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: 894452
  • *Total Topics: 15730
  • *Online Today: 44
  • *Most Online: 103
(December 19, 2006, 11:27:19 PM)
  • *Users: 6
  • *Guests: 9
  • *Total: 15

Author Topic: New video on site of possible OU test fixture  (Read 12118 times)

Butch

  • Guest
New video on site of possible OU test fixture
« on: August 15, 2007, 12:23:35 AM »
http://lafontegroup.com
New video is first file on front page of site.
Thanks,
Butch
Also see drawings section for more details.

Free Energy | searching for free energy and discussing free energy


Offline Humbugger

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 290
Re: New video on site of possible OU test fixture
« Reply #1 on: August 15, 2007, 06:56:43 PM »
Hi Butch...

I spent some time checking out your website and videos.  I don't get it.  Are you working on OU?  After looking at each video and all the drawings, I still don't see anything that indicates OU or, for that matter, anything at all remarkable, anti-intuitive or surprising.  What's with all that work, anyway?  What are you really working on?

I have $100,000 to invest but, so far, I'm not really finding anything on this site that looks fruitful or even close.

Humbugger

Offline Honk

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 497
Re: New video on site of possible OU test fixture
« Reply #2 on: August 15, 2007, 07:47:33 PM »
If you have $100,000 to invest you should contact either Jack Hilden-Brand or Paul Sprain.
Those people are the only ones having OU capable machines, at least wait a month,
then we will know for sure who wins the OU race. Either Jack or Paul, or none of them.....

Free Energy | searching for free energy and discussing free energy

Re: New video on site of possible OU test fixture
« Reply #2 on: August 15, 2007, 07:47:33 PM »
Sponsored links:




Offline Humbugger

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 290
Re: New video on site of possible OU test fixture
« Reply #3 on: August 15, 2007, 10:41:48 PM »
@Honk

You know from previous posts that I have a great deal of respect for your EE design and build talents.  Your skills are clearly well-honed in that area.  I guess I'm just not too convinced of the general critical-thinking ability when you suggest popping $100,000 over to the likes of Jack or Paul. 

Don't get me wrong, I don't think either is an evil or outright fraudulent scam-artist person; I just think they are more likely really good and sincere and eager guys who, sadly, have deluded themselves and many others, unintentionally.

Look at the Sprain motor and follow this basic simple logic:

1)  Without external energy input, the Sprain motor will not run past the sticking point, no matter where it is started by letting go of the rotor from a dead stop.  True and obvious?  It is to me.  If you put energy in by mechanically spinning it; it slows down and stops fairly quickly.  Do we agree so far? 

2)  These simple, observable, clear facts prove beyond any question that the rotational drag around the sticking point is always enough to cancel and overwhelm all the combined rotational-accellerating forces of all the permanent magnets in the stator spiral and the rotor because it obviously negates all the inertia imparted to the rotor by them.  Is that clearly obvious and true?  It is to me.  The rotor starts, turns and then stops, period.

3)  Stated more simply, the "negative sticky bad force" is always equal to or larger than the total "positive good spin force" accumulated into the system by all the permanent magnets.  There is a net zero turning force supplied by the permanent magnets.  N.E.T. Z.E.R.O.  If this were not true, the rotor would not stop.  We would see pure PM motors, linear and rotary, cycling by themselves with no electromagnets or other external energy input at all.  But we don't do we?  Nope!  Only Larry Tseung and Steorn see these, and only when no one else is looking.

4)  So, if a net positive rotational inertia is to be built up in the machine, making it spin continuously, even with no discrete mechanical load other than air resistance and bearing friction, all of that energy must come from elsewhere than the permanent magnets!  And, any energy taken out of the shaft must also be provided by inputting an equal amount more energy than it takes to just spin freely.  The magnets add nothing, we have already shown that.

Somehow, we have otherwise highly intelligent people concluding differently.  I don't see how, except by wishful thought and self-delusion.

