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.

GDPR and DSGVO law

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.
Amazon Warehouse Deals ! Now even more Deep Discounts ! Check out these great prices on slightly used or just opened once only items.I always buy my gadgets via these great Warehouse deals ! Highly recommended ! Many thanks for supporting OverUnity.com this way.

User Menu

Tesla Paper

Free Energy Book

Get paid

Donations

Please Donate for the Forum.
Many thanks.
Regards, Stefan.(Admin)

A-Ads

Powerbox

Smartbox

3D Solar

3D Solar Panels

DC2DC converter

Micro JouleThief

FireMatch

FireMatch

CCKnife

CCKnife

CCTool

CCTool

Magpi Magazine

Magpi Magazine Free Rasberry Pi Magazine

Battery Recondition

Battery Recondition

Arduino

Ultracaps

YT Subscribe

Gravity Machines

Tesla-Ebook

Magnet Secrets

Lindemann Video

Navigation

Products

Products

WaterMotor kit

Statistics

  • *Total Members: 84049
  • *Latest: Asuka

  • *Total Posts: 893952
  • *Total Topics: 15710
  • *Online Today: 44
  • *Most Online: 103
(December 19, 2006, 11:27:19 PM)
  • *Users: 1
  • *Guests: 31
  • *Total: 32

Author Topic: How this was done in 1821.....  (Read 39731 times)

Offline Omnibus

  • elite_member
  • Hero Member
  • ******
  • Posts: 5330
Re: How this was done in 1821.....
« Reply #30 on: July 12, 2007, 10:18:58 PM »
@NerzhDishual,

The excess energy produced by the SMOT comes from nothing. It is different from the cases you mention, such as, say, fuel cells or heat pumps whereby there is an actual source of energy (e.g. at the expense of the energy of the environment, for instance). In SMOT there's no such source, the additional energy produced comes, as mentioned above, out of nothing. Obviously, after having this experiment conclusively proving that CoE can be violated, we have to change our understanding of the nature of energy. Energy is a more general concept than hitherto thought, and is an expression of the motion of matter; for the appearance of energy it is not always necessary to have some pre-existing quantity which the energy would arise from.

Free Energy | searching for free energy and discussing free energy

Re: How this was done in 1821.....
« Reply #30 on: July 12, 2007, 10:18:58 PM »

Offline NerzhDishual

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 588
    • FreeNRG.info
Re: How this was done in 1821.....
« Reply #31 on: July 12, 2007, 11:18:55 PM »
@Ommibus

If you carefully read what I was trying to say you will see that we could actually agree ???. I try to be more accurate and clear as possible, should my English permit it.

According to you, the energy comes from 'nothing'.OK. But what is 'nothing'? That is the question. A very philosophical one.

Is it
Quote
always necessary to have a pre-existing quantity which the energy could arise from?

According to homeopathy: seems not. You do not need a single molecule of the active substance to get an effect. It is just the 'memory of water'. I do agree with this. But, what is the 'substratum' of memory, if any? IMHO, the same question arises about the controversed question of a life after death. Does it not?



Best



Offline steve_whiss

  • Jr. Member
  • **
  • Posts: 59
Re: How this was done in 1821.....
« Reply #32 on: July 13, 2007, 12:08:58 AM »
:) :)

The big Q is - is this energy new?

IF it is new, then Law of Conservation of Energy is <somehow> broken. Its unlikely the maths is bad (it's been raked over too many times) - so to my mind more likely some assumption or real-world aspect the maths ignores - makes some physical difference.

It seems to me that likely, the energy is from someplace else - so already exists in some invisible, undetectable form.

For instance, zpe. Humans can only see say 10^-4m by eye and down to 10^-18 m or so by electron microscope.

But we know from Wheeler in the 1960's that at foam sizes (10^-35m) that space itself is seething with massive, massive energy ... far greater then the E=mc2 energy we are used to.

So why not that?

I do not know how this can ever be proven.

:( what is special about magnets?

Anyhow, how do they work? Another thread perhaps.

Steve

Free Energy | searching for free energy and discussing free energy

Re: How this was done in 1821.....
« Reply #32 on: July 13, 2007, 12:08:58 AM »
Sponsored links:




Offline bitRAKE

  • Full Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 129
    • Nothing really
Re: How this was done in 1821.....
« Reply #33 on: July 13, 2007, 12:29:10 AM »
@bitRAKE

Quote
People that measure the SMOT ignore the fact they are placing the bearing and that require more energy when the magnets are present. If the bearing could be dropped onto the rail (from far outside of the magnetic field) with or without the magnets present then it would be proof. But that experiment will not have the desired outcome!
ThatÂ’s incorrect. Please see above my analysis which explains why youÂ’re incorrect.
Well, when you stop pretending the magnetic field isn't there then we can have an honest discussion. You cannot turn on the magnetic field after the bearing is placed on the track. No where in your analysis do you cover the pre-rail magnetic field effect on the bearing.

