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 : ) help us to bring you our services at . If you use this website and our services you declare yourself okay with using cookies .More Infos here:
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: Mechanical resonant oscillation as basic overunity method  (Read 1199 times)

Offline nix85

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 1191
Mechanical resonant oscillation as basic overunity method
« on: February 18, 2023, 12:54:53 AM »
I wrote about this in my Parallel RLC thread but due to massive amount of content here such things get easily forgotten so i want to remind of it

As we study more sophisticated ideas we often forget basic mechanical overunity principle of resonant mechanical oscillation, pendulum and weighted spring have long been known to be overunity.

You can see in the first device he is maintaining the oscillation with his pinky to operate a pump which would otherwise take significant effort.

Precession gravity overunity,

Skinner device

Another unknown one

Gravity trap

Gravity Assisted Power

At 5:22 he shows how really really hard it is to operate the pump directly on same length lever, he can barely do it with one hand yet with pendulum attached he can literally operate it easily.

We can see resonance, be it EM or mechanical is the way to go. And as it is nicely written in the video resonant mechanical system is overunity by itself, especially multistage. Imagine a small weighted spring 'tuned' to run a much bigger one and that one even a bigger one, tiny input should be enough to produce practically unlimited power.

I also read about at least one high power generator from 90s i think it was based on springs.

Since there is obviously a desire to prove any kind of overunity, these basic approaches should be given attention here.

Oscillation can be kept using a motor and a piston like this

or an electromagnet with a reed switch/hall sensor

And last but not least Milkovic double stage pendulum

For every short, slight push grandpa does at the top of pendulum oscillation, 33kg!! on the other side rises to 2 inches and free falls TWO TIMES. Many point to lack of looped Milkovic devices as proof that it's not overunity, but this is ridiculous, it would be physically impossible to do what is shown in this and other videos with such tiny energy input.

And another Milkovic replica showing clear energy amplification

And these claim it's looped and produces up to 2kw

Beauty of mechanical approach is it hardly gets any simpler than a weighted spring or a pendulum.

As for weighted spring, for more induction we want fast oscillation and also more weight is desirable for gain to be bigger, so stronger springs should be used, i would use rubber ones, they are cheap and silent.

Possible implementation of weighted springs and a motor and generator to test for overunity.


And since jimboot keeps deleting my posts on Holcomb thread i am replying here

Firstly the hypocrisy, he dares mention helpfulness, he has no helpful posts, i got many. Secondly, i did not baselessly accuse anyone and was not rude, starting with SL he mentioned his lingen thing, i asked what is it, he said nevermind since you dont know, i said now that you mentioned im curious, then he linked tons of threads and said its the "first verified replicable ou device", i said ok, can you back it up by a video or a measurement, and then instead of backing it up, he classified me as another "troll" (since he calls everyone troll who questions him) and started to troll me. I agree it was horrific but i did not start it and yet my posts got deleted, i got moderated, and to SL nothing.

And my post from few days ago i wrote (and since Jimboot deleted it i hope there is a backup but enough people saw it to confirm)

"Simulations are nice but as Don said there is a big difference between simulations and reality, we need actual tests/measurements."

And i am surely not "running away from scrutinty" as he accuses me, i always was, am and always will be for 100% open total disclosure of overunity.

If i were not would i give actual solutions, for magnet neutralization screen, for lenz canceled coil..... try it, see if it works.

I always spoke the truth and for this i get attacked.

As for jimboot's last accusation of "selfish and juvenile behaviour" and "littering thread with nonsense", just more projections from someone who contributed nothing.
« Last Edit: March 21, 2023, 10:25:19 PM by hartiberlin »

Offline nix85

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 1191
Re: Mechanical resonant oscillation as basic overunity method
« Reply #1 on: February 18, 2023, 04:59:36 AM »
And why not combine a weighted springs like in last image and a pendulum tuned at same frequency, so amplified power of a pendulum oscillates even larger weighted spring attached to a big generator, or a pendulum through a tuned spring oscillating even larger tuned pendulum... there is no limit, there is an infinity of possibilities, of combinations, based on same principle of single or multi stage mechanical resonant oscillation OU.

Pure beauty, undeniable gain. Lifting 60 pounds...