Published in PesWiki:

In Feb. 2006, Paul Sprain reported his results as:

out
.6 Nm at 10 radian/sec = 6W
in
19.8v @ 1.9A = 37.62W each pulse is 28 milliseconds = 1.05 W per pulse 3 pulses per sec = 3.1W total input


Now, really look at these numbers for a moment...do they make sense? 

The fact is, he is calculating energy in joules, not power in watts, when he multiplies 28ms (time) by 37.62W (power), yet he gives the result in Watts...wrong! 

Then there is the serious concern in my mind that, if he doesn't know the difference between power and energy, how can I trust him to properly measure the input voltage and current?  He reports it as if it were strictly a square wave, with current into the electromagnet rising neatly and abruptly (i.e. no inductance) from zero to 1.9A, holding steady for 28ms and then falling neatly back to zero.  Voltage delivered to the coil is reported as constant as well.  It's as if he were delivering power to a resistor!  I'd be surprised if the scope trace were nearly that neat and clean.

So, simply stated, I do not invest in such "magic motor" technologies because:

1) in every case I have seen or heard about, every claim of overunity has been due, upon closer inspection, to bad math and/or bad measurements

2) no fed-back self-runner has ever been shown and publicly demonstrated convincingly...none are available for purchase...many scams and frauds have been exposed and many have been promising machine delivery for decades, meanwhile bilking investors

3) no all-PM motor has ever turned freely on its own even under zero load. 

I just do not believe that, in fact, there has been any actual progress closer to those goals ever since the effort began to extract free rotary motion from permanent magnets.  That has been a few centuries at least.  Huge numbers of inventors and financiers have tried, most earnestly; all have failed. 

I believe there is a reason for that lack of achievement other than insufficient effort and funding, and it's not "government suppression".

If we are just into believing people's claims with no actual evidence other than their word, why not go with Lawrence Tseung?  He's supposedly got several OU machines and free-running pm-only motors going, one of which he says has been demonstrated for the Chinese government and garnered over a billion dollars in funding for the inventor!  Bah...humbug!

« Last Edit: August 16, 2007, 12:27:59 AM by Humbugger »

Offline Omnibus

  • elite_member
  • Hero Member
  • ******
  • Posts: 5330
Re: New video on site of possible OU test fixture
« Reply #4 on: August 16, 2007, 02:03:33 AM »
@Humbugger,

Your eloquent debunking misses one important discovery, proving beyond a shadow of a doubt that overunity is real. You say:

"1) in every case I have seen or heard about, every claim of overunity has been due, upon closer inspection, to bad math and/or bad measurements"

However, as I have shown conclusively, SMOT violates CoE and does produce excess energy. Don't get me wrong I'm not looking for investments at all. I just want to correct your statement. In addition, I should say that SMOT so far is the only device that I have seen violating CoE.

Free Energy | searching for free energy and discussing free energy

Re: New video on site of possible OU test fixture
« Reply #4 on: August 16, 2007, 02:03:33 AM »
Sponsored links:




Offline Humbugger

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 290
Re: New video on site of possible OU test fixture
« Reply #5 on: August 16, 2007, 02:09:45 AM »
I don't know much about SMOT.  My context here is motors which claim overunity operation and use permanent magnets with some electromagnetic means to overcome the sticky spot.  Is SMOT in that category?  Please link me to a primer on SMOT and I'll read up on it and try to comment intelligently.

..."as I have shown conclusively"...

Oh...wait...SMOT...is that the group where a steel ball rolls up a hill, falls off and rolls back to the beginning, all powered by permanent magnets?  I've never seen one of those that worked, even in a video!  I don't think I've even heard anyone claim they had a working SMOT.  Are you saying you have or know of and can prove the existance of a working SMOT device and, better yet, one that you can extract excess energy from?  Love to see your evidence.  Don't believe it!  Show me...conclusively!
« Last Edit: August 16, 2007, 02:30:13 AM by Humbugger »

Offline Humbugger

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 290
Re: New video on site of possible OU test fixture
« Reply #6 on: August 16, 2007, 03:36:45 AM »
@Omnibus

Just spent some time perusing your posts.  We have a semantic problem in what the definition of SMOT is.  It appears, to you, it is any system consisting of a stationary permanent magnet or several and an object that is placed by hand near it and is then moved by it but does not end up stuck to it.  Maybe your definition does not even include that last requirement, judging from some of your arguments I read...

