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 Posts: 894391
  • *Total Topics: 15729
  • *Online Today: 44
  • *Most Online: 103
(December 19, 2006, 11:27:19 PM)
  • *Users: 0
  • *Guests: 10
  • *Total: 10

Author Topic: How this was done in 1821.....  (Read 39896 times)

Offline Omnibus

  • elite_member
  • Hero Member
  • ******
  • Posts: 5330
Re: How this was done in 1821.....
« Reply #60 on: July 18, 2007, 06:16:15 AM »
Quote
You haven't shown that - it's an assumption constructed to reach your conclusion.

Nonsense. The fact that you have no clue what a conservative field is doesn't meanthat I'm making assumptions. You have a problem, not I. Lack of education as you demonstrate here doesn't constitute an argument in such a discussion. You may not contionue posting on this subject because the only thing you do is demonstrate your confusion.

Free Energy | searching for free energy and discussing free energy

Re: How this was done in 1821.....
« Reply #60 on: July 18, 2007, 06:16:15 AM »

Offline bitRAKE

  • Full Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 129
    • Nothing really
Re: How this was done in 1821.....
« Reply #61 on: July 18, 2007, 06:49:15 AM »
...and you call me arrogant.

Offline Omnibus

  • elite_member
  • Hero Member
  • ******
  • Posts: 5330
Re: How this was done in 1821.....
« Reply #62 on: July 18, 2007, 07:23:14 AM »
Yes, you're arrogant since you allow yourself to express opinions concerning conservative fields without having a clue about their properties. This is nothing but arrogance.

Free Energy | searching for free energy and discussing free energy

Re: How this was done in 1821.....
« Reply #62 on: July 18, 2007, 07:23:14 AM »
Sponsored links:




Offline bitRAKE

  • Full Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 129
    • Nothing really
Re: How this was done in 1821.....
« Reply #63 on: July 18, 2007, 07:40:40 AM »
What about your opinions about the SMOT? You rattle on about it's OU characteristic and science shattering consequences without having a clue of what is reallying happening. You don't see that as arrogant?

Offline Omnibus

  • elite_member
  • Hero Member
  • ******
  • Posts: 5330
Re: How this was done in 1821.....
« Reply #64 on: July 18, 2007, 08:07:23 AM »
Quote
What about your opinions about the SMOT? You rattle on about it's OU characteristic and science shattering consequences without having a clue of what is reallying happening. You don't see that as arrogant?

You continue with your arrogance. You have no basis to say the above because you don't know the basics. For instance, you dont know that the work -mgh1 + (Ma - Mb) spent to lift the ball from A to B is not an assumption but comes about due to the properties of the conservative fields involved. This is basic stuff which you don't fully understand but have the audacity to express opinions. Incompetence such as yours is not an argument.

Free Energy | searching for free energy and discussing free energy

Re: How this was done in 1821.....
« Reply #64 on: July 18, 2007, 08:07:23 AM »
Sponsored links:




Offline bitRAKE

  • Full Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 129
    • Nothing really
Re: How this was done in 1821.....
« Reply #65 on: July 18, 2007, 08:15:39 AM »
I see.

Offline Dingus Mungus

  • TPU-Elite
  • Hero Member
  • *******
  • Posts: 859
Re: How this was done in 1821.....
« Reply #66 on: July 18, 2007, 02:19:34 PM »
 :o

*dares to ask a OT question during a heated debate*

Is the "ball" pulled in to the gate by flux and accelerated out of the elevated exit gate? Do you have a good link to pictures and explanation of your measurements.

BTW... I don't want to get flamed but there are more accurate equations in physics to describe what you're doing. Just another equation to plug your numbers in to.

Total energy required to sustain velocity on an object uphill trajectory:
W = fMV + baV^3 + GMV (or) (f+G)MV + baV^3

W = energy needed in watts
f = coefficient of rolling resistance
M = weight in Newtons (1 pound = 4.45 Newtons)
V = speed in Meters/Second (1 mph = 0.45 meters/second)
b = drag factor in kg/m^3
a = frontal area in square meters
G = height of climb/distance of climb (e.g., % grade)

Free Energy | searching for free energy and discussing free energy

Re: How this was done in 1821.....
« Reply #66 on: July 18, 2007, 02:19:34 PM »
Sponsored links:




Offline Omnibus

  • elite_member
  • Hero Member
  • ******
  • Posts: 5330
Re: How this was done in 1821.....
« Reply #67 on: July 18, 2007, 02:31:53 PM »
No, this is just confusing the issue. There are no equations, especially not those you propose, that will describe more accurately the production of excess energy in SMOT than the ones I've presented. I have given the most succinct and yet rigorous analysis which demonstrates beyond doubt the production of excess energy. See my previous postings.

Offline Dingus Mungus

  • TPU-Elite
  • Hero Member
  • *******
  • Posts: 859
Re: How this was done in 1821.....
« Reply #68 on: July 18, 2007, 10:54:54 PM »
LMAO...

No, that my friend is pure physics. Its fairly obvious you haven't accounted for wind resistance or rolling resistance. Later I hope to further review the accuracy of your equation.