"I don't really notice any difference at all"

Offline nix85

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 1191
Re: Mechanical resonant oscillation as basic overunity method
« Reply #2 on: March 20, 2023, 08:36:25 PM »
FreeEnergy has linked an interesting video in his Gravity Piezoelectric Pendulum Generator thread. I would only replace the piezo with springs with magnets attached to them oscillating inside a coil or even better instead  of 4 springs one big one. Pendulum should be tuned to oscillate at same frequency as the spring and this can easily be achieved if weight can be moved up and down and fixed along the length of the arm. If pendulum and spring are in tune, i have no doubt such system will be at least 20x OU, possibly far more.

Another approach with two pendulums. If two pendulums are of same length they are automatically tuned, smaller one runs the big one. As advanced comment below says, translated "Yes, this model is the solution, and the evidence is that the entry of energy is separated from the exit of energy". Resonance, electromagnetic or mechanical, separates input from the ouput and allows the radiant to pour in. This would pair nicely with low rpm PMG.

Practical example of weighted spring resonant oscillation paired to rotary motion. Reverse could be used for generation.

Another method to run a generator with a pendulum using sprocket on ratchet.

Operating a Milkovic pendulum pump with a single finger 1200 liters per hour from 12m depth.


Offline C.O.P.1000

  • Newbie
  • *
  • Posts: 5
Re: Mechanical resonant oscillation as basic overunity method
« Reply #3 on: March 21, 2023, 01:08:55 AM »

 :) Funny. Holcomb is indeed not the first nor the best in OU - which does not mean they are bad, i never said or implied that, BTW i left similar comments on their youtube channel long before i was aware of SL's 'replication' attempts. And he thought i did it because of him. : )

I support Holocomb and i believe they are achieving certain OU. But, there are some questions. Firstly and of lesser importance their "theory" does not hold water. Real source of energy are certain subtle streams of energy that Tesla called Radiant Energy, Louis Rota Universal Currents etc. These are subtle forms of energy closely related to A field aka Aharonov–Bohm effect, gravity, ether. I already spoke of this many times, in the thread Two kinds of induction - Henry, and many others. If electron spin in iron atoms was the real source, then air core overunity like Don Smith would not be possible and other no-iron devices like JS's mentioned below.

Secondly, their 'demonstration' of supposed 20kw out with 2.5kw is not very convincing.

Test load we see are 12 incandescent bulbs. 20kw load? And when asked about this discrepancy they reply in the comments "The 12-incandescent light bank is only a part of the load. There are also motors, transformers, capacitors, that load bank calculation.". Well, capacitors are not a load, transformers neither except for the losses unless they are loaded with actual load, neither are motors unless they do work, free running they also only consume for losses. This is not how you do a proper OU demonstration. It should be done in clear space without cables all around, load should be clearly shown, not just few bulbs in the background and claim 20kw.

Secondly and most importantly, it's just that, assuming they can deliver what they claim, there are even better, more compact and lighter systems. Their alternators weigh like half ton and have to be lifted with a forklift, unlike systems based on Tesla coil, Smith, Kapandaze etc. These devices work on much higher frequency, require no iron core and are thus much lighter and more compact. Even better is aluminum-bismuth plate system of James Schwartz and even better than that are his neutrino rods. And if Don Smith's claim of matchbox size device outputting hundreds of kilovolts at high amps is true, nothing else comes even close. If Holcomb does what they claim and if they could do the same with modern core materials and raise the frequency into few dozen kilohertz region then they could achieve more compact device of same or even bigger power, but even then, ironless devices working at higher frequencies would be superiror.

It's also funny he claims James Schwartz is a "scammer" and "backs it up" with well known shill channel Skeptical Open-minded parody video. Guy who "debunks" overunity as a whole, claims it is impossible and everyone in it a scammer, his whole channel is 100% dedicated to this. And this is his "argument" that Schwartz is a scammer, funny. Schwartz is most definitely NOT a scammer, he's been in this field for 50 years literally, just this alone shows SL's "reach".

Schwartz has been in the game for 50 years. He is an inventor of 'neutrino rods', passive rods probably based on carbon capable of outputting hundreds of watts.

These were supposed to hit the market in Japan i don't know exactly when, it seems around year 2000., Schwartz claims 60,000 units were produced but the government had confiscated the devices because of the "risk of fire". As it usually goes with OU devices.

I said it before on this forum, out of all OU devices, these are probably my favorite. If 3 pairs of those passive rods can output continuos 750w how much could a volume of space of Holcomb alternator filled with these rods output, megawatts? Meanwhile probably weighing far less since they appear to be carbon based and thus light, far lighter than iron. BTW, altho most of you still do not believe contactee claims (wait and see) in the W56 case i spoke of number of times....