My definition, and I think this is generally accepted by the community here at least, goes a bit further and requires that the object remains in motion to form a continuously-cycling process. 

By definition, when you say "a SMOT", it implies, to me, a contrivance, a machine, a device, a system of elements.  It also implies, to me and I think most everyone except you, perhaps, something that does not involve a requirement to pick up the moved object with your fingers and move it around except maybe to initially place the object one time into "the SMOT environment".

If you are saying that any magnet which lifts up an object one time in spite of gravity is, in itself, a SMOT and is incontrovertable proof of overunity, then we also have a problem with sharing in common the definition of overunity.  I don't see the point in arguing science with words when there is no common agreement on what the words mean.

I am not a physicist, not even a pretender.  I'm an electrical engineer and a designer of machines, primarily electrical/electronic in nature.  What we are all seeking here, I think, is some constuctable contrivance which we can engineer to provide generally useful mechanical or electrical or thermal energy without having to feed in more energy than we take out.  That is what I envision when I hear the term overunity and that is the context for my use of the word.

I'm afraid I have to agree with Mr. Simanek on this one, after having read all of your posts and then his article as referenced by Wiki.

Free Energy | searching for free energy and discussing free energy

Re: New video on site of possible OU test fixture
« Reply #6 on: August 16, 2007, 03:36:45 AM »
Sponsored links:




Offline Omnibus

  • elite_member
  • Hero Member
  • ******
  • Posts: 5330
Re: New video on site of possible OU test fixture
« Reply #7 on: August 16, 2007, 08:35:31 AM »
@Humbugger,

I don?t care about your definition and please don?t involve the community here. Don?t hide behind the community, whatever it means. And, don?t make it appear that it?s a matter of semantics. It is not. There is a common agreement what a SMOT is, what a conservative field is and what the properties of conservative fields are. The problem is in you, not in the semantics. You don?t understand the problem and are trying to present it as a purely engineering and utilitarian one. The problem of whether or not SMOT violates CoE is, however, a scientific problem. I repeat, I have proven beyond doubt that SMOT violates CoE. Implementing this discovery into a useful product is a completely different, purely engineering problem, which will be solved sooner or later. You'd do better to mind this fact in your future writing or if you  feel you don't understand it to restrain yourself from generalizations.

As far as Mr. Simanek goes, his analysis is incorrect and your agreement with him shows your complete misunderstanding of the matters at hand.

Offline Honk

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 497
Re: New video on site of possible OU test fixture
« Reply #8 on: August 16, 2007, 10:57:29 AM »
@Honk

You know from previous posts that I have a great deal of respect for your EE design and build talents.  Your skills are clearly well-honed in that area.  I guess I'm just not too convinced of the general critical-thinking ability when you suggest popping $100,000 over to the likes of Jack or Paul. 

I didn't mean you to pop $100K whitout any proof or personal demonstration. I just suggested that you should contact them. Perhaps you'll get a nice surprise.

Then there is the serious concern in my mind that, if he doesn't know the difference between power and energy, how can I trust him to properly measure the input voltage and current?  He reports it as if it were strictly a square wave, with current into the electromagnet rising neatly and abruptly (i.e. no inductance) from zero to 1.9A, holding steady for 28ms and then falling neatly back to zero.  Voltage delivered to the coil is reported as constant as well.  It's as if he were delivering power to a resistor!  I'd be surprised if the scope trace were nearly that neat and clean.

