Language:
To browser these website, it's necessary to store cookies on your computer.
The cookies contain no personal information, they are required for program control.
the storage of cookies while browsing this website, on Login and Register.
 Storing Cookies (See : http://ec.europa.eu/ipg/basics/legal/cookies/index_en.htm ) help us to bring you our services at overunity.com . If you use this website and our services you declare yourself okay with using cookies .More Infos here: https://overunity.com/5553/privacy-policy/If you do not agree with storing cookies, please LEAVE this website now. From the 25th of May 2018, every existing user has to accept the GDPR agreement at first login. If a user is unwilling to accept the GDPR, he should email us and request to erase his account. Many thanks for your understanding

Custom Search

### Author Topic: 12 times more output than input, dual mechanical oscillation system !  (Read 2063087 times)

#### ltseung888

• Hero Member
• Posts: 4363
##### Re: 12 times more output than input, dual mechanical oscillation system !
« Reply #2820 on: March 05, 2015, 11:24:11 PM »
Please show ANY device using gravity as an 'energy source' producing MORE energy out than in; using unbalance will not matter.

@memoryman, Bill, MarkE,

One example of leading-out gravitational energy via Unbalanced Wheel and Centrifugal Force is the William Skinner device in 1939 driven by 1/8 horse power motor and cotton thread.

I shall focus on the class of lead-out energy machines.  If these machines can lead-out or bring-in energy from the environment, the Law of Conservation of Energy will not be violated.  The correct Formula in the case of gravity is:
Einput + Egravity = Eoutput + Eloss
or
Eoutput = Einput + (Egravity - Eloss)

So long as Egravity is greater than Eloss, Eoutput will be greater Einput.

The problem changes from producing the impossible perpetual motion machine to producing a lead-out energy machine.

The Raymond Head (RHEAD100) video (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gC6Qlj1Mbo8) showed that the Weight W1 was lifted twice with each finger push.  This was the result of the Centrifugal Force plus the weight of the pendulum producing a varying clockwise moment.  When it was greater than the anti-clockwise moment of the weight W1, the lever tilted higher on the LHS.  The weight was lifted.  When it is smaller, the lever tilted higher on the RHS - returned to original position.

Notice that the original position (state) was reproduced with the finger push.  The energy used in the finger push is much smaller than the energy required to lift the weight W1.

From the energy point of view, the Output was m1gh.  Some of this Output was fed back to return the pendulum bob to the original position. That energy was m2gh.  Thus there was a difference of (m1-m2)gh.  If properly configured, this value would still be much more than that supplied by the finger push.  Where did this energy come from?

Another experimental observation was that the pendulum swing amplitude did not decrease.  Thus the excess energy was not transferred from the pendulum swing.

One scientific explanation was- energy was lead-out or brought-in from the gravitational field.

Thus the Milkovic 2SO is a lead-out gravitational energy device.  The Chan Wheel is a superset of Milkovic. I have the Chan Wheel in Taipo, Hong Kong. I can claim to have a working lead-out energy device in my possession...
If the Unbalanced Chan Wheel can bring-in gravitational energy, the Unbalanced Cylinder Tsinghua University Energy Multiplier can do better.

The 57 QMOGENs compiled by Sterling Allan are all theoretically possible...

We are in the process of contacting the Taiwan Maglev of the Taiwan Edison Group.  Their invention was shown on Taiwan TV in July 2014.

The two most convincing QMOGENs videos on youtube are WITTS and YMNEE.  Both require reasonable rotational speed as expected from the Lee-Tseung lead-out energy theory.  (Centrifugal Force varies as the square of angular velocity.)

I shall use this reply 2826 to answer all future questions on whether lead-out energy machines exists.

#### memoryman

• Hero Member
• Posts: 758
##### Re: 12 times more output than input, dual mechanical oscillation system !
« Reply #2821 on: March 05, 2015, 11:39:42 PM »
you are confusing force and energy.
"I can claim to have a working lead-out energy device in my possession..." you can claim all you want; being able to demonstrate your claim with objective proof is something entirely different...
"The 57 QMOGENs compiled by Sterling Allan are all theoretically possible..." no, they are not.

#### Pirate88179

• elite_member
• Hero Member
• Posts: 8366
##### Re: 12 times more output than input, dual mechanical oscillation system !
« Reply #2822 on: March 05, 2015, 11:39:54 PM »
@memoryman, Bill, MarkE,

One example of leading-out gravitational energy via Unbalanced Wheel and Centrifugal Force is the William Skinner device in 1939 driven by 1/8 horse power motor and cotton thread.