Here is a documentary
First book
Second book i assembled here into a pdf you can download for free.

...their main source of power is a carbon rod excited by high frequency and they say if it was not loaded at all times it would explode (clearly, due to huge potentials built up). So there is something special about carbon and new graphene research confirms this. Life is based on it, afterall. And it has 6 electrons 6 protons and 6 neutrons, based on 9. There are also mentions of graphite on top of gravitational dipole of the flying saucer in the mentioned W56 case and earlier contactee cases. So i believe firmly carbon is a special material for interaction with subtle energy streams.

Here is an article translated from German with much detail about his aluminum-bismuth device.

He also uses magnesium and graphene and fine wire coils. BTW I think his idea of a power station is bad, each home should have a 20kw radiation receiver box which would be of small size, noisless and could fit anywhere while powering the whole household.

"Each Ceramic Flux Power Plate contains 5 coil plates; each coil plate contains 144 flux coils. A fully assembled Flux Power plate has a total of 720 Flux Power coils."

"A special frequency generator is used to induce a series of alternating flux frequencies to create a flow of electrons."

"The secret lies in the special materials in the plates and how the coils in the plates are activated."

Demonstrating his solid state 5 frequency device capable of 6kW, here powering an 800 watt helicopter lamp.

Below is his diagram showning "flux, voltage and current traces illustrating the operation of an embodiment of the invention", i presume these are the "5 frequencies" in action. We can see he is mixing AC sinewaves, squarewaves and pulsed DC waveforms. Reminds me of Otto's TPU replication attempt using 3 frequencies.

Good place to remind Steven Mark, EV Gray and Thomas Moray all used 6KHz!!

"Thomas H. Moray invented a specialized high efficiency 6,000-hertz power supply. It turns out that Edwin Gray's device also produced this same exact frequency."

Question is does Schwartz also use this frequency.

And older video of similar device powering few kw. Here he says about the plates

"We got a solid piece of aluminum plate on one side, you got a sheet of bismuth in there, you got another aluminum plate with six cut outs, you got the coils in there, then you'll put another bismuth, another plate of coils on top of that, then another bismuth and then a solid plate, now you've got a panel. When we activate these with our activator here which causes the frequency to these plates an alternating frequency they produce electrons by agitating the bismuth and the aluminum."

He also seems to be using bifilar coils he calls "special bifilar coils" "custom built electromagnetic coil to stabilize flux performance".

"ZPower Releases Breakthrough Solar Panel That Works at Night"

“ZPower has a revolutionary technology with the potential to significantly boost energy output.” - Prof Jan Capjon, Professor Emeritus, Dr Ing. University of South-Eastern Norway

“The ZPower technology can generate constant electricity anywhere, even underground. The world needs a technology like this to overcome current energy problems.” - Jason Kim, Research Scientist and Lab Manager

Obviously this approach is among the most delicate, fine tuning, precision, exact combination of materials, geometry, waveforms and frequencies are essential for success.

In short Schwartz is definitely not a scammer. How can Holcomb even be compared to this, a small, light briefcase of these aluminum-bismuth plates can output many kilowatts, what would be the size and weight of a Holcomb alternator for similar output. 5 times in volume? 50 times in weight? More?

Junior also disbelieves OU black market is huge and OU devices from flywheel, magnetic, HHO
to solid state have been sold for years all over the world. He, like few others around here, is up for a cold shower. :D

PS I am sincerely looking forward to see his Lingen in action, with proper input/output measurement and even better looped, and hopefully successful replications as well.


To recap on local jesters, unlike what citfta claimed here

waveform of an iron core coil as found in an alternator is a normal sinewave as seen here (it does not matter that in car alternator it is rectified into dc, obviously).

Any intelligent conversation with him is impossible, he is just trolling. His name should be enough of a clue. "Carroll" means fierce, ferocious, savage, vicious etc. So it's best to ignore him, don't feed the troll.                           


My motivation was always to enlighten all in all my threads and posts.


Another lenzless idea

Two kinds of induction - Henry

KUNEL device

Reactive Current - Parallel RCL

Just another Don Smith thread

Simple and powerful principle

Plauson's converter

to all the rest.

