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

User Menu

Custom Search

Author Topic: Kapanadze and other FE discussion  (Read 1146906 times)

rakarskiy

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 924
    • Free Energy Systems (UA)
Re: Kapanadze and other FE discussion
« Reply #2655 on: June 20, 2023, 08:05:06 AM »
Wesley, there is no eternal device, there are time intervals, relative to the observer, in which devices operate. For example, a permanent magnet. Keeps the production of magnetic flux for as long as its capabilities and operating conditions allow. Conventionally, a "piece of metal alloys" once launched by an electromagnetic pulse generates a magnetic flux. If its period that it will generate a magnetic field is 120 years, then - in relation to the observer, whose life span is 80 years, this is a magnetically perpetual magnetic field generator.

For example, your "official science", which you do good, does not know how a transformer and a synchronous generator work, where the phase winding is laid in grooves. or wound on a metal stator rod. Magnetic lines from the rotor poles do not cross the phase wires in these designs. Just like don't cross the wires in the transformer window. Empirically, design engineers have derived a formula for calculating the EMF for these structures, which is called the "EMF transformer formula". Physicists cannot explain, carrying all sorts of nonsense, the smarter ones simply call it an engineering formula "in fact".

Doctor (of Medicine) Robert Holcomb was able to build a generator with a rotor that does not rotate, neither physicists nor the corporations that control the energy industry can accept this, as this destroys their foundations.

Are you a researcher?, or a warrior of the system?
You can contact them and visit their center, the company where their device works. There is no need to go to Georgia here, the Holcomb Center is located in the USA, and operates on the basis of US laws.

pix

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 500
Re: Kapanadze and other FE discussion
« Reply #2656 on: June 20, 2023, 10:10:38 AM »


Doctor (of Medicine) Robert Holcomb was able to build a generator with a rotor that does not rotate, neither physicists nor the corporations that control the energy industry can accept this, as this destroys their foundations.



Every asynchronous induction motor has rotating magnetic field without physical rotation.
And Holcomb-style device you will have when you take a typical 3 phase slip ring motor ( commonly used in electric winches and cranes) and mechanically lock the rotor like Holcomb did. Measure output at slip rings and see if you get OU.


Cheers,
Pix

rakarskiy

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 924
    • Free Energy Systems (UA)
Re: Kapanadze and other FE discussion
« Reply #2657 on: June 20, 2023, 10:29:29 AM »
pix, This is the first thing that came to mind for many electrical engineers. Many have tried it, all had the same result: COP less than 1, very less. They got a transformer with very poor efficiency. There is a difference between a generator and a transformer, while the EMF formula is general, I already know this for sure.

In this experiment, they just approached the generator version, but the guy made a mistake, and so did I, advising him.

https://rakatskiy.blogspot.com/2022/06/static-electromagnetic-transducer.html

But even with a mistake, we can consider COP-1.3-2.0

Sergh

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 581
Re: Kapanadze and other FE discussion
« Reply #2658 on: June 20, 2023, 12:55:05 PM »
All these misunderstandings are due to excessive formalization. When a formal description is used, the general understanding of the physical entity is lost.
Example: Some wind many different coils and assume that their connection options change something and the result is an exclusive device.

Unfortunately, it is not. The resultant effect of many coils is equal to the same effect as from one. No matter how you wind it, along, across, in the opposite direction - nature integrates everything.

   Any formal concept does not fully correspond to the real one. Formalization was invented by people to make life easier.

stivep

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 3567
Re: Kapanadze and other FE discussion
« Reply #2659 on: June 21, 2023, 03:49:10 AM »
But even with a mistake, we can consider COP-1.3-2.0
Thank you for your comment.
 getting more energy net contradicts  models and rules in physics as energy must come from somewhere.
 So it is not important  to us what you have till you present it , prove it,  brand it and you can't even patent the mechanisms in physics as there are no patents for natural phenomena and its mechanisms. You can only  patent  applications.
Till than such  claim is rejected.