I shall focus on the class of lead-out energy machines.  If these machines can lead-out or bring-in energy from the environment, the Law of Conservation of Energy will not be violated.  The correct Formula in the case of gravity is:
Einput + Egravity = Eoutput + Eloss
or
Eoutput = Einput + (Egravity - Eloss)

So long as Egravity is greater than Eloss, Eoutput will be greater Einput.

The problem changes from producing the impossible perpetual motion machine to producing a lead-out energy machine.

The Raymond Head (RHEAD100) video showed that the Weight W1 was lifted twice with each finger push.  This was the result of the Centrifugal Force plus the weight of the pendulum producing a varying clockwise moment.  When it was greater than the anti-clockwise moment of the weight W1, the lever tilted higher on the LHS.  The weight was lifted.  When it is smaller, the lever tilted higher on the RHS - returned to original position.

Notice that the original position (state) was reproduced with the finger push.  The energy used in the finger push is much smaller than the energy required to lift the weight W1.

From the energy point of view, the Output was m1gh.  Some of this Output was fed back to return the pendulum bob to the original position. That energy was m2gh.  Thus there was a difference of (m1-m2)gh.  If properly configured, this value would still be much more than that supplied by the finger push.  Where did this energy come from?

Another experimental observation was that the pendulum swing amplitude did not decrease.  Thus the excess energy was not transferred from the pendulum swing.

One scientific explanation was- energy was lead-out or brought-in from the gravitational field.

Thus the Milkovic 2SO is a lead-out gravitational energy device.  The Chan Wheel is a superset of Milkovic. I have the Chan Wheel in Taipo, Hong Kong. I can claim to have a working lead-out energy device in my possession...
If the Unbalanced Chan Wheel can bring-in gravitational energy, the Unbalanced Cylinder Tsinghua University Energy Multiplier can do better.

The 57 QMOGENs compiled by Sterling Allan are all theoretically possible...

We are in the process of contacting the Taiwan Maglev of the Taiwan Edison Group.  Their invention was shown on Taiwan TV in July 2014.

Lawrence:

You did notice in that video link that you posted that there was indeed an electric MOTOR that was plugged into the grid driving that?
If indeed he got out all of the energy claimed vs input energy...then why does he need that motor at all?  Should it not be able to run itself then?

Do you see why we are all skeptical about these things?  He claimed 1200% more out than in.  Surely this would be way more than needed to run itself then right?

By the way...that 1/8 HP motor in the video was more like a 3 hp motor but...no matter.  1200% more out than in would easily allow you to loop the machine and you would not need any motor right?  1939 and we are still waiting.

Why?

Because, it does not work.

Bill

#### sarkeizen

• Hero Member
• Posts: 1923
##### Re: 12 times more output than input, dual mechanical oscillation system !
« Reply #2823 on: March 06, 2015, 01:00:41 AM »
Please show ANY device using gravity as an 'energy source' producing MORE energy out than in; using unbalance will not matter.
...or elastic bands.  Seriously what effect of gravity can't be emulated with elastic bands?

#### noonespecial

• Sr. Member
• Posts: 278
##### Re: 12 times more output than input, dual mechanical oscillation system !
« Reply #2824 on: March 06, 2015, 01:10:02 AM »
"Please show ANY device using gravity as an 'energy source' producing MORE energy out than in; using unbalance will not matter."
...or elastic bands.  Seriously what effect of gravity can't be emulated with elastic bands?

#### sarkeizen

• Hero Member
• Posts: 1923
##### Re: 12 times more output than input, dual mechanical oscillation system !
« Reply #2825 on: March 06, 2015, 01:33:49 AM »
How does this prove that you can't get this with rubber bands.

Sorry I don't have the energy to look up which moron-land project this is from.  It's the one where the investors have ties to US Govt. security or something.  You all think they're ninjas.  Whatev.....yawn.

#### TinselKoala

• Hero Member
• Posts: 13958
##### Re: 12 times more output than input, dual mechanical oscillation system !
« Reply #2826 on: March 06, 2015, 01:42:06 AM »
Power is not energy, peak power especially is NOT energy. The UL graph shows peak power, it does not show average power sustained over a long interval. Most assuredly it does not show greater energy out than in, and the device under test cannot be self-looped, nor can it provide more _sustained_ power out than is input to run it.

Quote from: LTseung
The two most convincing QMOGENs videos on youtube are WITTS and YMNEE.  Both require reasonable rotational speed as expected from the Lee-Tseung lead-out energy theory.  (Centrifugal Force varies as the square of angular velocity.)

Both are hoaxes, cynical frauds attempting to get gullible people to give them money. They do not work as claimed.