Here i exposed stivep's claim that you can't get power amplification in a RLC circuit. Not only can you get power amplfication big time, you can get overunity too as demonstrated here. And Makel bucking OU transformer next post below. 800 w in 1300 w out.

Guy i shared before who pumps 2.34kW in his big trans with 105W input.

Here he is looping it with UPS battery, battery starts at 13.69V.

Then he powers 280W of lights + charges the batter to 14.3V.

Reactive power is 1163W here.

And this beautiful example

And another example what is possible.

0-4W draw from the wall, load 300W.

Google translated video description

"Overunity transformer with 600 VA power. Transformer powered by mixed dimmer x resistive - inductive loads of 500 VA., Powered by 220 V AC current rectified by 4 diode bridges. A series of halogen lamps for one load have been connected to the outputs approximately 200 VA. Two other transformers are also connected to the power strip of the transformer, one of which consists of a series of 6 and the other of a single one with power factor correction capacitor without load. In the series of 6 a load of about 100 Va was connected by means of n. 2 car lamps. Lastly, 4 10 VA lamps are connected on the same socket, each regularly lit in the test. The total load on the illustrated circuit is approximately about 300 VA with input oscillating from 0 to 4 VA."

He is talking about 7 other transformers which can't be seen in the video, one of them with power correction cap, all in series. This resonates nicely with Stepanov. Large inductance 'removing' load from the wall.

And this one, we see classical power draw DROP with more load, power of RESONANCE.

Here is another example what's possible with resonant trans....

He is drawing about 17W from the wall and powers few hundred watt
worth of lamps almost completely from earth.

Already tiny amp draw from the wall goes even lower when he turns on the lights.

I have already explained few times why every transformer in flyback mode should be OU, for simple fact that magnetizing current which uses 1-5% of full load power creates full load potential energy flux in the core, power is flux times frequency (just like in the motor it is torque times velocity, same thing), flux is max in no load state, frequency unchanged. So of course backemf is overunity. I already shared this Marc Belanger's backemf OU video many times, powering the light while charging the battery.

As well as other examples like Meredieu i credited to lanca etc.

I also shared Gabriel device which was already spoken about here long ago.

And bolt's 250w or 500w lightbulb running almost purely on resonant reactive power and similarly from Dan Combine and his pdf from 2006 (in attachment). Etc endlessly.

Not to mention the occult stuff i shared here which especially still cannot be appreciated by most here and elsewhere, from secrets of the light and night side (Navaz) and infinitely more from occult and contactee sources to Aharonov–Bohm effect and A field as described in AETHER CONTROL via an understanding of ORTHOGONAL FIELDS

To secrets of gravity/antigravity, cities on the Moon, secret space programs, our hollow Sun, that light and heat are created locally in the atmospheres etc.

For OU there are so many ways, if you want simplest approach you want mechanical resonance, just a pendulum or a weighted spring or even better, as described above, combining resonant pendulum and weighted springs is a powerful way to OU. Next after that in sophistication is magnetic neutralization screen as i described it, this is good for motors but i always say it's best to cancel lenz directly as i suggested with magnets inside a coil, and yet better are large, high q OU transformers, be it backemf or resonance + lenz diversion etc. These are concrete solutions that lead to breakthroughs. But rare got clear vision and without it no true success can come. Seek always deeper understanding and higher energy level, you can run in circles on lower energy level forever and you will accomplish nothing and sadly that is exactly what most do, lukewarm "attempts" doomed to fail before they even tried. Sure it is all a learning experience but you MUST seek deeper understanding always, push yourself to the limits, break all boundaries, all limitations, don't settle for average. Always keep in your vision the basic OU principles of mechanical and EM resonance, so you always know you got a backup, and you will never be hopeless.

Overunity should be part of one's spiritual awakening, realization that we live in the spiritual Creation expressing through a mental duality (electric magnetic, male female etc emerging from the stillness of Self just like the Divine Sound/Music (Shabd) emerges from the Self beyond time-space (beyond the Great Divide of Maha Sunn)). All these things and more are summarized on my blog homepage VRILYA DHARMA

Truth is infinite.

Peace out,

« Last Edit: March 21, 2023, 10:26:27 PM by hartiberlin »

Offline Dog-One

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 944
Challenge for Nix
« Reply #4 on: March 21, 2023, 07:56:15 AM »
I have done nothing wrong, i shared more valuable and illuminating stuff than most if not all here, therefore, since i know my hands are clean, i will not be silenced.

I like your tenacity Nix.

