One only needs to do some basic tests to confirm that the device self runs, and to also be able to fully disassemble such a device
to determine if there is any trickery involved. Due to wide scale skepticism about over unity, it would seem to be quite advisable
then to set up a potential over unity device to be self running if at all possible, as this eliminates potential considerations to do
with measurement error. That would seem to be the way to go in regards to presenting over unity devices to the scientific community.
There really often is so many factors that could potentially affect measurements that configuring an over unity device to be self running,
if at all possible, before making any public claims about over unity would seem to be advisable. 
All the best...

 

Hi Lawrence. My comment that the bi-toroid transformer was around for some time was of course not meant to suggest that something being around for some time means it is not valid, but I was just pointing out that that device has been looked into quite a bit and does not appear to give over unity. I can't comment on
the Milkovic 2SO device or other similar types of mechanical devices because I know next to nothing about such things. I will say this however. If any given device really is producing over unity, it shouldn't be too overly difficult for the most part for a qualified experimenter to set up a demonstration that clearly shows that the device is generating over unity, which can stand up to close inspection.

Dear Void,
 
You are absolutely correct that any claimed OU device should be able to stand up to close inspection by qualified scientists.
 
The demonstration set up by Head in reply 2179 of this thread:
 
 In analyzing the Milkovic 2 stage pendulum as shown on youtube:
 https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gC6Qlj1Mbo8
 
 We noted that after 2.30 minutes, a single push by the hand will lift the weight twice. On close examination, the lifting of the Weight appeared to be when the pendulum bob is swinging with the maximum velocity at the vertical position.

In Physics, work is done (energy is spent) only when there is displacement.  In this case, the output is the lifting of the weight.
 
*** I am claiming that the Milkovic 2SO is already an OU or lead out energy device.

    A competent scientist will examine the Input (finger pushing the pendulum) and compare it with the Output (Weight lifted twice) to check for OU.
 
We did better.  We replaced the pendulum with an unbalanced wheel.  We discovered some additional facts:
 
1.     A balanced wheel will not lift the Weight.  An Unbalanced wheel will.  A Balanced wheel has no elements of oscillation of the pendulum.
 
2.      The number and positioning of the weights on the unbalanced wheel affect the performance.  It can be compared with pushing the swing at the right time or resonance.
 
3.  With the Chan Wheel, we can measure the Input and the Output energy carefully.  I am sure that there will be discussions or violent arguments on the measurement methods.  But that should give rise to good scientific knowledge.
 
4.  If we can lead out gravitational energy in the Chan Wheel or the Milkovic 2SO, we must be able to lead out magnetic or electromagnetic energy.  That can be demonstrated easily with the horizontal unbalanced wheel with appropriate magnetic fields.
 

I like the FixtheWorldProject.org approach – disclose the experimental steps before the final result. 
 
Many looked at the video but did not see that we have an actual OU device for over 20 years.  (I am one of them.  I looked at the video multiple times 10 years ago but did not see until recently.)  It is simple and easily reproducible.

Void,
 
Description of the Chan Wheel started at reply 2246 and that of the Yuen Wheel at reply 2296 of this thread
 
I shall now start the  "expected different views" on Input and Output measurements of the Chan Wheel.
 
The Input can be the difference in Potential Energy when the weight of the unbalanced wheel is at the top and the position when the wheel started not to lift the Weight.  These two height positions are relatively easy to measure and repeatable.  The Potential Energy is just
mgh where m is the unbalanced weight, h is the height difference and g is the gravitational constant.
 
The Output is detrmined by the total height of Weight W1 lifted.  This total height can be accurately determined by examining the video frame by frame with a graph paper in the background.  The Potential Energy or Work Done is MgH where M is the weight of W1, H is the total height lifted and g is the gravitational constant.
 
We can change the configuration to get slightly different COP. 
 
I shall wait for the arguments or objections on this simple method.
 
God Bless,
 
Lawrence