Offline shruggedatlas

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 549
Re: How this was done in 1821.....
« Reply #34 on: July 13, 2007, 02:28:21 AM »
Conclusively production of excess energy in SMOT can be demonstrated in a closed loop as in http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=2383887636280790847 shown schematically here: http://data.image.zabim.com/o-wa51V9glc9.jpg.

That's a great closed loop, except for one thing.  A hand is magically appearing and lifting the ball back to its starting position.  I think I see your plan for free energy!  Hire cheap labor to move little balls.

Free Energy | searching for free energy and discussing free energy

Re: How this was done in 1821.....
« Reply #34 on: July 13, 2007, 02:28:21 AM »
Sponsored links:




Offline NerzhDishual

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 588
    • FreeNRG.info
Re: How this was done in 1821.....
« Reply #35 on: July 13, 2007, 03:14:49 AM »


@Steve_Whiss 

Frankly, I have no definitive opinion about 'energy' and, BTW, the purpose of life :).

Does this energy comes from 'nothing'?
Does it comes from 'Eather'?
You know what? I just do not care!

The theory of the steam engine is appeared after the invention of real machines.

I do beleive that Free-Energy is possible. I sometimes make some experiments about it and write articles in a French fringe magazine...

Are the maths bad?
I have been told that Maxwell was using Quaternions and had 20 equations. Then Heaviside and Lorentz simplified/mutilated/altered/symetrised his equations.
So, now, we have only these (in)famous 4 equations taught at university.

I just guess that this vector calculus is not so 'appropriate'. Imagine a wall and to twin big guys. One of the guy is pushing one side and the other guy is pushing the other side. According to vector calculus the result force is zero. Obviously, something (the potential) is missing. The quaternions can deal with this.

Best 

Offline Omnibus

  • elite_member
  • Hero Member
  • ******
  • Posts: 5330
Re: How this was done in 1821.....
« Reply #36 on: July 15, 2007, 04:45:20 PM »
@bitRAKE,

Please read what I write and try to think before posting such nonsense:
Quote
Well, when you stop pretending the magnetic field isn't there then we can have an honest discussion. You cannot turn on the magnetic field after the bearing is placed on the track. No where in your analysis do you cover the pre-rail magnetic field effect on the bearing.
Here is my analysis from which you should somehow try to understand that I am ignoring nothing.

The analysis of a ball going around a closed loop as in http://data.image.zabim.com/o-wa51V9glc9.jpg reveals the following:

Since the ball doesn?t return along B->A the ball does not lose only the energy portion, imparted to it by the researcher, (+mgh1 ?(Ma ? Mb)) from the energy (+mgh1 +Mb) it has at B, that is, it?s not true that the ball returns at A with the energy

(+mgh1 +Mb) - (+mgh1 ?(Ma ? Mb)) = +Ma (CoE obeyed)

As experiment shows, the ball returns along C->A, therefore, the ball loses in addition to (+mgh1 ?(Ma ? Mb)) also the energy portion (+Mb ? 0) = mgh2 + [kinetic + ...] which the ball had stored at B but was realized at C. Therefore, the ball returns at A with the energy

(+mgh1 +Mb) - (+mgh1 ?(Ma ? Mb) - Mb) = +Ma + Mb = +Ma +mgh2 + [kinetic ...+]

As a result, in SMOT, the initial +Ma is restored and in addition an excess of +mgh2 + [kinetic ...+] is produced which is in clear violation of CoE.

Free Energy | searching for free energy and discussing free energy

Re: How this was done in 1821.....
« Reply #36 on: July 15, 2007, 04:45:20 PM »
Sponsored links:




Offline Omnibus

  • elite_member
  • Hero Member
  • ******
  • Posts: 5330
Re: How this was done in 1821.....
« Reply #37 on: July 15, 2007, 04:47:32 PM »
@shrugged atlas,
Quote
That's a great closed loop, except for one thing.  A hand is magically appearing and lifting the ball back to its starting position.  I think I see your plan for free energy!  Hire cheap labor to move little balls.
That's nonsense. Read my analysis, try to understand it and stop posting nonsense such as the above.