Forget everyone else here on this forum for just a moment and let me ask
of you a small favor.  Can you with your own hands please build a small electronic
device that powers a ten watt filament lamp, fully self contained, self running.

What I'm asking is for you to change roles for a couple of weeks.  Instead of
being a messenger, I'd like for you to become a teacher/instructor.  This is
for me personally, no one else for the moment.  I'm just asking you to show
me how to do this.  And I mean you, not someone else.  I've have been
experimenting with these types of devices going on two decades now and
have been unable to successfully replicate anything on my bench let alone
comprehend a solid principal of operation.  In every case, I ran into some
part of the device where it behaves exactly opposite of what the inventor
says it should do.

I'd really like for you to consider and accept this challenge.  If you will do
it, people will listen, I will listen, you will have made your point.  You will
be responsible for getting all of us back on track.  To be clear, the challenge
is for you to carefully, patiently walk me through a build of small electronic
device, piece by piece, until I can get it working.  You will build one of them
first as the template and help me along as I replicate and begin to understand
it.  The challenge isn't complete until I am satisfied with the results.

Are you in?

Are you sure enough about your convictions?  If you are, then this shouldn't
be difficult for you.  I would accept the challenge from someone else if I
had the knowledge and experience you have.  It's an easy decision.  I like
helping genuine and sincere people.  I'd do this for fun even if it cost me
many sleepless nights.  I just don't know what you know, so I cannot.
Let's change that together.  Are you ready?

Offline C.O.P.1000

  • Newbie
  • *
  • Posts: 5
Re: Challenge for Nix
« Reply #5 on: March 21, 2023, 12:21:45 PM »
I like your tenacity Nix...Are you in?

To start from the end, i am sure enough about my convictions and i have no doubt when i put my energy and funds in certain methods that i will eventually succeed but i made it clear many times, that i have not succeeded yet (am working on something related but different right now). So it is not hard to understand i can not guide you step by step to make a working device, and your sentence "I would accept the challenge from someone else if I had the knowledge and experience you have." and other sentences around it are not appropriate and are even verging on rude, firstly, it is not about challenges, but cooperation, sharing, and again, i cannot guide you a,b,c to do something i have not done (yet).

I stated openly and it is very clear that i am sharing methods i BELIEVE in, often backed up with examples i BELIEVE to be genuine, and explanations why they should work, nothing more and nothing less. For example for flyback i explained clearly that energy "transferred" (nothing is really transferred) through a transformer is proportional to flux times frequency and that 1-5% of full load energy is enough to establish full flux and thus full potential energy in the core. It follows logically from this that flyback mode should be overunity - and this is what we hear from so many sources. I have not seen anyone correlate this so clearly around here or anywhere - the fact that no load flux is max and that max flux means full potential energy - created by tiny input - also correlated with the fact that modern high perm cores need tiny input current to generate large flux.

Or the work of Janos Vajda, and the fact that energy of a wave is amplitude squared E = A² and thus uniting two same waves should double the overall energy. Vajda measured max of 48% increase over unity if i remember correctly.

So here we have principle of wave superposition, of resonance. And from best researchers in the field it's been heard since long time it all comes down to separating the input from the output with resonant systems, mechanical or electromagnetic, bigger the better, higher q the better. Of course this is not the only method, methods ala Ed Gray and Kunel are different, and there are of course many others not relying on resonance. There are so many approaches one needs to find what he resonates with the most.

Also, even someone who has done it - best he can is tell you how he did it, considering how delicate these things are, chances are almost certainly you would fail to replicate him, so it is always best to follow your intuition, build up your own knowledge and intelligence to the point where solutions open up, and always follow the method(s) YOU like the best, not just for sake of success.

With all that said, considering you apparently just want to confirm overunity with a looped 10W device. As i said few times already, i cannot guide you nor will i partake in any "challenge", but i can suggest, if you are sincere and determined, to follow these well known principles and mostly follow your intuition and what you feel is the best method for you. If you're just after any method just to prove overunity, i guess i would suggest you the tuned pendulum + weighted spring method. But i am not even suggesting, i am just saying generally, if i were suggesting the simplest method i believe can yield success, it would be that or even simpler just a big pendulum turning a PMG by a belt. In the end, it's all up to you, and each one of us.