I challenge you ONCE AGAIN, Lawrence: put your (or your backers) money where your claims are: Do what you said you could "easily do" months ago: Donate 100,000 dollars to WITTS and purchase a self-running QEG from Timmy Thrapp.

You will never do this thing you said could be "easily done", and I know why... and so do you.

#### Void

• Hero Member
• Posts: 2333
##### Re: 12 times more output than input, dual mechanical oscillation system !
« Reply #2827 on: March 06, 2015, 03:20:11 AM »
This video is interesting. It shows three types of unbalanced wheel configurations
and the types of vibrations/shaking they can cause in the frame holding the unbalanced wheels.
I may be misunderstanding what I was seeing, but it appears that at very high RPMs
the unbalanced wheels do not cause as much vibration/shaking on the frame, but at
a certain slower RPM range very large shaking/vibrations can occur in the frame.
In general is there a lot less shaking/vibration in an unbalanced wheel above a certain RPM?

All the best...

#### TinselKoala

• Hero Member
• Posts: 13958
##### Re: 12 times more output than input, dual mechanical oscillation system !
« Reply #2828 on: March 06, 2015, 03:28:37 AM »
What's unusual about that? Surely everyone who has worked with rotating/vibrating systems of any kind has encountered the same effects. At some speeds vibrations couple into the framework, at others they don't. It's simply mechanical resonance. I'll bet there are even rattles and buzzes in your car that happen at certain speeds but not at others.

#### Void

• Hero Member
• Posts: 2333
##### Re: 12 times more output than input, dual mechanical oscillation system !
« Reply #2829 on: March 06, 2015, 03:48:39 AM »
What's unusual about that? Surely everyone who has worked with rotating/vibrating systems of any kind has encountered the same effects. At some speeds vibrations couple into the framework, at others they don't. It's simply mechanical resonance. I'll bet there are even rattles and buzzes in your car that happen at certain speeds but not at others.

Hi TK, not sure if you are directing this comment to me as I said nothing at all about the video being unusual.

I posted the video because it shows three different configurations of unbalanced wheels and the different types
of vibrations/shaking they can produce on the frame, and I was also wondering if in general there is less vibration and shaking
from an unbalanced wheel at higher RPMs, or if it is just that as long as you are above or below the RPM of the resonance
point of the entire system that there will be a lot less shaking and vibration. Maybe there is someone around who has
a good knowledge of mechanical systems that knows the answer.

All the best...

#### MarkE

• Hero Member
• Posts: 6830
##### Re: 12 times more output than input, dual mechanical oscillation system !
« Reply #2830 on: March 06, 2015, 04:05:38 AM »
Hi TK, not sure if you are directing this comment to me as I said nothing at all about the video being unusual.

I posted the video because it shows three different configurations of unbalanced wheels and the different types
of vibrations/shaking they can produce on the frame, and I was also wondering if in general there is less vibration and shaking
from an unbalanced wheel at higher RPMs, or if it is just that as long as you are above or below the RPM of the resonance
point of the entire system that there will be a lot less shaking and vibration. Maybe there is someone around who has
a good knowledge of mechanical systems that knows the answer.

All the best...
Generally, a resonance is more likely to get excited when a system is excited above the resonant frequency, because doing so there is a likelihood of subharmonics that are close to the resonant frequency.

#### Void

• Hero Member
• Posts: 2333
##### Re: 12 times more output than input, dual mechanical oscillation system !
« Reply #2831 on: March 06, 2015, 04:13:07 AM »
Generally, a resonance is more likely to get excited when a system is excited above the resonant frequency,
because doing so there is a likelihood of subharmonics that are close to the resonant frequency.

Ok, thanks. That's interesting.
All the best...

#### ltseung888

• Hero Member
• Posts: 4363
##### Re: 12 times more output than input, dual mechanical oscillation system !
« Reply #2832 on: March 07, 2015, 12:04:23 AM »

The working QMOGEN inventors are happy to have the roadblock removed.  There is at least one scientific explanation on the source of their energy.

Divine Wine is to be shared...

Lawrence

#### memoryman

• Hero Member
• Posts: 758
##### Re: 12 times more output than input, dual mechanical oscillation system !
« Reply #2833 on: March 07, 2015, 12:33:51 AM »
You are deluding yourself if you think that there is even ONE working QMOGEN out there.
None of these videos show one.

#### ltseung888

• Hero Member
• Posts: 4363
##### Re: 12 times more output than input, dual mechanical oscillation system !
« Reply #2834 on: March 07, 2015, 12:42:30 AM »

UL test

Dear noonespecial,

Please supply more detail on the mentioned UL test.  Thank you.

Lawrence