COP >than 1  can't be seen at the output as a
NET VALUE.
and can't be utilized in real world.
Example  with Refrigerator is not the proof, but just a look  at one of components inside of the the  complex phenomena
Wesley
« Last Edit: June 21, 2023, 05:39:33 PM by stivep »

stivep

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 3567
Re: Kapanadze and other FE discussion
« Reply #2660 on: June 21, 2023, 03:55:08 AM »
All these misunderstandings are due to excessive formalization.
Any formal concept does not fully correspond to the real one. Formalization was invented by people to make life easier.
In average I agree.
However   most of us don't speak Chinese and Chinese  who don't speak English  can't understand what you writing about.
So it is the level of the reader who has or has not -a problem with understanding  without  formalization
Wesley

stivep

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 3567
Re: Kapanadze and other FE discussion
« Reply #2661 on: June 21, 2023, 04:17:48 AM »
OK Wesley, Let's put it another way.
The atom has been vibrating for billions of years. Therefore it is a perpetual motion machine.
the answer is NO!!!!!!!!!!
Motion of an electron is regulated by its energy level. Energy of electron is not an electron constant property  but its variable.
That energy  is regulated and comes from interaction of an electron with outside world. Collision of an electron with energy of positron  destroys  the electron  and in results its properties stop to exist - the end  products is two photons in opposite direction.
Electron  is not permanently associated with an atom and can  be separated from it e.g. by interaction with a photon.
And unlike an  electron  -photon doesn't have mass it moves at speed of light and doesn't behave as  an electron.
However due to  electron duality it can act as a wave or as a particle...electron is also not a property of a nucleus but its current guest
( depends on its energy level)
 
For  a rejected by science perpetual motion machine you need  constant energy value and constant energy use  -no changes  and no losses.
Electron  is under  constant energy fluctuation  any time  all the time  e.g. temperature
 
That what makes gold is not electron but nucleus
Quote
Gold is the 79th element of the periodic table and bears the symbol Au.
Gold’s nucleus is made up of 79 neutrons and 79 protons, making it very heavy and dense
why-is-gold-golden.

Talking with some students confused in  physics I like to add that generalization and simplification is  just first step however student must be remembering that in reality
Bohr atom  will be totally rejected by him in the near future as nothing in it  is true but  for the time being it is good for 10 years old  boy and maybe some  adults too..

 text  explaining that confusion is here :
Note: -the  article is  quite old.
Quote
Now, what should we teach first? Should we teach the correct but unfamiliar law
with its strange and difficult conceptual ideas, for example the theory of relativity,
four-dimensional space-time, and so on? Or should we first teach the simple “constant-mass” law,
which is only approximate, but does not involve such difficult ideas?
The first is more exciting, more wonderful, and more fun, but the second is easier to get at first,
and is a first step to a real understanding of the first idea.
This point arises again and again in teaching physics.
At different times we shall have to resolve it in different ways, but at each stage it is worth learning
what is now known, how accurate it is, how it fits into everything else,
and how it may be changed when we learn more.
https://www.feynmanlectures.caltech.edu/I_01.html
Wesley

rakarskiy

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 924
    • Free Energy Systems (UA)
Re: Kapanadze and other FE discussion
« Reply #2662 on: June 21, 2023, 06:39:56 AM »
Thank you for your comment.
 getting more energy net contradicts  models and rules in physics as energy must come from somewhere.
 So it is not important  to us what you have till you present it , prove it,  brand it and you can't even patent the mechanisms in physics as there are no patents for natural phenomena and its mechanisms. You can only  patent  applications.
Till than such  claim is rejected.

COP >than 1  can't be seen at the output as a
NET VALUE.
and can't be utilized in real world.
Example  with Refrigerator is not the proof, but just a look  one of components inside of the the  complex phenomena
Wesley

 ;)
Wesley, you are ignoring electromagnetism, and this particular thing is already a priori OverUnity!

The magnetic field of a magnet, what do you think, what kind of Energy?

Energy is the derivative of power with respect to time, a purely mathematical substance. Power consists of Force and speed for mechanics Pk=Fv, current and voltage for electromagnetic system Pe=IU. The current strength (I, A) is not a flow of electrons, but a vortex magnetic field, Voltage / EMF (E-U, V) between potential contacts, this is an electric vortex field, the effect on the conductor cross section is an electromagnetic field ( https://rakatskiy.blogspot.com/p/emf-and-current-in-conductor.html ). Science operates not with the "electrical energy" parameter, but with the "electromagnetic field energy" parameter, is this news to you?
Any generator with a ferromagnetic core uses a magnetic field amplification element in the core ( https://rakatskiy.blogspot.com/2022/06/magnetization-of-steel-magnetic.html ), which is like not OverUnity. Further use is already a purely engineering issue.