Offline Dog-One

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 944
Re: Challenge for Nix
« Reply #6 on: March 21, 2023, 01:01:33 PM »
Okay fair enough.  I wish I had your energy.   ;)

And you can call me rude if you would like.  Doesn't hurt my
feelings.  From my upbringing, rude would be something like,
"Put up or shut up b*tch!".  That's not me, not how I roll.  We
can come to an understanding, but I will caution you, there are
others watching and they have different tolerance thresholds.

I also recognize what "i BELIEVE" means.  We all have a unique
perception of the world around us and rarely does it happen when
two randomly picked individuals share an identical one.  I happen
to "KNOW" a few things that you wouldn't "BELIEVE", maybe not
even after I showed it to you.  So please, let's not go there right

Since you haven't been successful yourself at this work, let's try
slowing the noise down just a wee bit.  This stuff is difficult enough
without being buried in information.  The sharing of information is
fine if it is actual bench work to confirm some piece of the mountains
of data already floating around.  I have terabytes of information on
my server.  I have an epic fail pile of devices large enough to fill
a 26 foot pup trailer.  If someone asks me about something I may
still remember, I'll find it and give it to them, but I don't firehose
folks with it.  Doing so doesn't help the cause.  We need serious
participation here.  We need to get our hands dirty and figure out
something that works, then engage in discussion and nail down the
details well enough for others to experience the same phenomena
on their bench.

If you are convinced these devices really are so delicate they
cannot be replicated, then we're screwed and Stefan should just
retire and relieve himself of all the responsibility and grief keeping
this site operational.  I personally don't feel that way.  I think if
someone makes a device, they should be able to make a second
one that also works and then others should be able to do it too.
That's what we looking for I'm pretty certain.

So all I'm asking for here is let's get focused.  Concentrate on
something you can manifest and make it so.  Then we can talk
about it and go from there.

Also, who is Dan Combine?  That you or someone you know?

For starters, this little circuit needs to be researched carefully
to determine if it does anything helpful.

Offline ramset

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 7878
Re: Mechanical resonant oscillation as basic overunity method
« Reply #7 on: March 21, 2023, 04:13:05 PM »
A true time bandit ….
Taking peoples lives one minute at a time ( this you would gladly do forever
Just to have the stage ( look at me I’m important!!)
  With no conscience whatsoever .. it’s your religion
Nor anything to show but copy paste and hunches ..and conceptual errors .

Like a heckler on the other side of the barrier at a construction job site ( build topics) ..yelling instructions in another tongue .

A Martyr too ..
Actually unfortunately you are not unique in this Free Energy research field
There are plenty of others too ( doing this for decades end in sight )
Time bandits

Another offer ..since you seem to have unlimited time and Zeal , to fill forum with your concrete Whims ..

Put a budget to a build ( you say you lack resources)
make a presentation and your expectations ,

Start a build topic .. I had asked you many times before ,
( a self runner here would be easy for you it seems ( mechanical ( or anything at all)

This forum has many open source builders in the wings ..
Incredibly skilled with similar piles of failed builds !
As mentioned by DogOne ( me too … just not a sea container full)

Pick something and we will try to get you whatever resources you lack .
100% serious offer
Please make your presentation.

Offline Willy

  • Newbie
  • *
  • Posts: 17
Re: Mechanical resonant oscillation as basic overunity method
« Reply #8 on: March 21, 2023, 04:20:54 PM »
Since he (presumably so called mod) bans me and deletes my posts at Holcomb thread, i am replying here. I have done nothing wrong, i shared more valuable and illuminating stuff than most if not all here, therefore, since i know my hands are clean, i will not be silenced. BTW i got many more accounts and will make as many as needed, and if they really insist on silencing me, there are methods to take further measures.

Starting you own topics is simple.

Offline kolbacict

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 1175
Re: Mechanical resonant oscillation as basic overunity method
« Reply #9 on: March 21, 2023, 04:33:27 PM »
Well, I'll make a perpetual motion machine, let's say. What's the point?
I'll only get myself into trouble.  You won't take me  anyway.
I have long understood that there is little sense from it.
At best, if it has enough power for practical use,
put it in the basement and use it yourself.
Он нафиг никому не нужен.(OU) :(

Offline bistander

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 512
Re: Mechanical resonant oscillation as basic overunity method
« Reply #10 on: March 21, 2023, 07:00:39 PM »
You ban in vain, i got more accounts than you can count and can open infinitely more if needed. Like i said I have done nothing wrong,

Multiple accounts is forbidden in the forum rules.