~Dingus Mungus

Free Energy | searching for free energy and discussing free energy

Re: How this was done in 1821.....
« Reply #68 on: July 18, 2007, 10:54:54 PM »
3D Solar Panels

Offline steve_whiss

  • Jr. Member
  • **
  • Posts: 59
Re: How this was done in 1821.....
« Reply #69 on: July 19, 2007, 02:11:32 AM »
Hi all.....

at a first-order approximation (a decent one) factors like windage and rolling resistance are the same.

What I do not know is: how much energy it takes to put the ball-bearing back to "start" for each of the 2 cases.

What is being shown by the excess momentum? Where did it come from?

IF the hand of the operator had added energy, this would have been felt as a resistance (adding PE) when moving the ball to the start. AND 100% obvious to the operator. That I do not believe, as the magnets seem to want to "grab" i.e. pull out from where it is. Seems to me - the operator energy input is LESS not MORE.

Anybody actually done this?

I do not believe in "energy out of nothing" - yet I do believe in zpe. This energy MUST come from somewhere; I think from foam or one of the many fields associated with the Earth.

Let's work the problem guys. Where did that energy come from?

Ideas??

Steve


Offline Omnibus

  • elite_member
  • Hero Member
  • ******
  • Posts: 5330
Re: How this was done in 1821.....
« Reply #70 on: July 19, 2007, 05:01:35 AM »
@Dingus Mingus,

On the contrary. The term [kinetic + rotational + energy losses] accounts for that. Like I said, read what I wrote, try to understand it and don't fantasize.

Free Energy | searching for free energy and discussing free energy

Re: How this was done in 1821.....
« Reply #70 on: July 19, 2007, 05:01:35 AM »
3D Solar Panels

Offline Dingus Mungus

  • TPU-Elite
  • Hero Member
  • *******
  • Posts: 859
Re: How this was done in 1821.....
« Reply #71 on: July 19, 2007, 06:44:49 AM »
Fantasize about what???

I never said the SMOT or your equation doesn't work,
I was only offering a more standard physics equation...

I also asked two questions: Is the "ball" pulled in to the gate by flux and accelerated out of the elevated exit gate? Do you have a good link to pictures and explanation of your measurements? I would rather read your published notes or data, not a random arguement in a thread.

~Dingus Mungus

Offline Omnibus

  • elite_member
  • Hero Member
  • ******
  • Posts: 5330
Re: How this was done in 1821.....
« Reply #72 on: July 19, 2007, 06:57:37 AM »
Quote
I was only offering a more standard physics equation...

As I said, the equation you gave is accounted for in the term [keintic + ?] in my analysis. Your equation isn?t the solution to the problem, it describes only part of the output energy (specifically, part of the excess energy).

I?d like to have my arguments published but it?s impossible. Publishing is out of the question because it would open the floodgate in a direction which absolutely goes against the core of the current agenda in Physics. So, that?s out.

The arguments I gave in this thread should be enough.

Also, to answer your question, it seems that the part of +Mb which at C turns into kinetic energy (in addition to +mgh2) allows the ball to escape the sticky spot and to get ?recharged? at A. That is something to be had in mind in practical engineering applications.

Offline Dingus Mungus

  • TPU-Elite
  • Hero Member
  • *******
  • Posts: 859
Re: How this was done in 1821.....
« Reply #73 on: July 19, 2007, 07:21:49 AM »
(specifically, part of the excess energy)
No... I was describing Joules required to maintain velocity up a slope. No excess energy described. Excess would require a new equation and the addition of a second variable for exit velocity. I compulsively want to write it... But its not worth the time.

(I?d like to have my arguments published but it?s impossible.)
I only require a link to a site that shows your measurements and device.

(The arguments I gave in this thread should be enough.)
Well I'll pour over it again, but it was only an equation, no measurements.

(Also, to answer your question, it seems that the part of +Mb which at C turns into kinetic energy (in addition to +mgh2) allows the ball to escape the sticky spot and to get ?recharged? at A.)

??? ok...
At what speed does it exit the gate though?
Faster... slower... same velocity?

Offline Omnibus

  • elite_member
  • Hero Member
  • ******
  • Posts: 5330
Re: How this was done in 1821.....
« Reply #74 on: July 19, 2007, 08:19:00 AM »

Quote
(specifically, part of the excess energy)
No... I was describing Joules required to maintain velocity up a slope. No excess energy described. Excess would require a new equation and the addition of a second variable for exit velocity. I compulsively want to write it... But its not worth the time.

Never mind what you were describing because it?s beside the point. Read my analysis and, as I said, don?t fantasize and don?t try to confuse the issue.


Quote
(I?d like to have my arguments published but it?s impossible.)
I only require a link to a site that shows your measurements and device.

No such link. As I said, the analysis presented in this thread shoud suffice.

Quote
(The arguments I gave in this thread should be enough.)
Well I'll pour over it again, but it was only an equation, no measurements.

What measurements? What I?m presenting is a conclusive theoretical analysis. Anyone can measure heights h1, h2 and m.

Quote
(Also, to answer your question, it seems that the part of +Mb which at C turns into kinetic energy (in addition to +mgh2) allows the ball to escape the sticky spot and to get ?recharged? at A.)

Huh ok...
At what speed does it exit the gate though?
Faster... slower... same velocity?

The speed doesn?t matter in this analysis. What matters is that there is kinetic energy which is part of the excess energy. Everything else is just engineering details of no consequence for the main point of the analysis.

 

OneLink