Therefore, there is “Science as a kind of activity for the study of the universe” and there is “Permissible science” for the “herd of vegetables” who do not want to think.

Good discoveries!
 

kolbacict

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 1418
Re: Kapanadze and other FE discussion
« Reply #2663 on: June 21, 2023, 10:49:23 AM »
For  a rejected by science perpetual motion machine you need  constant energy value and constant energy use  -no changes  and no losses.
Electron  is under  constant energy fluctuation  any time  all the time  e.g. temperature
But if we cool a certain body (environment) ? Without initial temperature difference.
The internal energy of a substance is always directly proportional to its temperature.
So we can take some of the energy from the substance and use it. Or is that also impossible?
Only this is difficult to implement constructively, but that's another question.

Sergh

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 581
Re: Kapanadze and other FE discussion
« Reply #2664 on: June 21, 2023, 11:03:31 AM »
The atom has been vibrating for billions of years.
The problem is that we don't know what the price is.
All vibrations of a single atom since the beginning of time.
Or all the statistical variants of vibrations and fluctuations that occur when matter moves through time from the beginning to today.
One can imagine our Universe as a huge atomic icebreaker that moves through the ice of spacetime.
Although what is the use of these vibrations for us, if the energy is not spent? If we use this energy, then the state of the atom changes, its potential energy decreases.
Inside the thermos flask, the water is hot, but outside it is cold and does not warm the hand. You can make tea from hot water, but then the thermos will be empty.
Only this is difficult to implement constructively, but that's another question.
No, it's the same question. You can transfer energy from one place to another, but it is impossible to get more energy out of it than you spent. 
The Carnot cycle does not allow. And the growing entropy of our space.
Nothing will happen if we do not go beyond our space-time continuum.
« Last Edit: June 21, 2023, 02:02:53 PM by Sergh »

kolbacict

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 1418
Re: Kapanadze and other FE discussion
« Reply #2665 on: June 21, 2023, 02:34:26 PM »
No, it's the same question. You can transfer energy from one place to another, but it is impossible to get more energy out of it than you spent. 
The Carnot cycle does not allow. And the growing entropy of our space.
Nothing will happen if we do not go beyond our space-time continuum.
Magnetocalorics, ferroelectric capacitors (variconds). The Carnot cycle operates with heat, pressure and volume. We will warm our cooled varicond with the warmth of the environment at a certain time of the oscillatory process. The heat energy of the environment will be converted into electrical energy.
это всё дедиван разбудоражил пару лет назад

Sergh

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 581
Re: Kapanadze and other FE discussion
« Reply #2666 on: June 21, 2023, 03:26:36 PM »
No, that won't work. In any case, to obtain energy, an energy gradient is needed, a transition from a higher state to a lower one. On the contrary, it is impossible to move energy without additional costs. It is impossible to loop the process without additional energy.

In general, this discussion is meaningless. It is impossible to produce energy without a source. This is the end. DedIvan won't help.

bistander

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 705
Re: Kapanadze and other FE discussion
« Reply #2667 on: June 21, 2023, 04:05:16 PM »
...
Energy is the derivative of power with respect to time, ...

Hi Rakarskiy,
You got that backwards.
bi

rakarskiy

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 924
    • Free Energy Systems (UA)
Re: Kapanadze and other FE discussion
« Reply #2668 on: June 21, 2023, 04:11:12 PM »
Hi Rakarskiy,
You got that backwards.
bi

Mechanical energy is the energy associated with the movement of an object or its position, the ability to perform mechanical work. Work can only be done with force. On the time interval, the application of this force at a certain speed of movement. When performing work on a time interval, ENERGY will be determined.

 ;)

bistander

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 705
Re: Kapanadze and other FE discussion
« Reply #2669 on: June 21, 2023, 04:23:41 PM »
rakarskiy, do you have a problem with translation of derivative? Or just problem with physics?
bi

edit.

Quote
power is the time derivative of energy

https://tinyurl.com/Power-formula

wikipedia.org/wiki/Time_derivative
« Last Edit: June 21, 2023, 07:15:38 PM by bistander »