Offline bitRAKE

  • Full Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 129
    • Nothing really
Re: How this was done in 1821.....
« Reply #38 on: July 15, 2007, 05:26:49 PM »
@Omnibus, clearly we are speaking different languages. Without a translator I doubt the exchange can progress much further. Thank you for taking the time.

Free Energy | searching for free energy and discussing free energy

Re: How this was done in 1821.....
« Reply #38 on: July 15, 2007, 05:26:49 PM »
3D Solar Panels

Offline Omnibus

  • elite_member
  • Hero Member
  • ******
  • Posts: 5330
Re: How this was done in 1821.....
« Reply #39 on: July 16, 2007, 05:33:32 PM »
@bitRAKE,

Quote
@Omnibus, clearly we are speaking different languages. Without a translator I doubt the exchange can progress much further. Thank you for taking the time.
I'm speaking the language of Science and Reason. If you need a translator for that language, find one and don't waste the bandwidth of discussion forums such as this by filling them with nonsense.

Offline Paul-R

  • without_ads
  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 1978
Re: How this was done in 1821.....
« Reply #40 on: July 16, 2007, 06:13:22 PM »
@steve_whiss,

The ?Faraday? part of the job has already been done as far as overunity goes?production of excess energy and violation of CoE has been proven beyond doubt in SMOT.

The simple question is this, if SMOT is over unity, why hasn't anyone ever closed the loop? 

In truth, despite tremendous effort, no one has ever closed a SMOT loop, and no one ever will.
What is your proof for this statement?

A SMOT ramp gives extra potential energy (at the rate of MxGxH) to the ball.
The energy equation clearly indicates OU. The fact that the idea has not been
turned into a circle yet does not mean that this will not happen tomorrow.
Paul.

Free Energy | searching for free energy and discussing free energy

Re: How this was done in 1821.....
« Reply #40 on: July 16, 2007, 06:13:22 PM »
3D Solar Panels

Offline bitRAKE

  • Full Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 129
    • Nothing really
Re: How this was done in 1821.....
« Reply #41 on: July 16, 2007, 06:55:59 PM »
Typing an equation doesn't make it true. A test needs to measure input and output energy to determine if there is a gain from the SMOT - no such test has been presented and the analysis here is incomplete.

Offline Omnibus

  • elite_member
  • Hero Member
  • ******
  • Posts: 5330
Re: How this was done in 1821.....
« Reply #42 on: July 17, 2007, 12:31:03 AM »
@bitRAKE,

[quoe]Typing an equation doesn't make it true. A test needs to measure input and output energy to determine if there is a gain from the SMOT - no such test has been presented and the analysis here is incomplete.[/quote]
A test measuring input and input energy which clearly determines the gain from SMOT is made. The equations presented reflect that. You don?t understand that and continue to fill the forum with nonsense.

Offline bitRAKE

  • Full Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 129
    • Nothing really
Re: How this was done in 1821.....
« Reply #43 on: July 17, 2007, 12:36:40 AM »
@Omnibus, the nonsense is your conversion of input energy - which hasn't been measured. Some measurements of output energy have been made (ex. http://jnaudin.free.fr/html/smotidx.htm ). Using your rational one could say a door hinge is OU. Your equations reflect nonsense.

Offline Omnibus

  • elite_member
  • Hero Member
  • ******
  • Posts: 5330
Re: How this was done in 1821.....
« Reply #44 on: July 17, 2007, 06:22:47 AM »
@bitRAKE,

Quote
@Omnibus, the nonsense is your conversion of input energy - which hasn't been measured. Some measurements of output energy have been made (ex. http://jnaudin.free.fr/html/smotidx.htm ). Using your rational one could say a door hinge is OU. Your equations reflect nonsense.
You?re continuing with your nonsense. The input energy is mgh1 (in fact, it is less than mgh1 and is mgh1 ? (Ma ? Mb). The output energy is mgh1 + mgh2 + [kinetic + ?].

mgh1 < mgh1 + mgh2 + [kinetic  + ?]

input_energy < output_energy

Both input and output energy are measured since to measure heights h1 and h2 as well as m is straightforward (g is a constant) and [kinetic + ?] is always greater than zero.

If the input energy when lifting a ball from the floor to the table at height h1 is not mgh1 and the output energy when the ball falls back to the floor is not mgh1 then CoE will be violated any moment. It?s not. In lifting the ball from the floor to the table and then letting the ball fall back on the floor CoE isn?t violated.

CoE, however, is violated in SMOT, as I?ve shown.

You don?t understand the above and continue to fill the forum with nonsense.

 

OneLink