There is a 1 hour live feed video on his public demo somewhere at the net and I downloaded it a while ago. Right now I can find the link. Perhaps at home I'll find it.
Anyway, an this video the oscilloscope is showing the voltage and current going into the repelling electromagnet coil of his wankel motor.
It is far from the "square wave" reported. I believe he just simplified the report in order to not complicate it for the average reader.
But if he was to use my Flux Booster Controller it would turn the coil into a resistor like behavior. Immediate rise and fall times of the current through the coil.
My own tests show an efficiency increase up to 15 times depending on the type of coil and frequency used. So, let's see how things turn out in the close future.

Free Energy | searching for free energy and discussing free energy

Re: New video on site of possible OU test fixture
« Reply #8 on: August 16, 2007, 10:57:29 AM »
3D Solar Panels

Offline Humbugger

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 290
Re: New video on site of possible OU test fixture
« Reply #9 on: August 16, 2007, 12:39:35 PM »
@Omnibus   What can I say?  Your stubbornness is exceeded only by your hostility and rudeness.  You claim you don't care what others think or about defining terms for discourse...why such rabid passion, then?  Good luck and God speed...chill out!

@Honk    Love to see the video you refer to...haven't found anything like that.  I'm following the Hildenbrandt link re your controller and am anxiously awaiting the demonstration of a self-running system and/or solid evidence of excess energy output.  Good luck to you and to Jack.

Offline psychopath

  • Jr. Member
  • **
  • Posts: 62
Re: New video on site of possible OU test fixture
« Reply #10 on: August 16, 2007, 12:55:39 PM »
A SMOT(Simple Magnetic Overunity Toy) is a 1985 invention by Greg Watson from Australia which is supposed to be over unity. So far, there is no evidence of one that is looped.

But keep in mind, a looped SMOT is no longer a SMOT, that is, it is no longer Greg Watson's invention. In the patent it says it is simply a magnetic propulsion system.

I haven't built a SMOT yet, but I think the reason why so many people fail with this sort of thing is because they rely on the absence of friction. They expect the excess energy gained from each SMOT will let it keep going. I think what we need to do is basically "trap" it in a loop, instead of hoping it will have enough energy to pass some points. Although I might be wrong, as I have seen the video where when the ball is dropped from a SMOT it goes much further than dropping it without the magnets.

Also, I do not believe that Greg Watson built perpetual SMOTs as some people claim. All the talk about the "fine tuning" and friction minimizing seems a little bogus. Since there will always be friction, minimizing it is wasting your time(although it does help a little).

Free Energy | searching for free energy and discussing free energy

Re: New video on site of possible OU test fixture
« Reply #10 on: August 16, 2007, 12:55:39 PM »
3D Solar Panels

Offline Omnibus

  • elite_member
  • Hero Member
  • ******
  • Posts: 5330
Re: New video on site of possible OU test fixture
« Reply #11 on: August 16, 2007, 01:01:00 PM »
"@Omnibus   What can I say?  Your stubbornness is exceeded only by your hostility and rudeness.  You claim you don't care what others think or about defining terms for discourse...why such rabid passion, then?  Good luck and God speed...chill out!"

That's crap. Please, restrain youself from spewing nonsens when you don't have scientific arguments.

Offline Honk

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 497
Re: New video on site of possible OU test fixture
« Reply #12 on: August 16, 2007, 01:47:20 PM »
@Honk    Love to see the video you refer to...haven't found anything like that.

I can email you an adress of a DC hub that you can enter at a specific point of time and then you can download it from me.
Just send me your email and I'll share the video.

Offline acp

  • Full Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 178
Re: New video on site of possible OU test fixture
« Reply #13 on: August 16, 2007, 06:49:21 PM »
@Omnibus,

Can you please provide a link where you show conclusively that the SMOT violates CoE.

Sorry if this is alraedy posted somewhere else, but I don't find it on this forum. Thanks.

Albert

Offline nwman

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 308
Re: New video on site of possible OU test fixture
« Reply #14 on: August 16, 2007, 09:43:46 PM »
@Omnibus,

Can you please provide a link where you show conclusively that the SMOT violates CoE.

Sorry if this is alraedy posted somewhere else, but I don't find it on this forum. Thanks.

Albert

I too would like to see this!

Tim

 

OneLink